User talk:Bongomatic/Archive 4

IMDB
I was letting you know that those questions are being asked of them.... not of you.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 22:23, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah yes, some benefit in reading the subject lines! Bongo  matic  22:26, 1 January 2009 (UTC)


 * No problem. :) I am hoping I can get a definitive answer from someone. Certainly they have to post legal disclamers and do a bit of waffling on their own website, but I'd really like to know just what their commitment to accuracy really is.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 22:31, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Giant Squid (band)
Hi there. Before tagging articles with db-band or other subcategories of db-a7, please remember that CSD A7 only applies to articles that make no credible claim of notability. Articles that claim notability, even without sources, must be submitted to other deletion processes. In this case, the article makes multiple credible claims of notability (at first glance, it might even survive a deletion debate), so speedy deletion was not appropriate—please send it to AfD instead if you find it does not meet WP:BAND guidelines. Best, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 13:04, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your note. I have reread the article and reread WP:MUSIC and I still fail to find any claims that if demonstrated would satisfy the notability guideline. Are you referring to guideline (5)? Bongo  matic  14:38, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
 * No, the claim itself does not need to be of something that satisfies the notability guideline, which is why it is considered "a lower standard than notability". Any reasonable claim of significance or importance suffices. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:45, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Akmal Cheema - remooval of speedy tag
Hi, It is of course fine to remove your own speedy tag but a more informative summary would help other editors. Happy editing! Springnuts (talk) 09:02, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Roses are red, Bongos are blue?
I'd probably lean towards a weak keep. I am partial to the ultimate standard of whether the article makes the encyclopedia better or not, so I guess that makes me something of an inclusionist. It's not promotional, advertorial, difficult to maintain, controversial, and its accuracy isn't disputed, so I think it's okay to include it. The individual is not especially notable, but I did see a small number of mentions on google books, and they have some notoriety it would seem. That's my 2 cents. Thanks for thinking of me. ChildofMidnight (talk) 02:13, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

What do you think of this article ? ChildofMidnight (talk) 02:48, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * You can see my views on the page now :( Bongo  matic  02:57, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I would AfD it. It might survive, there's some claim to notability, but I don't think it's enough. I've tried to help the article creator and as I welcomed them, I can't bring myself to "push the button". ;) This one is a toughy in some ways: Grand Trunk Terminal Project (Portland, Maine). ChildofMidnight (talk) 04:30, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * What's tough about it? Seemed clear enough to me. Bongo  matic  05:55, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Indeed, doesn't seem to be much of a case for inclusion. But I have respect for the effort of the article's creator and I empathize with their nto wanting it deleted. It's interesting reading, just doesn't meet guidelines. ChildofMidnight (talk) 07:16, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Blog servers are free and plentiful, as are MySpace pages, Facebook groups, YouTube, and lots of other places where people can self-publish non-encyclopedic materials. People go to great efforts to create lots (hundreds of millions) of written works that aren't destined for Wikipedia. Their non-inclusion in Wikipedia is a slap in the face neither to their creators nor the subjects of those works. The beauty of electronically stored information is that it's easy to redeploy. People seem to personalize the effort and quality component of articles, and forget these facts in deletion discussions and considerations. This (in my view) skews their perspective and causing them to opine in a manner inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Bongo  matic  07:27, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Re:D-Irie
I added a source for the German hit to the article. It could probably do with a better source, but I'm inclined to accept the cited source as correct. I couldn't find a lot more - there was enough to remove the prod, but it could go either way if taken to AFD.--Michig (talk) 13:16, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Interpretation of 'hit' varies. WP:MUSIC doesn't define what is considered a hit, it just states "Has had a charted hit on any national music chart". Interpretation varies. For example, a reasonably high placing on any of the Billboard specialist charts (e.g. Country Music) is usually considered a hit here, even though that single may fall well outside of the top 40 of the main singles chart. Plenty of bands never get a chart placing on any chart - #49 in Germany puts him a level above those. WP:PROD is about deletions that are unlikely to be challenged. This one is borderline, so if you wish to pursue deletion you should take it to AFD. Thanks.--Michig (talk) 18:06, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Albert Beckford Jones article
Hi Bongomatic,

Would you please care to elaborate your reasoning behind the "notability" etc tags you added to the Albert Beckford Jones article/and or any other issues you have with it. As the author, I'd like to resolve the issues but I can't until I understand what specifically they are.

