User talk:Huon/Archive15

Happy New Year


Happy New Year! , Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year 2015, and I hope you have your enjoyment for your parents, siblings and other relatives and Happy New Year.--Bababa67 (talk) 23:29, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

If you want to display my message please put User:Bababa67/newyeardispla/editnotice The new year editnotice will gave to the Wikipedians on Last week of December until on 2nd week of January. This editnotice is originally was created by User:Bababa67. If you want to display my message please put User:Bababa67/newyeardispla/editnotice

Draft:Sachin Sharma
Hi Huon, Thanks for the discussion on the Draft: Sachin Sharma link. I made improvements as suggested and submitted for review by pressing the green button. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by P20121 (talk • contribs) 00:50, 2 January 2015 (UTC)


 * You're welcome, but you may want to check the draft's tone. With phrases such as "endorsed by many legendary artists" or "widely appreciated by audiences internationally", it currently sounds rather promotional, and the latter, at least, isn't backed up by the reference cited at the end of that sentence. Huon (talk) 23:50, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi Huon - thank you. I have edited accordingly for review. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by P20121 (talk • contribs) 11:39, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Happy 2015!
Dear Huon, Sending you greetings on the New Year, wishing that 2015 brings you good work and a modicum of stress...I still smile to myself when I think of our tussles...I learned a great deal, much more to learn. Cheers! Miramaribelle (talk) 06:36, 2 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks a lot for your good wishes; may you also have a happy and healthy new year! Huon (talk) 23:50, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Agnes Bennett
Thanks Huon for your help with Agnes Bennett Lakelady2282 (talk) 07:05, 3 January 2015 (UTC)


 * You're welcome, thanks for writing the article in the first place! Huon (talk) 23:50, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Interview for The Signpost
This is being sent to you as a member of WikiProject Articles for creation

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Articles for creation for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Thanks,  Rcsprinter123    (interact)  @ 09:54, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
Happy days! and thank you! :-)

EllenvanderVeen (talk) 10:48, 5 January 2015 (UTC) 


 * You're welcome, my pleasure! Huon (talk) 23:50, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Disruptive editing
I saw your block of an IP today. Here is another example of this IP's edits today (see end of thread, message addressed to me). ~ P-123 (talk) 21:24, 6 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Yes, that's trolling, but I'm not sure what you'd like me to do about that. The IP is blocked already. Huon (talk) 22:19, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Nur Khan Deletion
Hello Huon,

Thanks for getting back to me. After a long winded process and much back and forth with real time chat editors, I was advised to exclusively use sources that were independent of Nur Khan's website. The editors advised me that he had enough media coverage to exclusively use those as references. That is why in the second draft I omitted Nur Khan's website as a source. I didn't even use it. Where do you see the copyright violation? I want to create a third draft but want to make absolutely sure it will be approved. I haven't once copy and pasted. Really looking for some guidance! What would you advice? Thank you Huon.

Matte finish wiki (talk) 23:12, 6 January 2015 (UTC)


 * I rather doubt it's a coincidence that both your draft and Nur Khan's website contain phrases such as "has since set the industry standard" (which is not based on the given source, but in fact contradicted by it) or "[...] gritty rock and roll scene, featuring a series of concerts by established iconic rock and roll artists [...]" (and given that the source cited for that statement only covered the opening night, it couldn't say anything about a "series of concerts" either). You have taken the content from Nur Khan's website and hung some more or less related sources on it that may mention some keywords. That's not the way to write an encyclopedia article. Huon (talk) 00:09, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your response Huon. I think there has been a lot of confusion as this has been an ongoing project for me and I've rewriting it several times. For the next submission, I'll make sure that all of the language in its entirety is in my own words. I'll be sure to cross reference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Matte finish wiki (talk • contribs) 15:21, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Huon/Jaeze Can't figure out where to put this but it refers back to response you gave me.
http://msafungi.org/wp-content/uploads/Inoculum/32%282%29.pdf article about  J S Shipman  http://www.acube.org/files/7713/5328/0113/1993_3.pdf  article by Seago and Shipman                      http://read-about-it.blogspot.com/2010/02/poetry-and-science-anhinga.html  Anhinga Haiku             http://www.brooklinema.gov/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/164  Article about Dr. Shipman's Presentation on Good Germs, Bad Germs Among othersJaeze (talk) 02:57, 11 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Let me go through those references one by one:
 * Unless I'm missing something, all the Mycological Society of America newsletter offers is a note that Shipman is giving away a book he wrote about mushrooms. It's not a book review and provides no facts about either Shipman or the book (beyond Shipman giving it away). Thus it won't prove particularly helpful for Wikipedia's purposes. In particular, it's not an article about Shipman.
 * The Bioscene article is by Shipman, not about him. Wikipedia content should be based on independent sources, not on a person's own writings.
 * Read about it is Shipman's own blog. Another primary source. See above, except this is also self-published.
 * The Brookline note about Shipman's presentation arguably is the best of the four because it's apparently not written by Shipman himself and provides a little biographical information about him. But it's far too little for an encyclopedia article about him, and I rather doubt the Brookline Senior News and Events is subject to the editorial oversight required to be considered a reliable source by Wikipedia.
 * In summary I see no indication that Shipman meets Wikipedia's standards of notability, and we should neither have an article about him nor add him to the poets list. Huon (talk) 03:58, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Article for deletion need to review
You had once helped me with Gidugu Venkata Ramamoorty. I had put Gajendra Rathi for deletion and 1 vote agreed. It was closed with no-consensus. I still want it delete I want it deleted because I think that the person is not known like others who have their biographies here. Can you relist because you are an admin? నిజానికి (talk) 08:14, 11 January 2015 (UTC)


 * See User talk:Becky Sayles. Huon (talk) 13:18, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Deleted by you now. Thanks!! నిజానికి (talk) 16:03, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

thanks
I deleted the last paragraph from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Spada, as suggested. not sure what to do re: inline citations, as I taught with him at Parsons and this is all from memory. if that means the article has issues, well, that's the best I can do. thanks. 68.107.76.217 (talk) 01:01, 12 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Personal memories are not acceptable sources for Wikipedia; our content must be verifiable from reliable published sources. What cannot be verified in this way should be removed. Huon (talk) 17:36, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

thanks
thanks for blocking 65.87.149.7 I'm checking / reverting the changes now — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.114.11.16 (talk) 22:26, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Category:AR platform
Category:AR platform, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. DexDor (talk) 07:57, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

see User talk:Dannis243
see User talk:Dannis243 Dannis243 (talk) 16:49, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Kibi78704 & Porting :Template:Cite web to Scottish Gaelic Wikipedia
Thanks, Huon. That is exactly the information I needed. I may have a few questions once I start the process, but this is enough to get started. Happy New Year, Kibi78704 (talk) 21:19, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

see User talk:Dannis243
see User talk:Dannis243 Dannis243 (talk) 12:51, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you...
Thank you Huon for giving me this advice:

'''The image you uploaded was previously uploaded here. Thus it looks as if you didn't take it yourself but merely copied it from there. If you hold the copyright, please send an email from an address affiliated with that site to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org for confirmation. A standard release form can be found here: WP:Declaration of consent for all enquiries. Huon (talk) 18:37, 14 January 2015 (UTC)'''

I have emailed permissions-commons@wikimedia.org with a standard release form gathered from WP:Declaration of consent for all enquiries. Do I now wait for a response?

Lighthouselane (talk) 20:06, 14 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Yes. Unfortunately I don't have access to that email queue myself, but other volunteers will deal with it. Please be patient. Huon (talk) 20:15, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

see User talk:Dannis243
see User talk:Dannis243 Dannis243 (talk) 12:39, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

unrealated to my request
Hi, I have been working on the article with an editor called norbert in the live chat and we think it is ready for review. He asked me to ask you directly Huon, since you have previously reviewed it. Thanks a lot in advance. Carmen

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Cooperatives_Europe_(European_Region_of_the_International_Cooperative_Alliance) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.132.239.87 (talk) 15:53, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

see User talk:Dannis243
see User talk:Dannis243 Dannis243 (talk) 12:59, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

---

Upload Wizard (again)
Hello Huon - first, a belated Happy New Year! I see that your last 'Talk' correspondence is dated 14 Jan - so I am sure you are pretty busy again. As my title (above) says, I have been struggling with WikiCommons - and despite my best efforts, lost (or seem to have done so) see:  https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Second_Generation_CHAT.jpg. What did I do wrong?? Eager to stand corrected (!)
 * (PS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pronacampo9_/Main-subpages/Entry1) (Pronacampo9 (talk) 13:43, 18 January 2015 (UTC))

My last encounter with commons was 3 months ago, so, I must have been getting a bit rusty. There are still two things, though: 1. How/where do I adjust the pixels? 2. The image is a bit askew. Is it possible to replace it with a 'better' one later on? Thanks again so much. (Pronacampo9 (talk) 14:05, 18 January 2015 (UTC))
 * Prev: Ah! found it - I think. Second Generation CHAT.jpg




 * Hello Pronacampo9, and a happy new year to you, too!
 * You can adjust the size when the image is displayed; the "thumb" parameter creates a "thumbnail" of the image in a standardized size, but you can explicitly change that size by adding a parameter for the size in pixels; for example  will give the enlarged image displayed below.
 * At the Wikimedia commons, at the bottom of the "File history" section, there is a "Upload a new version of this file" link that can be used to replace the image with a newer version. The only restriction is that the new image must still be of the same file type (here, still .jpg).
 * On an unrelated note, there seems to be a "marbled" strip at the bottom of the image, possibly an artifact of the scanning process. If you upload an improved image anyway, could you try to remove that strip, too, maybe by cropping the image a little? Huon (talk) 19:22, 18 January 2015 (UTC)




 * Ah, what can I say! : as usual, you make it all (seem) all too easy. For the rare times I go on Wikimedia it is for me like walking on hot coals –scared of setting a foot wrong. When I could not upload what I had ‘created’ into my article,  I thought fate had struck again.

