User talk:BigHaz/Archive 8

Deletion of Deportivo Football Club
I think it was completey unnecessary to delete the club's page. It is not just a "minor club" and I was in the process of adding sources and completing the page when it was deleted. Can you please re-instate the page as I put it there as apart of the Wiki project for Australian football. I was also in the process of doing the rest of the teams in the league and eventually other leagues. I do not think you, or any other outside individuals realise how big this competition is in melbourne. I would appreciate a hasty response as I have most of the admins I have dealed with regarding this issue (yourself included) have provided no explanation and made decisions without consulting myself or any others.


 * I deleted the article because there was no verifiable evidence of its importance. The generally-accepted guideline is that teams playing at the highest level (in Australia that would be the A-League or the old NSL) are notable, but teams below that rank are not necessarily so. The addition of a "hangon" tag does not make a page immune from deletion, but rather signals that there are perhaps other factors to consider - those other factors were not sufficient to alter the decision I took. The fact that there is a WikiProject on a certain area does not mean that an article is immune either, a WikiProject is simply an attempt to standardise and generate information on the area in question. As this is (to my knowledge) our first dealing with each other, I'd appreciate not being tarred with the brush you're attempting to tar me with. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 00:41, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah fair enough mate, but i will endevour to find some more eveidence to back the article. But when it comes down to it, i think you are taking this whole website to seriously. Being"tarred" as you like to call, it means nothing in this world. I am voicing my opinion on your talk page.. woah! .. who cares. No one even looks at this talk page anyway. In the whole scheme of things, keeping an article on an albeit smaller football team in Australia, is not as bad as having snake high score champions in a list of notable alumini for famous schools. There is alot wrong with wikipedia, and most people are aware of this, maybe people like yourself should be trying to get rid of the big mistakes instead of articles that do not meet with your personal criteria. There are many other teams less "notable" than Deportivo, from leagues in Zimbabwe, Kenya etc. And regarding the highest level "guideline" are you telling me that the Foxtel Cup, New South Wales premier league and other statewide competitions will not be accepted to. Even though players like leijer, vargas and robinson have all come from this league last year and jsut won a premiership with Melbourne Victory. Surely wiki would like to now about these leagues. Don't mean to paint you haz, just stating the facts.


