User talk:Bgwhite/Archive 8

Speedy deletion declined: Jake Bostwick
Hello Bgwhite. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Jake Bostwick, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: '''The article is not substantially the same as the deleted version. A new deletion discussion is required.''' Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 01:22, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Could I take a look at the old one. Seeing how only did two more matches since the last deletion in a non-notable league, I'd like to see what has changed between versions. Bgwhite (talk) 05:37, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I've restored it at User:Bgwhite/Jake Bostwick. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 15:44, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Needs rectification
Hi Bgwhite. In my opinion, the article entitled “Shaibal Gupta” needs rectification because I’m unable to find name of Dr. Gupta in director’s list at Andhra Bank and the inline citation is a dead link. Probably, his term was over as the article was last updated on January 6, 2011. Being new, I don’t know how to proceed in this matter, so, please have a look and do the needful.Maharathi (talk) 14:44, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I found that his term as bank director is up. So, I changed the text and added a reference.  I also fixed the dead link.  Thank you for bringing it to my attention so it could get fixed. Bgwhite (talk) 18:25, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

autopattroled
I have no idea why I am not autopatrolled. To be honest, I generally don't pay much attention to those little things. :) It never occurred to me I wasn't or that I should see about getting it.  I should be getting a lot of work done on my dissertation done this month.  It wasn't that much of a problem but rather an issue of sitting down and doing some re-organising stuff to make things flow a bit better.  Not time intensive per say but just thinking intensive.  Priority banner in BLP I tend to borrow from existing templates and just re-use which ever one is handy when I go and create new talk pages.  Hence errors.  Sorry for taking so long to reply.  Was out of the country. :) --LauraHale (talk) 18:40, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

small request
Dear Bgwhite,

I tried to edit page about Elena Karaman Karic from the neutral point of view and to keep only data with the resources. But Since I am new in Wikipedia and you have huge experience could you please see the page is it ok right now.

Thank you so much in advance,

Warm hugs,

Anita — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.93.21.139 (talk) 08:46, 1 June 2012 (UTC)


 * First off, you did a great job of removing most of the puffery sentences. The edits cleaned up most of the neutral point of view issues.  I did some more editing to clean things up.  The article could use some more references. Bgwhite (talk) 18:05, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Dear Bgwhite,

thank you for your support since this is 3rd article I am editing in Wikipedia :)

If you find some time please just write what kind of references should I search for?

Thank you very much for your help,

Best regards,

Anita — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.223.39.130 (talk) 21:00, 2 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Wish I could help more, but with the refs being in Serbian or other languages, I'm not much of a help. WP:SOURCES has a write up of what is a good and bad source.  Essentially, if the source is independent (not by any of Karic's people or employers) and reliable (newspaper, magazine) it is a good source.  Stay away from blogs, facebook, forum posts, anything from Karic's people, etc. Bgwhite (talk) 20:30, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Changing "birth registered January→March 1900" to "born 1900"
Thanks for the clean ups. One thing to be wary of when changing, e.g. "birth registered January→March 1900" to "born 1900", I have subsequently found that in the past, the registration of the birth often took place several months after the actual birth, to the extent that I've found that some people births registered in April→June were actually born in the previous year. Best Regards DynamoDegsy (talk) 15:54, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Maybe changing it to say born c. 1900 would be better? Bgwhite (talk) 20:25, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
 * That seems like the best idea. Best Regards DynamoDegsy (talk) 15:07, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Michael Szilágyi
Hello. Iaaasi was blocked, as a result all of his articles were deleted by Ironholds (I do not understand the meaning of this rule), including Michael Szilágyi. The latter article met the criteria of the Wikipedia (form, sources etc.) Could you help me restore the article into my sandbox? --Norden1990 (talk) 18:49, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm unable to do a restore, but I'll get an admin to it.  Tell me when you are ready to move it from out of your sandbox to article space.  There has to be a special procedure to do that. Bgwhite (talk) 20:16, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your intervention. --Norden1990 (talk) 22:18, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Need assistance with a wiki you edited, please.
Hello Bgwhite,

First I would like to thank you for helping me with my English group's wiki page, Dan McLaughlin (photographer).

We're doing this for a project in our English class. I'm putting together the page and at first we wondered what we should name it.

Anyways, I cannot edit the title yet, or even upload a picture.

Would you agree that it is appropriate to change the title to "The Dan Plan"? And at the same time add the golf section back in while keeping all of the other information? If so, could you please change our title to "The Dan Plan" and help us upload this image:

The fourth picture, "ball toss" http://thedanplan.com/photos.php

Thank you so much,

Eric3791 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eric3791 (talk • contribs) 17:56, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Trisha Ventker - Thank you and hopefully issue is fixed.
Thanks for the article rating on Trisha Ventker as well as the information that you provided on the proposed deletion of the article. I have since added some additional citations that will help with the article. Although her book is not on the best sellers list, she is one of the first small press authors to have a book optioned for the big screen (by a pretty big name producer at that). I was not sure about the Match.com citations as this was the first time I have ever cited it, but I added them to show that she is sought after in the online dating community for her past experiences which are documented in her book. I believe she would fall under #4 as far as notability for writers (maybe I'm wrong, just my take on it). She has gained significant attention in the online dating and regular dating community based on her experiences. While she is no Stephen King, she is still notable based on her past experience as documented in her book. I am not sure if the additional citations (Fox News 31, Amazon.com, iUniverse, and Deadline) are better citations than the original. I know that these may not be the crème de la crème of references, but they are worthy of mentioning. Anyways, I added the citations to improve the article and removed the proposed deletion tag. I Also Added A Prior Prod Tag To The Talk Page in accordance with the deprog guidelines. Please let me know if you still feel that additional citations are needed. I will email her and ask her to provide some additional resources as well. I emailed her earlier today to get permission to use her image on the article and she was pretty quick to respond. Hopefully she will be able to give me some additional sources to add. Thanks again.