But there you were again, to get me out of the shifting sands: thanks so much for all the extra advice, too. Yes, I noticed only too well that ‘marbled’ strip, but not until it was ‘too late’ – happy to hear though that, here too, I can make amends. There is still a third diagram to come – will have to prove that, at last, I can walk on my own. Have this one on me! (Pronacampo9 (talk) 20:40, 18 January 2015 (UTC))


 * You're welcome, I'm happy to help. Thanks for the ale! Huon (talk) 20:55, 18 January 2015 (UTC)


 * : 19 Jan: Aint I a big boy now: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pronacampo9_/Main-subpages/Entry1

PS: One little fly in the ointment: I ended up with the date (19.01) in the latest (3rd) diagram. (Pronacampo9 (talk) 14:02, 19 January 2015 (UTC))


 * :: Yes, Huon, if the subtitle could simply say "Third Generation CHAT", (ie minus the x and the date), that would be perfect. It would also nicely harmonize the third with the second graph, which now says "Second Generation CHAT". Thanks for offering a pathway to do that. In the meantime I have figured out a way I could, perhaps do this myself: as you can see, I successfully replaced the 'marbled' and skewed 2nd graph with a 'clean' one. I could, therefore simply replace third graph with a new one, too, which swimply says "Third Generation CHAT". You see, when scanning the PP I had stupidly entered the date (19Jan) on the (saved) scanned jpg file and that unfortunately came through in the final product. Now, with these two synchronized files, File #1 stands out a bit, as it says "Image Caption", rather than "First Generation CHAT", as would be desirable. So what I suggest is that I will deal with the synchronization of the 2nd graph, first. (I'll have to wait till tomorrow to do that, as I have no scanner where I am now). But, please, if you would be so kind, could you have a second look at the first graph and possibly change the present "Image Caption" title to: "First Generation CHAT". PS: I think all of this will be worth the trouble: this is the only wiki article I know of where the three generations are presented on the same page, and I have a hunch that those graphs are going to be pretty heavily copied and used in the future. Muito obrigado! (Pronacampo9 (talk) 18:44, 19 January 2015 (UTC))


 * PPSS: now that I am 'at it', perhaps I could insert a new file for Graph 1, too, in the way I uploaded graphs 2 and 3, so that we get three graphs, all the same size and with the same (type of) subtitle. What do you think? (Pronacampo9 (talk) 18:54, 19 January 2015 (UTC)}


 * Re: my suggestion would be to upload the "clean" version, currently at File:Vygotsky Basic Mediated Action.jpg as a newer version in place of File:First Generation CHAT.jpg and have the then-duplicate at File:Vygotsky Basic Mediated Action.jpg deleted.
 * A: (NB: Knowing now that you hold company with dragons, (renewed) Respect! for you, Huon!)


 * Had a quick look, and, really, ‘we are getting there!’. As I said, I will have to wait till tomorrow for tackling this – (remaining, 1st generation) – job hands on. Only, as I have still the original PP draughts, I thought it might be simpler to make a new, “clean” copy from scratch, which resembles the two other ones as closely as possible, and then upload the new version on File:First Generation CHAT.jpg? The only instance where I cannot quite follow you, Huon, is when it comes to “deleting” File:Vygotsky Basic Mediated Action.jpg? Is it at all possible to delete anything on Wikipedia? I thought that anything you write or put there is archived there indelibly for ever and ever, amen? (-:
 * Thanks also for doing the Engeström principles adjustments. It’s a long time since I wrote that, so I will have to revisit that issue and see whether it would/will carry the approval of the big man from Finland if/when he sees it. Thanks again for all the painstaking work. (Pronacampo9 (talk) 20:30, 19 January 2015 (UTC))
 * If you intend to upload a newer version anyway, that's a much easier solution than what I suggested. It's possible to delete content both on Wikipedia and (for images) on the Commons, but it's not done without good reason - having two images that look the same probably would be one such good reason. For Wikipedia, deletion is governed by the WP:Deletion policy - the main reasons are probably "blatant nonsense or vandalism" and "the topic isn't notable enough for an encyclopedia article" (say, for local bands or small businesspeople writing about themselves), neither of which is an issue here. Huon (talk) 20:59, 19 January 2015 (UTC)


 * 20 Jan Dear Huon: I had just created a new ‘First Generation' slide to replace the one at present in the article with, but, when I opened thumb|285px|First Generation CHAT I saw that it was exactly the same as the new image I had created to replace it with . . . . So, no, I don’t think you ‘messed up’ yesterday: everything is for the best. I will now have another look at Engeström’s five principles. All the best (Pronacampo9 (talk) 10:33, 20 January 2015 (UTC))


 * 21 Jan: Yes, me again, Huon: (re - a possibly pedantic ps):  it is not uncommon for multilinguists to mix up especially the spelling of words. So, because for some years I had predominantly used French (eg Burkina Faso) I kept spelling the English word 'exercise' as “exercice” (fr) It took years for someone to pull me up on this. Now, this morning, when I was checking the Engström principles, I had another look at the 1st generation graph and it struck me that ‘Artifact’ is spelled there as ‘Artefact’. Checking up on google  I find that: Artefact is the British spelling of the noun meaning, primarily, an object shaped by human workmanship, especially one of historical or archaeological interest. Artifact is the American spelling. Both spellings are etymologically justifiable, and both are hundreds of years old in English. The British preference for artefact is a new development. The two forms vied for ascendancy in British writing through much of the 20th century until artefact finally gained the upper hand around 1990.  Quite some years ago, a (British) publisher made me change all by British spellings to American spelling and I have stuck to this ever since, including in this article.
 * Q: do you think this would be worth changing the present 1st generation diagram for or shall we let sleeping dogs lie? (Pronacampo9 (talk) 12:22, 21 January 2015 (UTC))


 * Wikipedia's stance on local varieties of English is that articles should be internally consistent, but unless the topic has a strong national association (say, England or Isaac Newton versus California or James Dean), whatever style the original author (here, you) chooses is okay and should not be changed just for the fun of it. Whether a diagram should use the same variant of English as the article it's displayed on is debatable; I'd say it's nice if we are consistent, but the same diagram may be used on different articles using different variants of English, so we can't hope to always be consistent where images are concerned. I wouldn't bother with changing that diagram. Huon (talk) 18:44, 21 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Thank you so much for this second opinion, Huon. Google Image fields both the Artisan and Artesan versions (including Pronacampo9’s, even though the article aint ‘published’ yet!).  I think your reply is well balanced, but I needed some confirmation about ‘letting sleeping dogs lie’, as, indeed, I am using the ‘artisan’ (Am) spelling in the main body of the next. Back with the nose to the grindstone now. (Pronacampo9 (talk) 19:41, 21 January 2015 (UTC))

On deleted pages
Thanks for explaining. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mylittlebirdies (talk • contribs) 21:48, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Odd reversion?
Hi—I don't really understand your reversion of [my edit here], as I'd never edit other people's reference entries. Any report that I'd done so would be an error (bug?). – AndyFielding (talk)


 * I assume that was an accident of yours. In your edit, you had not only changed "she" into "McCartney", but also duplicated a lot of stuff at the end of the page. If you look at the total effect of your edit and mine, you'll find I only removed that duplicate stuff at the end, but left "McCartney" (I didn't revert all of your edit, despite the edit summary). Huon (talk) 20:23, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Help With Todd Kerns Musician Page
Thank you for your assistance. Knowing where the incorrect information was coming from will help in getting the Birthday corrected. I really appreciate it! — Preceding unsigned comment added by NJY1976 (talk • contribs) 18:40, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

ANI notice
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 15:41, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your help!
Thank you for your help with editing the Tierra de Reyes page. I wish it didn't require third party intervention. It was never my intention to start an edit war, but all information I entered was immediately deleted despite proper citations, correcting English grammar errors, and adding more useful information. Once our bans were lifted the other user, once again, began deleting all my entered information so I'm done with Wikipedia. I don't know how you have the patience to stay at it but I'm glad that you're in there helping people and helping get good articles written. As a professional writer and editor I can tell you got the chops for it from looking at some of your other work. I hope you're working in the field, you'd be a great line editor at any firm!MJDecker (talk) 18:03, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

RS and first-party sources and MP3 Rocket
Apropos "reliable third-party sources" and this edit of yours - IIRC, reliable first-party sources are fine when it comes to verifiability of stuff about themselves - like in this case. That's policy, IIRC. So what policy justifies you removing them?--Elvey(t•c) 05:11, 24 January 2015 (UTC)