Simplynetworked (talk) 17:49, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi Simplynetworked. Thanks for writing.
 * Generally, I would recommend reading the guideline on notability and the policies on verifiability and reliable sources. In a nutshell, notability is demonstrated by significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.
 * I added the "Notability" and "Refimprove" tags because the notability of the subject has not been not demonstrated, and additional references would be required to demonstrate notability. The only existing references that provide significant coverage of the subject are not independent of the subject, and those that are independent do not provide significant coverage. (Note that a number of the sources that are cited—independent of the analysis above—do not appear to be "reliable" within the meaning of the policy.
 * I added the "Resumelike" tag because the article reads like a resume, not a biography. Read other biographies in Wikipedia and you will find many that are resume-like and many that are not—it shouldn’t take much effort to figure out the difference.
 * I added the "COI" tag because you have made significant edits only to one article, and one that is resume-like and does not read as neutral. This tag can be removed when other editors (other than sock puppets) make changes to the article.
 * Finally, I added the "Cleanup" tag because the article needs copyediting, especially in respect of punctuation and reference / link formatting.
 * I hope that’s a helpful response to your query.
 * Rgds, Bongo  matic  00:35, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Van Phillips (inventor)
I gave it a good push, I think you will like the improvements :) --Enric Naval (talk) 05:06, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Great! Thanks for improving it.

Speedy keep
Thanks for the link. I'm going to cease contributing to AFD discussions. When the community can't even make up its mind about what the different opinions mean, it's time to quit. 23skidoo (talk) 19:33, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Since you had such fun with the last article I dropped in your lap...
Dominic Covey and Burning Lands? A google search was ummmm not helpful. ChildofMidnight (talk) 20:38, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Whoa . . . nobody could ever accuse you of not knowing your spit from your spamola. Bongo  matic  05:47, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Gary Kurfirst

 * Thanks for the heads-up! Quite an interesting guy, actually. Bongo  matic  04:13, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Pineapple
Putting pineapple on pizza is sacriligeous and I'm deeply offended that this inappropriate food usage was posted on my talk page. What's next ham in a can called spam? There is an extraordinary pastrami pizza on offer nearby here. There's also a great place for arugula and prosciutto pizza. Of course a good margarita pizza is always a good choice. ChildofMidnight (talk) 08:38, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually it's not really that bad. But don't tell anyone I said that. ChildofMidnight (talk) 17:38, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * It just so happens I had home madae arugula / prosciutto pizza for dinner last night (were you snooping?)! Arugula is pretty awesome on margarita pizza or even a pizza with some spicy salami. Fresh cut chili is excellent to bake into them, too Bongo  matic  17:55, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Wow, you and Drmies are such gourmets! I struggle outside of boiling water and using the microwave. It's sort of like my contributions to Wikipedia, I let others do the heavy lifting. :) Did you see the glory that is my Snickers salad article? Please don't put it up for deletion. :) ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:25, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. It's way past bedtime. Pizza pizza. What? Sorry, dreaming... ChildofMidnight (talk) 08:15, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I know you don't like how the templates format names, but I hope you'll appreciate the improved references in Snickers salad anyway (and the excision of the dreaded "you").  Bongo  matic  08:31, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I love people who fix my citations. But why did you take out the quotes in the citations? I include semi-useful information that way and also it helps later on when the links go dead and certain deletionists *cough* *cough* try to kill it. If there's a quote they can see the article actually discussed the topic substantively and helps support what was verified from the articles. ChildofMidnight (talk) 09:06, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry to be simpleminded, but I don't see support for that usage in CITE (there's something for citing Web sources, but none of these references is to a web-only source). Also, it looks bad! I realize that s can also be used for footnotes, so there may be a justification, but the formatting would (in my view) need to be reconsidered considerably. Bongo  matic  09:16, 28 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Whoa. I'm coming late to this one, but really, pineapple on a pizza?? Worse than snickers salad! Drmies (talk) 21:25, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Boot Camp (film)
Might I ask about your determination as to how Boot Camp (film) fails WP:NF? For gosh sakes... I found reviews from opposite sides of the world. I mean sure... its not a blockbuster, but international distribution and international reviews in reliable sources? And even the nom himself voted keep, essentially withdrawing the nomination. I am confused. Now I certainly expect it to be a keep, with just the one un-expanded dissenting opinion, but I am quite curious at to your reasoning. Thank you.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 21:34, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I only saw one review, from JoongAng Ilbo. The rest appeared to me to be "trivial coverage, such as newspaper listings of screening times and venues, 'capsule reviews,' plot summaries without critical commentary, or listings in comprehensive film guides." Did I miss something? Bongo  matic  00:12, 26 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, you did... and with the greatest of respects, as I'm sure it was an honest error... but the section of WP:NF that you quoted verbatim and responded to point by point is specifically a criteria to be used for determining the likelyhood of sources being available, not for determining notability of subject, as that is covered in other and specific portions of WP:GNG, WP:NF, WP:N, and WP:V. Using the section as it was intended, I found sources.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 02:12, 26 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Here ya go... and only found and added because you pushed for more (mumbled thanks)... the film had an original title of Straight Edge which got a lot more coverage before than after the name change. Go figure. Aside from the new added sources (yes, reliable), under the (now found and sourced) working title of Straight Edge, the film was the first film to utilize a five-year-old incentive program that Fiji had designed and institued in order to create jobs while building a film production infrastructure on the island. So, a little film that actually had a first in something... for a country that did not have a film industry of its own... and I would not have discovered it if I had not kept digging. So thanks. It was worth it. Good show.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 07:05, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Tom Frieden Article
Bongo, exceuse my first forays into wikipedia editing. But I think that Tom Frieden, who you posted a notability question on, clearly meets the Wikipedia standards for notability. As I wrote on discussion page -

