User talk:Gparyani/Archive 1

First section
About this edit, what is the purpose/use of displaying font *file* names instead of the font names? What purpose does it serve? You should mention that in the article. - xpclient  Talk 07:11, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Secunderabad Duronto
Do you think it is a good idea to display fares in US Dollars? Three problems with this :

1. The seats are always sold in INR with exchange rate of the day applicable.

2. This sale is applicable to foreign tourists or if the sale has been concluded by travel agents outside India.

3. How does one cope with the daily fluctuations to the currency market?

I propose removal of the fare chart entirely or atleast the fare in US Dollars.

Superfast1111 (talk) 16:55, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Altered speedy deletion rationale: Sialhawk
Hello Gparyani, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I deleted Sialhawk, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided. The speedy deletion criteria are extremely narrow and specific, and the process is more effective if the correct criterion is used. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. the panda ₯’ 10:48, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Welcome message
Hello, thank you, I guess?

May I ask why you posted a welcome message on my page? Or was it an honest mistake? We don't usually greet people who's been for a while, but thanks anyway!

Have a great day. 舎利弗 (talk) 04:47, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

User:舎利弗: Edits from you were showing up in the list of contributions from new users, so I assumed you were a new user. Once you become autoconfirmed, your contributions will no longer show up in that list. Sorry about that. Gparyani (talk) 04:54, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
 * No worries, and thank you as well. :) 舎利弗 (talk) 04:56, 24 May 2014 (UTC)


 * User:舎利弗: You seem to meet the criteria for being autoconfirmed. I wonder why you aren't. Why is that? Gparyani (talk) 04:59, 24 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Actually, my preference page says that I'm already autoconfirmed. Actually this has been the case since a few days ago that's why I've been able to start using Twinkle. Hmm, weird. 舎利弗 (talk) 05:01, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated
Hi, I'm MrX. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Hong Kong Tea Festival, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. - MrX 00:18, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Edit summaries
Please make sure to include an edit summary with every edit. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history. Please try to include an edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. Thanks. -Fnlayson (talk) 16:00, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

U5 (user page abuse)
Hi. Just a word (or a few...) about U5. It's not for things like User:Nintendo's page. It's for people who post full CVs (resumés), fantasy football charts or fantasy Big Brother things, or who just use it for ranting about something. It's mainly for the people who don't do any other editing (or only one or two things) than their user page. They're obviously either using Wikipedia as a free web host or for advertising themselves. OK? Peridon (talk) 18:50, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Template:Sockpuppetry
When you tag a template for deletion,it is important to place the deletion tag between &lt;noinclude> and &lt;/noinclude>,so the deletion tag will not appear in pages which uses the template.Ssaz 12 (talk) 12:44, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: User:Siraj Aibani
Hello Gparyani, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of User:Siraj Aibani, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The reason given is not a valid speedy deletion criterion. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. the panda ₯’ 00:32, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Warang Chiti
Hello Gparyani, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Warang Chiti, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. § FreeRangeFrog croak 04:27, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Recent edits to Westview High School (San Diego)
I noticed that you recently added back the section that I had rolled back in this article. This section is largely uninformative and describes a system that is common to almost every high school in the United States. Furthermore, as you pointed out, it is entirely unreferenced, and provides no addition to the article. In accordance with WP:MOS, it should be removed.

Furthermore, it is not necessary to include the improve reference tag in every section lacking in references. It is already evident that in the two statements, one of them needs a citation. This tag, should, in general, refer to larger sections of largely unreferenced material.

I do not wish to start and edit war. Please provide your logic for keeping the tag and the section before reverting my edits, as I have here. &mdash;  P C  B  16:50, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
 * User:Pzoxicuvybtnrm: I added it back because I found a reference for that formerly unreferenced paragraph. I happen to study at this school myself, so I was able to talk with the administrators there and they themselves told me that what is there is truly true. Gparyani (talk) 19:31, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * However, while it may be true, it is uninformative because it refers to a situation that occurs in almost every school. In addition, this constitutes WP:OR which should not be used to reference the article. &mdash;  P C  B  16:42, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: User:Leilanistephens
Hello Gparyani. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of User:Leilanistephens, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: content is acceptable per WP:UPYES. Please check that out before tagging any more user pages, and be careful not to bite the newbies. Thanks. JohnCD (talk) 17:18, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Please stop editing archives
There's no need to remove links to the list of banned users anywhere but live policy pages and (sometimes) discussions. Please stop removing the link from archives. Protonk (talk) 19:42, 8 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Sorry about that. I was using Twinkle's automated unlink feature, which removes them everywhere. Gparyani (talk) 23:15, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

