User talk:Bellerophon/Archive 7

ready for review2
Hey there, I was a little tired when I did these, but I think I did alright. Had some weird run on copy come out at the end but I got it fixed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Selene Scott (talk • contribs) 02:03, 8 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Just read your comments on my answers to section two. I'm pleased. Hit me with the copyright section whenever you are ready. Oh, I had an issue that I ran by Virdatis, but I never heard anything back. I took out a word in a sentence on the Edgar Cayce page, I changed "He suffered from a stroke" to "He suffered a stroke". I listed my reason for omitting the word as 'unnecessary'. I went back to the page later and noticed that the entire section on his death was now missing. I looked in history and noticed a bot took out the section and listed 'possible vandalism by Selene Scott'. Is this something I should be worried about? I don't want to get a reputation as a vandal.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by [User:Selene Scott|Selene Scott]] (talk • contribs) 22:16, 8 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Don't worry. An IP editor made an edit after yours where s/he added "he was a sweet dude". Cluebot just reverted the IP edit and not yours, see this diff. The information about his death is still there, you can view it at: Edgar Cayce. P.s. don't forget those indents during conversations ;-) I'll add your copyright assignment soon. Pol430  talk to me 22:25, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks for checking that for me, It freaked me out a little when I read that! and why does it say 'unsigned' comment by me up there^? I'm signing....."Selene Scott (talk) 06:34, 9 May 2012 (UTC)"
 * "Fair use images must be used in at least one article (not "orphaned")"? One article in what? Wikipedia or something else? And what is "article 'namespace'? I saw the term highlighted once but lost where that was. "Selene Scott (talk) 07:17, 9 May 2012 (UTC)"
 * Yes it means Wikipedia article. Article namespace is also referred to as the 'mainspace'. You can find out more at WP:NAMESPACE. Pol430  talk to me 19:38, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation
 Roxane Permar, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation. Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! Yunshui 雲&zwj;水 13:44, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Re WARWICK EVANS
Pol430 Thank you for your reply. I will source links to the features. Jhoward2003 Jhoward2003 (talk) 18:22, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
 * You're welcome Pol430  talk to me 14:35, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Participation in your adoption school
Hi Pol430! Would you consider accepting me into your adoption school program? I appreciate your use of assignments and a grading system, and I think I would benefit from your conventional style of educating about Wikipedia. I currently do recent changes patrolling for vandalism as well as some light contributions whenever I find something that strikes me, but I'd like to get more involved in Wikipedia as well as develop a better understanding of its policies -- your program seems like a great place to start. Please let me know if you are available. Thank you! Rinkle gorge (talk) 04:10, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Rinkle gorge, yes I would be happy to adopt you. I will set up an adoption page page for you and send you a message when it's done. Pol430  talk to me 14:29, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Excellent, thank you! I've already started reading the material for the first section and I'll soon be ready for some questions.Rinkle gorge (talk) 17:02, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

New Page Triage prototype released
Hey Pol430! We've finally finished the NPT prototype and deployed it on enwiki. We'll be holding an office hours session on the 16th at 21:00 in #wikimedia-office to show it off, get feedback and plot future developments - hope to see you there! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 03:34, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

my entry
Hello,

Having read the rules for submitting an article, I am unable to see what rule(s) the submission is breaking.

Your note "This is still an advertisement and as had already been mention, one outlet of a larger franchise hardly seems notable. It is also unreferenced and therefore the content cannot be verified.", seems to ignore the fact that this goes against the same things that get approved all the time. If you do a search for any music artist who has redone the same song I.e Shannon Noll 'what about me'. This song was originally done by another artist and really if your reasoning is to carry merit, the only the original should be allowed to be listed. Mentioning any cd of any artist, any movie title under an individual heading, and album cover etc is more so advertising to what the entry I have submitted. This has been allowed on many hundreds of Wikipedia articles.

You mention about sources of information. I previously had sources and was told that because of them it read as an advertisement, now you are saying it needs them in order to be possible as an article. I removed all content that read as an advertisement and you are still saying it does. Nothing in the entry states anything not related to the business or what the business is known for. Previously it did, but after the last submission that stuff was removed.