Tom Frieden is an appropriate subject for a wikipedia entry: as a high-profile figure within the world of public health and policy his background and career are an important part of the public record. The New York City Department of Health is one of the largest public health bodies in the world and, under his direction, has taken a number of innovative policy stances such as smoke-free and menu-calorie labeling, that are the subject of a lot of interest, debate and research in the public health community and in those interested in New York City policy and politics. The community would be well served by having his background information on Wikipedia.

I agree with your other commentary: the entry needs to be reworked to conform to Wikipedia standards. Interested in your feedback, thanks. stvhamill
 * Please see reply on article's talk page. Bongo  matic  23:48, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Sweet Autumn Misery
It is a tough call, and I am actually leaning toward acquiescing to an unblock inasmuch as I don't see anything disruptive. One of GG's tells, besides the laundered images, is that he often adds hoax stuff or writes about future episodes of TV shows as if they've already happened, And SAM doesn't seem to have done that, and the images are all properly rationalized and used. But for most of us not familiar with Phillippines pop culture, we have to trust the assessment of those who do because it requires familarity with it to spot the socks. And obviously this makes it hard for any new editor with an interest or knowledge in that area ("hey! He's editing stuff about Phillippines pop culture! Must be a sock of Gerald's!")

Blake's comment can be read either way. I tell you what ... I will post a comment there that he can be unblocked, because the only way we can be sure he's a legit account is to let him edit again. Daniel Case (talk) 04:18, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note . . . appreciate the time to reply. But actually, I am also interested in the guidelines for blocking--amount of evidence required, process for gathering that evidence, and how the opinions of others are solicited / weighed. Are there guidelines or is it left to individual administrators' discretion? 06:54, 27 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, it is a matter of administrative discretion. Anyone disagreeing with the block can take it up on the administrator's talk page, or AN/I if that proves unproductive and/or there are several competing viewpoints involved. Daniel Case (talk) 21:37, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Aron Bielski
Yes, that is what I was arguing in the Afd that failed. However, if you know of a way to revive the deletion, let me know. Stetsonharry (talk) 15:52, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * His notability is due to the Resistance, not the movieDGG (talk) 16:17, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Bennie and the Jets
I'd recommend tagging them with a fact tag since there's not been an exhaustive search for sources. You can still try to find out if Newspapers and magazines request service yields additional information or get a John or Taupin fan involved in finding references since they are most likely to know where a specific fact was mentioned. - Mgm|(talk) 09:01, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Booby
Thanks! Now I got a pair! Drmies (talk) 21:23, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
 * "Bullshit! I can't hear you! Sound off like you got a pair!" Bongo  matic  21:26, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Ta
Crikey i wish i could rustle up a ref as quick as that - thanks SatuSuro 08:09, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Referencing
When I last checked up on your message, I saw only two stubs linked. You have plenty of them now. I'll check your contributions as soon as I can. - Mgm|(talk) 13:23, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Health Food
By the way on a couple of editor pages I watch there was a discussion about expanding the Bacon explosion article enough to make it a DYK. That one is still building interest momentum! ChildofMidnight (talk) 03:39, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Woo hoo!!! From to DYK!  Bongo  matic  03:40, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