I DON'T UNDERSTAND!
Please tell me what you are talking about! I don't understand! Koo-koo-klock-copyer (talk) 21:25, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Please respect the talk page guidelines when posting on other people's talk pages. Your user page must closely relate to Wikipedia's goals. You seem to have no purpose to Wikipedia other than to create your page. For more information, please see your own talk page. Gparyani (talk) 21:28, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
And here's a kitten to (electronically) play with while you (electronically) drink the beer!

Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   05:20, 16 October 2014 (UTC) 

VicenteJensen
Ones like that (about five lines, claiming to live in a place and finishing with 'Here's my website...') aren't U5 - they're G11. They're a spambot's work. I block them on sight. U5 is really for the posters of CVs, fantasy football tables and so on. Peridon (talk) 19:42, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

User:PabloOsvaldo17
Can you please explain why you tagged this account as a sock puppet? I understand the allegation that he evaded his block, but, first, the tag was false, and second, it's not your job to tag users in this way. Leave it to administrators, SPI clerks, and checkusers. I also removed the tag from the IP's user page. I don't want to see you do any of this again, even though I'm assuming it was done in good faith.--Bbb23 (talk) 06:00, 3 February 2015 (UTC) -- Unit388 (talk) 06:21, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Why did you tag A7?
You marked This article for non-notable person(s). The articles references clearly show he has published films, and has had lead roles if popular movie titles. Please be more careful next time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Unit388 (talk • contribs) 06:33, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Illuminati checker
Thanks for changing the speedy on Illuminati checker, I hit the wrong one. (So far this guy has been creating odd pages and then quickly putting up g7's to hide it, odd) Wgolf (talk) 23:55, 10 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Report him to WP:AIV. You may also want to give him a 4im warning for creating inappropriate pages (as he keeps doing it). Gparyani (talk) 23:57, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

unsure if my contest of the speedy deletion of my user page was accepted
My user page is no longer showing a notice for speedy deletion, so does this mean it won't be deleted, and I can remove the my objection to its deletion from my talk page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by JarJarBinksLikesStarWars (talk • contribs)


 * I removed the tag because of your edits. Feel free to remove the objection :) Gparyani (talk) 06:08, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I do want to step in a little here and say that while Wikipedia is not censored, it's almost always a bad idea to use profanity since it doesn't really come across well. In other words, most people will view profanity as someone being abusive, especially if there is a dispute going on somewhere. Even if you didn't mean it to come across badly and meant it to be funny (which often happens on here), you can't guarantee that this will be how the other person will see the comment as you aren't there to provide context via your inflections, mannerisms, etc. I use profanity pretty frequently IRL but not on here for that very reason. Tokyogirl79  (｡◕‿◕｡)   06:29, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Are you aware of SineBot?
You left a message on my talk page reminding me to sign posts on others' talk pages, after I forgot to sign a post on HJ Mitchell's talk page. I always intend to sign with the four tildes, but I forgot. It really isn't worth your time to remind me, or anyone else about this, since SineBot takes care of this now. I am not upset at the notice, but I would appreciate not getting such a large message every on my talk page every time I forget to sign something on a talk page. And, it is interesting that you noticed this even though it wasn't your talk page, and you took the time to post a notice to my talk page over something that doesn't even matter. Have you been stalking me? JarJarBinksLikesStarWars (talk) 20:31, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Nah, it was probably because of the comment on Gparyani's page, since you didn't sign that one. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   06:30, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Speedying basic user pages
I'm curious why you tagged this page for speedy deletion. It's well within WP:UPYES to have a short introduction to oneself. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:25, 23 February 2015 (UTC)


 * This was also extremely WP:BITEy. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:27, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

SATMAP Inc.
My apologies as I am new to Wikipedia, and was trying to figure how to move it to a draft section. ABonheur (talk) 06:25, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

my user page
that link is to my personal home page, according to User_pages:

"You are also welcome to include a simple link to your personal home page, although you should not surround it with any promotional language."

