User talk:DGG/Archive 48 Jan. 2011

ARCHIVES

Reminders

Topical Archives:

BLP (Biographies of Living People)

Deletion reform, Speedies, Notability, Sourcing,

In Popular Culture, Fiction,  Bilateral relations.

Academic things & people, Journals,  Books & other publications,

General Archives:

2006: Sept-Dec 2007: Jan-Feb, Mar-Apr, May, Jun, Jul, Aug, Sep, Oct, Nov, Dec

2008: Jan,  Feb,  Mar,  Apr,  May, Jun,   Jul,   Aug, Sep, Oct,   Nov,   Dec

2009:  Jan,   Feb,   Mar,  Apr,   May,   Jun,   Jul,   Aug,   Sep,  Oct, Nov, Dec

2010: Jan, Feb, Mar, Apr, May , Jun ,   Jul,   Aug, Sep, Oct, Nov, Dec

2011: Jan, Feb, Mar, Apr, May , Jun ,   Jul,   Aug, Sep, Oct, Nov, Dec

Template search
An odd issue. A while ago, I started Cabinet of President Umaru Yar'Adua, then later moved the content (list of ministers) into a navbar template and left the article as just a holder for the template. I meant to get around to adding content to the article discussing the delays in cabinet formation, reshuffles and so on, but got distracted. The template-only version has now been nominated for deletion on the basis that an article that has no content other than a template is useless. My fault for being so slow the finish the job. There is plenty to say, and I will add it before AfD closure. I am not asking for comment on the AfD.

But is a template-only article useless? A search on "Yar'Adua Cabinet" will find the article, with the list of cabinet members embedded in the template. Without the shell article, the search would not find the list. This must have come up before. Should there be a way that templates can be found in search results? I have been slapped before for transcluding lists from articles into templates, and now am seeing the reverse problem. Not really in this case, because I can and should add explanatory text, but in general it seems that there are some types of list that make sense both as navbar templates and as articles. The list should show up in search results. Thoughts? Aymatth2 (talk) 02:56, 31 December 2010 (UTC)


 * a navbox template can be made into an article or series of articles more or less mechanically, just as  an infobox and an article are inter-covertable. In fact, the entire Wikipedia could be written as structured data, using the semantic wiki extension.   There are some of us who think this might be a good thing: it would permit the reassembly of the information into articles of different types by the users according to their needs, and might be much easier to write--it is considerably easier to fill in boxes than to write good prose--and our attempt at using descriptive prose contributed in bits and pieces by a varied group of contributors usually results  in very poor quality prose. Descriptive does not have to be imprecise and dull, but that requires   individual creativity.
 * but to return to the question. Just add the text, even if it merely repeats in sentences what is in the infobox. (What you aimed for, describing the political situation , is considerably more ambitious--it would be very good to have it, but it is not necessary. When people want\s something a certain hidebound way, it is often easier just to provide it.      DGG ( talk ) 05:02, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I like the semantic wiki concept, since it should be able to handle this and many other types of redundancy problems automatically. In this case, for example, the entry for Babatunde Omotoba says he was head of the Nigerian Federal Ministry of Aviation from 17 December 2008 – 17 March 2010. From that it can be inferred that he was a member of the Cabinet of President Umaru Yar'Adua without any need to maintain a redundant list of cabinet members in navbar or article format. The information is held in one place only and the list can be generated as wanted. But I suppose moving to a structured model like that would be a huge upheaval, and could introduce new problems. It is not likely to happen any time soon. Maybe some day there will be a Web 5.0, or something, where content can be assembled from many different structured information sites and presented in the user's choice of layout. For now, I suppose we work with what we have. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:35, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * But we are in practice moving it towards a semantic model by the increasing use of templates, especially infoboxes, & I think this is probably a deliberate intention. We're not doing it in the academically proper way, which is  top-down, based on a formal ontology-- we can't; Wikipedia is almost incapable of doing anything in such a fashion. We're doing it from the bottom, by trying to formalize what we can.  This is reasonably focussing on the most definable things: people, places, and bibliographic references.  The resistance to these structures is partially those who see the longterm intentions and do not like it.  because it does decrease somewhat the fun aspect of it for those who   just want to work in a totally unstructured environment (ignoring the basic incompatibility of productive work and lack of structure--even for truly interesting gameplay).
 * As for partially red-linked succession boxes and lists, I think it is good to use them-- it indicates articles that needto be written.   DGG ( talk ) 18:58, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I hadn't really thought about that. It would be interesting to have some software that would scan the infoboxes, or certain types of infobox, and put the information into a structured database. Then experiment with auditing the database for internal consistency, and look at related constructs like lists and categories that should be consistent but perhaps are not. With officeholders, there may be a problem if there are large gaps or date overlaps between different holders of the same office, and probably all holders of that office belong in a common category and/or list. Locations in a given geographic division should all have coordinates that lie within the boundaries of the division. Etc. Wish I had the skills...


 * Moving towards giving entire articles an infobox-type layout would, I think, get a lot of resistance, although I can't see any particular reason not to go that way. I would visualize a form with standard facts at the top, then larger boxes holding text on different aspects, and standard navigation links to related topics for that type of topic. I agree on redlinks, although seem to have read somewhere that they are disparaged in navigational templates That is a guideline I am happy to ignore. With a structured database there would not be any redlinks, just entries without much information. Interesting. Aymatth2 (talk) 21:34, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

how to
I just noticed that the actual title of the article SMS König Albert contains italics, that is, SMS König Albert.

I have gone over the underlying markups but cannot see how this is being accomplished. Do you know?

