User talk:Cobaltbluetony/Archive24

'''DO NOT EDIT OR POST REPLIES TO THIS PAGE. THIS PAGE IS AN ARCHIVE.'''

This archive page covers approximately the dates between 2009-07-01 and 2009-07-31.

Felix Burda Foundation
This is a borderline call. It's not quite blatant advertising, even though there's a big COI issue. And there's almost a claim of notability, but it's not very clear. I've tagged with the article issues; I'm still looking it over some more and thinking. —C.Fred (talk) 02:08, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you
Thanks for cleaning up my Talk page. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 17:56, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

You deleted my page "Webbed Marketing." This is fine; I'll find a way to make the information more noteworthy. However, I didn't have the work that I created saved. Can you send me what I created on the page earlier that you deleted so that I can make changes to it? I don't want to have to start from scratch.

Thanks,

John Entwistle John Entwistle (talk) 21:49, 6 July 2009 (UTC)July 6, 2009 05:48 p.m. EST

Request for Undeletion
Hi

I put at least a notable amount of thought and work into my page Jake_Edwards_(radio_personality). I read about the notability criteria and want to add more about his notability. Therefore, can I please have access to the work already done so I can add to it?

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tntdj (talk • contribs) 17:36, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nora_Lustig
Hi there,

I saw that you added "Needs more citations" -- I went in and added some more citations. I think I have 9 total citations now, from very reputable sources (UN, World Bank, Brookings).

What else am I missing here. Do I have enough to remove that needs more citations box?

Your help is greatly appreciated.

Thanks,

Matt Aaron

Aaron.matt83 (talk) 17:39, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your submission about MeetingUniverse
1. By starting with the easy things. All of the "slanted" or potentially "blatant" advertising phrasing has been removed. Anything that can not be verified also has been removed.

2. Irrelevant fluff. I can't speak to that definition nor can I find it anywhere in Wiki article considerations but I hardly think if you were a planner attempting to plan a meeting for 1000 people over 3 days with multiple dinners, dine-arounds, activities, presentations, meetings etc. would anyone consider what is contained fluff.

3. Notability. I will give you $1000 if you can show me one instance on the article links provided that lead anyone to a banner ad about MeetingUniverse. They won't because they don't. Every article or book reference submitted is a 3rd party article reviewed by a professional editor. Hitro's comments truly border on libel by suggesting that fetzer has attempted to benefit commercially by attempting to gain from banner exposure. Again, to notability, one article does not notable make. Multiple articles in multiple industry publications as well as a book about starting a travel business says something about notability. If there is a particular article one does not like then by all means let me know and I will remove them. I have searched Google and found that there have been some SEO articles published but NONE'' of them have been listed here.

4. I think that the potential ignorance of the importance of the meetings industry was what led Meeting Professionals International the standards bearer for the industry to start their own wiki instead of being constantly beaten down by the wikipedia editors. I get that you are trying to make things relevant and significant but to ignore a $100 billion dollar industry is kind of ridiculous. To allow individual travel sites such as Tripadvisor and Igougo to remain while ignoring group travel is also ridiculous.

Hospitalityexpert (talk) 17:48, 7 July 2009 (UTC)hospitalityexpert ''

I'm having trouble understanding what is "inappropriate" about my submissions. It is a company profile. There are countless company profiles that are less notable or significant that the profile that I am attempting to create. Webbed Marketing is currently one of only 2 such marketing organizations in Columbus, OH and is the most profitable such organization in all of Ohio. WM is also one of very few companies which owes zero business debt, which is incredibly noteworthy and significant.

What suggestions would you have that would make this article more "appropriate?"

John Entwistle (talk) 16:23, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Edit conflict
Why not make note of it? It happens. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 18:58, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Joyce Wadler
Hi. Could you review Joyce Wadler and see if the page is ready for prime time, when you get a chance, Thanks. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 21:57, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the updates. Is the page ready for mainspace yet? If not what else does it need? Thanks for the help. Yours, Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 04:07, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your help. Could you move the Joyce Wadler page into the mainspace when you get a chance. I think it's good to go. Thanks!Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 16:27, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi!

FYI, the above editor started an AN/I thread about this edit of yours suspecting him to be a sockpuppet. Would you mind replying to him either at AN/I or his talk page? He seems to be acting in good faith trying to figure out what's going on.

