User talk:JBW/Archive 50

Kern Wildenthal
Hi James,

My Bio for Kern was used all over the internet and your copyright system found it on texasbusiness website. I will rewrite my article and submit a new version for Kern Wildenthal.

How do I do this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.98.244.142 (talk) 17:37, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Clarification
Re User talk:Lubnarizvi, WP:ANI: I assume you meant "warning template", not "block template"? The only edits I see from Lubna to HiaB's talk page are the noticeboard notification and the warning template that I warned her for. — Francophonie &#38; Androphilie  ( Je vous invite à me parler  ) 18:56, 2 January 2013 (UTC)


 * No, I meant block template: see this edit. I may have inadvertently been misleading by saying "the talk page of a user who was not blocked", when perhaps I should have said "the talk page of an IP address which was not blocked". However, the message was intended for the user who had used that IP address, so it was a message to a user. I will adjust my comments to make it clear I was referring to an IP talk page. Thanks for drawing my attention to it. JamesBWatson (talk) 20:28, 2 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi there. No problem, and my apologies for not investigating this thoroughly enouugh. So much of this had been about HiaB that it never crossed my mind that there could be incidents with other users. — Francophonie &#38; Androphilie  ( Je vous invite à me parler  ) 00:22, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Can you review?
There is an ongoing ANI thread regarding me[]. I'm not the issue here (really!). We have a history of accusations against me of Bias, Racism, Manipulation and a overall disregard to wiki policy. I'd like one of two things possibly both. The thread should be closed, it's a waste of everyone's time. The author themselves may possibly qualify for a token block as the personal attacks, assumptions of bad faith and is also a COI account as they are writing about a personal friend. The editor has been warned by multiple people at the AFD, On their talk page, my talk page and also at ANI about AGF. Either way it should be stopped to limit disruption. I'm fully open to reviewing my own edits on this because I have bent over backwards trying to explain the policies at length and nothing has been inappropriate but the circus needs to stop. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 16:59, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I have closed the ANI thread. I have stopped short of blocking the user, but have given a warning. If there is any more of the same then I will be willing to block. JamesBWatson (talk) 17:34, 2 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm thinking we're at the point where a block is warranted for disruptive editing. I do havve his page on watchlist due to the attacks and what not and I saw him sanitizing the page frmo a legitimate discussion [] and I quite nicely didn't even template as I thought it would not help with an encouraging message [] which was responded to in typical uncivil fashion [] and also []. I'm thinking we have a user that needs a break to read through our policies as he WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT anything any of the editors have thus far told him. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 01:38, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

ACtually I'll take this back to ANI because it doesn't appear you are active or online. Cheers and no worries. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 01:53, 4 January 2013 (UTC)


 * It was taken back to ANi [] but thus far only one person has looked at it and suggested to take the userpage off my watchlist. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 06:09, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Undeletion request
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Green,_Cumbria

has been deleted by yourself. I see a reason for the deletion but I believe the reason is invalid. The deletion of the page has created broken links on other pages.

Can you please undelete the page and let me know* when you've done so, so I can review its content, thanks.

Mike.
 * millomweb — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.150.255.143 (talk) 23:55, 3 January 2013 (UTC)


 * 1) I have removed some links from other articles. However, redlinks to nonexistent articles are not always a bad thing, as they may serve to call attention to subjects on which articles can be written.
 * 2) As for the deletion reason being "invalid", you do not say why it is invalid, but I have checked its history to see if I can find any possible reason. The article was deleted under speedy deletion criterion G5, as a page created by a blocked user in violation of the block, with no substantive edits by others. Certainly there were no substantive edits by others, as not a single edit by anyone other than the creator of the article was anything other than a trivial edit to do with such issues as categorisation, minor corrections in format etc. That leaves only the possibility that you think the article was not created by a blocked editor. Do you have any reason for believing that? Since the user who created the article stated as a fact that he/she had previously used another account which had been blocked, it seems, on the face of it, pretty clear cut. I see no grounds for overturning the deletion, which seems to be entirely in accordance with Wikipedia policy. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:20, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Got another one for ya..
[] promotional userpage, self promoting a company csd removed in excess of three times warned correctly by SD BOT. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 10:11, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * By the time I got round to dealing with this, another admin had already deleted the article and indefinitely blocked the user. However, if it's of any interest to you, I would have done the same had I got there quicker. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:29, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Artpop
Hi James!

