User talk:Bobby1011/Archive4

User talk:Bobby1011/Archive_1 User talk:Bobby1011/Archive_2 User talk:Bobby1011/Archive3

ItsNat
What is the problem now? this article already has passed two revisions of two different persons, a third revision?, a third person?, the text is different from the original source, is very hard to say the same with other words. This text is a brief overview of a software technology said with a technical language is not a political speech or a novel fragment, there is no much room for the creativity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmarranz (talk • contribs) 16:25, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Anyway I've changed the text one more time again. If it is ok please remove the advice, if not please answer here or in my talk.

Jmarranz 16:32, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Can you review again please? Jmarranz 16:44, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

AEGEE
Hi, I've deleted the noref tag you added to AEGEE now that I added some reflinks. I'm in the process of cleaning up & expanding the article, but as I'm an AEGEE member and not many people seem to be interested (in this article i mean, AEGEE itself is pretty notable!), would you mind keeping an eye on it for any accidental bias I put in? cheers, Moyabrit 10:48, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I've retagged the article because it still requires third party references that attest to its notability in the public. This includes mentions in mainstream news publications. It's nice that you have referenced the specific claims made in the article though. Bobby1011 06:04, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Two of the links I put in are external, and one is from a news agency. But more are on the way. Moyabrit 11:54, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

re: AfD of Millennium Villages Project
You recently closed the AfD for the article Millennium Villages Project with the decision to keep. Although the number of comments that supported keeping the article was greater than the number of those who opted to delete, I think that the reasoning given to keep the article was flawed. In particlular, no policy based argument was given as to why the article should not be deleted. The article failed to cite sources out side of its own web sites, and fails even to clearly state what the Millennium Villages Project is (Vaguely refering to it as an approach). Arguments to keep frequently cited the nobability of its parent organisations, but notability is not inherited. Please contact me as I wish to understand your rationale before considering taking this to deletion review. Bobby1011 04:43, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * The keep result was pretty clear to me. It is a really crappy article, yes, but it's a notable subject. It's a UN project, and it has been covered in various news outlets, including CNN Money and Scientific American. So citations are available, they just aren't present in the article right now. Cheers, Fang Aili talk 17:08, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Felgett's advantage
You recently tagged the above article as needing a clean up and attention from an expert. I am the author of the article and although not an expert in the field, I am concerned with spectroscopy on a daily basis. I would like to know in exactly what way I can improve the article so as to make steps to removing the tags. Thanks. Bobby1011 05:38, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Those are general tags indicating that the article needs to be re-formatted in accordance with the Manual of Style, and that an expert should review it so that it is understandable to the general audience (see WP:OBVIOUS). Michaelbusch 05:44, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Spade Ranch, Nebraska
Hi, just wondering why you want to delete the article on Spade Ranch, Nebraska

Sirc Michaels Picture
Hey - this is just a reply to your inquiry. I posted this on the page itself as well, but basically I screwed up. The picture is not /my own/, but I was unsure how to credit it. Also, I was in the middle of other things at the same time and got lost in what I was doing, which led to the screwup. This was the first article I tried to put together, and really assumed others would take over once I had put most of the stuff online. Now that I know better, I need some help to fix what I have screwed up. --Gonzodak (talk) 18:14, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Pooja Chitgopekar
An editor has nominated Pooja Chitgopekar, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:29, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:OE Germany
A tag has been placed on Template:OE Germany requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (&lt;noinclude>&#123;{transclusionless}}&lt;/noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 04:07, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:User Commodore
A tag has been placed on Template:User Commodore requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (&lt;noinclude>&#123;{transclusionless}}&lt;/noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 22:31, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:User OE Germany
A tag has been placed on Template:User OE Germany requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (&lt;noinclude>&#123;{transclusionless}}&lt;/noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 04:19, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:User QuPolice
A tag has been placed on Template:User QuPolice requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (&lt;noinclude>&#123;{transclusionless}}&lt;/noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 19:24, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:User Reserve
A tag has been placed on Template:User Reserve requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (&lt;noinclude>&#123;{transclusionless}}&lt;/noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 19:24, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:User bundy
A tag has been placed on Template:User bundy requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (&lt;noinclude>&#123;{transclusionless}}&lt;/noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 19:55, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:User qut
A tag has been placed on Template:User qut requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (&lt;noinclude>&#123;{transclusionless}}&lt;/noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:45, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Cobalt Hydroxide.PNG
Thank you for uploading Image:Cobalt Hydroxide.PNG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 14:05, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Ferric trifluoride.PNG
Thank you for uploading Image:Ferric trifluoride.PNG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 04:57, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Elution
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Elution, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Kkmurray (talk) 00:16, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Will do...
...thanks for the alert. It hadn't been AfD'd yet when I deleted it. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 08:50, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Ah, good. Many thanks and happy new year. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 08:55, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

WP:Listcruft is NOT a policy
Re:
 * Delete all of these unmaintainable, massive examples of utter listcruft.

So could you explain your deletion reason there? --Matt57 (talk•contribs) 12:40, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

re: AfD of Empower Orphans
I will address your points raised: 1). I could click on all 10 newspaper links and view them. I do not know  why you are getting 4 with 'Access Denied'.  Have you cleared your cache?  I remember that I had mistakenly added a comma, a few days ago.  At that time, it was giving me an 'Access Denied' message. 2). The newspaper images have been hosted at Empower Orphans because the newspapers do not keep the online version for very long. Of the 10 newspapers, 3 are linked to the newspapers website and 7 are linked to newspaper cuttings. 3). The original source and the date that the newspaper article appeared has already been mentioned in the References List.  What more is required? 4). These newspaper articles are from 2006 to 2009. Therefore it is definitely not temporary or short-lived. In fact, there is a new mention of Empower Orphans and the founder (Neha Gupta) in Philadelphia Inquirer's Citizen of the Year (http://www.philly.com/inquirer/opinion/80492867.html). This appeared on January 2, 2010. Anvcomp (talk) 22:48, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for updating the article on Empower Orphans. I am still getting familiar with wiki standards and policies. Anvcomp (talk) 15:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)