 * I'll reply at the article's talk page. Huon (talk) 13:00, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Daniel O'Keeffe (judge)
Thank you for your help! Ballyeagh (talk) 18:43, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

a week has passed and no one objected
see User talk:Dannis243 Dannis243 (talk) 12:13, 26 January 2015 (UTC)


 * I have implemented the changes; now Party of the Swedes looks exactly the way User:Huon/Test does. Huon (talk) 20:48, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

27January - Technical Assistance
Morning, Huon! Yes, indeed, I hit another snag – or rather, several ones at once: Q: All three questions are, really, a bit too technical for me and even if I deal with them, I may mess up. I suppose that the google search problem has to do with google resetting its alogarithms, but not sure. So, your guidance would, yet again, be extremely well appreciated in all those three instances. (Pronacampo9 (talk) 09:42, 27 January 2015 (UTC))
 * 1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural-Historical_Activity_Theory_(CHAT) went live yesterday but google cannot really ‘find’ it, or, at best, it is a 'hit-and-miss' with my Pronacampo9 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pronacampo9(identical) (identical) Test page
 * 2) Lakun.patra left a message saying, as you can see, that the article is an orphan re: This article is an orphan, as no other articles link to it. Please introduce links to this page from related articles; try the Find link tool for suggestions. (January 2015) I spent a long time reading a number of ‘how to link’ Wikipedia advisory pages but was not able to act on them. I sent an email to Lakun telling him about the 3 other wiki.en articles, but did not get a reply.
 * 3) I just got an Disambiguation notice from DPL bot, saying that Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cultural-Historical Activity Theory (CHAT), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Michael Cole (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject. It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 27 January 2015 (UTC)


 * PS: re: previous
 * The 'Disambiguation' problem pointed at by the bot concerns ===  Developments in the West  === section in the article (which starts with [Michael Cole] between (double) square brackets, which, indeed, leads to a Michael Cole disambiguation page and, a bit to my surprise 'our' (professor Cole) does not, as I had thought he had, a dedicated wikipedia page, but now I discover that this appears not to be the case. So, I am removing the square brackets and will find some other hyperlink to the Michael Cole's name of the article to. The 'orphan' question, however, is a tougher nut to crack and the wiki 'help' pages on this matter read a bit like high Mandarin to me (!) (Pronacampo9 (talk) 10:10, 27 January 2015 (UTC))


 * PPSS: I have now hyperlinked Michael Cole differently
 * re: === Developments in the West ===
 * Michael Cole, then a young Indiana University (Pronacampo9 (talk) 10:23, 27 January 2015 (UTC))


 * PPPSSS': Explanation: I had planned to 'sit on the fence' and 'brood' on the CHAT article for quite a bit longer. What prompted me to act, though, was the thought that, as long as the "Cultural Historical Activity Theory (CHAT)" Title remains 'open' it also remains 'open season' in wikiland, iow, anyone at any time is free to claim the as yet 'unoccupied' wikipedia title and start another article under precisely that heading. That would, in one stroke, invalidate months of hard-slogging work. So, publishing was in some ways a measure of 'self-defence'. (Pronacampo9 (talk) 10:44, 27 January 2015 (UTC))


 * 20:20hrs Tuesday - Thank you for your intervention, Huon. From which I deduce that some possibly procedurially improper shortcuts were taken. Though this was the way I was shown by the Spanish wiki bibliotecario to go about it. It is a very long text, so I will leave it till tomorrow and go through it again with the fine-tooth comb. And then press the green button. . .and see what happens! Thanks again. (Pronacampo9 (talk) 20:28, 27 January 2015 (UTC))


 * 20:50 - just before turning in I changed my mind. After fixing the Michael Cole anomaly which the bot had picked up earlier, I thought it might be better to press the green button regardless, and see what really happens. I went through the text countless times and at best can only pick up a few tiddling typos. While there may be major issues which I only will know about by pressing the green release button. So, here we go. (Pronacampo9 (talk) 20:55, 27 January 2015 (UTC))


 * done: Ah, I remember now. . . - I got my yellow box. After my excursion into wiki:es I had rather forgotten about wiki:en etiquette. Sorry. (Pronacampo9 (talk) 21:03, 27 January 2015 (UTC))
 * Sorry, we're working at cross-purposes here, and I'm too slow at explaining what I do. I'll revert the submission in a moment; the userspace draft template I added was meant to serve an entirely different purpose. Full explanations on your talk page when I find the time, ie within a few hours - I'm doing other things on the side. Huon (talk) 22:27, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

28 January chat about CHAT
Thank you soooo much for your time Huon – no need telling me how time-consuming all this is! It looks indeed that, last night, we were synchronically distance-editing on the same page, thus cross-purposely frustrating each other’s efforts. Sorry.
 * 1) I am not an orphan any more. Which is worth a mini-celebration!
 * 2) Michael Cole is already hyperlinked in the introductory section re: The term CHAT was coined by Michael Cole and popularized by Yrjö. I had forgotten that, further down in the text, I had placed Cole between double square brackets, thus landing me in Disambiguation territory. Further down, in the ==Developments in West== section, I see that the Cole (repeat) hyperlink has been replaced by [Michael Cole (psychologist)|Michael Cole]]. However, this results in a (inauthentic looking) ‘red’ tab. I hope you do not mind I (temporarily) removed all links, leaving us with a ‘plain’ Cole. In the hope that we find a thoroughbred ‘blue’ tab. (PS: I wrote this before I read your explanation on this specific issue - see further down here nr 8. (cross-purposes, again!).
 * 3)  I see that in Large Group Capacitation the caption namely the Cultural-Historical Activity Theory (CHAT)-based branch of Social Psychology,[44], now links to the new wiki article. Thanks for this. I am planning, in the next few days, to skim through other wiki articles to find similar links, starting with the ==See Also==section of the LGCapacitation article (which, I trust, will get me out of the “Orphanage” for good). (PS: more comment on this here further down nr 7.)
 * re: (→‎External links: remove submission template: Article is live already) Thanks for this, too – I already heard a Laurel&Hardy “Now, that’s a fine mess you got us in” coming. (Apart from saving us the regular “three weeks plus” waiting time. . .).
 * 1) I see that google is still straining to find it, but,  as you say, things can only get better in the future (re: then soon the live article will be the only one to be found).
 * 2) Thank you for saving me from that editorial bear pit (re: "we already have a live article; please edit that instead").
 * 3)  Links added to CHAT to the Large Group Capacitation and Laboratory of Comparative Human Cognition (LCHC) articles. (re: maybe you can take a look and find a better place within those articles where CHAT should be mentioned (and linked)?: A: Yes, this will keep me out of mischief for the next couple of days.
 * 4) Anyway, the red link is a sign for readers: "Notable topic here that an article could be written about!" – Oops: see supra. I already had removed the red marker before I read this. Sorry. And now I have lost the red link!. Anyhow, for readers really interested in Cole, he is already hyperlinked in the Introduction section. I will insert the relevant wiki link whenever the huon article comes of the conveyer belt!
 * 5) Now, what can I say or do?: after I have already toasted you to a Duvel on this same page, I can assure you that Grimbergen is the best of the best. Highly recommended. Gezondheid! (Pronacampo9 (talk) 10:24, 28 January 2015 (UTC))


 * 29 January: I have been adding links and have received a couple of thankyou's from authors of other sites. Querying google this morning "Cultural-Historical Activity Theory (CHAT)" (placed between quotation marks), is now listed third: progress - google seems to be catching up. (Pronacampo9 (talk) 10:01, 29 January 2015 (UTC))
 * Thanks from me, too, for adding those links! It's nice to see Google getting things right, too, though that's usually something that simply happens over time without any input from us - Google likes Wikipedia, and it tends to list our articles rather highly. Huon (talk) 20:08, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Please give us your reason for deleting our wikipedia page
Hello Huon,

How are you?

This is kashif. I created one page name Rahul N Anushka some days ago. I guess you deleted that page.

In support of our page i am typing some references here

" Reference about rahul-and-anushka "], www.notjustalabel.com, Information about Rahul and Anushka. “Reference about rahul-and-anushka"], Reference about rahul-and-anushka , Information about Rahul and Anushka. " Reference about rahul-and-anushka "], Reference about rahul-and-anushka, Information about Rahul and Anushka.
 * Reference 1 [https://www.notjustalabel.com/designer/rahul-and-anushka
 * Reference 2 [http://www.bharattextile.com/features/lakme-fashion-week/2010/spring-summer/profiles/rahul-anand.html
 * Reference 3 [http://londonist.com/2010/05/indian_premier_fashion_week.php?gallery0Pic=7#gallery

Thank you for your feedback.Can you please tell us reason why you delete our page Rahul N Anushka. We are trying to create and upload content from a neutral perspective about a designer label. This is similar to existing content and pages about other Indian designers such as Ritu Kumar, Manish Malhotra and others.