How do you get the format to show up for your citations? Do you copy and paste somewhere or type the whole thing out? ChildofMidnight (talk) 07:21, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I type  then paste in the descriptive data and add the   in the correct places in the pasted text. Then I type |url= and paste in the URL, and finish up by typing by hand  . So it's not really much more work than pasting in the info in the first place and putting it in the right order--arguably less, because order doesn't matter. You just need to remember a small number of field names.  Bongo  matic  08:50, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
 * How do you write the vertical line? And while we're at it, how do I do accent and tilde marks over letters? ChildofMidnight (talk) 08:58, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The vertical line ("pipe" in geekspeak) is found on most US keyboards as shift-backslash. When you're editing a WP page, you should have an area below the edit area that has a dropdown menu with "Insert", "Wiki markup", "Symbols", "Latin", "Greek", etc. The accented characters are to be found under "Latin". Hope that helps! Bongo  matic  09:01, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Great. Wünderbar. Gracias señor! ChildofMidnight (talk) 17:21, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I've expanded Bacon Explosion significantly (in percentage terms at least, if not in terms of total quantity of coverage). Do you think it's ready for DYK? Any other information to add there? Bongo  matic  23:33, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I already have it on the to do list. :) No worries. ChildofMidnight (talk) 01:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Aitor Iturrioz
You have no right to delete the article on Aitor Iturrioz. It is a famous actor but that does not have an award is not sufficient reason to delete an item. So I ask you to desist from his idea of deleting it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.118.251.143 (talk) 14:23, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The community will decide whether the article is kept. Please present your arguments at the appropriate discussion. Finding some sources that discuss the subject substantively is the key. And please refrain from being uncivil, it doesn't help your argument. ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:09, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Leon Klenicki
Thank you for expanding the stub. Bongo matic  01:39, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 * It's always a pleasure. We seem to be crossing paths on stubs of articles, and I'm always happy to flesh out articles and vice versa. Thanks for all of your work. Alansohn (talk) 02:08, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Redemptorists of Australia and New Zealand
Hello Bongomatic,

Thank you for taking the time to read my article. Though we may disagree on its worth, I’m sure we can agree that its contents need to be well referenced. I see that my page still has the caption “This article needs additional citations for verification.” What else do I need to provide for this caption to be lifted? Also please advise me on how I should go about contacting you. Is this the properway? Thank you in advance for your time an effort. RedemptoristAus
 * Hello RedemptoristAus. If you feel an article is well referenced and that issues that exisisted at the time of the addition of a tag have been addressed, you can simply remove the tag. It appears to me that in the above-captioned article, additional references have been cited.


