User talk:CactusWriter/Archive 2011

__NOINDEX__

Possible Spam?
Hi CactusWriter, I believe there is spam on the page Worst Cooks in America because when I scrolled down onto the finalists section I see a link saying: "Official Website for Jenny!" and I don't know if it is from a spammer or if it is wikipedia material. I'd appreciate it if you took some time to look over the article. Thanks, --  Para sect   (Discuss) 22:55, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree. The link serves no purpose other than to promote the individual. I've removed it as a WP:SPAMLINK. Good eye:) —  Cactus Writer (talk) 23:13, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alta_Tecnologia_Andina_-_ATA
hi: you deteled http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alta_Tecnologia_Andina_-_ATA  since you mentioned that the content was taken from http://www.princeclausfund.org/fr/forum/research-zones-of-silence-network-partner-drik-picture-library-crossfire-exhibition.html. However I must say that the content from PCF is a general content by ATA written by me and since I am part of ATA and the PCF it was used by the PCF. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tupacamauta (talk • contribs) 19:23, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, Tupacamauta. As I am sure you can understand, all Wikipedia editors are anonymous and therefore we do not accept permission for licensing except through official channels. Permission to use copyrighted text must either be given directly on the website or by direct e-mail to our WP:OTRS office. The instructions for doing so were outlined in the message on your talk page -- in particular, you can follow the procedure at Donating copyrighted materials. if you have further questions, please ask. — Cactus Writer (talk) 19:31, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Copyvio text should Not! sit in the article history -- wikipedia does not own it
Please don't do this. The copyrighted text belongs nowhere on wikipedia without the permission of the copyright holder. It doesn't belong in the article history. A person's entire biography was stolen and posted on wikipedia, and, now, there it is forever in the history if the article is kept, because, instead of deleting the copyrighted material from the history, or properly deleting an article without any clean earlier version, you just removed the G12 tag.

There is no "earlier version without infringement" that "should be retained," as this article was started by lifting an entire other web page.

Wikipedia does not have any right to that material, in the article history where anyone can pull it up, on the article page, in any other space on wikipedia. It's not ours. We're writing an encyclopedia, not stealing one page by page from the rest of cyberspace. This G-12 should not have been declined without a clean version to retain. --Kleopatra (talk) 05:37, 7 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi, Kleopatra. Yes, that was a perfectly appropriate decline of the G12 speedy. The copyvio text had been removed and a stub remained which made a credible assertion of notability. Therefore the article no longer qualified for speedy deletion. If all the text in the entire article was created as a copyright infringement (and removal would leave nothing redeemable), than I would have deleted the article. Please note that we don't usually need to delete the article history -- it is only if it becomes a problem with persistent restorations or a complaint through the WP:OTRS office. Our basic requirement is to remove copyright infringing text from the public face of the article. If we have received complaints than I am happy to rev/del the history -- and have done so many times in the past. As stated in our guidelines; so long as the infringing text is removed from the public face of the article, it may not need to be removed/deleted permanently unless the copyright holder complains via OTRS or unless other contributors persist in restoring it. However, I did forget to make a note of the deletion on the talk page. (I'm better at remembering that when I am the one removing the text). So thanks for reminding me, I have rectified that. If you need further explanation on this, let me know. And thanks for keeping a watch out for copyright violations -- it is appreciated. Cheers. — Cactus Writer (talk) 05:58, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
 * The tag that was on the article was G-12, and that's what you declined, and that state's what I posted above. If G-12 is not a legitimate tag, then work with the community for its removal, don't turn it into whatever other tag is convenient for you.
 * There is no way that I will ever bother to remove copyrighted material from the "public face" of an article if the result is that due to my removing the copyrighted material from the article, the article is left forever preserving the theft of copyrighted material on wikipedia. Thanks for making me the thief also.
 * Oh, and, thanks for letting me know that my work is responsible for the continuance of the farce that includes wikipedia main page articles, wikipedia featured articles, wikipedia DYKs, and wikipedia biographies all stolen from cyber space. --Kleopatra (talk) 06:54, 7 January 2011 (UTC)


 * And the remaining two sentences were also a copyright, which you could have seen by checking the website. I just wrongly assumed the article would be deleted in its entirety, so I changed a word, and left those two simple sentences behind. After leaving them behind, the article was reverted to include the changed word, to make the article a 100% copyright violation again, then the entire text was added back, and finally the text was added back to the article discussion page. So, it's your article now.--Kleopatra (talk) 07:03, 7 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Although it is understandable that similar sentences may appear to be copyright violations, this is not always the case. In copyright law there is an allowance for de minimis text. That is, if a statement of fact is reduced to such an extent that it cannot be stated any other way, than it cannot be copyrighted. For example, the lede sentence read: Monica Taylor (born November 1, 1970) is a talk show host and Emmy-nominated producer. These simple statements of fact cannot be rewritten without convolution, and therefore do not meet the legal requirement for copyright. This, of course, wouldn't be true if the promotional language on the original text remained: As an acclaimed talk show host and Emmy-nominated television producer, Monica’s authenticity has had a strong impact on audiences worldwide reaching millions in over 12 different countries and growing. Although the second sentence was contained as an independent claus in another sentence, I felt it also passed the de minimis test.


 * Kleopatra, I certainly hope you don't feel that Wikipedia or your work on it is a farce -- it isn't -- and I hope that you will continue to remove copyvio text as you find it. It is important that we retain editors like yourself who are passionate about editing and improvements. And we definitely need more editors willing to correct the abundance of reports at WP:CP. I don't mind discussing my actions -- because I've made plenty of mistakes in the past (unfortunately), and undoubtedly will make some more in the future. I hope you will reconsider your stance. Regards. — Cactus Writer (talk) 07:38, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Decline of copyvio on Najmul Hoda
I looked at the history and concluded that the page originated in Jan 2010. The copyright date on http://www.urduyouthforum.org/biography_Najmul_Hoda.php states 2009. So I did the nomination.... Are you saying that the gradual increase in size of the page implies that it done from scratch??? And that the copyright date on the Urdu Youth forum site is just wrong??? Regards, Ariconte (talk) 01:01, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, Ariconte. You are correct, that is what I am saying. I did notice the 2009 copyright date on the website -- but noted that every page on the website including those for current activities shows a 2009 copyright date. The website was probably created in 2009 and they are just using the same bottom template for every page. The incremental additions over time in our edit history indicates the article was created on Wikipedia -- so it is a reverse copyright violation. (Looking for the gradual build-up of text is often one of the only ways we can spot who has copied from who.) Thanks for checking on that. Cheers. — Cactus Writer (talk) 01:28, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Sayed Kasseb - re-creation of a deleted article without WP:DRV?
Hi CW,

I've just restarted Talk:Sayed Kasseb. Only text a template, which as a WP:BLP article must have. This message popped up: A page with this title has previously been deleted.

If you are creating a new page with different content, please continue. If you are recreating a page similar to the previously deleted page, or are unsure, please first contact the deleting administrator using the information provided below.

21:01, 5 January 2011 CactusWriter (talk | contribs) deleted "Talk:Sayed Kasseb" (G8: Talk page of a deleted page) As you previously G8'd the talk page, I'm guessing you may have deleted the article as well. Could you possibly have a little look into the deletion history of the article itself? Thank you!

--Shirt58 (talk) 09:57, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, Shirt58. Thanks for the notification. The article was previously speedy deleted for WP:A7 criteria -- no assertion of notability. This recreated BLP is much larger and makes more assertions now. It still reads like a resume of any average college professor and lacks any substantial references -- so I popped a tag asking for refs and am willing to give it time to comply with our criteria for WP:ACADEMIC. Unless there is no substantial improvement, it will probably need to be discussed through AFD. Cheers. — Cactus Writer (talk) 17:40, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * No wukkaz. Onya, mate. --Shirt58 (talk) 08:58, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion in minutes while still creating the content!
Please do not delete an article within minutes after it is created. Some of us require time (at least 15 minutes) to do the editing. I have recreated the article Distinguished Lukacs Professor with sources and references to establish notability. Mathstat (talk) 19:43, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, Mathstat. I apologize if we were too quick with the gun with that deletion -- there was a bit of a backlog at CSD at that moment. However, I do think that 10 minutes was enough time to add some text more than just the title. In the future, I suggest that you use your sandbox to build at least a minimal article (lede and refs) before creating it in the mainspace. That will go a long way to avoiding this kind of misunderstanding. Cheers. — Cactus Writer (talk) 20:02, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive news
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors at 19:45, 16 January 2011 (UTC).

