User talk:Bellerophon/Archive 11

Talk:List of number-one hits of 2013 (Austria)
Dear Pol43: I apologize for messing up the move of the above page. At first I didn't notice that the page name was wrong, and then when I accepted it the script didn't move it to mainspace as I expected. Then I got flustered and picked the wrong space from the list. I promise to leave any future dealings with that page to someone else. &mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 16:25, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem and no harm done :) It made me giggle though... Pol430   talk to me  16:29, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Shortcuts to other Wikimedia projects
You can wikilink directly to other Wikimedia projects. For example, the Commons main page is commons:Main page (commons:Main page). The :project:page name notation also works with other languages, e.g. the Spanish Wikipedia's equivalent to the Main Page is es:Wikipedia:Portada (es:Wikipedia:Portada). davidwr/ (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  02:06, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Or if you're too lazy to work out what the prefix is, you can just copy and paste the url into url2wiki, and it will do the work for you. :) There is also user:js/urldecoder, which works similarly. — Mr. Stradivarius  ♪ talk ♪ 02:54, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I did not know that. Thank you talk page stalker. davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  03:57, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeahhh, I've used them before and I was trying to remember how to format them, but my brain refused to cooperate. Thanks for the reminders and info. Pol430   talk to me  08:30, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

AFC redirects
Hi, just to let you know, Articles for creation/Redirects is full of junk, and I need your help to revert back to a good version. Thank you, Citrusbowler  (talk) (contribs) (email me)  18:53, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for restoring the page. Citrusbowler  (talk) (contribs) (email me)  19:06, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem, it seems odd that so much disruption occurred at once. Pol430   talk to me  19:10, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks very much :) Pol430   talk to me  19:45, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
 * You're welcome :) →Davey 2010→  →Talk to me!→  19:54, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Cheers for the replyon my talk page
Appreciated. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 16:21, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
 * You're welcome :) Pol430   talk to me  16:52, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Richard Divall - Entry query
Hello, You recently answered a query I had concerning a new entry I had created on Richard Divall

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Richard_Divall&action=edit&redlink=1

Your suggestion was that I had inadvertently deleted it. I followed your advice and went to undelete page but wanted to confirm that we are taliking about the page I created after the first was deleted due to unambiguous plagiarism from a biography on the emelbourne website. Apologies. I am new to editind on Wikipedia. My 'current' edit is all original content. Thank you for your help.

Londonopera (talk) 16:35, 10 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi, allow me to explain: Firstly, you didn't inadvertently delete your work because only administrators can delete things. You can create pages, but not delete them. The page Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Richard Divall (which you were working on) is different from Richard Divall and I have clarified that for you at Requests for undeletion. What appears to have happened, is that you did something that made an administrator think you wanted them to delete Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Richard Divall, which they did. Now that your request for undeletion points to the right place, there should be no issue with undelelting that page, and you will be able to continue where you left off. I hope that explains things for you? If you need any more help, just ask. Pol430   talk to me  16:50, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

United Country Real Estate
Hi Pol. Is it selfish for me to ping you to essentially skip to the head of the line at AfC? ;-)

I submitted another one on: United Country Real Estate

This one is somewhat borderline RE notability, but they are 80 years old, responsible for a historic first real estate catalog, and the sources themselves say they are "quiet" but the leader in country real estate (farms and ranches, etc.) So I leave it up to an impartial editor to decide, but I felt it was worth having.

My COI is that I'm doing it as a favor to a PR firm partner. CorporateM (Talk) 19:09, 10 June 2013 (UTC)


 * No problem at all, but it appears someone beat me to it :) Pol430   talk to me  20:57, 11 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Yah, fastest AfC review I've seen. Strange because the queue is usually so backlogged. Guess I got lucky! Next time I'll at least wait a bit before pinging you. CorporateM (Talk) 21:11, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Geniuses in what context? Was she a member of MENSA?
Hello Pol430

I like your comment and am in complete agreement with your changing "Draheim and other geniuses..." to "Draheim and others..." in the article Sue Draheim: "Editor's summary: /* The 2000s */ Geniuses in what context? Was she a member of MENSA?"