Should this page: ARTPOP(album) be moved (back) to Article Incubator/ARTPOP(album)?

I'm totally lost with things at the moment, and after so many moves of this page (and similar pages) by - I can't tell. Thank you, -- MST  ☆  R   (Happy New Year!) 11:52, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Hate to be a total pain in the ass, but shouldn't Wikipedia:Article Incubator/Artpop (album): be Article Incubator/Artpop (album) (minus the ":")? -- MST  ☆  R   (Happy New Year!) 12:02, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you! --  MST  ☆  R   (Happy New Year!) 12:12, 5 January 2013 (UTC)


 * You are not the only one who is "totally lost with things at the moment, and after so many moves". I managed to get hopelessly confused. However, I hope I got it right in the end. Thanks for your help: I didn't notice the colon until you pointed it out. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:13, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

You Should Apologize As Well
See User:MarcusBritish. -- 66.30.138.33 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.134.42.35 (talk) 23:00, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Any idea who this mentally-challenged hick is? He doesn't know me very well, if he thinks I'd ever apologise to a cretinous coward.  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh {chat} 04:18, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Looks like 64.134.42.35 is a proxy IP. Suggest the standard 5 year proxy block. -  Neutralhomer  •  Talk  • 05:46, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Child protection issue
Can you do me a favour as an admin? Take a look at User:H.Brian Griffin and remove then revdel the external links which point to the editor's personal website together with photos and contact details. Then perhaps explain the dangers faced by younger editors on Wikipedia. Thanks. --Bob Re-born (talk) 20:29, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh sorry I will take them down immediately! (H.Brian Griffin (talk) 17:41, 2 January 2013 (UTC))
 * It is for your own protection, I hope you see that. JBW - can you delete the revisions from his user page history? --Bob Re-born (talk) 19:34, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Happened by this randomly, I went ahead and did it. Complaint department at my talk page.  --j⚛e deckertalk 10:51, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Please help us to stop conspiracy against saraiki language in wikipedia
Hi Sir , sir I'm Saeed Ahmed from Riyadh Saudi arab.In this wiki pedia some people are editing disinformation about Saraiki people and saraiki language .these disinformation are conspiracy against Saraiki land and Saraiki language .please help us we are also part of this world ,we have also right to  protect  our  land & language & saraiki  people in democratic way .please dont be one sided I request again please dont be one sided,if You will be  one sided this will be cruel step against us.against Saraiki l and,Saraiki language & saraiki people. please stop conspiracy against saraiki language or Help us to stop these conspiracy .shah puri dialect is a Saraiki language some poeple editing and show this is punjabi and many others conspiracy against saraiki land ,Saraiki people ,Saraiki language .I hope you will consider Saraikies also a part of this beautiful world .you will help us to stop these conspiracy against us thanks

Saeed Ahmed Riyadh Saudi arab 00966568817680 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pakwaseb (talk • contribs) 09:23, 3 January 2013 (UTC)