I can put my personal home page link there, why speedy deletion my page again and again... --Xmercury (talk) 23:25, 15 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Please read that page again. Gparyani (talk) 23:41, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Clarification
Can you please clarify why you removed my article request? I tried to follow the guidelines for requesting an article, but I'm new and may have missed something. Thanks! 4rallyhealth (talk) 04:48, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I didn't; I just warned you adequately after someone else sent you the right kind of warning. Check your talk page's revision history to see who did. Gparyani (talk) 05:28, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks, I was able to see what happened there. I still don't understand why the edit was removed, though.  I tried to follow the guidelines for submitting an article request.  I could understand if the request was ignored, but I don't understand how an article request is unconstructive. Any guidance you could offer would be greatly appreciated.  Thanks again! 4rallyhealth (talk) 06:01, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

New User Asking for Help
Hello,

I was interested in adding to the Ernie Broglio page to follow a similar structure as other sports biographies (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernie_Broglio). I was planning on adding information to the similar format of the Lou Brock article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lou_Brock). I was interested in adding a brief early life section, baseball career and baseball statistics section.

I am just concerned with the regulations for editing biographies policy.

Please let me know if I can carry on with this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fry125 (talk • contribs) 19:13, 23 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages. You may proceed, so long as your contributions are reliably sourced. See our policy on biographies of living people for more information. Gparyani (talk) 19:17, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you kindly for reverting at my talk page. I know it was in good faith, but, I prefer to leave such posts. Unless terrible vandalism, I like to leave it there for the record. In this case, it was not even really vandalism. Also, although I appreciate the effort, it is not necessary for you to reply to posters at my talk page. I completely assume good faith, so please do not be offended. I am, though, very happy to have talk page stalkers such as you in case there is some reason for an emergency revert. Many thanks again. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:29, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Wavelength Capital Management
Why did you remove the db-g11 (WP:SPAM) tag from this article? WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 17:54, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't remember why I did now that the page is deleted, but most likely it was because I didn't think it was promotion at the time. It still met other deletion criteria, so I thought it was inconsequential if it was removed. But once again, I don't know what I was thinking at the time. Gparyani (talk) 23:13, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

List of most viewed kpop music videos
Hello, my friend. You PRODded List of most viewed kpop music videos, so I thought I'd point you to Articles for deletion/List of most viewed kpop music videos. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 02:01, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Design39Campus


The article Design39Campus has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * This is a very short article about a seemingly unnotable organization.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on |the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Compassionate727 (talk) 14:22, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Just letting you know I figured out what was going on there, sort of. Really just why the user they were tagged as a sock of appeared not to exist. They were automatically renamed as part of WP:SUL finalization earlier this year. They are now called. Why that user chose to label themselves as a sock of that person is another matter. As they don't appear to have been actively socking recently it seems unlikely a new uer would even be aware of them, suggesting that the tag is in fact telling the truth. Some trolls are weird like that, they actually want to get caught and blocked again, like that's something to be proud of. I did block them, only I did it per WP:NOTHERE, which is not dependent on them being a sock as well. I don't know that it is worth bothering to rename the sock categories or fix all the templates, but I did leave notes at the relevant sock category pages for future reference. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:50, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Socks
I understand. Good idea. If as it seems, that is the case, I think I wasted my time trying to teach the editor our guidelines on the talk page. If you need any help now or in the future you can let me know. Regards.--Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 09:57, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Take a look at Toitures, happy hunting.--Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 05:44, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Submitted both accounts for a sockpuppet investigation. Also, that page has been deleted as A10. Gparyani (talk) 15:38, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Good, it is clear that you are right. Unfortunately I think they are just single purpose accounts but at least you are sending them a clear message.--Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 19:12, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Even if they are single-purpose, the paid agency will still have a direct blow on them because of autoblocks. Gparyani (talk) 19:20, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Great!, I did not know about that feature.--Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 19:26, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Your edit at User talk:GGGGGGGGGG
Thanks for the thought, but there's no policy at all against using "GGGGGGGGGG" as a username.  Dwpaul  Talk   22:45, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Not a hoax
Your tagging of Lusty Lady Strike as a hoax shows a lack of WP:BEFORE. A simple Google search would have shown that this was an actual strike at a "gentelman's club"; the first instance of labor organization in the sex workers' trade. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 16:50, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Stose (Musician) speedy deletion request
I believe you should google search stose before requesting these please, the article is genuine and real and about him — Preceding unsigned comment added by Toplad191 (talk • contribs) 00:55, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Toplad191, I can see where Stose exists and his music can be purchased, but I can't see where he'd pass notability guidelines for a musician. You need to show where he's been the focus of coverage in independent and reliable sources. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  04:07, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
 * It also looks like it was unambiguous copyright infringement of this link, which poses other issues. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  04:09, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