By the way, thank you for proposing deletion as opposed to nominating for deletion or proposing speedy deletion. It appears that you are very familiar with Wiki guidelines and allowing me the opportunity to fix the article is greatly appreciated. --Morning277 (talk) 00:53, 5 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I usually do a Prod first in hopes that I am wrong. But boy, there are some articles where you go WTF.  My thought is that it would be best to combine the author and book articles as Ventker's claim to fame is only the book and not her photography or philanthropy.  Having combined articles is better because the reader gets more info in one spot.  Leave the Ventker link as a redirect to the book or visa versa.  Having a book optioned for a movie is not that big of a deal as most optioned books aren't actually made into a movie (Ender's Game is finally being done after 25 years, YAY). I originally deleted the Amazon ref as it is unreliable (info comes from the author) and can be promotional.  Problem with the iUniverse and Deadline refs is that they are about the book and not the author.  Most of the refs are just a blurb about or a quote from Ventker.


 * I really think there does need to be refs that are about her as only one ref of this type is in the article. At that point, it doesn't matter that the book is self-published or her standing the the book world because she meets GNG.  I have no problem in waiting for some more refs.  Give me a buzz when you do. Bgwhite (talk) 04:51, 5 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks again for the comments. I am waiting to hear a response to my email and hopefully will get something shortly. Thanks for the patience and understanding. --Morning277 (talk) 12:21, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Clean up
Hi BG, just a note about some of your edits labelled "clean up". I'm not sure whether you realized that you removed two templates here, and changed Further reading to "External link" here. You're also changing the Notes header to References, which is best avoided. Just wanted to make sure you were aware of this in case it's an AWB issue. SlimVirgin (talk) 01:11, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Per WP:FNNR, it can be listed references or notes. "references" are not to be avoided as 99% of the articles just have "references".  At FLC, you will be shot down if you label it "Notes" because if just using the, it should be labeled "References". (I had to change it in my FLC articles).  "Further reading" and "external links" can be used interchangeably.  Sorry, I didn't mean to remove the two templates. Bgwhite (talk) 02:41, 5 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I know that both may be used, but when an editor has decided to use Notes and Further reading, they shouldn't be changed to References and External link (esp not the singular). It's a minor issue, and I don't particularly mind, but in general it's best to avoid making style changes for the sake of preference alone, unless it's part of an overhaul. Thanks for letting me know about the templates. SlimVirgin (talk) 03:39, 5 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I saw some more of your articles today. If I remember right, I saw this before too.  Make sure you add "blp=yes" to the WikiProjectBannerShell.  If it isn't there, the BLP doesn't show up on the talk page.  It will also go into a database report and somebody would fix it.  Bgwhite (talk) 06:07, 5 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Okay, will do, thanks. I'm a bit haphazard when it comes to things like that. SlimVirgin (talk) 17:00, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Peacock and Advertising tags
Hello,

Thank you for editing the page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Crellin I created. Peacock and Advertising tags were added, thank you. I have gone over a couple of times, editing out puffery and adding another reference.

What are my next steps to ensure I have done the correct things and the article fits all criteria?

Cheers Rachel Rat.bat.cat (talk) 12:57, 6 June 2012 (UTC)


 * You have taken most of it out. Thank You.   The article still needs to be tightened up.  I'm not sure some of the info needs to be there.  I'll look at it in detail in my tomorrow.... which will be your yesterday because your today is my tomorrow via this.  btw, I like your choice of a name. Bgwhite (talk) 05:33, 7 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks again. please let me know if there is anything further I can do. I'm keen to learn how to do this properly. I'm no longer in New Zealand, so don't live in the future anymore. I'm in Palestine, which is the real time, right now. :) . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rat.bat.cat (talk • contribs) 07:17, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Flagicon
Hello,

What is wrong with a flagicon?

'In' versus 'on': Is research being carried out 'in' a field or 'on' a field? Hertils (talk) 23:59, 6 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm assuming the article is Gerald Westheimer.
 * For flags, read MOS:FLAG.  Essentially no flags in infoboxes except if the person represent the country, such a military or politicians.  Some sports do use them such as Olympic athletes, but others do not.
 * For in vs on. The sentence was "...known for his research of the eye".  In this particular case, he does research on the entire eye, just not what is "in" or "inside" the eye.  Another example would be, "he is a scientist of the body". It wouldn't be "he is a scientist in the body".  Otherwise, your statement about 'in' a field would be correct.
 * Don't worry, there are thousands of rules around here and nobody can 1/2 of them. Then there are English rules...
 * Also, the article could use some references about Westeimer that can be viewed on the web.
 * Thank you for asking questions. It is rare when that happens and very much appreciated. Bgwhite (talk) 00:51, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Max Fried
First off, please remain civil. There was no reason at all to call me a hypocrite. Where are these discussions about first rounders being automatically notable? I've been here since 2006, I have never seen anywhere that says that first rounders are automatically notable. Regarding the Kevin Gausman article, I didn't create him because he was a first rounder but because he was an All-American in college. It had nothing to do with him being a first round pick.--Yankees10 00:11, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I didn't call you a hypocrite. I said are you being a hypocrite by also creating another first rounder?  Asking a question is different than making a statement.  Your past refusal to abide by notability guidelines is well known, such as adding All-American college players and any minor league player.  The college players are not  automatically notable.  First rounders notable discussion is here.  If you notice  past year's drafts, majority have articles and they were all either created by you or edited by you.  Personally, I feel it should be a redirect to the team's minor league page, but you have shot that down every time I've suggested it.  Bgwhite (talk) 00:35, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Can you please ease up your tone? It sounds like you have some personal problem with with me...Anyways, I see no consensus in that discussion about first rounders being notable. Muboshgu asked the question and got only one response. Thats not a consensus.--Yankees10 00:58, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
 * As the vast majority of first rounders have articles, others have said yes they are notable, then there is no need to ever do a Prod. Prods are for uncontroversial articles. "Uncontroversial" is an extremely loaded word as I think the possible deletion of any article is controversial.  But evidence has shown it is definitely controversial for first-rounders.  There is nothing that shows all-americans should have articles at all, but obviously some will due to GNG.  You do have a point in articles that are all-americans and first rounders as they are much more likely to have references about them than high school kids.  As I said before that my preference is and also by rule, it should be a redirect. I personally don't think the majority of first rounders should have stand-alone articles.  So, I guess we actually agree, but not how it is executed? Bgwhite (talk) 05:17, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

