User talk:Andyjsmith/Archive 7

Brand page contest
Hi Andy, Thank you for responding to my article on the Nioxin brand. The article is intended to replace the one currently describing Nioxin, which has been marked as an ‘orphan’ and is very much out of date. Since being bought by Proctor & Gamble in 2008, the brand is no longer known as ‘Nioxin Research Laboratories’; it is no longer based in Georgia and there are several facts about it more important than it being stocked by ‘Regis Hair Salons – “the largest chain of salons in the United States”’. The article is not intended as a sales vehicle but as an informative piece on a popular US hair care brand, in the same vein as Pantene for example. If you could advise how I could adapt the Nioxin article to fit this precedent, I will gladly revise it. Many thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Usr01020304 (talk • contribs) 16:11, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of RO.B.IN
Hi Andy, I copy/pasted text for RO.B.IN page but from the author so I thought that would be ok, but you are right, that is not ok. So I sent email to him and hopefuly he will help write this page even better. Then I found out that the page exists but under Robin-Mesh so I made a redirect from RO.B.IN to that page. Is that ok?

Cheers, Valent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Valent (talk • contribs) 07:08, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

TransFX
Andy, I modeled our page after similar organizations whose pages have been accepted. Please refer to Scaled Composites and Triumph Group aerospace company. I believe that our page, as written, offers useful general information about industry-wide processes that we helped to develop, along with broader general interest issues such as our feature film work. I am a new user. Please advise me about how our page was interpreted to be strictly promotional and what I can do to remedy it. I would like to better understand 1) what differentiates us from the similar pages I referenced above, and 2) how to resolve the apparent conflict that our status as a company results in our page being defined as advertising. I am looking forward to making a conforming Wikipedia page with your input.

Maiamcmahon (talk) 16:25, 19 October 2011 (UTC)


 * The article was deleted (not by me) and I don't remember it well. However the warning I posted on your talk page gave links to some very clear wikipedia policies and guidelines, and the deleting admin agreed with my assessment. andy (talk) 22:42, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Brand page contest follow up
Hi Andy,

I'd really like to get moving on editing my Nioxin brand page to make it fit for Wikipedia. If you could respond with some advice about how to do this it would be much appreciated. Many thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Usr01020304 (talk • contribs) 10:50, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

copyvio source?
Andy, you tagged Muar State Railway as a copyvio, but you didn't indicate the source.-- SPhilbrick  T  12:03, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Weird - I pasted the offending text not the url. andy (talk) 12:33, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

against deletion of an article
respected andy, i have created an article about leadership training service. it is a social organistion working for the betterment of the society, its not an advertisement. so we wil appreciate if u give ur nod to this article

Kishore agarwal (talk) 14:57, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * }


 * No, it's an advertisement. andy (talk) 15:06, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Truth of Truths
Hi Andyjsmith. Just to let you know, I didn't think this one qualified for speedy deletion. There does appear to be some coverage in reliable sources, and there are some notable singers/actors performing. Thanks, Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 04:26, 25 October 2011 (UTC)


 * OK. andy (talk) 08:17, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of an Article

 * Andy, I haven't seen you make comments regarding deleting some of my articles. Please let me know What do you think you need to change?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Marketplace and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Hosting_Provider Interface Designer (talk) 11:24, 28 October 2011 (UTC) Interface Designer
 * I've deleted the second page, and I almost deleted the first page as G12. BTW, there were two sections with the same name "Speedy deletion of an Article"; I've merged them, so if you don't like the merger, please accept my apology.  Nyttend (talk) 12:04, 28 October 2011 (UTC)


 * That's fine, thanks. andy (talk) 12:27, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

-

Good afternoon, let me add few words in response to your strange accusations and group comments about me and some of my articles.