note
I am sorry for breaking Wikipedia today. I will not try to do that again. thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TristanAlessi612 (talk • contribs) 21:57, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Punjab Land Development Company
"If there is a dispute over whether a page meets the criteria, the issue is typically taken to deletion discussions...rather than being deleted." "Speedy deletion is meant to remove pages that are so obviously inappropriate for Wikipedia that they have no chance of surviving a deletion discussion. Speedy deletion should not be used except in the most obvious cases." (WP:DP) That is, if there is any chance the article would survive a deletion debate then speedy deletion is an unsuitable process. That certainly means that a topic thought to be, or actually is, notable is not eligible for A7. SpinningSpark 07:39, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Speedy and User: pages
Hi there. This is not an example of using your userpage as a webhost. The criterion applies to userpages that appear to be advertisements or resumes, not simply "Hi, I'm " pages. Thanks. Keegan (talk) 05:23, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of a new user's page
I think your nomination here is unwarranted. That user literally registered less than 30 minutes ago and you nominated the page one minute after it was created by the user's first edit (and the page you nominated is neither spam nor vandalism). You didn't even leave a message on that user's talk page beforehand. That's the most significant problem in my opinion. Dustin ( talk ) 00:23, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Assuming that editor does not make any other edits, I guess it doesn't matter whether or not its userpage is deleted, but I just think of what I'd do if I decided to become a registered user, created a user page, and suddenly had it instantly nominated under the CSD. I don't want to cause trouble and I'm not saying you don't have good intentions, but I think it would have been nice had you at least left a talk page notice beforehand. If you have any questions, leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Dustin ( talk ) 00:43, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion Nomination of User:Sacred Attention Therapy
Thank you for your message notifying me of the deletion of my drafted page "Sacred Attention Therapy" for the reasons stated. I am new to Wikipedia and and quickly learning. Is it possible to have your administrators transfer the text I had started in the "Sacred Attention Therapy" page to my 'Sandbox' so that I can continue to work on what was a draft of the article?

With much appreciation for any assistance you can provide. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sacred Attention Therapy (talk • contribs) 17:30, 1 July 2015 (UTC)


 * I suggest you contact the administrator who deleted your user page. If you already contacted them, contact someone in Category:Wikipedia administrators willing to provide copies of deleted articles.


 * Also, another thought: Your username appears to represent a company or group of people rather than you as an individual. Per the username policy, such usernames aren't allowed and are blocked. I suggest changing your username to avoid a potential username block. Gparyani (talk) 18:09, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