Some example links of other Indian designers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manish_Malhotra (Manish Malhotra) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ritu_Kumar     (Ritu Kumar)

Kind check above links, compare and guide us on how we can modify the content so that it is accepted like the other designers pages shared. Look forward to your mail and support


 * There are a couple of problems here. Let's start with those that led to the article's deletion (and for which, by the way, I'll also delete your draft, which is virtually identical to the deleted article): The content is unduly promotional and reads like something straight from Rahul n Anushka's PR agency, not like an encyclopedia article. In fact, you have been warned about that before, and yet you write something like, "It fast gained universal appeal as a vibrant and youthful brand offering a bold and confident line of Club, Cocktail & Luxury prêt for the modern woman", seriously? If it has gained universal appeal, where are the articles in Vogue and Elle about this brand? Of your three "references about rahul-and-anushka" given above, NJAL rather obviously is not a reliable source; it looks more like self-published content. The other two do not so much as mention "Rahul n Anushka", and even assuming the Londonist's comment about "RNA" is about them, there's no useful content that would help us write an encyclopedia article about them. I can only echo User:Tokyogirl79's comment that I'm concerned you're only here to promote Rahul n Anushka, not to improve the encyclopedia. As an aside, while other problematic articles would not be an excuse to write more of the same, take Ritu Kumar: "Ritu Kumar to win the Padma Shri - Times Of India" - reliable third-party coverage that expliciltly focuses on Kumar and incidentally confirms that she really is honored for her skill, not just vacuous spam. That on its own makes for an article far superior to your draft. Huon (talk) 20:08, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Peter Prior (Gulumba) has been accepted
 Peter Prior (Gulumba), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Redirect-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. . Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!  DGG ( talk ) 13:39, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=User_talk:Huon help desk] .
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Someone You just block is going around it.
Hey Huon,The IP you previously blocked User talk:64.6.124.31 is now editing under User talk:Task Force Tagger.I have previously had to deal with the string of User:Wild Wolf puppets and appreciate any help. --Molestash (talk) 02:36, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Adjusting pilot start date - WP:Co-op
Hello  Huon ,

I'll be putting out a formal update sometime soon, but I wanted to inform you that I've decided to push our start date back to mid-February rather than in January. There are number of reasons for this, but the biggest factor is that we are now facing the hard work of implementing our designs on the Mediawiki interface. It's a limiting environment to work with from a web-building perspective, and the team that worked on the Teahouse can offer similar testimonials to these challenges. We also want to make sure there is time for us and for you to test the environment out, ask questions at our project's talk page, and give us a little time to make any last changes before we start inviting editors to the space. If some of you know you will be unavailable during this time, it's totally fine if you need to bow out for the pilot. But we do need all the mentors we can get, so even if you can take the time to mentor just one or two editors, that would be fantastic. Thanks a bunch, I, JethroBT drop me a line on behalf of Wikipedia:Co-op.

(Opt-out Instructions) This message was send by through   MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:47, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

see User talk:Dannis243 (thank you but the other problem still persists)
thank you for fixing the form of the result boxex and it seems to be working on Party of the Swedes but while the form is fixed on other political party articles the distance between boxex is still abnormal on other political party articles, can you please make all "infobox political party" like User:Huon/Test because it was like actually like that before december 2014 Dannis243 (talk) 16:52, 31 January 2015 (UTC)


 * No, I can't, for three reasons. Firstly, you once again are so vague in your description of the problem that I have no chance at all of determining what you dislike, much less of fixing it. Secondly, I have modified the infobox template, and it work the same on all pages. The distance between boxes does not change from one article to the next. Thirdly, you yourself reverted the changes of December and were unhappy with the result of that reversal. I have no idea what mythical state the template supposedly had before December, but it appears you're not happy with that state, either. I had almost suspected that implementing the changes you had explicitly said would give the layout you wanted would not satisfy you. I'm done with this issue; it's hardly severe enough a problem to waste time and resources on. Huon (talk) 17:15, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Edit request or Article removal request
Can you please protect the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universidad_Empresarial_de_Costa_Rica Or edit with the website www.unem.edu.pl as you already discussed in the talk page? I think it could be better to be protected or erased, since the war edit remainsRamdiesel (talk) 17:00, 31 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Currently no website is given in the article. Given the disputes about what is the official website (and why would the official website on a Costa Rican university or business school use a .pl domain?) that may be for the best. Huon (talk) 17:59, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Wignulight93 sock
You declined an appeal of a two week block here because the account was a Wiglunight93 sock. But shouldn't that mean the two week block of that account is converted to an indef? DeCausa (talk) 20:42, 31 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Yes, and Salvidrim said they'd do so later tonight. In fact, I assumed the block was already indef. Huon (talk) 20:46, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks. I see you've now done the indeffing - thanks. DeCausa (talk) 21:07, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Can you tell if User:Sabot Cat is another of these socks? This user only began editing after these socks were blocked, and is reverting to the edits of the blocked sock on the Israel article. Gouncbeatduke (talk) 22:23, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Just going by the edits, I'd guess "no". User:Sabot Cat's edits are about whether or not Israel is a representative democracy, which doesn't seem in the least related to the parts of the article Ashurbanippal edited. Also, Sabot Cat is far older than the Ashurbanippal account, and I don't think the editing patterns match, either. Huon (talk) 00:23, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
 * okay, thanks. The last time this dispute tag was removed, it was removed by Ashurbanippal, but it was a long time back. It seemed strange to me that User who had done almost no edits before would suddenly remove them when Ashurbanippal got blocked. Gouncbeatduke (talk) 19:53, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi, Sabot Cat here. I just wanted to put in reliable sources for the claim that Israel is a representative democracy to resolve the dispute, and I think that's what WP:AD procedure is, unless there's more rules for this elsewhere, and if so my apologies for being in potential violation of them. Sabot Cat (talk) 01:06, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I continue to think it is very strange that a user who made almost no edits for five months suddenly became very active on the Israel talk page after Ashurbanippal was blocked and phrases all his wp:tendentious arguments exactly the same way Ashurbanippal did. Gouncbeatduke (talk) 12:33, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
 * It would be "her 'tendentious arguments'", which honestly I don't see why you view them that way as I've done nothing listed on that page; furthermore, I'm not a sock puppet and I don't know what I could do to verify that for you. Sabot Cat (talk) 17:12, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your help with the Calico Jack page!
I appreciate your fixing the birth and death dates. When I first read the page, the death date was "january 16, 2003" so I felt urged to fix it. Unfortunately, I wasn't familiar with the formula. Thanks again!

June w (talk) 13:01, 1 February 2015 (UTC)


 * You're welcome. Usually the template pages, such as Template:Death date and age, have some documentation on how to use the parameters. Huon (talk) 13:06, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Edit dispute
About Talk:Soto (food). Sorry, I don't meant to attack anyone, but his insistence, refusing any contacts or engaging in discussion, while indulging himself in editing guerrilla just kept going on and on. I promised not to do it again. Cheers!  Gunkarta  talk 17:01, 1 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Thank you for striking those comments. I have left a comment of my own on whether the infobox should mention the "Chinese-ness". Huon (talk) 17:05, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Bobby Watson (producer/bassist)
Hi Huon :)... nice to see you and your input. ... I have taken a lot of time to correct things kikichugirl mentioned...and placed more sourcing that most articles I have looked over of many artist before even attempting to input. What need be removed from this article so I can stop work on it.  Most of these artist are old and do not do interviews any more but I see have done notable works.   I see articles on Snooki and the Kardashians and the only things they are "famous for" or have contributed to society is that they have slept with recording artist or famous basketball stars...yet they are Wikipedia worthy?   Hmmm doesn't make since to me.   The only one really working out of Rufus is Chaka Khan...and the additions to wiki are the fact her son murdered someone...etc..what does that have to do with an art or talent or someone trying to contribute to the music scene after a bad group split...?? It all seems so backwards to me just like the hijacking done by artist/writers other artist wiki articles trying to spread their own "fame" beside..apart from and in addition to... Please assist me getting this article published. ..this Watson seems to have done just as much as his peers and sometimes more. .. thank you and " Kiki" Huon...Best... Poekneegurl (talk) 21:07, 1 February 2015 (UTC)poekneegurl


 * Wikipedia determines appropriate content by third-party coverage. We need such sources not only to establish what's notable, but also to allow our readers to verify the content. I don't see that such coverage for Watson; practically all the draft's content is unreferenced. Huon (talk) 21:29, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

My Little Pony: Equestria Girls 3
Hi Huon, FYI, Chaulin humberto tuteto removed the PROD template you added at My Little Pony: Equestria Girls 3. Not sure if we're dealing with competence issues or if the user is here to proliferate hoaxes. My feeling is that we're seeing a little of both. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:22, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Bobby Watson (producer/bassist)
Thanks Huon...appreciate the more detailed information. .. most of the article was composed by TMFELDERSTEIN. ...I have just been attempting to verify the information...he wrote...I have also removed what I thought was ridiculous and non essential like (being on a plane With John Belushi - who was entertaining the passengers)... also these one time "gigs" this musician did..I also felt were no consequential. .. I do not have time to work on this..so it will sit..unless someone else does it...it seems to have sat for almost 6 months un touched...prior to my asking you questions months ago and FreeRangeFrog reviving it. Anywho...God bless...you...take care of yourself My Best to you... Poekneegurl (talk) 01:13, 3 February 2015 (UTC)poekneegurl

Ref Desk removals
I saw that you removed hundreds of items from the Ref Desk today. The log just says "Other valid deletions". Can you provide any more detail ? Banned user ? (I am a regular Ref Desk contributor and would like to know if we are under some kind of attack.) Thanks, StuRat (talk) 01:14, 3 February 2015 (UTC)


 * It's not an attack. It were some 200 revisions because it was ancient history and I had to hide every diff between the problematic edit and the archiving bot a couple of days later. Huon (talk) 01:28, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

There is no policy/guideline which allows for the closing of a noticeboard discussion to be overturned
Sorry, but your attempt to strike through the close on WP:FTN has been reverted.