Speedy deletion nomination of EuroglycoArrays
A EuroglycoArrays article has been deleted from Wikipedia and reason for this which I got is section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion. But I want to clear that the matter which I copied from is our external website. For this what I would have to do? Thanks Euglyco (talk) 12:53, 28 October 2011 (UTC)


 * You need to follow the guidelines here. But even when you've done that, if material is copied from a company website it will almost certainly fall foul of one or more of wikipedia's rules about creating promotional articles, reliable sources and notability - it's unlikely to work! andy (talk) 12:57, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Ken Fero
I declined the A7 speedy. Having films reviewed by the BBC and The Guardian is a claim of notability. Thanks Secret account 02:31, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

You Proposed deletion of my page??
Andy, i have just begun writing the page, i write after the day's work and thus could not write an entire lengthy page at one go. How do you expect me to contribute to this article with such hurdles?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Enfield0088 (talk • contribs) 15:57, 3 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Please read the notice on your talk page. It asks you to "consider improving the article to address the issues raised". This isn't a hurdle - the article needs improving and you have plenty of time to improve it. However I see that while you have taken the time to leave a message on this page you haven't made any changes at all to the article. andy (talk) 20:36, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

C. Grimaldis Gallery
I removed your CSD on this page, because I think it does make a credible claim to notability (oldest), and has a ref from the baltimore sun. You can put i tup for AFD if you want. Gaijin42 (talk) 17:24, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

about speedy deletion of article Amrut Ghayal
Hello Andy,

Amrut Ghayal (Amrutlal Bhatt) is not a biography of a living person. He died on 25th December, 2002. Please review a couple of links in 'External links' section, of them one is in Gujarati and reads: અવસાન 25 – ડીસેમ્બર – 2002, રાજકોટ

And another one, kindly scroll down to bottom:

"Ghayal is gone now. I have no idea if the goddess of letters has paid heed to his commendation. I do not think that she has but hope one day she will. What a daydream!"

This is to cite official, available references, formally. Although it's well known that he passed away on that date. So, please remove the BLP notification from the article asap and oblige! :) Have great time ahead and thank you once again.

Shivnag (talk) 15:04, 9 November 2011 (UTC)Shivnag


 * Already done it, now he seems to be dead. andy (talk) 15:11, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion of Article
Andy,

I just saw that you have an article I created a few days ago. It is a project for a class I am taking. Is there a way you can leave it up for the next two to three weeks until my class ends, regardless of why you deleted it in the first place? I do understand why you deleted it, but it is part of my project that I need to do.

Zantedeschia (talk) 17:43, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Kent Durden / Ed Durden
Hi Andy,

These have been marked for deletion I am guessing because there isn't references that show the importance. I'm not sure what you need as proof? Since the subjects importance happened in the 50's-70's there is not much of a cyber paper trail. There are a million listings of the books that Kent Durden wrote (which is about Ed Durden), but does this count? I am new to this, as well, and not sure what you need to see. But, please do not delete. I have spent a couple days working on it. Let me know what I need to do.

Thank you

Kdianed (talk) 01:13, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Google hits aren't needed, they just make life easier. What is needed is to list some independent references such as newspaper articles, awards etc. See WP:RS. andy (talk) 09:39, 18 November 2011 (UTC) I have provided some and will add more. Thank you

Re speedy deletion of The kamikazes band
I removed your template because the article claimed a top 40 UK chart position. I've searched the official chart archives [] and have found no record of them having ever charted. Sorry. My heart was in the right place ...

I don't know the process - can you reinstate the template, or does it have to go thru AfD? Colon el Tom 13:02, 16 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I think you could just restore it because it was a genuine mistake. Maybe add db-hoax as well? andy (talk) 13:51, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Don't worry, I've done it myself. (Not a hoax, though). andy (talk) 14:05, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Colon el Tom 20:00, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion of Polo 24 Hour Bar
Andy, I'm new to wikipedia so I would like assisstance on making pages because I don't understand what speedy deletion is. If you could can you speedy delete it or edit the pages I have done to make them so they don't need speedy deletion. Thanks, Matthew583 (talk) 15:43, 17 November 2011 (UTC)


 * It's really easy. Wikipedia is not a place where you can advertise businesses. The speedy deletion warning on your Talk page is quite explicit and you should read it carefully. Unless the article is non-promotional in tone and clearly indicates why this business is notable then it will be deleted. See WP:CORP. andy (talk) 15:44, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

OK. Thanks for the tip. Matthew583 (talk) 15:46, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of The Gourmet Hotdog Company
Hi Andy, I'm new to Wikipedia and confess that I'm finding it quite complex (so much to read!) I think my article The Gourmet Hotdog Company has been deleted - and I honestly thought I'd created an objective article. Please would you advise what I need to do in order to have it approved? Many thanks, Ingrid