A little assistance please
I'm the person that posted the description of the company Collegesolved that you deleted. I was hoping you might be able to help me as a new member of the Wikipedia community as I'm confused as to why it was deleted. Perhaps you can make some recommendations as to how not to be flagged like this in the future? Thank you! Doanrichie (talk) 23:55, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, Doanrichie. The article on Collegesolved was deleted because there was no credible assertion of notability -- which is not unexpected for a newly started website. To see our guidelines about how a company or website can demonstrate notability, please read Notability (organizations and companies) and Notability (web). Essentially, the overriding criteria is this: a company or website is not notable until it has received significant coverage in independent reliable sources. Until a reliable independent source (e.g. magazine, newspaper, book, etc.) discusses the article subject and deems it notable, Wikipedia cannot make that determination. If you have further questions, please ask. Good luck with your editing. — Cactus Writer (talk) 05:24, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Peru's Challenge (copyright)
Hi CactusWriter, Apologies for the mistakes on my end regarding copyrighted material. I have amended the relevant pages on the PC website to include the copyright release. I hope this is the right one. Can you please confirm that there are no further issues. Regards AngeleneNieto (talk) 21:06, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, AngeleneNieto. Thanks for complying with our policy on the use of copyrighted text. The website now shows CC-BY-SA 3.0 licensing for the page in question, so I've restored the page Peru's Challenge. Please note that, although the text is no longer a copyright violation, it still may require editing to meet other Wikipedia guidelines on neutral point-of-view -- particular removing peacock and promotional language. I have left a couple of tags on the page as a reminder. Good luck with your editing. — Cactus Writer (talk) 05:22, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

A little more help please...
Another message from the person that created the Collegesolved page. The Wiki entry shows up high on a Google search for CollegeSolved and when you click through there are huge red letters saying that we were deleted for basically being too small. As you can imagine, this has a hugely negative impact on a start-up business. Can you just delete the page completely and I'll re-post again when the company has formal press coverage? Doanrichie (talk) 22:59, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi again, Doanrichie. That page was deleted completed -- all that remains is the record of the deletion which we maintain for our own transparency. There is nothing more to be deleted. As far as the Google search engine or its parameters, Wikipedia has nothing to do with it, and I'm not certain how often Google crawlers update. However, in my experience, those article "ghosts" usually disappear from Google searches after a week or so. Cheers. — Cactus Writer (talk) 17:36, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Suicide of Nicola Raphael
As you contributed to this article, or commented at its first AfD, you may be like to contribute at Articles for deletion/Suicide of Nicola Raphael (2nd nomination). JohnCD (talk) 14:45, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the notice. I will review the recreated article and debate. — Cactus Writer (talk) 18:30, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

I need your help or the help of other editors at wikipedia, please.
Hi CactusWriter, I need help moving my pdf digital documents from my website to the red outlined areas on the list of whistleblower site I think I understand but I am real fuzzy on the correct way to do this. I think if you can help me with a couple of them and explain to me the correct way to do this I'll be able to do the rest on my own. Thank YouQui Tam Relator (talk) 21:42, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, Qui Tam Relator. I am sorry but I need to be blunt. We have been discussing this for the past month and yet you still do not have a correct understanding about what Wikipedia is. This is an encyclopedia -- period. It is not a storage space for your scanned documents nor does it provide article space for your personal thoughts and commentary. Imagine if you went to your local library and asked them to paste your personal papers into the Encyclopedia Britannica. It wouldn't happen there. And it won't happen here. If your purpose is to maintain an online record of your life, than I suggest you create a Facebook page, MySpace page or other personal blog where you can easily upload anything and write everything as you wish. I am also concerned about your latest attempts: 1) to create an article about yourself (properly deleted for no credible assertion of notability, but just as likely to be deleted as only self-promotion); and 2.) the incomprehensible expansion of your entry at List of whistleblowers. During our discussions, you expressed the desire to help expand articles about Qui Tam lawsuits -- which I think is a fine idea. But if your only desire is to write personal commentary about yourself and your life, than I think you will be better off on a personal blog rather than Wikipedia. That is my personal opinion. I do appreciate your attempts to understand Wikipedia's guidelines. — Cactus Writer (talk) 02:27, 26 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Dear CactusWriter, I'm in no position to make a deal with you and I'm well aware of this fact,  but here goes, if you can see your way to putting me back on the List Of Major Whistleblowers as before with a few references and I go back and touch it please banned me from Wikipedia completely. I am a man of his word and give you my solom vow not to touch it again or my name in the future but would love to finsh Inge Maudal, Genisco Technology and John Michael Gravitts in the sand box and will look for your approval before posting on these names. I just don't want this very important case to go by the wayside of history without a mention of it. I promise to be upfront with you and not do anything without your approval, that is my word to you and if you've read about my past you know my word is all I have left. Please reconsider my proposal. Thank YouQui Tam Relator (talk) 23:53, 26 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Qui Tam Relator, regarding this comment, the opinions of any editor on Wikipedia are equally valid -- and that includes yours. Being an administrator doesn't provide more weight to my opinion nor does it allow me to override consensus or policy. Now several editors have already offered you the same good advice -- try building an article in your userspace User:Qui Tam Relator/Sandbox or at Articles for creation, use only neutral facts sourced to reliable references, than seek advice from experienced editors. I have offered an opinion at Talk:List of whistleblowers about your entry there and will wait for other opinions to find consensus. You are welcome to add your voice to that discussion. Cheers. —  Cactus Writer (talk) 18:34, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much CactusWriter
Very nice job on the new look on the list of whistleblowers page, great job and thank you for your consideration and patience with me. I have much more information in regards to Ramsey Clark Complaint and Oprration El Dorado Canyon thats not out there yet and still in paper form. I know a lot about thus area of information from a lot of different agancies FBI, DCIS, NIS, meetings with many people from many parts of the defense and congressional Investigators four days a week three hours every night after work we would meet in different restaurants all over the Los Angeles area for over two years. I know a lot about this subject matter. Thank you for your ear and patience.Qui Tam Relator (talk) 01:48, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Reinstating a page
CactusWriter, Having read through the requirements for notability I believe /collegesolved is ready for reinstatement. Please see the below links for more information and please let me know if you can reverse the deletion or if I need to re-create a new page.

IECA - the industry's most important association for the category of services provided by CollegeSolved:

http://www.iecaonline.com/blog/2010/12/02/new-partnerships-and-initiatives-help-independent-educational-consultants-enhance-service-to-students/

Bloomberg BusinessWeek:: http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=118355023

Securities & Exchange Commission (SEC) website: http://sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1509227/000150922711000002/xslFormDX01/primary_doc.xml

United States Patent and Trademark Office: http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4005:m2vqrt.2.1

Thank you Doanrichie (talk) 22:27, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Doanrichie, IMO none of those references establishes notability for collegesolved -- they only establish that it exists. As stated in the opening of WP:CORP: An organization is generally considered notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not sufficient to establish notability. A three sentence mention on the IEC blog is trivial -- especially when it was one of several websites incuded in that brief editorial. The info at Bloomberg.com appears to be self-submitted by collegesolved. The other two cites are insignificant.


 * I will not restore the article into the mainspace. However, I have placed a copy for you in the Wikipedia Article Incubator at Article Incubator/Collegesolved. This will allow you time to provide references which provide significant coverage of the website as well as obtain collaboration/advice from other Wikipedia editors. Good luck with your editing. — Cactus Writer (talk) 00:15, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar

 * Thanks, DustFormsWords! I personally think it was only standard operating procedure for investigating CP problems -- but I do appreciate your notice. — Cactus Writer (talk) 18:17, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program is looking for new Online Ambassadors
Hi CactusWriter! Since you've been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, I wanted to let you know about the Wikipedia Ambassador Program, and specifically the role of Online Ambassador. We're looking for friendly Wikipedians who are good at reviewing articles and giving feedback to serve as mentors for students who are assigned to write for Wikipedia in their classes.

If that sounds like you and you're interested, I encourage you to take a look at the Online Ambassador guidelines; the "mentorship process" describes roughly what will be expected of mentors during the current term, which started in January and goes through early May. If that's something you want to do, please apply!

You can find instructions for applying at WP:ONLINE.

I hope to hear from you soon.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 17:34, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Photo
Hi CactusWriter what is the easiest way for me to get a photo to you if I feel safe enough to do that ? Thank you for your ear and patience.Qui Tam Relator (talk) 23:00, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
 * What is the photo? If it is a photo to which you own the copyright and it is related to a Wikipedia subject, than you can upload it to Wikimedia Commons. The procedure can be followed at Commons:Commons:Contributing your own work. — Cactus Writer (talk) 18:47, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

GOCE January Backlog elimination drive conclusion
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors at 14:55, 5 February 2011 (UTC).

Yolanda Soares
Hi, I wonder if you would like to take a look at this article considering your past involvement, there is a fourth revert within 24 hours from the same IP which may or may not be related to problems in the past. Cheers Fæ (talk) 23:40, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, Fae. Okay, I see. You are right that the addition of birth date requires an RS. MySpace can sometimes be okay for basic info if it is the person's official webpage. But in this case, not only does the person have an official website, Myspace doesn't list an exact birth date. I've reverted and left comments on the article and IP's talk pages. Because I have edited this article, I am involved and cannot take any administrative actions there. If the edit warring continues, then you should file a report at AIV or RPP. Cheers. — Cactus Writer (talk) 16:11, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. The MySpace problem is slightly more wrangley that just being a verified 'official' website (I've had the problem several times) as celebs may want to disguise their age or may post many doubtful factoids about themselves. If what is being posted is, say, their opinion or self identity (e.g. "I am an African-American" vs. "I am black") then these are reasonable to add whereas independently verifiable facts (birth date, employment history, marriages etc.) as well as the obvious facts that involve other people ought to be supported by more than non-self-published sources. As usual it's a case-by-case sort of issue depending on what the nature of claims being made are and how controversial they are perceived to be. Fæ (talk) 17:52, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
 * That's a good point. — Cactus Writer (talk) 01:14, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