 * By the way, there is no such thing as "your article" or "mine"--just articles that you or I create or cotrbute to. Please see WP:OWN. Rgds & happy editing, Bongo  matic  03:39, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Reed Cowan
Your comment 06:12, 2 February 2009 at the AfD was  "don't beleive there is a consensus that regional awards of this nature are indicia of notability. There is no other material claim of notability." I was unable to address your concerns until some 15 hours had passed. In addressing your comment that there were no other claims to notability, I did a major rewrite, bringing his notable accomplishments to the beginning of the article, and sourcing them in reliable sources independent of the subject. THIS was what you saw before your comment. THIS is the one that you missed. I seek your input in regards the improved and sourced version that was deleted after the improvement but before response. Thank you.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 04:50, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * First, you were correct in your criticism of my comment that there were "no other claims of notability". What I ought to have said is "no other viable claims of notability." Since the AfD was closed when I saw your comment, I didn't change the archived discussion to acknowledge that.
 * Now, for your revised article. A few points:
 * List / directory articles that establish where the subject works do not establish notability.
 * [MQS] : Agreed. I would just as soon simply list them or toss them. Being a newcaster is what he does... minor emmys or no, his work is not my assertion of notability, simply information for the readers.
 * The Time Magazine article is on an unrelated topic (it predates the film by twelve years).
 * [MQS] : Correct. It only WP:Verfiied the African strife. It can go.
 * As mentioned in the AfD, I don't think there's a consensus that regional Emmy awards establish notability. Moreover, I think it's misleading to desribe them as "Emmy" awards without inline qualification.
 * [MQS] : Readers are invited to click on the refernce links... which is kinda why we add them. If you're saying you prefer them to be specifically stated as regional... that's fine, as consensus has accepted regional awards as notable..... depending on the region and the award. I think an award from an region of about 25% of the continental United States can be considered as a big enough region. If you disagree, that't fine and does nothing to make that 25% any smaller. You are free to go to open discussion at WP:N.
 * [Bongo] : But why would I feel any need to do so?
 * You have cited four local news stories on Cowan relating to the death of his son. You and I may have to agree to disagree on this point, but I don't believe there is a consensus for exclusively local coverage to establish notability. I the link to abc4.com didn't open, so I can't evaluate that. But it is inaccruate and misleading to refer to a local affiliate's content as from "ABC News" as the reference suggests.
 * [MQS] : I am sure that is not a purposeful misdirection. Perhaps you meant to say I supplied sources that dealt with notable envents after the son's death. And you are quite correct that we disagree. Deseret News is completely acceptable as a reliable source independent of the subject. Uou may taks that discussion over to WP:RS as you are wrong here to make such a claim in the face of guideline and prior consensus. The two main Deseret News articles (each 2 pages long) may "mention" the son's death, but they reliably source in depth his actions and his notability over a year after the death. The 3rd Deseret News cite is verification that their was a death, that the father was at the scene shortly after its occurance, and that it occurred over a year previous to the later 2 articles. And when didBoston's NBC station WHDH-TV become an affiliate of FOX in Fort Lauderdale? What is your source of that bizarre statement?
 * [Bongo] : Perhaps you are not aware of the meaning of "affiliate" that I conveyed in my comment above. There is a broken link to an article at abc4.com. The reference reads "^ [10] ABC News, accessed 01-28-2009". The reference states that is is from ABC News, when in fact abc4 is a local ABC affilate. The locale is—by defininition—the place where the affiliate is located.
 * The movie (at least according to IMBb) has neither been reviewed nor recieved any awards or nominations.
 * [MQS] : IMDB is not a reliable source for such and is only a link of convenience to readers.
 * Speaking in a non-notable conference (as referenced in the YWCA website) without any significant RS coverage does not establish notability, nor does addressing a state senate committe (even if covered in a website such as mybully.org, which would not constitute and RS, nor could such coverage be considered significant).
 * [MQS] : Again, it is WP:Verification of his outreach and activism... already covered in the 2 Deseret News articles.
 * The link to mapletree.publishing.com doesn't reference Cowan or Afraid at School.
 * [MQS] : It was there. Gone now. DId find mention of it in a Fox news source, but as it has not yet been released, it is not a notability. If the fact is kept, it can be WP:Verified.
 * Mentions as a survivor in an obituary do not esablish notability.
 * [MQS] : ? As mentioned above, the article is a WP:Verification of the son's death. Nothing in the article asserts notability for his being the father of a dead boy... and is there to refute any WP:UGH claims that the death did not happen.
 * The several non-independent sources you identified are not independent (nor do they appear to be RS).
 * [MQS] : Sources provided to WP:Verify a non contentious fact in a BLP may be used. There is no indication that the facts are in any way false or misleading. Can you be specific about which sources you feel do not act as WP:Verification of facts?
 * [Bongo] : I don't have issue with primary sources being used to source uncontroversial claims.
 * Emceeing an event that hasn't recevied significant coverage does not establish notability (and even emceeing an event that attracts significant coverage doesn't esablish it unless the emcee is noted non-trivally in such coverage).
 * [MQS] : Again, you continue to labor under the grave misimpression that all sources in an article must directly address notability and that that they must be expansive and in depth. Both assumptions are wrong. Only sources directly involved with sourcing an assertion of notability must be "significant".. and those HAVE been provided. Guideline instructs soundly that "Encyclopedic contenet nust be verifiable". Or are you challenging the minoe verified facts of the article? Which ones specifically?
 * [Bongo] : Wooooooo—"labor under the grave misimpression". Please, save it for elsewhere.
 * Addressing a conference that hasn't received signficant coverage does not establish notability (and even addressing a conference that attracts significant coverage doesn't esablish it unless the speaker is noted non-trivally in such coverage).
 * [MQS] : Again... and again and again... WP:Verification of his speaking at such events.
 * [Bongo] : Again... and again and again... you are welcome to engage in civil discourse on this page if you're capable of it, but be obnoxious elsewhere.
 * So in summary, to me it still fails to establish notability of the subject. If, on the other hand, there were significant coverage in (non-local) reliable sources independent of the subject, that would establish notability.
 * Rgds, Bongo  matic  06:17, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Responses (moved by Bongo  matic  to be inline with original bullet items)
 * Thank you for another insight into your processes.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 07:15, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I note that you removed what was a civil comment on your talk page. Without doing the same here, I would ask you not to be obstreperous on my talk page.
 * I removed a talkback template. There was no further need for the template after I followed it to your talk page.   Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 08:34, 3 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I am referring to this edit . Bongo  matic  08:43, 3 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Ah, yes. The lengthy response about your processes. As Wikipedia has no need to be like a paper encyclopedia, I did not need it on my talk page.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 09:02, 3 February 2009 (UTC)