--Cc60 (talk) 17:34, 17 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi. I nominated it for deletion (and an admin agreed) - for two good reasons: it read like an advert and there was also nothing in the article to indicate that it's a particularly notable company. You could start by reading WP:CSD and WP:CSD and follow the links from there. andy (talk) 18:52, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of S. E. Sever

 * Hi Andy, is there any chance I can repost S. E. Sever again? Bonnymdyohl (talk) 20:33, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Only if you can answer the issues that have been raised. And I'd be very surprised if you can - she's at the start of her career and simply has not done enough of note to meet wikipedia's criteria. This is something that you might want to revisit a year or more from now, but not anytime soon. It's worth noting that if you keep on trying to submit the article without dealing with the issues it may eventually be permanently blocked and any web links may be blacklisted. andy (talk) 22:42, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Last Warning
I am so sorry, my account has been hacked as I have been away on holiday and they have edited some pages. I have changed my password and I have no idea how they got it in the first place so there will be no more vandalism, ect. Thanks Matthew583 (talk) 10:47, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Let's hope not. andy (talk) 11:31, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Altered speedy deletion rationale: Claudio Tassis
Hello Andyjsmith, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I deleted Claudio Tassis, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided. The speedy deletion criteria are extremely narrow and specific, and the process is more effective if the correct criterion is used. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. &mdash; Joseph Fox 15:54, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I could see it was a copyvio but I couldn't find the source. I suppose G12 would have been clearer. Thanks. andy (talk) 15:55, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Objection to Deletion
Andy, I object to deletion of this page because it includes strong, valid sources mostly from U.S. Government data collection agencies, and because it covers an important topic that many people seek information about but can't easily find. When someone wants to join the military, their loved ones immediately worry about their safety. This article gives solid facts that reveal the truth about military mortality. People who are worried about the safety of their soldier want to know the truth. This article compares mortality rates of military personnel and civilians, as well as talking about the comparative danger of different military branches. This article contains important information about military mortality rates that many people search for and have a difficult time finding. As the fiancé of a U.S. soldier, the first thing I wanted to know was how likely he would be to die. I had a really hard time finding information that was unbiased and honest, but after going through numerous U.S. documents, I finally found solid information. I wrote this article for others who want the truth. I found comfort in this article, in knowing exactly how dangerous his work would be. The United States needs this article. It may not be entirely soothing to fears, but it is honest and can prepare people for reality. I can understand why some people would want to hide this information in the name of patriotism--to them, I say this: I love my country. But I love it's people, too. I support those who fight for our freedom, but I still worry about their safety. This information is unbiased and truthful, and it is important for those who want to know the reality of the situation. Please, please keep this page. Ladyrose16 (talk) 04:19, 29 November 2011 (UTC)Rosalind D.
 * I'm sorry, but wikipedia is simply an encyclopaedia. It's not a place where you can argue a case or "prepare people for reality". There are other sites for this, and you can always create your own. Please read this article. andy (talk) 10:38, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * If someone was to learn their dad had a severe illness, and they went on Wikipedia to learn about the illness, wanting to know the statistical likelihood he would die, I think they could easily find information about how deadly the disease was. How is this any different? If the statistics and data on my page are accurate and referenced from reliable sources, what is the problem? I would be glad to edit my page, or reword sections if it seems biased, but I can't change the numbers of deaths that occurred--wish I could, but I can't. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ladyrose16 (talk • contribs) 06:51, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I've already explained this. Wikipedia is the wrong place for this kind of article. There are plenty of other outlets. andy (talk) 09:58, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Yama-bito versus Yamabito
Dear Andy, Thank you very much for your quick reply. I am sorry if, being new to Wiki editing, I perhaps created a page I did not mean to. What I was hoping to do was get the title of the article I was working on "Yama-bito" changed to "Yamabito" (without the hyphen) I attempted to do that through the Move button, but because there was already a Yamabito page that was a redirect, I got stuck. The original article seemed to confuse the actual people Yamabito with, as far as I could tell, some anime or manga about shape-shifters that played fast and loose with Japanese history. In the dozen or so articles I read about the Yamabito, including the original Japanese historian Yanagita who recorded the stories in the first place, no one ever called them Yama-bito. I know this might seem like a small problem in the grand scope of things, which is why I attempted to fix it on my own ... creating, perhaps, more of a problem than I expected. If there is anyway I can fix this, I certainly will (cut and paste the re-edited article to the Yamabito re-direct page?) Either way, thanks again for your help. Oh, and when you say my page is up for speedy deletion, do you mean the confusing talk page I created by accident or the entire article on the Yama-bito? Duende-Poetry (talk) 22:21, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. The page that's proposed for deletion is "the confusing talk page you created by accident". andy (talk) 22:58, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Cheers! I'll learn more about templates before attempting more editing in the future. Take care. Duende-Poetry (talk) 00:14, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Driving Etiquette
I do feel that your rash deletion was unjustified. You do have a point, but there is no mention of driving etiquette in the article Traffic, and although it was a quick stub that I wrote in a little while, I do think that the subject has a lot of potential and a lot of importance in it's own right. Please can you undelete it and instead take it to articles for deletion.--Coin945 (talk) 17:43, 30 November 2011 (UTC)