I was waiting for someone to catch that. Of course, there is no way I can provide a source attesting to her being a "genius" (with a small "g"), but since I've provided a source attesting to her being a "Genius" (with a capital "G") (she was a member of the group "Stuart Rosh and the Geniuses"), how about if I change it to "Draheim and other Geniuses..."?

Also, thanks for all that other work you did on the article; it looks a lot nicer. Akhooha (talk) 22:30, 10 June 2013 (UTC)


 * So the term Genius has no meaning outside the name of the group? Why use it as two different versions of the same noun in the same sentence? Seems to me that "Draheim and others" has better flow!? Your welcome for the format fixes, if you need anything else just let me know. :) Pol430   talk to me  21:01, 11 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Well, it was originally intended as an innocent (and perhaps unsuccessful) play on words, but as I have the feeling that WP is no place for word-play, I'll go with the flow. I do have another question though, but as it's entirely unrelated to geniuses or Geniuses, I think I should start a new thread (I hope that's the right thing to do; please be patient with me if it's not, as this is my first experience with WP). --Akhooha (talk) 19:11, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Certainly. You can ask your question in this thread if you like, or start a new one on this page. Or, if you give me a clue what it's about, I might be able to point you in the direction of another suitable venue. Although it's good to have a sense of humour around Wikipedia (you'll need it sometimes...), the style of writing in articles is usually quite formal so that all pages seem uniformly encyclopedic. Pol430   talk to me  19:33, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Crosswind Kite Power
Thanks for fixing Crosswind Kite Power. My connection was lost just as the script was doing its stuff, so I'm not sure what happened. Many thanks. Jamesx12345 (talk) 20:49, 12 June 2013 (UTC)


 * No problem, I figured the script probably crashed on you, it happens sometimes (like when the API goes down). Pol430   talk to me  17:21, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Possibility of uploading photos directly through WP rather than Wikimedia Commons?
Hello Pol430, while I'm not entirely sure I understand the rationale behind it, I've been told by several helpers in the WP Help chat that if the subject is deceased, then an image of that subject is considered available for "fair use" and may be uploaded directly into the article through Wikipedia itself, bypassing the Wikimedia Commons route. I was told also that this could be done only after the article has officially appeared on WP, which the article in question (Sue Draheim) has. The photos I have in mind are already published in several places on the internet and I'd be able to provide URL sources, and am more than willing to give recognition to the sources in the text of the article. If it is indeed true that images of deceased subject are considered to be available for "fair use" in the English WP, then can you explain to me how I actually go about uploading them? One more question occurs to me: if the photo also contains other people who are still living, would they have to be cropped out? Thanks for your patience and your attention and your help. --Akhooha (talk) 19:56, 13 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi again! Yes, there is an argument in WP:Non-free content that images of deceased persons can be used under a 'fair use' rationale, provided that there is no likelihood of being able to obtain a free or compatibly licensed image. See WP:NFCI point 10. Generally, any free or compatibly licensed images should be uploaded to Wikimedia commons rather than directly to Wikipedia, this makes them more accessible to other Wikimedia projects. Non-free images must always be uploaded directly to Wikipedia with applicable 'fair use' rationale. To upload an image you need to click on the 'upload file' link found in the 'toolbox' section of the sidebar on the left of your screen. This will take you to the file upload wizard which should be fairly self-explanatory; however, if you have problems uploading the file yourself, you can make a request for a more experienced editor to upload it for you at WP:Files for upload. Pol430   talk to me  16:20, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Weird
Would you care take a look here and tell me why the user's edit history doesn't show said article? I wanted to get in touch with the deleting admin but can't find the deletion log. Thanks! FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 15:50, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
 * The submission you are looking for is Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Carnegie Cricket Club. It won't show up in the authors contributions because it has been deleted. Apparently, under criteria WP:CSD. Deleted edits don't show in your contribs; although, the number of your edits that have been deleted will show up in the edit count tool. Pol430   talk to me  16:07, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Cheers for that! It's strange that it was deleted under G13. I think I submitted it under G12. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 16:46, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
 * It could be that TParis just selected the wrong reason when pushing the delete button. It is the next criteria along after G12. I'm sure all will become clear when he responds to your talkpage note. :) Pol430   talk to me  16:53, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
 * G13 is a brand new criterion for CSD for "Abandoned AFC Articles". I mistakenly deleted it as G13 instead of G12 when I was deleting a bunch of other AFCs that were actual G13s.--v/r - TP 17:55, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Cheers for that! FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 23:08, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Hector Rosales
Hi,

I just reviewed your comments on my article for submission, Hector Rosales.