CSD U5
Please be more careful when making CSD U5 nominations like this one. I see others have mentioned this kind of thing before. While removing spam from Wikipedia is a major priority, in general it's best to assume good faith about a new user's intentions, especially one who hasn't edited anything yet and is only seeking to introduce themselves. Thanks. —  Earwig   talk 06:54, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Corey parent
Greetings! I see you nominated Corey parent for speedy deletion. As a member of the Vermont state legislature, Parent is notable per WP:POLITICAN, so the article is ineligible for speedy deletion. —C.Fred (talk) 19:31, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Vandalism?
On what basis did you tag Rashid Mohamadi as vandalism? WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 18:25, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Really short foreign language articles are usually vandalism, but this particular one (after checking a machine translation) wasn't. It is, however, an A7. Gparyani (talk) 18:27, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated
Hi, I'm Largoplazo. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Alan Reeves (composer), and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. —Largo Plazo (talk) 09:55, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Peggy Speas
Can you help me understand why you moved this article to user space? It wasn't perfect yet, but it was a perfectly valid, well-referenced stub. It's possible that the subject won't end up being notable enough, but I don't think this article was so outside the bounds of notability that it should be been summarily moved. A tag would have sufficed. I'm just concerned that this comes across as a little WP:BITE-y, even if that wasn't your intention. agt x 20:28, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
 * If it remained in article space, someone would likely come by and delete it as A7, even if it doesn't meet the criterion per se. The author said in the edit summary that he/she intends to work on it, so I moved it to a "safe haven" where the user can continue to work on it without the risk of deletion. Gparyani (talk) 20:33, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I disagree in the strongest possible terms. It's not just that this doesn't meet A7 "per se." It is far from being an A7 and would not have been deleted as such. A7 means no credible claim to notability at all. When you moved the article, it noted that the subject was a professor at a major university and the head of the Navajo Language Academy. Is that notability? I don't know, which is why a tag would have been appropriate. There's enough here that other members of the community could have edited collaboratively. This isn't so far from an acceptable Wikipedia article that it needed to be moved to user space. agt x  20:38, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay, I agree. As soon as the initial article gets deleted, the userspace draft can be moved back to article space as another page won't be standing in the way. The mere fact that she's a professor didn't seem like a credible claim of significance to me, as in my opinion, for it to be one, the professor must have achieved some title (e.g. emeritus) or done something else that is notable; as such, I would have tagged it for speedy deletion as an A7. However, I chose to userfy to let the author work on it. Since you disagree with me, though, I'll let it get moved back to article space, and then consider starting an AfD (what I normally do if someone else disagrees with my tagging). Gparyani (talk) 20:43, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Sounds good, thank you. Just as a follow up, I do not think that the argument that a person doesn't meet WP:PROF would stand for a speedy. Note the second numbered point on that page, that you don't have to establish notability to avoid speedy deletion. A7 is not intended for articles like this. Here, the person's academic achievements might lead to their article being kept, and that's enough for it not to be tagged A7. agt x  20:49, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
 * It's just that as a new page patroller, one sometimes has to make fast, quick decisions (especially to remove spam and copyvios), and personally I'd prefer to tag an article for deletion and have it later removed than not tag it at all. Gparyani (talk) 20:54, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I don't mean to harp on this, but that's not a good answer. There's no deadline here. If you think you're patrolling too fast to make the right decision, then you need to slow down. When you mark a brand new editor's page for speedy, it sends them the message that they're not welcome here, and that's bad. Speedy is meant for clear cases. There is simply no way that you could have identified this article as obvious spam, and you didn't tag it as a copyvio. If it's unclear whether something should be marked for speedy, then it shouldn't be so marked. I'd urge you to reread WP:SPEEDY, especially this part. agt x 21:02, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'll keep that in mind. And by the way, I didn't say "one always has to make fast, quick decisions"; I said "one sometimes has to make fast, quick decisions"... Gparyani (talk) 21:04, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Red sandbox
Now at User:Gparyani/sandbox 2. Again, thanks. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:46, 28 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Just to let you know, I did make a few more changes after updating User:Anna Frodesiak/Cuw-not-deleted-notice. I was on a short holiday, and when I got back, a few things glared at me. Actually, "...Hello! I am glad you are here..." still sounds odd somehow. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:01, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I replaced it with "I am glad to see you here". I also reverted your change to split the "please do not be..." because if two clauses are similar, a semicolon is generally preferred over a sentence break; a sentence break is usually used only when the two clauses are opposite (or unrelated) from one another. Gparyani (talk) 06:09, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I like your "I am glad...". I still prefer two sentences at the end. I care how the reader reads it, not what is grammatically right. Also, I hate semi-colons for some reason. Cheers. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:17, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Idea Couture
Hello Gparyani. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Idea Couture, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: '''An article about a company is not intrinsically G11. This article may not meet notability criteria but it is written neutrally enough to pass G11.''' Thank you. &mdash;Darkwind (talk) 00:23, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Prince Osei Owusu
Owusu clearly meets WP:NSOCCER. He appeared in the 3. Liga --McBesieger (talk) 00:07, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Pratva
FYI it's already been prodded once; creator removed prod saying "I'll talk to Crystallizedcarbon on his talkpage!", but has not yet done so. &mdash;George8211 / T 17:51, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

ManojPhulwaria
I have deleted this page as it was clearly a personal profile, and not an encyclopedia article. However, you tagged it as vandalism and I'm curious as to how you came to that conclusion. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:02, 3 August 2015 (UTC)


 * And today I find that you nominated 2015 Asian Women's Club Volleyball Championship as lacking context. The article is in poor shape, but the title itself provides sufficient context, and there was a little content that made it more clear, so that was just wrong on its face. It only took me a few seconds to find that we have an entire series of articles on these competiions and it just needs some editing, not deletion. Please be more careful when tagging things for speedy deletion, which is only for the most obvious, hopeless articles that will never be up to Wikipedia standards, not just poorly written articles on notable topics. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:01, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 4 August
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 11:40, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
 * On the Adobe Creative Cloud page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=674566332 your edit] caused an unnamed parameter error (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F674566332%7CAdobe Creative Cloud%5D%5D Ask for help])