 * The material is fully covered elsewhere in wikipedia. I'm not convinced that there is such a thing as "driving etiquette" but if you think there is and you can prove it from reliable sourced then you should look at adding it to an existing article such as Traffic. andy (talk) 22:00, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Take a peek at Driving etiquette at Google Books - the first source specifically. It seems like a well-documented concept. Also I think if it were an article, it would be a very useful article. I would imagine many people would find it useful to find a concise article on driving etiquette without having to fish out the info from various other parts of the internet. I personally think that it was a rash deletion. I'm up for a second opinion though - if it succeeds at the Articles for Redirection or alternatively fails at Articles for Deletion page, so be it.--Coin945 (talk) 04:47, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Nabuderian Pluridisciplinary Methodology
I have removed the prod tag that you re-added to Nabuderian Pluridisciplinary Methodology, as per policy once a prod tag is removed – even if by the article creator and even if in bad faith – it cannot be replaced. I only did this to comply with policy; this is not an endorsement for keeping this article. If you still wish to pursue deletion, feel free to open an AfD. I will be leaving a similar note on the talk page of the editor who originally placed the prod tag. &mdash; KuyaBriBri Talk 07:00, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

A redirect you created is up for discussion
Hi Andy, I just put the redirect Squamish Lil'wat Cultural Centre on Redirects for discussion here, and thought I would let you know in case you have any input to add. Thanks. MsBatfish (talk) 05:51, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I've added a comment. andy (talk) 09:39, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Menang
Well pruned--but this'll never be at DYK. There's nothing to find. 207.157.121.52 (talk) 18:03, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. And agreed. andy (talk) 01:03, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Thomas R. Liravongsa
How does this page meet the criteria for speedy deletion under A7? Per WP:CSD: The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source or does not qualify on Wikipedia's notability guidelines. This article had references, including a link to an interview to him, and had a section of "credits and accolades". Per all of this, the speedy tag on this page was removed by me. Feel free to re-add the tag if you do not in any way agree with me, but I feel PROD or AfD would be wiser than doing so. Best, Bryce  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 17:13, 16 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Check out the state of the article when I tagged it. 2 paragraphs of fairly standard puff about what a wonderful guy he is, an "associations" para which says nothing of interest, and then 4 "credits and accolades". Most of the "credits" are actually about what his company did, not the guy himself: came in the top 10 of a competition, developed a product based on someone else's software, developed another product of unknown notability, and had something to do with a subscriber-only interview in WSJ. Now if the article had been about his company then you might have a good argument. andy (talk) 23:40, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

ROOM 94
I've declined your speedy deletion tag on ROOM 94 for A7. The article mentions numerous international tours by the band, which is enough to satisfy the importance requirements of A7. However, you can still challenge the article's notability through PROD or AfD.--Slon02 (talk) 20:49, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, you're right. Prod it is, then. andy (talk) 23:56, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Sandra Kynes
Delete the item if you like. I'd have thought that an entry on a American author writing in a niche, but rapidly expanding, sector was important in it's own right. But hey what do I know? Usually such items are developed over time. I guess people will just use less-reliable web searches instead.Plingsby (talk) 13:06, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, why not add some evidence that this author is notable enough to merit an encyclopaedia article? See WP:AUTHOR. Right now she could be anyone. andy (talk) 13:30, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Naah just delete - apply the rules rigidly and reduce the sum of human knowledge... Plingsby (talk) 23:36, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