I think the criticisms of my article are a bit harsh for a few reasons: I am a17 year old high school student who, along with the rest of my English class, was given an assignment to write an article for an author who was taken from your list of authors who do not have articles published about them. Let me first say that I had to research 23 authors form this list, because, even though they were on the 'unpublished" authors list in Wikipedia, they were, in fact, published! SO, the list is definitely NOT up tp date. I finally came upon an author who had no ENGLISH article written on him. My English teacher said that we could write an article on an author who may have another article written on him/her in his'her native language.

I actually did not stumble upon the Spanish page for Rosales until after I had written my complete article. My information for my article was taken from the references I have listed on my article page......the Spanish article page, I see, also heavily relied on one of my references. I do not see how on earth you are saying that the author's own website can be considered an "unreliable" source!! If the author's own words are not reliable, then, what is??????

I have tried my very best with this article....none of the class had any idea how to even begin their articles, as the teacher basically threw the assignment at us and said go to Wikipedia WIzard and Sandbox, neither of which any of us had ever used before. To be honest, for my first attempt, I thought I did a really good job! So did my teacher, as I received an A+ on the article!! So, can you please tell me where or how I went wrong, because, for all of the hours I put into this, I would love to see my work published.

Yes, there may be a Spanish language article on Rosales, but 1) I never tapped into that as I did not even know it existed until my article was complete, and when I stumbled upon it in a Google search for information on Hector Rosales and 2) I believe my article gives much more information than the short Spanish language article and 3) There were just two websites that had enough information on Rosales for me to actually use as the basis for my article, and, even with that, I had to translate from Spanish to ENglish and 4) I disagree that there is not a need for an English language article on Rosales....not everyone speaks Spanish!

Pepetink (talk) 12:18, 15 June 2013 (UTC) Pepetink


 * Hello Pepetink! Ok, let me first explain that the comment in the grey box (inside the big pink template) on the submission, is not mine and I do not necessarily endorse that comment. My comment is shown below the template, where you see my signature.


 * So, a bit of info about sourcing/referencing on Wikipedia: when we talk about sources being reliable or unreliable, independent or not independent, primary, secondary and tertiary, we do so in reference to Wikipedia standards – rather than any other definition. On Wikipedia, sources published by the subject of an article are generally considered unreliable for establishing anything other than basic facts – because people can write anything they want about themselves, and where money and publicity are at stake, they often do... Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, so we must take every care to ensure that what is written in our articles is verifiable. That means having reliable sources. Also, we must make sure we only have articles about subjects that are important or significant and we judge this according to our notability policy. In order to determine a subjects notability, it is often necessary to see that the subject has been written about in multiple, reliable, third-party sources. All of these concepts and policies are summarized at WP:VRS.


 * The specific issue I saw with your submission is that it only contains inline citations to his own website. I was asking you, in my comment, to use the other (independent sources) to back up what it says in the body text, as well as the sources that point to his own website. If you can that, I will re-review the submission and I'm confident it will then be acceptable. Pol430   talk to me  12:41, 15 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Hello,
 * Thank you for the information....this is by far the clearest explanation of notability and reliable sources that I have seen anywhere on Wikipedia!


 * I understand, now, the reasons why the living individual is not considered a notable source(by WIki standards, that is). To be honest, I must be a bit naive, because it never woud have occurred to me that people would be dishonest with information about themselves, which, as you say, could lead to a Wikipedia article not being reliable!!


 * I will attempt to make the corrections you suggested, the operative word being "attempt."


 * Thank you for your help. I appreciate that you took the time to explain and guide me through the maze of information on Wikipedia!! Some of the other editors were not so kind. Pepetink (talk) 13:28, 15 June 2013 (UTC) pepetink


 * You're welcome! I'm currently making a few minor edits to the submission to improve things -- but don't let that stop you working on it. I managed to fix a broken link to on of his interviews with the Jornal De Poesia. Pol430   talk to me  13:34, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Oh, thank you very much for doing this:) I appreciate you taking the time to do this for me. Your contributions are greatly appreciated....more so because I really don't have a clue about the technical aspects!!