On the review of Go To Hex
It was a little hard to tell from your message (thanks for being speedy btw) but is the page currently being deleted? If so that is perfectly okay now that you send me that great info and links so I can actually make credible content thanks to it. That and I now know i can do all the editing for it that I want for it in my sandbox until it is ready. Great help and thanks! Put some Honey on it! (talk) 05:14, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Hallo,
The site is finished Maltin Kant (talk) 22:59, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Benito Corghi
Why the topic is not important? He is a victim of the eastgerman border system, like, for instance, Peter Fechter or Marienetta Jirkowsky. This is my first article in the english WP - so tell me, if I see something wrong. Greetings,--Giebenrath (talk) 17:38, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Lineage 3 is not Lineage Eternal
Lineage 3 is not Lineage Eternal. Lineage Eternal is an adapt game from Lineage (1). So, i suggest for remove re-direct Lineage 3 page to Lineage Eternal page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CongNong (talk • contribs) 23:17, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I get what you're saying, but since blanking pages is considered vandalism, even if you mean well, I had to revert it. If you think the redirect is not a plausible redirect, I suggest you start a discussion at Redirects for discussion, mentioning your concerns and providing reliable sources to support your cause, if needed.
 * On a side note, most blatantly implausible redirects can be speedily deleted under CSD R3, but since this one isn't blatantly implausible (as far as I can tell, and probably what others here can tell too), I suggest you start a deletion discussion at Redirects for discussion so that the redirect can actually get deleted instead of merely blanked. Gparyani (talk) 04:52, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

BLP prod
Just a head's up that sources to support a BLP need to be reliable, so a prod template can stay in place if there are sources that are not reliable. Cheers Flat Out (talk) 04:59, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Correct, but in order for the tag to be added in the first place, it must contain no sources whatsoever. Gparyani (talk) 07:08, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Yep, no sources. Flat Out (talk) 07:11, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay, guess I was wrong. Go ahead and add back the PROD; it may not actually be needed due to the AfD nomination, though. Gparyani (talk) 07:14, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Nah its fine let's see the AfD play out. Best wishes Flat Out (talk) 07:54, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

On your definition of a hoax
If something actually happened, then it is not a hoax. Don't mark pages as hoaxes when they are real events that you were just too lazy to investigate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Heidiwashere (talk • contribs) 01:51, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that, as no reliable sources existed at the time you created the article. Now there are, and the last few ones appear to have been published a few minutes ago. Gparyani (talk) 02:46, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of article about HitFox
Hey Gparyani. Thanks for all the input on my talk page. I had read the suggested articles beforehand. Regarding the rules concerning writing about companies what stuck out most to me was: "Wikipedia requires significant coverage in multiple independent sources for articles on organizations and companies". That's why I've listed so many external references in order to show the significance (e.g. sources like the reputable "Forbes" or "Techcrunch"). Can you give me some more hints and help how to make the article more significant? Or tell me what concerned you most about it? Thanks in advance! Fri0728 (talk) 09:51, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Your article appeared to have a promotional tone. Please see WP:NOTADVERTISING for more info. Also, your article may have lacked a credible claim of significance, or a claim that the subject is notable enough to meet the inclusion criteria. Gparyani (talk) 16:03, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Tagging of Ignatius Mystkowski
You tagged Ignatius Mystkowski for speedy deletion with A7 (no indication of significance) also for "blatant vandalism".

As for A7, it seems to me that "During the January Uprising he commanded a large branch of the insurgency . Along with his soldiers, he defeated the Russians in the Battle of Stok in early May 1863 and promoted to the rank of lieutenant colonel." is a claim of significance. Do you disagree?