This would be very useful in the titles of certain ballet articles. Happy New Year! — Robert Greer 02:32, 2 January 2011 (UTC)


 * the instructions are at Template:Italic title   DGG ( talk ) 03:10, 2 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you! — Robert Greer (talk) 15:10, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Rosie Mercado
Hello,

Was it you who deleted the "Rosie Mercado" Article? If so; Why?


 * yes, and I gave an explanation at User talk:GtheLad.   DGG ( talk ) 20:07, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Actually, the Rosie Mercado blprod was a different mistake than you think (its references were marked as references when I BLP'd, although poorly organized). I was had multiple articles open and think I just clicked the Twinkle menu on the wrong one. Anyhoo, thanks for catching the error; I'd already dropped an apology note on the author's page before you dropped your note. --Nat Gertler (talk) 23:44, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, I should also note that I am not likely to be following up on the article in a few days as you request, simply because it's got two sources, which is enough for me, and it's in a topic I neither know nor care to know much about, and as such cannot judge whether these sources should be considered reliable. I wouldn't even join in on the deletion discussion, much less start it. --Nat Gertler (talk) 23:56, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

(name redacted) Sea Monster
Hi There! We would like to know why this entry was deleted. It is mostly local oral folklore, so there is little possibility of getting print or online sources to cite. Thank you. Themarbleheader (talk) 05:40, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * it is uncited nonsense. I can find no indication of any possible references for the name of the story, the title of the purported book, nor the purported author of the book. Nor is even the name a likely name for the period.  If you have a published reference, give it here. There is however someone by that name from that city on facebook, from which it is possible to make a guess about the origin of the article.  If you try again at fiction, find some better postulated source than a book that is deteriorated to the point that nobody can see it.   DGG ( talk ) 05:59, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Isabell Villegas
Just out of curiosity, what do you see as Isabell Villegas' claim to notability? There's an unsupported claim to being related to C.S. Lewis (which is irrelevant, and when the creator of this article added the info to Lewis' article it was quickly reverted) and her career appears limited to a school play and some alleged awards attributed to no organization for no stated roles.

As an admin, you might also look into the article as a hoax. The article's creator recently claimed she is the younger sister of model Alessandra Ambrosio, who only has an older sister, Aline. It looks fishy to me.  Mbinebri  talk &larr; 15:53, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * the article claims awards, though does not specify details & I cannot judge their importance--but this is a claim to importance. (note that to pass speedy the claim is to any bona fide importance or significance, which is much less than the notability  required to keep an article) . If sources for the awards are provided, she might possibly be notable. If not, the article will be removed, which is what I expect.    DGG ( talk ) 16:02, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Expand
I don't think any of my removals yet have been anywhere close to out-of-line, but if you have suggestsions to help avoid another batch of reckless edits, I'm in. For instance, would you recommend some other template for Devon Gummersall? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 20:17, 4 January 2011 (UTC)


 * refimproveBLP. (I took care of it, btw) I'm not sure it was available when it was originally tagged. Can you suggest something that would work for "overall treatment too sketchy"?   DGG ( talk ) 07:13, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Cleanup-biography, Bio-context? Abductive  (reasoning) 07:32, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Brainloss
There's a Swedish word "hjärnsläpp" which can be loosely translated as "brainloss" or "braindrop" (as in, the brain drops out of your head), meaning the feeling you get when you realise some act of utter stupidity you've done and you don't even understand how you could have been that stupid. Such as my tagging this article for deletion for having the wrong title, after I'd moved it to a different title myself. Good thing you were more resourceful in the brain dept :-) --bonadea contributions talk 20:20, 3 January 2011 (UTC)


 * that's why it takes two people in order to get something deleted. And also why anything that gets deleted can be undeleted. Myself, I've made at least one mistake today in deleting the wrong article--that is, one that I know about.  DGG ( talk ) 23:28, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Rosie Mercado
Cheers for keeping the page on the site, Im fortunate enough to know the lady herself and shes well known within the fashion world; the Curvy Revolution is a convention due 18-20th Feb and one of the main events at Planet Hollywood and its the largest convention of its kind; and shes one of the hosts; here is a link to it. http://www.curvyrevolution.com/speakers/rosiemercado/reliable

The sentence "Bellisima's mission is to help every woman celebrate herself through self-confidence knowledge and unique beauty." was on the Bellisima site and its also on Rosies bio.

And could you please help me get an image, becasue i cannot get a image from google; but ill ask her what one she wants.