DC401
Thanks for dealing with that article. I protected that article against re-creation. For articles of that sort, I usually do the third time its created. (When they're actually abusive, I do it the 2nd time. )  DGG ( talk ) 16:51, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, David. I agree completely. Appreciate your taking a look there. :) — Cactus Writer (talk) 16:57, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Chewette
Hi CactusWriter, can you copy back my previous work to me, I will write is a more neutral way on this article, but need the previous job back as my reference, thanks!Felixlhk (talk) 02:41, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, Felixlhk. I deleted the article Chewette (per our WP:G12 criteria) because it was created entirely from copyrighted text. It is a violation of Wikipedia policy to allow copyright infringement on any page -- including user pages. Therefore, the page cannot be restored. If you wish to rewrite the article, please use original language. If you have further questions about this, please ask. Cheers. — Cactus Writer (talk) 06:31, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Early Modern Thought Online -- Deletion Hang on
Dear Cactus Writer, I can easily fix the article you deleted if given a couple hours. I was on the way out when the alert was posed. Both of the concerns are easy to address/fix. User:Gametus User:Gamonetus 23:22, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, Gametus Gamonetus. The article was removed per our WP:G12 criteria for copyrighted infringment. It is a violation of Wikipedia policy to allow copyright infringement on any page -- including user pages. Therefore, the page cannot be restored in its original form. If you wish to rewrite the article, please use original language. Cheers. — Cactus Writer (talk) 23:29, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I will re-write the page in a non-infringing form. I take you do not object. I have no personal connection to the group in question. PS: somehow my user id was mangled in the last posting; Gamonetus is it. Gamonetus (talk) 23:52, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, thank you. There is no objection to you resubmitting an article with non-infringing text. However, please remember that the article will still need to pass other Wikipedia criteria -- including the notability criteria for web content (please see Notability (web)). Good luck with your editing. (And I apologize for misspelling your username.) — Cactus Writer (talk) 00:11, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I noted that issue in the speedy delete posting. As one of the two or three synthetic databases on early modern printing, it should not be to hard to make a case for its significance. No foul on the name; I just thought not having the correct one might impede future communication. Gamonetus (talk) 00:17, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Warren Fales Draper delete
Hello Cactus Writer, and thanks for your concern about deleting the subject article. The article has been transfered from a user page to a main article, so the user page is no longer needed. I was under the impression that I was supposed to delete the user page contents as per new article creation guidelines. You can check to make sure the real article is available, and then delete the user page. Thanks.Sarnold17 (talk) 04:02, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Suraj Auto Gas
Dear CactusWriter, I request you to reconsider deleting the article Suraj Auto Gas. This company is providing great value in the automobile ancillary business in India. If you give me some more time I can get their satisfied customers to vouch for it and add their other credentials on the page with references. Thanks. Poshpigeon (talk) 06:02, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, Poshpigeon. The article was deleted because there was not even an assertion of notability -- which is not unexpected of a local car mechanic business. Please read Notability (organizations and companies) to understand the criteria for an article about a corporation or company. Significant coverage in reliable sources means substantial articles about the company in national magazines or national newspapers. Trivial mentions are meaningless. Customer reviews won't do it -- and, in fact, they should be avoided since they are not reliable sources and will be considered violations of Wikipedia policy on WP:SPAM. Although I am sure Suraj Auto Glass is a fine business and provides a valuable service, I see no assertion that it is notable. — Cactus Writer (talk) 17:52, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Permission
Hi CactusWriterm Today you deleted my article about Thesys Group, what kind of copyright permission do I need to reload the article from the company, or the permission is not the way regain the article? Havpet (talk) 18:39, 23 February 2011 (UTC)havpetHavpet (talk) 18:39, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, Havpet. Sorry -- I didn't notice that this information had not been left for you on your talk page. It should have been. You can find instructions for providing copyright permission at WP:Donating copyrighted materials, particularly the section titled Granting us permission to copy material already online. Just a reminder, though: even if permission is granted, the text can only be used on Wikipedia if it passes our core policies on Neutral Point-of-view, Reliable Sources and Verifiability. Otherwise it will need to be edited to bring it into compliance. If you have further questions, please ask. — Cactus Writer (talk) 19:36, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Qui Tam Relator & List Of Whistleblowers
Sorry for my absence after my last e-mail to you. . I'm writing to you to ask that you take into consideration a very small change in my bio on the List Of Whistleblowers. I made an agreement with both you and VQuakr not to go to that site to post anything there. I believe that it's important that future readers of that list and potential future whistleblowers know the sacrifice that I had made while I worked undercover for 18 months with the FBI and DCIS to uncover the fraud before the first gulf war in 1991. If I had not come forward in the mid 1980's to tell about the fraud chances are that the HARM missile would have been a disastrous calamity like the 1986 Libya Bombing Raid and the poor performance of the HARM missile in Libya and would have had the same results in Bagdad. What I'm wishing for will only take a sentence that you would construct and place in the already existing bio. Also CactusWriter there are conversations all over the Internet that I have had in the past with you and other editors and administrators all over the Web, is there something you can do about this and if not could you please delete this conversation after you read it. The only reason I want this sentence added to my bio regarding working undercover during that time period us to allow future whistleblowers that this could be a good way to tell a tale of fraud but can also be a damming situation on their future life like it has been for my life. Thank you for your ear and patienceQui Tam Relator (talk) 19:19, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Qui Tam Relator. I don't really see the need to expand the entry at List of Whistleblowers. It is not a bio and it seems fine for the purpose of the list. In regards to any personal information on Wikipedia: If there is anything problematic, please point it and I'll be happy to examine it to determine if it should be deleted. As far as information outside of Wikipedia, I am sorry but there is nothing that we can do. I'll remind you that the vast majority of off-wiki material that you have referred me to has been posted by you on your own website, youtube, etc. If these things are a problem than I would suggest addressing them first. Let me know if you have further problems. — Cactus Writer (talk) 21:34, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Award of Good Fellowship

 * Thanks, Michael. Although it was really only a quick and simple copyvio clean-up -- I appreciate the thought. — Cactus Writer (talk) 21:19, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Variety Garage article wrongly deleted...
Dear CactusWriter, I would like to challenge the wrongful deletion of the article "Variety Garage". Although the team do have a YouTube channel and blog, they are a filmmaking team that regularly produce a popular webseries. They have their own web domain, an Australian/international cult following, just under 10.000 total upload views and a history of covering important current events. As cited in the article, Variety Garage has also been written about by international Technology website www.macenstein.com The article clearly mentions its popularity, thereby passing A7 guidelines.

Please let me know what I can do to keep this article online. If there are any edits I need to do I'm happy to, but as an impartial fan of Variety Garage, I feel it important to maintain this article's existence. Thanks a lot, Best regards, Milly Bernarda — Preceding unsigned comment added by Millybernarda (talk • contribs) 06:02, 15 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi, Milly Bernarda. I am sorry, but the Variety Garage article was properly deleted. There was no credible assertion of significance. I did note the single reference you provided: it was a 3-sentence blurb from a blog site, the blurb was not about the website, and the single mention is nothing more than a comment on a reader's link. A total of 42 subscribers and an average viewership of a few hundred viewers per video does not lend credibility to a claim of popularity nor a cult following. You will find that significant YouTube sites tend to get millions of hits and large numbers of subscribers. (see for example Michael Buckley (Internet celebrity)) The deletion should not taken as a slight against the Variety Garage website -- it just hasn't yet reached a level of demonstrated significance for Wikipedia. If you wish, I can userfy the page at Article Incubator which will allow you a brief time to provide some good references. However, if none can be provided within the month, than it will again be eligible for deletion. Let me know. — Cactus Writer (talk) 16:18, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Mr Original

 * I have replied to e-mail at User talk:TheOriginalSkunk. — Cactus Writer (talk) 16:55, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Template:Ben Affleck
Since you closed a prior TFD, I am informing you of Template:Ben Affleck.--76.192.189.116 (talk) 14:03, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the notification. But as the closing admin, I had no opinion in that 2009 discussion and only acted on consensus opinion. I am going to remain uninvolved in the new discussion. — Cactus Writer (talk) 17:13, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Original Records is very unhappy with wiki and are considring legal action

 * I have place an indefinite block on User talk:TheOriginalSkunk for WP:LEGAL violation following my previous warning about the contents of their e-mail. — Cactus Writer (talk) 16:40, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Tower of Paterna
FYI, you forgot to add attribution to this article when you declined the G12 tag. VernoWhitney (talk) 14:36, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Whoops. Thanks for adding that in, Verno. — Cactus Writer (talk) 16:41, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of 120 HOURS
Hi, why was this page deleted? We used a lot of time creating it. Is it gone forever? It is a real competition, and everything written is real information that is important and informative for people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.36.96.255 (talk) 17:02, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi. The page 120 HOURS was deleted because it was an unambiguous copyright infringement (see our WP:G12 criteria). The entire article was created using text copied from copyrighted websites at and . Please note that Wikipedia takes copyright concerns very seriously and any infringement requires prompt removal. A message explaining this was left on the talk page of the article's creator at User talk:HansHalleraker. You may wish to read that now, since it provides some helpful links about use of copyrighted materials. The bottom line is that it is usually best to create Wikipedia text using your own original words. If you have further questions, please feel free to ask. Regards. —  Cactus Writer (talk) 18:04, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Zonguldak Karaelmas University
You G12 speedily deleted; it came right back, unchanged. FYI,  T RANSPORTER M AN  ( TALK ) 20:08, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay. Thanks. I deleted it again and left an only warning on their talk apge We'll hope they stop and think before doing it again. — Cactus Writer (talk) 20:13, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Back again as userbox only. I've G11'ed it in light of what's gone before. Regards,  T RANSPORTER M AN  ( TALK ) 20:38, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes -- but at least no copyvio text this time :) I'm going to decline that speedy -- it's not really spam. A search in google books and google scholar shows it is a legitimate university, so I'll add a quick intro sentence, a ref, and the official website just to get it started. I'll watchlist it to make certain the copyvio text isn't re-added. — Cactus Writer (talk) 21:19, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

