User talk:Akjar13/Archive 1

Welcome!

 * }

Keep the talk clean Akjar13 (talk) 10:30, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

"Dear Akjar13" - your comment in the form of a message to myself on the Talk Page of the article West Hartlepool War Memorial, 23 September
I thank you for what I consider to be certainly very good and friendly advice yesterday on the Talk Page as now cited in respect of the making of an account within Wikipedia by myself. I have a number of things to do at the moment (I am changing my address while staying in the northeast of England) but will certainly try to do this. It had in fact already occured to me that it is something I should be doing at last, after so many years! Well, for better or for worse we shall all see how this complicated affair goes. The business in the northeast of England is extremely complicated at the moment as you will see to some extent, if not entirely, on []. This is a rather complicated pdf file and unfortunately at no point does it directly tackle the problem in accordance with what is said by myself in Wikipedia. Whether this Wikipedia article has been read by the author of this pdf file or not is something I cannot say. If you can explain to me how you think Wikipedia can become involved in this, as you seem to imply, then please specify exactly what you mean, either here or on the West Hartlepool Talk page when I have provided my new Wikipedia identification, which I hope will be fairly soon and in the form of a response to your own message (or of course within my own Talk page as should, thanks to Wikipedia, by then have been created). I thank you again and au revoir. Peter Judge — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.146.165.186 (talk) 17:53, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Unintentioned duplication of talk entry entitled 'Dear Akjar13'
My apologies, this was done by myself and clearly it was not something I intended to do! After trying and failing, I have decided not to bother trying to remove the extra and useless section on your Talk Page, for which I apologize, but perhaps you can do this yourself? I close once again with regards.
 * PS I now (28 September) thank you for removing the duplicate and superfluous item on this page, and I have viewed what you say on the Talk Page of the article in question (on the West Hartlepool War Memorial in theory and in practice I am obliged to admit on an issue which is far wider and covers Europe as a whole so far as war memorials are cocerned). Please note I have there made a response which I hope you will consider and perhaps take into due account (I mean in particular the possible historic-running complexity of these matters).

Peter Judge — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.146.165.186 (talk) 18:06, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Your request for copyediting work at WP:OPNORMANDY
Copyediting help of any kind ... take your pick ... on any WP:OPNORMANDY article or on any article that's currently being reviewed would be great, and I'll be happy to give you feedback. See the top of my talk page for the current list of peer reviews, A-class reviews and FACs. - Dank (push to talk) 16:03, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Welcome aboard! EyeSerene talk 16:04, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for your response to my comment on the talk page of the article on David Croft. I agree with you entirely that the anti-vandalism bots do a good job on Wikipedia - I have heard that it normally only takes four minutes for vandalism in Wikipedia to get corrected, and I have noticed that vandalism in Wikipedia is soon corrected. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 18:47, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Help!
How do I put an inline citation request in an article?
 * Have you checked out WP:REFB? It provides a decent overview of how to add citations. Monty  845  15:03, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not trying to add a citation, I'm trying to say that a certain fact needs proper citation in hopes that someone will add one in. Akjar13 (talk) 15:09, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
 * You can use the citation needed template. &mdash;Akrabbimtalk 15:22, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you Akjar13 (talk) 15:28, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

A page you should read...
Advice for younger editors

Regards, --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:13, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
 * What reason is this for? If I don't know the policy to look for I woun't be able to improve. Akjar13 (talk) 10:15, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

STOP YOUR SPAM

 * Questions: 1.) Are you a part of the welcoming committee of Wikipedia? 2.) Why are you spamming welcome messages on the talk page of newly registered users? (Yes, I counted more than 70 SPAMMINGs from you!) 3.) Are you here to contribute or do you have some hidden agendas we should be aware of? Important note: Answer all these questions with due care. -- Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 10:22, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
 * 1. No I am not part of the Welcoming committee, though I would like to be.
 * 2. I did not feel like it was spam, I was merely trying to be friendly. I will stop if you think it is inappropriate for me to do so.
 * 3. I have no hidden agendas, my userpage describes me in full.