 * I am not planning to work on this article; I only kept it here in so those who might be interested, such as yourself, could work on it. You will need references from third party sources, and curvyrevolution.com is not likely to be considered reliable for the purpose. Please see WP:RS for a guide to what will be, and also WP:BIO for what articles about people are likely to be kept in Wikipedia. DGG ( talk ) 23:22, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Very well then, i think ive got a freind to help out as well. Also could you kindly link me to a page about uploading images? — Preceding unsigned comment added by GtheLad (talk • contribs) 11:41, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Requests for adminship/Lear's Fool
I may be mistaken, but I think you meant to place your recent comment in Ironholds' RfA, not Lear's Fool's. Ironholds was the candidate who discussed the Irish centenarians list in his questions. Lear's Fool made no mention of it.  Them From  Space  03:35, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Oops I will fix it DGG ( talk ) 03:36, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Speedy delete request of templates
He's been busy! (Have a look at his contributions list.) He's obviously "automated", (and I'm not!) Placing the "hang on"s is considerably more work than placing the CSDs! Is there some way you can do a mass undo? Or failing that, can you wave your magic wand over: Thanks in advance. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 03:39, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * 12:13, 4 January 2011 (diff | hist) Template:Ranks and insignia/OR/Thailand ‎ (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD G8). (TW))
 * 12:13, 4 January 2011 (diff | hist) Template:Ranks and Insignia of Non NATO Armies/OR/Blank ‎ (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD G8). (TW))
 * 12:13, 4 January 2011 (diff | hist) Template:Ranks and Insignia of Non NATO Armies/OF/Blank ‎ (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD G8). (TW))
 * 12:13, 4 January 2011 (diff | hist) Template:Ranks and Insignia of NATO Navies/OR/Portugal ‎ (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD G8). (TW))
 * 12:13, 4 January 2011 (diff | hist) Template:Ranks and Insignia of NATO Navies/OR/Luxembourg ‎ (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD G8). (TW))
 * 12:12, 4 January 2011 (diff | hist) Template:Ranks and Insignia of NATO Navies/OR/Belgium ‎ (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD G8). (TW))
 * 12:12, 4 January 2011 (diff | hist) Template:Ranks and Insignia of NATO Navies/OF/Slovakia ‎ (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD G8). (TW)) (top) [rollback]
 * 12:12, 4 January 2011 (diff | hist) Template:Ranks and Insignia of NATO Navies/OF/Luxembourg ‎ (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD G8). (TW)) (top) [rollback]
 * 12:12, 4 January 2011 (diff | hist) Template:Ranks and Insignia of NATO Navies/OF/Hungary ‎ (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD G8). (TW))
 * 12:12, 4 January 2011 (diff | hist) Template:Ranks and Insignia of NATO Navies/OF/Czech Republic ‎ (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD G8). (TW))
 * 12:12, 4 January 2011 (diff | hist) Template:Ranks and Insignia of NATO Armies/WO/Italy ‎ (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD G8). (TW))
 * 12:12, 4 January 2011 (diff | hist) Template:Ranks and Insignia of NATO Armies/RO/Greece ‎ (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD G8). (TW))
 * 12:12, 4 January 2011 (diff | hist) Template:Ranks and Insignia of NATO Armies/OR/Thailand ‎ (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD G8). (TW))
 * 12:12, 4 January 2011 (diff | hist) Template:Ranks and Insignia of NATO Armies/OR/Kingdom of Greece ‎ (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD G8). (TW))
 * 12:12, 4 January 2011 (diff | hist) Template:Ranks and Insignia of NATO Air Forces/OR/Portugal ‎ (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD G8). (TW))
 * 12:12, 4 January 2011 (diff | hist) Template:Ranks and Insignia of NATO Air Forces/OF/Australia ‎ (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD G8). (TW))


 * P.S. I didn't design or create these templates, (and there are dozens of others similarly named), but I don't want to see them deleted. Pdfpdf (talk) 03:39, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * P.P.S. These two are two of the "boiler plates". Pdfpdf (talk) 03:39, 4 January 2011 (UTC)


 * 12:13, 4 January 2011 (diff | hist) Template:Ranks and Insignia of Non NATO Armies/OR/Blank ‎ (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD G8). (TW))
 * 12:13, 4 January 2011 (diff | hist) Template:Ranks and Insignia of Non NATO Armies/OF/Blank ‎ (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD G8). (TW))


 * I think I caught most of them--see my comment on User talk:Mhiji, and also on the many similar TfD's he has been placing.    DGG ( talk ) 04:23, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

You are a seasoned Editor
Dear Doc., happy New Year. I thank you for helping with almost the flair of a prestidigitator in working on the “Alexander Animalu” article. I am this impressed because I created it. Now, I am very sure you are aware that some people may be very notable within their fields and have been reported several times in respected magazines and newspapers but had not had significant third-person independent Internet sources because the reviews and interviews in the hardcopy magazines or TV clips have not been uploaded into the net. When an article is written on such notable people, they are immediately deleted. This is what may happen to the “Jeff Unaegbu” article if this issue is not addressed. I am ready to place in your personal email, scanned pages of the newspaper interviews and magazine pages where my eight books have been reviewed. I appeal to you as a seasoned editor like myself, who edits also in hardcopy periodicals and is author of these eight books at 31 including the longest poem in Nigeria, to take a close look at the article and check the sources cited. For a complete copy of the long poem I just mentioned see this source . Your voice is needed at the AfD discussion page for Jeff Unaegbu. I am happy that the venerability factor has crept into your aura and I am sure you are more than able to utilize its influence over the quills that are angling for my deletion. For I think I am sure that you are a smoothing circuit among unceasing zippy zappy waves of bubbly historicity. Go figure. Thanks.Jeff Unaegbu (talk) 00:13, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Sending copies of articles this way is almost never necessary, and requests to do so should be discouraged.  Rather we need to establish the principle that those who wish to say that a particular printed source is irrelevant or erroneous have a shared obligation to try and find it. The presume of Assuming good faith is that people edit correctly--but it is only a presumption.  If there is evidence showing reasonable doubt, either   about the possibly dubious quality of the editor's work, or internal evidence about the article, or in cases involving negative BLP, then it is appropriate to ask the person introducing the material. I'll take a look at this particular article.  DGG ( talk ) 02:51, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Re: You are a seasoned Editor
Thank you for your breath of oragmatic humaneness. I suggest you open a corner in your user page with the title, "What people say about me (a) positive remarks (b) negative remarks" I know and I am sure (a) will douse (b) with the viscous glycerine! You laugh. Jeff Unaegbu (talk) 06:17, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * half of it is at User:DGG/appreciation  DGG ( talk ) 06:56, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

What?
What just happened? Why was the article deleted? Wth? — Preceding unsigned comment added by GtheLad (talk • contribs) 17:28, 4 January 2011
 * given you had added no usable 3rd party references, it was inevitable. When you have some, a I would suggest  asking Stwalkerster or Favonian who did the last 2 deletions whether they think the references are adequate.    DGG ( talk ) 02:29, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

I did but Favonian just reverted what i asked on his talk page and said could ban me for vadanlism... ? Strange world. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GtheLad (talk • contribs) 06:39, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I do not think you yet understand: the references you have are not sufficient. The article is promotional, and the early versions were copyvios. He looked at all this, and judged it the same way I did.  Please re-read  WP:BUSIC and WP:BIO. Enough, please.  DGG ( talk ) 06:58, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

But i thought you gave me until the end of the week ? Tell your buddy hes a complete asshole, how petty of him. I dont have all the time in the world to dedicate myself to this site like some of you failures probably do. With all due respect you were initially helpfull, However your freind and whoever deleted it have no reason; i have asked them politely and they threatened me with a ban; How pathetic.

