User talk:DoriSmith/Archive 4

Richard Fountain
Hiya. I've declined speedy on this and sent it to AFD where you may want to comment. Pedro : Chat  08:14, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Juan Ciuro
Dori -

I began creation of Juan Ciuro on a subpage on 2/25. It is incomplete (or was, as your actions on my clearly incomplete article got it deleted already). I THOUGHT from the various things I read that as long as the article wasn't "live" you had time to work on it. I chose NOT to use the sandbox, as it said the sandbox waas emptied each day, and I have short amounts of time to look at this, so I'd have been recreating daily.

Tha author has an interesting hisotry, and his first work is being used by several teachers in different states as supplemental reading. I would welcome your guidance in recreating this article in keeping with Wikipedia standards. I also want to know how to create it in my user area WITHOUT exposing it to deletion until it is complete.

Thank you, JLKDallas (talk) 14:59, 28 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Firstly, you created the page at JLKDallas/Juan Ciuro, which absolutely is a live page. I renamed it to Juan Ciuro per WP's naming standards.
 * Next, it hasn't been deleted, so far as I can tell. It is going through AFD, and you can comment at Articles for deletion/Juan Ciuro.
 * I think that you'll get a better understanding of what's going on if you read some of Wikipedia's policy pages, in particular: Your first article, Notability, CREATIVE, and Conflict of interest.
 * Whether or not the author has an "interesting history" isn't what matters to WP. What matters is whether or not the article shows that he meets the criteria at Notability and CREATIVE. Has he won any notable awards? Is there multiple published secondary source material that covers his life? Have other authors cited his work? Is the book available at a significant number of libraries?
 * These are the kind of questions that WP asks about biographical articles—so long as you can answer one with a "yes," the article is probably fine. However, most writers can't after their first book.
 * If he doesn't qualify, I recommend that you read Userfication. Through that process, the page can be moved into your user space, and then at some later date, if/when he does meet the criteria, all that needs to be done is to move it back to main article space. Dori (Talk • Contribs) 00:59, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. I will read all this and try to put it into my user space and do more research using the criteria you gave me. I really thought I had made a subpage as a user before. Sorry about that.

JLKDallas (talk) 14:31, 1 March 2009 (UTC)JLKDallas

Strings Movie 2009
Hey Dori,

Here is an additional article from Variety.com listing Strings as a feature in production. Does this work as evidence that it is a legitimate film?

http://www.variety.com/index.asp?layout=chart_film_prod_d&dept=Film&recordid=1117787024

Ben Foster fosterfilmproductions@gmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fosterfilm (talk • contribs) 23:15, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Did you read the guidelines on film notability as I suggested? In particular, "films that have already begun shooting, but have not yet been publicly released (theatres or video), should not have their own articles unless the production itself is notable per the notability guidelines" (quoted from here).


 * If your film is particularly notable, the article needs to say why that's the case. Just being in production isn't sufficient. Dori (Talk • Contribs) 00:59, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Up The Hill (JJS)
Note: I apologize for that mistakes. I taught redirects are like magic words that once click it it will show up your acticles. I'm very sorry for that and I will not do it again since you made me realized of my shortcomings. As a beginner I'm trying to learn from all the veteran wikipedians here. About those kids, they are all karate players of JJS. I try to make an article about them since they are actively competing in the national level but my references are short. Regarding Up The Hill, its more than 5 months that it a redirect to Jack and Jill School and this days I try to separate the article but I fail again. jjska®ate 空手| 道®   06:11, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Why did you delete our no find no fee article ?
Can you better explain to use which Wikipedia policy our article overstepped? Is there a way to place a Wikipedia article about this topic? It is a valid term used that is currently not listed....

Please help us understand what needs to be done.

Patentest (talk) 01:05, 15 March 2009 (UTC)


 * According to your PR, you've filed for a patent on this business method—which means that it's neither a generally used term nor a widely used method. That, combined with your username, implied that the article was there just for corporate aggrandizement. And as such, it qualified as spam, and was deleted.


 * BTW, I didn't delete the article (deletion requires an admin & I'm not an admin); I just tagged it. User:Accounting4Taste is the admin who deleted it.
 * Similarly, User: Wuhwuzdat tagged User:Patentest as more spam, and that page was then deleted by User:NawlinWiki.