Akjar13 (talk) 10:27, 3 October 2011 (UTC)


 * FWIW, you are too new to be a member, continue to contribute but in positive manner instead of spamming and I'll see what I can do, not before that. FYI, please note that Wikipedia is not a social network, that means your user page I'm referring to. Another thing, spamming is seriously frown upon and could lead to your account being BLOCKED if you repeatedly violate the policy of WP:Spam. Lastly, artificially inflating your edit count from 150+ to 220+ by spamming such messages of WELCOME using the Wikilove feature is not something you want to do without the explicit permission from Wikipedia community or from the user on the receiving end. In fact, we frown upon such nonsensical edits by newbies. For your benefit, I will be providing a welcome section on top of your talk page so you can make yourself familiar with our policies and guidelines. Read it, understand it and stick to it like glue. -- Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 11:15, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi both,

Another admin asked for someone to take a look at this. It looks like you've got off on the wrong foot, maybe this will help:


 * @Akjar - you're more than welcome to support new users and that's a great way to go.


 * The problem is that if you post messages saying "we" welcome you, newcomers will think you're speaking on behalf of a group or the community, they'll assume you have a lot of experience and knowledge, and may direct issues to you that actually, they should probably direct to more experienced people. Also some newcomers need a bit more guidance and you might not yet have enough experience to provide it. That's not to say "never welcome people". It's more, be aware of your own newness to this and focus on building your own experience as an editor rather than purely community work. If you do want to welcome people, take a look at some of the existing welcome templates, pick one that you like, welcome people occasionally (eg when they "slip through the net"), and if you do get asked questions be prepared to point them to other pages and more experienced people so they get the best information possible.


 * But full points to you for working to improve things and make others feel welcome! Now you just need to get the editing experience yourself, to do it well :)


 * @Dave - Biting's not needed here, a good explanation's enough :)

FT2 (Talk 11:36, 3 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I will take this information to heart, and will try and stick to copyediting until I am more experienced. Akjar13 (talk) 12:41, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

I got here the same way FT2 did - I was asked to look at the situation - and I just want to add that there's a whole lot of assuming bad faith going on here on Dave1185's part. Welcoming new users who haven't edited yet isn't recommended, but neither is it spam or unconstructive; mostly it's just the sort of thing where it's considered not very useful, and is considered a little bit annoying. Why assume that the goal is to "artificially inflate edit count", when it's equally - probably more - likely that what we have here is a user who figured out that they could do something that looked helpful, and is doing it as often as they can?

In addition, wikiprojects do not have membership requirements, nor is one required to be a member of the welcoming committee to welcome new users. Dave1185, please do not continue to tell users that they're "too new" to welcome or to join the welcoming committee; if you believe that a user's method of welcoming is annoying, excessive, or otherwise not ideal, try approaching them calmly and explaining to them why their edits aren't doing as much good as they think they are. The sort of accusatory, biting approach you took here is not acceptable. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 13:08, 3 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Granted, biting newbie isn't allowed but Fluffer's piling on this after FT2 and biting an oldie is? Brilliant... I've lost all respect for you. -- Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 13:28, 3 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Relax, nobody's attacking you. Sometimes it helps to hears different people's views or multiple comments, even if they say similar things, because it can help show if it's "just one person's view" or not, or say it slightly different ways. Take it as feedback that a couple of people felt it was a bit strong and what made them think it, use it as you think best, but don't stress over it :) FT2 (Talk 14:37, 3 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Well, just leave it here then... why did he come over to mine to give me another round? Isn't that piling on? In terms of AGF, he has kept it in name but lost it in spirit. Lost my respect, nuff said~! -- Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 16:36, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Define 'work in hero engine'
I develop games with the Hero Engine and played no part in the development of the software itself, I can change it to reflect from a third person perspective if that would help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.129.104.221 (talk) 08:39, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Third person is always preferred here on wikipedia, the reason why is because the issue has been raised of Conflict of Interest, because the accuser believes you to develop the engine. Please clarify this on the Talk:HeroEngine page. Akjar13 (talk) 08:43, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