 * If you have read the rules, then you have fundamentally failed to grasp them. With phrases like "No matter where you want to go, one of our team of travel professionals will have first hand experience in that region." appearing in the submission, it's hard to see how you could possibly think it is written in a neutral and non-promotional tone! I'll be specific and point out that the submission violates:


 * 1) The policy on neutrality -- because it reads like an advertisement.
 * 2) The policy on verifiability -- because it has no reliable references.
 * 3) The notability guidelines -- it fails to meet the requirements (mostly due to its lack of references, that would indicate the company has received significant coverage in independent, reliable sources).


 * When you first submitted the article for review, it looked like this. You had three external links that pointed to your own website. Self published sources, and other sources connected to the subject of the article, are completely unsuitable for establishing the notability of the company. We want to see that other people have written extensively about your company, in a non-promotional way. This is encyclopedia, not a directory listing, forum for free advertising or social networking site.


 * The fact that there are other articles on Wikipedia, that may not meet the notability guidelines, is irrelevant. If you have found articles that do not meet our criteria, then please feel free to nominate them for deletion at Articles for Deletion. Each submission must be assessed on its own merits. Pol430  talk to me 13:03, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Pervasive PSQL article for creation
Hello,

You said the article Pervasive PSQL had been tagged for deletion so that I could move in my article. But that is my article. It was not accepted because it was considered the same subject as Btrieve. I don't want it deleted; I want it included in Wikipedia.

Sorry, this is my first article and I'm having trouble navigating through all the currents of Wikipedia. Handworks (talk) 13:57, 14 May 2012 (UTC)


 * At the time I left you that message, the page Pervasive PSQL existed as a redirect (to Btrieve). In order to accept your submission, it is a technical requirement of the Mediwiki software to delete the redirect page, so that your submission can be moved there. You will now notice that your submission has been accepted, and can be found at Pervasive PSQL. In other words, it's all good... Happy editing. Pol430  talk to me 17:39, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks BM :-) Pol430  talk to me 17:09, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks :-) Pol430  talk to me 19:25, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Mail?
Hi, can you tell me where I can find my email? I see that most people have a link to 'email' on their user page, but I don't have one yet. A fellow wiki sent me a message on my talk page telling me to check my mail. Thanks. "Selene Scott (talk) 00:01, 17 May 2012 (UTC)"
 * Actually, its the guy right above this who sent you the barnstar who emailed me!"Selene Scott (talk)" —Preceding undated comment added 00:02, 17 May 2012 (UTC).
 * Yes, it was I. Emails sent using the Special:EmailUser feature is sent to your confirmed email address (visible to you on your preferences page).  Hazard-SJ  ✈   00:59, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Re: AFC reviews
Thank you for your post on my talk page. I am surely looking forward in taking necessary action while accepting or declining articles. I surely understand it.I assure you i will take more care while reviewing articles on AFC space.But as some of the articles lacks so much content i am declining them on my point of view and will take more care while accepting submissions like this.I have also noticed so many people writing down articles about unnoticeable persons and sometimes articles about them selves. I am also declining those articles. Thanking you, Regards & Wishes, Arshad.mohammed18 Pol430  talk to me 15:08, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

The reason for accepting article is It had enough references. It clearly talks about a notable band and i am very much sure about it .and also i believe it might be surely written from a neutral point of view. Still article needs content and lacks very much information .Any user in future might edit it with more information.Its good to have some thing, Its Better than nothing.The article about the band is not listed any where in Wikipedia .Do u think that this article must be declined ?. Well If so may i know the reason. Do you think that articles that i am accepting and declining are not trustworthy ? .If this is so you can clearly ask me to get out of AFC section. I thought of spending some time over here on Wikipedia as now i am in my summer vacations .As far as i am concerned i am only 14 years old. If you could give me any necessary suggestions about accepting and declining Articles.I would be very much grateful to you