 * As to what needs to be done... I don't know, as it depends on what it is you want to do. If what you want to do is create an article about how wonderful your business model is, then you've come to the wrong place. I'd suggest COI, BFAQ, and NOSHARE as places to start reading. Dori (Talk • Contribs) 04:23, 15 March 2009 (UTC)


 * While I was writing the above, Juliancolton blocked Patentest for exactly this reason. Dori (Talk • Contribs) 04:25, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Another PoliticianTexas sock?
Dayewalker just mentioned PoliticianTexas might be back, at ANI. Could use some help ... I smell a sock, but is it the same odor? Blueboy96 01:41, 15 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Sorry I didn't get to this faster, but by the time I did, you'd already made the right call. Thanks! (especially for finding and stomping on his two uploaded files also!!) Dori (Talk • Contribs) 04:47, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Automated Tissue Image Systems
I deleted most of the cruft from a very difficult to read article, and the copyvios. I'm not sure I really have an opinion on it now as it was so badly written and so impossible to read and so incredibly overloaded. However, please voice your opinion on the whether or not the rewritten article should be deleted. --KP Botany (talk) 00:57, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Good work! I've added my comments over at the AFD—while I still think it's a lost cause, you've done a great job of trying to find the useful bits. Dori (Talk • Contribs) 00:38, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

WPAFC
Hi, I've noticed you helping out at WP:AFC. Just wanted to say welcome and maybe you'd like to join officially by adding your name to the list on WP:WPAFC? &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:58, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I've now done so, and thanks for the welcome! Dori (Talk • Contribs) 00:38, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I wonder if you could look at something if you get a chance? We used to have a javacript helper User:Henrik/afc-helper for reviewing submissions, but most of the reasons don't apply now and the templates don't exist. I wonder if we could get one for the redirects and category submissions? (I noticed that you are a programmer!) &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:23, 25 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Somehow, I knew that was coming... Sure, I'll take a look. Dori (Talk • Contribs) 21:47, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:51, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Why was my page redirected by you?
I sent an email to admin I received a reply stating that you are the one that redirected the page titled " Kali Bowyer ". I went today to add to it and upload photos and poof it went somewhere else...WHY??? Quick ques also how is it you are able to move pages around?

-Mari 3/24/09 —Preceding unsigned comment added by KaliInfo (talk • contribs) 01:02, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Welcome to Wikipedia! I've answered this both here and at your talk page.
 * First off, and most importantly: Kali Bowyer is not "your page." While you created it, you don't own it—on Wikipedia, anyone can edit it.
 * As to why I made it a redirect: the article,, wasn't a good article by Wikipedia standards. It had numerous problems, including copyright violations, issues with external links, conflict of interest, neutral point of view, notability, and in particular, issues involving biographies of living persons. But mostly, it came down to the policy described at people notable only for one event and articles about people notable only for one event—when in doubt, just redirect to a larger article about the one incident. So, that's what I did.
 * All of the above blue links are to Wikipedia policy pages, and you should check them out. Another good page for you to read is Your first article. If, after reading them, you think that you can write an article about Kali Bowyer that meets all of WP's criteria, go for it.
 * And finally, as to how I can move pages: anyone can do that once they've been autoconfirmed. An account is autoconfirmed after the account is four days old, and after ten edits. So, make a few small edits and wait a day, and you should be autoconfirmed as well.
 * If you have any other questions, just ask! Dori (Talk • Contribs) 02:04, 25 March 2009 (UTC)


 * left you reply on my talk section would you check out ..thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by KaliInfo (talk • contribs) 18:15, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Replied at.

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Felix Zenger
Hello, I've declined the afc nomination that you put on hold, because it was a copyviolation. Normally, I would have just waited out the 24 hour hold, but the sooner copyvios are gone, the better. Thanks for reviewing at AFC! Regards, FingersOn  Roids  01:27, 26 March 2009 (UTC)


 * No problem at all, and thanks for the notification! Dori (Talk • Contribs) 00:03, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Cadline article deleted
Please follow this website http://www.wipo.int/ipdl/en/search/madrid/search-struct.jsp and type to HolderName cadline You will receive the following result: (151)	 05.06.1996	658605 (180)	05.06.2016 (171)	10 (732)	CADLINE KFT Montevideo u. 3/b H-1037 Budapest (HU) (812)	HU (540)	ArchLine (541)	Reproduction of the mark where the mark is represented in standard characters (511)		 09	Logiciels. (822)	HU, 05.06.1996, 139 775 (300)	HU, 08.12.1995, M95 03675 (831)	AT, BX, CH, CZ, ES, FR, IT, PL, PT, RU

