User talk:ConcernedVancouverite/Archive 1

Welcome
Welcome! Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:
 * Respect intellectual property rights - do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
 * Maintain a neutral point of view - this is possibly the most important Wikipedia policy.
 * Take particular care while adding biographical material about a  living person to any Wikipedia page. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced to multiple reliable sources.
 * If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to [ do so].
 * Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Deliberately adding such content or otherwise editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism, doing so will result your account or IP being blocked from editing.

The Wikipedia Tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 11:37, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Concerned?
What, may I ask, are you concerned about? -- &oelig; &trade; 05:39, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Raj Hundal
A tag has been placed on Raj Hundal requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you.  Teapot  george Talk  18:07, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

openoffice
hi cv, my first time editing an article. i think what i said is fair. people think they are getting to the real openoffice.org site, but it's openoffice.org-suite.com and it's designed to look like the real one.

can u please paste the original comment i wrote here...

and then tell me how i should reword it in order for it to be constructive?

i don't think openoffice.org likes the way the org-suite.com people are doing business. i just want people to be aware.

thanks! b.g. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.68.253.66 (talk) 23:14, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Godhra tak
You tagged it for WP:CSD. I deleted it for a different reason, but I don't think it's had a deletion discussion. It was speedy deleted once before, which does not qualify it for G4.  Enigma msg  05:30, 6 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the note, Enigmaman! ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 05:33, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

please leave funnyfest alone
Hi. I do not know why you are so concerned with our site. we are new too this, but will learn fast. we edited properly but it will not save. please advise how we can insert the copy below and also how we take off the delete tag. thanks.

We edited it to this BUT IT WILL NOT SAVE???

FUNNYFEST Calgary Comedy Festival will be hosting its 10th anniversary comedy festival in 2010. FunnyFest was founded by [Stu Hughes] with the support of Paul Flegal. The FUNNYFEST is produced by volunteers and offers a variety of themed comedy shows. Since 2001, FUNNYFEST has shared the gift of laughter all over Canada. FunnyFest offers approximately 150 shows per year. The 10th annual FUNNYFEST Calgary Comedy Festival, April 29 thru May 9, 2010. FEATURES: 11 nights of comedy with 70 performers at 15 venues with over 11000 punchlines and 22 comedy themes

[edit]External links

Stu Hughes' website [1] Feeling down? Don’t have a cow, man [2] Funnyfest economic grief requires comic relief [3] Laughing Moments Article: Best True Story by performers at FunnyFest [4] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Silver7too (talk • contribs) 16:57, 6 September 2009 (UTC)


 * An admin will review the page. You should not delete the speedy delete tag until an admin reviews it.  Thank you. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 17:02, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

The Herald
Why has my article been nominated for deletionHavok a (talk) 19:10, 7 September 2009 (UTC)


 * See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#G3 for an explanation of the reason I have proposed it for speedy deletion. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 19:16, 7 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Well that doesnt explain it Havok a (talk) 19:19, 7 September 2009 (UTC)


 * There are details on the page itself of how you can contest the proposed deletion. You can raise your concerns on the article's talk page.  Thank you. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 19:26, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Why nominate article Jef Van Campen for deletion?
It was listed as failing the notability policy, however, this article adheres to item : "The person's work either (a) has become a significant monument, (b) has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) has won significant critical attention, or (d) is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums, or had works in many significant libraries. " While the admins do allow articles with less usefull information about certain other painters. Jef Van Campen is a well known Antwerp (Belgium) painter. Also, we would appreciate if the admins would respect the other wikipedia suggestive policies and tags like "Underconstruction" which specifically indicates that the article is not yet ready, there is still work to be done, and therefor to be so kind to not yet tag it for deletion. Not all contributers work or are able to work as fast as others. Regards, Lightningbit (talk) 22:02, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 * The article did not present a convincing case for that per the WP:ARTIST criteria. If it is the case, then you should mention so on the talk page by citing the appropriate reliable sources that say so.ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 23:07, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Again, then what is the use of the "underconstruction" tag then, indicating we are still actively working on this article, and to be so kind not to tag it for deletion yet? It is there for exaclty that reason, to give us some time to finish the work. So please allow us some time to be motivated to contribute in a positive way, rather than punishing the work we are trying to do Lightningbit (talk) 23:22, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Feel free to raise your concerns on the article's deletion discussion page. It is best to get other user opinions on it rather than just arguing your position on my talk page. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 23:52, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Ferry & Water Taxi Companies in Vancouver
You keep editing the pages of "False Creek Ferries", "Aquabus" and "Granville Island Water Taxi Servies" and you have created a page called "Granville Island Ferry" that makes no sense. Your editing is confusing and you clearly have no knowlegde about the ferries and water taxis of Vancouver besides being a passenger. The "Granville Island Ferry" page should be deleted, it confuses people and is redundant. "False Creek Ferries" is a division of "Granville Island Ferries" and "Aquabus" is not ! You have no idea what you are talking about or changing.
 * Thank you for your note. There is no company called "Granville Island Ferry."  There is a company called "Granville Island Ferries."  The link for the legal company name is set to redirect to the False Creek Ferries page, as it should.  The term "Granville Island Ferry" had previously been misdirected to do the same and I modified that to avoid the confusion that it was creating by directing users to only 1 of the 3 water taxis operating at Granville Island.  If you feel the page should be deleted, please go ahead and put in a request for deletion instead of raising it on my talk page.  Thank you.ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 01:42, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Since you state that I am only coming from the perspective of a "passenger" may I ask what your perspective is? Are you affiliated with one of the companies per chance? ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 02:30, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * My apologies is I have ruffled any feathers, I am new to wiki editing. My frustration is mainly derived from my lack of knowledge in wiki editing and again, my apologies for berating you for editing. I am a maritime historian, passenger, and recreational mariner with years of experience and thought to help out by fixing up some of those pages seeing as I observe them everyday outside. igwwgi 20:55, 13 september 2009 (PST)
 * Thank you for your apology. I hope as you learn the ropes with Wikipedia you find a productive way to contribute your knowledge and enjoy the process. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 16:10, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Ozzie Wright
Hi CV. Just wanted to let you know that I declined the speedy you suggested for this one. I think it would need an AfD discussion if it is to be deleted, given that there is coverage in third-party sources. Regards, Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 03:28, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know! ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 03:30, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. Thanks for the work you are putting into New Pages Patrol – sometimes a thankless job. :) Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 03:34, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

the aquabus
Hi, you have added a citation from About.com to the Aquabus page that states the company was conceived in 1979. This is inaccurate. 1979 the first ferries began operation, 1982 False Creek ferries was formed and 1985 Aquabus was formed. About.com is a poor source as it itself is not sourced. --Igwwgi (talk) 16:01, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Please do find a more reliable source that has different information and add it to the article. Currently, that is the only information I have found from a reliable source so far.  If you have other reliable sources, please do share them.  Thank you. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 16:16, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I believe it is better to have uncited truth than cited errors. You have used a citation about a Vancouver business written by a travel writer from Florida that made an article with several key errors that will reflect poorly and confuse anyone wishing to learn about the subject in question. My edits are not vandalism. They are done in good faith in an effort to ameliorate the reality of the articles I have edited. --Igwwgi (talk) 17:21, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, I have searched around and I can't seem to find any reliable sources that state otherwise. If you can locate them, please do add them to the article.  I note that the company's own website also mentions 1979 as the year the idea was conceived:  .  Due to your potential COI deleting a citation without providing a better contradictory citation can be perceived as a conflict of interest edit. It really would be best for you to bring it up on the article's talk page instead of just deleting it without providing an alternate citation.ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 17:25, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Regarding your question
Ciao, ConcernedVancouverite, and thanks for bringing Shinto religious symbol\ to my attention. In answer to your question, the way to respond to good pages created at a title with obviously unintended typographical errors is to move the page to the correct title and tag the mistitled page (which would then be a redirect) for speedy deletion under criterion WP:R3 "a recently created redirect page resulting from a typo or misnomer which is implausible and not common, and is not in another language". Regards, Skomorokh  18:56, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the quick reply! That makes sense!  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 18:59, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem, glad to help. Skomorokh  19:07, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Reverted your revision to Help_desk
Please don't delete messages from the help desk, instead add a note that you found the answer ukexpat (talk) 19:19, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. Sorry for the confusion.  I had no idea!  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 19:43, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

new to wiki
I will refrain from any more postings or edits. I am new to wiki, obviously I haven't learned the rope well. My apologies. In reference to the pupeterring, I was unaware that not signing in caused a problem. I am also not affiliated with some of the other accounts you mentioned. Again, I will not be partaking in editing again.--128.189.215.92 (talk) 18:51, 16 September 2009 (UTC)


 * You are welcome to contribute to Wikipedia in a constructive manner. Not signing in is not a problem at all.  That is perfectly acceptable.  However editing from a registered account does have some added benefits.  I would encourage you to register for an account and participate in the community in a constructive manner. If you are not affiliated with the other users identified in my sock puppet report, then my apologies.  I'm sure an admin will take a careful look at the report and investigate it fully and if you are not affiliated with the other users there won't be any problem at all.  You can also comment on the sock puppet report directly as well if you would like to. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 18:58, 16 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi there, the users that you listed are not all me. I formed my account when the ferry account did not work cause it was COI. I did not know this, I am not affiliated with the groups that the articles refer to. I am just trying to help write them. I would greatly appreciate it if you could stop this inquiry. I plan not to edit on wikipedia anymore. I am just another citizen like yourself that was trying to better wikipedia in Vancouver. I had no intention on making errors in links such as the Snug Cove vs Snug Cover or removing the S on one of them. I apologize again for any added work I caused you in fixing my errors. --Igwwgi (talk) 22:00, 16 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your apology. I am glad you have the best interests of Wikipedia at heart.  If you plan to contribute constructively and in a non-biased manner then it would be a shame for you to stop editing on Wikipedia.  I suggest you make your case on the sock puppet case page instead of on my talk page, as the admin that evaluates it may not find your comments here. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 22:03, 16 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I do not plan to contribute anymore, at least not until I get the rules understood first. I would appreciate however if you could aid in addressing the dismissal as you instigated it. Please and thank you.--Igwwgi (talk) 22:08, 16 September 2009 (UTC)


 * There is nothing left to do on the sock puppet case other than waiting for an admin to review it. If you do not plan to edit, then the result of the sockpuppet case will not matter to you at all.  And regardless of what happens with the case if you want to contribute in a constructive non-biased matter in the future you should be able to.ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 22:10, 16 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Okay then, I have explained the situation. Again my apologies and I shall work on the wiki jargon and rules. Thanks --Igwwgi (talk) 22:12, 16 September 2009 (UTC)


 * If you have trouble finding the articles to read over to get yourself acquainted with the various policies and procedures you may find some of the links on this page: User_talk:128.189.205.220 helpful.  Best of luck. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 22:20, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Akai Rice
Hi, CV, the speedy deletion request on Akai Rice has been declined by. I have taken the article to AfD at Articles for deletion/Akai Rice. Cheers, Cunard (talk) 05:56, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for following up on that and taking it to AfD. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 15:17, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! Cheers, Cunard (talk) 06:22, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Granville Island Water Taxi Services
A tag has been placed on Granville Island Water Taxi Services requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for organizations and companies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 01:08, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

fair use audio clips?
Thanks for the comment on my talk page regarding audio clips I put online. I studied the fair use issue, and as far as I can tell there's no problem--can you explain more? There's another editor who deletes my additions entirely, without discussion and posts that I'm a sockpuppet in the subject line. So I created audio clips to provide better references for quotes. The clips are short and total less than two minutes of a five-hour show. Each clip is about 20 seconds. That's well within fair use. I saw that wikimedia commons won't allow uploading fair use material, so I created an external web site to host fair use excerpts of copyrighted material. Where exactly is the problem? ChildrenDeserveBetter (talk) 16:27, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

I should add that I did first post on the Greg Fitzsimmons talk page that I could provide supporting fair use audio online if necessary, but there was no response. The external links are not any kind of "spam". ChildrenDeserveBetter (talk) 16:35, 19 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I found a few issues with the links in question: 1)  External_links urges extra caution with content being from WP:RS regarding biographical material, and External_links states that external links on such biographies must be of high quality and be judged by a higher standard than for other articles.  An IP hosted website on a personal user account does not meet that test.  2)  External_links suggests you should try to avoid directly linking to any content that requires special software, or an add-on to a browser, such as a sound file. It is always preferred to link to a page rendered in normal HTML, on a WP:RS that contains embedded links to the rich media.  3)  YT also suggests strong caution when dealing with copyrighted rich media links.  Going forward I would suggest you raise these issues on the article's talk page and allow others to give their opinions on it as well and then when a consensus is reached about the inclusion or exclusion of the material the article can be edited as appropriate.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 16:55, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I didn't know you'd respond so quickly--thanks! In the meantime, though, just before I saw your message I posted the question at the Biographies of Living Persons Noticeboard--can you take a look? I had already started a discussion at the talk page before even hosting the clips, but no one responded, which is why I went ahead with the audio clips. ChildrenDeserveBetter (talk) 17:00, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I had already responded on the BLP board with the same response when I saw your posting there. I think you've set the process to discuss it in motion now and hopefully everyone can reach a consensus on how to solve the question.  Enjoy your editing! ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 17:03, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, I saw! Our quick responses get us a little out of sync. I did start a discussion at the Fitzsimmons talk page, and I find this process interesting. Can you comment there? ChildrenDeserveBetter (talk) 17:11, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I already did. Let's keep the discussion there or on the BLP board going forward.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 17:14, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion tag
The article Citytv.com.co is not an article about just any website. It is an article of a highly notable video sharing service based in Bogota, Colombia. The article addresses the existence of the service in a very encyclopedic manner. I understand the problem of relativity regarding you being a Canadian and me being a Colombian on the notability of such service. But if this was the case then i should apply a speedy deletion tag to articles about video sharing unfamiliar in my home country. Not only is this article notable on the basis of the unique kind of video sharing service based in Colombia, but also because it lies under the Citytv brand name which you being Canadian would probably know more than I do. Therefore I request politely for you to remove such tag. I am adding a tag. Please redirect other editors on this matter to the talk page of this article. Thanks--Camilo Sanchez (talk) 21:22, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I have responded on the article's talk page. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 21:39, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Hey ConcernedVancouverite: You are adding a deletion tag once again on the article Citytv.com.co and as you can see we have talked about the notability of this article before. --Camilo Sanchez (talk) 16:07, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I have commented directly on the article's talk page. Best to take your discussion to that location and/or the AfD thread so others can read it as well.ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 16:12, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Method of adding all contributions from a particular anon IP user to your watchlist?
helpme Is there a way to automatically add all contributions from a particular anon user IP address to your watchlist in the effort to keep an eye on problematic vandals' future contributions?