As for vandalism, please do remember that no good-faith attempt to improve the project is vandalism; even if misguided or incorrect it isn't vandalism. Or do you think this is a total hoax? That would indeed be vandalism, but I see no indication of it, and you didn't say as much. If not that, why did you think this was vandalism? Dis you see something that I have missed? DES (talk) 02:16, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I thought it was a hoax, so I tagged it as G3. I also added A7 as I thought it might be, and even Template:Db-multiple says that "the page may be deleted under any criterion that is valid". Unfortunately, that template does not allow for specialized versions of criteria (like the "hoax" version of G3 or the several different subject-specific versions of A7, for instance). Gparyani (talk) 03:43, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
 * OK I understand that. Another time you could make a talk page post or just indicate the specifics in the edit summary. A reviewing admin should look at either of those. I am curious, what made you think it was a hoax?
 * Do remember that speedy deletion is for blatant hoaxes, that is ones where there is no real question. If you aren't sure, please do a bit of googleing before tagging. There isn't a huge rush.
 * As for A7, please remember that if there is any credible claim of significance, even if there are no supporting sources, A7 doesn't apply.
 * Why am i going into this in so much detail? For two major reasons. First, if a new or fairly new editor creates an article and it is promptly tagged for deletion when id ought not to be, we may lose an editor. See WP:BITE.  Secondly, a speedy deletion is often checked by only two people, the tagger and the reviewing admin. The admins is supposed to be sure that a page fits at least one of the criteria before deleting, but admins get in a hurry also, and are just human. The tagger should also try hard to tag only appropriate pages, ones that ought to be deleted under the criteria.
 * I understand that you were attempting to review new pages and keep improper pages out of Wikipedia, and that is a much-needed function. But patrollers need to learn the criteria and how to apply them, so when I find a tag I disagree with, I often leave a note for the tagger, and when I don't understand what the tagger had in mind, I ask questions. Sometimes I make mistakes, and decline a tag when i should have deleted the page. Thank you for your help on the project. DES (talk) 04:13, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the trouble. If only Twinkle would let me provide an edit summary... Gparyani (talk) 04:41, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Don't do this, please
Gparyani, this type of comment is not appropriate. Your comments there, speaking poorly of someone in the third person as if everything you write on Wikipedia isn't in public, have been rude. Trying to delete what you thought was an attack page was a nice thing to do, even if it was a mistake. "I was trying to be nice but I made a mistake and I apologize" would have settled the issue. Instead, you've made insulting comments, in multiple venues. You say you fear personal attacks in response to your deletion nomination, but so far you're the one making them. The matter is settled; stop now. Opabinia regalis (talk) 00:55, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that. I didn't mean for it to be a personal attack, though, but now I understand, and won't do it again. Gparyani (talk) 01:35, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
 * In fact, I'll try not to interact or otherwise mention him for a week, or possibly more. Gparyani (talk) 01:56, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you (though I hope you see the irony in apologizing for that particular post... ;) I do want to say, it's not just about any specific person; if it weren't Alakzi it'd be someone else eventually. Anna is right about the effects on you (pie!) but also, talking about someone that way can be hurtful to them in ways you don't think about if you don't think they're part of your audience. Opabinia regalis (talk) 07:11, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

17:59:00, 17 September 2015 review of submission by ChuckGranite
ChuckGranite (talk) 17:59, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Plebeia remota
Hello Gparyani. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Plebeia remota, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Per the wording of the criteria " Similarly, this criterion does not cover a page having only an infobox". Thank you. Courcelles (talk) 23:10, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

18:41:41, 17 September 2015 review of submission by FactsnotFiction2015
Hi Gparyani, hope you are having a nice day. Thanks for reviewing the NetNames post. I am just about to attempt a re-write but wondered if you might add some clarification?

Firstly. The advertising tone. Was it that the reference links were pointing at netnames.com? Or that particular sections were written not from a neutral point of view? I can definitely find alternative reference sources and change the tone of specific sections. Any chance you could highlight the sections that you found particularly biased? I would really appreciate it.

Best,

FactsnotFiction2015 (talk) 18:41, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

FactsnotFiction2015 (talk) 18:41, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Your submission was declined for both reasons; in fact, most of it is how the company itself describes it. Please see WP:NPOV and WP:RS to help you further improve your draft before resubmitting. Gparyani (talk) 23:31, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Gparyani, will amend accordingly. FactsnotFiction2015 (talk) 19:44, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

