User talk:Accounting4Taste/Archive 18

Thanks for the information on speedy deletion. I've been trying to figure out how to get people on Wikipedia aware of my articles, written over the past ten years. They are not advertising. They are just articles representing thousands of hours of research and writing over the past decade. I suppose I could add my links to other relevant pages in Wikipedia, but I thought it would be nice to include the topics in list form. Read the list of topics and let me know if you can think of a way to give Wikipedia users access to these links. If so, I will be happy to do the necessary editing work. Perhaps you can but it in the sandbox so I can play with it. If not, I will understand. Thanks for your editorial assistance. Bob Tschannen-MoranLifeTrek (talk) 01:33, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

I am just trying to figure out how come everytime I begin to create an entry on here you think its funny to delete it.

Speedy deletion of Delengua Spanish School
You deleted my article about Delengua Spanish School, because there was "Unambiguous advertising or promotion". Delengua is a Spanish School on Spain, and I have been looking for others Spanish or Language School on Wikipedia and there are many other articles what have not been deleted. My page did not have any offer or direct advertising, I only try to complete the information on Wikipedia because I saw there were others articles about the same topic. -- DioniWan  &#x007C;   Talk  09:24, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your note. Apparently your definition of advertising is different than mine; mine includes unsubstantiated, and unsubstantiatable, statements about the merits of a commercial institution or its commercial offerings.  I'm afraid that the argument that "other articles exist" doesn't carry much weight on Wikipedia; you can refer to the policy at this page, but in general (a) I have no idea what articles you were looking at, (b) I'll suggest that they had considerably more in the way of references than yours did, and (c) if you think they don't meet our standards, you're welcome to tag them for a deletion process in the same way as was yours.  I will recommend that you click on the links in this paragraph for further information, and look at the specific policy governing advertising and some general background material found at WP:Why was my article deleted? and WP::Your first article for further information; best of luck with your future contributions.  Accounting4Taste: talk 16:18, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
Oh... Airplaneman talk 02:08, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Why do you keep deleting my stuff?

You deleted the entry for LegalTorrents without hosting a discussion. You did not cite reference to WP:SPEEDY. Please put it back and and follow protocol.24.5.84.188 (talk) 00:03, 10 August 2009 (UTC) Some support for "the importance or significance of the subject": LegalTorrent is one of the only online comunities to legally host and distribute media peer-to-peer, and now has over a quarter million unique visitors per month on the website (http://www.quantcast.com/legaltorrents.com/traffic) and many, many more from RSS and direct access to the content. It is also one of the only online communities to collect money and pay Content Creators for their creative efforts (http://www.legaltorrents.com/about/faq). The service has distributed over 1.8 petabytes of entertainment content as of Aug 2009. 24.5.84.188 (talk) 00:10, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Reply
Thanks for your response, I'll see what I can do to improve that article. Netalarm 16:15, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

DO NOT DELETE MY CONNOR IMPSON PAGE I'M A PRO PLAYER AND IS ALMOST THE BEST ON MY TEAM. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cmanuse (talk • contribs) 19:08, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Jamestown Associates
I undid your speedy deletion of Jamestown Associates. The article just survived AfD 8 days ago with a "keep" result. As such, speedy deletion was not appropriate. (Also it appears there was additional material in the article's history that had been removed from the current version.) Please don't forget to check the history when deleting articles. Thank you, ThaddeusB (talk) 17:08, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
 * My apologies; you're absolutely right, I missed the history completely. Sorry for your extra trouble; I'll go back and make sure that any links I removed are replaced.  Accounting4Taste: talk 17:13, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
 * No worries - we all make mistakes. As a side effect I noticed there was some useful information in the history, and removed some of the promotional language, so the article ended up better off. :) --ThaddeusB (talk) 17:16, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
 * It's a lesson that I should listen to the little voice inside that was saying, "Are you SURE this is a non-notable company?" I actually removed a link that should have demonstrated notability to me.  I think I'll take a break until I can bring a sharp mind to my work .  Accounting4Taste: talk 17:19, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Eh, don't beat yourself up, we all make mistakes. If you don't make mistakes, you're likely not human and the government will probably be knocking on your door fairly soon........ Vicenarian  (Said · Done) 17:21, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi think you deleted a page I just posted on Myolive. Could you possibly retrieve the page and give me some guidance on what needs to change? I'd like to document the product in the context of other similar products. Ssreedharan (talk) 01:37, 31 July 2009 (EST)
 * Thanks for your note. I've retrieved the deleted material and will place it into a "sandbox" page for you at User:Ssreedharan/Sandbox immediately after I write this note.  First of all -- your username doesn't appear in the history of this article, to the best of my knowledge.  If by chance you are using two accounts, which I know happens occasionally with folks who aren't familiar with our rules, please don't -- one account is all you're allowed, unless there are special circumstances.  Not to worry, just pick one and stick to it.  Second -- it's not in the context of similar products that you need to document this product, it's with respect to reliable sources.  The text that I examined had no references -- citations from arm's-length, third-party experts that asserted the notability of the product -- and those are crucial for Wikipedia articles.  It's not enough for a product or company to exist, it has to be notable, that notability has to be asserted and bolstered by reliable sources, and those reliable sources have to be verifiable.  I hope this helps you work on the article.  You may find this article to be a useful overview of getting started with creating an article, and this one to be useful as an overview of what to avoid.  You can also follow any link in this paragraph for a more detailed explanation of the terms.  If you have any further questions or problems, don't hesitate to contact me at your convenience; I'm a Vancouverite too, not that that matters, because I'm here to help newcomers.  Accounting4Taste: talk 17:47, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Lions Bay Media Inc.
You deleted the article on Lions Bay Media Inc. on the grounds, I assume, of failing to establish notability. Lions Bay Media Inc. is a very young company that uses new technology in the field of internet advertising. As an internet copywriter in the same field, I strongly predict Lions Bay Media will continue its growth to become one of the leading proponents of online media technology for advertising, and a frontrunner in the advertising revolution we are currently experiencing. Linthwaite5 (talk) 18:12, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
 * When it does, and you can demonstrate that notability by reference to arm's-length third-party expert sources, there is no bar to the article's being remounted. At present, the article I examined didn't meet Wikipedia's basic requirements in some crucial areas, including references, notability and verifiability, and had strong overtones of advertising.  You may want to look at WP:Why was my article deleted? for an overview of what goes into decisions like the one I made, and/or this article for some basics on the requirements for Wikipedia articles.  Best of luck with your future contributions and endeavours.  Accounting4Taste: talk 18:17, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I call that argument "Up and coming next big thing", or WP:UPANDCOMING for short. Wikipedia articles aren't based on potential, but on current reality. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  18:37, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Cluedo
Your welcome. --Sophitessa (talk) 23:20, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
Airplaneman talk 03:24, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