Pepetink (talk) 14:19, 15 June 2013 (UTC) pepetink

Talkback
Suri 100 (talk) 07:40, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Cigar
I noticed that you forgot to send a note to user Professor Twain after reverting his edit to Cigar. In recognition of DTTR I resisted the urge to send a template to you, but I thought you'd like to know. I went ahead and left the user a note about the edit as well. Hopefully that's OK with you. —    Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 20:00, 19 June 2013 (UTC)


 * No clue at all how I messed up your page and then had to use 3 more edits to fix it, but I think I got it back properly. Sorry, I'm usually more adept at these things. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 20:04, 19 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I don't normally leave a message when reviewing pending changes. In hindsight, this editor was probably trying to be helpful and a little message alerting them to the revert would have been kind. I'll bear it mind next time. And thank you for your DTTR consideration :) Pol430   talk to me  20:09, 19 June 2013 (UTC)


 * FWIW, IMO it's all vandalism, and I don't give newer editors the credit for being able to tell protected from regular pages, so I warn them all. But that's the great thing about Wikipedia, there are so many different means to reach the same ends. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 20:29, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Filibustering
I am not filibustering. The requests age out and get archived regardless of whether you close them or not. What I am doing is answering the reasons given for rejection. Which is clearly not the same thing. I am not preventing the archival of the requests, since they age out. Several of my requests have aged out without accepted, so I have not kept them live by entering new replies to myself; if I were filibustering, I'd post a new timestamp all the time, which, I am not doing. -- 65.94.79.6 (talk) 00:11, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Why did you decline my submission?
Who are you? And who do you thnk you are? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amitkumarraut (talk • contribs) 08:18, 20 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Hello! I'm Pol430, I'm a reviewer at WikiProject Articles for Creation. I declined your submission because it consisted of nothing more than the title of the subject, so there was really nothing for me to review. I would like to suggest that when you talk to other editors on Wikipedia you do so in a civil manner otherwise you may find help and assistance unforthcoming. Pol430   talk to me  11:15, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

AfC assistance
Hi Pol430. I was hoping you could help me with a situation at AfC. I've been reviewing articles for a few months and today I came across this submission: Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Texas_A%26M_Foundation. I was going to approve it, but the move couldn't be made because it already exists as a redirect that navigates to Texas A&M University. The redirect's revision history shows that the Texas A&M Foundation article was deleted via AfD in 2009. What would be an appropriate course of action at this point? QuantifiedElf (talk) 18:16, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment And does the submitting editor's username suggest a potential COI? QuantifiedElf (talk) 18:19, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi QuantifiedElf, I have just declined that submission. Sorry for jumping into it in such a manner, but there were multiple issues that I found with the submission and the easiest way for me to communicate them was to write a detailed custom decline message. It think I have mostly answered your questions in the decline message, but in relation to the second part of your question: I would suggest that the user's username strongly indicates a conflict of interest. I hope that helps? Feel free to ask any more questions you may have. Best Pol430   talk to me  18:45, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Cool. Cool, cool, cool. You definitely got all my questions in your decline message. Quick question, how do you go about discovering copyright violations? Is it just a feeling that some copy might in violation and then running it through a Google search? QuantifiedElf (talk) 20:38, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Basically, yes! The more you deal with copyright violations, the more you develop an eye for it. At AfC we primarily find copy and pasted text taken from somewhere on the internet. When we deal with copyright violations we do so according to WP:CV and WP:Non-free which tells us that copy and pasted text taken from printed sources or online sources is considered subject to copyright unless is is explicitly disclaimed at source or compatibly licensed (see also WP:DCM). It is important to make the distinction between what Wikipedia considers a copyright violation and the legal principle of 'copyright violation' -- the latter is a matter for courts of law to decide. In terms of discovering it, you can check a submission you suspect might be a copyright violation by search for unique tracts of text using a search engine. There are also a couple of tools that help with detecting copyvio, such as:
 * Copyvio detector tool (use with caution, prone to weirdness...)
 * Duplication detector tool (use to compare an article to a webpage for matching text)
 * User:MadmanBot/manual (use to force MadmanBot to check a specified page for copyvio) Pol430   talk to me  20:55, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Texas A&M Foundation Page
Pol430,

I was wondering if we could chat more about the decision to disallow the Foundation's Wikipedia page.