Thanks. Big Bird (talk • contribs) 16:58, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for reviewing our references
1- Nothing we submitted was behind a paygate. Im sorry that you ran into that issue. I am more that happy to help you access that article if you would like. 2- The article in Colorado Meetings and Event was written by a staff member but had to go through editorial before being published. Should I just take it out? 3- I would like to discuss the references that Corbin Ball made and why they are non-notable mentions.

Thank you,

Mfetzer3 (talk) 16:59, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Sock-Puppet Accusation
CobaltBlueTony,

I would like to resolve the accusation I have been told you leveled against me about sock-puppetry. If I am incorrect in addressing you please forgive me. My friend has helped me in asking for help with this article as not many individuals seem willing to answer my questions. You were one of the only ones answering and for that I thank you. The user hospitalitypro is not me and can be proven if you look at the I.P addresses and if you can the names used to register those accounts. What can I do to make sure that this false accusation is removed promptly. I have been very disappointed with my experience here at Wikipedia as it seems that people pull the trigger before investigating. Please help me out with this.

Thanks,

Mfetzer3 (talk) 17:08, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Seagal
Thanks, it seemed very sus to me. This article gets a lot of abuse. The thing is the guy may weigh 300 pounds now but back when he graduated and all through the 70s and 80s the guy was as skinny as a rake!! Dr. Blofeld       White cat 17:16, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

SockPuppetry
I told you that he was a friend of mine so that should clear up your confusion. Most people do not answer my questions on Wikipedia and it is frustrating! I appreciate that you actually have provided some form of logical feedback. I have asked for help multiple times with the article and no one has offered help. It was for that reason that I though if my friend would approach the subject it might get more attention as it was not from the person who wrote it, me. When does this check user happen so I can get that notice off my page? And what do I have to do to get help with an article rather than flip flopping criticism. Also, who establishes notability of the articles I post? Who decides that they are irrelevant and not notable? Have you checked out the articles I asked you to check out? I am still waiting for an answer as to why they are still up with internal references when MeetingUniverse got the boot because of "non-notable" references. Aren't "non-notable" mentions better than internal biased references? All I'm asking for is consistency and no one has been able to answer that for me. Are you willing to try so I understand please?

Thank you,

Mfetzer3 (talk) 20:28, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Hell In A Bucket (talk) 14:55, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar of Civility
Thanks! I moved it to User:Cobaltbluetony/Awardsandbarnstars. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 15:33, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Request Denied
So your request has been denied. What can I do to help get this process moving or at least resolved? I was unaware that asking for help getting answers to legitimate questions was grounds for an accusation of MeatPuppetry. If people had actually answered my questions rather than ignoring me I would not have tried to be creative and asked for help. So that said, now that I know that it is not allowed to ask for help from a friend regardless of the intent, can I get that notice taken off my talk page please? I am only trying to become active on Wikipedia and apparently need help learning the rules. What can I do?

Thank you,

Mfetzer3 (talk) 16:37, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Notable References?
Cobaltbluetony,

Could you please review the following articles and notify me as to your opinion regarding their notability for the article MeetingUniverse? They are more than a passing reference and have quite good detail about the subject.

http://www.meetingsfocus.com/displayarticle.asp?id=11292 http://meetingsnet.com/corporatemeetingsincentives/news/trip_advisor_meetings_1208/

Thank you,

Mfetzer3 (talk) 16:53, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

My talk
Hi. FWIW, I'm fine with Jennavecia's edit. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 18:58, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Friends seated
That works for me. Do you have a clue as to why he's trying to say what he removed is "illegal"? Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 19:31, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

User talk:Beganlocal
Who do you think he's a sock of? --jpgordon:==( o ) 00:17, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

GFDL sites
Hey there.