User_talk:67.80.106.105
Hello Again. I am looking for your advice yet again. I noticed this user deleted massive amounts of information on their talk page. When I clicked on their talk page, it seemed to be a biography of a living person or a synopsis of a story. I viewed the user's history and he has a lot of talk about vandalism that he deleted that I think it's important to keep. What is done in these situations?--TParis00ap (talk) 16:10, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks again for the insight and advice. I never considered the history is used to check on people who vandalize, I was just looking at the history of changes when I noticed it.  Kind of a dee duh dee moment for me.  As far as the advice, it's actually a great piece of advice that I will probobly take.--TParis00ap (talk) 20:31, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

My Edited Article
Hi, I'm wondering if I could try again with my article. I've edited it and it's in my Sandbox. I would like to call it, "Life Coaching Topics and Essays". When you get a chance, let me know what I would have to do to make it acceptable. Thanks. Bob BobTschannen-Moran (talk) 18:52, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your note. I've had a look at the sandbox page, and I have to say that I don't think you have grasped the basic Wikipedia concepts at all -- this article would be immediately deleted for a number of reasons.  Principal among those reasons is that every single link leads back to your own work; that's just another form of advertising with which Wikipedia editors are very familiar, and that would mean immediate deletion.  (And, as before, it doesn't matter whether or not you earn money from that advertising.) Second, "personal essays" are absolutely not allowed on Wikipedia; they fall under our original research policy, so an article called "Such-and-such topics and essays" would be deleted as "original research by synthesis".  Third, you haven't provided a single reliable source to back up any of the statements that you make.  For instance, "Personal development came to be called Life Coaching around 1990."  Who says so?  Why should we believe that, whoever said it, they have sufficient expertise that we would believe them?  How can I verify that statement?  You are defining a large field containing thousands of practitioners, life coaching, entirely in terms of your own personal work; I can't believe that there isn't a single person in the entire world who ever had anything to say about life coaching other than you, and you have given me absolutely no reason to believe that you're an expert other than your own implicit assertion.  You seem to have missed the entire point of our neutral point of view policy.  Please, Bob, before you waste any more of your time, go back and read the rules that govern everything that happens here; I'll point you to them here once again, just click on the word "here" and read the article that tells you the basics that every Wikipedia article MUST have.  Then type "Life coaching" into the search box and note that the two paragraphs that are there contain four distinct reliable sources, none of which seem to be your work, and also that life coaching isn't thought to be sufficiently distinct from Coaching to be worthy of its own article.  I have no wish to encourage you to waste your time; you may have to accept that there is nothing you can contribute to Wikipedia that will be allowed to remain there.  As before, I'm still available to help you if you have any further questions, and I hope I have not been terribly insulting to you and your work, but it doesn't seem as though anything has changed at all since the first time your article was deleted.  Accounting4Taste: talk 19:24, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Dick Bush (porn director)
Hi there Accounting4Taste, I was creating some pages for Uk Adult Film Company Relish Films and it's Directors, specifically Dick Bush (porn director). It was flagged for quick deletion and I appreciate that you have some links to reasons for that. I've given them a read and am wondering if I can get that page back or if you could point me to where I have made an error. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Catshatcockshot (talk • contribs) 01:40, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your note; I've replied at your talk page at User talk:Catshatcockshot. Accounting4Taste: talk 16:13, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Snowy delete
You told me about WP:SNOW and I was wondering how that works. Do I just suggest it? Like this AfD]: I would think WP:SNOW would apply. --[[User:Slgcat|Sophitessa (talk) 06:01, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I tend not to use this reasoning, just because I think there is almost always a better reason that references a specific policy; it's only when you can't find any specific policy that applies, but you know the article is somehow "unencyclopedic", that I'd use SNOW. In the AfD discussion you've referenced, someone has suggested "Speedy Snow", which is a shorthand for your reasoning, and I could agree; someone will probably close this early.  However, for an AfD discussion, I would almost never suggest ending it early unless it was really blatantly obvious that the article violated a speedy deletion criterion.  My thinking is that another couple of days one way or the other isn't going to make any difference in the long run, and, who knows?  Someone might come up with a convincing reason to keep the article in the interim three or four days.  For this specific deletion discussion, there's not much of a point in suggesting SNOW as a reason, because someone already has; the closing admin will look at all the reasons and assess them without reference to how many !votes each one has.  Thanks for your note; always happy to give you my opinion, and I hope it's useful to you.  Feel free to consult me at your convenience.  Accounting4Taste: talk 15:39, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

$10 Dinners
Thanks for editing that article. I KNOW it will need its own article eventually. I just didnt know how to do all the ref stuff. :P Thanks!!