inre Yelena Chernykh
Just gave myself a headache going through sources and translating Cyrillic Russian to find out a bit more about the actress. What I am finding is that there is some older coverage about her work, and the more recent coverage of her death is beginning to include information about her past. More to do, yes... and I am hoping for help from editors far more able than I in translating. Any opinion on how I might best proceed?  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 07:37, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
 * sadly my knowledge of the Russian language is not good enough to help in directly translating work, however, if you put the translations in my sandbox I will happilly copyedit them so they make grammatical sense. Akjar13 (talk) 08:32, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Also, it would be an idea to minimise the use of the Cyrillic on her page. It's been slightly over-used, however the content is looking good. Akjar13 (talk) 08:36, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXVII, September 2011
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 01:48, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 00:37, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

you kind of messed me up
"The frequency of edits" may not have "merited the [in use] template", but the fact that he author died yesterday does. Regardless, I was working on the page, and your edit cost me my edits.

Please be a little more considerate of your fellow Wikipedians... -- *Kat* (meow?) 09:37, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
 * If you read the documentation for the template, you would see that there have not been enough edits for the recent death template to be used. I apologise for causing an edit conflict, but the template is only used on rare occasions (it kept being removed from Steve Jobs even the day he had died due to low edit rate). Here is what it says: As such, it should only be used in cases where many editors (perhaps a hundred or more) are editing the article on the same day, and should be removed as soon as the editing goes down to a normal level again. Do not use it merely to tag the article of a recently deceased person, as that would defeat the purpose of the template.

Skyrim nuisance
Agreed, i couldn't help but comment, his "corrections" were baffling. Bobfordsgun (talk) 16:05, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXVIII, October 2011
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 07:48, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

J. Blackfoot
A stub "provides very little meaningful content; may be little more than a dictionary definition." A harsh judgement, to say the least. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:22, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I called it a stub based on how other bio articles have been rated. Since the article has a Bio section that would normally need to be split and expanded on (Early Life, Career, Later Life) for it to be a start, I called it a stub. Also, from the BIOG/A page, " is usually very short, but if the material is irrelevant or incomprehensible, an article of any length falls into this category." The biography section is hard to read (because it's too compact). Sincerely, He's Gone Mental 09:31, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
Lol

Usx9 (talk) 13:39, 9 December 2011 (UTC) 

Talkback
—Tom Morris (talk) 14:49, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Welcoming you to the participants list on AfC!
Hi, and welcome to WikiProject Articles for creation! We are a group of editors who work together on the Articles for creation and Images for upload pages.

A few tips that you might find helpful:
 * Please take time to fully read the reviewers' instructions before reviewing submissions.
 * The project's discussion board is the best place to ask for help or advice. You might like to watchlist this page, and you are encouraged to take part in any discussion that comes up.

Once again, welcome to the project. Mediation4u (talk) 12:22, 14 December 2011 (UTC) I find the box above useful for AfC quick links. Hope this helps, Mediation4u (talk) 12:22, 14 December 2011 (UTC) editing is fun
 * Article submissions that need reviewing can be found in Category:Pending AfC submissions and there is also a useful list which is maintained by a bot.
 * You might wish to add AFC status to your userpage, which will alert you to the number of open submissions. There is also a project userbox. If you haven't done so already, please consider adding your name to the list of participants.
 * Several of our members monitor the IRC channel, and you are welcome to join in to ask Wikipedia-related questions.
 * The IRC channel is used occasionally for internal discussion regarding the Articles for Creation process, and also serves as a recent changes feed, displaying all edits made in the Articles for Creation namespace.


 * Thanks, Will be helping here when vandalism is low. Sincerely, He's Gone Mental 08:16, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In Emily Howard, you recently added a link to the disambiguation page Lincoln College (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:35, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Rollback
I have granted rollback rights to your account; the reason for this is because after a review of some of your contributions, I believe you can be trusted to use rollback correctly: for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see New admin school/Rollback and Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck and thanks. —Tom Morris (talk) 14:28, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you, I will do my best not to misuse this privellege. Sincerely, He's Gone Mental 14:51, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