 * What I'm objecting to when I say "tarred with the brush" is the sentence most of the admins I have dealed with regarding this issue (yourself included) have provided no explanation and made decisions without consulting myself or any others. Given that you hadn't dealt with me at all on this or any other issue, it's a long bow to draw to say that I've provided no explanation. A message was placed on your Talk page when the article was tagged as a Speedy Deletion candidate, so it's not like you were not aware of the thought processes involved in deleting the article. Surely the assumption would be that the lack of notability which was identified when the article was originally tagged was still the case when it was deleted. Additionally, while you have every right to voice your opinion here, and I welcome it, I'd remind you to assume good faith on my part.
 * In terms of the argument that there are worse articles to keep than one on a minor-league football team, I'd respond that you're welcome to tag them for Speedy deletion (or put them through another part of the deletion process) yourself - or to let me know about them and see if I do the same. I agree that on the face of it there's no point at all in having a snake high score champion in a list of notable alumni, so just let me know where this article is and I'll have a look at it right away.
 * I am aware there are flaws with Wikipedia, and I'm actively engaged in trying to improve the place. One way in which I'm doing this is by applying the consensus-based criteria for notability, which are anything but "my personal criteria". Among these criteria are the ones which the article you wrote failed to meet.
 * Where the teams from Zimbabwe and Kenya are concerned, I stress again that it's hard to make a judgement without seeing the page in question. However, if the team fulfills the notability criteria, then there's nothing wrong with having it. If the teams are from the top league in their country, for example, that's a point in their favour. If you want me to look into the matter, I'd be more than happy to do so.
 * In terms of the lower leagues in Australia, the advice that I'd give you is that any team in any of these leagues would need to prove notability through reliable sources (Deportivo did not at the time it was deleted). The fact that Victory's roster hails from the lower leagues is neither here nor there since every player must have got a start somewhere. Again, write the article with reliable sources to back up the claims of notability, making certain that it meets the criteria involved, and you should be fine. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 09:21, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: Your RFA
I do in fact have a question for you. I seem to have lost my bearings on here, not knowing where to go or be next. I'm wondering if i'm RFA worthy myself in fact, and I was wondering if I could get your opinion. Just Heditor review 02:21, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
 * My own feeling would be that it couldn't hurt. The discussion about assuming good faith could come back to bite you, but even if nothing else you'd have a number of people (hopefully) providing constructive criticism (hopefully). I'm perhaps not the best person to have asked, in that I don't tend to remember names around here overmuch - but then again, I don't remember you doing anything bad :) BigHaz - Schreit mich an 02:27, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Heh, me and my big mouth. This whole thing with Essjay and Jimbo's double standards just disgust me and I sent another civil, but negative comment on his talk page. Essjay betrayed us all and Jimbo seems to want to give the situation kid gloves, but meanwhile when it was clear that Yanksox was in some emotional distress a few weeks ago, he didn't show the same pity and just desysopped at will.
 * I have too much empathy to be an administrator I guess. At least in a crooked place like this anyway. I want to help, but it seems there is nothing I can do to fix such a big problem. Just Heditor review 02:36, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
 * There's nothing intrinsically wrong in my book with having empathy and being an admin. I mean, yes we have an image as being some kind of evil unprincipled swine, but at least in theory we're meant to be out there helping the little guy as well as deleting the articles that he wrote that shouldn't be here. That kind of thing. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 03:11, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Ideally, yeah. Thank you for refreshing my soul, my friend. I'm glad I could support your adminship, you've paid me back already. I might give it a shot tomorrow, not sure yet though, but in any case, thank you for the insight and the hope. Just Heditor review 03:38, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
 * You can count on at least a "moral support" vote from me if/when you do throw your name into the ring. I'm unlikely to be the first to express an opinion, so the strength of any support would be determined by what else is going on. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 03:40, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

DRV comment
You commented at deletion review "When I write "non-notable", I see that as another way of saying "db-bio" (a practice I'm willing to change if it confuses things for people)". It is certainly clearer for others if you write either the speedy deletion tag ("db-bio") or the speeedy deletion criteria "[[WP:CSD]]". The educated editor will understand either. I prefer the latter formulation, because the uneducated editor (the usual creator of articles deserving speedy deletion) can just click on your deletion summary and see the criteria under which it was deleted. I can't prove that this helps, but I think that it does. GRBerry 04:35, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Roger. Will do in future. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 04:38, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank You!
Thank You BigHaz for your answers! You may delete this ASAP, since it's more of a test to see if this is the page where I (or anyone) could ask you a question. Again, thanks for taking the time to answer a new guy's question! Frommeyer 10:15, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
 * You're most welcome. I'll leave it up here in fact, just in case any other new editors come across me and are curious about where to ask questions. Don't worry about taking up space - those "archives" you can see on the top right of the screen are where all the old discussions go eventually. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 10:21, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

DYK
Your tiny gesture at the end of DYK's message is really kind. Danke! &mdash; Indon ( reply ) &mdash; 10:53, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Aw shucks! It's my little thumbs-up to multiculturalism. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 10:54, 4 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Um, you updated DYK about 10 minutes after I did! (sorry, had not updated the counter on the suggestions page)  I have rolled it back - we can use your update in 6 hours time. -- ALoan (Talk) 11:22, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Oops. I thought there was something amiss when I was doing it, but couldn't quite tell what it was. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 21:27, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Take a look at DYKs before putting them up on the Main Page. I had to remove that one about the mushroom because it did not meet the DYK expansion rule.  Nish kid 64  20:56, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Darn. I thought I'd checked them all thoroughly this time round. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 21:27, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Du hast darum gebeten ...


ZUFRIEDEN???!!!

(Nichts für Ungut, konnte nicht widerstehen, und es hat gut getan... :-) ) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sluzzelin (talk • contribs) 02:19, 5 March 2007 (UTC).