Tdinatale (talk) 18:58, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
 * My pleasure. A PROD tag, like you applied, frequently encourages someone to add references, just like I did.  I hope you don't see this as critical, because it's not meant that way, but did you consider not tagging it and just leaving it?  It seems as though, by what you said above, that you thought it had notability.  Tagging it might have meant that someone would have to remake it from scratch.  As I say, not a criticism, just something you might want to consider in the future.  If you see articles like this that need references, there are a couple of things you can do, including adding a "references" tag to it; this alerts people who focus on such areas without leaving the article in jeopardy of being deleted.  If there's something I can do to help you find areas where these sorts of tags are listed, just leave me a note.  Accounting4Taste: talk 19:03, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

OH!!! I forgot, Apparently (according to the Food Network site) It's actually called Ten Dollar Dinners, not $10 Dinners. If you could change the actual title of the Article.. that'd be awesome —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tdinatale (talk • contribs) 19:15, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Done, and thanks for checking into it. Incidentally, you can accomplish that just by clicking on "Move this page"; it doesn't require an administrator, although I'm always happy to help.  Accounting4Taste: talk 20:01, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't know what's wrong
Hi!! I don't know what the name is for Melissa d'Arabian's new show. I was watching television and the commercial said $10 Dinners. However, the website said Ten Dollar Dinners. So, I honestly, have no idea. Please write me back!! Koloheshark (talk) 00:23, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
Persian Warrior Contact Me! 20:16, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Nick Hoogz
If you are interested in weirdly vandalized pages, here's one. I'm not sure how it's managed to escape notice for so long. By the way, is a page like this eligible for speedy delete? I had one declined because there were too many edits and it was too old. I AfD'ed this one to be safe. --Sophitessa (talk) 06:56, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Wow, that certainly was a weird article -- superficially realistic but when you get right into it, some rather nasty personal comments. I've never heard of "too many edits and too old" as being a reason to decline a speedy deletion tag, but then I would probably use a PROD tag if it was something that others had worked on extensively, just to give them a chance to improve the deficiencies that I was noting.  I don't regard myself as either a "deletionist" or an "inclusionist" -- two terms you will hear thrown around from time to time regarding how an individual feels about articles in general -- so I try to tag/delete things that are clear-cut and "low-hanging fruit" in general, because there's plenty of those.  My philosophy, though, is that we're trying to keep both useful articles and working editors, so if something has potential or someone believes that what they're doing is worthwhile and I think all that's needed is a hand, I'll do what I can to save the article or help the editor.  But if I think the article doesn't meet the deletion criteria, I'll go to bat against it.  So sometimes articles might be "eligible" for speedy delete but you may try to lend a hand to improve them if you think they will be useful to people using the 'pedia.  Hope this helps.  Accounting4Taste: talk 18:02, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

RE; User_talk:Hu12
The talk page doesn't note the deletion result of the atcles second nomination. The previous AfD was actualy closed as "delete". Also there has been No visible improvement since then (Dec 08- current). Which qualifies as a deletion under WP:CSD, WP:CSD. Perhaps re-consideration of Dragonfly CMS would be apropriate? Thanks--Hu12 (talk) 13:52, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I've deleted the page and responded on your talk page, but thanks very much for bringing this to my attention -- entirely my silly fault. Accounting4Taste: talk 18:03, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Connor Impson
It's back. Again. Thought you might like to know. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 19:21, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Grazie'. I've SALTed it upon its third recreation, which should solve the problem.  Accounting4Taste: talk 19:57, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Let's hope so. And prego, signore, of course.  -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 20:20, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

I found a reference
Hi!! I found the reference for the $10 Dinners. If you go to the website at, and watch the video, close to the end it will say $10 Dinners. I wanted to let you know before anything was changed on her page. Thanks!! Koloheshark (talk) 17:03, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your note. I'm not sure exactly why, but the video seems to buffer endlessly without loading for me.  However, I expect you noted that three times on that page it is written -- once in large letters at the top of the page -- "Ten Dollar Dinners".  That was what I was using as my authority.  Accounting4Taste: talk 17:10, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Help on Frank and Mary's Restaurant and Lounge
Do you think like a restaurant review on the web would be good? Would this be a good review? Click here Sedna10387 (talk) 18:15, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * No, unfortunately this would not qualify as "expert opinion" because anyone can upload a review of a restaurant to that website without identifying who they are. An expert opinion is one by a person where the reader has a chance to assess why the person is qualified to make that decision -- like a restaurant reviewer in the local newspaper who has a regular column and who has somewhere explained his/her qualifications to judge restaurants.  Accounting4Taste: talk 18:21, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Do you think you can help me find a good reference somewhere? Thanks, Sedna10387 (talk) 18:48, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I've found a brief mention by a restaurant reviewer for the Illinois Times and have added it to the article; I'll see what else I can find, because 1 is not likely to be sufficient. Accounting4Taste: talk 18:54, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * That's all I can find -- there are a few references to the NASCAR advertising material on the walls, but that has nothing to do with the relative excellence of the restaurant. I have to leave for lunch but will keep an eye on this when I return.  It may be that there's nothing further on the web -- do you have access to local print materials?  Accounting4Taste: talk 18:59, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

I noticed that the new reference you put in isn't coming up. it says cite error. Sedna10387 (talk) 19:00, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for helping me so far. Have fun at lunch! I'm leaving to get my haircut :) Sedna10387 (talk) 19:07, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

What's print material? Sedna10387 (talk) 19:09, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Things like local newspapers that are not available to read on-line. On-line citations are preferred, but print material is quite acceptable if it's properly documented -- like, "The such-and-such newspaper of such-and-such a date, page X, column Y, written by Person's Name".  Accounting4Taste: talk 19:11, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

No, I get my daily newspaper on Thursdays and it it has a website. click here Have you found anything? Sedna10387 (talk) 21:38, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

We'll work on this tomorrow. Thanks, Sedna10387 (talk) 00:52, 7 August 2009 (UTC)