David Steen (photographer)
Stop deleting referenced material. If the page says that David Steen took a pic and on his site there is a pic of that person, of course it proves he took the pic or he would get sued. Talk sense.--Shylock&#39;s Boy (talk) 10:14, 7 June 2012 (UTC) How on earth is it defamatory? If three people or indeed 300 people do something stupid, it doesn't make it not stupid! It is NOT defamatory or indeed unsourced. Of course it is sourced - he has the pics on his site!!!!!!!!--Shylock&#39;s Boy (talk) 17:35, 8 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Please stop. Please stop calling me stupid here and in the article's history.  Again, the photographer's website is not reliable nor independent.  I could put up a website of photos and say I shot them.  Please only add reliable and independent references per WP:SOURCE. Bgwhite (talk) 17:42, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes, you could put up a site of photos and say you shot them but why would you unless you were an idiot (which, of course, you are not)? Why would you put up a site with hundreds of example of your photos for sale and videos recalling anecdotes of what happened at the shoot unless you had shot them? No personal sites are independent but hundreds of articles on here are sourced by them. And I am not sure how I am edit warring when my work gets changed. The other idiots (obviously not you) are the ones who are edit warring. --Shylock&#39;s Boy (talk) 17:54, 8 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Again, please stop calling me and others stupid and idiots. People lie all the time.  Yahoo's CEO just resigned for lying about his education.  I'm not saying Steen is lying, just there needs to be reliable references.  Your work gets changed for not having references.  You are edit warring by adding material that is not referenced.  Please read WP:SOURCE and just stop. Bgwhite (talk) 18:25, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
§§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 19:56, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Lyrik
Thanks for drawing my attention to lack of references or reference becoming a dead link. I have now provided three separate references about this notable Israeli artist. I have added a refimprove tag as well to allow others to pitch in with additional references werldwayd (talk) 05:44, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Social Media? Unsourced information?
Not so, just as with any other info you can easily find it if you follow the links provided. Since there might be some confusion I added a link to the Japanese wiki which in turn links to credible sources.--Thronedrei (talk) 00:15, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:NOTRELIABLE.  Wikipedia is unreliable because anybody can edit it.  If Wikipedia is using a reliable ref, you use the ref, not Wikipedia or a Japanese wiki.  Blogs, Facebook, Myspace, Tweets, and Wiki's are all unreliable unless it is by a person, talking about themselves.  Bgwhite (talk) 01:13, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note that you are being lazy (as was I) using Wikipedia as a source of course doesn't work, I did however point out that the wikipedia itself linked to reliable sources. I.E I meant that you should go to that wikipedia and follow the links to the reliable sources and confirm the information for yourself instead of just saying there was no reliable source (which there were.) As such the height and measurements of a person (when they are a model and she makes a living on her body) is very relevant to an article of a person. Unreliable? The info was easily found in the reliable sources amongst these the website for the group/company she was working for. As she is a public person her hobbies/skills would also be relevant. (but I wont argue this point)--Thronedrei (talk) 21:24, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Be careful with the lazy comment. I see over 200 new articles a day and I don't read Japanese. I quote from page I linked above, "The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material."  You added the material, it is your job, not mine to "easily" find the info amongst websites and get the reliable references from Wikipedia pages. If one is going to source Wikipedia, they should spend the extra few minutes to get the reference, assuming there is a reliable, independent refs available.  I removed the section about her hobbies as trivial.  Height might be relevant if there was any ref that says she was a model or sourced her height.  The sentence about Oscar Promotion was unreferenced.  If the info can be found "easily", why not add it. Bgwhite (talk) 22:19, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Steve Nguyen
Hi! Thank you for taking the time to review an the article I've created for one of my clients, Steve Nguyen. I've submitted it to the AFC section for review, but it's been taking a while due to the backlog. For some reason, an article with the same name was deleted 3 years ago, but I'm pretty sure that they weren't the same person (since there are many with the same name). I've used secondary sources from articles and online publications that have been used by other approved Wikipedia articles, and I have had it peer reviewed by other IRC users. As far as I'm concerned, I haven't gotten any harsh criticisms or feedback. As far as notability is concerned, I've provided sources that are existing and credible to the American Journalism Review as well as the AAJA. Please let me know if there is anything that the article needs. Thanks again! Madebyhumans (talk) 21:48, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, the old article that was deleted is about the same person in the new article. The new article could be deleted because it was deleted before, but the old article was done several years ago.  The article is in serious need of reliable, independent references.  There are blogs, interviews and articles associated with Nuguyen.  I have serious doubts about if Nguyen is notable per Wikipedia's guidelines.  If you could add some good references, my doubts will go away.  I have the article in my watchlist as I was hoping some refs were added, else I was going to do a Proposed deletion tag. Bgwhite (talk) 22:03, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply! I'm assuming the last article that was written might not have been properly cited or written well from the previous submitter. I'm looking for independent references, but nowadays, everything published online that can be cited are blogs, podcasts, interviews, and online articles. We have a few interviews lined up with CNN and the Wall Street Journal that will be included as soon as it is published. The citations that are there are credible publications and verified sources, but I've added a few more to the sections needed. Going through a lot of the other Wikipedia articles of people that Nguyen is associated with, they don't seem to have half as many notable citations and references, yet they've been approved. I've used the same sources as they have just to be safe, but if they aren't credible or reliable, then I'm not sure what is. Thank you for not doing the proposed deletion! Since the last article was done such a long time ago, I'm looking to add more online sources to this existing article. Is it alright if you could remove the notability tag until the sources are provided? Thanks again. Madebyhumans (talk) 23:14, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * You can't judge your article based on others. I look at new articles and I try to judge the new articles by current standards.  Also, as this article was deleted before, the article needs to overcome the problems brought up on the past deletion.  It was deleted because he hadn't done anything that was "notable".  There are plenty of online articles that are independent and reliable.  It also helps that newspapers are also online.  I've gone thru and deleted refs that didn't mention him, were straight up blogs by an individual and removing non-notable statements.  I re-added the nobility tag and a reference tag.  I'm really hoping you can find some refs, because right now, I don't think the article would pass another deletion review. Bgwhite (talk) 16:14, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm not judging the article, but the sources that were used are from the same sources that Nguyen's article used. Madebyhumans (talk) 17:02, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
 * In that case, I implore you to check out these articles: Timothy Tau, AJ Rafael, The Fung Brothers, George Wang, Teddy Zee, Adrian Zaw, Don Le, Jane Lui, and Karin Anna Cheung. What you'll find is that there are people in the Asian American community doing similar and notable things. I'm all for writing articles in a nonbiased view simply because I've never even met these people. They use the exact same sources, which have been approved by many of the editors that have looked at these articles. This is not a judgment call, but judging by comparison, it seems like you have it out for the article to be deleted. Madebyhumans (talk) 16:48, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Again, do not judge one article based off another. There is a page that describes this at OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Bgwhite (talk) 16:54, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Arthur Calder-Marshall
I appreciate most of your changes. However I believe the "name dropping" paragraph should remain, though I admit it's rather unsatisfactory. These fellow writers were more than mere friends. They were colleagues with whom he formed a sort of writer's circle. For example, AC-M was a mentor to V. S. Naipaul early in the latter's career. Later, their paths diverged and Naipaul unflatteringly based a character in a later work on AC-M. Also, by removing the paragraph, you removed the crucial statement that AC-M was responsible for coining the term Greeneland I strongly believe the history of the critical term must stay as it has become part of the critical lexicon. Yes, by all means respond here. Thanks. Fanthrillers (talk) 22:34, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I have no objection to adding the paragraph back in as long as it is referenced. Having him associated with these people should be referenced. Bgwhite (talk) 15:47, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Jurij Moškon
Hi, I've seen you removed 'one of the most prominent' from Jurij Moškon.(diff) What's wrong with this phrasing? It was appropriately sourced. --Eleassar my talk 10:21, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
 * One source, that includes just one sentence about Moškon and is promoting the film, is not exactly a ringing endorsement. It is also a peacock term.  The phrases, "one of the most prominent", "one of the most notable" and "one of the most respected" are impart the same meaning, yet two are specifically mention as peacock terms.  Bgwhite (talk) 16:29, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
 * The Manual warns against the use of these terms "without attribution", not in general. I'll see if I can find a better source. --Eleassar my talk 17:32, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
 :- ) Don 16:57, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Zimmerman
If you want to delete this article, you must request its deletion through the official process. Gregcaletta (talk) 18:37, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I can't and didn't delete the article. But, I will take it to AfD as there are zero reliable, independent references about him. Bgwhite (talk) 20:12, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
 * AfD is done. I suggested you read up on WP:GNG.  Specifically, "'Significant coverage' means that sources address the subject directly in detail, so no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention but it need not be the main topic of the source material"   The references you added are just quotes or sentence about Zimmerman.  Nothing goes into any coverage. Bgwhite (talk) 20:25, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Shawn Welling for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Shawn Welling is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Shawn Welling (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Article was speedy re-nominated due to lack of wider involvement in the first discussion.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 02:44, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Ki Fitzgerald‎
I agree that the article is written poorly and references are somewhat inadequate. There is already an elaborate section in Busted about the legal dispute. Some of it can be introduced here as it is a relevant part of his career as well. Also what is not mentioned is that he was also lead singer in a band called Eyes Wide Open after Busted See http://www.bbc.co.uk/kent/content/articles/2005/08/31/your_sounds_eyes_wide_open_feature.shtml but again I couldn't trace any no charting hits from this band. I will add some stuff to tidy the article, but still an AfD is in order, and who knows... may prove to be beneficial for the editors to improve on the article and on their references. But wait for 24 hours, see my additions and the other contributors' additions and if not convinced put it to AfD werldwayd (talk) 07:09, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia Help Survey
Hi there, my name's Peter Coombe and I'm a Wikimedia Community Fellow working on a project to improve Wikipedia's help system. At the moment I'm trying to learn more about how people use and find the current help pages. If you could help by filling out this brief survey about your experiences, I'd be very grateful. It should take less than 10 minutes, and your responses will not be tied to your username in any way.