FYI - article you salted
Hi. Undeletion was requested at REFUND of Alaha Ahrar, which you salted. I said they would have to convince you, but I told them at WP:REFUND why it was unsuitable. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 21:19, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, JohnCD. Thanks for the notice. It was salted because the exact same article (as Alaha Ahrar and Sajia Alaha Ahrar) was created 5 times in one day -- and deleted for both "no significant assertion" and copyright violation. You are correct that it was unsuitable. It should be noted though, that even if there was some assertion of significance, it is a violation of our policy to undelete a copyright violation. Thanks again for responding. — Cactus Writer (talk) 21:34, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah, I just read your reply at WP:REFUND and see that you already had it all covered :) . Good response. — Cactus Writer (talk) 21:37, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Andrea Whittemore-Goad
Hi, regarding this recreated article, what address is recreating it? Off2riorob (talk) 18:07, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, Off2riorob. User:Lartistatigre reintroduced an article about that person -- not an exact duplicate from the previously discussed and deleted one, but no new information. — Cactus Writer (talk) 18:13, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Cool, thanks - Off2riorob (talk) 18:18, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Ottoman Princes
Why is it deleted? It is interesting to know how many princes, there are Selim78 (talk) 15:48, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
 * The list was removed from Wikipedia articles as a violation of WP:BLP policy concerning unsourced names. The issue has been discussed numerous times, including Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard/Archive110, Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard/Archive111, and Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard/Archive113. It can not be re-added without proper reference to reliable sources. — Cactus Writer (talk) 17:13, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
 * That's the point. The names are assigned Even the own homepage of the dynasty was posted http://www.ottomanfamily.com/ Dilek2 (talk) 17:51, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
 * As has already discussed with you here, that website does not qualify as a reliable source. I am sure that you understand that anyone can create a website and promote anything they wish -- therefore we cannot accept these as reliable independent sources. For these names of living people to be added as encyclopedic content, it will require you to find reliable independent sourcing, for example in scholarly journals or books. — Cactus Writer (talk) 18:05, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Hello??? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCSxG3szB1A&feature=related This is the Homepage of the Dynasty...not of everyone... The actually Heir is also listed in this Homepage See this Video...a lot of Princes and Princesess... OH MY GOD...I know...there are Muslim's and that's the Problem for you Dilek2 (talk) 18:43, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I have no issues regarding anyone's ethnicity, nationality or religious affiliation in this list. Dilek2, please note that your arguments will be received better if you can refrain from making these types of personal attacks and accusations. (Here and elsewhere  ). My only concerns are the core policies of verifiability and no original research, especially with regard to living people. If you have new references, than I would suggest you discuss these with the other editors at Talk:Line of succession to the Ottoman throne. —  Cactus Writer (talk) 17:40, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Turkish boys are circumcised they are Muslim's. Why did you delete it?Dilek2 (talk) 18:50, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry. The removal of that sentence was unnoticed collateral changes when I reverted your unsourced, frankly odd, changes of "male" to "circumcised males" in the referenced demographic tables. I see that you have restored the sentence in question. — Cactus Writer (talk) 17:50, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Conversation on my talk page about your archives
There is a conversation open on my talk page at User_talk:VQuakr that is related to you, specifically a conversation you had with another user in January that now resides in your talk page archives. Kind regards! VQuakr (talk) 03:55, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, VQuakr. I'll take a look and reply there. — Cactus Writer (talk) 05:41, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

BLPN
Hi. :-) I've already started several related threads at BLPN, but not about this particular AfD. I'm kind of shy about starting yet another, but please consider whether the BLPN folks would want to know about it.  Cheers.Anythingyouwant (talk) 03:04, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, Anythingyouwant. Your efforts in keeping track of these kind of BLP issues is much appreciated. There is no doubt that the website in question fails as a reliable source for BLPs. In fact, it is an epic fail -- and any editor who tried to base an article on it would be soundly criticized at GAR, FAR or even in an RFA. Fortunately, the current AFD seems to be doing a job of forcing these editors to find proper sourcing. For the moment, I think we can wait to see how the article shakes out. If issues with some of these names remain (particularly with recently-born minors), than it can be readdressed at BLP/N. I realize the frustration for you in explaining to editors our policy on encyclopedic sourcing on BLPs -- especially those whose intense interest in a subject sometimes blinds them to proper scholarship. But there's no need for you to shy away -- BLP issues take priority since the Wikimedia Foundations resolution back in April 2009. So thanks again for your persistence. Let's see how this one shapes up. Cheers. — Cactus Writer (talk) 01:42, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks for the reply and encouragement. Cheers.  :-)Anythingyouwant (talk) 01:52, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Rupert Edward Inglis
I am planning to create an article on Rupert Edward Inglis who was an England rugby international, who was killed at the Battle of the Somme in 1916. I see that you deleted an article of the same name in December 2009. Can you undelete it or let me know if the deleted article had any significant content. Thanks. -- Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 08:59, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, Daemonic Kangaroo. That article was an WP:A7 deletion -- because there was no assertion of significance for this individual. (being one of the 72,000 names listed on the Thiepval Memorial is not an assertion of significance.) But I've userfied the original article for you at User:Daemonic Kangaroo/Rupert Edward Inglis so that you can work on it. You are certainly welcome to add some information and references which can address this person's significance and notability. Cheers. — Cactus Writer (talk) 01:04, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Re-evaluating a submission
Hi CactusWriter. A while back you deleted a new page post of mine then moved it to the incubator where it currently sits. I have since updated it with a number of references, including a partnership with what I believe is a relevant 35 year-old non-profit association, some articles from college newspapers, and an article from BusinessWeek. I think the article is now purely factual (as opposed to opinionated) and, most importantly for Wiki submissions, relevant. Would you be the right person to potentially take a look and see if you think it's ready to be a live Wiki entry? If so please do. If not could you tell me how to go about getting it reviewed and then published? Of course, if you still don't feel it's ready any additional thoughts would be appreciated. The article is on CollegeSolved and the link is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Article_Incubator/Collegesolved

Thanks! Doanrichie (talk) 19:43, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, Doanrichie. I'll be happy to take a look and see your improved version. — Cactus Writer (talk) 18:08, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
 * The language was still too promotional for an encyclopedia, so I rewrote it. The references are somewhat skimpy, but there is enough there to verify the information in the current article. (I think it would have been better to wait to write the article until there were more substantial refs -- the problem being that the website has only launched this month). I went ahead and moved the article into the mainspace at Collegesolved. Good luck with your editing. — Cactus Writer (talk) 19:19, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Barry Southgate
It's a flat-out copy/paste of the previously deleted article.

The dope even posted the sd tag from the previous article. Granted, that saved me a few seconds, so perhaps I should thank him... Half Shadow  05:46, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Aii! I've dropped a final warning on his user page spelling out the problem. If he recreates it, disregarding the warning, than there will be no choice but to block. Let's see if he gets the message. — Cactus Writer (talk) 05:53, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I requested it be salted. It's been created four times and three of them were copyvio. Half  Shadow  05:58, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Done. I was 50-50 on protecting, but you are right: three recreations of a copyvio in one day is too disruptive. — Cactus Writer (talk) 06:04, 27 April 2011 (UTC)


 * I've blocked him indefinitely. He is required now to state a clear understanding of copyright policy before being allowed back in the door. — Cactus Writer (talk) 14:17, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for everything
...and all points duly noted. Cheers! Inferno,  Lord of   Penguins  04:14, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. It was no problem at all. :) — Cactus Writer (talk) 04:17, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for adding the Copieds and doing the dummy edits. I redid the tags, as there was something wrong with the  or   parameter. Do you remember which you used?  should generally not be subst'd – I'll find the appropriate note to put on its documentation. Flatscan (talk) 04:39, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Hmm. I used the  parameter with http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_tornadoes_in_the_April_25%E2%80%9328,_2011_tornado_outbreak&diff=next&oldid=426578655. I should have rechecked them after I placed the tags. Thanks for checking for me. And a reminder note is always good -- I tend to forget which templates to subst.  —  Cactus Writer (talk) 04:56, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
 * That explains it,  is meant to be the id only, "next" in this case. Use the full URL with   next time. I found very few templates that specify not to subst, so I didn't update the doc. Flatscan (talk) 04:47, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah, okay, there was my mistake. Thanks for letting me know. — Cactus Writer (talk) 00:45, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Barry Southgate II
You recently (twice on 27 April) deleted the article Barry Southgate as a copyvio. It has since been recreated as User:Ranti og/Enter your new article name here (I removed the blatantly copyvio'd bits, though). I was wondering if you could check the revision history of Barry Southgate for me and see if User:Ranti og was the creater of the article (any of the times it was deleted). Also, could you leave a talkback on my talkpage if you reply here? Thanks! — Preceding signed comment added by Cymru.lass (talk • contribs) 01:44, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, Cymru.lass. The new article created here is an exact copypaste of the original article (even including the G12 speedy template). It was deleted 4 times (3 for copyvio and once as an A7). It was also deleted when the editor, after being blocked, persisted in copypasting the same article on their talk page. You can review the attempts to discuss with that editor at . They are currently indefinitely blocked for copyright violations and two other administrators have declined unblock requests (which even included more copyvio). This new account is an obvious sockpuppet created for block evasion. — Cactus Writer (talk) 02:31, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I really appreciate your help. Should I take this to SPI? I've never really dealt with sockpuppets that much, so I don't know what the protocol is... — Preceding signed comment added by Cymru.lass (talk • contribs) 03:10, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
 * That's okay. I've already listed it there. I'll wait for a confirming opinion before proceeding further. Thanks for looking into the article background. I appreciate your diligence. Cheers. — Cactus Writer (talk) 03:20, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
 * No, thank you :) Happy editing! — Preceding signed comment added by Cymru.lass (talk • contribs) 03:57, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Patrick Seybold Deletion
His notability was clearly shown in the article, as per the statement of his current position at Sony, which puts him in charge of almost all major press releases from Sony (see PSN Blog), as well as the list of games he has been credited with working on.Shardok (talk) 22:35, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, Shardok. There was no assertion of the individual's significance. Please note that a Senior Director (essentially Senior Vice President) has no inherent notability -- there are dozens, if not hundreds of these positions in any large corporation. That he writes press releases about things which may notable, does not make him notable. And I did look at the listed game credits and looked on the IMDb reference that you provided where he his listed as nothing more than "miscellaneous crew." This should not be taken as a slight against Patrick Seybold nor his job in Public Relations -- but, in my opinion, there was nothing presented which asserted any significance for an encyclopedic biography. You are welcome certainly to discuss this further at Deletion review. Cheers. — Cactus Writer (talk) 00:43, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 07:09, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much for help with N. arizonaria!
Dear CactusWriter,

I just wanted to thank you very much for your help in editing my N. arizonaria page - its the first page I've created and am very happy to know others are willing to help me wikify it enough for use. I just wanted to let you know that I am currently waiting for Dr. Erik Greene and John Gruber to sign permission for their photos to be uploaded to wiki-media - they have already given me free access to many very nice photos but I just wanted to let you know that they have not been uploaded yet but hopefully will be shortly. I also just had a quick question - I re-wrote the Biston Strataria page on april 30th, however I was not signed into my account and only my IP address is listed under the history so other users cannot contact me - would you happen to know how I could fix this so I can better be able to communicate with the users there?