Thank you. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 21:28, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
 * As far as I know, you can only watch pages, not users. Sorry. Xenon54 / talk / 21:55, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
 * That's too bad. Thank you for the quick response!  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 21:56, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Point Loma neighborhoods
Thank you for your interest in the Point Loma article! And thank you for creating an article about La Playa.

However, you are under a misimpression; Shelter Island and La Playa are two different places. La Playa is the historic beach on the mainland of the peninsula, and there is actually a lot that could be said about it - many paragraphs worth of history, some of which are summarized in the Point Loma article. La Playa (actually Ballast Point) was the first place the Spanish landed; it was the "port" (actually just an anchorage) for the town of San Diego for more than 100 years; and it marks the end of the historic La Playa Trail, the oldest commercial trail in the western United States, which connected San Diego to its shipping. La Playa is definitely worth an article of its own.

However, La Playa is not the same as Shelter Island. Shelter Island is an sandbank offshore from La PLaya, which was filled in for development in the 1940s and 1950s.

I am going to remove the redirect of "Shelter Island" to "La Playa," and I will add links within the article to La Playa where appropriate. But I will not make any changes in the Shelter Island article yet, figuring you might prefer to make the corrections yourself. If you would rather have me add the correct information, or discuss it with me, let me know.

Thanks again for your interest!--MelanieN (talk) 23:27, 20 September 2009 (UTC)MelanieN


 * Thanks for your note. I was just trying to clean up what appeared to be an issue with a new article that was created and had been tagged for speedy deletion by another editor.  I am not familiar with the area.  If you move over any citations that I added to the article you are moving it to all should be fine.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 00:28, 21 September 2009 (UTC)


 * What was the new article tagged for speedy deletion? Did it have to do with San Diego or Point Loma? I am very interested in those areas. Thanks! --MelanieN (talk) 01:58, 21 September 2009 (UTC)MelanieN


 * I see that someone added "stub," single-sentence articles about the various sub-neighborhoods of Point Loma - Loma Portal, Roseville, etc. Was one of those the candidate for speedy deletion? I didn't see any tags. If you want to give me a week or two I will see that those get fleshed out. Meanwhile I will delete the disambiguation linking Shelter Island to La Playa. After I create an article about Shelter Island I will add a proper link. --MelanieN (talk) 02:47, 21 September 2009 (UTC)Melanie


 * Here is the diff where I stepped in on Shelter Island:  and what I saw on the La Playa at the time:    I see you have deleted the portion about Shelter Island from the La Playa article.  I'll move that over to the Shelter Island article and then leave that article for you to build out as you see fit.  Thanks!  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 03:00, 21 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks! Everything in the article is now correct, and I will get to work improving it as time allows. --MelanieN (talk) 13:24, 21 September 2009 (UTC)MelanieN

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 19:24, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

did I do RFC right?
Hi. Sorry to bother you, but I wonder if you'd tell me if I did the RFC correctly. For the fourth time, the other editor just deleted everything I write at Greg Fitzsimmons, with virtually no discussion, so I tried following the RFC policy. How to I get someone to comment? Thanks. ChildrenDeserveBetter (talk) 16:31, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * It appears that you created the RFC correctly and that it is appearing on the noticeboard. It can take a while for other editors to comment.  You might also want to review your other options at Dispute_resolution as well if needed.  Good luck! ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 16:55, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. When I didn't see the RFC I panicked, but it soon showed up just as you said. Also, I did add on to the earlier discussion about fair use excerpts at Biographies of Living Persons Noticeboard. If you have time to comment there I would be interested to hear your opinion, because I believe referencing the external fair use material is going to become necessary. ChildrenDeserveBetter (talk) 22:36, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Honestly it strikes me that if no reliable news sources such as a major newspaper, etc. reported on it then it is not a notable enough of an issue to warrant placing the details on an individual person's BLP article. If you can find coverage in a major news outlet that would be a signal that it is actually a notable event.  I have tried to search and can't find any such reliable source mentions of the incident.  But perhaps you can. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 22:49, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, I'm just trying to understand the policy here, so I wonder if the following about sums it up:
 * I understand the prohibition on original research. Editors also don't make a judgment call as to notability. They have to rely on major sources' reporting something, and that's the only thing that truly counts toward notability. There are lots of poorly sourced things on WP (for example, the stuff about Fitzsimmons's father), but all editors' silent assent to this implies a kind of acknowledgment of notability, so such material stays and is assumed ok until someone objects.
 * Is that the general idea of how editing works? ChildrenDeserveBetter (talk) 23:10, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Probably the best way to sum up the issues around primary sources vs. secondary is well written here: PRIMARY.  The logic behind that policy is explained here:  PRIMARY.  Hope that clears things up a bit.  Happy editing!  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 23:50, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Article does not meet criterion
I declined your nomination of Producing editor for speedy deletion, since the article does not meet criterion WP:G11. It is not exclusively promotional and can be improved. This is BTW, something you yourself already realized when you added article issues, which says "Please help improve the article". &mdash; Sebastian 07:33, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your response. I've gone ahead and started an AfD for it.  Cheers!  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 14:12, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Perfect! I saw the replies at Articles for deletion/Producing editor, and they all seem to make sense to me. I'm no expert in that area, though, so I'm keeping out of it. &mdash; Sebastian 19:25, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Social evil article
If social evil article is criteria for speedy deletion, why not Social issues? The article is 100% similar. Short introduction. See also links. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 111.125.244.140 (talk • contribs)
 * You should discuss your concerns on the article's talk page so other editors can read the discussion easily. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 18:23, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I just noticed this conversation, and saw that the nomination for speedy deletion was not correct. CSD A3 is only for "No content" - please read the details at WP:A3. &mdash; Sebastian 19:33, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note, Sebastian! ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 20:20, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for being polite and gracious! :-) &mdash; Sebastian 20:29, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

I brought up Obama Bin Laden for deletion review
With all due respect, it does not seem you actually read the content of the article before nomination. XCD (talk) 01:40, 30 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your note. I certainly read it.  As did the administrator who deleted it, I am sure.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 02:07, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Nabalese
I'm sorry: I've put the categories so I dleted that message. Now I'm putting the references. Shall I have to tell you and then you delete the template? --Jeneme (talk) 16:29, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Are you referring to the merge template? It seems the article should be merged into the larger article.  I don't see enough to make a separate article for now.  Why not just add the content to the primary larger article as proposed in the mergeto template? Please feel free to bring up this discussion (including your response) on the talk page of the article itself so others are more likely to see it. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 16:38, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * At first, I think to do that, but just watch the category I'm going to translate. It's too much to add to the main article so I've decided to translate article by article instead of putting two dialects in the main article and then creating separate article for the rest of dialect. --Jeneme (talk) 16:45, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I've put sources and the internal links will be completed when I'll do the rest of the articles, but I can't do all of them in the same day. --Jeneme (talk) 16:53, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * As mentioned earlier, it would be best to have this discussion on the talk page of the article. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 17:00, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

False Creek Ferry page edits
Hi ConcernedVancouverite,

Thanks for the warm welcome. With regards to the neutrality of my additions, what about the edits I have made is at issue exactly? Kahloke (talk) 00:16, 1 October 2009 (UTC)


 * These are some of the edits that appeared to be of issue:   as you redirected the pages of a competitor to False Creek Ferries to the False Creek Ferries page.  Please review the materials at WP:COI.  Thank you. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 00:22, 1 October 2009 (UTC)


 * You are entirely correct. It was an error made quite a long time ago, one which has not been repeated.  It is no doubt apparent to you that I am somewhat of a novice with regards to Wikipedia.  I sincerely hope that, while my past mistake cannot be erased, any skepticism on your part can hopefully be overcome through diligent and honest research and, hopefully, a little good faith. Kahloke (talk) 00:40, 1 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I look forward to you making good faith contributions to Wikipedia. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 00:43, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Polanski
Aw, thanks. I don't think we've seen the end of the postings about the persons who signed the petition and I expect a protest for removing all the ones I did. The wording was less than neutral and to me, basically implied something beyond what the signings meant. I found reliable sources for the Nicholson article and expanded it just a bit regarding his friendship with Polanski and how the Tate murder effected Jack. I've been thinking for a while about trying to expand the Nicholson article and maybe I might take that on soon. Thanks again. Wildhartlivie (talk) 00:23, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree - there will be a lot more of the random acts of vandalism around this. I wish all of those users would take the time to reliably source NPOV content as you did with the Nicholson piece.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 00:27, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

notoriety
I see you reverted my edit. Why don't you think notoriety is the more accurate word? December 20, 2012 (talk) 02:00, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The choice of word is not as neutral, per WP:NPOV, in my opinion. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 02:53, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

John Armstrong
Wow, you are quick on the draw! I went to revert that vandal, and I hope I didn't cause an edit conflict with you because it looks like you were already on the case. Regards, MarmadukePercy (talk) 00:39, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the kind words! Sorry for any edit conflicts!  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 00:40, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Sports question
helpme Is a legitimate reliable source for sports information? It seems to be popping up on a whole bunch of stubs lately and the site looks kind of junky to me, but I'm not a sports expert by far. Here is a sample diff (there are literally dozens of these recently added):   For a non-sports enthusiast like me this site looks like a spam site, and I just want a second opinion before I start removing the links in a large scale way. Thank you for your help! ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 04:04, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It's probably best to ask at the reliable sources noticeboard. Tim Song (talk) 05:12, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

email
I answered your email.`   DGG ( talk ) 05:47, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Sports-reference.com is a reliable website
Regarding your edits to Byeon Sang-Su and Yun Gi-Su, sprint canoers who competed at the 1988 Summer Olympics in Seoul, the Sports-reference.com site has a section devoted entirely to the Olympics that covers every athlete and the results of evey event at every Olympics. Please do not remove links for items that are legitimate. Both articles you tag have been reverted to their initial edits. Also, please see WP:BIO regarding notability in the athletes section for future reference. Chris (talk) 18:38, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your note. It isn't clear to me that Sports-reference.com is a legitimate WP:RS.  It appears to be a rather spammy looking site.  Can you provide a better WP:RS?
 * The IOC Reports from http://www.la84foundation.org lists all of the Olympic results from the 1896 Summer Olympics in Athens to the 2006 Winter Olympics in Turin (The 2008 Summer Olympics in Beijing has not been released.). Other SR.com coverage also is done for baseball, pro football, pro basketball, and ice hockey, FYI. Chris (talk) 18:49, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It would seem to make sense to me to not link to such a spammy looking site, and instead use a more reliable source in the articles. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 22:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Schlong Island
I brought up your speedy delete of Schlong Island on WP:RfD. I do not think you were acting in good faith. Good day. Zweifel (talk) 10:32, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your note, I have responded on the RfD page as to my reasoning for the deletion request. I would have been happy to explain it to you if you would have simply asked me directly, as Woohookitty had suggested you do.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 15:12, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Flagg conflict of interest
Hello, i am new to wikipedia so i am learning, but can you please explain why you removed the information on my grandmother from Crimplene. it is all documented. if you go to google news, it is confirmed there. (Jdf3524 (talk) 17:45, 4 October 2009 (UTC))

Can you please explain what i am allowed and what i am not allowed to add to the article about Josh Flagg. Why is art allegations get its own category, why can it not be integrated into the text. (Jdf3524 (talk) 17:49, 4 October 2009 (UTC))

May "TV personality, Josh Flagg, is the grandson of Herman Platt" be added to Herman Platt. Mat the same be done for Benjamin Platt. (Jdf3524 (talk) 17:52, 4 October 2009 (UTC))


 * Welcome to wikipedia. I may suggest that you slow down your editing a bit until you become more familiar with the norms and procedures as many of your recent edits have not provided reliable sources to back claims.  You might want to review the policy about biographies of living people as well, as it contains details about what types of sources you need to provide to make any claims about people.  The particular edit you are asking about was added without providing any citation whatsoever.  It is not the responsibility of a reader to go and verify claims about people.  You should provide an in-line citation for such a claim in the text.   You will find some very useful links and tips on how to edit effectively on your talk page.  Happy editing!  In addition, I strongly encourage you to read over the conflict of interest policy since you have stated that you are in fact Josh Flagg.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 17:54, 4 October 2009 (UTC)


 * If you go to google, please visit new archives, not only is there enough information on the subject, if you type in crimplene+ edith flagg, the majority of the articles all referance Eduth Flagg, please go back to the first mention of crimplene ever in the united states, (october 1965), it is all available on google, unfortuenetly all the articles are in the archive so you would have to pay LA Times $3 per article, but just because you have to pay for the articles in the archive doesnt mean that the article should be removed that is unfair. please research first. there are huindreds of documentation. further, Imperial Chemical Industries paid my grandmother to advertise the fabric accross the country, look at just one of her ads and you will see their official seal on the advertisement.


 * http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/latimes/access/487295412.html?dids=487295412:487295412&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:AI&type=historic&date=Oct+14%2C+1965&author=&pub=Los+Angeles+Times&desc=Clotheshorse+in+the+Jet+Age&pqatl=google


 * http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/latimes/access/501527932.html?dids=501527932:501527932&FMT=CITE&FMTS=CITE:AI&type=historic&date=Jan+13%2C+1966&author=&pub=Los+Angeles+Times&desc=Display+Ad+111+--+No+Title&pqatl=google
 * http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/latimes/access/486071442.html?dids=486071442:486071442&FMT=CITE&FMTS=CITE:AI&type=historic&date=Oct+27%2C+1966&author=&pub=Los+Angeles+Times&desc=Display+Ad+35+--+No+Title&pqatl=google —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdf3524 (talk • contribs) 01:12, 5 October 2009 (UTC)


 * As mentioned earlier, "You should provide an in-line citation for such a claim in the text.  You will find some very useful links and tips on how to edit effectively on your talk page." ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 01:16, 5 October 2009 (UTC)


 * can you please tell me how to do an inline citation, i tried and tried and have no idea, but i dont see why the articles are being deleted. the information is all on google? can you please explain better. i dont know how to do these referance codes, please with out me re reading, tell me how to cite the articles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdf3524 (talk • contribs) 01:29, 5 October 2009 (UTC)


 * i am getting notices from you but it would help if you could reply in plain english so i understand, as it is now, i dont know what any of these warnings are for, my question is why is wikipedia not looking in th enews archives where all this information is clearly documented in referance to Platt and Flagg.