 * My general response to most of your comments is that because my opinion at the AfD was based on notability, I enumerated each reference for its potential demonstration thereof—not because I am under the misimpression that each was intended or required to make such a demonstration. But rather to make sure that I didn't miss out on any potential claims.
 * Your LAST comments AT THE AfD were made 15 hours before the additional sources were added and before the multiple assertions of notability were brought up to and generalized in the header paragraph. Your format of enumeration seemed to require a point-by-point response, so I enumerated right back.
 * I believe enumeration is possible without sarcasm. Bongo  matic  08:43, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes.


 * That we disgree on Deseret News as a reliable source is apparent.


 * No disagreement on its reliability. As mentioned, numerous discussions in which I have participated demonstrate a consensus that even reliable local sources do not establish notability. Bongo  matic  08:43, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I read WP:RS. I provide sources that meet WP:RS. If requires "significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject" and I provide exactly such and it is disregarded, I would wonder why the guideline even exists.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 09:02, 3 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I read here in Wiki that "The Deseret News is a newspaper published in Salt Lake City, Utah, and is Utah's oldest continually published daily newspaper. It has the second largest daily circulation in the state behind The Salt Lake Tribune." So it is difficult for me to see that source as not complying with WP:RS. And to address my last confusion... even with the link gone dead, please accept that since the article has been headed "From ABC NEWS:", that was my reason for listing it that way in the citation. I did not wish to assign it to any other than its originator as the text made it apparent that the information came to the affiliate from the parent company's news feed.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 08:34, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Specific responses are inline with the original bullet points and your replies.
 * Rgds, Bongo  matic  07:42, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Bacon Explosion
I have been following with interest the evolution of the Bacon Explosion article. If only it were a wee bit longer (over 1500 characters of prose) it would make an excellent article to be featured on the front page as part of a "Did you know?" listing, complete with photo. Since DYK is for Wikipedia's newest articles, the expansion to 1500+ characters would really need to be finished sometime today or early tomorrow to qualify. I sincerely hope this is something you'd be interested in tackling. Thanks in advance. - Dravecky (talk) 16:09, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, it's all yours gentlemen. ChildofMidnight (talk) 22:16, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * CoM: thanks for the excellent work! Dravecky: looks set to go—comprehensive, well-referenced. What more could you hope for from a WikiProject Bacon article?! Bongo  matic  23:51, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome! (Actually, I should have further described it as "American and Canadian football-sized" but there's only so far you can push the language). Daniel Case (talk) 16:12, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Allen Zwerdling