If you need more information to demonstrate that I am the trademark owner please let me know. If you do not need more information, please restore the Cadline article. Thank you. Zoltan Toth Managing director of Cadline Kft. CadLine Ltd. Montevideo u. 3/B 1037 Budapest HU Tel:+36-1-3889733 Fax:+36-1-3889870 Email: tzoltan at cadline dot hu Website: www dot archlinexp dot com User:cadline Cadline (talk) 16:45, 26 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Answered by TomStar81 (who had received the same message) at Cadline's talk page. TomStar81 then blocked him for violating the username policy.

AFC/R
Oh, my mistake. I assumed that the process for accepting redirects were the same as accepting articles. Thanks, ƒingers on  Roids  21:06, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Seeking Consensus
I've read many, many pages since your last talk message.

On this page: Autobiography I find the following:

"'The proper way to get your own writing about yourself in if you really think you can meet the inclusion criteria and are willing to accept having a neutral, non-promotional article is to make a proposal containing the text you want, instead of just putting it up directly, and seek the consensus of the community through discussion.'"

I have created a sub-page to my user page -- User:Lperdue/DraftBio -- and am working on it there. All comments on how to make this better are welcome.

I am particularly interested in how to structure footnotes, specifically:

1. I have extensively footnoted the section dealing with the Da Vinci Code controversy. I have, in most cases, I used the documents filed with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. While federal courts make their filings available online, you need a premium account with their PACER website to buy the documents (at $0.08 per page). For obvious legal reasons, those documents are encrypted so that they cannot be altered.

Because they are court documents, they are in the public domain.

I have purchased the documents and parked them on one of my web sites. I have then linked to them in the footnotes. I have referenced both the Random House documents as well as mine.

These are as original, verifiable and credible a source as exists for the controversy. If these are not adequate, or the citations need editing, I just need to know how.

2. The verification for my bestsellers in the 1980s exists primarily in materials from my publisher. I have scanned those and parked them on my web site. The publisher, Pinnacle Books, filed for Chapter 11 in 1986. The bad news is that they owed me more than $800,000 in royalties. The good news is that all of the materials I have scanned passed into the public domain following the end of their bankruptcy.

Again, these are _not_ documents that I have created, produced or had an influence on.

Thanking everyone in advance for all comments to make this better.

Lperdue (talk) 04:07, 28 March 2009 (UTC)


 * As I understand it, all of the above are primary sources, and therefore should not be used on Wikipedia at all. If there aren't any 3rd party verifiable reliable sources, then I'd suggest just leaving out that section all together.


 * But that's just my understanding... Dori (Talk • Contribs) 02:30, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

To Dori Smith re: Allison Abbate article
My name is Liza Dodson or Mickey7474, I have attempted to put a brief bio for Allison Abbate, but it said I need more verifiable 3rd party sources. I have a friend Sam Slovick, that used his "myspace" for his source. I'm not sure what else is more legitimate than the New York Times, or maybe I'm not understanding the concept, as this is the first thing I have written for Wikipedia. Any advice would be most appreciated.

Thank you for your time, Liza Dodson (or Mickey7474) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mickey7474 (talk • contribs) 04:07, 28 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I said Allison Abbate needed more verifiable sources back when the only source it contained was to Imdb. Once you added some other sources, I made it an article. Thanks for your contribution!


 * Re: Sam Slovick—I looked at his page and said, wow, that could certainly use some cleaning up, so I did. You're absolutely right that the NY Times is a great source, and MySpace is not. Dori (Talk • Contribs) 02:30, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

CMS Made Simple deleted
Hello,

I have submitted a new article to open source CMS Made Simple (http://www.cmsmadesimple.org). This was a combined translation of CMS Made Simple articles from German (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/CMS_made_simple) and Russian (http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/CMS_Made_Simple) already added to Wikipedia.

Why this article is treated as spam and deleted immediately? I did follow the guide how to write the articles and have used all the tips presented their and I gather and sort the information translated very carefully. I have not even made a copy of this article, so that the time spent on it was wasted.