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Arshad.mohammed18 (talk • contribs) 04:36, 18 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Arshad, your efforts to help out at AfC are appreciated, but you must work within Wikipedia policy. The article Midnight Red (American Group) may be notable, but there is no evidence of their notability. The references on the article are all primary sources and do not help to establish notability. The article is written in a very promotional tone that does not comply with the policy on neutrality. It should not really have been accepted at that stage. I'm not going to ask you "get out of AFC section", but I think you would benefit from building up your experience in other areas for a little while and then coming back to AfC when you have a better understanding of policies and guidelines. I appreciate that you are only 14, you would probably benefit from some mentoring from an experienced editor. If you are going to continue at AfC please seek some mentoring from an experienced editor, please familiarize yourself with the notability guidelines, what constitutes a reliable sources and the policy on neutrality, and read the reviewing instructions carefully. I will fix up the article in question as best I can. Best wishes. Pol430  talk to me 15:24, 18 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Well, Previously I have edited around 4 Articles about Educational Department Of Andhra Pradesh i.e, State Board Of Technical Education, Andhra Pradesh ,Andhra Pradesh Board of Secondary Education , District Educational Office Ranga Reddy , Andhra Pradesh Board of Intermediate Education on which i had incredible knowledge and i am quite sure that u might be the one who checked them . I have surely worked on them and tried my best in making them good . I was also thinking of creating more articles on Educational Department and i am working on it.Then i finally wanted to get to AFC section .Will try my best while accepting Articles . Are you a Official Person from Wikipedia? .Don't mind i am Just asking it out of curiosity.I just want to be a you know kinda web designer and trying all the web related things. I am also a huge fan of Wikipedia just wanted to be a best editor over here. Anyways thank you for your post and suggestions and will try my best efforts in understanding the rules and regulations for accepting and declining articles. Once again thank you for your post.And also suggest me Rules which i am lacking  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arshad.mohammed18 (talk • contribs) 15:54, 18 May 2012 (UTC)


 * You're welcome, Wikipedia is not just an online encyclopedia, it is also an online community. There are very few 'official Wikipedia persons', but members of the Wikimedia foundation could be called that. Most of the editors here, including administrators, are volunteers -- including me. It is the community that decides how Wikipedia runs and it is the community that establishes the policies. The Wikimedia foundation look after legal matters, the servers, and take care of foundation issues. Just concentrate on the rules I have already pointed out to you for now. Pol430  talk to me 16:09, 18 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Can i come back at AFC section i got a Message on my Talk Page that it Needs reviewers — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arshad.mohammed18 (talk • contribs) 07:30, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Deletion review
You and some others have stated that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Afranet can't be submitted until a deletion review takes place. Unprotecting a page isn't within the scope of deletion review, it is only for restoring deleted content/challenging closures. Ryan Vesey Review me!  16:32, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
 * The reason the page is protected is because of many recreations and the fact that the article was deleted as the result of an AFD discussion. The request for unprotection has been declined. The only remaining avenue to creation is to ask for deletion review to establish that the proposed version of this article, addresses the concerns raised in the AFD. DRV is the appropriate venue. Pol430  talk to me 16:51, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

re article Gordon Stewart
Thank you for your edits to my page Gordon Stewart. I have made several more edits to substantiate data. Have I done enough to have the POV removed? bills_mother Bills mother (talk) 21:29, 18 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi, you have only made edits to the references, which is good, but the POV tag relates to the tone of the article's text. For example: "Making regular appearances as Musical Director for BBC Radio 4's The Daily Service and the BBC's popular Songs of Praise over a period of 15 years until 2011, Dr Stewart is a familiar figure to congregations across the UK." and "Dr. Stewart's repertoire is large and covers all the major schools of organ composition. His recitals often include music by J S Bach and a composition by a living composer. Dr. Stewart has had music written for him and dedicated to him, including the following:". Wikipedia articles must be written from a neutral point of view they must not priase, show off or 'big up' the subject. Please tone down or remove any promotional language and be careful to avoid peacock words. Once that's done the POV tag can be removed. Best. Pol430  talk to me 21:36, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Articles for Creation: Keshe Foundation
Pol you reviewed the article but judged there was not enough reliable information. Please state the info your are refering to. If you do not understand the science, please don't block the wiki page ! --Goddly (talk) 07:48, 19 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Actually, I judged there were not enough reliable references. Reliable references are required so the information can be verified and so there is evidence of the subject's notability. Undoing my edit has achieved nothing and is disruptive to this encyclopedia, because you have removed the tags that we use to keep track of submissions. This has nothing to do with my understanding of science; it has everything to do with the fact that your submission is not suitable for Wikipedia, at this time. And the fact that you have failed to understand Wikipedia inclusion guidelines. Pol430  talk to me 09:22, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi Pol, Why are 300 patents at the European PAtents Office not reliable enough for science? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goddly (talk • contribs) 19:12, 20 May 2012 (UTC)