 * FYI... I moved the article to User:Sedna10387/Frank and Mary's Restaurant and Lounge and left Sedna10387 a note on why I moved it. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 05:54, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Homophobia katy perry
My turn to let you know that I have removed a PROD you put on, though in a different direction: you PRODded this article as unsourced OR, but it seemed to that its last section ("Katy Perry is also sexist... I hope she dies while jacking off...") took it into the realm of unacceptable personal attack, and I have blanked it and tagged it db-attack. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 18:52, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your note; this is 100% fine with me, I just wanted it gone and appreciate your initiative. I'll go and delete it as an attack page.  Accounting4Taste: talk 18:56, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * But someone beat me to the punch. Thanks again for dealing with it.  Accounting4Taste: talk 18:56, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem. I went back to check some other edits by the same user, but I see Edgar181 has cleaned them up, too. JohnCD (talk) 19:00, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Ok so first you delete my article, then you come back and make it so I cannot recreate it?

Deleting my Article
So first you delete my article, then while I am searching for stuff you come back and delete it? How do I file a complaint with Wikipedia?
 * Do you seriously want to recreate it? I rather thought we had dealt with that question, but if you really want, I'll remove the protection.  However, if I see that you have remade it, I will submit it for the Articles for Deletion process about which we spoke; you can't go on like this indefinitely.  Accounting4Taste: talk 21:20, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

I am just really frustrated, I have a list of things I want to create on here and have links to them, and the first one I try to create gets blocked and then locked up. Is there any chance it will get approved if you pass it to log deletion? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Minerfan (talk • contribs) 21:22, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The protection has been removed. I've made a copy of the deleted material and will put it into a "sandbox" page for you if you wish.  Perhaps you should start with an attempt to understand the basic principles that underlie every article on Wikipedia; you can find them here. I'm not absolutely sure what you mean by "if you pass it to log deletion" -- I can say that it won't pass the scrutiny of new page patrollers if you simply recreate the article exactly as it was before.  You may find this hard to believe, but I'm actually ready to work with you to help you understand our policies and will try to make them clear to you if I possibly can -- and I believe almost anyone else here will try to help you in the same way if you ask them.  Accounting4Taste: talk 21:27, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Hey man, I added another article from the local news paper. It is in the Sandbox or whatever, can you look and see if that is enough? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Minerfan (talk • contribs) 14:13, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Minerfan/Chris_Lynn —Preceding unsigned comment added by Minerfan (talk • contribs) 14:31, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Is that enough proof? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Minerfan (talk • contribs) 15:01, 12 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your note. I think you have mistaken "proof" for what is actually required, evidence of notability.  You have certainly demonstrated that the individual in question works where you say he works and does the job that you say he does; frankly, I never doubted it for a moment.  What is required is evidence of notability, and that consists of the opinions of arm's-length third-party experts writing in reliable sources in a verifiable way, and I don't see any of those things in the article you've asked me to look at.  I will be honest and say that I think it's entirely unlikely that this individual has that kind of notability; what I would be looking for is a number of articles written at a national level in, say, magazines (not blogs or forums) written by people who don't work for the same organization as the subject, suggesting that the subject was better at what he does than most other people in the same field (or entirely worse, which also constitutes notability).  One important point to consider is that notability is almost always not local; by its nature, it is widespread, and so the focus would be towards documentation at a national level rather than at a city- or state-wide level.  You are entirely welcome to re-mount the article in whatever fashion you care to do so, and you require neither my assistance nor my permission; my extensive experience in the area tells me that the next editor who tags the article, and the next administrator who deletes it, will do so for the reasons expressed in this paragraph, but you may disagree.  Again, I suggest you read this article for information about the essential elements that must be present in every Wikipedia article.  If you have any further questions, feel free to leave me another note.  Accounting4Taste: talk 15:26, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I understand completely what you are saying, but tell me this, how does this article show notable? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Craig_Pintens, it has the same type of information in which I am giving and no news articles. I did some research and found it because it goes into the category of athletic administrators.

Editor signing article
The creator of the new articles Obiko and Sandra Sakata‎ keeps signing the articles. I've removed the signatures twice and referred him to WP:OWN but he has added them back. How should I handle this or should I do anything at all? --Sophitessa (talk) 22:38, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I've left a note as well and tagged Obiko for speedy deletion because of its lack of references and general lack of notability. The proprietor might be notable but I can't see it for the store.  I'll have a look at the proprietor's article in more depth in a minute.  Accounting4Taste: talk 22:42, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I put proposal to merge the two articles but I guess he removed the templates. --Sophitessa (talk) 23:16, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * That was reasonable -- I just couldn't see anything about the store that was independently notable, and it seemed as though everything had been put in terms of the store's creator. It might be considerably different if there are any reliable sources that demonstrate some of the notability that seems to be asserted, but I can only guess at what might be out there.  Keep me posted if anything happens that you think needs attention.  Accounting4Taste: talk 23:22, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