Thank you for your reply, Sonya —Preceding unsigned comment added by CMS Made Simple (talk • contribs) 07:29, 30 March 2009 (UTC)


 * There's a number of points to answer here:
 * The article name was the same as your username. That implies that you're involved with the product, such that you shouldn't be editing it at all. See BESTCOI for more info.
 * No one deletes an article by themselves. In this case, I nominated it for deletion, and I'm Spartacus! did the actual deletion.
 * As I wrote on your talk page, "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"—so no, your work is not gone forever.
 * This article has already been through AFD (see WP:Articles for deletion/CMS Made Simple) once with a consensus of delete, and so is more likely to be speedily deleted when it's recreated.
 * Honestly, in this situation, if it was me, I'd ask for the page to be userfied, and then I'd submit it through AFC. Dori (Talk • Contribs) 20:39, 30 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Hello DoriSmith!
 * Thank you for your quick and competent reply. I am not the developer of the project. I have just had no better idea for username :) Sorry for that. I will follow your recommendations and try to recover the page. Thank you again! —Preceding unsigned comment added by CMS Made Simple (talk • contribs) 07:27, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Nick Wolf
Hello there... Finally someone that helped me!

Hey Dori, perhaps we can communicate here about getting Nick Wolf a wikipedia page

I just wanted to say Thank You for your fixes to my article about Nick Wolf...

I was just wondering if i could perhaps get that page for Nick Wolf up... Allot of people will find in informational... Nick has been compared to another author seen on wikipedia: Alec Greven

All Nick would want is a nice small wikipedia page such as what Alec has... He does not wish to promote his book. Is it at all possible for you to post up the little blurb about Nick? You did a good job with the article and i appreciate it allot!... If you need more facts about Nick being legit feel free to contact me at YankeeUnit2@gmail.com ...

Once again, THANKS for the comment on the article.

Let me know if there is anything you can do...

THANKS! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.151.23.219 (talk) 19:51, 2 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't think that Nick currently qualifies for a Wikipedia article. Alec has a NY Times bestseller with a mainstream publisher. Nick has a self-published book. If you can figure out how he would possibly qualify under the notability guidelines, feel free to add that to the AFC—but currently, I don't think it's going to fly. Sorry 'bout that... Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 20:09, 2 April 2009 (UTC)


 * RESPONSE--


 * I just went over the Notability guidelines for "Creative Professionals" and i found that he WOULD QUALIFY for the Notability Guidelines...


 * I think that Nick would follow the Author profession obviously...
 * Out of the guidelines i feel that he completes these:


 * The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by their peers or successors.
 * He has been commented on as a role model to his peers and a town celebrity. He has also helped others in his town write and publish their own books.


 * The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory or technique.
 * He has the only written book of "101 Pick-Up Lines" & he has the ONLY concept of writing a book not to make money for himself, but to raise the money for cancer which is one of the reasons why he has so much media attention.


 * The person's work either...(c) has won significant critical attention.
 * He has been on 2 Television News Shows, 3 Newspapers and 2 Radio Stations with more scheduled to come. It is also in the works for him to be on The David Letterman Show.


 * Now, i know that i am not the KING of Wikipedia like you; however, now that i pointed out the Notability aspect, would you be kind enough to please add the article for Nick Wolf that we both worked on?... It would be highly appreciated and i don't think that any harm can come from it... Please communicate with me if you have more issues with creating an article for Nick Wolf...


 * Thanks for the help! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.151.23.219 (talk) 21:25, 2 April 2009 (UTC)


 * No, sorry—in this case, "peers" refers to other people already considered notable. Otherwise, the captain of every high school football team could be considered notable!


 * Also, self-publishing books doesn't contribute to notability.


 * By critical attention, WP doesn't mean media attention. A book review from a reliable source is much more useful than a David Letterman appearance.


 * Many people have written books on picking up women. Many people have donated proceeds for books to charitable organizations. Neither is new. If you can find an article in a reliable source that says he originated an entirely new concept, that's another story.


 * ROTFL? Me, King of Wikipedia? Hardly; I'm not even an admin! Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 21:43, 2 April 2009 (UTC)


 * RESPONSE 2--


 * To respond to "Peers" section, i want to point out that Notable people DO CONSIDER NICK NOTABLE. An example is posted on his website... Fellow Funny-Man Gilbery Gottfried finds Nick Notable... HERE IS THE PROOF! http://www.freewebs.com/101pickuplines/Gilbert%20Gottfried%201.jpg


 * To respond to the "Critical Attention" section, i want to point out that Nick did have a book review from a reliable source; a newspaper called The News Times.