Thank you very much! Hellokapi (talk) 08:24, 4 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi, Hellokapi. I was happy to help. And you did very nicely -- especially for a first time! An editor had listed Nemoria arizonaria for speedy deletion only because there was no text in it at the time. That is one of the categories at WP:CSD. Of course, a quick google check easily identified the topic enough for me to add a couple of introductory sentences with references -- enough for me to decline the deletion request and keep the article. In the future, it's a good idea to create a new article in your userspace (for example, at User:Hellokapi/Sandbox. Then, when there is at least enough there for a stub article (i.e. a good introduction and a couple of references), you can use the "move" tab to move the article into the main Wikipedia space. This will usually prevent any pesky Speedy Deletion tags on your new articles.


 * As far as your IP edits are concerned, there is nothing that can be done to change their identification to your username. (This is because IPs are anonymous and there is no way to prove those edits came from a particular registered account. Especially in cases where the address is located at a large institution.) Most every WP editor at some point forgets to log in when making an edit. It is no big deal. If you want to discuss a particular edit you made as the IP, you can always leave an explanatory note on the articles talk page Talk:Biston strataria.


 * If you have any other problems, feel free to ask. Good luck with your editing. Cheers. — Cactus Writer (talk) 15:53, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

census data source
Hi, at Articles for deletion/John W. Ross you mentioned 1910 census data confirming other info. I split the John W. Ross article into John W. Ross (Iowa architect) and John W. Ross (North Dakota architect). Could you possibly add the census data source, if it can provide anything at all additional? Or point me to it, if I could do that? Thanks for your helping with info there already. -- do ncr  am  03:40, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, doncram. I'm not certain the US Census data adds anything. More importantly, drawing conclusions from it could be considered original research. It is best to allow reliable sources to develop that info. (I only used it in the discussions to confirm there were indeed two separate architects as several editors had mentioned -- and that the article was wrong.) I can give you the source if you want to look at it yourself. It is quite easy to find online if you have an ancestry.com account. I'll take a look at the split articles tomorrow when I have a moment. Cheers. — Cactus Writer (talk) 05:14, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Archbishop Curley-Notre Dame High School
Did I do something wrong with the speedy deletion request? I had already removed it three times and have warned op de talkpage. There several people putting the copyvio in. Quite new to en-wp but 5 years experience on the Dutch WP. Eddylandzaat (talk) 21:10, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, Eddylandzat. Welcome to the English side -- not much different than the Dutch version, I imagine. I would have speedy deleted the article if there was not a previous clean version prior to the copyvio additions. But your version here appeared to be clean, so I simply rolled it back rather than lose the entire page. I then placed a warning to the violator to stop adding the copyvios. If they persist in adding more copyrighted text, they will need to be blocked. Additionally, if you run into this situation again -- an editor or group of editors persisting in adding copyvios or reverting your edits -- than you can request the page be temporarily protected at WP:RPP. If you any further problems, please let me know and I'll see what I can do. Cheers. — Cactus Writer (talk) 21:27, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
 * The main difference between en-wp en nl-wp is the way procedures work. Templates here en templates there. Whole storybooks about who to asked for a block or a page deletion. IEW!!! nl-wp is more user-friendly on that point: just ask it nice, clear, politely and with evidence. I will read the page you've mentioned.  Eddylandzaat (talk) 21:59, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes. I agree that smaller wikis are more user friendly. On the Danish Wikipedia at home, almost everyone knows everyone else -- and rather than use a template, we can just open the window and shout at the other editor down the street. :) The English Wikipedia tends to require more strictly-by-the-policy behavior (especially for administrators) -- just because of the immense multi-cutural global nature of the beast. Hope you enjoy it anyway. — Cactus Writer (talk) 22:50, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't believe you. Shouting to RodeJong will ruin your vocal cords. Eddylandzaat (talk) 22:59, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Possibly. But who would notice? The Danish joke goes: "Danish isn't a language, it's a throat disease." I believe the Dutch might have the same joke. — Cactus Writer (talk) 23:06, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Personal attacks - User:AnnekeBart - (A new category: The mathematician - historian)

 * " Having to deal with these idiots is really trying "


 * " I am loosing my patience and have a hard time staying civil when confronted with such people. "


 * " Please find an actual reliable source, not this encyclopedia nonsense. "

[ Sources: ( Grove Art, Oxford University Press.; The concise Oxford dictionary of art and artists.; Old Master Paintings and Drawings. Di Roy Bolton. ) ] --Davide41 (talk) 22:16, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

See: Giulio Clovio


 * For the mathematician... Professor of History: " All are tertiary sources "
 * The claim for a Croatian Clovio emerges every now and then from that country's dilettante historians (also mathematicians, analysts, engineers etc.)
 * This person does not recognize published documents and after attempts to explain on the talk page, apparently suffers from a reading problem. Can you help? Thanks.

'''-- In 35 years of teaching. Absurd and humiliating. --'''


 * I decided to remain silent ... but I am continually insulted. --Davide41 (talk) 23:41, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Having had no interaction with you, the other editor or the article in question, I have no idea what this is about. I see that you are spamming the same confusing message on multiple administrator's talk page. If you are having problems which require administrator intervention, I suggest that you post a single clear and concise message at the WP:ANI bulletin board. — Cactus Writer (talk) 17:58, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Ardnacrusha
Now you got it right :-) Thanks for improving the article and removing the wrongly spelled redirect. Eddylandzaat (talk) 16:14, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, that was a bit of a "whoops" on my part. I didn't realize the misspelling until I had rewritten the article. By the way, for your future reference, when you copy-paste someone else's text, than you must provide attribution to them. This is for our copyright policy. (See Copying within Wikipedia). I'll do a history merge of the pages in a little bit to cover it. Cheers. — Cactus Writer (talk) 16:20, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Have something to ask.
Hi CactusWriter, After 6 years of using wikipedia as primary source of reference , I came to know I can also contribute to wikipedia through editing of articles Although I have made some minor edits (including creation of 2 articles) but still I am not able to the find the link or you can say the way to find the articles which requires editing (grammatically incorrect/ sufficient references not cited etc etc.)  from a single repository relating to a particular subject.Also tell me the significance of new wikipedia projects being created. gauravpruthi 07:13, 12 May 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gauravpruthi (talk • contribs)
 * Hi, Gauravpruthi. I know what you mean about the difficulty of finding pages and projects -- after so many years, I'm still wandering around looking for pages. And forgetting where pages are that I could swear I had seen previously! Anyway, if you're looking to find lists of articles that require editing, a good place to start is at Cleanup. There is a box there with links to lists like Category:All articles with unsourced statements and Category:Articles lacking reliable references. Wikiprojects are gathering points for editors who are interested in collaborating on a specific topic. For example,WikiProject India and WikiProject Spaceflight might be projects you would be interested in joining. Each project will have lists of articles which need attention -- and you can talk to the other project members about articles, ideas, questions or whatever. If you have further questions, let me know. Good luck with your editing. — Cactus Writer (talk) 15:41, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Dutch Pronunciation Help
Hi, I am still trying to figure out the IPA stuff. Anyway, I'm trying to get a Dutch IPA for the Yde Girl page. I don't really understand how to do this. Could you help me please? Thank you, --  Gourami Watcher   (Gulp) 18:47, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, GouramiWatcher. I'm not familiar with the Dutch language at all, so I can't help you with that. The IPA-nl template is the one to add to the article, but you will need to use a Dutch dictionary to find the proper pronunciation symbols. Perhaps you can ask an editor from the Netherlands for help -- someone like User:Martijn Hoekstra or User:Drmies might be able to help. Good luck. — Cactus Writer (talk) 04:56, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! --  Gourami Watcher   (Gulp) 12:35, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Merge reminder
Just a reminder of a merger proposal you made here almost two months ago. You might want to go forward with it, it just gets harder and harder to merge as time goes by. --Muhandes (talk) 9:08 pm, Today (UTC+3)
 * Hi, Muhandes. Thanks for the reminder. I had hoped there would be more responses from interested parties -- but plenty of time has passed and with no apparent objections . And I agree with you that a merge is best done early on, before much work is done on the new article. Since I am not very familiar the subject, would you mind moving any useful text and references from Anti-Ahmadiyya sentiment to Persecution of Ahmadis? (If you do any copy-pasting, please remember to note it in your edit summary per our copyright policy at WP:COPYWITHIN). Afterwards, we can change the one article to a redirect. I also would also suggest the introductory sentence at Persecution of Ahmadis be changed to something like: The Persecution of Ahmadis is the persecution of Ahmadi Muslims (Ahmadiyya) for their religious beliefs and political positions. This is because many sources I saw seemed to be  about Pakistani Nationalism rather than simply Islamic Beliefs. Anyway, let me know if you are able to merge them, otherwise I'll try and get to it in a few days. Cheers. —  Cactus Writer (talk) 20:51, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid I have very little understanding of the subject, so I would hesitate to do it myself. --Muhandes (talk) 10:39, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing my mistake in Whistleblowers
I probably misremembered, I believed the law suit also were for off-label advertising for use of Zyprexa by children, but there is no such mentioning in the sources I supplied. As I remembered it there was no research backing such usage and it was not approved for use in children until november that year (but I can't find my references for it now.) Nopedia (talk) 22:11, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem. The list entry only needs to be a brief overview of the case. If you find better references, than you are welcome to add the extra info -- otherwise, I think the entry is fine as it is. Cheers. — Cactus Writer (talk) 20:55, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Page Move
Hi Cactus Writer, I have been working on this userspace:User:Gourami Watcher/List of bog bodies for a long time to replace the old List of bog bodies page because my version has more reserch and organization than the previous. I'd really appreciate it if you could delete the old page and move mine in its place. Would that be possible for you to do since you are an admin? Thank you,  Gourami Watcher   (Gulp) 02:07, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅. — Cactus Writer (talk) 20:49, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks!--  Gourami Watcher   (Gulp) 23:58, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Comeback Season II listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Comeback Season II. Since you had some involvement with the Comeback Season II redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). 117Avenue (talk) 03:02, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, 117Avenue. That change from an A1 CSD decline to a redirect was a long while back. And the topic of hip-hop mixtapes is not exactly my area of expertise -- so editors more familiar with the topic should make the decision. But I've provided some neutral commentary at the discussion. If you have any questions, let me know. Cheers. — Cactus Writer (talk) 18:33, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
 * And I'm not a fan of Drake either, but somehow his discography has ended up on my watchlist. So I decided to do a good favour (perhaps too tired), and tried to cleanup the redirects to the main article and the discography. 117Avenue (talk) 22:51, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