 * http://www.nytimes.com/1984/03/09/business/changes-at-platt-music.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdf3524 (talk • contribs) 01:48, 5 October 2009 (UTC)


 * You should visit the article's talk page which you want to add a reference to, and propose the discussion there using "reference tags" which can be accomplished following the instructions here: REF.  Since you have a conflict of interest, just propose those changes on the article's talk page.  Do not edit the articles directly.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 02:03, 5 October 2009 (UTC)


 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:REF this is totally confising, can someone at wikipedia help me doctor it up. i will supply the referances which i have always done in the articles and hopefully someone can put the article together. this is very important because it looks weird that there is no information on edith flagg. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdf3524 (talk • contribs) 03:48, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * This is not the right place to ask for help. You can do so on the article's talk page - not on my talk page.  Please also sign your talk page comments with 4 tildes (~) so that people can tell who wrote it easily.  Thank you. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 03:53, 5 October 2009 (UTC)


 * how do i get to the articles talk page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Godzillamurphy (talk • contribs) 04:45, 5 October 2009 (UTC)


 * You click the "Talk" tab at the top of the article you're interested in, or you type Talk: before the article title. Talk:Edith Flagg is the talk page for the article Edith Flagg. -- Eastmain (talk) 13:59, 6 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Have you created a second account now? ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 14:53, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

David Ferriero
Wow - you did such a nice job with Joshua Greenberg I'm wondering if you might want to help with David Ferriero. I've been "arguing" with the two articles' creator, Tenmei, about what to include, but this is a tough person. If you have time/desire, maybe you'll want to look. Thanks. -- kosboot (talk) 20:57, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I noticed the issues on that article as well, as I was going through and trying to figure out the full story on Joshua Greenberg. I will definitely take a look in more depth at it as well.  Thanks for the heads up!  Best to assume good faith on Tenmei's part, and try to improve the articles as best as possible.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 21:00, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * There is a significant difference between a colleague who is uncooperative, obdurate or ignoring you and one who does not understand what you're trying to explain.


 * Wiki-jargon not understood
 * Please stop adding synthesized claims based on original research.

Concepts expressed in different words Citations claiming things about his tenure need to be drawn from reliable sources that have drawn that conclusion themselves – not by our conclusions from primary sources.


 * My sentence:
 * Ferriero is the NYPL's representative in
 * the Google Books Library Project.

Your re-statement: The library joined the Google Books Library Project during Ferriero's tenure.


 * This may seem a bit frustrating for you, but it is not a waste of your time. Thank you for persisting.  Please keep David Ferriero and Joshua Greenberg on your watchlist. --Tenmei (talk) 01:35, 4 October 2009 (UTC)


 * CV, I appreciate your work on this. I've left notes at the user p. of the editors above. I'd appreciate it if you;d email me from my user p. about what may be going on here.   DGG ( talk ) 02:33, 4 October 2009 (UTC)



The explanatory comments at Articles for deletion/Joshua Greenberg were useful for me. Pondering the array of views in this thread helped me to step back only slightly -- but even small movements do evoke a changed perspective. --Tenmei (talk) 16:09, 6 October 2009 (UTC)


 * In my opinion, the AfD thread resulted in an improved article; and I want to acknowledge your contributions specifically because they undoubtedly caused me to re-examine my imperfect understanding of original research and synthesis. Thank you. --Tenmei (talk) 18:09, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Glad to have been of help. Happy editing!  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 18:11, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:40, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

NPOV
Thanks for feedback :) Doing assignment for school (development Geog 362)- We could also include overall positive aspects :) New to Wiki as haven't done anything like this- so much different than your standard, typical paper —Preceding unsigned comment added by Derekchang85 (talk • contribs) 21:34, 22 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, there is a good write-up of the neutral point of view standards here: Npov that you might find useful as you edit the article into a more neutral version. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 22:05, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Was working on in class yesterday; not enough time to finish editing as also had to write notes from lecture :( was going to focus on yesterday after class but unable since it was blocked! Hopefully it is the last wiki assignment instructor assigns!  She is a "critical, feminist geographer".  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Derekchang85 (talk • contribs) 19:20, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Conflict of Interest
It is not a conflict of interest. I am not affiliated with the artist. I just went to him to ask his permission to write the page and get reputable resources for information for his biography. I never said I was "paid" to write his page. Please remove the warning from the page or let me know how I can do that. Sayitdigital (talk) 17:04, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I have replied on the other talk pages. If Sayitdigital feels that their comments do not mean there is a conflict of interest, they can raise the issue at WP:COI/N. Singularity42 (talk) 17:17, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
 * The edit made by Sayitdigital here says, "He has hired me to create this page for him." That is a fairly open and shut conflict of interest. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 17:47, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, I agree entirely. It's just that Sayitdigital was asking at various places what they could do to have the tag removed. I replied (i.e., they can raise it at WP:COI/N - where they would just get the same reply), and I was just trying to get the conversation containted back to one page. Singularity42 (talk) 17:51, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Fully agreed. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 17:52, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Hello
I am not trying to stop the discussion from occurring in any way - however the posts in question are active open source projects and it seems outright wrong the person that has been flagging them does so repeatedly. I did not get a message saying it needs to be discussed, I got a message saying it was pending deletion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sumdeus (talk • contribs) 23:07, 8 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your note. Instead of removing the deletion template it would be best to discuss your concerns about the article on the articles for deletion discussion page that was created about the article at:  Articles_for_deletion/NovaDB.  After the discussion concludes there an administrator will make a decision based upon the consensus hopefully reached in that discussion.  But it is important to leave the template on the article itself so others will find the discussion about the potential deletion of the article.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 23:11, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Joan Rivers page
Thank you for fixing the Joan Rivers page. Someone had messed with the page and I was trying to fix it but couldn't figure out how to have the page revert to the correct info. Yup a computer dummy. So thanks for fixing that page before I could figure it out.

Syd Sutherland —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.152.171.174 (talk) 06:20, 14 November 2009 (UTC)


 * You are welcome. When you click on the history tab for a page, you can see all of the previous versions of the page.  When you click on the date for a specific one you will see the old version.  If that is the last non-vandalized version you can click edit and save it with a note that you are reverting to the last clean version.  That should help you in the future with a similar situation.  Happy editing!  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 16:17, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Vancouver
- Mkdw talk 11:56, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

False Creek Ferries
Hi there, I was just wondering why my edit on False Creek Ferries, referring to the fact that they area division of Granville Island Ferries Ltd. was reverted. The company has appeared as both names, in some of the references provided in the reference section. Just curious, thanks. --Igwwgi (talk) 07:43, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
 * For the same reason it was removed by another editor before here:  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 17:43, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Gamal al-Banna
Dear ConcernedVancouverite,

I'm not an experienced wikipedia contributor; I've just learned the "German" way of adding information. I thought I did indicate the sources for the "Gamal al-Banna" article. If not, I'm sorry, and thanks for your help!

Best, LR. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.173.123.79 (talk) 22:07, 4 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure what you mean by a German way of adding information. But in any case, you may want to review the section on original research which will give you a good idea of how to include research and conclusions drawn in cited sources, rather than drawing your own conclusions when writing.  Good luck!  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 23:09, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Benford Ferries
On the Aquabus page you removed the point that the Benford Ferries were originally built for False Creek Ferries. Although it says both were hard working for both companies in expo. If you look at the sources for False Creek Ferries and Aquabus regarding the Benford Ferries. The first one (ship of the class) was built for False Creek Ferries as the "Spirit of False Creek I" was built in 1983 and Aquabus was not formed until 1985. Also the Benford design plan shows the name "Spirit of False Creek" on the side. On a recent ride with both companies I noted that they are indeed the same class of ferry. It isn't a major point but just thought I'd throw that out there. --Igwwgi (talk) 07:53, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Unless you find a written third party source for that claim, it would qualify as original research, which we do not add to Wikipedia entries. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 16:11, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Michael Saint
Hi... I went through and cited just about everything on there. Pouring through more articles that I could dig up online to gain more info and cite more information. Thanks for your help in tagging it and letting me know what I had to do to clean it up.

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:42, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Dengeki Daisy
I'm confused: the URL that you said was the source for this article (http://manga.animea.net/dengeki-daisy.html) has absolutely no text. Did you mean to refer us to a different URL? I've declined the speedy because I don't see anywhere whence this text could have been copied; if you have evidence that I'm missing, please list the page at Copyright problems, where it will be reviewed by people who are more involved with fighting copyright violations than I am. Nyttend (talk) 21:52, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
 * It loads fine for me. I just checked it again.  Perhaps you have an issue with your browser? ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 03:54, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Edith Flagg
Seem familiar? As the site doesn't state this came from Wikipedia, I must assume vice-versa. Half Shadow  21:38, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks like the site is a web-crawler; the text vanished from there when I reverted it and now it's back. That's just lazy. Half  Shadow  02:45, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Seems like you have found they are lifting from Wikipedia, not the other way around. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 04:03, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

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

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Articles for deletion/Joshua Greenberg (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:06, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

FunnyFest Calgary Comedy Festival
I've removed your speedy deletion tag from FunnyFest Calgary Comedy Festival. Frankly, I'm baffled that you would think that this article meets a7. It makes a clear indication of notability -- it is "Western Canada's largest comedy festival," in one of Canada's principal cities -- and more importantly, offers two WP:RS references, including an article from the Calgary Sun. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 02:58, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
 * It has been speedily deleted many times already under A7. After people dug into it and looked at it, it didn't meet notability.  I take your point that speedy isn't the way for it since they now claim notability - even if it is a dubious claim.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 03:57, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Ferry Ballet
I saw that someone added a Ferry Ballet note in a section of the False Creek Ferries article and it was removed due to lack of sourcing. I did some looking on the web and found a source to back up the Canada Day ballet but not the fireworks one. I will continue to find another source for that but if one doesn't exist then perhaps take it down indefinitely until that person who added it can find it on their own. --Igwwgi (talk) 06:24, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
 * As with anything on Wikipedia, quality sourcing and verifiability is key. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 15:20, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

James Ransome
Thanks for your message, but I've not made any edits to any page relating to James Ransome. I've never even heard of him. I'm not aware that I have a shared IP address either. Assuming that I have, clearly some other user has made whatever changes you are concerned about. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.133.233.45 (talk) 10:44, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * You can see the edit in question here:  It is possible that someone else had your IP address previously, when that warning was issued.  As noted in my original message, "If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make any unconstructive edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant warnings."  Creating an account is easy, and it will avoid you receiving any such notices for edits made by other people.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 17:16, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

edit of social pedagogy
hi,

i have noticed that you hvae mad e a change to the social pedagogy links section and started deleting the link to residential child care networking site that discusses residential child care And social pedagogy. could you tell me why you think it is spam please? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gaz12000 (talk • contribs) 16:56, 8 February 2010 (UTC)


 * It is critical to establish notability when adding articles about a new website. I saw no evidence of such notability.  In the future if the site you created eventually becomes notable as reported in reliable sources, then it may be time for an article for it.ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 17:34, 8 February 2010 (UTC)


 * ok i will have a look into that. do you realise that all of the links have been deleted from the page apart from one. they are all very useful and i have been able to send people to this page to get more information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gaz12000 (talk • contribs) 17:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes. I removed several other links on the page per the links normally to be avoided guide. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 17:50, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Darren J. Butler


A tag has been placed on Darren J. Butler, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article that does not provide sufficient context to identify its subject. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template   to the article and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Malcolma (talk) 17:38, 11 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, my first reaction was also to speedy delete it when it was created and I started that process . I dug a little deeper and it seems he has 2 movies that have been released, so I just moved it to a proper capitalization and tagged it with all the problem tags that applied.  Perhaps the original creator, Vasprow49, will do a more thorough job if they decide to re-create it. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 18:17, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

2010 Olympic Village
Why did you revert my edit? --Stepheng3 (talk) 20:52, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Didn't mean to. Must have been an editing accident.  I don't remember doing that!  Sorry!  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 02:35, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
 * No problem. I've redone it. Cheers, --Stepheng3 (talk) 02:51, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Budhda birth date controversies
this article is not taken from single source,i have aded many references and after some days i will add some more references regarding this article —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lostinindia (talk • contribs) 17:26, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * It would be best to include them in the primary article Buddhism, as much of the content was just duplicated from there. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 18:37, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I shall be grateful for your regards,Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lostinindia (talk • contribs) 22:00, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