After the Nazi's Died
Hi Andy. Can you explain why this article would qualify for G1? The criterion doesn't include poor writing, vandalism (G3), material not in English, badly translated material, or hoaxes (G3). If you can understand it, it's not nonsense. -- Bryce  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 14:04, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Simply because it's "incoherent text or gibberish" - for example the opening sentence. It's been deleted now anyway. andy (talk) 14:07, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks for your quick and prompt response. I think it would qualify better as a hoax (G3), in which it has been deleted under. Thanks, Bryce  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 14:08, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, I wasn't sure. I think it was actually supposed to be about a game or comic or something rather than a hoax claim. But whatever. andy (talk)

Speedy deletion declined: Glomesh
Hello Andyjsmith. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Glomesh, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  14:22, 17 February 2012 (UTC)


 * OK, thanks. andy (talk) 14:42, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Vinci Clinic
Could you please mention how can i improve my article ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vinciclinic (talk • contribs) 13:49, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

PROD
It is a good practice to check the available sources before prodding an article, especially one like The Good Vibrations Guide to Sex. -- Supernova Explosion   Talk  11:46, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion - Asia Food Recipe
Not sure why you nominated this for speedy deletion. Here is the information I provided on the speedy deletion tag:

"This page should not be speedily deleted because... This page meets the notability requirements for websites. It is the largest recipe submission website in Asia and there is a citation for that source. Not sure why it is being nominated for speedy deletion otherwise. This cite is simliar to other notable recipe submission sites that are also currently on Wikipedia."

Can you shed some light on why it was nominated? --Morning277 (talk) 12:38, 19 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Here are less notable Wikipedia articles on the same subject:--Morning277 (talk) 12:50, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

AfroFoodtv.com Cookin' with Coolio Epicurious FoodPair RecipeBridge Yummly

About the article jabong.com
I have tagged the page as newpage. I am yet to edit it fully. The article is about an Indian website company. There is no reason for it to be deleted. Harsh 2580  (talk)  14:11, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I can see that the article has now been moved to your user space. However I can find nothing about the site that make it particularly notable and worth having its own encyclopaedia article. andy (talk) 15:21, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Delete the Albert_Brahms
You can delete the article, if it is ok with you. I understand it is ur Job. But it could be a better one if you could transform the article to a better version than what it is now. Thats why Wikipedia is on a wiki based platform, primarily for anyone to edit and deleltion comes in second. I am not a native English speaker and that was the best I could do. I did that with hope that another user would come across it and do the necessary improvements rather than DELETE..or is contributing to Wikipedia a reserve of linguists? If you Improve it you would make the World a better place... Stephen was here.  Talk to Me.   Email Me.   —Preceding undated comment added 08:16, 13 May 2012 (UTC).
 * Please read my comments on the Prod notice carefully. I can't fix this article because I can't understand a word of it and I doubt if anyone else can. If you want an article in English on this person please find some bilingual speakers who are interested in the subject. andy (talk) 09:57, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Research Outputs by Country
The article states a large number of credible references from sources like BBC, Thompson Reuters etc. Hence it meets the notability features. I removed the tag as it cited enough evidence. Neutrality may be an Issue. But this is an article in progress. Kindly revert or reply in case any clarification is needed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gregorykarn (talk • contribs) 01:15, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

TheIrishWarden
I think you made an error you said I made an attack page when I was just advising the user and left a sock puppet case note. Anyway they got blocked for harassing me! I'm sure you'll see your error. Thanks TheIrishWarden - Irish and proud (talk) 14:28, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * You're right - I was a bit trigger happy. Cheers, andy (talk) 14:29, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah I find easy to become trigger happy sometimes. Everyone makes mistakes so I forgive you, not like it's anything major anyway! Thanks TheIrishWarden - Irish and proud (talk) 14:48, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Miss Sri Lanka Online‎
Hello Andyjsmith,