 * Sir Dravecky: Once again, honored and flattered. Bongo  matic  15:49, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Happy to be of service and thanks again for creating such great new content. - Dravecky (talk) 15:53, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Dessert bars
Hello! there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath and respond there as soon as possible. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:15, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Bacon Explosion

 * What a moment . . . one to relish! (Do you think relish is good with Bacon Explosion?) Bongo  matic  17:00, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * It is quite a moment but I'll skip the relish. Please pass the eggs, instead. - Dravecky (talk) 17:03, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Notability of Alan Scott (blacksmith)
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Alan Scott (blacksmith), by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Alan Scott (blacksmith) seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Alan Scott (blacksmith), please affix the template to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that '''this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here''' CSDWarnBot (talk) 02:00, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Are you going to do a DYK hook for this article? ChildofMidnight (talk) 20:30, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Hadn't thought to do so . . . what's entailed? Or do you want to? Bongo  matic  22:56, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
 * No worries, I'll try to do one or I'll delegate it... ChildofMidnight (talk) 23:46, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Daniel Seligman
Where anywhere does it say that Seligman is an Australian? He served in the United States Army, graduated from an American university and worked heavily with American publications. If he's not American, than that should be explicitly stated and sourced in the article, so that it can be easily verified by a casual reader. Cheers, CP 21:12, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Oops, was thinking abuot another article I was working on. Apologies. Bongo  matic
 * No worries. I'm guessing that it was Alan Scott (blacksmith), because I just about actually did make that mistake there, haha. Cheers, CP 00:52, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, I’m an evangelist for d mmmm yyyy format, and use that format in all articles I write from scratch. But I don’t revert so-called “corrections”. Arguably, Scott had a close nexus to the US too, so if argue on that basis (not on the basis of nationality), I will not revert. Bongo  matic  01:00, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Copyright problems
Hi. Thanks for keeping an eye out for copyright concerns on articles like International Aid, Inc. When tagging such articles, though, please follow the directions on the template both in listing the article at the Copyright Problems board and in notifying the contributor. Under current administrator guidelines, such articles cannot be deleted until seven days after the contributor is notified (unless they meet the copyright speedy deletion criterion), and these are not routinely examined until seven days are passed. Having to relist such matters prolongs the amount of time that Wikipedia is hosting inappropriate content.

Again, I appreciate your watchfulness in this respect, and please let me know at my talk page if I can clarify these procedures. Thanks. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 18:54, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Oops . . . serves me right for not speedy-ing it! Will read the instructions next time. Thanks for the note. Bongo  matic  18:58, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 19:01, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

...and you and I...
Well, that's citing Yes. Hey, can I ask you, don't pile it on, please. A few of us have already gotten too angry with this editor, and that includes me. And while we're on the topic! "This is between Sinterklaas and I" is acceptable for a lot of English speakers--it's an example of hypercorrection, and it happens when people try to sound more formal than their usual comfort level is capable of. But you have to know that I'm something of a grammatical relativist (ChildofM wouldn't be surprised), since I will accept "Bongo is smarter than me" as grammatical. Of course, I won't let students write that in formal papers... Take care, Drmies (talk) 19:04, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
 * It's also in Touch Me by The Doors. "'til the stars fall from the sky for you and I". I'm a bit of a grammatical relativist myself. Did you see this delightful column? I also liked Robert Weisberg's letter in response.
 * Speaking of third graders, I assumed that editor is one, so (not piling on any WP issues) I thought it would be considerate to give him a tip to use to impress his teacher once the articles are deleted and can't show them to him/her anymore. Bongo  matic  19:17, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, there's also "make it shine for you and I" in Rainbow's "Catch the Rainbow." Haha, yes, I did read "Oaf of Office"--fantastic. Thanks for reminding me: I'm going to send a copy to my mother in law, who is a high-school English teacher of the old school, and I'll go read that response quickly, thanks! Later, Drmies (talk) 19:32, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

