User talk:Cnilep/Archive/13 November 2009

Robocup Rescue Simulation
Hi. Just wanted to let you know that it wasn't only the lead that infringed in that article. Accordingly, I've deleted it and made your new lead the entire body. Thanks for rewriting this. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:16, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

culture, again
Hi Cnilep. In response to my invitation that you help with the Culture article, you posted a handful of very important and interesting quotes that you thought were relevant here. Since then, Maunes has drafted a section on "language and culture" here ... would you be willing to go over it and see if you could improve upon it/expand it? Perhaps you could see places to insert your quotes, and use that as a way to develop strategic points? You are the only other person who has expressed an interest, and while I really like what Maunes wrote, it is a draft and I think you bring other perspectives that are valuable. Slrubenstein  |  Talk 18:41, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll have a look at it and see if I can add anything. I've copied the draft from Talk:Culture to User:Cnilep/Culture draft so I can have a bash at editing it without gumming up the talk page. Cnilep (talk) 21:55, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually if you don't mind I think it'd be useful and interesting if you could just edit the draft on the talk page. That way we'll all be able to see it improve and discuss changes as it moves along.·Maunus· ƛ · 22:17, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I completely see your point, but I have a small pet peeve against dozens of incremental edits being made on talk pages. Any objections to editing it at User:Cnilep/Culture draft, perhaps with a pointer there from Talk:Culture so that other editors can edit there, too? (I hereby give you permission to edit the page in my user space, just in case you might have held back.) Cnilep (talk) 22:44, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you and Maunus can work on it together in this new location, and when you are ready, put it into the article where, of course, anyone can dit it? Slrubenstein  |  Talk 22:57, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I guess we can do it that way too. No problem. Can you provide a link on the talk page so that other interested parties can participate? ·Maunus· ƛ · 23:23, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Tereza Elizarova
An article that you have been involved in editing, Tereza Elizarova, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Thank you.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message.  Transity  ( talk &bull; contribs ) 16:29, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Howdy neighbour!
Hi Cnilep,

About: Rice rocket AFD.

Mighty neighbourly of you. Yep, you are right, I was wrong, and thanks for pointing this out so well. I'll be interested to see how the AfD works out, especially with respect to our !comments. Thanks again!--Shirt58 (talk) 11:31, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I think neighborly is not a misspelling per se, but an Americanism. It therefore works well with howdy, hayseed and the like.
 * Silliness is accepted but not required on this user page. Cnilep (talk) 18:40, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Culture Redux
You did an amazing job, thanks. i am moving your draft to the Culture article - I hope other linguists at Wikipedia (there are others, aren't there?) will work on it in situ but I want to thank you for helping make an article on an important concept close to complete. Slrubenstein  |  Talk 07:18, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
 * There are indeed others. You may want to request additional input at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Linguistics. Cnilep (talk) 16:36, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

I think I did, when I first did my rewrite of the article. No one responded. But I will try again! Slrubenstein  |  Talk 17:12, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

draft page
go ahead. Do you want me to delete it for you? Thanks again for helping make the culture article thorough and scholarly! Slrubenstein  |  Talk 17:19, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm waiting to make sure it's OK with Maunus, then I'll request deletion. Cnilep (talk) 17:46, 31 July 2009 (UTC).

shall I go ahead ?
will I go ahead and redirect all the links to this as per this discussion? or should we request that Case management be moved to Case management (disambiguation)? Earlypsychosis (talk) 08:11, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
 * It's probably best to move Case management to Case management (disambiguation) and then update all of the links. That would require an admin to first delete the DAB page to make way for the move. Cnilep (talk) 18:25, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

The Universe of Myron Evans
regarding the article and my "commenting out for legal reasons". I was doing Recent Changes Patrol, came across this article, and felt I had to make a quick decision but wasn't sure what to do about it. To me it seems that the article describes a film/broadcast that hasn't been published yet (see tag above). It also seemed to me, at the second's glance that I had at it, that this might possibly be some infringement. For definite infringements, I would've chosen to blank the page, but since I wasn't completely sure (and on second thought it occurs to me I might have jumped the gun on this one), I simple put around it. So it's still there, only invisible. If you disagree, take the signs out, it'll re-appear. I myself will read it in its entirety again. Sorry for any confusion, I was in a rush. Seb az86556 (talk) 03:28, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

OK... read it. This is all very confusing.. half of this stuff needs a -tag, and since it's for something that hasn't even happened yet, wikipedia could be in trouble if any of it turns out to be wrong. I'd say it's better to leave it hidden and somehow try to rush the deletion. Seb az86556 (talk) 03:42, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for explaining. I think we agree that the page is problematic and should be deleted. Note that I have placed a dated prod (not a speedy delete) on the page. If you think the page meets the criteria for speedy deletion you can add the appropriate tag; you can add a prod2 tag if you have other concerns relating to deletion that don't meet the criteria for speedy deletion. Otherwise, if no one objects to the dated prod, the page will be deleted in a few days. Cnilep (talk) 13:43, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

TwiCon PROD
I have removed the prod tag from Twicon, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the prod template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Articles for deletion. Thanks!