WP:AN is not an appeals court for noticeboards.

jps (talk) 21:11, 4 February 2015 (UTC)


 * There is WP:Closing discussions, which explicitly says that WP:AN is the appropriate place to challenge a closing. Unless you're saying that once someone has judged the consensus there's no turning back (which would be a pretty ridiculous stance since even admins can err), I'm not sure I understand your point. Particularly since the AN discussion had more participants than the original discussion, I also don't see how you can argue that there wasn't a consensus to overturn the closure. Huon (talk) 21:21, 4 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Closing discussions is not policy nor is it a guideline. The proper venue to discuss fringe theory matters is WP:FTN itself. AN is not a court of appeals for noticeboards. jps (talk) 21:27, 4 February 2015 (UTC)


 * It's an information page. If you know of a policy or guideline that contradicts it, please provide a link. Otherwise see WP:Local consensus. You seem to be arguing that getting the wider community to take a look is a bad thing. It never is. Huon (talk) 21:38, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
 * WP:FORUMSHOP clearly contradicts it and is policy. jps (talk) 21:39, 4 February 2015 (UTC)


 * So what is your point? That there would have been a valid consensus to overturn the closure if only those editors who commented at WP:AN instead had done so on a more obscure page? That won't fly. Also, whether or not the closure was appropriate is an issue unrelated to the topic of the discussion, and raising that unrelated issue in another forum, particularly one suggested by an information page on challenging consensus, is not forum shopping. Huon (talk) 21:46, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
 * The information page you cite clearly says that when policy contradicts it, the policy wins. If we allow for forum shopping, then we will open up to review all consensus-based decisions on content that occur on noticeboards which defeats the purposes of the noticeboards in the first place. We decide content matters on noticeboards and AN isn't equipped to change that as administrators are suppose to handle matters related to the administrator rights, not content. If someone thinks that there is potential for consensus to change, they should take it up at the board itself. We have plenty of people there who can help. You are free to help there too. jps (talk) 21:50, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
 * What was discussed at AN was whether or not consensus was correctly established. As I said, that's not the same question as whether or not the migration theory is accepted as the mainstream position. It's not a content issue at all, but a question of process, and discussing it in the relevant place is not a contravention of WP:FORUMSHOP. The fact that there was a wide consensus to overturn the closing admin's decision shows that this was not an abuse of process, and editors at AN are perfectly able to deal with any abuses of the kind you describe if they were to occur. On an unrelated note, I consider it disingenuous to "archive" a thread that was actively edited hours ago, and more so to add to the archive something other than what you removed from the live noticeboard. Huon (talk) 22:21, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Huon. I'd been planning to go to ANRFC to ask for a second opinion on that point once I got back, but it seems you've provided that already. FWIW, the addendum to the AN close is still there (and was already removed once and restored by FreeRangeFrog).  Sunrise    (talk)  04:29, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Removed again; I was not aware that had restored it; I trust this can be the end of it. Drmies (talk) 15:55, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
 * My apologies if threw a wrench in the corn flake bowl, I reverted the removal of a comment by another editor characterized in the summary as "gibberish". I didn't initially notice said comment had been inserted into an archive template, but I assumed later that the closer would deal with it appropriately as needed. § FreeRangeFrog croak 16:33, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
 * No problem. Drmies (talk) 16:35, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Shia Islam India
Just wanted to clear out the recent BLP violation. Other user had inserted name and picture of Aamir Khan, and he had no reliable citations for that. I have inserted picture and name of Emraan Hashmi there. Bladesmulti (talk) 03:06, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Request on 13:15:42, 11 February 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by MThuMREn
I'm not sure whether the article meets the criteria - but I thought it would, given the standard for Wikipedia-pages in Germany

Dear Huon,

thanks for reviewing the article for Salzgitter Mannesmann Line Pipe. I am not entirely sure whether your feedback related to the relevance criteria or the provided source. I thought that the criteria for an article would be met, as on the German Wikipedia a company meets it with a actual or historical revenue > 100 Million. Or do you mean that the companys website is not a valid source. Then I woul change the source for this to the financial report of Salzgitter AG (Source 1) which provides the important figures on page 97. I would be grateful for a hint.

Best regards MThuMREn

MThuMREn (talk) 13:15, 11 February 2015 (UTC)


 * The English Wikipedia measures notability by the amount of third-party coverage in reliable sources a company has received; see WP:CORP for detail. In fact, all content should be based on such sources, with primary sources such as the corporate parent's website or financial report used only for uncontroversial details such as the name of the CEO - but not for claims that might be considered promotional, such as "introduced the push-water pipes and fiber cement-coated tubes on the market". Also, we shouldn't base entire articles solely on primary sources. Since all four of your references are primary sources, that's a problem, and swapping one of them for another will not help. If you could instead find historical newspapers or articles in reputable magazines that discuss this company in some detail, things might be different, but you'd probably have to rewrite the draft in its entirety to make it summarize what sources such as those report about the company. Huon (talk) 19:07, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

All right! Thanks for your answer! Best regards MThuMREn  — Preceding unsigned comment added by MThuMREn (talk • contribs) 08:27, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

According the talk page, rewrite the article to reflect the truth
It seems, the truth explained by SEVERAL users in the talk page for the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universidad_Empresarial_de_Costa_Rica is been ignored. Please read the facts in the talk page shown by SEVERAL WORLWIDE users. The actual article does NOT reflect what has been discussed there.Ramdiesel (talk) 17:58, 11 February 2015 (UTC)


 * I'll reply at the article's talk page. Huon (talk) 18:17, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Rufus (band) article..new info
Hey Huon. .. it's me again... wishing wiki not be used as a fighting grounds or "he say she say fight grounds...I wish to ask you to once again monitor recent info placed on the Rufus (band) site... I have "nicely" approached the person on their talk page a few days ago and not heard from them as yet... some of the info placed is very controversial. ..I am familiar with some of it..and chose NOT to place it in Wikipedia. .because of wishing to be CREDIBLE...  the party states that it is factual info...leading me to believe they are somewhat familiar with criteria/requirements..but offer no certificates... will you either approach them or remove info or ask for verification sources.  I left a very "friendly" note... because I am new to community but only wish credible verifiable info be submitted. I am being held to those protective rules..and I feel others should be as well... no one wants wiki to become a battle ground for axes that anyone wishes to grind. Thanks

Poekneegurl (talk) 21:17, 12 February 2015 (UTC)poekneegurl


 * To be blunt, the Rufus (band) article is a largely unreferenced mess with severe tone issues. It should be improved or drastically shortened. Mfich36's edit was not an improvement because it didn't improve any of the previous edits, was not accompanied by reliable sources to back up the changes, and in at least one instance contradicted the source we already had. For those reasons I'll revert it, but the article will need much more cleanup than that. Huon (talk) 21:38, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

WP:Co-op news for December 2014 – Feburary 2015
Hey, it's been a while. The Co-op team has been hard at work during over the winter, so let's get right into what's been happening: Thanks to all of the new mentors who have joined over the past few months. Big thanks to to posting about our little project here to the gendergap-l mailing list. I, JethroBT drop me a line 00:47, 13 February 2015 (UTC) on behalf of Wikipedia:Co-op.
 * Graphic design work is nearing completion and development work is coming along slowly but surely. The main components of the space, profiles, the landing page, and the mentor landing page have all been built, and we're basically just putting the pieces together.  We have close-to-final draft of the landing page, which is currently at User:Slalani/Landing_page, and in the thumbnail to the right.  You can check out other components over at User:Slalani if you're curious., , and I are working together on some of the front page elements.  We've also been doing some testing on test.wikipedia.org for profile building and matching.  If you're curious about checking that out, let me know.
 * We've finished up a survey for newer editors to assess their experiences of using existing help spaces (e.g. Reference Desk, Teahouse, IRC, The Wikipedia Adventure) on en.wikipedia.  is putting together a summary of that survey, and in the meantime, some findings from that survey of 45 newer editors include:
 * On average, editors found contributing to Wikipedia to be easier after using the help space compared to before.
 * However, after using one or more help spaces, only half of editors reported that editing, addressing social challenges, and resolving technical issues were easy or very easy. The other half of editors were either neutral, or reported that these matters were difficult or very difficult.
 * Just under 30% (11 of 38 editors) of newer editors said they probably would have stopped editing entirely had they not received support from the help space they used.
 * Editors frequently reported either 1) that they would not have been learn what they needed without the help space, or 2) That they could have found it, but admitted that it would have been difficult or taken much longer.
 * We will be making one final move of the pilot start date to March 4th, 2015. This is the last move (I promise), because we can't afford to run the pilot any later than that.  So there it is:  March 4th or bust!  But we won't bust, because there are just a few things left on our plate before we can run our pilot successfully.  I'll be alerting you about when you will be able to make mentor profiles soon, so when you get a message about that, please take a minute or two to create your profile here (otherwise, you won't get matched to any editors!).