By the way
There is a Minnesotan cuisine category. Word is spreading... ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:03, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

The Baconator
Wow! I'm just getting around to updating the DYK Stats page, and your Bacon Explosion hook drew an astounding 40,500 views. That's the third most of all-time. Congratulations! Cbl62 (talk) 04:17, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Good job. ChildofMidnight (talk) 04:55, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks Cbl62. Great example of teamwork. I doubt that Alan Scott (blacksmith) will get as many hits if CoM writes a DYK hook for it, but it's now a lovely little article, but it will at least get some traffic. Bongo  matic  05:45, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * It's hooked. No pic though... We need a picture for chicken fried bacon though. :) ChildofMidnight (talk) 05:58, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I have sent off a request to Ovencrafters for a photo to be released into the public domain or free license. Do you want to pull the nomination until the last moment so we can hope they come back within that window? Bongo  matic  06:35, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Best to just add one if it comes in. I'm not sure they'll use an oven photo anyway, not the most exciting subject matter, and I didn't come up with a very exciting hook. But we'll see what happens... ChildofMidnight (talk) 06:40, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * "... that Alan Scott was a blacksmith and author who advocated designed and built brick ovens and promoted artisanal baking?"  Bongo  matic  07:10, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

The only problem I see with your hook, and to some extent with mine, is that they are article summaries. Something intriguing that draws in the reader would be best. I also like to include links to other articles that might be insteresting (like blacksmithing, baking and brick oven). So for example, I liked including the blacksmith thing because I think that would be an interesting article and might pull soem people in who are interested in that subject to this subject's article. But I have no objection to the hook being altered or to an alternate being proposed, and I'm no expert on which hook work best. I'm just sharing my thoughts. ChildofMidnight (talk) 16:48, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Another alternate hook: ... that Alan Scott was a blacksmith who designed and built brick ovens and promoted artisanal baking with milled flour ground from the Callington Mill? Bongo  matic  05:05, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I tweaked a bit. I like. It's a bit wordy, but I think it's good. Who knows. :) ChildofMidnight (talk) 05:11, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Like the idea, but sicne Callington Mill hasn't yet recommenced operations, don't know if it's a little misleading. Bongo  matic  05:35, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

I think it's a good one. If the others haven't been reviewed you can put it first. It don't think it's misleading. He wanted community ovens and mills as I understand it. Just the sort of communist that you and Drmies favor. :) ChildofMidnight (talk) 06:55, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I just got an absolutely awesome photo of the man in front of a great oven. Unfortunately there was no explicit release in the e-mail, so I hope that she follows up with it quickly. Bongo  matic  06:58, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Did you know that Alan Smith believed that community ovens could bring people together, and that he founded a company that sells ovens, Ovencrafters, to put his money where his mouth was? Drmies (talk) 20:11, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Taste article
What do you make of this article: Superior Taste Award? A couple of us thought Technochrist does not to meet the notability guidelines, but no one nommed it for deletion yet. ChildofMidnight (talk) 20:18, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * You just want me to do your dirty work. Bongo  matic  23:12, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I guess it looks that way doesn't it. I don't have much heart these days to do AfD noms. It seems like most of my energy is expended writing silly articles, trying to keep up with my watch list, and trying to save stuff from getting deleted. I nommed the STA article. You didn't offer an opinion, so I took your silence to mean you support whatever I think. ChildofMidnight (talk) 01:22, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I looked at the STA and it looked to me like puffery. I didn't have a chance to do the nom myself (not that I was trying to avoid doing all your dirty work&mdash;just didn't get to it yet!). Bongo  matic  06:25, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
 * No worries. Good job on the Alan Scott article. I didn't get a chance to look, but I presume they used your superior hook? I've always been a big fan of brick oven pizza. ChildofMidnight (talk) 01:53, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I edited the hook at the DYK including elements of your and my edits. It used the picture! WP:Recent additions. Bongo  matic  02:19, 18 February 2009 (UTC)