 * I have no idea why they are not reliable for science... But I can tell you why they are not reliable enough for Wikipedia. I repeat: "Reliable references are required so the information can be verified and so there is evidence of the subject's notability." To clarify further, The Press TV sources and the Washington Post source do not mention Keshe at all, so they are pretty useless really. We need to see that the subject of the article has received significant coverage, in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. If you don't understand what Wikipedia means by those terms, take a look at WP:VRS. Pol430  talk to me 19:22, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 11:10, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

re revised article Gordon Stewart
Thank you again for your guidance. I have toned down and removed some text in the article Gordon Stewart. Does it now reach POV standards? Thanks... Bills mother (talk) 13:27, 19 May 2012 (UTC) bills_mother
 * ✅. Pretty much, it would benefit from a copy edit, by an independent copy editor. You can request one at WP:GOCE. Pol430  talk to me 13:30, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Please review me...  Strike  Eagle  ✈  14:39, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

AfC
I see that you are quite active there and I have been going through few submissions. I found that I can really help there so just wanted to know that is there any semi-automated tool for AfCs? Regards, → TheSpecialUser TalkContributions* 16:05, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi! Yes, you can find full instructions at WikiProject Articles for creation/Reviewing instructions. There is a reviewers script that makes reviewing soooo much easier. You can find the installation instructions at User talk:Timotheus Canens/afchelper4.js. Presently, the AfC backlog is spiraling out of control, so help from clueful editors is very welcome indeed. Pol430  talk to me 16:13, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Kin
Thanks for rejecting my article, which has been rejected numerous of bloody times although I have done my best to make sure it's a proper encylopaedic article. Just... thanks. All of you mods know how to kill hopes instead of helping. Borderings (talk) 17:31, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

And one thing which makes me so upset is that you rejected my article just because of one or two terms which you claimed wasn't neutral. Then you could have at least let the article be accepted, then notify me of the mistake I made. Do you know how tiring it is to keep submitting over and over again and experience this rejection countless times, and having the moderators change their stories all the time? The last moderator didn't say ANYTHING about the neutrality of the article, it's like everything always changes, always finding something to pick at and all I want is this album to deserve some recognition, which it does. I'm just unhappy, and I'm sorry I'm ranting on you, but I hope you understand my appeal. Borderings (talk) 17:45, 19 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Borderings, I understand you frustrations. I'm sorry that I did not take the time to re-write the promotional phrases, but I would ask you to understand that Article for Creation currently has a massive back log. We receive about 250 submissions per day and our number of reviewers is dwindling. When I do have time to tackle some of the backlog, I don't always have time to make the required changes. The reason that it is a different reason each time is that we use templated declines, we can only select one reason at a time. Again this is due to time constraints. Your edits have mostly addressed the problem. I have not checked the referencing in detail but at first glance it looks ok. I have accepted the submission. Pol430  talk to me 17:59, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