I noticed you prodded this article. It doesn't particularly matter to me whether or not the article is kept, but I moved this article from AfC. I did this in part because of the sources, which seem to be major sources from that part of the world. Help me understand why these are unreliabel sources, so I can do better reviews in the future. I would prefer that this be changed from a Prod to an AfD, because usually prods are for uncontroversial deletions. Given the number of sources which appear at casual glance to be independent of the article subject, and the number of notable people working on the project, I'm not sure this deletion is uncontroversial. All the best,   78.26   (I'm no IP, talk to me!) 15:55, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Luther L. Bohanon
Hello, you tagged this for speedy deletion back in 2008. It was removed, but because of the reason given, not necessarily because he is notable. Could you please look it over and consider either removing the notability tag or prodding it? Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 13:45, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Done it. IMHO a federal judge is notable but it still lacks citations. andy (talk) 12:26, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 10
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Social networking service, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ning (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) 11:22, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Corporate anniversary
Event managers, as you know, handle corporate anniversaries -- it is an event they manage -- so I am wondering why you reverted my addition to the See also section.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 20:44, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Event management is about the process of managing and not about the events themselves. There's a Categories section which generically includes all organisational events. andy (talk) 20:52, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I am not fully grasping what you're getting at -- that is, how is it possible to separate out the management of an event, from the event itself? They go together like hand in glove. And event managers will want to know about corporate anniversaries since, in most cases, they are a string of events needing to be managed.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 21:52, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
 * For goodness sake! Does the Chef article link to meat or vegetables? Yet chefs prepare food, so surely the article should link to food? In fact why not just link only one particular type of food, say asparagus. andy (talk) 22:58, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I think the two subjects are more related than in your example. The primary people who plan and manage corporate anniversaries are event managers. And event managers run corporate anniversaries. An event manager, reading this wikipedia article, may be highly interested in corporate anniversaries, and vice versa. I think you'll see if you hold tightly to your requirement that event management stick tightly to its subject, then much of the article (which has few references) should be deleted, according to your logic.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 00:34, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Conf management systems
Hi Andy, I am dealing with around 800 conf proceedings published in Computer Science and believe me, there are less than 10 systems people actually use. I just wanted to build a list so that they can compare pros and cons as there are really many systems around. I thought I'd put a list and someone would compare - like paid/not paid, how many conference supported, etc. There was a similar page on reference managers (bibliography management systems - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_reference_management_software. Sorry, but one needs to start from sth to get to such page, I'll probably need to create it separately. Just the current page seemed too empty to not put the list there... P.S., funny, I looked through the change history - you keep deleting links to conference management system from various users. Sorry, who are you to decide what community wants?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Birukou (talk • contribs) 19:57, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Your revision
There are editors like mezzo mezzo who are continuously disallowing editing Salafi,Wahabi ,Ahle Hadees pages to other editors according to their personal hidden agenda.I tried with verifiable sources to put its relation with Terrorism and am also discussing it with editors but mezzo mezzo just prevented me and others on the baseless pretext of one or other.Msoamu (talk) 15:38, 9 February 2013 (UTC)


 * I suspect that it is you that has a "hidden agenda" but I'm really not all that interested. Religion, and particularly sectarian strife, are an abrogation of human reason. I simply can't understand why (a) people rely on an imaginary friend to help them run their lives and (b) are prepared to kill or be killed in order to prove that their imaginary friend is better that someone else's. They were all made up by a bunch of elderly men (many of whom wear dresses) andy (talk) 10:50, 14 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Agree about the irrationality of the imaginary friend. My guess about the reason why people conjure up such beliefs is because of the weirdness of the human predicament -- humans have a strong desire to live but eventually it ends; to try to deal with such an absurd situation, people will bow down to men wearing dresses mumbling phrases in Latin. My way of dealing with the absurdity is equally absurd -- I contribute to Wikipedia, among other things. :)--Tomwsulcer (talk) 12:23, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Andy, since it seems that you're not entirely abreast of developments, can I point out that the conflict between Msoamu and MezzoMezzo is, at least for now, resolved, and the content dispute is undergoing a discussion. :) Lukeno94 (talk) 17:47, 14 February 2013 (UTC)