14:48:11, 18 September 2015 review of submission by Chy syl
Hi Gparyani. Thanks for reviewing my article and for giving some tips on how to proceed. I have been looking extensively into using external notable links and how to use them in the article but realise I might have done something wrong on the level referencing. Is that also the reason why you declined the article? Or would it have to do with the quality of the links that I have used. Sorry for asking. I am new to all of this and want to make sure that my contribution lasts:) Anything you can share with me would be highly appreciated. Thanks!! Chy syl (talk) 14:48, 18 September 2015 (UTC) Chy syl (talk) 14:48, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I declined your submission because, if it were accepted, it would merit an immediate deletion per our criteria for speedy deletion. Specifically, it would qualify under section A7, which states that articles about websites or web content, along with a bunch of other eligible subjects, can be speedily deleted if they lack what is called a credible claim of significance. In other words, in order for your article to not be deleted for this reason, it must contain at least one credible claim why your article may be significant. Please see my previous link for more info. Also note that even though the article may not meet the speedy deletion criteria, it may still be deleted through other venues such as WP:AfD if it does not meet the notability criteria.
 * In addition, your references could use some work. In particular, you'd want to use reliable sources to support your claims. Gparyani (talk) 16:05, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Gparyani. This is good feedback and very helpful for me to further work on the structure of the article and to properly cite to the sources used. With regards to my sources, I have seen that 12 out of 13 references used have been 'retrieved'. Would this mean the community could consider them reliable enough to consider the submission of the article? As I see that more (notable) sources are appearing on this specific topic I would like to continue adding them to this draft. Thanks again for looking into this:) Chy syl (talk) 19:25, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

23:33, 17 September 2015 review of submission by Azntaiji
Hi Gparyani,

Thank you for reviewing my AFC on Inspirock. Wanted to see specifically how I can improve the Notability of it.

I've listed eight independent and reliable sources verifying the company's notability, including Conde Nast Traveler, Forbes, Economic Times, TechCrunch and Huffington Post.

Any help/suggestions would be appreciated. Thanks

Azntaiji (talk) 23:30, 28 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Cool, you've added sources to establish notability. However, what your article lacks now is a credible claim of significance, which is a statement in the content of your article that states why it is, or may be, notable. Please see my previous link for more info. Once you add that, resubmit your article and let me know here, and I'll accept it if there are no other problems. Gparyani (talk) 16:39, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion of Article Shielding lotion
I'm curious why you used G11 as a reason for speedy deletion. Did you not understand the article, or were you simply looking for more to base your nomination on? You might have had a case under the notability factor, since some folks are pretty rabid about nominating anything as "not notable" they personally haven't heard of. But G11 doesn't even apply, since shielding lotions are not a brand, company, entity, product or idea. Shielding lotions are merely a class of lotions already recognized in academia and science. In fact, they have been referred to as such going all the way back to the 1960s. Dr. James Schultz (talk) 20:44, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
 * It was quite subtle, but many of the claims in the article, as well as the clear links to clinical studies (usually, we put them down in the references or external links), make it seem promotional. This is combined with the fact that it makes only positive claims without saying a single thing critical of the subject. (Though that last reason on its own is not enough to justify G11, combining it with other reasons is.) Gparyani (talk) 22:07, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
 * The lack of criticism does not in itself constitute a bias or indicate promotional content. It's merely a reflection of the material available. If you can find reliable sources that illustrate possible risks from shielding lotions, by all means include them in the article. But don't throw the baby out with the bath water, as the saying goes. James Schultz (talk) 23:11, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I believe I already said that, and I won't pursue speedy deletion as a result. I will, however, search for reliable sources that aren't already in the article, and if I don't find any, I'll consider starting a deletion discussion. Gparyani (talk) 23:13, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of article about VIRUS (Cyber Fools) (film)
Please remove the vandalism tag. The events are legitimate and proof can be supplied if needed. Don't flag the film and it's events because you are unaware of it.

Please read the updated talk page for the removal of VIRUS. Understand that this is legitimate by simple google searches. dont waste my time. --- Virtual Assassin
 * I've replied to you on the AfD page. Gparyani (talk) 23:21, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Nor'wester (Bangladesh)
Hello Gparyani. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Nor'wester (Bangladesh), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The Nor'wester page is a disambiguation page so A10 does not apply. Thank you. SmartSE (talk) 18:28, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

 * Can I ask what it's for? Gparyani (talk) 07:03, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Simply a nice message because I notice too much drama around here.  SwisterTwister   talk  12:13, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks :) Gparyani (talk) 14:51, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:25, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:Blocked user
User:Blocked user, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Blocked user and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of User:Blocked user during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Leaky Caldron  12:28, 9 January 2016 (UTC)