 * You say "please dont be one sided". I saw an edit war, and warned both the editors involved. The edit war continued, so I blocked both of them, both for the same amount of time. "One sided"? JamesBWatson (talk) 19:22, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello Saeed Ahmed and JamesBwatson There is no such conspiracy. I am also a Saraiki and Saeed (Pak waseb) is also a saraiki. Dear for proving Shahpuri being a dialect of Punjabi, i added sources as per local websites of Sargodha and Khaushab Districts where this dialect is spoken (see below). Additionally as per Census 1998 of Pakistan Statistic division of Pakistan issued booklet for each district figures. Unfortunately that is not available on line but Saeed when you go back Pakistan you may get a copy in which local people have opted 90% as Punjabi. Additionally i have added international websites links (Mostly from india), see all the references please (see below). Please dont claim those as Saraiki who dont consider them self Saraiki. We all live in Punjab Provinces. Punjab means land between five rivers so technically we all being local are punjabi. Linguistically through out Punjab or other parts of world Languages change after every 12 kilometers. I can communicate with all dialects of Punjab province and every other person from Punjab province also know the fact about mutual intelligibility of saraiki and punjabi. we must love each other and live together. No one disrespects beautiful saraiki (Southern dialects of Punjabi) culture but we cant call every one saraiki forcefully. Best Regards and Special Thanks JamesBwatson.

References

^ http://sargodha.dc.lhc.gov.pk/?page_id=1335 ^ Punjabi University, Patiala ^ The Indo-Aryan Languages By Colin P. Masica (page 18) ^ http://www.sikhchic.com/history/mother_tongue_the_many_dialects_of_punjabi ^ http://languages.iloveindia.com/punjabi.html ^ http://sargodha.dc.lhc.gov.pk/?page_id=1335 ^ http://www.pakistan.web.pk/threads/khushab-district.7507/ ^ http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/letters/04-May-2012/more-provinces Saraikistan (talk) 04:13, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Same applies to Jhagvi dialect or jhangochi

References

^ http://www.thenewstribe.com/2012/01/16/major-punjabi-dialects ^ Punjabi University, Patiala ^ http://www.findpk.com/cities/Explorer-pakistan-Jhang.html ^ http://languages.iloveindia.com/punjabi.html

Hello JamesBwatson

Protection requested for WP articles Shahpuri, Shah puri, Shah puri dialect and Jhangvi dialect because Pak waseb after getting bolcked for 72 hours is using other IP adresses to consistently malign it. Regards and Thanks Saraikistan (talk) 05:25, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Rather than protecting the articles, I have placed blocks affecting the IP addresses that have been used. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:30, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

So that didn't work!
Despite what I thought was a well-crafted note on the IP editor's talk page, this happened shortly afterwards. --Biker Biker (talk) 23:18, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I am not in the least surprised. However, I am still happy to have given the editor a chance, although he/she chose to throw that chance away. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:20, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Gerry Georgatos
It seems to me that whoever is editing as is in way over their head. By using a real-life name, they may be doing harm to the named person. They have now another request at User talk:Gerry Georgatos which, I suspect, might escape attention because it (again) didn't use the proper format. I think some assistance in the process of Unblock-un might be called for, not as a gesture of good will towards the current user but as harm minimisation for, what seems to be, the innocent 3rd party. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 02:44, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Never mind: . -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 06:40, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Artpop again
I dropped by to see if you were around after I added to Sockpuppet investigations/JosephDann which you had closed the last case of. I saw a move in your edit history I didn't get (moving what is now Wikipedia talk:Article Incubator/Artpop (album)), joining a what appears to be a common confusion. From what I see a redirect to itself has been moved around from various places. A redirect that somehow appeared around a deletion or partial move? Since it appears to have always been a redirect to itself should this be blanked. I'd do it myself if I was sure I wasn't missing something?. And if you're here soon, given your experience, I'd appreciate it if you can you look at the SPI (if not already resolved). I don't like being impersonated, even it is the best form of flattery. duffbeerforme (talk) 09:11, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) Artpop: Sigh. I thought I had finished with this. However, thanks for pointing it out. I had a tedious and confusing experience trying to sort out the various disruptive moves to one place after another of the page which is now at Article Incubator/Artpop (album), and it did not cross my mind that a side effect of my efforts was to move a meaningless redirect (in the guise of the corresponding talk page) around all over the place. However, I have now deleted it. Your suggestion of blanking it would have been OK, but there seems no point in keeping a page which has never had any meaningful content. Thanks again for pointing it out. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:39, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * 2) SPI: ✅. Quite apart from the sockpuppet issue, the impersonation would itself have been sufficient grounds for blocking one of the accounts. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:53, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Sockpuppet Investigation
Please also see User:Zurdo427 and User:Bullbox777 I believe they might be connected to Brian Holztman, all three have edited in the same area Darrell La Montre Hell In A Bucket (talk) 10:51, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Possible, but I don't see enough evidence to take any action. However, you can add them to the SPI if you like, and it is possible that a checkuser may find evidence. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:59, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * NO worries I'll keep an eye out, you know more about this case then I do, I just noted they appeared on the same pages and all three are new accounts. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 11:02, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