Thank you for your time,

the wub (talk) 18:07, 14 June 2012 (UTC) (Delivered using Global message delivery)

Mall Nukke
Hello, we had an edit conflict in the article Mall Nukke. My edit added all the exhibitions back. If you want to remove them again, go ahead. By the way, the article's name caught my attention, as her name sounds like the Finnish word mallinukke, meaning mannequin (dummy figure to model clothes on), literally "model doll". J I P &#124; Talk 18:43, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Yea, I'll remove them again. A list of ~100 exhibitions is a bit on the long side.  There were some other copy editing stuf, don't know if you nuked them or not, but will check in case.  I love names, so I can see why you were interested.  I met somebody yesterday who's name was Timo Soni.  I'd swear that would be a Finnish name, but it was Indian. Now I know somebody who speaks Finnish.  That would have come in handy in some past articles.  I'm jealous.  I loved Finland when I visited, absolutely beautiful, yet doesn't have a big population.  Ahhhhhhh Bgwhite (talk) 21:03, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually, that person's name struck me as interesting too, because it is almost like Timo Soini, the leader of the True Finns party. J I P  &#124; Talk 03:52, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Esma Aydemir
Hi! Please check my comment on Talk:Esma Aydemir. Thanks. CeeGee (talk) 08:13, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Pls recheck my additional comment. CeeGee (talk) 08:33, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