After the Fact
A page headlining my band was previously deleted and I feel that it was unjustly deleted. We have paid our dues as musicians and are near being signed. This page was created to advertise our work. If you could please restore this page I would be grateful. Thank you, AustinPow813AustinPow813 (talk) 01:42, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your note. I've examined the text of the deleted article once again.  First of all, since you've said that you've created this article to advertise your work, that alone is sufficient reason for it to be considered for deletion as advertising.  The standard that Wikipedia uses to assess articles about musical groups is found at this link, and since the group is only "near being signed" I can't see any way in which it could meet any of the requirements of this standard.  There is no bar to the article's being recreated at any time in the future if it does meet any of these standards; the primary requirement is multiple sources of coverage in non-trivial publications, like articles in newspapers, magazines and books.  If you're planning on suggesting to me (as so many people do) that the group is somehow emblematic of a certain style of music or from a certain city, I would be looking for significant media coverage, like an interview or two in a publication like Rolling Stone or a publication of equivalent stature.  Best of luck with your future contributions.  Accounting4Taste: talk 16:26, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Help on article User:Sedna10387/Frank and Mary's Restaurant and Lounge
Do you think you can help me again with this article? The article has been renamed so it won't be deleted and I can work on it. It would be a lot of help. Thanks, Sedna10387 (talk) 11:46, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Viva exists and has importance
The Brazilian association Viva Brasil exists and has importance, but you wipe out the article about that association.You were unfair with me. This is the main organization against Gun control in Brazil. Agre22 (talk) 14:35, 7 August 2009 (UTC)agre22
 * Thanks for your note. I have no doubt that the group exists, since I'm willing to take your word for that, but you have failed to provide any evidence of its importance, which is a crucial part of any Wikipedia article.  The evidence that would be required is arm's-length third-party expert sources that say that the group is notable and do so in a verifiable way.  (You can find out more about the concepts of evidence and notability by following the links in this paragraph.) You can look at WP:Why was my article deleted? for further background information about the necessary evidence that's required for articles to be maintained on Wikipedia, as well as WP:Your first article.  If you feel you can provide such references, feel free to recreate the article; if you require the text to be provided to you, you can leave me a note and I will place it into a "sandbox" page for you.  Accounting4Taste: talk 16:31, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Frank and Mary's
Do you think any of these are good references? http://news.google.com/archivesearch?um=1&ned=us&hl=en&q=%22Frank+and+Mary%27s%22&cf=all Sedna10387 (talk) 15:03, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * These might be a problem. I looked at a few of them and they are behind what's called a "paywall"; only the first few lines of each article are provided.  There is enough evidence to demonstrate that the restaurant exists and that it serves catfish, I think, but Wikipedia doesn't usually use references that you have to pay to verify.  I'd recommend that you try to find articles where you can see the entire thing without having to pay a fee.  Accounting4Taste: talk 16:33, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Hey
Is there any way you could help me with my user page?? I am trying to use the Tabs template, but I don't know whats wrong. If you could help me that would be awesome. Koloheshark (talk) 17:05, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry to say I'm not the person for the job; I don't know anything about using templates. In fact, I'm not sure where you would go to find that information... anything like that I've just copied from someone else's coding and, as you can see from my page, I haven't done anything fancy.  You might try copying someone else's code and see if that works for you.  Again, sorry not to be of more help.  Accounting4Taste: talk 17:08, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Assuming you mean the PageTabs template, documentation can be found template:PageTabs. In general, documentation for a particular template can be found at "template:template name". More information on templates can be found at WikiProject Templates. If you need help coding, sorry I can't help you but maybe you can find help on the project page. --Sophitessa (talk) 19:29, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

User name problems.
What do you do about problematic user names? , who was the one adding his signatures to the pages I asked you about above, kept adding ® to his user name so I looked it up. It's the name of his photography business. It is also registered as a trademark with the USPTO which could, I suppose, create a problem. I found the style guide for including trademarks in articles but nothing about a trademarked user name. Sorry I keep bothering you with questions. --Sophitessa (talk) 20:33, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Not at all -- please, don't ever worry about asking me questions, that's what I'm here for. (I'm going away for the weekend, though.)  I think you will find everything you need to know at Username policy, including a set of escalating instructions, where to report the username for attention, etc.  There is a way that you can deal with this described on that page if it seems that the user is acting in good faith, but I think it's quite clear about where you go to report this.  You would know better than I whether this user is acting in good faith, so you can handle it however you wish.  (Incidentally, thanks for helping the user above about the tabs template -- I'm hopeless with stuff like that!)  Accounting4Taste: talk 20:39, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Suspected sock puppet
I suspect User:Nataliacreamer is a sock puppet of User:Tomfeltenstein. The account was created just after the Tom Feltenstein article was nominated for speedy deletion (vanity article, has been deleted once before), and did nothing but remove the speedy tags from the article. - X X X antiuser 21:11, 7 August 2009 (UTC)


 * That seems like a good deduction, and I agree with you... do you think it's worth taking any further? I suspect that the individual will entirely concern himself with this one article and either bring it up to standards or recreate it so many times that it will be SALTed.  I have never initiated a checkuser request, but I understand it requires quite a bit of someone's time.  Let me know what you think.  Accounting4Taste: talk 21:16, 7 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I've never done it myself, I think that's a bit beyond the scope of what I'm used to doing on WP (I usually just monitor recent changes and report vandalism and such). The article was deleted and she's gone and created it again. It actually looks like it might be an encyclopaedic subject, but still reads like self-promotion. - X X X antiuser 22:12, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I was away from my desk over the weekend and I now note that all of the individual's contributions have been deleted and nothing further has happened since Friday. I will keep an eye on both usernames' contributions but I think there will be little left to patrol.  Thanks again for keeping a watchful eye on this.  Accounting4Taste: talk 16:09, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Roderick Haig-Brown Regional Prize
Just a quick note, the remaining text was still in infringement of the source, a straight copy / paste after the second sentence. I've refactored. MLauba (talk) 21:13, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for bringing me up to date on this, your courtesy is appreciated. Apparently I didn't check closely enough -- I may have read the first sentence carefully and then just scanned the rest.  My apologies if I've caused you any extra trouble, but it looks as though you have brought it in line with copyright rules.  Is there something further that I can do to help you?  I only got involved in the first place because I've had a brush with the topic in real life and knew it was notable (I live in British Columbia), but I'm prepared to do further work if you think it's necessary.  Accounting4Taste: talk 21:19, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * No bother at all, I found this one while working down the backlog at WP:SCV. Of course, the article itself certainly merits expansion :) Cheers, MLauba (talk) 21:32, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, notable to British Columbians, who are perhaps not quite the literary centre of the universe. But Mr. Haig-Brown  was a famous local writer and Chancellor of one of our universities -- kind of like the Stanley Cup for hockey was named after Lord Stanley.  And I know the winner of the prize each year gets lots of attention from the local press (there's a publication called B.C. Book World that may be on line if required).  I'll see if I can think of something useful to add to the article, and thanks again for working on it.  Accounting4Taste: talk 21:37, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Revocation (band)
I am wondering why you deleted the Revocation (band) page just a moment ago...they are a well known metal band that are signed to an an international record label based out of philadelphia PA Relapse Records. I currently am doing work for the label and I can't understand why this page was deleted yet none of the other bands I created were deleted...I didn't do anything different this time then any other time. T0778kj (talk) 19:19, 10 August 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by T0778kj (talk • contribs) 19:05, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your note. If you are currently "doing work for the label" you may want to look at our conflict of interest policy, which has a direct application to that situation.  In addition, my assessment (as well as that of the editors who tagged the article and related albums for speedy deletion) was that the band in question didn't meet the requirements of the standard to which articles about musical groups are compared.  In general, comparison of one article to another isn't considered a useful argument on Wikipedia; if you feel there are other articles that don't meet our standards, you would be welcome to tag them for deletion in some way and have them similarly assessed.  You can find detailed information about any of the standards to which I've referred here by clicking on the links in this paragraph; also, you can find a useful overview at WP:Why was my article deleted? and WP:Your first article.  If you have any further questions, feel free to leave me another note; best of luck with your future submissions.  Accounting4Taste: talk 19:54, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