I am a uniatarian who is pretty much buddhist
Greetings,

Why would anyone have problems with my setting down the rules for the cardgame countdown? If you have different rules I would only like to hear your variations. It actuallly took me over two days to peg the game straight. I didn't want to leave the rules unclear. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.37.244.91 (talk) 05:57, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I think you may want to place your arguments for keeping the article on the article's deletion discussion page here: Articles_for_deletion/Countdown_(card_game) so that all editors involved in evaluating the article have a chance to see them.  Generally for an article to remain on Wikipedia it has to be about a notable topic.  Notability is determined based upon reliable sources.  If you can provide reliable sources that discuss the game, that will go a long way in convincing editors the article should remain.  Best of luck.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 14:33, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 19:58, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Recent report to AIV
Thanks for your vandal fighting efforts but your recent report to AIV on User:Tormn was unwarranted as the user has not edited since 2009! AIV is for reporting active vandals as a means to prevent damage to the project only. It is not meant for punishment. Thank you for your attention. -- Alexf(talk) 17:26, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Addendum. I see he has a recently deleted article. User in that case must be warned with at least a level 3 for it to be reported afterwards to AIV. -- Alexf(talk) 17:27, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your note. He had written an attack article, which I suggested for speedy deletion.  It clearly was removed before you considered the AIV request.  I made the request based upon the attack article, which led me to look at the rest of his editing history which was all composed of vandalism and attack edits. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 23:01, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Vandal
Hi there. Could you please vaporize User:Livestrongest. It is a vandalism-only account and sock of User:Livestronger as can be seen here. Thanks. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 16:37, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure why you put your request on my talk page. But I've gone ahead and filed a vandalism request:  .  In the future, you can file such a request yourself as well here:  Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism.  I haven't looked through the sock information, but if you have a case for that, then you can file it here:  Sockpuppet_investigations. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 19:02, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure either. For some reason you are on my list of people to run for such matters. I will learn how to request a block. It's about time. Anyway, thanks for handling that. A sock investigation might just be a waste of time, as this user will most likely be blocked. Thanks for helping. I appreciate it. Enjoy the cherry blossoms about to explode in the West End. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:05, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah, okay. I checked out Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism. It looks easy as pie. I thought it was some huge procedure. Thanks again, and sorry to bother you. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:24, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Korean things
Dear ConcernedVancouverite, Hi - I have added some extra things to the Korean Journal of Sociology and Korean Sociological Association and removed your tags. Hope that is OK. (By the way have you noticed Other Associations and Journals don't seem to have much by way of citations?) Could you have another look at Gil-Sung Park to see if you think the extra things have helped to establish his notability? I think it is a bit tricky for ntoable Scholars who aren't publishing everything in english to have the evidence as easily available on the usual indices. On the IS thing you mention there are only 4 Koreans in all areas and those ones are not the ones you might expect. Best wishes, (Msrasnw (talk) 11:24, 8 April 2010 (UTC))
 * Thank you for the changes. Honestly the KSA sounds like it may be notable because of its local prominence.  It is still unclear the journal they publish is notable enough for a separate article.  The only claim to notability is that it is "core" by CSA.  But if you read what core is defined as any journal with the word "Sociology" in the title qualifies.  So that really isn't very notable.  In terms of Gil-Sung Park - it still appears too early for notability based upon the criteria at WP:PROF. But likely the discussion at the Afd will decide "undecided" since you are arguing strongly to keep it. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 14:28, 8 April 2010 (UTC)


 *  Comment - The criteria listed at the cited website in the line after your quote finishes goes on to say that "All substantive articles appearing in these journals are abstracted and indexed, and citations are provided to the book reviews published therein." Articles from this journal are abstracted and indexed by the CSA. This in my view establishes notability.  Wrt having an article for the journal I think there is more than enough evidence for this being the main Korean Sociology Journal and so sufficient notability for us. Perhaps we should ask someone from WikiProject Academic Journals to have a look as it clearly seems to me to match their requirments. Best wishes, (Msrasnw (talk) 14:43, 8 April 2010 (UTC))


 * Oh dear - you have merged them without discussion! (Msrasnw (talk) 14:55, 8 April 2010 (UTC))


 * Yes, per Help:Merging - "Merging is a normal editing action, something any editor can do, and as such generally does not need to be proposed and processed. If you think merging something improves the encyclopedia, you can be bold and perform the merger, as described below. Because of this, it makes little sense to object to a merger purely on procedural grounds, e.g. "you cannot do that without discussion" is not a good argument." ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 14:58, 8 April 2010 (UTC)


 * "If the merger is controversial, however, you may find your merger reverted, and as with all other edits, edit wars should be avoided. If you are uncertain of the merger's appropriateness, or believe it might be controversial, or your merger ends up reverted, you can propose it on either or both of the affected pages." Perhaps we should discuss at the Discussion Pages and get some help (Msrasnw (talk) 15:07, 8 April 2010 (UTC))
 * I don't really have a lot of time to spend on such a minor issue. If you want to leave it that way and feel strongly about it I won't object to keeping it separate.  But it still doesn't seem notable as it is a journal of a very minor organization that doesn't seem to have a lot of notability.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 00:08, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean?
Hello and thank you for the kind welcome. In the article Pascack Valley Regional High School District you reversed an edit I had made which added the assigned number of the robotics team. While I don't have an issue with that - I have to assume you know better than I - Now I'm just confused, and I'm not sure even where to start explaining.

FIRST us an organization "For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology". They use robotics to promote science, technology, engineering and math (STEM). While they have a few Robotics programs, The "FIRST Robotics Competition" (FRC) is their oldest and most complex, open to high school students (grades 9-12) worldwide. Each of the 1800+ FRC teams has been assigned a team number, and this team number is a critical and important part of that team's identity. In other words, knowing that there's a team from the St Catherine's school in Toronto might not be recognized, but just say "Team 1114" and everyone involved knows which team you mean, the team that's won the world championship several times (doesn't matter if it's true, just accept the concept).

The Pascack Valley team is better known as FRC Team 1676 (or FRC1676). Since this key piece of information was missing from the citation in the article, I thought I'd add it. You decided differently, and reversed the edit. Was it because I did not cite a source (although citation #6 does, in fact, show the team number). Was it labeled "Cryptic" because you did not look at the citation #6, or do not understand the standard method of noting a team for search friendliness? Or?

How does one cite a fact? Is a web site linking the team number to the team name and location be sufficient? Must a book be published that explains the team number and name are linked, thus becoming a valid citation? Must such a thing as a team number actually be attributed, since it is so unlikely to be challenged?

Frankly, I am very confused as to how one might cite a fact, something like this. I just don't know what anyone wants to see. Maybe you can clarify this for me? Can you state your intention in reversing my edit? I thank you for your time, in advance. Noah976 (talk) 01:41, 11 April 2010 (UTC)Noah976
 * For the single sentence in that article adding the FRC Team 1676 appeared to be unnecessary detail, and hence I simplified the flow of the sentence so it could be read and understood by people outside of that specific domain. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 03:04, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the clarification, sometimes us geeks forget that we need to share with other humans Noah976 (talk) 18:55, 11 April 2010 (UTC)Noah976

AfD nomination of Makoa Kali
An article that you have been involved in editing, Makoa Kali, 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. jmcw (talk) 13:35, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:46, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 22:34, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Aquabus - Benford Boat Link
Dear Concerned Vancouverite. I was not trying to add false information into the Aquabus article, I was simple trying to present the information from the Benford Boat design citation link in the manner in which I understood it. My sincere apologies if it appears that I vandalized that article. Furthermore, I am not all to aware of the workings of wikipedia, but I can tell you that I was simply trying in good faith to share cited info. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.6.120.162 (talk) 21:54, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your note. My read of that linked PDF file is that it doesn't make clear which company the original boat was built for.  In the absence of confirmed reliable sources it is better not to add such original research. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 23:55, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay, again sorry about that, I can understand that it is unclear. --174.6.120.162 (talk) 07:17, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:38, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 14:38, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Would like clarification about adding external links
You have deemed us inappropriate with adding information to a few Vancouver neighbourhood pages in the form of an external link to blogs and real estate information -- But there are other similar external links that are in place and have not been removed -- why are some okay and others not? For instance: Under the Grandview-Woodland neighbourhood page at the bottom under reference there is a link to "Live On The Drive" which is a Realtor's website. At least our websites have pertinent information for people looking to move to the area. We run blogs that talk about schools, lifestyle, restaurants, events etc. All useful information. Other realtor's websites are linked all over the neighbourhoods, and they have not been removed....?

JustinLeigh (talk) 18:36, 18 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Please refer to WP:Linkspam and note, "Inclusion of one spam link is not a reason to include another." As such, if you feel other links do not meet the inclusion policy, please go ahead and remove them as well. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 21:52, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:12, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:47, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Added template for SuggestBot
Hi,

Thanks for being one of SuggestBot's users! I hope you have found the bot's suggestions useful.

We are in the process of switching from our previous list-based signup process to using templates and userboxes, and I have therefore added the appropriate template to your user talk page. You should receive the first set of suggestions within a day, and since we'll be automating SuggestBot you will from then on continue to receive them regularly at the desired frequency.

We now also have a userbox that you can use to let others know you're using SuggestBot, and if you don't want to clutter your user talk page the bot can post to a sub-page in your userspace. More information about the userbox and usage of the template is available on User:SuggestBot/Getting Recommendations Regularly.

If there are any questions, please don't hesitate to get in touch with me on my user talk page. Thanks again, Nettrom (talk) 23:07, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 16:55, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:27, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 09:53, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 09:04, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Autograph hunting
Please sign your warning here. Cheers,  Chzz  ► 16:32, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Oops. Thanks, Chzz! ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 20:11, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Tines and Barbs
You can't A7 a game - it's only for people, animals, web sites and organisations. Anyway, I've deleted it as a hoax as a quick Google shows absolutely no evidence of its existence. Peridon (talk) 21:01, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 00:36, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 08:45, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Dmytro Blazheyovskyi
I've removed the BLPPROD as the subject of the article has just died, so the article no longer qualifies as a biography of a living person. (Coincidence or what?) I have no opinion on whether the article should be kept or deleted, but if I were you I'd wait a few days to see if any other reliable sources produce formal news obituaries, which would settle the notability question once and for all.

I honestly don't know if you can re-PROD this under the rules, but AFD is always there for doubtful cases. --NellieBly (talk) 02:59, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up. I'll AFD it pending notable obits.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 03:03, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem. My first thought was, "boy, this editor's BLPPRODs are more powerful than he realizes!" --NellieBly (talk) 16:11, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Biosphere Gasification Process
Not sure why your so concerned with my additions to the Biosphere Gasification Process. Spectrum Blue Steal is a partner of True Green Energy Group and they have referenced the website already in the content. Why would you remove my tag. They deserve to have their website linked to their tag. I was only try to get some information out on the newest action heros in the Green Energy World. I am also Canadian and a Vancouverite. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KarenCorbin (talk • contribs) 16:10, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

PS- TGEG HAS the patent to the Biosphere. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KarenCorbin (talk • contribs) 16:14, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Please refer to REFSPAM. Thank you. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 16:54, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

SHI International Corp. Wikipedia Page
Hello ConcernedVancouverite,

I am writing to you regarding the article that I created for SHI International Corp. I saw that you marked the page for "Speedy Deletion" and I have contested the deletion, as well as another Wikipedia member, but I have not heard back from you. If you read the entries on why the page should not be deleted, as well as check Google for SHI International, you will see that they are a reputable company and deserve to have a Wikipedia page. I would like to have the template removed, but since I created the page, I am not allowed to do so. Would you be able to remove SHI International Corp. from the Speedy Deletion list and NOT delete the article itself?

Thank you.

SoccerDude83 (talk) 20:17, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
 * The speedy has already been removed since notability claims have now been asserted. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 22:06, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Nine Technology
Hello,

I saw that you marked my Nine Technology page for speedy deletion. That's fine, I accept that some folks might not see a deduplication patent (among other things) as notable. But I wish you hadn't marked it in the middle of the night - I would have contested the deletion had it been during working hours. As it is, I have to appeal for it to be userfied so I can edit it further and assert notability because it was deleted before I had a chance to respond to your tag.

If there's any way you can help me get back that article so I can continue to work on it and try to assert notability, I would be much obliged.

Ajvsell (talk) 15:27, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
 * You'll have to follow the usual procedures to request it to be userfied. Best of luck. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 15:48, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:03, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Felix Biestek
You might want to take another look at the expanded article.  DGG ( talk ) 00:10, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I've responded on the Afd.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 00:23, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Inappropriate RS3 of Obama Bin Laden
Hi. I thought I would comment on "Obama Bin Laden"

CSD says the redirects have to be "implausible"

http://www.fox40.com/news/headlines/ktxl-osama-v-obama-one-letter-mistake-strikes-multiple-networks-and-tv-stations-20110501,0,5601804.story shows how very plausible this spelling is

So it does not qualify for RS3, and I am notifying you and the person who deleted the redirect WhisperToMe (talk) 23:20, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your note. It still strikes me as an attack redirect, intended to slander, even if a few local stations in the Fox network have reported it. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 23:35, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for starting the Redirect for discussion page. I'll make additional comments there WhisperToMe (talk) 23:45, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Sounds good. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 23:45, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Greensax
Hi,

First of all greetings to the beautiful city of Vancouver and surrounding BC. I agree with you that what I wrote looks like advertising, how about just simply putting "Greensax is a trade name of a compostable bin liner". Please let me have your thoughts.

Glic16 (talk) 12:07, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
 * It is best to take up those proposed solutions on the talk page of the article in question. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 17:11, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Samuel Khawas
Hi Vancouverite, just for your information, the correct criterion was. Of course, it is not that important :) --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 15:38, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you. That is a new one for me - I'll remember for the future!  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 16:32, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

On "Emanuel Pastreich"
I do appreciate your response on the "Emanuel Pastreich" entry. Actually I personally would prefer to have someone other than myself update the entry. And would welcome a third party to rewrite the entry. But it certainly is not exceptional that I would do it myself. If you feel that the recent additions are inappropriate. I have no particular problem with reducing the length of the entry. As for significance of my work, I would argue, and others would argue as well, that in fact that entry understates significance. I am happy to address that issue directly. Thank you for your interest and I welcome a discussion on this issue. Emanuel —Preceding unsigned comment added by Epastreich (talk • contribs) 02:31, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I refer you to AVOIDCOI and strongly encourage you to read it carefully to avoid any issues of conflict.ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 02:35, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I cannot find a way to respond to the last comment on the entry "Emanuel Pastreich" so I am starting a new entry. If you can move this posting to that section, I would appreciate it. First, thank you for taking the time to consider this entry. I would like to ask that the discussion on deletion be limited to a period of 10 days, with a decision to be made on deletion around May 15. In the case of deletion, I would also like to set a clear time for when the entry can be considered again: say after six months. Secondly, we must distinguish between significance and conflict of interest. Conflict of interest is not grounds for deletion. Conflict of interest is only grounds for revision or review. I propose that the entry be rewritten by a third party who does not have any relationship to the individual in question. That would be holding the entry to a higher standard than most Wikipedia entries. I am open to suggestions as to how to select that person. Or I can recommend someone. Thirdly, if significance is the question, strong arguments mustbe made for and against. There are highly qualified people who are ready to make the argument for. Just recommend a format. Thanks again, and let me know if the above is appropriate. The notification of deletion must be removed. Either through a revised entry or deletion of the entry. Epastreich (talk) 01:36, 7 May 2011 (UTC)


 * You should be directing your comments to the deletion discussion, but be sure to disclose your potential conflict of interest when doing so after you have read the COI guidelines I referred you to earlier. That discussion can be found here:  Articles_for_deletion/Emanuel_Pastreich ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 01:43, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Your recent AfD nominations of mathematicians
Hi: It may be helpful to you to read WP:PROF, and familiarize yourself with the standards contained therein, particularly regarding citations and the like. It would save us at AfD a good bit of time. Thanks, Ray  Talk 17:37, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note.ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 18:53, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