GOCE elections
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 07:43, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Request to unprotect a page
Hello. I am asking for you to unprotect the page Katrina Dunn. You were the last admin to protect it, and rightfully so, as it was a recreation of a thrice-deleted version of the article because it was a copyright violation. I have drafted a new version of the article, which includes verifiable third-party sources which establish notability, that I would like to create under this title. Thanks in advance. Agent 86 (talk) 10:39, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Hello CactusWriter. This was requested at RFPP and the new draft at User:Agent 86/sandbox looked OK to me, so I undid the create-protection. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 04:07, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay. Thanks, Ed. — Cactus Writer (talk) 21:25, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive invitation
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 08:49, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

North-South Center
I would like to ask why this article was deleted due to "unambiguous" copyright infringement. The North-South Center was a major publisher of academic books, articles and monographs, using U.S. Federal Government money for publishing operations. Its published material is still used and referenced by many academic institutions and by major international organizations. There was no copyrighted material in the deleted article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blotz1 (talk • contribs) 18:45, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
 * The North–South Center article duplicated the text from http://www6.miami.edu/cgmaps/northsouth.html. (It was almost an exact copy -- the only alteration being a shift from present to past tense.) The original website page clearly states "Copyright 1997-2000 University of Miami, All Rights Reserved." As such, the Wikipedia article was properly deleted as a copyright violation. Please note that this has nothing to do with the notability of the subject itself. If you wish to recreate an article on the subject, please do so without copyied text or close paraphrasing, i.e. using only original language. Regards — Cactus Writer (talk) 21:44, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

About Avalon University School of Medicine
Dear CactusWriter,

I hope you are fine. First of all I apologize if I have violated any copy right law of wikipedia. I am Associate COO of Avalon University School of Medicine (If you want any proof for this I can provide you). Since very long time some people keep changing our page on wikipedia and we are facing lot of problem because of that. I don't know how we have to deal with this situation. For example some one from ip address 67.176.167.7 changed our page and wrote some incorrect information about our accreditaion on July 27, 2011 i corrected that and posted information about our medical school on our wikipedia page I took all the text and all the information from our website and after few days again some one change our page and the ip address was 208.54.40.163. This ip address did again incorrect change about our school license and accreditation on July 29, 2011. Again I corrected that but after that you and someone named TeapotGeorge but these changes were not against our university.

I am really new to wikipedia so don't know how can I stop this kind of incorrect information posting on our wikipedia page. Please guide me on this. I will really appreciate for that if I can get any help on this.

Thanking you, Asfateh — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asfateh (talk • contribs) 19:11, 30 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi, Asfateh. I understand -- don't worry -- there is a learning curve to understanding the rules of Wikipedia. I have removed all the copyrighted text from the Avalon University School of Medicine page. And I also rewrote the article with neutral non-promotional language using only information confirmed by an independent source -- the WHO website. So it is no longer a copyright violation. Permission to use copyrighted text is handled only through the Wikimedia Foundation OTRS office. As you can understand, because all Wikipedia editors are anonymous online (i.e. anyone can say that they are anyone), proof is obtained only through official channels. (Please read Requesting copyright permission for more information).


 * If you find an editor or IP address is adding disputed information to an article, you should first attempt to discuss the issue with that editor directly. If the discussion does not resolve the issue, you can seek help from any administrator or editors at Third Opinion or Request for Comment. If the disputed information is truly blatant misinformation or vandalism, then you can report the individual to Administrator intervention against vandalism for action.


 * If there are further problems or question, please feel free to notify me and I'll see what I can do. Cheers. — Cactus Writer (talk) 00:00, 31 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Cactus writer, On one link for avalon university school of medicine there is no mention of the school being un-accredited. Then when I go to the link for xavier university school of medicine curacao, which is the same school as avalon university, it says that the school is un-accredited and the link it posts was to the W.H.O. This school is accredited by the government of curacao and is subsequently accredited by the ecfmg in order for its students to sit for the usmle exams. I tried to make some revision but I am new to wikipedia and I hope I did it correctly. There was a poster named teapotgeorge who was correct in making the changes. I might have undid them, dont know. If I did I apologize. My intention was to remove that line about xavier university not being accredited because it is. The w.h.o is not an accrediting agency, simply a directory of medical schools around the world. So that comment with the link to W.H.O. is incorrect. Thanks, ng54 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ng54 (talk • contribs) 00:51, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Ng54, you may have a misunderstanding of the term accreditation. A listing in the IMED means the school is recognized by its appropriate governmental agency. This has been added. ECFMG is not an accrediting agency -- it's function is to checks that students are eligible to take the USMLE because they attended an IMED school, etc. -- it certifies students, but it does not certify nor accredit the school itself. You are correct that the WHO is also not an accrediting agency -- however, it's AVICENNA directory is considered a reliable source for information about medical schools including accreditation-- and it was in this regard that it has been used. — Cactus Writer (talk) 18:21, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

deletion of my page
Dear Sir: I am the president of Water Without Borders, in Pleasant Valley, NY. An associate of mine, on my behalf, submitted our information page to Wikipedia. It was copied directly from our website, with my permission. I see that it has been deleted. I would like to have it put back on. Please let me know what I need to do for this to happen.

Thank you for your consideration. Franklin Evert — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.2.25.162 (talk) 13:58, 4 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi, Franklin. The article Water Without Borders was deleted two years ago (August 2009) because it was copied entirely from this web page -- a violation of that page's "all rights reserved" copyright. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text borrowed from other websites. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Permission to use copyrighted text can only be granted by the copyright holder. Please see Requesting copyright permission for details. Contact is made through the Wikimedia Foundations's OTRS office.


 * As a side note, even if permission were granted, the text on the organization's page would not be acceptable "as is". The language is far too promotional for Wikipedia. It is always better to write an article using original language which meets our criteria for neutral and independently verifiable encyclopedic content. Cheers. — Cactus Writer (talk) 15:35, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Question
Hi CactusWriter, I've been working on the List of bog bodies article for around 6 months. There are certain pages that redirect to my article because they were too short, for example Elling Woman redirects to the page, but the section about her is far down on the long list. Is there a way for the redirect to go to the part of the list about the Ellling Woman and several others? Thank You, --  Gourami Watcher   (Gulp) 20:36, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
 * That's a good question, GW. I'm not sure that it can be done. Offhand, I don't know of any way to create a piped link into a table. Perhaps someone at the Help desk can give you a definitive answer -- or direct you to someone more knowledgeable. Let me know if you discover a way. Otherwise -- people who are redirected to a list usually understand to scroll through the alphabetical listings -- so I don't think those redirects will cause any significant problem. Cheers. — Cactus Writer (talk) 20:46, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Sounds good! Thank you for your reply. --  Gourami Watcher   (Gulp) 19:00, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 16:11, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested: Shankar chandraker
Hello CactusWriter, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Shankar chandraker, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: He is a newspaper journalist. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. nymets2000 ( t / c / l ) 22:46, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi NYMets, please note that passing WP:A7 criteria for people requires a bio page to make some assertion of significance. In other words, it answers the question: why is this person significant? Simply having a common job is not inherently significant. "He is a newspaper journalist" is no more an assertion of significance than "She is a plumber" or "He is a teacher". (Of course, as a newspaper journalist myself, I am quite aware how insignificant that job is -- there are hundreds of thousands of us). Although A7 criteria require a lower standard than Notability criteria -- it is a still good idea to be aware of our Wikipedia guidelines for notability (in this case, you may wish to read WP:CREATIVE as well as WP:GNG). These will provide you with a better understanding of expected biographical requirements. As the article stands now, there is still no assertion of significance. Additionally, no independent reliable source is provided for even cursory verification -- a violation of WP:BLP. I had actually already deleted the above article after it had been A7 tagged earlier, then tagged it myself after the same editor recreated this autobiographical article. If you wish the article to remain, please address the above issues. Cheers. — Cactus Writer (talk) 18:25, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Clarence Bicknell- article deletion
Hi Cactus Writer My article on Clarence Bicknell got deleted very quickly, apparently for copyright reasons. However I own the material and am authorised by the family to publish it and have already replied as such. Can you tell me what I should do to get it reinstated? Thanks.

Also while you're there please give me the URL for tutorial on putting images into the article. Thanks!