I am unsure as to what I was missing that meets the criteria for allowing Revocation to be on wikipedia. I would like to know what I specifically need to add. I have used info from the Record Labels website as well as independant news websites that focus on news about heavy metal music. The band has rereleased one album through Relapse and has a second one officially announced with details such as track listing release date cover art and preview tracks on their myspace...I feel this meets the criteria because as one of the links "why was my article deleted" that you provided, took me to a page that said one of the criteria for having a band on wikipedia was "Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels (i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable)." Relapse Records and Revocation both fit that stipulation. So is the issue that I just didn't provide enough info or that the band Revocation is just not worthy of being on Wikipedia at this time and I should move on to another band Secondly I am not directly working for Relapse Records, I used to intern for them a couple of months ago, I have since stopped officially interning there but I am still a big fan of the music on their roster and I enjoy building these pages about their artists T0778kj (talk) 20:13, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your note. As I think you've already worked out, the criteria given at WP:MUSIC are quite specific.  I note by examining the specific text of the deleted article that the group actually has not released two albums yet -- they have released one and expect to release another.  Unfortunately, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball and generally does not accept statements about projected future actions as being useful unless they are backed up by multiple third-party arm's-length reliable sources; as the saying goes, "There's many a slip 'twixt the cup and the lip."  There will be time enough in October for this article to be re-mounted if and when the second album comes out.  Please also note that I have no idea of the relative importance of the specific label and an assessment that that's not "one of the more important indie labels" may be made by someone with more expertise than I.  If you'd like the text of the deleted article to be retrieved for you in a couple of months, I'll be happy to do that; just leave me a note with the specific name of the deleted article.  (You can also mention the names of the associated albums and I'll retrieve the material from them for you as well.)  Again, I'm not an expert on indie labels, so you may be going into this with an administrator with much more expertise at that future point, if and when the article is re-mounted.  Incidentally, you require neither my assistance nor my permission to remount the articles if you think I'm wrong; another editor would assess them by comparing them to WP:MUSIC and you may think you'll get a different result.  If I can be of any further assistance, feel free to leave me a further note.  Accounting4Taste: talk 20:27, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

IHP Results page
Hi

Thanks for the feedback. Compared to working with the rude patroller blanchard, having our page deleted by you is almost a pleasure! I'd appreciate it if you could restore our page to the sandbox (IHP+Results) so I can put in proper references. If you have 2 mins to tell me how to put these in best i'd also appreciate it (and maybe you could have a look at the 'parent' page, IHP+ International Health Partnership, since so far no-one's killed it but you never know...)