May 2011
Hi ConcernedVancouverite. Thank you for your work on patrolling new pages and tagging for speedy deletion. I'm just letting you know that I declined your deletion request for Wamiq, a page that you tagged for speedy deletion, because the criterion you used or the reason you gave does not cover this kind of page. Please take a moment to look at the suggested tasks for patrollers and review the criteria for speedy deletion. Particularly, the section covering non-criteria. Such pages are best tagged with proposed deletion, proposed deletion for biographies of living persons, or sent to the appropriate deletion discussion. Catfish Jim  &#38; the soapdish  18:44, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note. It seems it was deleted by another admin. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 03:33, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Internet Business Group
Query, While I am inclined to agree with A7. They have listed themselves on Bloomburg as a reference as being notable. Any reason other then that? Phearson (talk) 23:05, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I noticed that too. But that Bloomberg database is not something which establishes notability.  In fact, even trading on a stock exchange (which it does not appear this company does) doesn't automatically confer notability.  :)  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 23:07, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
 * P.S. And the article was just recently deleted for A7 at 00:44, 11 May 2011 and was hastily recreated. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 23:09, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
 * If you say so, I agree. Phearson (talk) 23:09, 11 May 2011 (UTC)


 * They were featured prominently on a Fox25 segment about reputation management, but I can't include the reference since YouTube references raise copyright concerns. I'd appreciate some clear-cut advice on how to solve this issue, other than finding every news reference out there and including it. And "hastily recreated"? I re-wrote the whole thing to try and make the article more objective and include references. I don't see anything in the guidelines about "hastily recreated" pages other than if the article is identical to the one deleted, which this one is not. It has been deliberately restructured to remove any subjectivity or self-promotion, with references included to notable mentions, although it seems the definition on "notable" differs from person to person. Rwelement24 (talk) 23:16, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
 * It likely would be best for you to move the discussion of the article to the talk page for the article, instead of my talk page. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 23:24, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Done, and apologies for blowing up your talk page :-) I'd appreciate a continuation of this discussion on the articles talk page. Rwelement24 (talk) 23:29, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Question
Hi ConcernedVancouverite. Can you please explain why you deleted the talk page on neutrality relating to the Ali Ezzatyar listing, as well as the comment you left (and I left)? Can you further describe how/why you decided to include that neutrality tag in the post? After reading through the guidelines, I still believe that tag is unsubstantiated. Also, as biographies were deleted per your request (Ali Ezzatyar and Michael Young), why is it that one such biography was deleted and the other kept, with no trace of the blanking of the latter article prior to deletion? The process seems a bit unfair, like selective editing and recording. Thank you for your time and patience. --Smallcoffee (talk) 09:14, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I am unclear what you are referring to - I did not delete any talk pages. The deletion discussion for the Ali Ezzatyar article can be found here:  Articles_for_deletion/Ali_Ezzatyar, and the Ali Ezzatyar article is still found here Ali Ezzatyar.  In terms of the article about Michael Young, it appears it was deleted by Gogo Dodo with an explanation that it was done as a speedy deletion as follows, "G7: One author who has requested deletion or blanked the page."  You may want to check with Gogo Dodo on that if you need further information, but it sounds like the original author of that page blanked it and as such it was speedily deleted. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 14:09, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
 * ConcernedVancouverite, you had left analysis that indicated that various contributors to the thread on its creativity were related to one another. I responded to that. I have the conversation copied; the exchange and the page itself no longer exist. I figured it was in both our interests for our views to be considered in discussion there, but I can no longer find the discussion. Any input on where I can find that again (besides the version I saved) would be appreciated. There are so many discussions that I believe I lost the location on that one. Thanks. --193.36.240.5 (talk) 19:29, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I am not clear what removed discussion you are talking about - unless you are also editing under the account Smallcoffee? If you are referring to the Smallcoffee sockpuppet case, it is still currently open:  Sockpuppet_investigations/Smallcoffee.  It would be best for you to continue your conversation on that topic there.ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 20:15, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Hello ConcernedVancouverite
I'm new to wikipedia and so I could use your help, I realize my acitivites have raised a few alarms with you and so I was hoping to open up a line of communication. My name's Chris, I'm originaly from Vancouver as you seem to be, Coincidently enough, and now live in Montreal. I'm confused as to why "Informaction" was deleted as an article and why the links were removed. Informaction is a prominent Documentary Production company here in Montreal, has won many awards and it's films are well known throughout Quebec. Also, can the links I put be considered spam, they are relevent to the films because Informaction is the production company of those films. As well, "East End Forever" is an award winning film here in Montreal and very important to the community. I've noticed that other Film production Companies exist on wikipedia so I'm wondering what makes a production company that is important in Quebec different then one that is important in the US for example. I am sincerely and respectfully asking for your input and also any advice you might have towards how Informaction and its films can be kept on wikipedia. Thanks -Chris Cswanz (talk) 21:00, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Welcome to Wikipedia. The article in question was recommended for speedy deletion because it made no claims of notability.  You can read the notability guidelines here to get an idea of what types of information would make a company be considered notable.  Keep in mind that to establish notability you must document such claims using references from reliable sources as well, and not from the company itself.  In terms of adding external links, I have provided you with a link to the external link guidelines on your talk page.  You can click that link to read up on them to better understand the norms on Wikipedia.  Welcome once again! ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 21:04, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry
sorry i keep messing up and you keep catching me haha. best regards N0+4dM1nFJ (talk) 21:02, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
 * You may want to read up on the Wikipedia welcome information available on your talk page so that you can contribute to the project. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 21:05, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

RE: Erewhon cereal
I'm brand new to editing and creating articles here on Wikipedia. I was wondering why my last article on the history of Erewhon organic cereal (one of the first organic food distributors in America) was flagged for speedy deletion? The initial article was not flagged until I tried to add their logo, then was immediately deleted. Unfortunately, I was not even finished adding references or citations to said article and image. Could this deletion be reconsidered or at least some explanation provided as to why it happened, please? Regards,Jrlittle83 (talk) 21:36, 12 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Welcome once again to Wikipedia. It has not yet been deleted, but has been recommended for speedy deletion because there were no claims of notability in the article.  If you disagree, please go ahead and do so quickly on the talk page of the article and suggest what claims of notability exist.  If the deletion goes through before you get a chance to, you can always ask the administration who deletes it to move it to your private userspace so you can work on improving the article to establish notability by citing reliable sources.  Good luck! ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 21:41, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Please note that the A7 criterion is not for making claims of a lack of notability in an article. That is reserved for the other deletion processes, PROD and AFD.  That distinction is important, as the cereal article does make a claim of importance/significance, which is all that is required for it not to be speedied under the A7 criterion.  I hope that makes sense - feel free to ask if you have further questions about this. Logan Talk Contributions 01:35, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your note. If you look at the history there was no such claim made when I nominated for speedy.  It was added later:   ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 02:19, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested: Erewhon Organic Cereal
Hello ConcernedVancouverite. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Erewhon Organic Cereal, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you. Logan Talk Contributions 01:32, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your note - I'm well aware of the A7 rules. If you look at the history there was no such claim made when I nominated for speedy.  It was added later:   ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 02:20, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Don't nominate notable people for deletion
thanks. Flying Fische (talk) 21:21, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your note. If you are referring to the Florence Peake article, there are no claims of notability made in the article, as notability can not be inherited. If you disagree with the speedy, instead of continually removing the maintenance template, click on the contest button and make a case for notability on the talk page. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 21:26, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 07:49, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Your speedy deletion nomination, Ends & Whites, 15 May 2011 7:20pm
Dear Sir, if this is a speedy deletion, please would you advice how main agencies such as Jones Lang LaSalle are permitted an entry? Best regards. Yours faithfully. —Preceding unsigned comment added by WebAdministrator2011 (talk • contribs) 18:40, 15 May 2011 (UTC)


 * I assume you are referring to the article Ends_and_Whites? The article does not make any claims that the organization is notable.  I am not familiar with the other articles you reference, but if they also do not contain any notability claims you should perhaps nominate them for deletion as well - but that is an entirely separate issue.  Each article on Wikipedia is evaluated on its own. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 18:43, 15 May 2011 (UTC)


 * 20:06 BST 15 May 2011 : Sir, organisations become notable through self promotion. Please would you confirm your status? If you speedy delete self promotion, yet do nothing about a main agency posted since 2009, your motives should be questioned and your ability to edit on this source reviewed. Yours faithfully. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.242.83.178 (talk) 19:09, 15 May 2011 (UTC)


 * I am not following your point. Organizations which have reliable sources that write about them to establish notability can be the subject of articles on Wikipedia.  Organizations which do not, can not.  If you feel another article is written about an organization which is not notable, then please by all means bring that up on the appropriate article discussion page. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 19:14, 15 May 2011 (UTC)


 * 20:17 BST 15 May 2011 : Sir, the entry is a reliable source. The entry is based on a source from a globally regulated profession. What is your status to challenge? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.96.219.250 (talk) 19:18, 15 May 2011 (UTC)


 * I encourage you to read the Wikipedia entry and what sources are considered reliabe: WP:RS.  If you feel the article was deleted by an administrator by mistake, then by all means please raise it with the deleting administrator.  Best of luck. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 19:22, 15 May 2011 (UTC)


 * 20:26 BST 15 May 2011 : Sir, the source is reliable. The source is from a globally regulated profession. By allowing a main agency a presence since 2009 and by speedy deleting a self promoting organisation, you may wish to consider competition law. Best regards. Yours faithfully. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.96.219.250 (talk) 19:29, 15 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Which source? I just reviewed the deleted text of the Ends and Whites and it cited no sources, other than a link to the company's own website. Sorry for jumping in, but this administrator agrees with ConcernedVancouverite's tagging of the article and its subsequent deletion, not only for the identified criterion (A7, no assertion of significance), but also under two other criteria—G11, blatant advertising, and G12, copyright infringement—both ultimately arising from the lifting of text from the E&W website to Wikipedia. —C.Fred (talk) 20:12, 15 May 2011 (UTC)


 * 22:16 GMT 15 May 2011 : Dear Sir, Thank you very much for your comments. A main agency gains a huge advantage by its presence based on notability, and by the deletion of a little agency. A self promoting little organisation embraces the spirit of competitin lw. There could be a copyright matter if the author of the artice is not the author of the source. The main agency's presence could be considered is blatant advertising. Thank you again very much for your comments. Yours faithfully. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.242.94.14 (talk) 22:16, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is really not an appropriate venue to gain competitive edge through promotion - regardless of the size of the organization. You may find this a useful read:  WP:PROMOTION.  It also sounds as if you are suggesting that you share authorship with both the account Webadministrator2011 and the author of the E&K website based upon this comment, "...if the author of the article is not the author of the source."  If this is the case, then you may want to read over the Conflict of Interest policy as well:  Coi. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 22:22, 15 May 2011 (UTC)


 * 22:31 GMT 15 May 2011 : Sir, in line with that, agencies would not have a presence based on notability or on any other basis. However there is a main agency with presence since 2009. The continued argument you propose would need to be in keeping with the spirit of competition which it may not be. The conflict of interest policy only applies if there is a conflict of interest. If such policy is to be proposed as a basis for deletion, the considerations of the policy would be applied. Webadministrator2011 is updated to another user name due to inconsistencies with administrators of this site. Yours faithfully.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.242.94.14 (talk) 22:31, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
 * It sounds as if you have not had a chance to read the links provided above which give very clear guidance on how to establish the necessary citations to demonstrate notability for the subject of an article. I should also note that I was not suggesting conflict of interest was the reason for deletion, I was just drawing your attention to the conflict of interest policy as based upon your statement it sounded as if you may have a potential conflict of interest.  Once you have read those materials over if you have issues or suggestions about Wikipedia policies, I suggest you take them up on another venue than my personal talk page, as I do not personally have the power to make changes to those policies as they are the result of user input and discussion in appropriate venues (not on a single editor's talk page).  Best of luck with resolving your issues to your satisfaction. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 22:40, 15 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Subjects may have articles on Wikipedia if they meet the notability criteria. That may skew in favour of larger agencies simply because they've been around longer and have more opportunities to be written about in reliable sources. However, because articles are written from neutral point of view, that exposes the larger agencies to more opportunities to have negative information about them. Conflict of interest, in an of itself, is not a reason to delete an article. However, the user with a conflict must be very careful to write the article neutrally, lest it be deemed promotional. —C.Fred (talk) 22:37, 15 May 2011 (UTC)


 * 22:53 GMT 15 May 2011 : Sirs, the richest source for citation is the author. The citation matter would need to be satisfied by adding the authorship. Citation would therefore no longer be an issue if authorship is added. Gratitude to you for this point. There still appears to be inconsistency in the argument that a main agency with notability can have presence whilst a self promoting agency cannot. The argument does not appear to embrace competitin, albeit that this is not a place for competiton, although it may in instances unintentionally have become so. The conflict of interest matter is open to criticism however the basis for the presence of a main agency would need to be fully considered by applying the same arguments. There are many areas for criticism, however since a self promoting agency entering an article is not wanted here evidently by immediate speedy deletion, there is no further need for any resourcefulness on this thread. Thank you Sirs for your considerations. Yours faithfully. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.242.94.14 (talk) 22:53, 15 May 2011 (UTC)


 * I am happy to hear that you have heard the message that Wikipedia is not a venue for self-promotion. Best of luck pursuing your promotion using means other than Wikipedia.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 22:56, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

inre Articles for deletion/Investigating Tarzan
Perhaps you might wish to revisit the article. Some of us others had far better luck in our research into sources. As what you first nominated has become THIS, I might ask that you even consider a withdrawal. Best,  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 11:11, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the note. I've responded on the AfD. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 15:44, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
 * And thank you for the withdrawal. Sometimes with my google-foo I get lucky. Best,  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 19:38, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Crunchy Black
Hello ConcernedVancouverite. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Crunchy Black, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: '''As a member of a notable group, he passes the criteria for A7. AfD might be a better idea.''' Thank you. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 21:53, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the note. I've gone ahead as you suggested and opened the AfD. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 22:14, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
 * As you may have guessed by the ugly bolding, it's all userscripts ;) Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 18:05, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