And it caused much embarassment as well; Thanks a lot guys. Really.

PS: It was that Wuwuzzu who was the biggest failure of them all, what a cocky little moron; Honestly you have people such as these running your sites? Give me a chance to edit the damn page at least -_-

WP:Deletion
DGG, it seems you accidentally moved WP:Deletion to WP:Deletion policy, instead of the other way around. Could you check into it? Thanks. --Bsherr (talk) 02:21, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
 * The result was that all of Deletion policy's revisions were deleted, leaving behind a nonfunctional self-redirect (formerly located at Deletion). Moonriddengirl reverted.  So if you still want to move the page, you'll need to start over.  :)  —David Levy 02:26, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Probably best to open a discussion about it on talk first. SlimVirgin  talk| contribs 02:27, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd welcome discussion. Come on over to Wikipedia talk:Policies and guidelines, please. I'll post at WT:Deletion policy too. --Bsherr (talk) 02:36, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Indeed, this change might not be uncontroversial. While Deletion has redirected to Deletion policy for a while, there are other pages (such as Deletion process and Guide to deletion) that would be reasonable targets, along with the various deletion fora.
 * Given these pages' existence, an ambiguous title like Deletion probably isn't the most user-friendly choice. (Quoth the text to which you linked, "the page names of policies and guidelines usually do not include the words 'policy' or 'guideline,' unless required to distinguish the page from another.")
 * In this instance, I'm inclined to think that Deletion should be a disambiguation page of sorts (serving only to point people in the right direction). —David Levy 02:41, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
 * That's a fair criticism. I too now wonder about a disambiguation page. --Bsherr (talk) 02:55, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Bsherr I think your tag got it the wrong way around: DGG probably just hit the "click here to perform this move" that the tag says. I must say, I did have a chuckle when I saw on my watchlist that DGG, of all people, had deleted WP:Deletion policy. :) I agree with SlimVirgin that discussion would be good for this, it's a core policy long standing under that title. :) --Mkativerata (talk) 02:32, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I was just coming to say the same thing. Db-move is meant to go on the page that's in the way, not the one that needs moving. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 02:34, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I correctly tagged WP:Deletion, the move target, with db-move, not WP:Deletion policy. --Bsherr (talk) 02:52, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I think you are right. As a result of the moves and restoration, the history of the redirect (created in 2005) seems to have been merged with the history of WP:Deletion policy. That might affect the way this tag is displayed. It seems clear that the move tag was placed on WP:Deletion although the edit field still shows the wrong "to be moved here" page was identified. --Mkativerata (talk) 03:04, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I've undone the history merge, which in hindsight was more effort than it was worth (and MRG's edit now looks a little weird in the history, sorry).--Mkativerata (talk) 03:28, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
 * P.S. I can barely open your page to edit it! I had to go see why. 639 kb. Wow. Maybe you should consider archiving at some point for the benefit of those of us with imperfect connection? --Moonriddengirl (talk) 02:35, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Tahash -- content noticeboard
Hi DGG it looks like there's an out-of-control original research writer at work on the Tahash article. At the Content noticeboard, myself and another non-admin don't know what to do. Do you have advice?--Tomwsulcer (talk) 15:00, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

NYC Wikipedia Day Invitation
As a New Yorker, I invite you to join me in my Meetup/NYC/Wikipedia Day discussion on how to improve the coverage of New York City. My hands-on tutorial on wp:inline citations will be directed to Manhattan in particular, but the discussion will be open-ended, drawing on my experiences improving coverage of Philadelphia history and government.--DThomsen8 (talk) 15:34, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Tekufah
Thanks - your wording is much clearer than mine. I wish my Hebrew was better than it is! And Philologus has proven in the past that research on topics he doesn't know is not one of his strong points. ;-) -- kosboot (talk) 17:58, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Abdul Majid Zabuli for deletion
The article Abdul Majid Zabuli is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Abdul Majid Zabuli until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. David in DC (talk) 20:33, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

ben scott
you deleted my ben scott ac/dc page claiming the person is not notable enough..