I sincerely thank you for the help. I assure you this article will keep to the standards of Wikipedia, and you've just made my day. Borderings (talk) 18:05, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Glad you're feeling better :) Pol430  talk to me 18:22, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Is European Patent Office reliable source?
Hi, I've noticed that you declined article about Mehran Tavakoli Keshe (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Mehran_Tavakoli_Keshe), so I would like to ask - is it a patent published at European Patent Office not a reliable source? Jakec10 (talk) 00:44, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes it is a reliable source. The issue is that there are not enough reliable sources that are independent of the subject and give significant coverage of Keshe. The notability criteria have not been met, which is why the submission cannot be accepted. Also, the submission is not written from a neutral point of view. Pol430  talk to me 10:13, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your review of Neoweb entry page. 3 quick queries.
1. I neutralized one sentence, but would be interested in finding out which content in specific is under "dispute" so I can try to make it more neutral. 2. There is a note that the article is an "orphan" due to a lack of links. However, there were 6 Wiki links already in the article. In any case I will attempt to additional ones. 3. When I created the article, I used the term "Neoweb" which is actually a mistake, since the legal trademark is for PRS-Neoweb (as used properly in the body of the article). Can you please assist me in changing the actual article name so as to avoid legal complications. Thanks in advance for your assistance to inexperienced editors. YSchary YSchary (talk) 07:35, 20 May 2012 (UTC)


 * 1. Sentences like: "Extensive research has broadened the understanding of cellular confinement and reinforcement mechanisms." is an opinion and should be be removed, if the article is to have a neutral tone. As an encyclopedia we are only really interested in facts. Also, please check through the article for any examples of peacock words.
 * 2. An orphan is not an article that lacks link to other articles; but one that lacks links from other article. That is to say, no other articles link to it. I have checked again and can see that the Route Trident article links to the article so I have removed the orphan tag.
 * 3. I have changed the page name as requested. Hope that helps. Pol430  talk to me 10:01, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Adoptee or mentee
Hello! I selected a couple adopter names that resonated well with me to see if someone could mentor a new editor already going through RFC/U. There is disagreement whether the editor's admitted bad habit of not handling disputes well is reformable or irreformable. It appeared the next step was for an outside entrant (me) on the "pro" !side to see if a neutral mentor can be found agreeable to all parties. It would be understood that if two other editors objected to the mentee's edits as, say, personal attacks, the mentee and the objectors (e.g., those from the "irreformable" !side) would give you the power to make a judgment to strike or not to strike. The editor in question is User:Agent00f and the topic area is mixed martial arts, though he has expressed willingness to demonstrate constructive edits to other topic areas. You can see some of the hot pages in my edit history, but I'll watch for replies here for a bit. Thank you for your consideration. JJB 19:34, 20 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi JJB! Although I'm almost always willing to take on mentees, I have looked over the RfC/U and over Agent00f's contribs, and I don't think the issue here is a genuine, good faith, lack of understanding. He strikes me as the sort of person that is quite adept at getting to grips with policy when he wishes to. I am left with the impression that the problem is behavioral and I don't believe this leopard will change his spots. Because he seems largely unwilling to help himself, I don't think I can help him either -- least not in a way that continues to be conducive to furthering the values of Wikipedia. Pol430  talk to me 17:33, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Geordie Stewart article is revised, could warrant a second look
Hello Pol430. WT:Articles for creation/Geordie Stewart has been improved since you declined it at AfC. Could you take a look and see if your opinion has changed? The article by the BBC and the one in the Daily Mail appear to confirm that this climbing achievement is valid. Since the article now appears to have acceptable references this is no longer an unsourced BLP article. The Discovery Channel announced they would have a segment on him May 17, which presumably has aired now. EdJohnston (talk) 02:26, 21 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi Ed, when I assed this I had reservations that it might have been a hoax, if I had spent a little more time looking into it I probably could have fixed it up and accepted, but I was on a drive to clear out some of the backlog -- so apologies for being less than thorough. Article accepted. :-) Pol430  talk to me 17:05, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

RF Binder verifability
Thanks for the feedback. Which claims do I need to source in more detail in order for my article to be published? If there are certain sentences you had issue with, I'd gladly source them and re-submit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gjh1588 (talk • contribs) 15:46, 21 May 2012 (UTC)