May or may not be sufficiently notable, but WP:CRYSTAL doesn't apply (any more). Chris Johnson (talk) 05:54, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of The Universe of Myron Evans
An article that you have been involved in editing, The Universe of Myron Evans, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Thank you.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message.


 * Thought you might be interested in this :) Seb az86556 (talk) 13:15, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Speaking in Tongues: The History of Language
Speaking in Tongues: The History of language is important and very notable  because of the  sheer caliber of experts that have been assembled. All of experts – are recognized as being at the top of their individual fields of studies. ( For example Noam Chomsky is seen as the most important linguistic alive today – Larry Hyman is recognized as the world expert on African languages and on and on. This in itself is a great accomplishment.  At present they  may not be any academic materials written yet about the film since the film is relatively new but the film is now in the collection of many linguistic departments all over the world over.

I think that it is shame that that this article was deleted. It is the most extensive and far reaching documentary series on linguistics of its kind. (Awane2009 (talk) 17:12, 11 August 2009 (UTC))
 * I'm sorry to hear that you feel badly about this.
 * A documentary cannot inherit notability from individuals who appear in the film; it must be shown to be notable in its own right. A good way to do that might be to cite reviews or other discussions of the film in reliable sources such as magazines or newspapers. The standard for inclusion on Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. Cnilep (talk) 17:18, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Outlines
Thank you for the heads up.

If you have any questions about outlines, or if you've noticed that there's something missing from the explainations or instructions for outlines, please let me know.

The Transhumanist 20:20, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Santa Fe Independent School District Police (Texas)
I merged and redirected instead of deleting it outright. Bearian (talk) 18:05, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for letting me know. I'm going to put an Issues tag on the section, since I still don't know what a School District police force is or does. Cnilep (talk) 18:08, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

List of DSiWare games (PAL region)
I'm not seeing the fundamental advertisement in List of DSiWare games (PAL region). Could you enlighten me? Thanks!-- Fabrictramp |  talk to me  20:34, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Let me preface this by saying that I don't use console games, so forgive me if I misunderstand concepts such as "shops" and "prepaid points".
 * According to Nintendo DSi, "The Nintendo DSi is able to connect to an online store called the DSi Shop. Using a Nintendo Points Prepaid Card (previously known as Wii Points Prepaid Card), users are able to download DSiWare games and applications to the internal memory of the DSi system." List of DSiWare games (PAL region) is, according to its lead section, "a list of games and applications for the Nintendo DSi handheld game console available for download via the DSi Shop in the PAL region." Unless I'm mistaken, this serves only to help would-be customers of the DSi Shop purchase items, thereby promoting DSi Shop. I will copy these comments to Talk:List of DSiWare games (PAL region) so that other users may also comment. Cnilep (talk) 20:42, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Just to expand, in a system I do use, my local grocer publishes a list of produce available, with prices. This is very useful to people like me who eat, but it is unambiguously an advert. Cnilep (talk) 20:55, 12 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I can see your point, but I'm also thinking this might be better at a wider forum such as AfD or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Nintendo. The DSiWare shop / WiiWare shop is probably closest to Apple's App Store -- a way to release apps/games (admittedly for one specific platform) that are priced too low to be of interest for a brick-and-mortar retailer to sell. (Full disclosure: I don't have a DSi but I do have a Wii and have purchased a grand total of one WiiWare game.)


 * If you're still of the mind it needs to be deleted, then List of WiiWare games should be bundled in with the AfD (on my Wii console, it's the same shop), as should List of DSiWare games and applications and List of DSiWare games (North America). I'm not sure why the DSiWare list is split into three articles -- if they are kept, I think they should be merged into a single article, with the points info ditched. In fact, I could even make an argument to merge all three of the DSiWare lists into the sub-articles of List of Nintendo DS games. On the Wii there's almost no functional difference between a WiiWare game and a Wii game, and I imagine the DSi is the same way. Thoughts?-- Fabrictramp |  talk to me  22:34, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Comparison of gestures
I read trough to the arguments about why the list of gestures needed to be kept. However, as far as I see, the most important argument -being that it would serve as the main article if "Types of gestures" was removed, is now irrelevant as the article was kept. If you are not happy with the simplification on going from 2 to 1 article, perhaps a seperate comparison article may be made. Also, some added info should be made at 1 page to differentiate it rather than be a reproduction -admittedly with some extra information per gesture-. An idea that comes to mind is categorising at "Types of gestures" on meaning, while list of gestures is alphabetically made-up.