LauraHSD (talk) 09:44, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I would have to differ with your assessment of User:Blanchardb's assistance, but I admit that the celerity with which new pages are assessed here may have caused you to think otherwise. Be that as it may, we're both here to help you and so I'll be pleased to restore the deleted material to a sandbox page at User:LauraHSD/Sandbox (click on the word "sandbox" to go there) as soon as I finish this note.  Since I'm not sure exactly what type of references you'd like to cite, you might find the general overview at WP:Citing sources to be most useful; if there's a particular source requiring any special format, like IMDB, I'll help you further if I can.  I'll also have a look at the parent page as you requested.  Feel free to leave me a further note if I can be of assistance; I'm sure that User:Blanchardb will also help you further if requested, and in general s/he is more able to point you to extremely specific pages than I usually am.  Accounting4Taste: talk 16:31, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I've had a look at the "parent" page that you noted above. To me, relatively untutored in this field, it seemed as though the article didn't really make plain what it was getting at, in the sense that in order to understand what I was reading, it was mandatory to go to the web pages that were associated with different concepts.  There seemed to be quite a bit of field-specific jargon that wasn't well-defined so that the average reader would grasp everything that was being asserted without referring to supplementary pages.  However, that's not a big issue; it certainly doesn't violate any policies of which I'm aware, and I rather doubt that anyone not already familiar with the field will be going to that particular article, so it's probably just that I'm not the target audience for the material.  There were a couple of instances in which I noted that the references provided were to self-generated material; when you're talking about the policies of an organization, of course, it's entirely sensible to refer to how that organization expresses its own policies, but as a general rule it's considered better to confirm such things with reference to arm's-length third-party sources of expert opinion, or what's called here reliable sources.  It was also difficult for me to understand the way in which cited organizations and policies related to each other... I am not sure still which organizations are part of the UN, which are arm's-length, etc., but again I think this might be just my own ignorance at work here.  However, the principle that I'd suggest you consider is that, when reading an article, the average reader should be able to consider the reliable sources and assess them for him/herself in order to determine how much credence to place in an article.  Since it wasn't really clear to me how the different organizations were related, I couldn't have decided if it was a case of one branch of an organization assessing another or whether the parties were truly at arm's-length.  There's only one specific suggestion I could make that might help the reader; you might want to change the form in which the references are provided such that the actual date of accessing the web pages is mentioned.  Because web pages are subject to a kind of coming and going (I admit this is less likely with, say, the United Nations than a blog), it's usually considered useful to state a specific date when a specific webpage was accessed so that the Wayback Machine at archive.org can be used if required.  If I can be of any further assistance with policies or anything else, please don't hesitate to contact me at your convenience.  Accounting4Taste: talk 17:23, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion
The page on AnAkA that I just put got nominated for speedy deletion. Well, being that I am not the best writer or best wikipedian I dont believe it possible for me to write a nice article on my first try. However, the band that the article is about is in many circles considered famous including the Heavy Metal world. They are constantly being played on 89.5 WSOU the nation's top college radio station with over 120,000 monthly listeners and with a dedicated slot for them at 11:00. Additionally, their myspace page has over 497,000 plays, 630,000 views and the band has been skyrocketing in popularity ever since their first major release album has been getting lots of praise. So while it may be according to wikipedia standards (and i'm not so sure about that) that AnAkA should be deleted, I believe that even if you delete the article you might want to save the page because it won't be before long that according to anybody's standards they are considered famous. Thanks for reading Power2People (talk) 22:05, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your note. The problem is not with your writing skill but with the notability of the band.  There's a specific standard against which the notability of bands is measured: it's found at this link, and to the best of my understanding there is no evidence that this band meets it in any respect.  You can be sure that the material on the page has not disappeared; if at some future point you can provide reliable sources that demonstrate that this band meets WP:MUSIC, feel free to leave me a note and I'll retrieve the deleted content for you.  Best of luck with your future contributions.  Accounting4Taste: talk 22:09, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

What the hell?
You deleted Diop Kamau = Police Complaint Center supposedly because it was an "attack Page"?! Here is the google-cached copy of the article which you eliminated.


 * 21:14, 5 August 2009 Accounting4Taste (talk | contribs) deleted "Diop Kamau" ‎ (G10: Attack page or negative unsourced BLP: Attack page or negative unsourced BLP (CSD G10))
 * 21:07, 5 August 2009 Accounting4Taste (talk | contribs) deleted "Diop Kamau" ‎ (G10: Attack page or negative unsourced BLP: Attack page or negative unsourced BLP (CSD G10))