✅ CeeGee (talk) 09:13, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Alex Everett
I had reverted the BLP Prod template, User:Aquarius2 did remove that template and I gave a uw-1 warning. ApprenticeFan work 06:49, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
 * The BLPprod tag was improperly implied. Can only apply if there are no references. There can be unreliable references.  IMDb was used as a ref, while unreliable, it is good enough to keep away the BLPprod tag.
 * I had thought about doing a Prod, but was on the fence. Bgwhite (talk) 06:57, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Catherine Zask – text deleted
Hi

I'm a begginer so first please excuse me if I'm not on the good place to ask you something. I noticed you deleted a part of the biography of Catherine Zask: “She works with institutions and companies, creating their visual identity and designing various aspects of their promotional material. Among them: University of Franche-Comté, Scam (Civil Society of Multimedia Authors), Hippodrome (National Theatre in Douai), French Ministry of Culture, Paris Diderot University, Hermès International, Bernadet Construction, Groupe-6, Nantes School of Fine Art…”

May I ask you why? Thank you. --JeanBobDujon (talk) 13:57, 16 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you for asking. There are thousands of rules around here and it is daunting for new and veteran users. Two reasons.  One is name-dropping and the other reason no references.  In Zask's case, it would be best if there was a reference on what she specifically did for the company. Bgwhite (talk) 22:42, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Cheetah Master
Hello. I've had to decline your prod on this article as it was prodded once before. Do feel free to take it to WP:AfD though! Cheers, Whouk (talk) 12:10, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Question re: Template:Twitter
I noticed you removed the template/link from Kyle Larson (racing driver). While WP:ELNO says not to link to Twitter tweets, it doesn't mention links to an article subject's official Twitter channel; I'd presume that would be accceptable. If it's not, though, shouldn't Twitter be deleted? - The Bushranger One ping only 22:11, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
 * It used to say "Twitter feed" until an IP changed it. I just changed it back.  The beginning of the sentence is also key, "Links to social networking sites".  Twitter is a social networking site. Bgwhite (talk) 22:15, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, that's true, but the doc for the template also says The external links guideline recommends avoiding links to Twitter unless the Twitter feed is an official account "controlled by the subject (organization or individual person) of the Wikipedia article".. But it's no biggie to me - just want to be sure one way or the other. :) - The Bushranger One ping only 23:04, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
 * This is true. However, if an official website is given, then no social networks.  See at the top of ELNO, "Except for a link to an official page of the article's subject, one should generally avoid:"  If an official website is not given, then a twitter feed or facebook link is ok.  There are exceptions.  I personally do... if a person is notable for blogging, then the link to the blog is ok.  While an essay, I generally follow WP:FACEBOOK's advice. Bgwhite (talk) 08:11, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Alrighty, and thanks. - The Bushranger One ping only 21:16, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Question re: Shaun Phillips (director)
I see you removed several sources including IMDB, YouTube & MySpace links. In the case of YouTube & MySpace links, it is not YouTube or MySpace that is being credited as sources for Phillips, rather the videos themselves, many of which contain direct references to Phillips or Phillips's works themselves. For instance, if a video is a promo for a TV show or DVD - or an interview with Phillips himself, how does a person know it exists if they can't view the video itself? YouTube in many cases is only being sited in this context because the video no longer has links at the networks where it originally aired. In the case of MySpace, all videos using that as a source are only doing so as a means to view the video and to prove it existed and was created by Phillips and/or his company Artistic Perspective Entertainment when it was originally uploaded more than 5 years ago. I am new to creating articles so any help you can provide here would be sincerely appreciated.Bh1967 (talk) 22:59, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
 * The problem being is the credits can be easily faked. They are considered a primary source and can only be used when reliably published.  Put up on YouTube or myspace is not reliable published. A trailer on a movie studio's website would be reliable published, but the same trailer on YouTube is not.  Anyone can edit IMDb, which is why it and Wikipedia cannot be used as a reference.  IMDb can be put in the external links. Bgwhite (talk) 23:06, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

How can someone fake a news report from NBC-TV? That was among the many links you deleted. The News report is over 7 years old, so it is not available at their official website anymore, so I linked an archive copy that I found on YouTube, but it IS the news report as it originally aired on NBC-TV 10 Philadelphia in 2005. You also deleted the official film listings for The Philadelphia Independent Film Festival taking place later this week. Again, how could that be faked? IMO you went a bit delete happy without actually checking to see exactly what you were deleting. None of what you deleted was faked and a lot of what you deleted couldn't be faked.Bh1967 (talk) 23:54, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Alf Francis