Finally, if you don't like the name "List of gestures" perhaps Enumeration of gestures is a middle-way for both of us. KVDP (talk) 06:47, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * We may be talking past one another, so please correct me if I misunderstand you.


 * First, by "the arguments about why the list of gestures needed to be kept" do you mean Articles for deletion/Types of gestures? Or do you mean Talk:List of gestures/Archive 1? Note that the first is actually about reasons to keep or delete Types of gestures, and the latter has barely begun.


 * On the assumption that we are discussing the AfD for 'Types', let me further note that, while I supported deletion of that article, the consensus of users was to keep it. If you now feel that 'List of' should be deleted as duplication, the proper course of action would be an AfD discussion or a proposed merge.


 * Regarding "if you don't like the name 'List of gestures'," I actually do like the name 'List of gestures' for a stand-alone list. Again I fear we are talking past one another. Cnilep (talk) 13:33, 13 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I indeed was talking about the Afd for Types. As for the 'List of' being deleted, I already did a try (which failed) by changing the article to Comparison of gestures. As I'm concerned if people like to keep this article, it's fine by me, yet then the list should be expanded and kept alphabeticly (to differentiate it). Finally, sorry for the typo on the last one, I meant if you don't like the name 'Types of gestures' (PS: I don't like this name myself neither, at all) —Preceding unsigned comment added by KVDP  (talk • contribs)  13 August 2009
 * Thank you for clearing that up. I see no particular problem with the name 'Types of gestures'.


 * Until two or three months ago List of gestures was arranged alphabetically. I changed the page to its current lay out since the names of the individual pages are usually not very informative. Note that the page is a stand-alone list - a list of links to pages on a similar topic. If you have a more informative layout for the page in mind, I suggest that you discuss it at Talk:List of gestures.


 * Finally, since you bring it up, I feel that it is not appropriate to attempt to delete a page by moving it to a new name. If you feel that a page should be deleted outright, there are established procedures for doing so. See WP:Proposed deletion or WP:Articles for deletion. Cnilep (talk) 17:22, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * P.S. Please remember to sign posts to talk pages with four tildes (~) . Cnilep (talk) 17:26, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Don't Be Afraid of The Dark
Hello Cnilep, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Don't Be Afraid of The Dark has been removed. It was removed by ThaddeusB with the following edit summary ' (contest prod - future films are very rarely notable, but this one seems likely to be as it has already been covered by many reliable sources & had a notable accident during filming - standardize referencing) '. Please consider discussing your concerns with ThaddeusB before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 01:28, 18 August 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Removal of PROD from ISU 2011 Congress in The Netherlands
Hello Cnilep, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to ISU 2011 Congress in The Netherlands has been removed. It was removed by Dutch3DMaster with the following edit summary ' (making it more informative and less commercial (since it is not a profit making event)) '. Please consider discussing your concerns with Dutch3DMaster before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 21:31, 18 August 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Dormant company
Ooops, that must have happened when I was on New Article patrol, I'm not sure what happened there. I have reverted my edit. Thanks for pointing that out to me. Jezhotwells (talk) 01:32, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks re Paul Crowley
Thanks for pointing me to the right procedure for deleting a redirect ciphergoth (talk) 10:58, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Lodestar (band)
Hey, Cnilep, it appears that you will need to do more than edit the discography to save this. Can you attach some sources, at least which support the discography and the connection to Senser? Un sch  ool  02:09, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
 * So far I've not been able to find any that I consider reliable - thus I'm not withdrawing the nomination or !voting to keep. The info I added was from a record-sales site. I'll try to find more reliable sources. Cnilep (talk) 14:17, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

re: Lodestar
Hi. I recall the name of the band from Kerrang in the late '90s. I've found this review when they supported Tool around that time. Don't know if it helps, but they should certainly survive AfD IMO.  Lugnuts  (talk) 14:31, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Terry Long (white supremacist)
Thanks for finding sources for this. I prodded it because I couldn't find reliable, neutral sources, and the Nizkor one wasn't sufficient for an article that just said he was a leading white supremacist. As it stands, I think he's of marginal notability at best - but I have no problems with the article after your improvements. It's a good save. — Gavia immer (talk) 19:24, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. It's handy to have access to ProQuest through my library. Cnilep (talk) 19:38, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Supervan
I apologize for my annoyed tone earlier this morning. I realize you have indeed made an attempt to improve the situation. Your edits are appreciated. Thanks and happy editing. --dab (𒁳) 17:31, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