(Opt-out Instructions) This message was send by through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:36, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Sydney Railway templates
Thank you for fixing that problem so promptly this morning - this means I will now be able to totally clean up the use of the old templates.

As far as the difference between Circular Quay and City Circle on the Bankstown line is concerned that was done at the time the Sydney Trains version was copied from the CityRail version by an editor who is now no longer active - reason unknown. Circular Quay is a station on the City Circle (furthest away from Central station) and there has not been any change to that since 1956. Some people seem to prefer City Circle for this sort of thing while others prefer Circular Quay. I could easily start a posting war on that issue. If I have any further problems I will use the link you provided which was much appreciated. Fleet Lists (talk) 02:49, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Request on 21:43:36, 17 February 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by MACH22
I want to add my article and it was rejected. I made some references and I want to verify my claims. How do I do this?

MACH22 (talk) 21:43, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

How do I verify my references so my article can be added to Wikipedia??MACH22 (talk)


 * You made references? Wikipedia content should be based on reliable sources that are independent of the subject, like articles written by newspapers or reputable magazines. Unless you're a journalist working for Rolling Stone or the like, I rather doubt you can "make" references Wikipedia would consider reliable. If you know of reliable sources and want to add them to the draft, see WP:Referencing for beginners on how to do so. However, the point isn't that you should be able to verify what you wrote (we'd hope you already know it's correct; otherwise you wouldn't write it); our readers must be able to verify the content for themselves. For example, "Lamont Caldwell is an all around musical force, with several musical instruments under his belt from saxophone, guitar, bass, piano and drums" - ignoring the unduly promotional tone for the moment, how can I check that Caldwell indeed plays saxophone, guitar, bass, piano and drums? Which source says so? Huon (talk) 22:05, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Advice on referencing
Thanks for the advice have implemented the changes suggested (Tcannonrb (talk) 13:57, 19 February 2015 (UTC))

Draft: James J. Kellaris
Hi Huon! Thanks for the feedback on my article Draft: James J. Kellaris and thank you for fixing my section headings. I am still adding references to the article. I did grab a lot from Kellaris' website but he gave me permission to use it, so thus there is no copyright infringement. I need to leave the article for a day now so I can work on my book. Should I submit the article for review now, or wait until I have more references listed? WHB (talk) 21:07, 19 February 2015 (UTC)


 * There are two issues here: Firstly, it's not enough for Kellaris to have allowed you to use the content; Wikipedia accepts only content that has been released under a free license so that everybody may re-use and modify it for any purpose, including commercial purposes - and we need evidence for such a release. If Kellaris is okay with that, he could add a note to his website releasing it under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License. And secondly, personal websites largely aren't written in a tone that would allow us to copy-paste them and arrive at a good encyclopedia article; the purposes are too different. And Wikipedia content should be based on reliable third-party sources. Thus it's probably easier to summarize in your own words what independent sources say about Kellaris than to bother with the licensing.
 * If the draft were submitted in its current state, it would probably be declined because entire sections don't cite any sources - that's not acceptable for the biography of a living person. For such articles it's not enough to give a list of references at the end, but you'll have to clarify which of the references supports which part of the content, preferably via footnotes. Again, see WP:Referencing for beginners on how to easily cite your sources.
 * On an entirely unrelated note, if a rather little-known scholar's list of "selected works" is longer than that for Nobel Prize winners like Stephen Hawking, it's probably not selective enough. Much better than a bare list of dozens of publications would be a text explaining the significance of his work, based on independent sources such as review articles discussing Kellaris' publications. Huon (talk) 21:39, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Block
Hello I'm not sure how I haven't addressed the reasons, I refuted both allegations? what more would I need to do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.41.41.184 (talk) 22:11, 20 February 2015 (UTC)


 * The IP address was blocked for the following reason: "Abusing multiple accounts: Please see: Sockpuppet investigations/Capt Jack Doicy". You have not addressed that, and since you still are evading the block on your account, I will block the IP again, this time for longer. Huon (talk) 22:31, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Bleh
If you want to unblock Haunted331, go ahead. DS (talk) 01:42, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Help with redirecting previous account talk page
The reason why I requested a redirect is because I lost the password to my previous account. Joey13952 alternate account (talk) 22:52, 22 February 2015 (UTC)


 * I have added a message to User talk:Joey13952 telling people that it was your previous account and to contact you at your current account's talk page. That should do, particularly since your previous account's talk page wasn't that highly frequented anyway. Huon (talk) 00:24, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks,Joey13952 alternate account (talk) 07:22, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Huon,

Thanks for your remarks - I'll take the issue to the hebrew wikipedia. You are absolutelly right about the well sourcing of the article and that's exactly the reason I want the article in hebrew - most reliable published sources are in hebrew and there is no point of making a link to them in an english article. Anyhow, if you have any specific remarks about the article, I'll be more than gladly to apply them because I agree that reliability is more important than just to promote an issue.

--Lydia-cz (talk) 15:27, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

WP:Co-op: Presentation at Wikimania 2015
Hey. I've put in a submission for a presentation at Wikimania 2015 called Is Two the Magic Number?: The Co-op and New Editor Engagement through Mentorship. I'll be talking about the state of finding help spaces on en.wiki and how our new mentorship space, The Co-op, factors into that picture. Reviewing will begin soon and I'll need your help to be able to present our work. Please review our proposal and give us feedback. If you would be interested in seeing this presentation, whether you are attending or not, please add your name to the signup at the bottom of the proposal (you do not need to attend Wikimania to express interest in presentations). I, JethroBT drop me a line on behalf of Wikipedia:Co-op.

(Opt-out Instructions) This message was send by through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:19, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Unblock decline
This edit edit-conflicted me. I was going to say much the same thing, but your way of putting it was more amusing than mine, so for once I am glad of the edit conflict. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 20:42, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Co-op: Mentor profiles and final pilot prep
Hey mentors, two announcements:
 * 1) You can now make your profile at The Co-op!  Please set up your mentor profile here as soon as you are able, as the pilot begins on March 4th.  It isn't very involved and should only take a minute.  If you need more info about what the different skills mean (e.g. writing, communication), please refer to these descriptions.
 * 2) Profile creation, invitations, and automated matching of editors, profile creation, that will be coordinated through and a few gadgets may not be ready for our pilot, and will have to be done manually until they are ready.  In preparation for the pilot, please read over these instructions on how we will be manually performing these tasks until the automated components are ready. I, JethroBT drop me a line on behalf of Wikipedia:Co-op.

(Opt-out Instructions) This message was send by through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:41, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Universidad Empresarial de Costa Rica:
My edition reflect a hard writting effort to bring reliable sourses. I feel its unfair to undo all the work, I did to bring references to the discussion. Also I must underline, that controversial website was www.unem.edu.pl not www.unem.cr Furthermore, I see no reason why the listing of 27 notbale people has been shortened. I am the only one engaged in bring facts and already discussed all the aforementioned in the talk page. By the way NONE of the user that reverts my editions, are bringing ANY fact into the talk page. Ramdiesel (talk) 20:18, 1 March 2015 (UTC)


 * I'll reply at the article's talk page. Huon (talk) 20:30, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

I also expose my facts in teh talk page And there are several user with the same approach like mine in the talk page. Also be aware that the page is semiprotected, so many user are not allowed to editRamdiesel (talk) 23:10, 1 March 2015 (UTC)


 * As I pointed out on the talk page, those "several users" were one and the same, and have been blocked from editing for pretending to be several people to gain the upper hand in that dispute. Huon (talk) 23:17, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

According to your edition, user Safetylun edited the article and he is also wrong??? Don't you think you must be the wrong one here??? Ramdiesel (talk) 00:50, 5 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Once again I'll reply at the article's talk page. Huon (talk) 01:13, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Confusing notice on my talk page
I recently edited 2002 Gujarat riots. A user Kautilya3 had some dispute with my editing. I don't have any problem with that. But he has mentioned something about Arbitration committee. I don't know why he said that here. Is he asking me not to edit any India Pakistan topic? If I have a valid reference then what's wrong. I am also not doing original research and I am mentioning whatever is written in the source using my own words. --CosmicEmperor (talk) 03:46, 2 March 2015 (UTC)


 * That message is a notification that Pakistan/India/Afghanistan topics have been hotly contested in the past, that they are thus subject to special scrutiny and that people pushing a nationalistic point of view (of any kind) may find themselves more quickly sanctioned than elsewhere. That's not saying you are such a nationalist, but that it's a topic area where tensions tend to run high and it's better to be extra careful. When a topic is particularly sensitive (such as the Pakistan/India/Afghanistan topic area) it's a good idea to discuss changes on the articles' talk pages before reinstating an edit that has been reverted.
 * The issue User:Kautilya3 raised was one of undue weight - yes, you had a reliable source for that incident, but was it really important enough in the grand scheme of things to be mentioned in an article on the riots in general? Should every comparable incident for which we can find sources be mentioned? There were over a thousand deaths and numerous non-fatal injuries; why detail those three killed? Huon (talk) 20:59, 2 March 2015 (UTC)


 * I know that that notice looks scary, but the essential point was to point out that you are required to read and follow policies. There are a lot of policies and it takes time to learn them.  But, the experienced editors will point out the relevant policies as you go along.  Please follow them and you will be fine.  Nice to see that you have a guide that can show you around. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 21:41, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Premier Basketball League page
As I said on the Premier Basketball League 2015 season talk page, I apologize for undoing your large edit on the 2015 season. I thought it was just the league trying to protect its image again. I also said that I would welcome an updated summary, now that there is non-Facebook confirmation from one of the teams' websites, and the league's website itself , that there are financial difficulties on a number of teams, and that the season is ending three weeks early, and the playoffs starting on March 21. Just wanted to reach out to you here as well. Cheers! Things Said Over Coffee (talk) 02:46, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Peter Glassgold
Here are some web pages which refer to Peter Glassgold. I've copied the relevant text. I hope this is the kind of thing you are looking for. The guy really has been an important behind-the-scenes figure in contemporary literature.