BLP prod of Sir Ralph Wedgwood, 4th Baronet and Anthony Galsworthy
I have removed the BLP prod tags you placed on Sir Ralph Wedgwood, 4th Baronet and Anthony Galsworthy, as per policy the BLP prod tag can only be added to an article if it "[contains] no sources, whether reliable or not, and in any form (references, external links, etc.), which support any statements made about the person in the biography" (emphasis mine). Both articles had at least one source, albeit unreliable, at the time you tagged them, and in fact someone had removed a tag from the Galsworthy article at the time you tagged it. Compliance with policy is the only reason I did this; I have no prejudice against opening a regular prod or AfD for either of these articles. &mdash; KuyaBriBri Talk 19:01, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note. I had always read the policy as requiring reliable sources.  But I see the details further down now that say any sources. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 19:04, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Daniel Torre
I added some references to the Daniel Torre article you put for deletion. The user who made the article is most likely the actual player. Spongie555 (talk) 03:33, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I've removed the BLPPROD. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 04:03, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Show some more judgement, please
Tagging George Taylor (botanist) as of questionable notability isn't very helpful. He was a Fellow of the Royal Society, knighted, and director of Kew Gardens. See his obituary in The Independent. It's no wonder Flying Fische is getting annoyed. Fences &amp;  Windows  22:42, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your note. I will not comment on another editor's motivations for their behaviours as I think that is inappropriate to do and would only be a guess without a thorough understanding of the individual, their life, their stress sources, life challenges, and their passions.  I prefer to focus on the content of the article when discussing tags and citations.  The article, as written when I added the notability tag, was citing only two sources, one of which was  original research, and the other of which was a source which relies on self-provided data.  The obituary which you refer to was not in the article, if it was, I would have not applied the notability tag.  I have now added a reference to the obit, which is in fact a reliable source and not a self-reported source or original research and the tag no longer applies.  Without having applied that tag, I imagine that obituary would not have been discovered and subsequently added to the article, and the article would have remained questionable sourced.ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 23:47, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Question
I'm sorry,but I have to ask you,why did you change Peter Falk's ethnicity back to Polish?His great-grandfather,Miksa Falk was Hungarian,born and raised there.It's even on Peter Falk's page right after his ethnicity.So that makes him part Hungarian also.How is that Polish?Even if he was part Polish the info on his ethnicity is FALSE.Then he isn't JUST Polish and Russian.This needs to be cleared up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.184.135.148 (talk) 05:26, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Peter Falk
Here is the link from imdb's site.I believe they're more accurate regarding to Peter Falk's ethnicity than people who keep changing his Wikipedia profile and misleading people. http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000393/bio
 * IMDB is not considered a reliable source as it is user generated. I changed it to what the article that is cited  states. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 15:06, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Barbara Morgan, Willard D Morgan
Hello, we are trying to very carefully keep the whole wiki completely documented as there is an abundance of material. I am having a copy editor at work review, and make some suggestions for us. If you have any specific suggestions we would be happy to receive the criticism. I am rathe a new user, and didn't know about tag issues. Sorry for the error. Nils —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nmorgan65 (talk • contribs) 16:08, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what you mean by "we" exactly. Are there a group of you editing the Morgan articles?  Do you have an affiliation with the subjects other than sharing a last name?  My biggest suggestion would be to read over the conflict of interest guidelines and be very careful to follow them. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 17:05, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

I am affiliated through genes. They are my grandparents. My cousin and I were adding material to recognize areas not originally in the earlier Barbara Morgan Wiki, that have been widely published, and to create a base wiki for Willard Morgan, as the levels of public, and published recognition continues to grow. We are being very careful to have complete attribution. Again, I am going to have a non family member at work review, and make suggestions based on guidelines. We certainly look forward to potential additional facts being added through the wiki public process. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nmorgan65 (talk • contribs) 18:09, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Re: "Question about using TW to report sockpuppets"
I don't use TW, so this is only an assumption on my part, but is you know (or think you know) the account is a sock, then realistically, you know who it's a sock of. Perhaps you should use the name of the person whose sockpuppet it is as the first entry, instead of the name of the sock.

Just a thought, but it makes sense. Half Shadow  16:09, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the reply. I should clarify the question.  It is a technical question about how to use Twinkle to report socks correctly, as twinkle seems to only ask for a list of the socks, but then it takes the first one and lists it twice.  May I ask what tool you use to report socks if you don't use TW?  Perhaps there is a better/easier way?  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 17:07, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't know; I don't use tools, I do my work 'by hand', so to speak, and have done maybe a handful of reports in my time here. Someone else could give a far better answer than me, this is simply a drive-by assist. I freely admit I have no experience with TW. Half  Shadow  18:53, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for trying! ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 20:16, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm mostly a vandal-tosser; in situation in which I'm moderately sure a sock is being used, I bring it to the attention of any admin who may be personally involved, or I may bring it to AN/I in especially extreme cases, but I'm mostly grunt work. Half  Shadow  20:25, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Deletion
An article you created, Granville Island Water Taxi Services is currently up for up for deletion discussion. Hooper (talk) 03:39, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Template Abuse
Claiming vandalism in a edit summary should be refrained from. Remember to Assume Good Faith in editors. Hooper (talk) 03:42, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
 * If you are talking about how he labeled his reversions of your removal of the speedy tag from the ogres article, I don't see anything wrong with it.  I think it's perfectly fair to call someone editwarring to remove a speedy tag from an article they created themselves vandalism.  You are also wrong that it should be refrained from in general - Twinkle, Huggle, and a number of other tools have prefilled buttons for labeling stuff as vandalism, presumably if it was categorically inappropriate to label edits as vandalism they would not have such.  Take a look at WP:AAGF, and stop being so WP:POINTy.  Kevin (talk) 06:02, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Gunnah Mollah
Thanks for the heads up, I've revised the article and removed the deletion template.  JRA _ Westy Qld2  Talk 08:04, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I figured you would want to know since you weren't notified by the person who placed the tag. Glad you were able to find additional sources and improve the citations.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 15:27, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Dr. Enuf
I don't understand how Dr. Enuf's official Facebook page is a non-reliable source. It's Dr. Enuf's page. That's where they primarily communicate with their customers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.132.128.220 (talk) 16:15, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Since FB is an unreliable source, I also expect to see you removing the FB link from Sarah Palin's page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.132.128.220 (talk) 16:24, 29 May 2011 (UTC)


 * You may find this useful to address your question: Verifiability.  Generally to establish notability for a claim you need to find secondary reliable sources.  If the claim that the product can be found in Cracker Barrel stores is notable, then you should be able to find reports of it in reliable secondary news media sources.  If not, even if it is announced on an official website for a company it would amount to original research.  Additionally part of the reversion you are questioning removed links to a third party website starting with the words "wheretofind" per WP:SPAMLINKS.  With regard to your question about Sarah Palin's page, I have not reviewed her page.  But you may want to review WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS.  If you find a problem with the Sarah Palin page, then by all means go ahead and edit it appropriately. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 17:25, 29 May 2011 (UTC)


 * I don't have any problem with Sarah Palin's FB link. It's her official FB page.  Just as what I linked to was Dr. Enuf's official FB page.  What I posted, that Dr. Enuf was being distributed by Cracker Barrel stores, is fact and was mentioned by Dr. Enuf on their official Dr. Enuf Facebook page.  I have no idea why that would be considered unreliable.  If Pepsi remarked on their FB page that they're now distributing their product by Rite-Aid stores, how would that be unreliable?


 * I understand how wheretofind is considered spam. Thanks for clarifying.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.132.128.220 (talk) 18:16, 29 May 2011 (UTC)


 * As I mentioned above, even if they announced it on an official webpage, for it to be notable enough of a claim to be included on the article there would be reports of it in a reliable secondary news media source. Otherwise it is just daily operating information for a company, which is not necessary in an encyclopedia article. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 20:19, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 22:52, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Marginally contested speedy
Hi, I declined the speedy on Laurie Bartram, but only just... the article didn't say as much, but she had a fairly high profile role in the original film version of Friday the 13th. Cheers,  Catfish  Jim  (ex-soapdish)  17:56, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for letting me know. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 19:09, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Damon Giglio
Hi Concerned Vancouverite, RE: Damon Giglio I see my article on Damon Giglio has been nominated for deletion. I was correcting and editing today,that were reccommended by other wiki editors, but my changes could not go through I think as somebody was on the page nominating it for deletion. I feel Damon Giglio is noteworthy because he was founder of the largest online real estate company in 2005 and through him managed to change the laws on how internet companies could do business. Quite an important law these days. I can not seem to update the file anymore. Please let me know what I have to do to continue my writin? Thanks very much, AlanAlanHoes (talk) 20:17, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I just looked at the article and it seems open to editing, so I'm not sure what difficulty you are having. In terms of the article itself, based upon what you have written here perhaps the company is notable.  But notability is WP:NOTINHERITED, so you would need to provide reliable source coverage of him as an individual, not information about the company he founded. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 23:19, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

CSD notification
The page Margarita Agibalova looks like it may be a valid CSD, but I prefer not to delete a page unless the creator has been notified. I understand that sometimes automated tools fail to do the notification for some reason. Not sure if that was the case, but could you make the notification? SPhilbrick T  21:16, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note. The editor was notified when I placed the CSD tag:  . ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 23:15, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Very strange. I'd swear it wasn't there when I looked; in fact I poked about and found the PROD, but didn't see a CSD notice. It has been a long day, and there are a lot of notices on that page, maybe I just missed it. Sorry for the request.-- SPhilbrick  T  23:21, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * No worries! ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 23:22, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Just as an FYI, a current candidate for admin is catching some flack for multiple simultaneous PRODS. I don't think the argument is that it is against the rules, just that it might not be the best way to address the problem. One person suggested that one PROD, plus a bullet list of the rest would be less "in your face". I agree. If you agree, would you consider amending the recent notifications to TatyanaR. Alternatively, would you object if I make the change?--  SPhilbrick  T  23:37, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I can understand the logic of doing that if the PRODs were all with the same concern. But the series of PRODs there cover slightly different issues, so I'm not sure how a list would be able to present it cleanly.  I'm open to your suggestion for the future when PRODs for articles by a single editor are all around the same issue.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 23:46, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I noticed that the PRODS have differing reasons. However, many of the CSDs are identical - A7. I'm being bold and trying something. Tell me if you object. There are far more CSDs, so I grouped 19 of them. Not as many Prods as I thought, so I won't touch them.-- SPhilbrick  T  23:59, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * That certainly works! Now if only the automated tools could do that when they notice you've added a second CSD of the same category to make the quality control work more streamlined!  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 00:07, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I like that idea. Might be tricky to implement correctly, but I bet it could be done.-- SPhilbrick  T  01:14, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Yulia Rumyantseva
Hello, I declined to speedily delete this as it asserts significance, a lower standard than notability, w/ "editor and film producer". Cheers, and happy editing. Dloh cierekim
 * Thank you for letting me know. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 01:24, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

The Dirty Martini Duo
so this was a learning experience for me. Lacking WP:RS we put the BLP Prod right back on there. Cheers, Dloh  cierekim  03:29, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, I was following that, seems like a long path. Hopefully someone either finds sources for it, or the prod gets completed without being removed again.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 03:38, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Jorge Camil Starr
thanks for getting the ones I missed. Also, I new there was a word I was looking for. Dloh cierekim  15:13, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * No worries! ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 15:14, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Contested speedy deletion: Nappier DJ Nate Thomas
I contested the A10 speedy deletion tag you placed on Nappier DJ Nate Thomas, as it fails the "recently created" criterion (it's over 2 years old) and does not appear to duplicate the Just Blaze article to the point that it "does not expand upon, detail, or improve information" about that article. A10 is mainly for articles whose entire content is copied and pasted from another article and where the new article is not a plausible redirect to the "from" article. Another acceptable use of A10 is when an article is copied into a new title and all mentions of the original subject are replaced with mentions of the new subject, for example, copying the article Blue to a new article called Vancouver green and replacing all mentions of "blue" with "Vancouver green". &mdash; KuyaBriBri Talk 16:04, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Um, that is exactly what the article is. It is a copied article from Just Blaze that appears to be a hoax.  It just wasn't caught when originally written because the editor who reported it was using an Anon IP.  It is at AfD now and people are recommending speedy deletion actually based upon the hoax angle.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 17:08, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Consider me WP:TROUTed. I didn't dig far back enough in the history of Just to see that you are exactly right on the copy-paste count. And if A10 was around in March 2009 and you had caught it then, it absolutely would have applied. But as it stands today it still fails the "recently created" criterion of A10. I fully support a G3 speedy deletion as blatant hoax and will post diffs on the AfD shortly. &mdash; KuyaBriBri Talk 18:34, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 19:21, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion converted to PROD: Derty sesh
Hello ConcernedVancouverite. I am just letting you know that I have converted the speedy deletion tag that you placed on Derty sesh to a proposed deletion tag, because I do not believe CSD applies to the page in question. Thank you.  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 00:07, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for letting me know. But it appears that it was deleted by another administrator already without waiting for the expiration of the PROD.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 03:03, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Altered speedy deletion rationale: Dat Good
Hello ConcernedVancouverite. I am just letting you know that I deleted Dat Good, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you.  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 03:27, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for letting me know. It had struck me that the portion of A3 that reads, "This also applies to articles consisting entirely of the framework of the Article wizard with no additional content beyond the above." applied.  But G2 works too.  Thanks.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 03:29, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

City Models
Dear Vancouverite, can you please explain me the resaon why you commented the page created for city models as there was no page on this major agency which contrubuted to the development of a new form or model management in france ? do you have any comment on the content ? i checked several pages of model agencies and it seems to be strictly conform to all of them tahnk you ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikilawrenceolivier (talk • contribs) 17:19, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Dear vancouverite i do not know how to do the page i created was delted without any reason and i dont know how to recereate it it seems there is an issue i cannot understand in this article can you please comment the content that was deleted and improve it if necessary ? there is no page for several major agencies models like carla bruni elle mc pherson or some other as big justify an article and each time ist s deleted can you recereate th page and amend content if necessary ? thank you in advance ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikilawrenceolivier (talk • contribs) 17:38, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Hello I rewrote the page and left it in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Wikilawrenceolivier/City_models a draft space please have a look and comment if needed so we avoid this useless deletion process after this i ll write the missing pages for the major agencies worldwide there are many missing ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikilawrenceolivier (talk • contribs) 18:07, 9 June 2011 (UTC)