We have edited our content significantly from 2009, including more links to outside sources than our website and images as well as adding more information.

We also see that our counterpart that runs the alumni affairs program for Texas A&M and raises the university's annual fund, The Association of Former Students, also has a page on Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_Former_Students.

For these reasons we were curious as to why our page was taken down again.

I'd love to speak to you further about this.

Thanks for your help!

Rachel Dohmann — Preceding unsigned comment added by FoundationFan53 (talk • contribs) 21:44, 20 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi, certainly. Let me address the points you raise in order: 1) The deletion discussion in 2009 focused not only on the sources present, but also on what sources could be found. That discussion took into account some coverage in regional newspapers, but the outcome was still that the article should not stand in its own right. Personally, I feel that the subject probably does pass Wikipedia's threshold for notability; however, I do not feel that the submission and its sources are so substantially improved as for me to be confident that unilaterally re-establishing the article, against the consensus formed in 2009, would be uncontroversial. This is why I suggest that the submission be listed at deletion review, which is the official forum for overturning previous AfD discussions. 2) The fact that a similar article exists on Wikipedia is not a rationale for the acceptance of a submission; they must each be judged on their own merits (see WP:OTHERSTUFF). 3) The submission page was not 'taken down' it is still there. It has been declined for live publication in Wikipedia for reasons mentioned here and in the decline reason noted on the submission. You can continue to edit the submission and address the concerns raised, then resubmit. 4) I notice you have not responded to the copyright concerns I mentioned!? You cannot reproduce text taken from elsewhere on the Internet, not even your own website, without the copyright owner authorising its reproduction in accordance with Wikipedia's licensing conditions; you must follow the formal process for doing this, although the text in question is highly promotional and probably better off removed or entirely re-written. I hope this makes things clearer for you? Pol430   talk to me  07:22, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Concord Prison Outreach
Concord Prison Outreach - Dear Pol430, thank you for looking at my submission. Can you help me with what minor edits you might be referring to so I can clean up the article. Also, there seems to be a couple of other problems I don't know how to fix and wonder if you can advise me - I'm not as tech savy as I should be I suppose to do this, but I thank you for your time! Mark Wfingerle (talk) 13:50, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

New Article Lady Kash Has been declined
Hi,

I am creating this page on the artiste Lady Kash as she has broken away from the duo of Lady kash and krissy. This is the reason the page lady kash and krissy cannot be used any longer. Please consider this and approve the article the next time it has been submitted for review. thank you.

Jeevan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeevastana (talk • contribs) 18:07, 21 June 2013 (UTC)


 * My apologies, I should have read further down. I have amended the decline reason. Pol430   talk to me  18:21, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Lady Kash
Hi Pol430. I've speedy-deleted the above page per your request, I'll leave moving the page and clearing the AfC stuff to you as I'm sure you're more familiar with that whole process than me. Best wishes. ~ mazca  talk 11:46, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Many thanks, all done :) Pol430   talk to me  13:36, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

A330-300 can land in paro
i am sure an a330 -300 can take off and land here because i had calculated it already

if you want to see i can e-mail you

(Do do doggy (talk) 01:22, 30 June 2013 (UTC)).


 * No, I wan't to see you cite a reliable source -- your calculations are not a reliable source, they are original research. I reverted your edit quite legitimately per WP:CHALLENGE. I suggest you make yourself familiar with Wikipedia's core content policies before contributing further. Pol430   talk to me  08:13, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 30
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Theodore Tracy Fairchild, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Republican Party (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) 11:07, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

HellermannTyton
Dear Pol430,

I've created an Article regarding the Company HellermannTyton. It’s a global company, but there isn't a English Wikipedia article - especially poor because the company was established 1933 in England, as Insuloid. I'm really sorry about that the article seems to be advertising. Of course, as I'm working for the company, I have to be very careful not to tap in the trap of having a conflict of interest.