New Hyde Park (unincorporated), New York
With regard to the issue of the unincorporated area of New Hyde Park, this hamlet is governed by the Town of North Hempstead. The hamlet absolutely exists as road signage from the Town of North Hempstead is present in the hamlet. The village of New Hyde Park, on the other hand, is a distinct incorporated entity with its own government. Therefore, in my view, each deserves its own page. Wikipedia has thousands of listings for hamlets. Why should this hamlet be shortchanged simply because a nearby village exists with the same name? All the more reason for the clarification.

Ironically, I actually created the "Greater New Hyde Park" section of the Village page as an interim solution - but it is an imperfect one. Significant confusion still exists with the Village page as it toggles back and forth between information relating to the village and outside of the village (i.e. throughout the Village article). I just did not get a chance to complete all of the other pages to complete the project before you deleted the page. To clarify, Greater New Hyde Park (an unofficial name for comparison purposes only) is comprised of the Village of New Hyde Park along with a number of neighboring hamlets. I was in the process of describing all of the neighboring hamlets at the time of deletion. By directing the links for the hamlet of New Hyde Park to the Village of New Hyde Park only exacerbates the confusion. I was going to delete or clarify the Greater NHP section of the Village page after I had an opportunity to complete the process.

In summary, can you help me to fix all of these pages so that they are absolutely correct? Linking both the hamlet and the village to the village page is causing confusion and is incorrect. I propose the following solution: Complete pages for all of the neighboring hamlets within the 11040 New Hyde Park postal zone i.e. New Hyde Park, Manhasset Hills, North New Hyde Park, Herricks, Lakeville Estates and Garden City Park and then refer to their existence on the New Hyde Park Village page. At the end of the process, it is illogical to have pages for only 5 of the 6 hamlets simply because mention is already made of New Hyde Park hamlet in another article. By way of background, I have decades of experience with the geography of New York, as well as other areas, and can make sure the information is correct. Thanks. Mapmann (talk) 20:09, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

In addition to the above, a link needs to be created for "New Hyde Park, Queens" because part of the New Hyde Park 11040 postal zone extends into the neighboring county, Queens County. This is a good example of why I believe we need different pages for different components. Wikipedia should not create a misimpression for example that the village somehow extends into the City of New York. (Just like we do not want to create the misimpression that the village and the hamlet are the same). Mapmann (talk) 20:26, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I am not an expert in political geography or the governance of New York state, so I may not be able to offer the best solution to this problem. I think the first thing to do is to consult independent published sources - perhaps an atlas or atlases, supplemented with state records of some kind - and find out how these divisions are treated in those sources. It seems that you know from first hand experience about the relationships between the various towns, villages, and hamlets, but Wikipedia requires verification by reference to reliable sources independent of the subject. Therefore, you will need to clearly cite these atlases or other sources in the article(s).


 * From your description, it sounds like a redirect to North Hempstead, New York might be more appropriate than the current redirect to Greater New Hyde Park. Have I got that right? I'm quite confused by the fact that all of these hamlets are within the same zip code. Does the postal service divide the area by different criteria than the municipalities do? Cnilep (talk) 20:54, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, the postal service designation of a zip code may not coincide with legal boundaries for cities and villages (especially hamlets which do not inherently have "boundaries"!), or even counties. The reason for this is simple. The USPS sets up its postal zones for the efficient delivery of the mail and not as an indication of underlying goverance. It is a completely independent process. Only the municipalities govern and they set their own boundaries.Mapmann (talk) 23:18, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