GFDL contents can no longer be imported into Wikipedia since the license change unless it is also licensed under CC-BY-SA; the compatibility only goes one way. This is due to the fact that material that is licensed only under GFDL cannot then be made also made available under CC-BY-SA (which Wikipedia now requires), whereas the opposite is true. &mdash; Coren (talk) 16:00, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

O Fenian Block
Would you care to comment on this IMO it is a bad block and you have been mentioned by another editor. BigDunc 10:15, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Corp / Company Guidelines
Sorry, I found it shortly after I posted to you! Thanks for the quick reply! Cegough (talk) 12:52, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Dunt dunt dunt
If you're going to delete it after I declined the speedy, the least you can do is close the AfD.-- Fabrictramp |  talk to me  18:51, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I see you did while I was leaving you a note. Never mind!-- Fabrictramp |  talk to me  18:51, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Dear Cobalt Blue Tony,

Regarding the Haliburton Sculpture Forest page, I believe that it has sufficient third part resources. I have referenced reliable websites, newspaper articles, and written publications. I have even added more upon suggestion. I therefore believe that the article should not be deleted. Do you have any specific reasons it should be?

Thank you,

Fakeman73 (talk) 19:00, 20 July 2009 (UTC)Fakeman73

As frustrating as I can be......
You know I do want to learn and become a better editor here. I am trying very hard to understand all the policies and undoubtably I still have a ways to go. Is there something in paticular you are referenceing in my tagging. I try and keep a short reign on my tongue, but I am willing to consider what you have been discussing with me. One thing I had to learn about CSD's is that it doesn't have to be notable only claim notability to pass deletion. Is there something I am missing on the AFD's that are similar. 16:17, 21 July 2009 (UTC) Hell In A Bucket (talk) 16:18, 21 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I did read all of your previous postings. However with all the things seeping into that message and my perceptions (which can be and often are wrong) at that point kinda of clouded the thing for me. I don't mean that confrontationally only as a personal candid viewpoint. I am personally amazed at some of the things allowed here. In honesty what you stated there has been told to me more then once when nominating articles on AFD's so more then likely there is a valid viewpoint there. I likely will not be nominating articles for AFD for a while. I will instead work off the page Articles for deletion and see what can be gained there. Perhaps there are better examples I can sedek there to improve. A bit of constructive criticism, I was really trying to disengage when I said "We have to agree to disagree" There is two sides to every arguement and undoubtably there were people in the original arguement that felt the way I do. The point being a slighlty less confrontational response would be, "I understand you disagree and many agree with you but in the end the consensus was." I'm not being picky but it acknowledges that there has been a discussion regarding it and your opinion while shared was not what made policy. Just a helpful suggestion because that is what kinda ticked me off, it might help avoid things like that in the future. Thank you for taking your time to answer my questions I know your time is not limitless. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 18:23, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Notability / Reference Tags
Hey, one of the pages I created Irving Equipment was tagged as needing references and possibly not meeting notability guidelines... I have made the repairs suggested and was told when this was done I could remove them and put a note on the discussion page about what I did to meet them, but would like an admin to remove the tags where admins tend to have more say and power with that sort of thing... could you take a look for me? thanks :) Curls82 (talk) 17:03, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

AFD nom
You're right, I didn't know any of that. I have no idea why you would expect me to know any of that, or why you didn't mention any of it in the nomination, since you clearly think it's relevant (and I agree that it is). From the nomination, it appeared that you had come across the article immediately after its creation and decided, for no apparent reason, to skip all intermediary steps and bring it to AFD; if there was any indication of the article's history, I doubt I would have said anything.

If you're going to expect people to make decisions based on certain information, it's generally a good idea to provide them with that information.

(That being said, I'm through discussing the article/nom and was planning to delete it and related User Talk pages from my Watchlist upon signing on today, so there's no need to continue this discussion if you share my feeling that there's little point.) Propaniac (talk) 17:14, 21 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I can see the delete log (but don't normally check those); I can't see the Undelete link. I had never heard of the article before the AFD so I hadn't seen any of its prior history, which shouldn't be a detriment to being able to evaluate its AFD nomination. Even if the information is otherwise accessible (assuming a user knows how to access it), my feeling is it takes fifteen seconds to write out "Previously speedy-deleted as spam", or whatever, in the nomination itself. Propaniac (talk) 17:37, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

AGF has it's limits
I have difficulty believing that this supposedly brand new IP editor just happens to come along and his sole contribution is to restore an article that has been deleted more than once, an article that is nothing but shameless spam. Sorry, maybe I'm jaded, but that stretches believability. Niteshift36 (talk) 13:38, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