Regarding the sources, I try to find as liable sources as possible. But this is quite hard in the manufacturing industry, they aren’t this present in the digital world. So there was no other way to take the divers websites of the sister companies (especially the African website, which is quite detailed). Regarding the "Neutral point of view": I'm writing Wikipedia articles for a couple of years and always try to be as neutral as possible. Especially concerning this article I want to put in noting more than facts.
 * Is it possible that you could mark which parts of the Article in creation needs to be changes to meet the "What Wikipedia is not" requirements?
 * Also about the sources - to go through the archives of the company is like a hobby now. finding really old pictures and catalogues from the seventies. But the history websites are the most reliable sources in the internet.
 * Do you have any hints for reliable sources except "Find sources: "HellermannTyton" – news • books • scholar • JSTOR • free images"

I just can say, that I’m really stay behind Wikipedia and not want to advertise for anything or anybody. Just being part of Wikipedia and making information available to every user --Paul HT (talk) 11:05, 1 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Paul, I relation to your first point: The overall tone of the article strikes me as promotional. See WP:Guide to writing better articles for more advice. In relation to points two and three, reliable sources are generally things like newspaper articles, interviews, coverage in published books -- that king of thing. See WP:VRS for more. Pol430   talk to me  20:03, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

The EU-28 redirect
If you deny the EU-28 redirect you should do something about the EU-27 redirect(as a matter of fact if you type EU-27 in the Wikipedia search field you will be redirected to the page "European Union"). Oh and by the way you should check out this site as well(it's the offical site of the European Statistis bureau) so please change aprove the redirect, trust me I'm a European! Have a good day!
 * If you had provided a source to begin with it would have been accepted to begin with. Simply because EU-27 existed does not automatically mean EU-28 should (see WP:OTHERSTUFF). In light of the source you have provided, I have now created the redirect. Pol430   talk to me  15:11, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

vandalism on article
Dear POL 430, the bio article on "Jeff Rustia" is currently being vandalized with information that is incorrect and damaging. How do we stop this drive by vandalism. Looking for your help and suggestion. Corrections have already been made. But it will happen again. thank you. Arms863 18:14, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, the open nature of Wikipedia means that articles are prone to vandalism. The annon editor only made two edits and they were a while ago, so there is no further action than can reasonably be taken at this time. I have left them a warning at their talk page, but they are probably long gone. If they come back, let me know. Pol430   talk to me  19:28, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Lithgow power station.
please find 11 references that I have added to my article. Most are letters from the Electricity authority of Commission. These are the only reference that I have and can if necessary submit the whole of these letters and reports in full. Please let me know if this is required. Signed John Stirling. Email jstirl@aanet.com.au


 * I can't see where you have added any references to the article. The only edit you made it was to resubmit it for review without changing anything. Pol430   talk to me  08:13, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Maker's Row
Hi there,

I have a quick question you may be able to help me with: I'd like to embed a video into my "Maker's Row" article and add the company description to the side, but can't figure out exactly how.

Thanks so much!

Americanmanufacturing (talk) 20:31, 5 July 2013 (UTC)Americanmanufacturing


 * Hello, you are not able to upload media such as images and videos yet as your account is not WP:AUTOCONFIRMED. You can make a request at Files for upload where an experienced editor will look at what you want to upload and determine if it is within Wikipedia's guidelines to do so. If it is, they will upload it for you. Pol430   talk to me  20:37, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Great, thank you! How do I get the mini details to the right side of the page?

Thanks so much! Really appreciate it. Americanmanufacturing (talk) 21:46, 5 July 2013 (UTC)


 * You're probably looking for Template:Infobox website. Pol430   talk to me  21:54, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

The Evolution of Imagination Part 1. The Nightmare of sleep
Hi, Thank you for reviewing my submission. However I am a little nonplussed by your conclusion..."It appears that your submission is either an attempt to be humorous over being factual, or is an obvious hoax. As Wikipedia strives to contain only factual entries, we can not accept your submission at this time."

My entry is certainly not humorous or a hoax as my book has been endorsed by Professor Ray Bull, Emeritus Professor of Forensic Psychology at The University of Leicester. (BSc, MSc, DSc, CForPsychol, FBPsS, FAPS). ISBN 978-1-909465-02-2.

My theory is based on scientific research and is certainly brand new as it describes exactly what happens to us during the eight hour sleep cycle, which has never been explained before. Perhaps, more importantly it also links the role of sleep in the evolution of our Imagination, which is again a first discovery.

May I respectfully ask do you know exactly what happens to you during the eight hours you are asleep at night... e.g. in the two periods spent in deep sleep you are in a state of coma and during the five periods of REM sleep your body muscles are frozen.