User:Junkyard69
Hey James, I just looked at the user you provided and from my view it appears to be a duck case. Newly created account, instantly goes to a AfD and then edits the article sometime after the user was blocked for promotional usernames and the article was nominated. Thoug if the use denies any connection, it still appears to be two duck that have gone swimming. Though you already worked that oit, just wanted to share my findings with you. Take care, John F. Lewis (talk) 15:00, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree, and I did consider just blocking, but I thought I would give the user a chance to be honest about it, before deciding whether to block indefinitely or only for a while. However, on reflection, life's too short, and I will go ahead and block. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:07, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Would you please consider reversing your actions as far as Junkyard69 and the alt account go. The blcoking template clearly states: "please take a moment to create a new account with a username that represents only yourself as an individual and which complies with our username policy." I have a feeling that he was only following the template. -- Guerillero &#124;  My Talk  20:26, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I am in two minds about this. As far as creating a new account goes, what you say is probably true enough, but posting two "keep" comments to the same AfD via different accounts, without mentioning that you are the same person, looks to me like abuse of multiple accounts. However, having thought it over, I think that on balance you are right, and I shall give the benefit of the doubt and unblock. JamesBWatson (talk) 20:54, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Guerillero, what lead my to put my findings here is also the user requested a username change as well as creating another account. The new username request is yet to be dealt with but the new account does not show a clear good faith usage but rather to immediately continue the users actions by commenting on the AfD. So from your above it appears it may have been a good faith mistake by requesting a new username and creating a new account or it may be early multiple account abuse as the user has the Account but it has not been identified as being the blocked user, plus double commenting on AfDs is how I see several accounts that are good faith continue into bad faith editing and in one case, socking. John F. Lewis (talk) 22:43, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * After having a little discussion with Guerillero on the IRC it appears this is 99% likely to be a good faith mistake though the AfD comment should e mentioned upon unblocking if you do so James. John F. Lewis (talk) 22:50, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Action Beat
Hi James,

It appears the Wiki page for my band 'Action Beat' has been taken down. Last time I checked, it looked like someone had edited the page for a 'laugh' - so I'm guessing this is the reason it was taken down? Please can you advise me how to get the page back up?

Many thanks.

John — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.108.145.21 (talk) 15:09, 7 January 2013 (UTC)


 * The article was deleted because it gave no indication that its subject was significant enough to be the topic of an article in an encyclopaedia. Unless you can provide reliable sources to show that the subject satisfies Wikipedia's notability guidelines, the answer to "how to get the page back up" is that you can't, as any attempt to do so will just result in deletion again. My searches very strongly suggest that it does not satisfy those guidelines. I wonder if the editing "for a laugh" that you refer to was the vandalism from the same IP address that you are editing from. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:28, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Range block?
The users 171.33.208.148 and 171.33.210.101 have both been warned by me for vandalism just today (UTC+8), and the former has been blocked by you. Seems like the address keeps changing, possible to rangeblock? Cheers! Hop n hop (on the arctic ice) 15:16, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅ Looking at the editing history, I see that almost all editing from the range for a very long time has been vandalism, so blocking stands to gain a good deal. Thanks for pointing this out. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:41, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

No problem, just doing my job as a Wikipedian. Hop n hop (on the arctic ice) 15:46, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