 * To respond to "New Concept" section, on FOX and CBS Nick has been credited for being a High School Student author giving money to charity.


 * Does this help, Hopefully we can get it up! lol..... "It's Good To Be The King" - Mell Brooks, History of the World Part 1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.151.23.219 (talk) 21:54, 2 April 2009 (UTC)


 * If you can find a reliable source that covers Gilbert Gottfried saying that, then that would be a factor. A picture on his own web site? Sorry, but no. Keep in mind that the criteria requires several reliable sources quoting several peers, so it's got a ways to go.


 * If you're talking about this New Times article, that's about the author, not a critique of the book.


 * High school students giving money to charity is admirable, but it's not new.


 * My one real piece of advice: create an account of your own! Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 23:35, 2 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Response--


 * If i make an account, who would have to approve the article for Nick Wolf? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.151.23.219 (talk) 02:34, 3 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Everybody, and nobody. No one would have to approve it; so long as you're a registered editor, you can create a page. But any registered editor can tag it for CSD, PROD, or AFD. At this point, I'd have no qualms tagging it for CSD, and I suspect most admins would then delete it promptly. I'd recommend reading Your first article and BESTCOI. But really: register for an account, edit articles on topics where you don't have a conflict of interest for a few months, and then think about it again. There's no hurry for Nick to have an article, really. Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 03:17, 3 April 2009 (UTC)


 * ACCOUNT RESPONSE--


 * I made an account but now this comes up when i try to make an article for Nick Wolf...


 * —Preceding unsigned comment added by YankeeUnit2 (talk • contribs) 13:31, 3 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Ah, so now we're finally getting some truth. I've been assuming good faith, but you've been messing with me.
 * The User:YankeeUnit2 account was created on 17 April 2008—almost a year ago.
 * The article Nick Wolf has been speedily deleted six times, which is why it's now protected.
 * You tried to create the article 101 Pick-Up Lines, which was speedily deleted.
 * You've tried to create WT:Articles for creation/Nick Wolf through AFC at least six times.
 * You've already been blocked once for recreating deleted articles.
 * You've uploaded File:101 Pick-Up Lines Front 1st Edition.jpg twice, and it was deleted.
 * You've added Nick to the Newtown, Connecticut page five times and it's been deleted every time.
 * You've added a mention of Nick's book to Pick-up line five times and it's been deleted every time.
 * Earlier in this thread, I made it clear that Nick Wolf does not meet the criteria for a WP article. Lots of people agree with me (based on the number of deletions and AFC declines). You, however, keep feeling a need to recreate the article, and you can't, due to the above.
 * As I said earlier in this thread, I recommend that you drop the idea of this particular article, and instead edit articles on topics where you don't have a conflict of interest for a few months. At this point, I don't see any reason to continue to assume good faith, and I'll be ignoring any comments from you here that just repeat the same stuff over and over. Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 21:40, 3 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Last words--


 * I apologize... I am sorry that i am not use to this wikipedia posting up and down stuff lingo. I didn't realize you guys were very very picky. At first i thought that the things were'nt rite which is why they were deleted, and i tried fixing them so they would stay up... Your the only user that actually gave me and explanation of what to do..... I thank you for the tips; and i am sorry that i wasted your time...... Hopefully in some time i can get something to remain up at this site... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.151.23.219 (talk) 03:54, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Wells Fargo Center for the Performing Arts
Actually, while the Center has a Santa Rosa postal address, it is outside the City of Santa Rosa. The city limits are nearly a mile south of the Center, near Dennis Lane. --Stepheng3 (talk) 03:36, 5 April 2009 (UTC)