 * The page was speedy deleted because it was written in an advertising like tone. Wikipedia is not a place for advertising.  You can read over the guidelines on how to write a good Wikipedia article here:  How_to_write_a_great_article.  Please also read over the guidelines on notability and learn how to include references to reliable sources to confirm any claims of notability.  Please note that representing famous people does not create notability, as notability is WP:NOTINHERITED.  If you need help re-writing, or advice on an article in your userspace, please place an editor assistance request using the following:  Editor_assistance.  Best of luck.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 21:41, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Tagging Jorge Camil Starr
I understand the reason that you placed 6 tags on the Jorge Camil Starr article, but I've removed two of them because they overlap with other more specific tags. I've done this to satisfy the policy on overtagging which suggests that 6 tags is excessive, especially when some of them are closely related. --Mrmatiko (talk) 18:24, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * It appears multiple editors added tags around the same time. Thank you for consolidating them into a single listing.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 21:35, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Cold Rock Ice Creamery
Hey, seeing as you've taken an interest in this article, would you like to help and edit and bring up to par? Also, what's the problem with this reference (other than the formatting and lack of in-text stuff) - http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-3189769/Cold-Rock-Ice-Creamery-grows.html ? I didn't understand your reason for the edit, "References: removing citations that were passing references, or behind paywals". P.S - I love your 'dated info' tag in the history section. Tinkstar1985 17:31, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The issue with that reference is that it is behind a paywall so it can not be read by users without registering. We tend to avoid those.  If this is such a large chain there should be much better secondary reliable sources available in mainstream news outlets. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 17:49, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion converted to PROD: Adhyapakar Ariyan
Hello ConcernedVancouverite. I am just letting you know that I have converted the speedy deletion tag that you placed on Adhyapakar Ariyan to a proposed deletion tag, because I do not believe CSD applies to the page in question - A7 doesn't apply to books. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 16:05, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the heads up. Agreed.  I just modified the speedy I placed on the other article created, and notice the original article which these both duplicate has already been deleted by you:  SANGEETH-THE TEENAGE NOVELIST ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 16:07, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, all three basically identical. His own article had an impressive ref list, but it was copied from this article. An enterprising youth; I've pointed him to WP:AUTO and WP:COI, but for form's sake we'd better do the book articles by PROD. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 17:48, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Sounds fine by me. Thank you for handling the conversion and pointing him to more guidance.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 18:07, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Text Marketing
Hello,

I'm new to Wikipedia and while I understood the issue with regard to the links to our site (I had already removed them) I don't currently understand how our post is in violation. Please help me understand what is still needing to be corrected.

Thanks.

Paul Faherty — Preceding unsigned comment added by Text2vip (talk • contribs) 18:16, 12 June 2011 (UTC)


 * You may want to read over the following to give you a handle of what is acceptable on Wikipedia: conflict of interest, and neologisms.  Basically you should not write about a term that is primarily used to promote your own company.  If you can find reliable source coverage that is written ABOUT the term, not just using it, then perhaps it can have its own article (without links to your company of course).  But otherwise it just doesn't warrant an article.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 18:53, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
 * P.S. It appears there is also already a direct article on this Text_message_marketing but that also suffers from the same issues, and I have nominated it for deletion.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 18:58, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Hockey
Go Canucks! --Camoboots11 (talk) 02:32, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Um, thanks? ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 03:21, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:08, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Syndicate (producer)
Hello ConcernedVancouverite. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Syndicate (producer), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you. Salvio Let's talk about it! 13:26, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the note. Out of curiosity, what did you read as a credible claim of notability?  The only claims I saw there were by association with famous people, which seemed like WP:NOTINHERITED.  But you saw something else.  What was it?  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 14:38, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I saw no claim of notability, actually; I saw (unsourced) claims of importance, which are the ones you correctly identify as WP:NOTINHERITED, which, however, were enough, in my opinion, to "protect" this article from a speedy deletion under A7. Let's call it a reprieve: had the article not been an unsourced BLP, I'd have prodded it... Salvio  Let's talk about it! 14:46, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for clarifying your reasoning. I had no idea that inherited claims were enough to pass speedy.  Thanks for the explanation of your reasoning.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 14:51, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, A7 is about importance and not notability, so, sometimes, claims falling under WP:INHERITED can be enough to save an article; not always, of course: someone's son or pet, for instance, if not otherwise significant, will certainly be speedied. It's more of a case-by-case call... Salvio  Let's talk about it! 15:19, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Pages you want to delete, but probably won't because I contest them
Hi. Why is it that all of a sudden you are marking pages for deletion that I have created, some recent and some that are several months old that have not been marked before for deletion? Tinton5 (talk) 21:18, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I have explained the rationale for all proposed deletions on the individual pages. Generally subjects need to be notable as documented in reliable secondary sources to have articles on Wikipedia.  For those that are not, and for which I can not find evidence of such reliable sources, I propose deletion and explain it as such on each proposal. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 21:22, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.   Thank you. Tinton5 (talk) 22:07, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for notifying me. I have commented there. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 22:32, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Delete article
I just want the article removed, I'm not sure how to send a private message on Wikipedia is it even possible? Thanks.--Jimmyson1991 (talk) 23:33, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I see that speedy deletion has already been requested. It should be handled shortly.  Private messages are only possible if a user has agreed to be e-mailed.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 23:37, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Les Twins
Hello,

I am the person who wrote the article for Les Twins, the dance duo, an article on which you made many many major corrections. In one of your comments, you mentioned that the article on Les Twins might be a fanpage or something like that. I truly want you to know that yes, I like Les Twins, but I am not an obsessed fan. I put hours and hours into writing that article because it had to be made, and I can assure you that every single line I wrote in that article is a fact. Apart from what I already knew, I checked numerous websites to confirm these, and all validated these notions. You also deleted the entire "Appearance" section, claiming that no evidence was provided that these were notable. I mean no offence, truly, but you must not be very familiar with Les Twins. They are very popular and notable dancers in many countries, and all the mentioned "Appearances" were noteworthy, in particular winning the Juste Debout international competition this year, appearing on Ellen DeGeneres and, as you may or may not have heard, they a currently touring with Beyonce. I think that is a significant appearance, don't you?

I noticed that you are an important member of Wikipedia (unless I am mistaken, but that's what it seems like), so I just wanted to make clear that the article I wrote was very time consuming and I checked every bit of information to confirm. Whole sections that you deleted were based upon multiple interviews of Les Twins. I now edited the article to its original state, and I hope that you can leave it as such. Minor edits are normal, of course, but deleting entire sections based on your own opinion of what is or is not noteworthy seems a bit unfair.

I hope I didn't come off as rude, that was not the intended tone. It's simply hard to convey the desired tone by writing. If you have any questions about this or about anything concerning Les Twins, please feel free to contact me.

Sincerely, ImDaBoss3000 — Preceding unsigned comment added by ImDaBoss3000 (talk • contribs) 00:37, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your note. Actually the changes you placed back into the article were not appropriate, and I have reverted them.  You re-added a ton of links that do not conform with the external linking policies.  See WP:ELNO for more details.  Basically you can not add claims of notability which are based upon your own interviews, or interviews of the subject of the article.  Those constitute original research and are not acceptable unless confirmed in reliable secondary sources.  Please review the links I have just provided you regarding external links, original research, and secondary sources.  Additionally, please review notability for details on what constitutes notability on Wikipedia.  Thank you!  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 03:26, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Royal Flush Magazine
Is it fixed sufficiently? I am a fan of the mag and wanted it to be done right... — Preceding unsigned comment added by JaneSane (talk • contribs) 13:19, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your efforts on improving the article. There are still a lot of issues with the article, and the tags should remain in place until it is fully addressed.  The tags will help other editors find the article and help you to improve it.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 15:31, 13 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Can you be specific about the issues so they can be fixed? I hate when Wikipedia just says there are issues and dont let you fix them...  I believe I took out all the "peacocking" which i found when people talked about the mag so i thought id use it.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by JaneSane (talk • contribs) 20:57, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I am confused as to what you mean that Wikipedia doesn't let you fix the issues? Feel free to edit the article and make improvements.  That is how the process works.  To clarify a bit more, the tone of the article still has promotional feel to it.  There are still expressions such as "for years now" which are just too generic and ambiguous.  The article still contains a lot of information that is not particularly notable or relevant.  The article still has claims which are unsupported about what it is "known for", etc.  I hope that clarifies things a bit for you, so that you can help clarify the content of the article.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 19:01, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Deleted page VIRTVS ANTIQVA
Helo, I've been trying to create a page on a non-profit reenactment group VIRTVS ANTIQVA and it has been deleted. First, I would like a copy, and second, I've seen a category Historical reenactment groups. Should all of them be deleted according to the guidelines? I believe the presentation of such groups is of relevance due to their educational and non-profit profile. VIRTVS ANTIQVA is the only such association in Romania dealing with reenactment of gladiatorial fights and I did place an emphasis on the sources is uses, presenting data on amphitheaters and gladiators in the Roman province of Dacia. Is it acceptable to present our creations, that is our two free online specialized periodicals? Thank you, Claudiapulchra (talk) 06:28, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * You can request a copy of deleted materials from whichever admin has deleted them. You can find that record by looking at the log file for the article in question.  In terms of if those other articles should exist, it honestly is not clear.  I have not taken a careful look at them, but a cursory look suggests many do not meet the criteria for inclusion.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 18:56, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Question regarding New Jersey, USA synagogues

 * Hi ConcernedVancouverite: As your user name openly indicates and as you declare about yourself on your user page that "I am a concerned Vancouver citizen with a strong interest in local politics" would you care to clarify why you have chosen to nominate for deletion not one but three articles about synagogues located in New Jersey in the USA? Why did you stop at only these three synagogues, maybe you should also nominate basically every synagogue included in the parent categories of the articles you nominated for deletion, as there are at least 130 Reform Judaism synagogues in Category:Reform synagogues in the United States and at least 65 Conservative Judaism synagogues in Category:Conservative synagogues in the United States. What's Up, Doc? IZAK (talk) 08:48, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * See my comments regarding the above concerns at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Thank you, IZAK (talk) 09:20, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * As noted in my reply to the editor who initially asked about this question, I have explained the deletion rationale on each article as I nominated them for deletion. I'd also like to point you to the responses by two Wikipedia Administrators to your activity/questions regarding this issue so you can better understand how good quality control editing is conducted on Wikipedia:   notes, "If someone notices that a person has created an article that may not meet our guidelines, it is normal to take it to Prod or AfD, and to check if other articles by the same creator have the same problems. Nominating multiple, even many articles by the same creator for deletion is not hounding or harassment, but good editing, if the nominated articles (or at least a significant proportion of them) indeed fail our guidelines." and  which notes, "IZAK, throwing around accusations of hounding and harassment without just cause is not acceptable...I believe the person who needs to proceed with caution is yourself, your unfounded accusations can be considered personal attacks. Consider this a formal warning."  I hope that both my explanations, as well as the explanations of two administrators has helped you to understand how the quality control process works on Wikipedia.  Best of luck with your editing.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 18:54, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Two days late, but sharing the quote anyway
"Now if you're ever crossing This mighty bridge sublime And nineteen scarlet roses pass before your mind Remember and be kind The bridge came tumblin' down And nineteen men were drowned So you could ride to the other side Of old Vancouver town"

- Stompin' Tom Connors

Having seen your username a few months back, and since I'm a big fan of Stompin' Tom, I had made a point in my mind to share that song snippet here on the 17th; real life just kept me from getting online to do it then. (Now if real life could just let me get out there to see the bridge in person…) —C.Fred (talk) 15:39, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * It has been a difficult time in Vancouver recently, but your thoughts are much appreciated and thankfully things are slowly back on track here. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 18:55, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Speedy for animals!
Who knew? Cheers, 99.168.84.75 (talk) 03:03, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Definitely not me! Thank you for pointing it out.  Is that a recent change?  I don't recall that from the past.  It was needed, and very appropriate for the article in question.  Thank you for pointing it out!  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 03:05, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Perhaps--I don't recall it either, and only realized it when someone else applied it to the article's previous incarnation. Wikipedia evolves. 99.168.84.75 (talk) 03:06, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thankfully! I have had one or two articles I remember wanting a speedy criteria for animals to apply for - good that the policy now includes it (if it didn't before and it wasn't just me not realizing it).  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 03:08, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * You'll appreciate this one, which has lingered for several days . 99.168.84.75 (talk) 13:25, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh my..... ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 13:26, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Hanan Kattan
I have removed the prod tag you placed on Hanan Kattan, as per policy an article that has been discussed at AfD and kept is permanently ineligible for prod. This is true regardless of what you think of the merits of the "keep" arguments in that discussion, as the mere presence of "keep" arguments – whether or not they are within policy – indicate that deletion is not uncontroversial. I took this action solely to comply with policy; please do not interpret it as my endorsement for keeping the article. Feel free to open another AfD. &mdash; KuyaBriBri Talk 16:49, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Michael Lissack
This is Michael Lissack. Please stop re-editing the text re the harassment charges filed against me. I DID NOT plead guilty to any criminal charge and yet the language which you keep re-inserting suggests strongly to a reader that that is exactly what I did. I pled guilty to a civil violation (which under NY State law - the link to which I provided and you removed -- is the equivalent of a parking ticket. ) I was assessed $35 in court costs. No fine no nothing. The language you keep inserting suggests far worse. I regard your langauge as not only inaccurate but libelous, defamatory and harmful to me. (The discrepancy was raised TODAY in a job interview). Please stop. You are causing me hurt for no reason and you are NOT making the record more accurate but rather less so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.203.10.194 (talk) 17:14, 27 June 2011 (UTC) Please feel free to contact me at michael.lissack@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.203.10.194 (talk) 17:36, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your note. Wikipedia requires reliable sources to establish facts.  I moved the article closer to the language of the article.  If you can provide other reliable source articles which attest to the changes you are proposing, that would be helpful.  Thank you.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 21:06, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I see you have edited the article in question to now read, "Later in 1998, Lissack was arrested by the Manhattan District Attorney's office. He was charged with using the Internet to harass executives at Smith Barney by posting messages that solicited phone calls to the company's headquarters and, in some instances, to the homes of executives. He later pled guilty to the civil violation of second degree harassment and acknowledged that he sent phony harassing e-mail to Salomon Smith Barney employees." which seems to now be in line with the cited sources more directly. Thank you for making such a change and agreeing to move the article closer to what was reported in reliable sources.ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 22:57, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 17:32, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Shinca Entertainment
Hello ConcernedVancouverite. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Shinca Entertainment, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 cannot be applied to products. Thank you.  LongerTitanLegs LongerTitanLegs / talk &#124; contribs \ 04:01, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * It pretty clearly is not a product as it is a company. May I suggest you re-review the rules of speedy deletion prior to removing speedies with inaccurate reasons such as the one you gave here?  Thank you. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 15:22, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Sky Kids Channel
Hello ConcernedVancouverite. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Sky Kids Channel, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 cannot be applied to products. Thank you.  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 04:01, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for letting me know. It struck me that it was claiming to be an entertainment company and not a product.  But in any case, apparently it has been speedy deleted by another editor as being a hoax.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 15:22, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Neuttro
Regards ConcernedVancouverite: I was just wondering if the article need more Material for not be deleted (Neuttro). I'm working on it, because this is not a promotional thing, I think the band locally deserve to be known as one of the top acts in Rock in the Island. You can ask references to major artists and bands in Puerto Rico. Thanks a lot! Oxi — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mroxidizer1 (talk • contribs) 15:11, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the work you have done on it. The article still needs reliable sources to establish the various claims you have made in it.  Can you please provide the links to the actual newspaper articles in the article?  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 17:42, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for being polite. The radio "citations" was "aired" live, but I was witness on that. I help with other source and referneces that can help, all those references can confirm the existence and the information is accurate. I also use the "link" tag for some references that can be found here, internal links on wikipedia. Thanks! MrOxidizer1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mroxidizer1 (talk • contribs) 03:56, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Jeffery Tinsley
Re:Damon Giglio-- I am wondering why articles like Jeffrey Tinsley remain on Wikipedia. I think I understand why Damon Giglio was deleted, but I think there should be some consistency. This Jeffery Tinsley article does not not seem noteworthy. Can I vote to have it deleted in the editing box. Thank you for your helpAlanHoes (talk) 17:12, 30 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your note. I haven't looked over the article you are referring to, but if you feel it does not meet Wikipedia quality standards you should first try to determine if it can be improved and make those improvements by adding reliable sources to demonstrate notability.  If your effort to do that fails, then you can pursue an appropriate deletion option, which are detailed here WP:FAILN.  Good luck and enjoy your editing!  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 18:39, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:45, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Clean-up on Leon Daniel
Hi, I just did a great deal of clean-up on the Daniel page. Thanks for adding in the sources and finding additional ones, they were very good, and I think the article as it stands now is much stronger. I think what could be done next is to find whether any of his other stories are notable. I didn't cover his work in Cuba because I couldn't find much detailed coverage of it, unlike the Vietnam War and civil rights work. I, Jethrobot drop me a line 17:30, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I've been seeing your cleanup, and it is quite positive. I think the article is starting to shape up nicely.  I may spend some more time on sourcing for it, if I clear up some time to do it too.  Happy editing!  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 18:07, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Deletions on Patrice Evans Page
Hi,