 * The issue is not so much the lack of citations for claims, rather the quality of the sources. We need to see reliable sources that are independent of the subject and give significant coverage of the subject. Ideally, we look for sources like books, magazine interviews, newspaper articles etc. But not blogs, press releases or sources that are closely connected to the subject. See WP:VRS for more. Pol430  talk to me 17:51, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

I've sourced the article with more independent sources and made further edits to improve upon notability. I hope this helps, and I look forward to publishing the article. Thanks again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gjh1588 (talk • contribs) 15:28, 23 May 2012 (UTC)


 * No, that has not rectified the problem I'm afraid. Only source #2 actually speaks about RF Binder in any detail. The other sources either only make passing mention&mdash;the listing of awards that in themselves Wikipedia does not consider noteworthy&mdash;or does not mention them by name at all. Wikipedia cannot be cited to its self, per WP:CIRCULAR. So the reference that links to the Ruder Finn article carries no weight and its presence is inappropriate. Pol430  talk to me 17:23, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

New Page Triage/New Pages Feed
Hey all :). A notification that the prototype for the New Pages Feed is now live on enwiki! We had to briefly take it down after an unfortunate bug started showing up, but it's now live and we will continue developing it on-site.

The page can be found at Special:NewPagesFeed. Please, please, please test it and tell us what you think! Note that as a prototype it will inevitably have bugs - if you find one not already mentioned at the talkpage, bring it up and I'm happy to carry it through to the devs. The same is true of any additions you can think of to the software, or any questions you might have - let me know and I'll respond.

Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 13:18, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you very much, TheSpecialUser. Pol430  talk to me 17:25, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Chicago White Metal
Still waiting to hear back from you on whether or not my page will be created. Please respond... — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChiWhiteMetal (talk • contribs) 15:48, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I am currently busy in real life and in other areas of Wikipedia. I will not be reviewing AfC submission for a while. Your submission is currently awaiting review along with ~730 others. If you need help please post at: WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk. Pol430  talk to me 19:03, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I've taken a quick look at the submission, and I'm a little worried about possible copyright material in there. There are odd ellipses, the word "our" is used 11 times, and that was after Pol removed a bunch of stuff straight from here. @ChiWhiteMetal, have you written all of the current content yourself? Remember that Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia, so we cannot accept material copyrighted by anyone else (a company's history page is almost certainly copyrighted). Now, like Pol says the NPR source is pretty good, but it isn't enough by itself. I can't see the EBSCO stuff, and none of the others seem to really discuss the company in detail. See this for a very short guideline on the kind of sources you want.  Nolelover   Talk · Contribs  22:10, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for looking into it Nolelover. Wow! I have talk page stalkers! I'm honoured ;-) Pol430  talk to me 22:59, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, 40 of us can't be wrong; you must be doing something good ;)  Nolelover   Talk · Contribs  23:28, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the info... The company history is internal, therefor it's not copyrighted. I will look into more legitimate sources and try again. Again, thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChiWhiteMetal (talk • contribs) 14:22, 25 May 2012 (UTC)


 * You cannot reuse the company history text on Wikipedia. It is a matter of Wikipedia policy to presume content taken from websites is copyrighted unless it is specifically disclaimed. I appreciate that, judging from your username, you are connected with the company, but we cannot prove this; therefore, we must assume that the company history is subject to copyright. If you are responsible for the creation of the company history page, then as far as Wikipedia is concerned, you are the copyright holder&mdash;at least in part. If you wish to reuse the company history text, you must either license that section of the company website under a suitable free license, or donate the material to Wikipedia (click the blue link for details of the formal process). This brings me onto the next point, you need to change your username or set up a new account. Wikipedia does not allow account names that appear to represent a group or organization. Your account name should only represent you as an individual. We cut new editors some slack while they are editing in the AfC space, but if the article is accepted and you continue to edit in the mainspace under your current username, your account is likely to be indefinitely blocked from editing. I don't wish to scare you off, but I feel it only fair to highlight problems now that might occur in the future. Pol430  talk to me 17:57, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! I truly appreciate it. I will figure out how to change my username (I changed my "signature" but that didn't seem to work). I will also talk to my boss to see which route is best for our situation. You obviously know what you're doing and I apprecaite you dealing with me during this (more difficult than I thought) process. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChiWhiteMetal (talk • contribs) 12:18, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