 * In theory, yes, it should be in Larkfield-Wikiup or Mark West. But in day-to-day life, it's thought of as being in Santa Rosa. If you look at the Center's web site, they just say "Santa Rosa," not "Santa Rosa postal address." The Santa Rosa article has included a mention of the Center as a feature of the city for a long time (?). So I'm comfortable putting it in Santa Rosa, unless you think that it's really an issue. Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 04:55, 5 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Er, actually I'm not okay with perpetuating falsehoods from day-to-day life. I wouldn't want Wikipedia to say that the Earth is flat, or that ulcers are primarily caused by stress, or that Columbus was the first person to reach America.  It's certainly useful for readers to know that the Center (and the Airport, for that matter) is/are closely associated with Santa Rosa, but we shouldn't say or imply that it's in Santa Rosa.
 * I'm curious, by the way. Where on the website (outside of postal addresses) do they mention Santa Rosa? --Stepheng3 (talk) 16:12, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * It's in the title of nearly every Web page on the site: "Wells Fargo Center for the Arts Santa Rosa, CA" For instance: Wells Fargo Center for the Arts Technical Specs, Santa Rosa, CA 707-527-7006, ext. 130 and Wells Fargo Center for the Arts, Santa Rosa, CA Mission Statement. It's also common in their PR: their February newsletter had a headline of "Arts Center Earns NEA Grant to Bring Top Notch Dance to Santa Rosa." Here's a recent press release; you'll see that "Santa Rosa" is in the address and in the dateline and the body says "for Wells Fargo Center for the Arts in Santa Rosa."
 * I wouldn't call it "perpetuating falsehoods," myself—it's not as if it's in some other city, after all.
 * And just for the hell of it, some Google hit counts:
 * "wells fargo center" "santa rosa": 78,000
 * "wells fargo center" "sonoma county" "santa rosa": 11,000
 * "wells fargo center" -"sonoma county" "santa rosa": 66,000
 * "wells fargo center" "sonoma county" -"santa rosa": 1,440
 * "wells fargo center" ("mark west" OR larkfield OR wikiup): 1,390
 * "wells fargo center" ("mark west" OR larkfield OR wikiup) -"santa rosa": 33
 * Sounds like Google's got an opinion as to where it's located... Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 02:51, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree that the Center is not in any other city; it is on unincorporated land in Sonoma County.
 * All the places where Santa Rosa is mentioned in connection with 50 Mark West Springs Road (such as in the footers of the webpages) are clearly referring to its postal address, not the municipality. Lots of properties in unincorporated areas of the County (such as Larkfield) get their mail via the post office of a nearby city, and this is an example of that phenomenon.
 * The Google hits indicate an association, not a location. For instance, if you got lots of Google hits combining "Guantanamo Bay" and "United States" that would not imply that the bay was located in the U.S.
 * The "Top Notch Dance to Santa Rosa" blurb is the best evidence you've found so far. However, I believe the writer was using "Santa Rosa" in some vague or proximate sense. I hold an encyclopedia to a higher standard of accuracy than a promotional website.
 * My reading of the map might be considered original research. For stronger evidence that the address is in an unincorporated area, anyone can use the Registrar of Voter's district lookup page.  Select "Santa Rosa" and "Mark West Springs Road" and "50 - 50 - E" and it will tell you that the address in question is "Unincorporated Area."
 * How attached are you to the current wording? I'd be fine saying that the Center is closely/strongly associated with the City, or located just outside the City, or has a Santa Rosa postal address.  I might even go for "on the outskirts of" the City.  However, I stubbornly object to saying that it's "in" the City, since it lies outside the city limits, and that's how cities are defined. --Stepheng3 (talk) 05:47, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Temporary injunction and your use of my monobook script
Hi DoriSmith,

I am pleased to see that you have included my monobook script for delinking dates in your monobook; I hope you've found it useful.

I have to let you know on your talk page that ArbCom has announced a temporary injunction against the "mass delinking of dates". You can still delink dates on an occasional basis; however, you may wish to be cautious and use the script only for its non-date functions until the issue is resolved by an RFC poll. You may wish to express your view on autoformatting and date linking in the RFC at: Date_formatting_and_linking_poll.

Regards Lightmouse (talk) 22:19, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Lightwarrior2
Hello Mrs.Dori!!

Please delete also my account and images (not only my article).

Thanks.

Best regards.

--Lightwarrior2 (talk) 03:22, 10 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm not an admin, so I don't have the capability to delete anything.


 * I strongly suggest, though, that you read Userfication. Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 03:37, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Notability.
Hello,

Just a note, a person does not have to have a WP page to be notable. Thanks!--gordonrox24 (talk) 02:53, 18 April 2009 (UTC)


 * If they don't have a WP page, they need (per WP:WPSCH/AG): "a citation a) to verify that they did indeed attend the school and b) to verify the statement of their notability in their short one or two line description." Any alumni added with no citations and without their own WP page can and should be deleted. I've gone into more detail about this over here on the talk page if you'd like to discuss this. Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 04:00, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Prods removed
Hi, DoriSmith. I just removed PROD templates towards deletion which you had placed on two Oyster Bay-related articles. I believe you are aware of a somewhat cooperative effort to fix up Oyster Bay History Walk first, instead. Paste, Beeswaxcandle, and I have all been doing some editing there. Please join!