The Ohio College Access Network
We are a non-profit organization that was deleted. I followed all of the rules and guidelines, did not promote the networking organization at all, yet was deleted without anyone even reading the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by OCAN KH2G (talk • contribs) 14:48, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

User:Smurfmeister
This user was autoblocked due to your block of User:Sigmaentertainment. This user's edits seem to have nothing in common with Sigma's and I am inclined to unblock, but I'd like to hear from you first. I notice that your talk indicates that you're offline, but (perchance) that may be inaccurate. If you agree, feel free to unblock the user yourself, if not please add to the user's talk to help the next admin who happens by. Cheers, Carlossuarez46 (talk) 16:43, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

John Jack
Hi,

You just deleted my page on John Jack, a Peninsular war soldier of the 52nd Regiment of Foot.

As a new user I appreciate that I'm still a learner at this game, but I don't understand why it was deleted and the reason that seems to be given seems kind of odd.

Can you tell me where I went wrong and send me a copy of the deleted content as I didn't retain it?

Obviously I could recreate it, but it would be easier if you could do this for me.

Thanks,

Andrew Morton —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andygm (talk • contribs) 22:37, 22 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi Cobaltbluetony. I am a member of the Military History WikiProject, with an interest in the Napoleonic Wars, through which I came into contact with Andygm above.  I have offered to mentor him in writing articles, and contributing to our various pages.  The above deleted article was on a verifiable Peninsular War soldier. While he might not have inherent notability, I suspect some of the information will be of use in other articles. (I have not seen the article content, but know of the soldier.) It would be great if you could retreive the deleted information and userfy it with Andygm.  I will work with him in identifying what is appropriate for WP.  Many thanks, Gwinva (talk) 00:54, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for doing that. Gwinva (talk) 22:35, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

CVISION Technologies, Inc. article
Hello,

I am in the process of rewriting the CVISION Technologies, Inc. page you had deleted, and am attempting to make it conform to the guidelines for inclusion. The article can be found at User:Mvcfalcon/CVISION Technologies, Inc.; I would welcome any feedback you might have.

Mvcfalcon (talk) 16:22, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Out of curiousity.
I was wondering what precedent an article such as Speed Limits in Mississippi would come into play. Are there many pages like that?Hell In A Bucket (talk) 16:38, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of MediaCurves
Hi,

I have been working on this page and wanted to get clarification on a few points. I read your comments on this page's citations. I understand that some of the sources were created or written by mediacurves, such as the businessyellowpages.com reference. I was unaware that they wrote this entry and am happy to delete these sources.

However, I am slightly confused about your criteria for deletion based on the other sources. You wrote that it is hard to confirm reliable sources since MediaCurves is involved in media and internet marketing. This reasoning is circular by definition and makes it impossible to put up an entry on any internet/media based company. Yet MSN and many other internet based news companies have entries. I do not see the distinction.

Also, many of the sources you found to be trivial or not neutral come from major news sources such as FOX, CNBC, and NPR. Please provide me with definition of a trivial source. These are highly regarded news sites. In terms of notability, these sites are reporting on MediaCurves’ groundbreaking research, which is very impactful on public opinion. This creditability and impact on public opinion is what gives MediaCurves notability.

I am happy to work on editing this entry to help improve the sources if you will give me some time and a few explanations so I can avoid future problems with this page. Thanks for your help and undestanding. --Bentheintern (talk) 20:12, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

farm town and Farm Town
You deleted and probably blocked farm town. The decision was presumely correct, however in the meantime I created a stub in Farm Town, explaining why the topic is (afaic) enciclopedic. Some other nice Wikipedians have also developed the article further. Can you make farm town a redirect to Farm Town now? -- Giorgio Gonnella (talk) 05:40, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

PhoenixVideoFilms
has asked on unblock-en-l to be permitted to change their user name to an acceptable one. I have created a new account for them and counseled them with respect to Conflict of interest and FAQ/Organizations. I will monitor their editing closely. Fred Talk 22:45, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank You
thank you for the welcome page and for helping me with the Michele Ruiz page. trying to figure out what else will need a citation, but your initial feedback was very helpful. great stuff on here.

--Scoons (talk) 22:49, 29 July 2009 (UTC)