-- and yet nothing in the article was disparaging of Diop Kamau or the Police Complaint Center. And you did so without any discussion or consensus. It seems you deleted the page because you are disparaging of the subject of the article. If not, how about explaining one single thing in the article that was negative and or unsourced, or which constituted an attack of the articles' subject? 70.246.244.4 (talk) 11:49, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your note. I'm afraid that I regard suggestions that the individual in question blackmailed another, or that he was mentally unfit for duty, and many other such suggestions, without a specific reference directly attached to each and every such assertion, as having the potential to expose Wikipedia to a suit for libel.  Since I work in the legal profession, perhaps you'll accept that I know potentially libellous statements when I encounter them.  To quote from the relevant policy page, found at WP:BLP, "We must get the article right. Be very firm about the use of high quality references. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion. Biographies of living persons must be written conservatively, with regard for the subject's privacy. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid paper; it is not our job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives. The possibility of harm to living subjects is one of the important factors to be considered when exercising editorial judgment." I believe I've followed that policy, and that I haven't been unduly insistent upon the provision of high quality references.  However, if you feel this material should somehow be returned to Wikipedia, I recommend WP:Deletion review.  Best of luck with your future contributions. Accounting4Taste: talk 16:41, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for replying to my note. I honestly don't know to what you're referring when you wrote: "I'm afraid that I regard suggestions that the individual in question blackmailed another, or that he was mentally unfit for duty, and many other such suggestions, without a specific reference directly attached to each and every such assertion, as having the potential to expose Wikipedia to a suit for libel...." --but you're not referring to this article you removed, because it has no mention of any that or that kind of stuff in it. What are you talking about, then? The article was reviewed and approved by Diop Kamau before it was published, to ensure that it was accurate and not libelous. He's involved in the legal profession too. He may be curious too...what are you talking about when you wrote: "I'm afraid that I regard suggestions that the individual in question blackmailed another, or that he was mentally unfit for duty, and many other such suggestions, without a specific reference directly attached to each and every such assertion, as having the potential to expose Wikipedia to a suit for libel...." Of course, several people "feel this material should somehow be returned to Wikipedia," and it should be submitted to WP:Deletion review* in lieu of you restoring it ASAP. 70.246.244.4 (talk) 00:13, 12 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Seeing that you have not speedily replied (even though you speedily removed the article without consulting with anyone), I figure it is because you have not reviewed my reply to you here on this page. So I have moved it "up the page" (downward literally) to try and ensure that you see my reply and respond ASAP. I would prefer you explain yourself as quickly as you completely erased an article which was fully documented about a notable person and organization. I would prefer you not evade the issue, or express weird convoluted unsubstantiated claims, and that you restore the article ASAP. Something's fishy about this: You removed an article about a controversial human rights/civil rights advocate, made bizarre and unsubstantiated claims about the article and the person(s) described in the article...and then when you are asked about it, you make more unsubstantiated and bizarre claims and then don't respond to a request that you explain why the information was completely erased. Tell me, what do you think of Diop Kamau and the Police Complaint Center? Are you irritated that he is an African-American? Annoyed that he and his organization oppose and expose violations of civil rights? You didn't drag your feet when you erased the information about the Police Complaint Center...why are you dragging your feet about restoring it?  70.246.244.4 (talk) 06:40, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I believe you have your response above. If you still disagree with the deletion decision, you are welcome to request a review at WP:DRV at this time. Vicenarian  (Said · Done) 06:46, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I believe I received "my" response above too, but for reasons I carefully explained, I don't find the response rational nor satisfactory. Seeing as you are are evidently satisfied with a garbled and evasive non-answer, I'm deciding it is a waste of time to ask Diop Kamau's detractor to explain himself. I'll take this to WP:DRV now...let's see if they are any more rationale than you and Accounting4Taste. By the way, what do you think of African-American civil rights activists such as Martin Luther King, Jr. and Diop Kamau? Do you dislike them? Willing to censor them? I'm just curious, no problem if you don't feel like responding. 70.246.244.4 (talk) 06:54, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Martin Luther King, Jr. was a seminal figure in the African American civil rights movement. I have never heard of Diop Kamau. I have absolutely no knowledge of or opinion on him or his views, nor do I believe Accounting4Taste has any ill intent against him. You mistake the application of Wikipedia policies and guidelines for personal feeling. I think I speak for both A4T and myself when I say that we would treat an article about a civil rights hero or a KKK leader with equal care, as we are dedicated to Wikipedia's goal of presenting neutral, accurate information regardless of our personal opinions on any particular topic. I hope this helps clear up any misunderstanding. Regards, Vicenarian  (Said · Done) 12:00, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Deletion review for deletion of Police Complaint Center, Washington D.C.
An editor has asked for a review of August 5, 2009 deletion. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. 70.246.244.4 (talk) 06:57, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I just want to point out that the cached version does not even resemble the one that was deleted, which fits the description by Accounting4Taste, and is clearly a page that only serves to disparage or disrepute its subject. That said, I think this older revision is perfectly acceptable, and therefore the page should have been reverted to that instead of deletion. It could be that Accounting4Taste simply forgot to examine the history of the page, and mistook it for a newly created attack page, an understandable mistake considering its nature. Regards, decltype (talk) 07:57, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I also strongly urge you to refrain from personal attacks in the future. decltype (talk) 08:02, 12 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Hey, good job! At first I was ticked because it seemed in your comment that you were defending the deletion of a reasonable article. And I was only upset because it appeared the deletion of Diop Kamau was a personal attack against him. But no, you explain that the version Accounting4Taste deleted was nasty and illicit. You're probably right....Diop Kamau and his Police Complaint Center have attracted vandalistic and slanderous activity, all along.  Accounting4Taste evidently did 'forget' to examine page history, or I hope he would have realized the page was vandalized for classic reasons.  So all allegations of racism aside, can Accounting4Taste re-publish the article?  The original is the one which I have repeatedly published from Google's Cache.  I'm looking in my files for the text version of the Wiki-html.  I'll submit it here if I find it. cheers! thanks for intervening, the whole thing involves understandable mistakes, considering the nature of the beast. Regards,70.246.244.4 (talk) 08:10, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I have restored the article as it appeared on June 12 2009. Accounting4Taste: While I would normally not restore a deleted page without consulting the deleting admin, I feel that restoring this article is uncontroversial. If you disagree, feel free to re-delete the page without consulting me. Regards, decltype (talk) 08:40, 12 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Awesome. thank you Decltype, and Accounting4Taste, considering your background and your position, I would like to consult with you (privately) about an unrelated issue. Any communication of mine with Accounting4Taste, I may also forward to you as well, Decltype, you have both demonstrated sensitivity which can prove helpful in many other regards. 70.246.244.4 (talk) 08:48, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I think User:Decltype has made an entirely reasonable decision and if s/he is satisfied with the outcome, I am too. I should say that I have a policy of declining (or transferring to public view) any private communications about Wikipedia, since I very much prefer to do its business in the full view of the community.  I also cannot give advice with respect to the US legal system, since I'm not licensed to practise law in that country, if that bears on anything about which you wanted to consult me.  Accounting4Taste: talk 14:48, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

User unavailble
Hello, i'm in a bit of bother here because recently i tried to create an account and it said it was created, then i tried to log in and an error occured, do you have any idea of what may have happened? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.147.74.149 (talk) 18:47, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry to say that I don't have a lot of suggestions about what might have happened; I don't know what the "error" was that occurred. Could it have been that you mis-typed the password?  Did you accurately type the name of the account you created?  If all else fails, and you wish to create another account, I don't think that would be a problem as long as you only ever used one account from that point on.  Let me know if there's something further I can offer.  Accounting4Taste: talk 18:56, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

It says, there is no user by the name Doughnuthead (yes that is the user name i was suggesting), but when i created the account it said it was created--78.148.30.86 (talk) 20:45, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Hello! If you'er having trouble creating a username, please feel free to submit a request here and a friendly account creator will assist you. Regards, Vicenarian  (Said · Done) 20:53, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
 * All I can think is that there might sometimes be a gap between when an account is created and when it actually goes into action. I confirm that an account called User:Doughnuthead apparently exists, but it has no contributions, no history, has made no edits, and contains nothing on the user page or talk page, etc.  and so I suspect this is the one you created.  My only (poor) suggestion is that you should wait perhaps 24 hours just to see if the delay I posited actually exists. I think User:Vicenarian's advice above is well worth following and if I were you, I'd immediately submit a request at that link.  Accounting4Taste: talk 20:57, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Whoops, no, that account does NOT exist. I'm out of ideas and suggest you follow User:Vicenarian's advice above. (And thanks for the helpful comment, sir.) I'm sorry I couldn't be more useful to you. Accounting4Taste: talk 20:58, 12 August 2009 (UTC) Thank you for all your help!--78.144.180.95 (talk) 08:23, 13 August 2009 (UTC)