I think some of the problem we might be having with this Patrice Evans Article is that much of the material you deleted refers to his writing under his *established* pseudonym, "The Assimilated Negro."

If I understand correctly, material referring to "Negropedia" can't be published until the book is actually in publication -- is that right? If so, I'm not contesting that and I (or someeone) will return to that information when the book is published.

However, the Gawker, Grantland, and all of the external references excluding those to Negropedia are, I believe, established reliable news sources that refer to The Assimilated Negro, Evan's writerly pseudonym. What can I do to rectify this?

The same issue with The Assimilated Negro.com -- does the site need to refer to Patrice Evans by name as the author to be admissable?

Thank you for your time.

Juliaclaret (talk) 23:11, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
 * There is no issue with those being his work. But the issue is that the work needs to be sourced in secondary reliable sources.  You may benefit from reading over the materials at:  WP:RS to get the details of what constitutes reliable sourcing.  Additionally the work on a book that is not yet published is too early to be written about on Wikipedia as it has not been established as a notable piece of work yet.  Good luck with your editing!  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 23:48, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Tribes (band)
Hello ConcernedVancouverite. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Tribes (band), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: '''Featuring on NME website and BBC introducing section is enough for A7. Take to AfD if necessary.''' Thank you. Ged UK  07:17, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for letting me know your view on it. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 14:07, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Pixarpedia
It was a good idea to change it from CSD to PROD; thanks for that.

It does seem to be some kind of book. Whether it is notable is another matter entirely; I don't know.

My only involvement, really, was that I saw the new page, and it looked a mess because the template was broken, etc.

Anyway - thanks for changing the CSD to PROD, that was very thoughtful. Best,  Chzz  ► 21:05, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * It had sounded like a webpage until you added the amazon link to clarify that. Still doesn't seem notable to me, but I suppose we will find out!  :)  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 21:09, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah; I googled it out of curiousity, and noticed Dorling Kindersley mentioned. They're a big publisher, so it might or might not pass notability (depending on if there are reviews out there). But, that's the point of not speedy deleting, to give a chance. Good stuff; thanks.  Chzz  ► 12:18, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

RFC/N discussion of the username "I Jethrobot"
A request for comment has been filed concerning the username of. You are invited to comment on the discussion here. I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 21:15, 18 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you for drawing my attention to it. I've commented there.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 21:42, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Regarding Vehix
Per your concern about speedy deletion of Vehix I have replied here. What do you think? - Inigopatinkin (talk) 16:30, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I'll respond there. Thanks for the heads up.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 16:49, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Leon Daniel
I'm a little confused. Does the scholarship require secondary sources to provide notability of the scholarship? The article isn't about the scholarship, it's about Daniel. I'm not sure why the scholarship needs to be notable all on its own for it to be included as factual information as a part of a notable subject. If it's the somewhat ego inflating quote "a legendary journalist and war correspondent of his era, and former United Press International Bureau Chief in London," that is bothersome, I can remove it. I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 16:57, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Basically we try to only include information about article subjects that is notable enough to have been covered in secondary sources. In this case, the scholarship is nice, and potentially may be notable, but normally for it to be included in an article about the person it was named after (the article's subject) it would need to be reported in a secondary source that the school initiated the scholarship.  Otherwise it generally is viewed as original research, which we normally do not include.ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 17:06, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Searching for this scholarship in secondary sources has been quite difficult. But I think I have found one that is acceptable:
 * Listing of the scholarship at the Downhold Project. The project's description is the following:
 * The Downhold Project is devoted to the independent collection and publication of historical information about international news agency United Press International, its divisions and predecessor companies by the people who once worked for them.
 * The website says that contributes to the website must fill this criteria:
 * If you once worked for United Press International or any of its successor companies, please submit your personal information.
 * To me, this seems sufficient as members of UPI are sufficiently independent of the university. I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 21:05, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
 * It is definitely borderline as you suggest, but adding the cite helps. Thank you for locating it!  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 22:22, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Antony Penrose
Can you please restore the page I created on Antony Penrose. I'm happy to add further information about why this subject deserves an entry in Wikipedia. Thanks. Patchen (talk) 08:34, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
 * You would need to contact the administrator who made the deletion: .  Please be sure to read over the notability guidelines before doing so, to ensure he meets those criteria.  Details:  WP:N.  Best of luck!  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 13:54, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 17:23, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

SAPS
SAPS is an historic institution within the history of the science fiction community. The author of the initial article is not an experienced Wikipedian, and did not realize how much context is necessary for mundanes to understand its meaning and place in SF history. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  02:51, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
 * It also needs a lot of improvement on the citations front to establish notability. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 03:24, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Not disputing that! -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  12:35, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Articles from Festival Circuit, Keanu Breeze
Dear Sir/Madam, I have received information of a possible Sockpuppetry allegation, which is alarming considering no illegitimate information has been created. The reason for three separate accounts from the same IP address is because we are a shared computer. In terms of the interest towards the filmmakers Benjamin Potter and Gregory Hughes, the two of them are young and upcoming writers who are creating an impact within several film communities. Their latest film Crossharbour is up for best short film at the 2011 Albuquerque Film Festival, as the reference indicated several times. Mr. Potter is also the recipient of the prestigious Dean's Award from the world-famous Conservatory of Theatre Arts & Film, as well as a writer of global commercials, a finalist at the 2007 PAGE International Screenwriting Awards, as well as a staff writer on an upcoming Travel Series. References were rightly given and then deleted for these achievements. Mr. Potter is also an NCAA golfer with an established track record of success. Again, the references pointed this out. If you could contact me back and remove such an allegation, it would be most appreciated. If there's one thing I value, it's integrity and I want nothing more than to help create accurate, reliable Wikipedia pages. Filmfestivalcircuit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Filmfestivalcircuit (talk • contribs) 21:38, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I would suggest that you place the information about you sharing a computer for all the accounts onto the sockpuppet case directly so other editors can have the benefit of your thoughts on the matter. Regarding the specifics of the individual articles, it is best for you to post your thoughts and/or concerns on the individual talk pages of those articles so other interested editors will be aware of your thoughts.  Regarding citations, I would strongly encourage you to review WP:RS which details what is considered a reliable source for Wikipedia.  Additionally, it sounds as if you may be related to the subject of those articles since several people sharing the same computer all have an interest in the articles, so I would also strongly encourage you to read over the conflict of interest information for Wikipedia to be sure you avoid any conflicts of interest in your collective editing.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 21:52, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Martha McCabe
Hello ConcernedVancouverite. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Martha McCabe, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Competing in the World Championships is enough to pass A7. Thank you. — G FOLEY   F OUR!  — 07:12, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your note. There was no claim of any success at the Commonwealth games though.  So I've gone ahead and PRODed it.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 15:51, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually, she won a bronze at the World Championships yesterday. — G FOLEY   F OUR!  — 18:42, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for that update. I've gone ahead and located a source reporting on that and added it to the article.ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 22:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Zu Klampen Verlag
Hello ConcernedVancouverite. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Zu Klampen Verlag, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: '''It's on the borderline, but the fact that it's won an award and has a de.wiki article makes me lean toward declining speedy deletion. Try PROD or AfD instead.''' Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 07:59, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the note. Looking over the German article there isn't much there either, which is why I nominated it originally.  I've gone ahead and PRODed it for now.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 15:53, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Digital Legacy
Hi, I created a page regarding Digtial Legacy and see you have added some concern, the page now displays "Please help to establish notability by adding reliable, secondary sources about the topic" I have read the guidelines and to be honest, I'm not quite sure what I need to do, I have added references and external links etc, but I guess thats not enough. I feel The topic of Digital Legacy is an important topic that is only going to grow in the public's awareness and should have a place within Wikipedia. Could you possibly guide me as to what needs to be done? Cheers Paul 09:40, 30 July 2011 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pagolding (talk • contribs)
 * Hi. You may find the writings at WP:NEO helpful.  Best of luck with your editing.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 16:15, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

USC SoundCheck
Hey Concerned Vancouverite, Please explain why you deleted the Wikipedia page I created. It follows guidelines and is about a student organization at the University of South Carolina. I am confused as to why this was deleted.BradyStephenson (talk) 15:40, 30 July 2011 (UTC) There are numerous other pages on Wikipedia about a cappella groups. Please undelete this. BradyStephenson (talk) 15:43, 30 July 2011 (UTC)


 * As noted in my original note to you when I nominated the page for deletion, CSD, which means that the page read as a promotional page instead of an encyclopedic one. A few notes for you:  1)  If you are affiliated with the group I suggest you read over WP:COI and avoid conflict of interest edits.  2)  Any subject requires notability to have an article on Wikipedia, so if you do not have a conflict of interest and plan to edit the article, please review the guidelines on establishing notability WP:N.  3)  Regarding your comment about other pages on wikipedia, please read over WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS, and if you find other pages which do not pass notability guidelines, please try to fix them or if they are not fixable then nominate them for deletion.  Best of luck with your editing.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 15:47, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Alvaro Torres-Calderón
I am sorry for the misunderstanding. I was editing the page about the poet Alvaro Torres-Calderón. I did not intend to create a war editing. Please, forgive my inexperience since this is my first article. Do not erase my contribution. Sincerely,(˜˜˜˜) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ilartiste (talk • contribs) 03:18, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your apology. I hope the links I provided you will help to get you started in editing following the Wikipedia norms.  Generally when several other experienced editors all correct your edits in a similar matter it is best to try and understand why, rather than just continuing to put the edit in question back without addressing all of their concerns.  Best of luck with your editing.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 14:11, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Antony Penrose
Can you please restore the page Antony Penrose, which has been deleted? Thanks Patchen (talk) 12:16, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
 * You would need to contact the administrator who deleted the page to make such a request: .  Best of luck with your editing.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 15:18, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Don E stevens
Hiii can you please give me the material I have included in the above article, before it got deleted. It took lots of effort from me to include all that material, I forgot to save it fro records. can you please message that material or revert it back from deletion, so that I can elaborate. What if in future I get all sources on this and wish to elaborate??? I am in the process of editing and without looking at discussion page of Don e stevens you may have speedy deletion it??? I am not happy (Dragonbooster4 (talk) 19:02, 6 August 2011 (UTC)).
 * You would need to contact the administrator who deleted the article to ask for a copy of that material. I do not have access to it.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 21:21, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Why thank you
Thanks, I feel very welcomed. Do you know anything that needs attending to? -- 67 23:18, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
 * There are literally thousands of things. Find the articles that are of interest to you, and try starting with those.  Keep in mind the various policies of Wikipedia to make sure your edits are in line with the spirit of the project.  Best of luck!  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 23:19, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the additional notification. If you could just tell me what a sockpuppet is. To tell the truth it sounds like something from sesame street, but that's obviously not what your going for right? -- 67 23:45, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Plenty of information available for you on the links provided. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 23:46, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Anyways, this is my username now, feel free to add me to the case if you want.TimeStandStill (talk) 00:46, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Brother HL-1250
Hello ConcernedVancouverite. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Brother HL-1250, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: '''Creator wants an AFD, and there's no real harm in giving him one. I read the nomination as more of a "neutral, but we should discuss this" than a "please delete" one.''' Thank you. Courcelles 23:49, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for letting me know your reasoning. If you have the time, please do visit the WP:AIV page listing regarding the same user posted by another editor.  Thank you.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 23:52, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing me that way, those edits may be a little promotional, but they're not vandalism. Courcelles 00:07, 7 August 2011 (UTC)