the page was only 15 minutes into construction and i question how you could decide so early that this page does fit the wiki criteria; "notability is not temporary" and if you were to source info on bon scotts son you will find enough there to change your premature view. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sonofbon (talk • contribs) 02:02, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
 * What claimed notability is there? I will restore it if there is any possible reason to do so. Merely being Bon Scott's son, or or there being a controversy about whether or not he is hissom, is not a claim to notability, especially considering the requirements of WP:BLP.   Please answer here, or at WP:Requests for undeletion where you made a request,  .  DGG ( talk ) 03:09, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
 * What claimed notability is there? I will restore it if there is any possible reason to do so. Merely being Bon Scott's son, or or there being a controversy about whether or not he is hissom, is not a claim to notability, especially considering the requirements of WP:BLP.   Please answer here, or at WP:Requests for undeletion where you made a request,  .  DGG ( talk ) 03:09, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Just a clarification
Hi DGG. I noticed your reply to Gimme Danger here. I was just confused whether you were withdrawing your oppose or whether it was just a reply to Gimme Danger... Thanks and best regards.  Wifione    .......  Leave a message  12:05, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the response. Kind regards.  Wifione    .......  Leave a message  04:01, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Update of the Article, Chris Ojigbani
Good Morning. Towards the end of the year, you helped me in my article 'Chris Ojigbani'. Afterwards you aske me to add additional citations. After adding the citations, some tags came up asking to add secondary citations. Which I have also added. But after adding the secondary citations, I don't know how to remove the tags. Please kindly help me remove the tags. I appreciate the work you are doing. You are indeed a veteran editor. Thanks and Happy New Year again. Emeka2011 (talk) 09:04, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I cleaned it up a little & removed one tag, but it's the community that has the right to judge notability if anyone wants to question it.   DGG ( talk ) 03:10, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Dr.Annasaheb Shinde College Of Agricultural Engineering Rahuri
Not that I particularly care, but there actually is a typo: vide Dr.Annasaheb (no spacing) Travelbird (talk) 06:52, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
 * right, I missed it. but if I did,someone else will  DGG ( talk ) 06:58, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Restore deleted page
Dgg,

It was good to meet you and I'm sorry to ask for this but could you restore the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camden_County_College_Lindback_Award_Recipients

Even though I did what Pharos said to do so that it wasn't deleted, some jerk deleted it and it had the chart I wanted to move over to Camden county college main page (as we discussed)

Why are people such jerks? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Profgennari (talk • contribs) 02:12, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I see he responded on his user talk p. now, that he moved it to User:Profgennari/Camden County College Lindback Award Recipients, Had he not, responded, I would have asked him first--though I have the technical ability to restore it myself,  I always ask the deleting admin first, in order to maintain friendly relations and make it clear we're not working at cross purposes.  And I find it tactful  in this sort of thing to assume that someone forgot or did not notice, not that they are jerks or unhelpful.    DGG ( talk ) 02:34, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough. Thanks for the help and advice. It's just that it sat there for a month and then after putting a specific note not to delete it for a little while it gets deleted. But I will take your advice. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Profgennari (talk • contribs) 03:13, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Italian cabinets
Hi, can you restore the deleted pages in Template:Italian Governments. Even if to my user space. How sad that those who deleted it didn't see their potential.♦ Dr. Blofeld  12:26, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I will restore them to your user page in batches, and what I suggest you do is to translate the first few lines, but an "underconstruction" tag on them, and reinsert them to user space. Do a few at a time, please, & try to get some sort of reference in, since the absurd comment was made "how do we know these lists are even correct?" As for the general practice, I'll start a discussion on it today. I want to remove untranslated article present on another WP) not just a a speedy criterion, but as a deletion criterion altogether. I think it absurd to delete articles from other Wikipedias just because they  haven't   gotten rapidly translated, when it is has become so much easier to make an approximate translation from many languages, and we have so many people who can improve it to a better one from almost any Wikipedia language. But at the same time, I'd like to make a real push for people bringing articles to bring over the refs also. The difficulty will be with the apparent practice of the frWP and some of the others that if a source for the information about the common run of things is so obvious that anyone could find it in any library, there's no need to give it specifically.     DGG ( talk ) 18:25, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
 * A question DGG: WHat's abusrd about saying "how do we know these lists are correct" about entirely unsourced lists? I also strongly advise against placing unsourced lists involving hundreds of redlink names in article space that largely consist of a foreign language. After the articles are translated and sourced is when they should go live. This really shouldn't be a tough concept to grasp.Bali ultimate (talk) 02:07, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I am prepared to make the assumption that articles about the Italian cabinets in the Italian Wikipedia are likely to be correct, just as ours are here--those are not the sorts of errors that go unnoticed. I agree it needs to be proven.  So I went and looked a little further, the frWP page for the first one I checked   gives the source, ; going there, I find the English translation of the official source for them all is   This shows how foolish we all  are, myself included, for I joined in debating this back and forth for several days without actually thinking to look, when looking   solved it in about 2 minutes.  Bali, your challenges are useful, and should be followed up seriously, for this is a lesson to us all.    DGG ( talk ) 02:08, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Excellent. Now all that has to happen is for you or blofeld (or someone) to provide the source, and do the translations (which are tedious in this instance, but not difficult), remove the italian language categories etc... and then publish the articles. I of course won't stand in the way of that. The key here is that someone has to do the work first.Bali ultimate (talk) 02:24, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I think from the above Br.B means to do most of it, I hope that when you said "someone" should do the work you did not really mean "someone other than me". And there is no reason articles should not stand while they are being worked on. There is no rule that everything must be done in user space first -- that is  necessary only when there are doubts about it being fit for main space in the end. NOT BURO, and whatever way of writing is most expedient is suitable.    DGG ( talk ) 02:36, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Biorébus
You redirected this article to Laurent Schwartz (oncologist) and told the author why; but he has re-created it as Biorebus (without the accent). I have followed your example and redirected it, but told the author that if his re-creation of the article means that he is not happy with that approach, he should say so on his talk page, and I will restore the article and start an AfD. You might like to look at User talk:Ludivine1989 and see whether you want to add anything. JohnCD (talk) 21:41, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I tried to give me a warning of what is likely to happen, but it is hard to do that without being negative.   DGG ( talk ) 01:37, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Steffen Gielen
The above article was previously deleted due to reason that apparently no longer apply (subject was still a student back then). The text now posted was taken from |http://wikibin.org/articles/steffen-gielen.html and is licensed under GFDL. Since we no longer use that license, is the text permissible ? Travelbird (talk) 14:18, 13 January 2011 (UTC) I consequently deleted it as g4, recreation of previously deleted article without addressing the issue.  DGG ( talk ) 17:02, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) The license is not permissible, but if that were the only problem, the simple descriptive text could be rewritten easily enough
 * 2) But there is no additional notability since the AfD in '08. He has now graduated and taken a postdoctoral position, but that's not a substantial addition of notability. It is possible that his publications might have since then become very important, but Scopus shows that they still have almost no citations.
 * The text might not have changed a lot, but the number of publications is quite large now. edit by 92.226.118.195,  21:23, January 13, 2011
 * Scopus shows 7 peer-reviewed published articles. They have been cited 2,2,1,0,0,0,0 times,h=2. It's not a question of  the articles being too new to accumulate citations, since the cited ones are from 2009, which is a long time ago in physics. Checking in arXiv, I find 3 papers total. Of the additional two, one is a conference paper, and the other has no indication of publication. The citations for the papers, including citations by the author himself, are 6, 5, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0.  If you really want an AfD, I will undelete it and send it thee, but the only honest advice I can give   is that it will certainly be considered that the subject has not yet  reached the stature expected of WP:PROF.    DGG ( talk ) 22:30, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