I looked into changing my username, and though I submitted a request, it seems to be a long process. So, I created a new account. My new name is dj_jaco_10, but I'm not sure how I can access the information to edit, can it just be moved into this new account? Anyways, I am in the process of writing the email for permission, so that should be done soon. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dj jaco 10 (talk • contribs) 12:51, 29 May 2012 (UTC)


 * It looks like your request for a change of username has been processed now. Choose which account you are going to use, but don't edit under both accounts. I'll have another look at the submission when I get chance. Another reviewer may beat me to it. Pol430  talk to me 19:28, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

I'll get rid of the other one in order to keep this one. Anyways, I submitted the copyright info yesterday, so we should be set on that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChiWhiteMetal (talk • contribs) 14:33, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Do you know if there's been any progress on this page? Still hasn't been created, but I really haven't heard anything from Wikipedia in a while regarding it. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dj jaco 10 (talk • contribs) 17:57, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
 * - it's still an advertisement for a non-notable firm. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  18:06, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Ugh, what is the best way to make it "notable"? I donated my copywritten content, I updated my sources, and deleted my other account because of the name. What else can I do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dj jaco 10 (talk • contribs) 17:52, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Articles for Creation Appeal

 * Wow... that looks familiar... Pol430  talk to me 07:57, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
 :- ) Don 17:53, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia Talk:Articles for Creation/Constitutional question of constitutionalism vs. imperialism and the lawyer Bruce Clark, Ph.D.
Dear Pol430: Your rejection was too purely emotional, strident and venomous to be independent and impartial. It evidences that you probably either have a personal animosity against or aversion to Clark or a passionate dependence upon empire for your own sense of security and safety. Would you ask yourself to consider a COI declaration?--Evarose3 (talk) 18:16, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I have returned from looking again at your rejection on the ground ultimately that the article was just "not suitable for Wikipedia." When I click on that I am taken to a list of things Wikipedia is not, and I assure you neither is the article any of those itemized article types. The last item is the Wikipedia "is not censored." I suggest you are censoring.--Evarose3 (talk) 18:32, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Dannyboy1209
FYI. 28bytes (talk) 15:30, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Interesting, we live and learn. I see Dannyboy has suggested that he is willing to be mentored, if he is unblocked. FWIW, I would be willing to attempt to mentor him, under strict conditions. Namely:


 * 1) He agrees to complete my adoption school, from which he must graduate.
 * 2) He understands that he must fully commit to the adoption school and it may take months to complete.
 * 3) He refrains from making inappropriate edits to articles and the kind of silliness in other areas of Wikipedia, that got him blocked in the first place -- this kind of thing
 * 4) He does not try to use Aspergers as an excuse for poor behavior.
 * 5) commits to a 1RR agreement, until he has graduated.
 * 6) He accepts that he is not going to become an administrator within the next 12 months and does not make any RfAs or requests for other account permissions until I agree he is ready -- which will not be until after he has graduated, at the very least.

He agrees that if he deviates from any of the above, he will be re-blocked (indefinitely). Pol430 talk to me 16:09, 27 May 2012 (UTC)


 * That's very generous of you to offer your time to serve as a mentor. Personally I think he (and the 'pedia) would benefit from a fairly long break from Wikipedia before trying a mentorship arrangement, but I'll defer to Floquenbeam's judgment on that, as he's the blocking admin. Not technically an admin at this point, but you know what I mean. 28bytes (talk) 16:24, 27 May 2012 (UTC)


 * I tend to agree, patience is a virtue. My offer of mentorship stands for the future. On that note, I was surprised to see Floquenbeam step down, another sad loss for the admin corps. Anyway, thanks for keeping me updated, much appreciated. Pol430  talk to me 16:32, 27 May 2012 (UTC)


 * No problem. Yeah, the admin corp is minus one of its best, at least for the time being. Breaks are good sometimes, though; hopefully it won't be permanent. 28bytes (talk) 17:30, 27 May 2012 (UTC)