A redirect to the Town of North Hempstead would be better than a redirect to Greater NHP but it still would not correct the problem of why this hamlet would not be recognized like all others in the Township. Therefore, I do not recommend such a redirect. Nassau county is one of the most esoteric areas in the country for municipalities so the problem is more pronounced here in comparison to other areas in the USA. I can tell you that photographic evidence exists showing the hamlet on an official roadsign on an area road with the name of the hamlet and the seal of the Town. It is a "document", just an unconventional one. It certainly is proof.(By the way, in New York State, Townships are called "Towns" but they are the same as Townships in other states). To what extent is a photo of a government issued roadsign considered acceptable proof on Wikipedia? Mapmann (talk) 23:18, 8 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Photos are considered primary sources. (See No original research.) Primary sources generally are considered acceptable as evidence for uncontroversial, descriptive claims. (See Attribution.) I would suggest that, if there is a sign saying "New Hyde Park (unincorporated)" or something of that sort, then a photo would be acceptable as a source for the existence of the place. Beyond that you'd probably want to point to some sort of local council or something. Cnilep (talk) 00:00, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Okay, in addition to the photo of the sign (which associates the hamlet with the Town of North Hempstead), I located a secondary source. The US Geological Survey Geographic Names Information System clearly identifies the hamlet as a "populated place" (Feature ID 958423) as distinct from the incorporated village (Feature ID 2391011). This federal recognition is more than enough to reinstitute the Wikipedia entry for the hamlet and is right on point. I can add these footnotes with appropriate links to the USGS and then later work the picture into the page. Mapmann (talk) 02:54, 9 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, that sounds like just the thing. Happy editing, Cnilep (talk) 13:03, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Promotional Merchandise
Thanks for taking a look at the page I submitted. Unfortunately it will be difficult to find references outside of the industry as I do not believe they exist. The trade associations referred to are independant bodies, but I guess they are still involved in the industry. I have now spotted the 'Promotional Item' page which covers the USA market. This has several references to the USA Trade Association, similar to the UK Trade Associations I mentioned, but which are being questioned? I simply wrote this article to give the industry a presence in Wikipedia for those who wanted to know what promotional merchandise was & to explain how the market works - it is clear I am not an expert in writing this stuff! I will take a look at how I can get it closer to what is required. Thank for you help & anymore amends anyone can find would be appreciated. David Sourcing (talk) 05:57, 11 September 2009 (UTC) I have made amendements where I could recognise them. One problem is the research findings within the article are created by a commercial organisation within the industry. The research is recognised & used industry wide, but I am unable to mention the source due to their commercial status. I am a bit stuck on how to improve this! David Sourcing (talk) 06:22, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
 * To the extent that some information is available only from trade organizations, it may be best simply to supply external links to that information (if it is available on the web). I would consider trade groups and individual firms what we call "primary sources", meaning that they are closely linked to the subject. Primary sources are acceptable as references for non-controversial descriptive claims, such as the fact that the industry exists and has trade groups. They are not generally accepted for evaluative statements, such as the importance or projected growth of the industry. I wonder if there are case studies or textbooks used by colleges or business schools that you might consult as "secondary sources", necessary for such evaluative claims. Cnilep (talk) 14:27, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

I am not sure there are, but I will do some more research to see if I can find anything. thanks for your help. David Sourcing (talk) 04:59, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

RfD nomination of Veiculo Lançado de Microssatelites
I have nominated for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Cnilep (talk) 15:02, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. Cnilep (talk) 15:44, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
 * You're quite welcome. Cnilep (talk) 15:44, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Death panel
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. -- 209.6.238.201 (talk) 16:51, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 * As you may know, attempting to reach consensus is Wikipedia's fundamental model for editorial decision making. It is patently not vandalism. Please refrain from template abuse. Cnilep (talk) 17:02, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Masonic Temple (Rock Springs, Wyoming)
You identified this article as a stub (Wyoming-related, NRHP, and Freemasonry-related). What must be added to the article to destubify it? Leveck (talk)
 * Different types of articles have different standards, often related to particular WP:WikiProjects. In general, good articles should have multiple third party sources (Masonic Temple (Rock Springs, Wyoming) currently has one, which may already move it from stub class to start class), broad description of all relevant facts, and proper style and formatting. The major thing I would say is missing from this page is breadth of coverage. What makes this temple notable? What interesting (and directly relevant) information might encyclopedia users wish to know? There is more information at WP:Good article criteria and Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment. Happy editing, Cnilep (talk) 20:25, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Removal request
You removed my removal request of the redirect from my name (Martin Krafft) to the book I wrote (The Debian System). I do not want that association with my name on wikipedia. Could you please fill me in on what grounds you removed this request? What steps must I go through to have my name no longer redirected to my book? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.74.106.21 (talk) 19:24, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The pages Martin Krafft and a number of similar pages are currently being discussed at RfD. This is the proper procedure for removing redirects. Cnilep (talk) 18:34, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * This is Madduck. I did not mean to send this message, and I was unaware I did. I read your constructive suggestion and went to RfD, but apparently I inadvertedly hit before. Sorry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.74.106.21 (talk) 22:24, 7 October 2009 (UTC)