December 2011
Hi Akjar13. Thank you for your work on patrolling new pages and tagging for speedy deletion. I'm just letting you know that I declined your deletion request for The Stars Are Singing, a page that you tagged for speedy deletion, because the criterion you used or the reason you gave does not cover this kind of page. Please take a moment to look at the suggested tasks for patrollers and review the criteria for speedy deletion. Particularly, the section covering non-criteria. Such pages are best tagged with proposed deletion, proposed deletion for biographies of living persons, or sent to the appropriate deletion discussion. ''I am mystified as to why you believed this page met this criterion. I didn't see anything to indicate testing. '' Beeblebrox (talk) 18:03, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I tagged the page as all I saw was the terrible edit the IP had made. I made the judgement in haste and I apologise. I normally do check the history, however I only looked at the diff. Sincerely, He's Gone Mental 09:41, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 10:16, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

3 things
Hiya!

Template:Infobox character
Re. #Close - thanks for commenting on it. I can see what you mean about the !voting, but personally I'm not so sure; I read the !voting as;
 * Remove it: CTJF83, Bignole, Maith, Jinnai, Zythe, Erik
 * Don't remove it: Sgeureka, plus possibly Rich Farmbrough (not an explicit oppose, I grant you), and note DGG 'don't have to use it'
 * Uncertain seems to be Pmanderson, Blake, J Greb

And one "keep both or remove both" AnemoneProjectors

Thus, although I have not actually made a decision on it, I'd lean towards "no consensus" I think, and would probably suggest an alternative approach: remove it from the example in the doc, Template:Infobox character/doc and/or explain the parameter in the documentation. Most people, when using an infobox, copy/paste from the top example. In the case of e.g., it shows the "Blank template with basic parameters" and then goes on to give details about certain other params - such as, for the somewhat contentious "religion" parameter, it explains in the doc, If relevant. For living persons please refer to WP:BLPCAT. Please be sure to support with a citation from a reliable source. - I wonder if something similar could be used on this one?


 * "hopefully an admin can close the discussion" - they're asking for an uninvolved editor - they do not need an admin. People assume admins have some special status regarding content issues - they do not. They just have a few special buttons. So it's true that only an admin can properly close e.g. a consensus-to-delete, but any editor can close discussions like that one - you, me, anyone.


 * I did notice the tag, however to actually make the change, an admin would be required so I decided not to do it myself. I put J Greb as remove and PMAnderson as keep. I read a 63% majority removal and felt that that was a large enough consensus, especially as the keep votes didn't comment as often. Sincerely, Akjar13 (He's Gone Mental) 15:38, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, sure, and you're in no way "wrong". Just be careful about thinking it's a vote.  Chzz  ► 02:19, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Your sig
Your signature of "He's Gone Mental" is rather confusing; it is preferable to have your user name in there - at least as part of the sig. For example, you could maybe have "Akjar13 (He's Gone Mental)" with links, or something. See WP:SIG While not an absolute requirement, it is common practice for a signature to resemble to some degree the user name it represents.
 * Thanks for the idea, I was considering a compromise and yours works perfectly. Sincerely, Akjar13 (He's Gone Mental) 15:38, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Nice.  Chzz  ► 02:19, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

WP:AFC
Re. "do you think I'm doing things right at AfC?" - I checked the most recent 10 that you did. All were 'decline', and I agree with your decision on all of them. I was particularly impressed that you bothered to comment on the user-name too, here. Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Arlindi55 could have been declined as "Submission is not in English" instead of blank (but it doesn't really matter).

Note, I only checked the most recent ten, so it wasn't a very thorough review.

So, keep up the good work; if you're ever uncertain about an AFC, just either ask (me, if you like), or leave it for someone else. Cheers!


 * Thank you. I focus on clearing out the obvious declines (and occasional accept) as the computer I mainly use for editing has a whitelist (and it's bad practice to circumvent it). If I notice their name is similar to the article they wrote, then I notify them about the COI and username policies. Thanks again for the support, and I look forward to working with you further on AfC. Sincerely, Akjar13 (He's Gone Mental) 15:38, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Cool; I'm sure I'll see you there; also there is WT:AFC of course. Best,  Chzz  ► 02:19, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Michael Best and Friedrich page
Hello, You recently edited the Michael Best & Friedrich page. I was told before this that all I had to do was add a few more citations and it would be good. Then I got this message from you: "This article may meet Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion because I accidently misnamed the article, please delete this ASAP. Asserted to be non-controversial maintenance. See CSD G6. If this article does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, please remove this notice."