 * Helo! This is yours infobox? Error? Eurohunter (talk) 14:57, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Not sure what you are talking about. What error are you seeing? Bgwhite (talk) 17:45, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Steven W. Meier
Can you assist me by identifying the specific areas that are related to the tag that you placed back on the article. I spent an hour looking for citations and even with the ones that you removed there are still additional independent resources to support the content. Please assist so that I can keep the tag from being reinserted. --Morning277 (talk) 20:41, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually, I see that you took the entire award section off of the article. I have since reverted it to the original state that I had it in earlier. If you would like to discuss the content or the citations, I would be happy to do so on the talk page. In the meantime, I will get some additional sources together. Thanks. --Morning277 (talk) 20:51, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I removed it because a) there is no reliable ref as you linked to an ad in a Magazine. Super Doctors is not a prestigious award and it is not done by Los Angles Magazine.  The top 5% get the designation, which works out to 2,000 doctors.  Also, you self-nominate yourself and have to subscribe to Super Doctors.  The two other awards you mentioned has no reference.
 * Have you thought there Meier is no notable. If there are no refs to be found, then he isn't notable. Bgwhite (talk) 20:57, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I know that you are an experienced editor which is why I came to your talk page. I hope that you understand that although not as experienced as you, I am aware of the guidelines that you site. There are numerous sources which I have gathered (there are additional ones that you did not remove) on him and feel he is notable. He has also come up with a couple of new surgical procedures which are being used in the field however I do not have time to create an extensive article on him. I was going by the notability standard that states "Editors evaluating notability should consider not only any sources currently named in an article, but also the possibility of notability-indicating sources that are not currently named in the article. Notability requires only the existence of suitable independent, reliable sources, not their immediate citation." There are sources out there, I just do not feel like creating an extensive article (if someone else feels like it they can). Thank you, as always, and once again, for your input. I will add some additional sources that hopefully will be more reliable and we can move on. --Morning277 (talk) 21:04, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I haven't thought of doing a Prod or an AfD. I really wasn't questioning his nobility, just bringing up a thought.  The problem with alot of working doctors (not full-time research) is that there is not much written about them, which makes adding sources hard.  When there is stuff written about them, it is either self-publicity or tangles with the law.  The article is written well, just not alot of independent refs, which is going to be hard to overcome with him being a doctor. Bgwhite (talk) 21:13, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Once again, your experience shines through. It IS difficult to find independent sources on ALL working professionals, notable or not. I am going to just add the information about his surgical techniques, source them to medical journals, and call it a day. Thanks again. --Morning277 (talk) 21:19, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Ata Atun
Hello Why you delete the contents? information source includes a list of books and articles, necessary --Bilgifevzi (talk) 09:43, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
 * No, that's not necessary--what's necessary is verified text that establishes the subject's notability. What you have now is a list of books and articles, and that does not an encyclopedic article make. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 11:50, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Request of image deletion
Hello Bgwhite! after long time again, I hope you're going good in health and WikiWorks. I'm here to ask you about deletion of my image (File:Rafhan Shaukat 08.JPG) from English Wikipedia and Commons Wikimedia. Please help me in deletion of that image. Hopefully awaiting for your reply.--   Assassin'S Creed    T -  E  -  C  -  G  - 07:03, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I have a feeling I'm doing much better than you... I'm not in school taking tests.  Hope your schooling is going well.  Are you on break for summer?  I did a request for a speedy delete.  That should delete the image.  Oh, be careful about your photos. I had to look at the photo and I saw a scary, ugly monster until I realized it was you :) Bgwhite (talk) 07:18, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Hahahah, you are really so funny Bgwhite, by the way thanks for help. And I thank you for appreciating my photo, :-p. That was really scary for me also that's why I had to deleted that, :-). And my school is messing a little bit, I'm thinking of study Mass communication after two months, I hope I'll be good in that. What about you, what do you do all the day?--   Assassin'S Creed    T -  E  -  C  -  G  - 12:26, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Doctor Who
Given your penchant for Doctor who and his companions, you might be interested to note that for Fathers Day I received a coffee cup in the shape of the TARDIS (complete with a lid), and miniatures of all eleven Doctors. They are Lego compatible, and come with miniature sonic screwdrivers. --kelapstick(bainuu) 08:41, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Ha, my kid spent the last two days playing with Legos. She's a natural. I told my brother (it was his Lego) about the tires, and he was fascinated. Drmies (talk) 18:35, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Personally, I'd rather play with Amy Pond, River Song, Romona II, Sarah Jane or Martha Jones. My wife would love to play with Capt. Jack.  My wife and I love the Lego video games. Our favourites are Star Wars and Indian Jones.  A Dr. Who Lego video game would be fun with all the different characters in the Dr. Who universe.  One is never too old to play with Legos. Bgwhite (talk) 21:14, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I am going to build a Lego TARDIS to go with my people. I just need to find enough blue. Ever been to Legoland?  It's great.  They just opened one in Florida too.  I just started watching the Martha Jones episodes BG, and I concur. --kelapstick(bainuu) 21:37, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

PROD removed
I have removed the prod tag from Neil Munro (journalist), which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the prod template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Articles for deletion. Thanks! --Ddcm8991 (talk) 16:27, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

FLH
Personal correspondence may not be reliable, but it's used in APA formatting. MaynardClark (talk)
 * This is Wikipedia and not APA. Bgwhite (talk) 23:01, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Deletion review for Shawn Welling
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Shawn Welling. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 02:39, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you!
Hi Bg. Thank you for this and this. It's a pleasure to be working with you! --Shirt58 (talk) 11:39, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Marina Malfatti Re
Lol! thanks for the reporting, I had just used for this article the Gianfranco D'Angelo infobox as a "model" and then I have forgotten to change the birthplace. I will try to be more careful... Good work. Cavarrone (talk) 08:08, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Hey
Sorry I kept deleting your comment that I didn't like at Articles for deletion/Thom Huge (2nd nomination). I didn't know that deleting other user's comments on an AfD discussion was considered vandalism. Interlude 65 00:57, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Andy Stott proposed deletion
Hi, sir! I'm the creator of this article, which you proposed for deletion, using the argument that "although he has reviews, he don't have any information that goes in depth about him." But don't you think AllMusic and Discogs are reliable sources? In 2011, his albums received a Honorable Mention by Pitchfork Media for Best Albums of the Year (here). Don't you think it's reliable and notable? I'm new here, sorry if I'm being annoying, but I'm defending this article. Thanks for the attention! See ya. --MatheusLPereira (talk) 00:03, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, there have to be independent, reliable references that talk about him. It is not good enough that albums were produced as anybody can produced albums these days.  There have to be people talking about him.  WP:MUSBIO lays out what makes a musician notable.  Let me ask a person more who is knowledgeable about music to take a look at the article and see if he can find anything.  Bgwhite (talk) 05:14, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Many thanks for your trust in referring this to my attention. What's also nice is that this also fall's nicely within the context of my membership of Article Rescue Squadron project. I have now reviewed this artist's page. The colleague who had created the page initially failed to produce enough references. So such a note was very appropriate at the time. But after you referred the page for review, I checked coverage about him. True, still no mainstream media coverage, but he certainly has a buzz with alternative media and music followers. He has a massive output (two albums in one year) and a big number of EPs. See all the additional references I added plus a considerable amount of new info about him. I think we can change the page while adding Notability and Refimprove notes rather than propose deletion. Take a look at the references added and see if this would be possible. Either way, this gave me the opportunity, while working on the page to check dozens of his actual work and I was stunned by the shere talent of this artist. So it is a gain for me regardless of your decision. werldwayd (talk) 14:40, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

"Please don't remove the Articles for Deletion tag" answer
"Do not remove the tag. An admin will remove it when the deletion review is over.