New WikiProject Novels initiative
We have begun a new initiative at the WikiProject Novels: an improvement drive. As a member listed here, you are being notified. Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Novels and WikiProject Novels/Collaboration for more details. Also I would like to remind you to keep an eye on the project talk page at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Novels. Thanks, Sadads (talk) 00:42, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Delete of Hovid Inc
Hi DGG, I was refering to your edit at Wong Lo Kat where you agree that the page is NPOV, where at 1st I disagree with you and tag a Speedy Deletion on it. Since that, I follow the style and put in a NPOV info of Hovid Inc but was deleted. The 1st deletion been challenged and I was in the mid to search for more info to post reference and there was an admin who remove the tag, then again the 2nd Speedy Deletion, where I don't even had the chance to challenge the Hang-On then the page been delete. Not fair for me. Hope you can assist on this and the Admin who delete this page had his talk page semi-protected. Very very not fair. Hope you can assist. Felixlhk (talk) 01:50, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * It's not a question of NPOV--the question now is whether there is any realistic claim that the company has plausible claim to significance or notability . It might, but the only way you will show that is if you can find some references providing substantial coverage from  3rd party independent published reliable sources, print or online, but not blogs or press releases, or material derived from press releases . Any language will do, Chinese included, as long as someone here can verify it. But it cannot be a press-release, or written or posted by the company or its founder.  I'm pretty useless at finding Chinese references, but if you can find them, tell me here what they are & I can at least look at them and see roughly what they're about with help from Google Translate. & then ask someone who knows the language to take a look.    DGG ( talk ) 02:43, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi DGG, thanks for your reply. Able to contact the Admin who delete the page, the page been restored but now at AFD. I had no problem to debate on AFD. I hope you could comment some of your view to Hovid Inc as well. I also don't hope all my works always get deleted because only notable in Asia and not western country. Asian also use Wikipedia, right? Thanks! Felixlhk (talk) 07:42, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Ambarish Srivastava

 * Good evening! Respected Sir DGG, my article was moved User:Spjayswal67/Ambarish Srivastava to Ambarish Srivastava: restored to main space as per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2010_February_14 by your great support. I am thankful to you for that. It was nominated for deletion that time by Mr. SpacemanSpiff. You had also participated in Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2010_February_14 and you had also rearranged it. Now Mr. SpacemanSpiff continuously hearts this article, he had deleted a major part such as ‘professional membership’, ‘poetry’ and ‘architectural works’section of it. If these sections were not considerable why he had not deleted these immediately after its restoration. It appears that he have some irritation due to restoration of this article. To check it you can view its history. It is my humble request to you that please suggest me that what can i do to resist it. Please help again to protect this article.Spjayswal67 (talk) 15:09, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Sorry
This illustrates the dangers of anything requiring only one click. I quickly reversed it. postdlf (talk) 17:51, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * no problem.   DGG ( talk ) 21:24, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Wong Lo Gat/Wong Lo Kat
For this article, I agree that somewhat informative, Wong Lo Kat itself is a common herbal tea formula in China, but somewhat being commercialize by a FMCG canning company. If the article is mainly introducing the herbal tea formula itself, yes...I agree not to delete the article. But here, the canning company is referring Wong Lo Kat article to their company, while Wong Lo Kat is easily found by mixing certain chinese herbs to boil into a beverage by local Chinese Medical Hall (Chinese Herbs Pharmacy). So do you think it was a advertising/promoting? 219.93.60.62 (talk) 06:33, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
 * there is no clear difference between informing and promoting. If the commercial beverage is notable, there can be an informative article about it. The question is whether there should be one article or two. It would depend on the sources--can you find references for the general herb mixture independent of the company's product?    DGG ( talk ) 15:37, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi, I'm 219.93.60.62 till I register an User ID. OK understand about that but really need to inform the author to post more, too brief and the reference links really too old and dead. Thanks! Felixlhk (talk) 07:46, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

New User: Utterman
Hello -

This new user "Utterman" appears to have registered two days ago for the purpose of deleting articles. Might you be able to look into this?

Many thanks!