These are not in themselves new discoveries and I refer to them (and the research in my book) but what is new is that the mechanisms of the sleep process have now been integrated into one 'unified theory' of sleep,which has never been explained before I would be quite happy to send you a copy of my book .... to an address at Wikipedia for security purposes, should you so wish. but I would please ask you to reconsider perhaps by visiting the website www.nightmareofsleep.com Best wishes, Roger Cliffe-Thompson Roger Cliffe-Thompson (talk) 23:44, 5 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, but I thought your submission was a student prank. Largely because of the opening line: "In the whole of human history there has never been a cohesive scientific explanation as to why we are rendered unconscious each night. Now, an explosive and entirely new 'Theory of Sleep' clearly defines sleep's true purpose". We simply can't write like that in an encyclopaedia.


 * You will need to rewrite the submission according to WP:NPOV. Also, in order for your book to be included in Wikipedia it will need to have received significant attention in reliable sources, such as the mainstream media, to meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines -- which can be found at WP:NBOOK. Pol430   talk to me  20:33, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Wizkid
"It still reads like an advertisement." How exactly does it read like an advertisement? Provide specific examples, please.

"The tone of the article is outrageously promotional" This is your personal opinion.

"it needs to be fundamentally rewritten to comply with WP:NPOV."

"Get rid of all the WP:PUFFERY, WP:WEASEL words and totally unsubstantiated opinion pieces like: "Wizkid is known by many as a collaborative genius". " I wrote a separate paragraph to validate my point on him being a collaborative genius. I don't get you. If you want to decline the article, you have to come up with something better than that. Everybody can't write like you. Everybody ought to have a different writing style. In the article, I mentioned the individual's early life, collaborations, album, and provided proper citations. I don't see what I did wrong. I still don't understand why you declined it.

versace1608 03:37, 6 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I shall respond to your points in order:


 * 1) It still reads like an advertisement becuase it contains phraseology such as "Wizkid became a household name within Nigeria's musical landscape", "Wizkid is arguably the best young musician on the African continent." and "Since the genesis of his career". Nope of these statements comply with WP:NPOV and their only purpose is to promote the subject in subjective terms; this is at variance with what Wikipedia should be -- a balanced, neutral encyclopedia.
 * Yes, it is. More accurately it is my considered opinion based on having been around here a while and having conducted thousands of other reviews.
 * 1) It does need to be fundamentally rewritten, again this is my opinion. An opinion I have formulated based on detailed knowledge of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.
 * 2) While it is true everyone has a different writing style, all articles must be written from a neutral point of view (WP:NPOV); this isn't just a preference, it's policy and one of the five pillars of Wikipedia. It is quite possible for you to express your individual writing style and maintain a neutral point of view.
 * 3) It's largely irrelevant because another reviewer has accepted your submission and moved it to mainspace. Pol430   talk to me  17:25, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

In reference to my username: It isn't referring to an organization or company name. Rather, it is referring to the idea/subject of manufacturing in America. Hope this clears up any confusion.

Best regards, Americanmanufacturing (talk) 17:22, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! That helped.

I saw that my page has been flagged as an advertisement. Any suggestions as to how I can fix that? Thanks!

Americanmanufacturing (talk) 14:01, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Roy Wilkins Center for Human Relations and Social Justice
The Roy Wilkins Center for Human Relations and Social Justice was founded in 1992 as a joint effort of the University of Minnesota and the Roy Wilkins Foundation to carry on the legacy of Roy Wilkins, former chief executive of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). It is the only endowed center and chair in Wilkins' memory in the United States.The Roy Wilkins Center for Human Relations and Social Justice was given the mandate to carry on Wilkins' work through cutting-edge research, dialogue, and consensus among people of all communities.

Mission: The Wilkins Center undertakes research to guide and empower policymakers and community leaders to develop and promote solutions to the problems of racism and racial and ethnic inequality.