All the best, and greetings from wet UK Marcus Mbicknell (talk) 19:25, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Mbicknell. The message that was placed on your talk page refers you to the Wikipedia instructions at Donating copyrighted materials. Specifically, this section outlines the two methods for releasing text or images from material already online. As far as uploading images (also known as files) you can start at Upload or use the upload wizard at Wikimedia Commons. By the way, please note that although permission is granted to use the copied material -- the text must still be edited to meet Wikipedia's core policies of verifiability and  neutral point-of-view. Good luck. —  Cactus Writer (talk) 19:55, 28 August 2011 (UTC)


 * HI CactusWriter. I have read those pages. My article specifically complies with the policy on donating material which I own. What aspect does it violate? Thanks Mbicknell (talk) 20:04, 28 August 2011 (UTC)An email containing details of the permission for this text has been sent in accordance with WP:OTRS.
 * Note to uploaders: Please copy the URL of this image or article in the email to assist OTRS volunteers to find it. If an email cannot be found in the OTRS system, the content may be deleted for lack of valid licensing information.
 * Note to OTRS volunteers: If the email contains sufficient confirmation of the validity of the license, please replace this template with PermissionOTRS. Otherwise, remove the copyrighted content, deleting the page if necessary. Mbicknell (talk) 21:58, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Approval to use outside text from your website can only be granted through official communication with the Wikimedia OTRS office -- talk page declarations are insufficient. I will assume that your placement of the "OTRS pending" on my talk page means that you have sent an e-mail to the OTRS office. After that letter is processed by one of Wikipedia's OTRS agents (usually a week or two), then use of the website text will be free from copyright violation. In the meantime, I've restored the page and replaced the copyvio text with a brief introduction with references. You are, of course, welcome to expand that entry using original unpublished language. Thanks for complying with our policies. — Cactus Writer (talk) 15:38, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Jeeloy
ealov (talk) 05:25, 29 August 2011 (UTC)Hello, I have written an article about jeeloy, but the article is deleted, the article is about the musician duo. I've added an accurate reference in the article. Can you explain how that article can be approved by wikipedia?
 * Hi Ealov. The article was deleted because of WP:A7 criteria -- an article about a musical group that does not make any assertion of significance. Simply being a musical group is not enough. And although the A7 criteria are a lower standard than Wikipedia requirements, you may wish to read WP:Notability (music) so that you are aware of the notability standards that are expected. Additionally, when writing an article, please do not copy text from other online websites -- that is a violation of copyright. If you have further questions, please ask. Cheers. — Cactus Writer (talk) 15:51, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

 * Thanks, SwisterTwister! I am a cookie addict. (And it was nice to answer the orange message line and find it wasn't another complaint.) — Cactus Writer (talk) 04:45, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Misrepresentation, poorly sourced materials, incorrect allegations, potential for uncalled for harm to living person
I am not an Administrator. I am a subject: Terri Crawford Hansen; I check periodically to ensure no vandalism or distortions to bio, as has happened to fellow journalists and authors. Moreover I recently reported misrepresentations in Wikipedia to Native journalism that generated negative comments from major journalism organizations, and swift change by Wikimedia. I was warned by fellow journalists to keep an eye on the bio for vandalism. That said, you've created several poorly or non-sourced assertions and misrepresentation. Who or what is your source for removing my role as a key environmental journalist in Indian Country? I have letters signed by current editors from more than one publication attesting I am one of Indian Country Today's most important news reporters, especially on environmental issues. This I agree is subjective, but I believe was generated by Wikipedia's Native American/Indigenous working group. Copies of letters may be posted at the National Press Foundation, or one of the other fellowship awarding organizations. I have them on file as well but I would consider it in very poor taste to post them publicly on my news site. I have a 16-year history as an environmental journalist in Indian Country. I am likely the only reporter in Indian Country to win key environmental journalism fellowships, not just in Indian Country but in the arena of U.S. journalism. My national reporting on climate change in tribal communities is some of the earliest reporting in this area. What qualifies as "key"? What is your logic? Who are your sources? I can provide copies of half a dozen letters from more than one editor and more than one publication, but I am not invested in this. It's part of the overall problem here.

Mother Earth Journal is a news site. It was constructed and established as such. It provides news reporting, not blog posts. Guest blogging, opinion and commentary is restricted to the Commentary section. As a news reporter I do not write op-eds. MEJournal has a small circulation, but more than some small newspapers I've written for. Over 5,000 Facebook fans. When active well over 100 hits a day. The most hits for one article was nearly 800. MEJournal was established when there was a lack of environmental reporting in indigenous communities. That has changed, and perhaps MEJournal will fold, or be sold. Regardless explain your reasoning for targeting this non-income producing news site to reduce it to "blog." You, one person's judgement has caused its monetary value to plummet.

Here I am very concerned: Who is "worldcat" and "other sources?" Name them. I co-authored the multiple volume Encyclopedia of North American Indians. Editor was Don Birchfield. Another co-author was Philip Red Eagle. Both still living. This was a major project for me. This encyclopedia is used in many public school systems to educate grades 7-10 to Native American issues. I know all volumes of this encyclopedia is in Portland, Oregon's Multnomah Country Library. It cannot be checked out but it can be photocopied. I can provide proof of authorship. To who do I send it? Name your own sources so I can address this at its root.

I can't speak to Water in the West book. It's an anthology; I authored one chapter. Perhaps Wikipedia has a policy that individual authors are not considered "authors," when the book is an anthology and if so, fine. If not I can send or research proof. My primary concern is the appearance now that I have stated untrue claims at points in the past, and this is not true. As a professional journalist I am bound to tell the truth and report attributed and sourced facts. You say you are a journalist. As such you know the harm you are doing. All a journalist has is their reputation and credibility. As a freelancer and correspondent I represent the news organizations I report for. I strive for excellence. Your allegations have the potential to damage the reputation of a living person, cause a loss of editorial assignments, and loss of income. You've combed this profile and made major and poorly sourced ("and other"?) changes. This profile has stood since the Native/Indigeous group launched their initiative. My overriding concern is your justifications, and intent. Are you a competitor? Is this retaliation, as happens by subjects of stories? Is there ill intent? Tell me what proofs and documentation you need, and how I supply it. Name your sources who are saying I did not co-author these books so I can get to the root of this situation. If you can't provide solid sources undo your allegations, and changes. Do not change them, undo them or the damage remains.

I ask forgiveness if I have not handled this properly. I am heavy with assignments, this was unexpected, and I lack time to learn the collection of Wikipedia rules (I know there are a number of intricate rules based on past news reporting of Wikipedia.) Yet time is of the essence due to the great potential for harm. Thank you,

Signed: Terri Hansen. My IP will automatically post. I am writing from Portland, Oregon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.171.160.120 (talk) 05:46, 11 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi. I'm not CactusWriter, but was coming by to leave a note for him and saw the above. I can understand your concerns that your article may be diminished by a competitor, but CactusWriter is a long-term editor and administrator of Wikipedia who has worked on a wide variety of articles (as of this writing, he has worked on 5,423 different articles).


 * While I do not know which sources he meant by "others", I can supply a few links: WorldCat, GoogleBooks, ottobib, shelfari, Tower Books. I'm afraid that the challenge with Wikipedia is that we need reliable sources to include information. Reliable sources in the context of Wikipedia means a source published by a reputable peer-reviewed publication (online or print) that is not connected to you. The degree of connection permitted varies depending on how extreme the source. For instance, we might include authorship information based on the publisher's website, even though they are connected to you, but we would not verify something like "best-selling" or "important" based on that.


 * The source once given to verify that you were co-author of this text is neither active nor archived. The Library Journal reviews reproduced at Amazon suggest that there were 56 or 60 authors, but I'm afraid they don't name names or single you out as being a more substantial contributor. The difficulty of being a contributing author to compilation works of those kinds, of course, is that it's often the editor who gets sole credit on the cover and in catalogs, and finding reliable sources to document author involvement and the degree of author involvement can be difficult. Certainly, information on your role in those books can be included once reliable sources are produced.


 * Verification through reliable, published sources is also required for language such as "Indian Country's key environment and science journalist". I'm afraid we are not permitted by the site's policies to refer to letters from editors for that, unless they have been published somewhere that we can access. We are not permitted to use unpublished information in Wikipedia articles.


 * In terms of Mother Earth Journals, this is what we term a "self-published site" on Wikipedia. The term "blog" is not intended to be pejorative; we actually do permit and encourage citations to blogs maintained by reputable individuals. As our article on Blog notes, they extend well past the traditional diary form. I can see why you might find the language "blog" misleading, given that traditional connection. Pending input from CactusWriter, I have incorporated the language used on the site itself describing it as "online public service news project", but we cannot include you as a correspondent for this, as it is your own website. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:34, 11 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi, Terri Hansen. The comments by Moonriddengirl accurately describe the situation. In addition, I will explain that we attempt to edit every article so that it provides a neutral point-of-view -- avoiding language that presents an opinion or judgement as if it were encyclopedic fact. We regularly remove biased words like "celebrated" or "leading" unless they can be attributed to a significant and independent reliable source. For example, rather than call someone "award-winning", we simply cite their awards -- allowing the reader to draw their own conclusion from a position of verifiable fact.


 * The term blog was not meant to reflect poorly on your Mother Earth Journal website. (In fact, blog is used to describe even major websites like the Huffington Post.) I used it to be more accurate. The original language stated that you were a contributor to the Mother Earth Journal in the same way you contributed to independent news sites. This, of course, was misleading because it is your own website. Moonriddengirl has now tweaked the language to the website's self-description.


 * Although the links for authorship of the two books were no longer active -- I did look for some information about them. For example, descriptions of Water in the 21st-Century West at Amazon and the publisher revealed this was a compilation of newspaper articles that had been previously published in High Country News. The book itself is attributed to the editor Char Miller. It would be incorrect to call you the author of this title -- notwithstanding inaccurate sources like this -- but, as Moonriddengirl explained, information on your contribution to this book and the encyclopedia can be included once reliable sources are produced.