PR (talk) 19:19, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * just remove any prods you think unjustified, & if he take them to AfD and the discussions there will deal with them--and, if appropriate, send him a message.  He's not brand new--he  seems to have been here ery occasionally since June, and most of his edits seem very good.    DGG ( talk ) 21:32, 14 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Eh, he's definitely a bit suss, he prodded and then sent to AfD the first article I ever created. Account created June 2, 12 edits (autoconfirm established), maybe 30 or so edits sept 10-13, then he came back on Jan 12 for about 20 more edits.  He knows how things work, yet created a wholly unsourced biography on Jan 12, Haji Mohamad Sheriff bin Osman.  I have no idea what his game is, but there is one, no doubt with a history.--Milowent • talkblp-r  04:50, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Email Message
''This message was blocked by an edit filter. Since it looks to me like a false positive I am passing it on. JamesBWatson (talk) 20:12, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

I am new to Wikipedia however am trying to learn as I appreciate what you are doing. Today after we posted [], I received a message and an email in Spanish which I do not understand (I speak English). Two things, can another email be sent in English so we understand; and in response to the message, may we be given another opportunity to rewrite before being blocked. I think we understand better the regulations as when the article was written we refered to other similar articles for an example without completely knowing the rules. Thank you for the consideration. Rssatl (talk) 19:43, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * will reply later today  DGG ( talk ) 23:30, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Huron County Library
Hi, are county libraries notable?♦ Dr. Blofeld  14:47, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I had my doubts at first, but most have been held so.   DGG ( talk ) 23:09, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

iPad 2
Can you please discuss this at Talk:IPad. -- Eraserhead1 &lt;talk&gt; 20:27, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Archive?
Your talk page is getting very unwieldy ... pablo 20:53, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Library subject at AFD
You might be interested in this one. It seems to be in your field. Uncle G (talk) 21:39, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

NPOV on Debbie Smith Act
Any chance you could post your concerns about NPOV on Debbie Smith Act on the talk page? You tagged it as NPOV, but the humble backlog clearer cannot necessarily see what it is you objected to! Thanks. —Tom Morris (talk) 00:44, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * so I did, the headingis "Comments"   DGG ( talk ) 14:58, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Camerapedia again
Please see this and consider doing, well, something or other. Thank you! -- Hoary (talk) 08:35, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * right.   DGG ( talk ) 16:23, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Article nominated for deletion
Please see Articles for deletion/Arno Tausch (2nd nomination) since you are one of the contributors to the article. Jaque Hammer (talk) 10:32, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I must confess I would have been happier never to have to deal with this one again.   DGG ( talk ) 03:24, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

On the Tausch entry, a suggestion
Let me please deposit here also my recent comment:


 * Comment (from User Franz weber) I would not like to vote in this debate here, but let me come up with a practical suggestion: I think that user Msrasnw would be Wikipedia experienced enough to come up with an article really conforming in style to Wiki standards and in the sense of the suggestions he has made here on these pages [User Franz weber]]. You seem to be a meta-meta editor of Wikipedia. User Weber is personally in favour of keeping the article, but does not vote; being a man of compromise, he is strongly in favour of keeping articles on mice and neuroligsts, just as people researching the World Values Survey. With a monthly access statistics of about 700-800 (all languages) the markets have already decided to keep the article, however I concede it has to be wiki-style indeed. user weber

Dolores Bernadette Grier
Howdy, you recently closed an AfD and deleted the article Dolores Bernadette Grier. Could you please userfy that page and let me know which, (if any) pages linked to it? Thanks. - Haymaker (talk) 10:56, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * moved to User:Haymaker/Dolores Bernadette Grier. See what you can do. If you decide you cannot fix it sufficiently, and want it deleted, let me know, & I'll put it back at the original title & then delete it.   DGG ( talk ) 01:57, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Beerware
Just a heads up that you forgot to sign here: I considered adding your sig for you but I decided it would be better to let you do it since the AfD was already closed. --Tothwolf (talk) 16:15, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
 * fine. In any other circumstance, please just add it.   DGG ( talk ) 17:38, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Removal of the Minecraft country "United Republic of Noxville"
May I ask, why did you remove this article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.19.124.69 (talk) 01:20, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Please revisit
Please revisit this discussion, where I have asked you a question. Debresser (talk) 21:15, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject Magazine Bloginity
Hi DGG, I noticed you are a member of the WikiProject Magazine, which I have joined and will contribute in the future. I have created a new page for an online magazine Bloginity which was up for speedy deletion several times for several reasons. I was hoping to get your voice on this matter and help me get the page published as it contains quality and informative information for anyone who is interested in reading about the background, and foundation. I am looking forward to your reply, and hoping that you would share your voice in this article entry. (71.190.254.239 (talk) 21:13, 20 January 2011 (UTC)). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.190.254.239 (talk)
 * commented at the AfD . what this really needs is one good substantial 3rd party reference that actually talks about it--the present references only weakly imply notability. I agree that is is unrealistically difficult to do for material such as this with our present interpretation of the rules--but Wikipedia is  quite conservative in some respects.  That's what tends to happen to revolutionaries a decade further on.    DGG ( talk ) 04:36, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi DGG, I really appreciate your feedback on the AfD page. I've been going back and forth with several administrators that actually at one time someone erased the page content and I was not able to recover it so I had to reconstruct the entire page from beginning. There is a major source talking directly and about the online magazine in television news - and it is a very respected source, AZCentral. There are many well known websites that are quoting Bloginity magazine in direct such as MTV, Yahoo! Canada and Yahoo! News as well as straight quotation from The Huffington Post . What do you think? I am looking forward to your reply DGG. ( Knox387 (talk) 14:59, 21 January 2011 (UTC)).
 * as I asked there, are they isolated quotes or do they use it as a regular source? (And, what is harder to determine, to what extent do they prefer to use it over comparable sources providing similar material?)  I think it's  accepted that isolated quotes do not prove notability.   DGG ( talk ) 17:43, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi DGG, If I understand your question correctly Bloginity has been quoted in these sources several times (Yahoo, MTV etc). I do not believe they are isolated quotations but quote Bloginity due to quality information that was found in the online magazine. For example, The magazine (Bloginity) has interviewed over 100 celebrities in the past years which have also been quoted by known publishers like Us Magazine, People Magazine but you must remember that People Magazine, and Us Magazine are a competition of the brand so I do not think that they will write about how the magazines success and progress. Unless ofcourse, it's Forbes who writes about the Top Blogs type of lists. According to Bloginity, they have published a seasonal spread during 2010, I think the brand deserves a recognition I just don't know yet how to work around it yet. ( Knox387 (talk) 19:04, 21 January 2011 (UTC)).
 * Hi DGG, sorry to bother you again. I wanted to get your attention in private and let you know that I have added, and edited a few sections of Bloginity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Knox387 (talk • contribs) 21:51, 21 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi DGG, Once again I apologize for bothering you and I hope that all is well. As the Buzz goes on for the page I have created, the website has been named as the Webs Best Entertainment Spots by AllMyFaves . I have also added several citation templates to the page to make it better. Please review it in your earliest convenience. Here is the page Bloginity — Preceding unsigned comment added by Knox387 (talk • contribs) 18:23, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Review
Hey, i have just cleaned up the David Wood (Christian apologist) article which you voted for deletion. Do you still maintain your original position? Someone65 (talk) 03:28, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
 * very good work fixing up the article. Reading the actual refs carefully convinced me to change to keep, as I commented there.   DGG ( talk ) 05:44, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Govt Titumir College
For some reason I have Govt Titumir College on my watchlist, and I noticed that Airplaneman and then you moved the article. I do not recall what it looked like, but something has gone wrong because the article is now just a redirect to itself. You might be able to find a deleted page that can be used to restore some content? Johnuniq (talk) 22:19, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
 * between us something did go wrong., I'll fixit, though I am not sure what the eventual title should be.    DGG ( talk ) 22:49, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I have now restored it under the form of name used on the site: Govt. Titumir College Usually we do not qualify by place unless there is ambiguity, but personally I have always thought this  unhelpful.    DGG ( talk ) 23:42, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Highland villages
Hi. Remember our conversation about Scottish villages. Well some of the Scottish project have now said exactly the same concerns I had. Perhaps you could comment here. ♦ Dr. Blofeld  21:25, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
 * and so I did: the additional and most convincing argument for having pages on every village is to encourage new users to add information.     DGG ( talk ) 05:08, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi,