Also, next time, please add information that would make a footballer notable. Professional footballer is notable, a U-23 is not. Please review WP:NFOOTY. Bgwhite (talk) 00:39, 27 June 2012 (UTC)"


 * This player is already a professional player, She shouldn't be nominated for deletion. I'm sorry for having exceeded the discussion, but I was afraid that the article was deleted. SirEdimon (talk) 22:16, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Dora Deliyska
The article was started yesterday, haven't had the chance to get back to continue in the last 24 hours. But I think you're jumping the gun. Rather than write me a brief note of your concerns that you could have put on the articles talk page or on my own...Instead, you move immediately move to delete. I notice your concerns and was planning to address them in my next edits...unfortunately because most of the material is not in English, translation is necessary and that has kept me from continuing for a day or two. But my delay does not justify your jumping the gun. Please retract your deletion proposal for the next few days. It's the equivalent of clubbing baby seals. --ColonelHenry (talk) 06:42, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
 * An article has to be "read to go" with necessary references and meet all the requirements before it goes live. There are Patrollers via New pages patrol and by other means that check to see if an article is ready and meets the requirements.  If it is not, then action is taken.  Next time, you can create the article in your sandbox, edit it and then when it is ready, move it to mainspace.  You can find your user sandbox [ here].
 * For Deliyska's article, you can remove the Prod if you feel it is unwarranted. I usually do check when a Prod is removed. To give you time, I won't check Deliyska's article for several days Bgwhite (talk) 06:56, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't believe in "ready to go" before going live. Sometimes, articles have to grow organically--even though it isn't optimal or desired. Paintings don't get created ready-to-go--even the greatest artist will screw up a few strokes, start a painting and get thwarted by lack of inspiration or running out of a certain paint. Some of us don't use sandbox, or have the time to do it all at once.  Sometimes, we are bit daunted and confused by all the policy/tools/bots/templates/etc. that are creating a creeping technical labyrinth on Wikipedia when it used to be much much easier to contribute without CompSci/coding expertise.  Hypervigilance of this sort can only drive away editors who might be great contributors if they weren't dissuaded from participating because all the technical/bureaucratic/regulatory nonsense and the persons too enthusiastic to wield the tools in such a way that has the unintended consequence of undermining Wikipedia's mission and reducing its access to new talent.--ColonelHenry (talk) 14:04, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm not talking about the article should be perfect. Every article has to meet some minimal standards in order to have a page.  If it doesn't meet the standards, it get removed.  Standards such as references and nobility. Bgwhite (talk) 20:18, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
 * "nobility" ;-) that hasn't had much place in world events since 1918 and I'd quote Beaumarchais if that was the case here. Notability I can understand. I know what you mean, I agree with you. --ColonelHenry (talk) 20:31, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Darren Tough and WP:BLPPROD
Valenciano (talk) 08:11, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Valenciano (talk) 08:31, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Listas and persondata
I recently added WPBiography to a few articles and it wasn't too long before you came in and added listas and persondata. Is there something that you watch that helps with this? Does AWB do this automatically or is there something that you need to add or a box you need to check? Dismas |(talk) 12:46, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I look at a few things. Database reports/Recently created biographies of living people gets run once a day, most of the time. A bot adds the Biography banner, but I add listas and any other parameters.  There are two categories I look at, which probably is how I found your articles.  The categories are Category:Biography articles without listas parameter and Category:Biography articles without living parameter.  I try to keep them cleared out every day.
 * I have two AWBs going, one for the talk page and one for the article. This way I can add the parameters to the talk page, while cleaning up or adding stuff to the article, such as persondata. Bgwhite (talk) 19:45, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Mistake
You added the 'Living people' category to an article about a religious denomination in this edit. Debresser (talk) 20:16, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I came to the article because the biography banner was added to the talk page. I removed the banner. Bgwhite (talk) 22:59, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
 * And I removed the category. Thanks. Debresser (talk) 00:32, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

I discover only now WP:NTRACK
Damn, I would have avoided wasting time to create articles so well made​​. :-( BTW I wanted to know if there is a place to express any reasons for keep the page, before June 29 will be automatically deleted? Otherwise, never mind, I saved the pages and will keep them good, when athletes will reach one of the 10 criteria. --Kasper2006 (talk) 10:01, 22 June 2012 (UTC)


 * You are not the only one who missed it. Best thing is to do a copy-paste to a text file on your computer.  At least they weren't big articles.  I haven't gone thru the entire day's worth of new articles, so I'm sure I'll tag a few more. Bgwhite (talk) 19:30, 22 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Because few cases are very close to respect than criteria 2 and 5, could you tell me if it is possible to request consent for their keep. For example, entering the deletion request here? --Kasper2006 (talk) 06:39, 26 June 2012 (UTC)


 * It is your right to remove the Prod. However, close doesn't count.  They have to pass the threshold.  Some recent track athletes I've sent to AfD and were deleted are Tyreek Hill and DaBryan Blanton.  In Hill's case, one commenter said a track meet was only a month away and could it wait till then, but Hill was still deleted because he did not currently meet the guidelines. Bgwhite (talk) 06:49, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