If you do decide to do a piece, I can get nitty-gritty stuff like birth date, etc. for you.

Yours, Rev. H. Carlton Earwiggherd a/k/a Denk a/k/a ? I wouldn't mind giving my real name, but I gather Wikipedia has some policy against that.

Glad to see that Wikipedia is joining with the ACLU to stop NASA's snooping into everyone's curiosity.

PETER GLASSGOLD sources:


 * 1) http://www.peterglassgold.com/
 * 2) http://ndbooks.com/author/peter-glassgold
 * 3) http://www.amazon.ca/s/ref=nb_sb_noss/180-9749704-5274132?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=Peter+Glassgold&rh=n%3A916520%2Ck%3APeter+Glassgold
 * 4) https://www.graywolfpress.org/blogs/pub-talk-fiona-mccrae-interviews-barbara-epler
 * 5) http://www.greeninteger.com/book-digital.cfm?-peter-glassgold-hwaet-&BookID=313
 * 6) http://www.nyu.edu/about/news-publications/news/2001/04/04/olympia_dukakis_peter.html
 * 7) Peter Constantine
 * 8) http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2014/10/19/a-poem-for-sunday-129/
 * 9) http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/goldman/peopleevents/e_freespeech.html
 * 10) http://coloradoreview.colostate.edu/paul-hoover-interview-for-the-colorado-review/
 * 11) http://ecologicalart.org/octaviopaz2014.html
 * 12) http://chs.harvard.edu/CHS/article/display/1323
 * 13) http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2000/2000-01-16.html

Peter does not have many pieces on-line. Here is one: http://www.postroadmag.com/26/recommends/glassgold.phtml

I’m going to see if there are others. -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rev. H. Carlton Earwiggherd (talk • contribs) 15:11, 10 March 2015 (UTC)


 * First of all, please don't copy-paste the sources' content onto Wikipedia; that's problematic on grounds of copyright. Just the links will do nicely.
 * There seems to be a misunderstanding about the kind of sources Wikipedia needs. There's no need to look for Glassgold's own writings online; they will be of no help at all. If we want to point our readers to an overview of Glassgold's work, an external link to WorldCat would do. What we need, however, are reliable sources that are independent of the subject and discuss him in some detail; the Wikipedia article should then be a summary of what those sources report. (Giving me the "nitty-gritty stuff" without sources thus won't work.) Of the sources given above,
 * #1 is his own website, clearly not independent;
 * #2 and #5 are publishers promoting Glassgold's works, the first one also the company Glassgold worked for, not an independent source;
 * #3 is a bookstore selling Glassgold's works, not a reliable source for a biography;
 * #4 might help, but there's very little information on Glassgold, little more than a passing mention;
 * #6 is a press release, not independent news coverage;
 * #7 is Wikipedia, which does not consider itself reliable, and even if it were that's a mere name-drop;
 * #8 is another passing mention that says no more about Glassgold than that he edited a volume of poetry;
 * #9 is yet shorter and doesn't even write a single sentence about Glassgold;
 * #10 is a personal anecdote that provides no information about Glassgold beyond what #4 already said;
 * I'm not quite sure what #11 is, but it's again a passing mention of less than a single sentence that adds nothing to the information in #4;
 * #12 is more interesting since the footnote [35] gives some information on Glassgold's stance on interpretation and author's intention that likely guides his work as an editor;
 * #13 mentions his name, but not himself;
 * finally, the best I've seen so far is the book review you linked to yesterday in the chat; that one discusses his writing style (for that one book) in some detail.
 * That's very, very little. I could probably summarize all the information provided by those sources in three sentences. However, those sources hint at others that may be more promising: New Directions quotes a review of Glassgold's work in The Nation, but doesn't give enough bibliographical information to make it readily identifiable; The Green Integer refers to a review of a work of Glassgold's in The New York Times in 1985. Those are the kinds of sources we're looking for. Unfortunately I'd expect both of those are available only offline, likely in library archives, and finding them may prove quite a task. To be honest, I feel somewhat out of my depth here. I'll ask for help at WT:WikiProject Literature; people there may know of additional sources, may have better ideas of how to find the sources we know about already, and may be a little more dedicated to writing about an author, editor and publisher than me. Huon (talk) 21:51, 10 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Hello, Huon, I replied to the above many days ago, but my reply does not seem to have appeared. I am not sure if this is the right way to reply. I'll just try again.
 * I think you will agree that Peter Glassgold does deserve a Wikipedia article. He has edited books by a number of well-known authors, he was editor-in-chief at New Directions for many years and co-editor of its influention annual publication, New Directions. He is the author of a novel and editor of a number of anthologies (published by other firms). He was active in Pen. All-in-all, he has played an important role in the literary world for the last forty years. The problem, re: Wikipedia, seems to be 1) he is of a generation that is too old to have a large on-line presence, but too young to have academics start writing papers about him.
 * Thank you for your offer of asking for help at WikiProject Literature. Is that something I could do? Rev. H. Carlton Earwiggherd (talk) 19:40, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Hello Rev. H. Carlton Earwiggherd, nice to hear from you again. Your previous reply indeed seems not to have appeard; it doesn't show in your contributions either, so apparently something went wrong with saving that edit. But yes, this is the right way to reply. Regarding Glassgold, I already have left a message here, but unfortunately the WikiProject seems less active than we might hope. I don't think someone has taken up the challenge. Huon (talk) 20:08, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Mentorship
Hi new mentor! Koopa24


 * Hello Koopa24,welcome! I see you have already found my talk page. You said you were interested in learning abouut images and media. That's quite a large topic, with copyright one of the main concerns since Wikipedia aims to be a free encyclopedia that can be freely re-used for any purposes - preferably including images. Do you have particular questions you're interested in or tasks you want to work on, or would you prefer a generral introduction to image use on Wikipedia? Huon (talk) 17:57, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for help w/ Afredo Sciarrotta page
Thank you for your advice on the Alfredo Sciarrotta page, and for fixing those footnotes! I have located an article from the Boston Post in 1948 on Sciarrotta entitled, "Modern Cellini Has Cloak and Dagger Record: Italian Refugee Silversmith has Connoisseurs Beating Path to His Door in Newport, R.I. Spirited to U.S. During War by O.S.S." Is this sort of reference sufficient or still too local? I will also look for more modern citations re: his artistic influence, and reconsider what you term "grandiose language," but it might not be the case that all clandestine O.S.S. activities have been as widely publicized as you believe. I appreciate the chance to keep the page up there and will work on a revised version! JRB250 (talk) 21:34, 15 March 2015 (UTC)


 * The Boston Post article would definitely help. Please be aware, however, that I only declined the speedy, discussion-free deletion since the article credibly indicates that Sciarrotta may be important - a deletion discussion may still be launched and find that he doesn't meet the higher hurdle of notability (though with the Boston Post article things look better in that regard, too). Huon (talk) 21:46, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Mafia Magazine
After your sarcastic remarks, I find it hard to take you seriously or believe that your decision to recommend Mafia Magazine's page for deletion not a personal one because your feelings were hurt when I replied in kind to your sarcastic remarks in the talk room. I don't see this as professional in any way, shape, form or fashion. If Mafia Magazine's page does not meet "Your" requirements, then feel free to delete and we will be done with it completely. We look forward to discussing our experience with you, Huon, and Wikipedia with our readers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Madegray (talk • contribs) 00:51, 21 March 2015 (UTC)


 * You may want to take a look at Wikipedia's guideline on conflicts of interest. I'm not aware of having made any sarcastic comments, nor did I see you making any sarcastic replies. I do see, however, you assuming bad faith on my part. The notability requirements aren't "mine" but Wikipedia's. If Mafia Magazine meets them, provide evidence and I'll gladly change my opinion. You're welcome to join the deletion discussion at Articles for deletion/Mafia Magazine or to improve the article itself. I looked for reliable sources covering Mafia Magazine in some detail and didn't find anything, though. Huon (talk) 01:13, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

So your comment about the place of birth on a plaque wouldn't be considered sarcasm to you? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Madegray (talk • contribs) 01:16, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

When I asked you how would I go about verifying the publisher's place and date of birth, you answered, "How do I know the CEO's birth date, was it on a plaque?" That was unnecessary and unprofessional. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Madegray (talk • contribs) 01:22, 21 March 2015 (UTC)