 * If any of you are fine with it, I would also gladly put Dannyboy through my adoption school come August (going on a trip on Tuesday for 2 months). Buggie111 (talk) 21:05, 27 May 2012 (UTC)


 * I think he is going to have to agree to some other conditions as well, see the above list. Also, the duration of his block should probably be deferred to User:Floquenbeam's judgement. But sure, I have no problem if someone else wants to adopt him if/when he is unblocked -- provided he understands he has a lot of trust to win back. Pol430  talk to me 21:10, 27 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Above tends to mirror my thoughts. Save for the fact I'd also like him to stop the megolomaniac signatures he uses. They seem a bit bitey. Buggie111 (talk) 22:48, 27 May 2012 (UTC)


 * I don't know if he's really being serious, but [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ADannyboy1209&diff=497098296&oldid=497098012 he finally accepts].--Jasper Deng (talk) 18:35, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm sure he is serious about being unblocked, but not about committing to mentorship. I anticipate he would last minutes before being re-blocked. I don't think anyone who has commented on his page believes he is 'suitable' for unblocking. I've certainly not noticed any admin who believes it would be sensible to unblock him. Perhaps Dannyboy will be able to contribute positively to Wikipedia in the future, but I think he has demonstrated (quite unambiguously) that now is not the time. Pol430   talk to me  18:17, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Twinkle
I installed and am going to do a thorough study of the policy's as recommended."Selene Scott (talk)" —Preceding undated comment added 20:54, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Great stuff, it will come in handy later in the course and indeed your future Wiki career. I responded to your question at the adoption page btw. Pol430  talk to me 20:58, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UFC 149: Aldo vs. Koch (2nd nomination)
I doubt very much that retaining this article will help ongoing MMA debate reach a conclusion the whole wiki-community could accept. The MMA fans have made their position clear, nothing short of an article for every MMA event is going to be acceptable, in fact retaining it give them an insensitive to continue to filibuster. Mt king  (edits)  02:33, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Reply: Copy and Past Move
In the future I'll be sure to move the article as suggested. Is there a good way to remedy this for the article in question, or has it already been fixed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Supaiku (talk • contribs) 09:55, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
 * It needs an administrator to perform a history merge, I have added a tag to the article which will draw it to the attention of an admin. It may take 24-48 hrs for someone to do it, but it will be fixed soon. Pol430  talk to me 09:58, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

 * No problem, thanks for the cookie. I agree that there could be some further improvements on the layout. I'll make some suggestions on the project talk page when I have some time, feel free to make suggestions also. Best. Pol430  talk to me 12:55, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Do you have two minutes?
If so, could you please tell me if I did anything wrong here? I declined a submission as non-notable (I was on a a phone at that time) and I might have erred in doing so - the article's notability was established. But I ended up receiving a gross personal attack which made me very upset. I tried to stay calm and sort things out with the user. If you have two minutes, can you please review my actions and see if I have done anything out of line here? This is not the first time I have been attacked by someone because I declined their submission. → B  music  ian  02:01, 29 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi BM, other than the mistaken decline, I don't think you have done anything wrong. You handled the confrontation quite well. XB70's post was out of line, but appears to have been born out of frustration and a lack of understanding about WP:NPA. The situation seems to have calmed down now, so I don't see a need for me step in; if the problem re-occurs let me know and I'll see if I can help. As for being attacked, I happens sometimes, I have experienced it too -- several times. See the archived example further up this page... Rest assured that as long as you do the right thing, your attacker will come off worst in the long run. It's a thankless task we do at AfC, but every now and then you get a nice message from a grateful new editor and that makes it worthwhile for me. Pol430  talk to me 10:26, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot! How are you finding adoption by the way? You're an excellebt adopter and I'm sure your adoptees would agree! → B  music  ian  10:32, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Yes, it's time consuming and I'm probably a hard task-master, but it's rewarding and I have two great adoptees! Pol430  talk to me 19:31, 29 May 2012 (UTC)