And an athlete qualified for 2012 Summer Olympics? --Kasper2006 (talk) 10:32, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Your CSD of Marios Antoniades
Greetings Bgwhite, I hope it's all well. I declined your speedy deletion of Marios Antoniades, as at the time of his previous AfD it was only known that he made one 3-minute appearance in the Cypriot First Division, while now it is found that he actually made another 90-minute appearance in 2008. So G4 doesn't really apply here. If you want, bring it to AfD for a second time. Cheers. – Kosm  1  fent  05:38, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

PROD for Shehan Ambepitiya?
NTRACK:  Only junior event that is notable is winning "individual gold medal at the IAAF World Junior Championships or Youth World Championships. --Kasper2006 (talk) 11:55, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Article has been around for awhile. Personally, I don't like doing a Prod on an older article as nobody might be looking at it or having it in their watchlist.  He won in the South Asian Games games, but I don't think makes him notable.  The games really only India, Sri Lanka and Pakistan.  I don't think he meets NTRACK.  Of greater concern is that he is from Sri Lanka.  Indian and Sri Lankan newspapers love reporting anything and everything.  Check first for any news about him because he may pass GNG. Bgwhite (talk) 17:23, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
 * And if an athlete qualified for 2012 Summer Olympics, he respect NTRACK? --Kasper2006 (talk) 22:30, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Rules says "competed in the Olympics". So qualifying would be a no.  The athlete could injure themselves before the Olympics.  Depending on the country, the national champ is the only one that could compete in the Olympics.  The national champ does qualify for an article under NTRACK.  Had some really bad Canadian track articles come in yesterday.  I didn't look at every one on the Canadian website, but it appeared only the champ could go to the Olympics. Bgwhite (talk) 22:57, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Harry Sutcliffe
Hello. I'm afraid I've declined the PROD you seconded on Harry Sutcliffe because the article had previously been PRODded. Cheers, Whouk (talk) 22:12, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Surely a BLP Prod does not invalidate a later general prod. They aren't really the same type of process, even though similarly named and executed. Lady  of  Shalott  22:46, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Found the relevant quote in WP:PROD: "This does not affect the regular prod process, which may still be used on BLPs, including BLPs from which the sticky prod has been legitimately removed." Lady  of  Shalott  22:51, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
 * From the logs, the article was previously deleted via a Prod. If an article has been previously deleted via a Prod, it cannot be Proded again.  I get this every so often.  User:Anomie has done a great bot that checks new articles if they had been deleted via an AfD.  I've put in a request a few weeks back to check if it had been deleted via a Prod before. Bgwhite (talk) 23:13, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Ah. I should have thought to check that. I just assumed it was the BLPprod that was the issue. Lady  of  Shalott  23:52, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Re: John Tippets
(I've moved it to the form previously redlinked at Template:Idaho State Senators.) You removed the only reference not from his employer? Dru of Id (talk) 22:52, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
 * His name doesn't need a reference, which is why I removed it. If it doesn't reference anything specific, then it should go into External links or references section.  Bgwhite (talk) 23:00, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
 * His middle initial was not available anywhere else I looked. If you can find it elsewhere I'd be surprised. Dru of Id (talk) 23:03, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Swifty *  talk  07:21, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

24 hour protection on Tomorrow (The Cranberries song)
Hi. I've protected Tomorrow (The Cranberries song) for 24 hours. You should know better than to edit war over something like this. Take it to the talk page, get consensus. That's the way things work here. If I see this behaviour from you in the future, I will be pulling out the block card.  Worm TT( talk ) 07:30, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Hey, why blame me? I did one edit and reported the 3RR (actually 5RR) one minute ago.  It was taken to User_talk:Drmies. Bgwhite (talk) 07:32, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Apologies, I reacted too quickly. You did indeed only revert once - I was going through the other pages to see who to drop the protection note on, shouldn't have mentioned blocks.  Worm TT( talk ) 07:39, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Looks like I opened a can-o-worms with that one. Thanks for taking care of it.  Maybe links to amazon and itunes should be banned altogether. I would think that release info, etc. would be available elsewhere.  Maybe something similar to ISBN and Special:BookSources Click for sample Happy editing / reverting!  Jim1138 (talk) 07:44, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
 * To the Worm: I've never reacted too quickly, especially with the wife. Nope never :)
 * I would agree that Amazon and iTunes should never be used. Problem with music is I don't think there is a good central location for release info that books have.  In some cases, Amazon or iTunes maybe the only source.  Of course I don't see why having a release date of every country is needed.  But, I'm not a music person.  If I have specific questions on something music related, I ask a couple of editors more knowledgeable on music articles than me.  Bgwhite (talk) 07:56, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm looking into the dispute now. I should point out that a recently promoted FA Halo (Beyoncé Knowles song) has itunes links in, and it wasn't raised as a problem. I don't like absolutes - even sources such as official sites and non-independent sites on some things can be used for purely factual data, such as release dates.  Worm TT( talk ) 08:11, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
 * As stated on Drmies talk page and somewhat above, having an Amazon or iTunes link to reference a release date is ok, but not ideal. If a reliable reference is available then use that one over Amazon or iTunes.  The Amazon link was never removed from the article in dispute, Tomorrow (The Cranberries song), where it was referencing the release date.  In the Beyonce article, both iTunes and Amazon are being used to reference the release date.   Amazon was being removed saying it was available for digital download.  Saying it is available, here it is where to buy it doesn't reference anything and is spam.  Plus, you are already referencing it was available on the release date given.  Bgwhite (talk) 08:45, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Hey Bgwhite. Looking into the matter further, I've blocked Swifty. I must point out that you should make sure you notify editors regarding noticeboards in future, though I do accept your comment below. I've also left a comment at AN3. Swifty's not a bad apple, and I don't believe he is the same as the IP - hopefully this won't put you off in future.  Worm TT( talk ) 10:46, 4 July 2012 (UTC)