 * This refers to our conversation on IRC. Your reply to my question on where you got the information from was that you had worked with the company and worked for the distribution company. I didn't see how that would let you know the place or date of birth of Gordon Gray, and since his assistant gave you that information, it indeed doesn't seem to come with merely working for the distribution company. From Wikipedia's point of view the "plaque on the wall" would actually be a little better than "told by his assistant" because our readers might have a chance of looking up such a hypothetical plaque while there's no way at all for them to verify what the assistant said. While not entirely serious, my comment wasn't meant as sarcasm, and I apologize for the misunderstanding. The basic issue remains: The lack of reliable third-party sources discussing either Gray or his magazine. Huon (talk) 02:27, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Very poor cleanup but a good avoidance of taking responsibility. We will delete all submissions for Gordon Gray as well as for Mafia Magazine. Thank you for being so "helpful." Not sarcasm, just misunderstood. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Madegray (talk • contribs) 03:50, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Reply
Hi, my question wasn't about the other person commenting on my talk page. I put in what I thought were good faith edits and that user responded in what I saw as a hostile matter. I was curious if there was a way I could ask you or another Wikipedia user a question off the privately. Busy Moose (talk) 19:17, 22 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Many editors can be reached via email (when you look at the left sidebar at a user or user talk page, there should be an "Email this user" link), but Wikipedia generally prefers discussions to be kept public; for example, I will not reply by email to any mails I receive. Huon (talk) 19:26, 22 March 2015 (UTC)


 * That's fine then. I'll say it here. That case on my talk page you saw was an example of many instances I've been seeing, but not getting into regarding...well, what I see as just plain rude behavior for the sake of being rude. I know there are rules on here about that stuff, but it seems they're ignored more often than not by the editors with higher edit counts. I'm beginning to distrust the motives of other users as well - that their interest is basically protecting their own views and edits. I'm getting fairly fed up with the culture of this place, and I'm wondering if I'm just not seeing something since I only have a few hundred edits so far. Busy Moose (talk) 19:59, 22 March 2015 (UTC)


 * I read AussieLegend's comment quite differently: It was not only a thorough explanation of why they thought the image shouldn't be removed, but also an invitation to explain your concerns on the talk page. Wikipedia aims to resolve disputes via discussion, and people who repeatedly remove content without explaining their concerns may find themselves blocked. You seemed to be headed in that direction; thus AussieLegend warned you of the likely consequences if you continued that approach. Not as a threat, but as an invitation to change your approach before there are unfortunate consequences. Basically, if you find an edit of yours gets reverted, you shouldn't revert again, but discuss the issue on the talk page and establish a consensus. Huon (talk) 22:24, 22 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Consensus is impossible here unless you are one of Jimbo's lackeys. I can see nothing has changed here over the past ten years. Busy Moose (talk) 22:33, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

You've got mail
-- CosmicEmperor  (talk) 06:25, 23 March 2015 (UTC)


 * I have seen the mail. Working on that draft is on my to-do list, but it's a rather low priority for me, sorry. Huon (talk) 22:13, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

12:42:09, 23 March 2015 review of submission by KHEname
KHEname (talk) 12:42, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Dear Huon, just one or two hours ago I deleted the file from March 22, 2015. I did send you on the talk page two messages for this. Are you rasing my revised file from today? it is not the old one from yesterday, Kalmbach H.E., MINT


 * I have replied at the talk page, but to be blunt, what you're writing is pure gobbledygook and I'm afraid that you're trying to pull a Sokal on us. That would be considered disruptive, of course. Huon (talk) 22:13, 23 March 2015 (UTC)


 * CONCERNING your Article for deletion request, Huon, for the article Coorol Mills I add my comment to the reviewer who accepted this:

Entry on your article page for deletion not found Monday March 23, item 20?, - so my comment is to the reviewer to check on another reviewer called Huon for incorrectly suggesting with his crew the deletion of the article cooroll mills: the model was developed and published in recognized scientific international journals after Tschernobyl and Kalmbach gave on at least 30 international recognizes congresses talks on this model, also under the name WIGRIS. The model is found in the literature quoted and can be checked through newly created videos, also quoted, which technically are running as simulations. The symmetries, spaces ans energies are described also in the literature and in the article submitted to Huon 6 energies, symmetry and spaces, Kalmbach H.E. KHEname (talk) 21:45, 25 March 2015 (UTC)


 * As I mentioned elsewhere, I have not found a single mention of "Cooroll mills" at either Google Scholar or the arXiv preprint server. There's no mention of that term in the cited sources, either, not even in the paper written by yourself. The physics is, to put it mildly, debatable, but that doesn't even matter since Wikipedia cannot have articles on subjects that haven't already been discussed in reliable published sources. Huon (talk) 21:57, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank You
Thank you. There are a lot of celebrities and many famous places in Bangladesh. I want to write about them. And ask for your help if i have any problems.(Razu 23:49, 23 March 2015 (UTC)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by EditorRazu (talk • contribs) 23:42, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion
Hi Huon, I proposed an article for deletion that was created by a user you Co-op mentor, EditorRazu. I just thought you would like to be aware of this. Please see his talk page for more information. Thanks, ~EdGl  !  00:44, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your help!

Ahl9f (talk) 00:32, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Jacky Xu Page
Hi, thank you for your response. This is regarding the page that I created titled 'Jacky Xu'. May I know how can I submit the resources that you are asking? Do you want an image or a link or something? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kat.pambid (talk • contribs) 05:10, 26 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Hello Kat.pambid, since Wikipedia requires sources published by a reputable publisher, you should provide enough information for our readers to look up that source on their own. For, say, the web edition of The Straits Times a link would definitely help, though you should still provide metadata - the title of the article, the publisher, the publication date and so on. That way, there's a chance to find the article again if the publisher changes the URL. The videos at WP:Referencing for beginners explain how you can easily create nicely-formatted footnotes with all that information. If you want to cite a book or the print edition of a newspaper or magazine, you'd need to provide enough information for our readers to look it up in a library - author, title, publisher, publication date (particularly important for newspapers or magazines), page number and so on. Again the videos will explain how to add such sources, too. I'll take a snippet about the other Jacky Xu, the Chinese billionaire, to provide an example of what the end result should look like:


 * Jacky Xu is a Chinese businessman who owns the Trendy Group, a fashion company comprising several brands. In 2015 Forbes estimated Xu's fortune at US$ 1.39 billion. Living in Guangzhou, he holds the citizenship of St. Kitts and Nevis, making him the richest citizen of that country.


 * As you can see, I have given sources that are independent of Xu and directly support the statements I have made about him. The same would be expected for the article about your Jacky Xu. For example, "Jacky developed his company into a leading private vocational training chain in Singapore" - which third-party source confirms that? Something like that would definitely need to be backed up by an independent source; otherwise it could be dismissed as promotional hype ("leading", in particular, is a buzzword that doesn't convey any real information. Whom does the company lead, and in what way? Did they have the greatest market share among Singaporean vocational training chains? As a further aside, we should refer to the subject by his last name, not by his given name).
 * Is this helpful to you? Huon (talk) 19:12, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Joshua Chit Tun
I do not understand how Wikipedia functions in regards to the editing process, however I do want to address the current page for deletion, Joshua Chit Tun. I did not create the article, I do agree there are too many links referenced to stubs etc., without second sources. However I assure you if one was diligent to do the research it is not hard to verify at all. In the end this is trivial and not my concern, I am confident in a few months there will be valid sources to meet your standards from a variety of news group. It is just prior to this I preferred to keep what I was working towards a private matter, nevertheless I am one to document all aspects of my life. Every page and every image for every year.

Wikipedia is not my thing. This was just to acknowledged your comment, as you are the expert on Wikipedia, however I will continue to do and your comments are well noted, my team will make sure that the news covers my experiences.

To conclude, I would appreciate it since you know how to navigate Wikipedia to work with the individual who created the article to improve it so in that regards it meets all standards.

Thank you.

- Joshua Chit Tun — Preceding unsigned comment added by JC2016 (talk • contribs) 01:29, 31 March 2015 (UTC)


 * The article has by now been deleted following this deletion discussion which you participated in. Wikipedia content must be based on what reliable sources that are independent of the subject have reported about it. The now-deleted article did not cite a single such source, and I rather don't think anything your team was involved in would be considered "independent". Please also note that writig about yourself on Wikipedia is strongly discouraged due to the inherent conflict of interest. The original author of the article about you was User:Brotothextrem; you can contact them at their talk page. However, Brotothextrem is a rather inexperienced editor, and it seems likely that they misjudged whether you meet Wikipedia's standard of notability. I see no indication that you do; thus Wikipedia should not have an article about you at this time. Huon (talk) 23:02, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of John D. Hunter
Relying on Google News??? Don't take personally though, if you were into computer science and ever plotted with something called matplotlib, probably this question would not have stood at all. Can't this help? http://paw.princeton.edu/issues/2012/12/12/sections/memorials/2519/index.xml Xscontrib (talk) 05:42, 31 March 2015 (UTC)


 * I was aware of that source, and I rather don't think an article in an alumni association, signed by his class, would be considered a reliable third-party source. Huon (talk) 21:04, 31 March 2015 (UTC)


 * The one is supported is some more references and a public domain image. Xscontrib (talk) 09:15, 8 April 2015 (UTC)