 * Sehr humorvoll, aber ich hab' die Frage (oder der Grund warum ich mit dir gesprochen habe) vergessen. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 02:25, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
 * ehm, no good reason, I saw your signature (mit Aufforderung, dich anzuschreien) in a discussion I was mildly interested in, and, well, I'm silly by nature. ---Sluzzelin  talk  02:38, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, but of course. Should've put 3 and 7 together and got 95. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 02:59, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: Amaro (saint)
Thanks. It was left on the Suggestion page and I hadn't taken a look on the Main page. &mdash; ERcheck (talk) 03:16, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Not a problem. It was my fault, I think, in that I'd updated DYK at the same time as someone else did last night (my time) and with at least one ineligible item, so ALoan and NishKid were left having to roll back my goofs - and they may just have rolled back too far. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 03:18, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Aging in Place

 * Template talk:Did you know - Thanks for your pointers. How would you phrase the lead-in for the newly-created Aging in Place article?  Smee 13:17, 5 March 2007 (UTC).
 * By "lead-in", I mean the lead-in for the WP:DYK piece... Smee 13:30, 5 March 2007 (UTC).
 * I see your points, and removed the nom. Smee 22:04, 5 March 2007 (UTC).
 * Which explains why I couldn't for the life of me find the thing :) Don't let it get to you, though. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 22:05, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

DYK

 * didn't know that fact. Very interesting. Good song. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:05, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * They was robbed, frankly (although there were no qualifiers who didn't really deserve to be there). This year's Polish entry should be a real treat. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 03:32, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Melita toniolo
Sorry about that; wasn't my intention to be rude. Makes me cringe though to read what I wrote. Thanks for pointing it out! -Yupik 19:43, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
 * That's ok. I wasn't sure whether you'd already translated it or something (knowing you, anything's possible). BigHaz - Schreit mich an 22:03, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
 * :D Nahh, I've been busy with Haapamäki railway station lately :) -Yupik 07:39, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 5th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:06, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Gamefabrique deletion
Hello, BigHaz. I'm a creator of Gamefabrique article and a contributing member of a russian wikipedia, but first time faced a page deletion here. Is it possible to restore the article, I want to add some more facts about community? Blastermaster 08:03, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Would these facts allow the article subject to pass the notability criteria? BigHaz - Schreit mich an 08:08, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of WasabiTV
I am just referring to why you deleted WasabiTV. It is a first in australia and a new starting point for producers to promote content.

On top of that it is pushing technology in australia that hasnt been utilised. IT is a non commercial site and it was created as s top searched item in Google is "Who is WasabiTV".

This input was also to complements inputs from TVS and C31 in Wikipedia. It adds an alternative.

Im willing to discuss it further.

Cheers —Preceding unsigned comment added by Flamingspartan (talk • contribs)
 * Firstly, I've moved your question to the bottom of the page, as that's where new discussion is normally meant to go. I've also added your username as you hadn't signed it - just press the ~ key four times in future, and Robert will be the husband of your mother's sister, as they say.
 * Turning now to the article in question, when I came upon it there were two Speedy Deletion tags on it. The first said that it was "blatant advertising" (what we call "db-spam" in shorthand). The second said that it did not meet the criteria for notability as it related to websites and web-based things ("db-web", in Wikipediaspeak). While I marked the page as "spam" when I delivered it, I'd actually argue that it was more just a "db-web" case. There was no attempt made to back up the assertions of notability - such as they were - in the article. Additionally, and this is why I marked it as "spam" when I deleted it, the tone was very promotional. I'm sure it's a great initiative, but it felt as though it was an ad, rather than an article.
 * In terms of the other inputs you've cited, that really isn't a persuasive argument. Just because those two companies have articles doesn't mean that this particular one needs to have one. Indeed, it may well mean that those two articles shouldn't be here in the first place. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 11:54, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi thanks for the reply,

regarding the tone, well sorry for that. I will change that asap, if reinstated.