User destroying WP for personal or national feelings
I request you to kindly have a look at some notes I left here, here and here. I am sorry for some of my heated words in TPs and edit summaries but frustration is also a human feeling. I also have a feeling I begin with one of the right users here to ask help and hope I will not have to continue disturbing all admins I can reach to give an end to one or two (not more than three counting one blocked from the area) editors very interested in certain issues and who do not leave a stone unturned (including falsification) to impose their biassed POV in WP. I need help from impartial and especially objective editors/admins like yourself. Thank you. --E4024 (talk) 16:03, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) A check of your comment at Talk:Anti-Armenianism casts doubt on the objectivity and accuracy of your own editing, where you seem somehow to have misread two different sources.
 * 2) At Talk:Sevag Balıkçı consensus seems to be against you.
 * 3) At Talk:Sarkis Torosyan I am not at all clear what your point is. You suggest adding information to the article, and I don't see any explanation what you think the problem with doing so is.
 * 4) If you can give a clearer indication what problems you are referring to then I will see if I can help, but at present I see one talk page where you have posted a comment which is not evidently problematic or controversial, another one where you appear to have made a mistake, and another one where you have, quite rightly, raised your concerns, and discussion seems to have produced a consensus, so the thing to do is simply accept that consensus. Or have I misunderstood?
 * 5) I fully share your view that people with nationalist opinions should not try to force Wikipedia to fit their nationalist point of view. It is good that you hold that opinion, as it means, of course, that your own editing will not be influenced by such a nationalist perspective.
 * 6) I am not quite sure what you mean by "I also have a feeling I begin with one of the right users here to ask help and hope I will not have to continue disturbing all admins I can reach to give an end..." but it looks alarmingly as though you are saying that you intend to trying a succession of administrators until you get the result you want. If so, I strongly advise you not to do so, and you should be aware that doing so will be likely to get you blocked from editing. If that is not what you meant, then you may like to clarify what you did mean. JamesBWatson (talk) 17:30, 7 January 2013 (UTC)


 * My replies are below:


 * 1) Please also read the two preceding talks of mine there, titled "Incredible" and "Credible?" I hope that then you will understand me better. (Attention: I have no POV editing in the article text; if yes, please show me.) I will not comment on how you read those sources.
 * 2) I will return to this point later as I first have to address some issues there. (I have helped that article a lot to make it more NPOV and will contribute more.)
 * 3) Read the TP now, as I explained several things, again please.
 * 4) You have seen my SPI request, without being informed by me. You may see other issues concerning this chat here and there by yourself; if you have time and do not get bored. BTW none of us are immune to misunderstandings: Rather new users like me, experienced editors, admins, everybody...
 * 5) Don't worry; I don't even have time for nationalist (or not) editing of my own; I am busy all the time trying to clean articles from nationalist bias.
 * 6) I will not do any admin shopping; I understand they have little time to see all the details. (The reason I asked help was for the total course of behaviour of some users who, IMO of course, seem not be here really to help make an encyclopedia but do have a proper agenda which is beyond the dissemination of knowledge, and I dare think this agenda is not a very noble one. I am afraid I will not be able to explain more of this; let us say it is a "feeling" of mine and pass this point.)

Thank you very much, Mr Watson for your time and attention. Best. --E4024 (talk) 23:26, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Stubbing it up
I created a stub on Brian Evans. it can be found here Brian Evans (Singer) I believe that as a stub form it meets notability guidelines but just barely. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 06:54, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

she already recreated it!
LENDEH KEMOKAI managed to recreate the page before you blocked her Gtwfan52 (talk) 09:24, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, so I saw, and I deleted it again. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:28, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Message
Are such comments allowed taking in consideration Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Proudbolsahye/Archive?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 23:22, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Good day to all (morning here). Sorry for the interruption. Antidiskriminator, I am informing the user very politely about something. I am telling them in advance that if I am mistaken about what I am implying, I apologize in advance. Please take this as a good-will gesture intended to prevent a drama.(Thanks for your tolerance about my occupation of your space, Mr Watson.) Best. --E4024 (talk) 09:47, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Pollenware
Hi James! I replied to your deletion note. I will do what it takes to make sure my article follows the rules: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:CarrieBartlow CarrieBartlow (talk) 16:50, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