RoywilkinsUMN (talk) 17:44, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ratanjan
DEAR SIR, I HAD WRITTEN AN ARTICLE ON 27 JUNE 2013.I HAD MADE SOME CHANGES IN THE ARTICLE. I HAD MADE PARAGRAPHS. I HAD GIVEN REFERENCES ON 13 JULY 2013. SIR, RATANJAN WAS AN ANCIENT TEHSIL PLACE. IT WAS A PARAGANA. THERE ARE MANY ANCIENT MONUMENTS. THESE ALL MONUMENTS ARE NOT THERE IN NEAR BY VILLAGES.THIS VILLAGE IS NOT INCLUDED IN WIKIPEDIA. IT IS ALSO NOTICED THAT THE HISTORY OF MANY VILLAGES IS NOT INCLUDED. I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE ADDITIONAL INFORMATIONS BEING A STUDENT OF HISTORY, POLITICAL SCIENCE & MILITARY HISTORY.I REQUIRE YOUR MORALE SUPPORT. REQUEST ADD INFORMATIONS OF RATANJAN. THANKING YOU SIR.YOUR'S FAITHFULLY..COLONEL ANNASAHEB VASANTRAO DESHMUKH.Annadeshmukh (talk) 05:28, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
 * The submission is still unreferenced and you didn't add any to it on 13th July 2013. Pol430   talk to me  18:59, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

I could use some help. please <3
the sins are in my five children - ending with my youngest child nickolas. they rape me and implanted their seed in me. i'm in love with alain my ( sonny boy) his mind has be very mess with by lorena hanger sheddy she and her mother both have had sexual intercourse with Alain hoping to have a baby. They did not suceed in pregnancy of Alain. On April 6, 2013 10:31am. We have the child and need them to be disposed of immediately they have killed of Alains 9 year old his father Roland and his brother is in prison - please release him we need help. the child protection act is a fraud for children to be killed. many geneocide have taken place billons of people have die to feed him. Tammiantal (talk) 14:48, 15 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Totally weird... Pol430   talk to me  18:55, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/ThrillMe
Hi Pol 430

Many thanks for your reply. I will try my best to address these concerns but as you can imagine, it is hard to find more than a handful of reliable sources for a product that is relatively new so I slightly feel caught between a rock and a hard place. if I delete them outright then I will then be told that I don't have enough secondary sources and if I keep them I will be told they are not reputable enough.

by the way, I should point out that of the sources I cited, two also have their own wiki entries: BFM TV and Nana 10 And they all have google page rankings of 6 or over

BFM TV has a google page ranking of = 7 Nana 10 = 6 beet.tv = 6 docnews.fr =6

by comparison: Channel 4 = 7 the times = 8 cnet news = 8 huffington post = 7

As I said before, I don't understand where the difference lies between my piece about the ThrillMe site with its genuinely innovative use of facial expression technology – originally developed for advertising and now being taken in a wholly different direction – and generic plugs for famous and less-famous outfits, such as Flooved, Valve Corporation or Rotten Tomatoes. Have Wiki standards risen exponentially since these were allowed through or am I missing something here?

Later on, once the site is fully launched there will be more reviews and more sources, but for the moment, while it is in technical trial, I wanted something for those who hear about the site through word of mouth or blogs or any other source to be able to look up.

Best wishes

Nigel Matador45 (talk) 16:23, 15 July 2013 (UTC)


 * So basically you recognize that the subject is not yet notable!? Which would seem like a good juncture for me to point you towards WP:CRYSTAL. Pol430   talk to me  18:56, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

ACC Access
Hello. I have suspended your ACC access as you have been inactive for 45 days or more. Should you return and wish to have your access restored, feel free to poke me.  D u s t i *Let's talk!* 23:15, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

COI AfCs
I feel a bit selfish attempting to skip to the front of the line at AfC, but as long as you don't mind my pinging you, I'll keep doing so in hopes of fast, high-quality AfC reviews. A lot reviewers will pass just about anything and on account of my COI, I would prefer an editor I know will at least give it a read-through:

If you have some time to check out my submissions: CorporateM (Talk) 23:05, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jeremy Stoppelman
 * Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Greg Renker


 * Nevermind - another editor got it. CorporateM (Talk) 19:32, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/RfC Reviewer permission
You are invited to join the discussion at WikiProject Articles for creation/RfC Reviewer permission. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:09, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

ANI
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. T/S: 17:21, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

YGM
Hi there,

You've got mail from youngtan88.

Please can you get back to me as soon as possible.

Many thanks. T/S: 17:21, 13 October 2013 (UTC)