Wikipedia is working well when people want to promote independent content online, without the use of YouTube in Australia, Its really the first and only Online TV website out there.

This gave a run down on the technologies, the limitations, the contract and legal challenges.

Regarding notability what more can i use, i would be happy to add these. I guess this was a living article and it was intended to grow. The intiative also is different as it has multiple relegious, non relgious, sports, computers, and other content for users..

Flamingspartan
 * Therein lies my point, you're trying to "promote" the topic. Wikipedia, being an encyclopedia, is not about the promotion of things which will develop into more successful things, but rather the documentation of things which already are successful. What we'd need is multiple, non-trivial, independent mentions of the service. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 21:15, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Userfication of List of German actors (from 1895 to the present)
Thank you. -- Black Falcon 18:02, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

List of real people appearing in fictional context
An editor has asked for a deletion review of List of real people appearing in fictional context. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. John Anderson 18:20, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

University of the Philippines
Thanks for your contribution to the University of the Philippines page. But Upsilon Sigma Phil (1918), not Sigma Rho (1938), is the first Greek letter fraternity in Asia. It was founded also at the University of the Philippines. Check out the following sites for further information:


 * Fraternities and Sororities in the Philippines
 * Upsilon Signma Phi Fraternity

Thanks - 7258 03:58, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * You're welcome to change it. However, I refer you to this AfD which ended in a decision to merge the contents of that article to the one on the University of the Philippines. The only information which could be merged (by the admin who drew the short straw - me) was its claim to be the oldest. If that's not the case, feel free to remove it. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 06:04, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Couldn't resist...
WENN DU/SIE DARAUF BESTEHEN SCHREIE ICH AUCH GERN (although I think it is considered kind of rude...) Just dropping by to tell you I have noticed you helping out on the pages needing translation; thank you. Cheers. Lectonar 10:59, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Moving categories
I'm not sure this is even possible, but is it possible to move categories to a new name? -Yupik 12:41, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't have any extra tools to do it that I can see. Probably the solution would be to create Category: NewName, add all the articles in Cat: OldName to it (let's hope there aren't zillions of them!) and then put Cat: OldName up for deletion (either empty, having removed everything from it, or as being superseded by NewName). It seems to be the way with a fair number of housekeeping things around here, actually - slow and steady. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 22:22, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

U deleted the Faith Evans picture
You took away the faith evans pics. I didnt add it, but I think it was legal. It is a promo pic from 2005. Arent promo pics ok? What needs to be attached/tagged to it?Lilkunta 13:47, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * What it needs is a copyright tag. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 22:25, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Biographical entries
This is the first bio I am attempting to author, and have taken care to make sure that I am writing about noteworthy individuals (who are also living, contemporary figures currently involved in major business, social, and philosophical movements).

I have re-created the bio with a list of various outside, credible references who wrote over a number of years and whose research is coming from multiple sources.

Should I simply attempt to create the article in Wikipedia again (this time paying close attention to the capitalization =), or should I run it by you for proofing?

Thanks for your willingness to help! Maleopold 19:55, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I'd suggest that you'd be well-advised to run it by me (and maybe another admin as well, just for another opinion). That way we can see what we're dealing with and go from there. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 22:19, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

How do I run it by you first without creating another article? Email you the Word document? Maleopold 20:21, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * What's the title of the article again? BigHaz - Schreit mich an 21:52, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 12th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:09, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar
Shucks I wanted one ! EnviroGranny 22:10, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep contributing and I'm sure you'll get one soon enough. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 23:55, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

DYK Karaköy
Thanks so much for your contribution. Please do not hesitate to contact me whenever you need assistance in Turkey-related topics. Happy wikiediting. CeeGee 14:44, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Composite/Prime
That is a little suspicious, yes. But, their arguments are so weak it doesn't really matter. And I checked, but they both have edit histories reaching back about 9 months, so no SPA issues. Mango juice talk 00:53, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. I realised after I said it that it would be even trickier, since they both would have edited mathematical articles, so you couldn't even automatically see a socking pattern. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 00:57, 17 March 2007 (UTC)