What is going on? Now the content is gone and I can't seem to resubmit it. Please advise.

Kailey — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100statestreet (talk • contribs) 16:02, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I moved the page to Michael Best & Friedrich LLP, where I should have moved it to first. Your article has been accepted. It's just that I accidently moved it to the wrong page. You haven't done anything wrong, It's just that I've only recently started using the 'move' button. The CSD message was not intended for you, but rather an admin so they could clean up after the mess I made. I apoligize if I caused you any grief. Sincerely, Akjar13 (He's Gone Mental) 16:11, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

That's ok, thank you for the apology. The page still doesn't seem to be searchable on Wikipedia (i.e. if I enter "Michael Best & Friedrich LLP" in the search term it doesn't find the page). Should I just stop messing with it or should I be making changes and resubmitting? It is also re-directing from a page called 'Michael Best & Friedrich LLP (2nd Submission).' Please advise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100statestreet (talk • contribs) 17:03, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * That's weird. When I enter it in the search box it goes straight to the correct page. The link I put works as well, so you can use that to get to it if needed. You don't need to resubmit it as it has been accepted. You can feel free to continue improving on the article, just remember it is in the mainspace. Ignore the redirect, that will be cleared at some point. Sincerely, Akjar13 (He's Gone Mental) 18:54, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Revert
Why was my edit reverted? --93.138.153.184 (talk) 19:16, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Baking Pot
EncycloPetey (talk) 06:09, 23 December 2011 (UTC) 08:02, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Collateral damage
Re - I spoke to that user; I believe it's a legitimate edit, not vandalism, so I undid your revert.  Chzz  ► 21:11, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I reverted his edit since he was removing info with refs. But I do make mistakes sometimes, so thanks for fixing the issue for me. Sincerely, Akjar13 (He's Gone Mental) 09:03, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, sure, it's no problem.
 * Of course, not every edit that removes a ref is vandalism. It is worth having a quick look at the edit-summary of such edits; it is rare for vandals to write an explanation like that one - that's a strong indication it's not vandalism.
 * Sometimes vandals will add edit-summaries, to attempt to mislead. But not very often.
 * Thanks,  Chzz  ► 13:37, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIX, November 2011
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:08, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

GOCE 2011 Year-End Report
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 05:49, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

RE: Conqueror (Paper Manufacturer)
Matthijs Bouma, author of Conqueror (Paper Manufacturer)

Dear Sir,

I've received your rejection, and am a bit puzzled by it, because the reference made to quote the history of the company (their own site) seems to have been accepted on other manufacturers' articles (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parker_Pen_Company#cite_note-timeline-1, http://www.volvocars.com/intl/top/about/corporate/volvo-sustainability/Documents/Volvo_Corporate_report_ENG_2010_locked.pdf), and if unquoted, does not seem to cause any problems. Must I remove the quote (i.e. leving it unreferenced), or try and find another timeline for the manufacturer, while others can freely quote their websites?

Awaiting your reply, I remain,

Yours sincerely,

Matthijs Bouma


 * The problem is that you must use third-party sources for articles. While their site is reliable, it cannot be used as a source on an article about itself. Secondly, I have a concern that it would be 'prodded' and swiftly deleted were it put in the mainspace.


 * I would advise you to find more sources and increase the content, following the Manual of Style.

Sincerely, Akjar13 (He's Gone Mental) 16:18, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Dear Sir,

I have added a second reference to a site called Superbrands.uk.co which is, to the best of my knowledge, not related to Conqueror. Still it isn't good enough? It appears to have been rejected again, unless I have done something wrong in posting, being a bit of a noob. As for adding content, I would be afraid that the objectivity might be endangered, as I happen to think that Conqueror make a very nice sheet of paper...

You have not answered my question why it seems to be acceptable for other articles that refer to the subject's own site as their source. Why can they, but not I?

