User talk:Dcshank/Archive 9

Please don't disrupt Wikipedia to prove a point
Your page moves to convert Somewhere I Have Never Traveled to a title in the Chinese alphabet are disruptive. That French-language title you refer to is somewhat problematic, but it refers to a French legal term that appears to have no English-language equivalent. The existence of that page does not in any way justify using Chinese titles in the English Wikipedia. Please don't disrupt Wikipedia to prove a point. I have protected the page against page moves to save you from continuing your silliness. --Orlady (talk) 21:34, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay, fine. But not a good argument, if any language does not have an exact English translation, it is Chinese, not French.  However, if you talk to a Frenchman he will tell you the opposite.  I'm only speeding up the process, because next it will be German, then Polish, then Russian, then...  FYI, the IP's starting the French mess all over the Wiki has been permanently blocked on the French Wiki, that is when he/she/they started the French spamming here using several IP's.  :- ) Don  22:01, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Like I said, your page moves were disrupting Wikipedia, for the purpose of making a point about that other article. (I know that you know that the film was released in the west with that English-language title.) If you don't want that French-titled article to remain in the English Wikipedia, make your complete arguments (including any insights you have regarding discussions on French Wikipedia) at the AfD. Don't drag unrelated articles into it -- that's disruptive and it won't accomplish your goal. --Orlady (talk) 01:06, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Nathan2055talk - contribs 00:15, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Re! :)  Theopolisme  TALK 00:10, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:72.45.201.66


A tag has been placed on User:72.45.201.66, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.  :- ) Don 02:26, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

OMG, I'm tagging myself.

Talkback
Ryan Vesey Review me!  03:43, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Newbie confused by AfC page-move
Please help new editors find their work by leaving a note on their talkpage when you move their misplaced new pages (to avoid confusion such as User talk:DMacks). DMacks (talk) 15:04, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Responded on user and mover pages.  :- ) Don 15:25, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the followup! And also thanks for working on AfC:) DMacks (talk) 15:45, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Followup on editors at AfC moving thier own submissions to article space
I thought I'd followup on your comment at AN/I regarding the usefulness of AfC if editors can just move their own submission to article space. The way I look at it, AfC is designed as a sort of safe haven for article submissions that may or may not be ready for article space. By going through the review process, a new editor can avoid the WP:BITE of someone tagging their article for speedy deletion 90 seconds after its created, and it being outright deleted a few minutes later. Nothing forces an editor creating an article to start it in AfC space, so if they do create it there, and then move it themselves to article space, its not doing anything they could not otherwise have done. They loose the protection AfC space offers new articles, but AfC is nonetheless valuable for those who don't move their own article out. Monty 845  14:50, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

My philosophy also. When they move it out too soon, most of us at AfC will move it back if we think it should be protected or CSD it ourselves to eliminate a troublesome article/editor. Thanks for your thoughts.  :- ) Don 14:57, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Note on Lindsey-Fox algorithm
Definitely not trying to give you a headache! If you could accept the prior version, I will replace the opening paragraph with the new one and I think all be be better. This is my first submission and I am still having trouble with the process. I am puzzled by the window that asks for non URL references. The first four are to peer-reviewed articles. What am I misunderstanding? Csburrus (talk)

Definitely not trying to give you a headache! If you could accept the prior version, I will replace the opening paragraph with the new one and I think all be be better. This is my first submission and I am still having trouble with the process. I am puzzled by the window that asks for non URL references. The first four are to peer-reviewed articles. What am I misunderstanding? Csburrus (talk) 15:07, 23 July 2012 (UTC)


 * If you could fix the article that is in AfC now: Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Lindsey-Fox Algorithm with the intro from the one in Main space The Lindsey-Fox Algorithm for Factoring Polynomials, and then let me know when it is finished, I will do the swap. I have placed the AfC article under review, so no one else should touch it.  Little busy right now.  We can discuss the citation issues after this is handled. Thanks.  :- ) Don  16:26, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

COI jobandtalent
Thank you for your assistance with the jobandtalent article but I ensure I reviewed the COI before beginning the contribution. As I am unpaid and only temporarily with the company, I believe my contributions are permissible. My resources are verifiable and creditable, as they include the top newspapers (in terms of circulation) in Spain and prominent global publication, the Financial Times.

I ensure that this is not a joint-account and I will change my username to reflect that. My talk page will still include my affiliation with the company so that concerns over COI are still known.

If you have any other concerns, please do not hesitate to ask. Aside from minor edits, I do not intend to make future contributions to the article.

Thanks again, Jordan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jordan.jobandtalent (talk • contribs) 08:06, 25 July 2012 (UTC)


 * No worries. It's my fault for not flagging things before approving the article.  Any article on a company is advertising.  We just try to keep it low key.  OrangeMike is watching, so best to keep a low profile for a while.  Get your user name changed first.  Some of the cites are not really the best to be using, but I found enough good ones that I approved the article, and the promotion is pretty low key.  Any cites that are or look like press releases should probably be replaced if possible.  Some information like number of employees, etc. require first party citation, nothing you can do about that.  Overall, a pretty good article.  Thanks.   :- ) Don  14:19, 25 July 2012 (UTC)