You recently declined my speedy request of Thomas Adams School with the comment "needs expansion, not redirection or deletion". However note that the article was tagged as G6 not R3. The entire point of the nomination was to move The Thomas Adams School there, which has a lot more information. Travelbird (talk) 08:11, 28 January 2011 (UTC)


 * My apologies; I must have missed that, & I will fix it today.   DGG ( talk ) 20:56, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program Newsletter: 28 January 2011
Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 00:31, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Water and the environment
...was 2 hours past the 7 day limit when you deprodded. Taken to AFD. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 04:59, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I'll comment there. But I don't see that it was over the limit makes a difference: you seem to be assuming that everything that is still on the Prod list at 7 days should be automatically deleted. That is not the case, anyone can remove the tag at any time, but should add a reason--though I always give a reason/ Even more, anyone may ask for the article to be restored fir further, even after it has been deleted, and it almost always will be.  Additionally, the deleting admin checking the expired prods has the responsibility to actually think and look, & should not delete if thinks the deletion unreasonable.      DGG ( talk ) 19:36, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Billy Davis (Arizona State Senator)‎ and my PRODs
Hey there, I noticed in your removal of my PROD for this article you insinuated that I hadn't looked for sources. I had! I looked on Lexis Nexis and was completely unable to find anything remotely resembling in-depth coverage of this person. You're not the first person to insinuate I hadn't bothered to look for sources and I notice you didn't add any yourself. Help? All Hail The Muffin Nor does it taste nice... 10:29, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * apparantly, DGG you were correct. i added some sources from a google. question, what do i do about an attack page on article subject? i added at bottom of external links. delete if you think slanderous. bleah. Slowking4 (talk) 16:49, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I may have missed something but he's not correct in assuming I didn't look. All Hail The Muffin Nor does it taste nice... 18:37, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * . I agree I should have sourced the article before removing the tag, but I thought -- and thought correctly -- that it would be pretty obvious. I should have gone a little slower, and my apologies for that . An assertion that someone is a state senator will either have findable sources or be a hoax.  I assumed the reason you didn't find was because you hadn't looked.   The name is, however, difficult to find, and you might not have checked all the possibilities.  The article may need a little cleanup, including a change of title to meet the MOS, and I will check further  DGG ( talk ) 19:29, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * i found sources, and i looked; you did not find sources....Slowking4 (talk) 20:57, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * yes,yes, i should have found and added them myself initially. But I am normally doing a number of things here at the same time, & do not always get back to something immediately. DGG''' ( talk )
 * no, no not you DGG, but Muffin. as a confirmed sloth, i dislike false protestations. current AZ senate ; earliest session of senators online is 1997? ; needs a printed almanac. Slowking4 (talk) 02:31, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Slowking, let's AGF here: I watched Muffin search for a good 5-10 minutes for sources for the article, and if you look at her contributions for the time, she was referencing unreferenced BLPs at a rate of knots. Mistake made on Muffin's part in not spotting all the sources, perhaps, but it's clear she looked, there's no harm done, and the article is sourced now. Chase me ladies, I&#39;m the Cavalry (talk) 19:57, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Right. That's what PROD is for. What one person misses, another will catch. At this point, most of the unreferenced BLPs that get deleted as unsourced  are sourceable and worth sourcing. Only problem is the lack of coordination, which makes patrol inefficient, since one of us doesn't see what the other s have been doing & where they looked,. Muffin, my apologies--I've missed some obvious ones also.  DGG ( talk ) 02:10, 31 January 2011 (UTC)