I'd rather not fight separate AfD or other battles. Certainly I would object to the accuracy of your assertion in one of the prods that the article's material is already included in the History Walk article. There is material in these two articles which is not captured appropriately there yet, and it is helpful to keep the articles in place while we work on them. Then implement redirects or uncontested deletes for those articles. So, I am trying to ask you nicely, to help us do a nicer job, going in the same direction eventually. doncram (talk) 19:49, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, I looked at both of them, and saw that the information had all been moved in—which is why I started the WP:PROD. What parts did you think weren't?
 * And, btw, I thought I was being helpful. Given that no articles currently link to those two pages, I figured it was a good idea for someone who User:Inoysterbay hadn't decided was already against him to do the prod. Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 19:53, 22 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Okay, I'm sorry, i see there is more on both of the Captain Kidd and Typhoid Mary sections of the Oyster Bay History Walk than i was aware of. I checked the contribution history at the History Walk article and found no edits by you.  I didn't notice that material being addressed already somewhat by others.  So sorry about my too-quick statement about the one point.  But, anyhow, the History Walk article is itself unstable.  It's not clear yet how long the passages will be.  I'd rather not swap in material, delete articles, then later find that we want to edit down those sections and swap material back out to the articles (then to recreate them?).  We might find new sources with new material, too, in the process.  Why not just keep the other articles in place while we work until reasonably satisfied on the tour article.  And, agree in the Talk there before deleting other articles. doncram (talk) 20:05, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Discussion moved to Talk:Oyster Bay History Walk.

Dynamy
Originally at User talk:Mgreason :

Regarding Dynamy and Santa Rosa, California: I actually was looking into this recently for something else altogether, and found out that the SR office never opened. I've changed the two articles accordingly. Hope that's okay—Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 20:44, 22 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Whenever more current information is available, the original article should be updated. Do you have a reliable source you can cite for this? Mgreason (talk) 20:48, 22 April 2009 (UTC)


 * It's not so much that there's evidence that it doesn't exist as there's no evidence that it does. If you go to their home page, there are no links to post-2007 pages that mention "Santa Rosa." The last newsletter to mention SR was in Winter 2007—over two years ago. If you look at the Dynamy SR web site, it hasn't been updated in almost four years. If you look at the staff directory, it's entirely in MA. All of their housing is in Worcester. The Directions to Dynamy page only gives directions to Worcester. And so on.
 * If you can find evidence that there is a Santa Rosa program, I'd love to know about it. Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 06:58, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Stanster69
I've replied to your post in User_talk:Stanster69, cheers,  Chzz  ►  02:52, 8 May 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) 17:02, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Jon Ramvi
I noticed you cleaned up and edited the article about Jon Ramvi, but the talk page hasn't been updated on what is needed to be done. Please clarify
 * This biography of a living person needs additional references or sources for verification. Tagged since May 2009.
 * What does this mean? How can I contribute to fixing this point? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ramvi (talk • contribs) 13:57, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
 * There are actually a few different questions here. To take them one at a time:
 * The article needs secondary sources. Right now, all the article's references are to interviews with the subject, which are primary sources.
 * There are several statements in the article that aren't sourced at all (his birthdate, for instance).
 * Assuming you are Jon Ramvi, then the answer is that you shouldn't be doing anything with this article at all. That also applies to the articles Easy Peasy, List of Netbook Distributions, Netbook, Comparison of Linux distributions, and so on.
 * Sorry if that comes off as a little harsh, but those are WP's policies (which is why I do very little editing on topics related to JavaScript, for instance). I strongly recommend that you read Wikipedia's best practices for editors with conflicts of interest. Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 21:02, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Roger that —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ramvi (talk • contribs) 07:54, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I just got this notification. I should not increase it's quality of information and references? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ramvi (talk • contribs) 11:26, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
 * It sounds to me like something that you might want to discuss with Widefox (Talk), as he's the one who tagged it with prod. And anyone can remove a prod tag, of course. Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 03:43, 24 May 2009 (UTC)