Thank you for your speedy reply. I am eagerly awaiting the next step in this my first article for Wiki. Until it arrives, I shall be as before,

Sincerely yours,

Matthijs Bouma


 * It has not been declined a second time, please wait until another reviewer comes along and looks at it (I only review articles once). Articles can refer to their own site only if it is backing up other third-party sources. At the time I declined it, you were only citing conqueror's own site, which due to WP:RS, is not aligned with Wikipedias policies. The best way to add content would be to search for articles about it in newspapers, magazines and reliable websites, and then summarize what was said about it. Sincerely, Akjar13 (He's Gone Mental) 16:49, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited 9GAG, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Macedonia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:20, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

List of Power Rangers
Hi, I've noticed you've also saw this diff http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_Power_Rangers&diff=next&oldid=469719755 - Cluebot reverted it was I in the wrong removing that edit. ObsidianCommand talk   14:35, 5 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Haha, Cluebot still needs some some work getting back up to speed. You did it just fine, I'll bring this up with Rich. Sincerely, Akjar13 (He's Gone Mental) 14:38, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

RE: East Bengal the Real Power
i have posted the official website of my article East Bengal the Real Power i.e. www.eastbengaltherealpower.com. also the mention of this article is provided in Kingfisher East Bengal F.C. under the topic 'Supporters'. If you want, I can also provide contacts with the founding and the active members of East Bengal the Real Power. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Indrajittt (talk • contribs) 09:52, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:3PARTY. Being mentioned in Wikipedia does not mean it's notable, and I do not need to contact any members. What I would like would be some reliable sources such as: A newspaper or magazine article about the group or an official statement by the team about the group. Sincerely, Akjar13 (He's Gone Mental) 10:04, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Mixman Article
Hello,

I just wanted to ask more about the point of view issue that was raised by editor of an entry I submitted. I am not new to Wikipedia, but am new to posting articles. Just a little background... the article is on Mixman. My oldest son started using Mixman and when I went to find out information about the product/company I was surprised to find nothing on Wikipedia. Being a former Financial Analyst who used to write and publish about public companies, I thought it would be fun to do some research on Mixman and post up the information. Since, I sent the page in last night, I have found more information about the period of time when the Mixman site/service went a bit dormant and plan to add that now that I know more about it. Regarding the point of view, the editor said the article should be written in a more neutral point of view that does not show off the subject. Can I ask them to be a bit more specific on where in the article they think it isn't neutral? I would love to have this entry go up, but am unsure how to proceed given my limited background in writing articles as well as the fact that, while my son loves the technology, my opinion on Mixman is already pretty neutral.

Thanks, Algurley (talk) 17:08, 6 January 2012 (UTC) algurley

More information needed about File:Swtor spaceship.jpeg
Thanks for uploading File:Swtor spaceship.jpeg. However, it needs some more work before it is okay to use on Wikipedia.

Please click here and do the following:


 * 1) Add a description of where the image comes from (not what it is) and who the creator is. Please be specific, and include a link if you can.
 * 2) Find the appropriate license from the list of free, non-free media, or public domain options. Copy the license template and paste it in the file's page, and save.

If you follow these steps, your image can help enhance Wikipedia. If you have any questions, feel free to ask at the media copyright questions page.

Thank you for your contribution! --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 14:05, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Submission
Hi akjar13, Just wondering about the issues found with my article submission http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/FuturICT.

You rejected it because the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia - however the item you are referring to "Living Earth Simulator" is not the same as this article. The Living Earth Simulator - which i understand is redirected to - is merely a single element of the entire project.

The other issues i have encountered in trying to get this article published revolved around self referencing - however, because the project is only a pilot project, there has been no research done yet - therefore the only material available is found on their website in the form of informational factsheets etc.

I would greatly appreciate if you could help me get this article published.

Thanks K — Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.239.97.143 (talk) 16:27, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I felt that as the subject of your article was mentioned to the full extent of reliable sourcing in the project's page, then there was no further work that can be done. Once there reliable third party sources available, re-write the article, in a less promotionally sounding way, and re-submit it. i have a policy of only reviewing a submission once, so another reviewer would be looking at it. Sincerely, Akjar13 (He's Gone Mental) 14:57, 13 January 2012 (UTC)