 * I understand that it can be worrisome to have a bio page on Wikipedia -- especially with the seemingly vast construct of rules here. But that is why Wikipedia takes a very conservative approach with regard to our core principles of verifiability and neutral point-of-view in biographies of living people. This is especially true for bios that have very little coverage independent of the subject. And, no, I am neither a competitor nor have ill intent nor have had any prior knowledge of you. The only vested interest I have in this article (and in the thousands of other myriad topics on which I have volunteered) is the accuracy of the information. — Cactus Writer (talk) 19:49, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the copyright cleanup
I was coming by just to thank you for pitching in at WP:CP. :) It is much appreciated. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:35, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I should be ashamed -- obviously if I am fiddling around with CP stuff, I'm uber procrastinating at home. :) And thanks for the stalker reply in my absence. —  Cactus Writer (talk) 19:56, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Another cookie for you!

 * Hey, thank you, Disneywizard -- for creating a page on a very fascinating subject. I'm learning a lot of new history because of you. And there appears to be many articles on that topic that still need creating. This guy, Lee Eyerly, was very important, so Wikipedia could use an article on his company and its original rides like the Orientator or Acroplane.


 * By the way, after reading some of the links you added -- I need to tweak the history at Frank Hrubetz & Company to bring it in line with sources on Eyerly. Also, an entire section could be added on the impact of numerous lawsuits filed against the company. A google search shows hundreds -- and, according to Hrubetz, it was a major part of business for these companies. Thanks again for building the topic! — Cactus Writer (talk) 16:55, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Deletion question
Why did you delete Three Guys and a Twelve Pack article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Plandest (talk • contribs) 23:33, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Plandest. A reviewing editor tagged your editor for deletion per Wikipedia's WP:A7 criteria -- that means it was an article about web content that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant. (Before deletion, I did a quick search to see if I could find anything which might make a relevant claim of significance, but could not. Although the A7 criteria is less strict than our notability criteria (i.e. "Is the subject notable?"), you should read our guidelines for Notability (web). This will help you in determining when a podcast is considered a notable subject for a Wikipedia article. If you have further questions, please ask. — Cactus Writer (talk) 05:19, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

User talk:Wuhongcheng
Hello, would you be willing to suspend this user as they were warned about placing advertising on Wikipedia, and here we are a year later and they do it again. It may be a good idea to revoke their talkpage abilities as well. SwisterTwister  talk  04:09, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, SwisterTwister. That user's actions are concerning -- not only is it advertising but also a copyright violation. However, the notice from last year was only an initial warning -- it didn't mention the possibility of a block -- and their actions are not yet sufficiently bad enough to block them without notice. I have left them with a single warning clearly stating they will be blocked if they continue with more of these violations. If there are more problems after this, than any admin can block them. Hope that helps. — Cactus Writer (talk) 18:02, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Wagner Calhoun
I noticed somebody made an article named Wagner Calhoun that was deleted by you, is it possible I can be emailed the original content of that page and the name of the editor that made it? SalfEnergy 08:20, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, SalfEnergy. What is the reason you are asking for the name of the editor and the page content? — Cactus Writer (talk) 17:08, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Review of article : Porcelain dish
Hi, CactusWriter. Thanks for your improving of sacrificial metal article. In another article, that is porcelain dish (Laboratory), I found out that it is actually no need to remove and redirect to the evaporating dish article. I know they are similar articles, but after I made some research on the internet, I found out that porcelain dish is not equally to evaporating dish. Although porcelain dish is a type of evaporating dish, not all evaporating dish is porcelain dish. This is because porcelain dish still has other functions, like heating, drying, calcination and others. Besides, evaporating dish is not stated clearly in what aspect, in that article only written as a type of laboratory equipment for evaporating. If talking in merge field, I think the evaporating dish article is too little made the porcelain dish article perfect. So if you are free, please review the porcelain dish article and see wherther it is compulsory to remove and redirect to the evaporating dish article or not. If you have any comments and opinions regarding to these articles, please post at my talk page. Thanks.

Regards, Palaxzorodice (talk) 14:53, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Replied. — Cactus Writer (talk) 19:16, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Moon kana
While this musician appears to be more notable than, say, a YouTube artist, it seems to me that her article doesn't really establish any of the notability criteria. Xenocide Talk undefined Contributions  18:06, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, TheXenocide. That may be true -- but the WP:A7 speedy deletion criteria has a much lower threshold than WP:Notability. Note the footnote to A7: It is irrelevant whether the claim of notability within the article is not sufficient for the notability guidelines. If the claim is credible, the A7 tag can not be applied. In this case, an autograph session at the Japan Expo and comment "underground icon status" in the single cite are enough of a credible assertion of significance. If there is doubt that an article meets notability criteria, than a PROD or an AFD are the next approach. Cheers. — Cactus Writer (talk) 18:22, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * That makes sense. Thanks for clearing it up. Xenocide  Talk undefined Contributions  18:45, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Declined speedy at Turnhouse Golf Club
Thank you for rejecting the speedy delete of Turnhouse Golf Club. This doesn't happen nearly as often as it should. D O N D E groovily  Talk to me  22:33, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem -- discussion and consensus are always a good choice. Good luck. — Cactus Writer (talk) 23:18, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Eiler Larsen
The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

NAVY CHILDREN SCHOOL,Visakhapattnam
u had deleted my page sanbox for navy children school i have edited can u please let me know if it is fine now??it is in my sandbox and have no intension of putting it up as an article before permissionBhavna.jaidwal (talk) 19:43, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Youtubek whack-a-mole
Thanks for blocking a Youtubek sock at the same time I was filling out the SPI on him. It's warming to see swift action! I'm afraid that guy is going to keep throwing socks at Wikipedia on a regular basis. I am keeping an eye on Nokia040. Binksternet (talk) 17:36, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I am afraid that you are right. The Youtubek problem has been a competency issue since the very start -- meaning they simply do not understand the problems -- therefore, I expect they will continue to pop up indefinitely. Fortunately, they are fairly easy to spot. I sometimes let them dither along for a bit with hope that perhaps they have improved, but in the end, I'm always disappointed with my own naivete. Thanks for keeping an eye out and filing those reports :) -- and feel free to contact me anytime about it. — Cactus Writer (talk) 17:52, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Survey for new page patrollers
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Wiki Media Foundation at 12:03, 25 October 2011 (UTC).

Whit Babcock
Hey, I see you deleted this page. I have warned who has created the article several times regarding the copyright violation. I have also recently warned about recreating the page. I'm not sure who created the one you deleted but action may be needed. I'd say to salt the article (ask) but I think the subject may be notable so salting may deter someone else from writing a quality article.  Ol Yeller21 Talktome  20:44, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay. Thanks for the heads up. From the copy-pasted press release,, the subject doesn't appear to pass notability at this point -- but they are certainly in a position to become so. So I didn't salt, but I will watchlist the page and keep an eye out for the uploaders. Cheers. — Cactus Writer (talk) 21:00, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 00:48, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Business Intelligence 3.0 article deletion
Hello CactusWriter,

I'm writing to you in regards of the Business Intellgience 3.0 page deletion. I spent last week rewriting it and I think now it's good to go. Could you please take a look at the article. I did not submit it yet, but I have created it as a user draft. I would really love to publish it but first I would really appreciate your opinion.

Thanks --Vladimirovrs (talk) 14:38, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

The Emirr
Hello dear CactusWriter. Please do something about this file. It contains swearing. Also the uploader wrote my name to be the author. Already thank you for attracting. Have a good day.  TheEmirr  Message  14:07, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, Emirr. I'm sorry but Wikipedia is not censored, therefore posts containing swear words are not deletable for that reason alone. However, a piped link to a subpage of yours as the author is certainly improper -- I consider it a personal attack -- and have removed it. If you have further problems with this, let me know. — Cactus Writer (talk) 19:55, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Some falafel for you!

 * Thanks, Sreifa. It was no problem. Now I'll need to take a break for dinner. :) — Cactus Writer (talk) 19:58, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

WHY?
I want to know why you deleted the article I created, The Black Strat. I find it outrageous that you have done this. And you said it is advertising shessh would David Gilmour sell his beloved strat? I don't get why Eric Clapton has articles on TWO of his guitars and David Gilmour is not allowed! I have not been on wiki lately so I don't think it was me who put the copyright stuff on the article. Personally I think the article should be re-created.

I will be looking forward to your reply.

Willrocks10 (talk) 19:54, 15 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi, Willrocks10. The Black Strat article had been tagged for deletion as a copyright violation because the text was copy-pasted in its entirety from this website -- including the promotional advertising for the book by Phil Taylor. Therefore, it was deleted per WP:G12 and WP:G11 criteria. You are correct that you were not the editor responsible for adding the copyvio text. Thanks for pointing that out to me. It was, in fact, added at a later date by a serial offender -- the article should not have been deleted, but rather, reverted to a prior non-copyvio version. I've restored it to an earlier version. Sorry for my error. Cheers. — Cactus Writer (talk) 01:11, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much for restoring it. I will make sure no-one will put anything copyright on it!

Willrocks10 (talk) 17:28, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

FYI: Roxanne Blanford
An editor brought up a concern about the deletion you did back in October. See the deleted comment at Talk:Roxanne Blanford. I left the editor a note on their talk page. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 07:02, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Gogo Dodo. I've replied at User talk:McPhersonddx. — Cactus Writer (talk) 02:11, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

One Steffi in the right direction
Could you unblock Steffi so I can create a given name page, please? Clarityfiend (talk) 05:00, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, Clarityfiend. Steffi (name) is available if you wish to create a given name page. Once you have created it, than we can redirect Steffi there. Cheers. — Cactus Writer (talk) 17:56, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Done. Thanks in advance. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:40, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 10:26, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Request for a mentor
I want to create articles. How can I know if my IP-address has been misused by another person? Articles about controversial Norwegian subjects are being deleted left and right, with accusations about sock puppetry?

Is there any non-Norwegian user, that you would recommend that I ask, to become my mentor in things regarding wikipedia?--62.92.255.199 (talk) 14:36, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * This IP has been blocked as a suspected block evader. From the contribution pattern it is pretty evident that the IP is not misused by someone else. Geschichte (talk) 13:39, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

GOCE 2011 Year-End Report
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 06:00, 2 January 2012 (UTC)