I haven't heard back yet. Maybe my note hasn't reached you yet. Please advise. --CarrieBartlow (talk) 15:06, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi James. I'd like to apologize for creating an article that seems to be getting speadily deleted everytime I posted it. It's really frustrating, but I realize that it's my writing- not the system at fault. So with that said, I could really use your advice on:


 * My first version only had one third party reference. I corrected this after CaseyChesh had a conversation with the deleting admin about notability and added two more sources: Bloomberg (2x) and Sillicon Prairie News. Even with this done the system still said it lacked notability. Do I have to actually include a sentence saying "This company is notable because of XYZ?"
 * I can understand why the page can come off like promotion. I really like Pollenware and want it's huge breakthrough in working capital finance to be described. But more important, I want to publish my first article and have it accepted! :) So please advise what I could remove in order to at least get a stub going.
 * Is the word "Pollenware" protected now? I'd like to pass a draft by you for approval so I don't any more heat for all these deletes. I heard that sometimes you can put the deleted page on a talk page so you can work on it? Do you recommend this or another technique?

Thanks in advance for your feedback! CarrieBartlow (talk) 19:39, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

He's back
Hi James, our friend User talk:81.109.93.181 is back, up to the usual nonsense. I thought he had a permanent ban? Regards Footballgy (talk) 13:59, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Sigh. Blocked again. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:47, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Pollenware Take 2
I posted updated content with 3 strong references on my talk page. Would you mind taking a look at this. Figured it was a better tactic than posting and getting deleted. CarrieBartlow (talk) 20:08, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Croonerman
Hi, James, just in case you didn't notice, you might want to weigh in here.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:03, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Deprodding Lily Laight, Chloe Hawthorn, Lara Wollington
FYI: I am removing proposed deletions of three stubs created by my adoptee. I hope to have your blessing in trying to convince her to return and improve these articles to the required level. If you can please state on the talk pages a brief statemented of the required notability criteria you think is required - GNG or more specific that would be helpful since I have not edited in this area. Thanks BO &#124; Talk 04:28, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

your attention needed
User:Rabenwappen‎ and User talk:Mosmartin‎(sockpuppets) and also at here regarding some developments on the Croonerman front. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 11:47, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Nightingale College Page Deletion
I see you deleted the page Nightingale College Utah that I just created, can you give me some feedback on how to create the page in a non-promoting way? (it was not my intention, I just found that the School does not have a Wikipedia page and wanted to help out)

Thank you, XtremXpert (talk) 13:29, 11 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I should think the subject is probably suitable for an article, but you need to avoid such language as "The mission of Nightingale College is to prepare its graduates to walk in the footsteps of Florence Nightingale with confidence, competence, and compassion" and "Nightingale College’s purpose is centered in the educational and professional success of its students and graduates, improving the communities it serves, and ultimately contributing to the reshaping of health care in the State of Utah and across the nation", etc etc. The purpose of a Wikipedia article should be to give an impartial, detached, third party view, and not to tell us what the institution itself would like us to believe about it. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:34, 11 January 2013 (UTC)


 * You are right, I haven't thought about that. Do you think you can revert the deletion, let me redo the content and then ask for your review? XtremXpert (talk) 13:41, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
 * OK. I have restored the article. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:46, 11 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I'll go and redo the content looking at other schools' Wikipedia pages and let you know when I think is done so you can review it. Thank you, XtremXpert (talk) 13:50, 11 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I removed the information that was self-promoting and added some other info. Please take a look at the page Nightingale College Utah when you have time and let me know what you think. Thank you, XtremXpert (talk) 14:15, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
 * It looks OK to me. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:20, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

IP 125.60.243.121 and Proki
Hi, I notice you blocked this IP address way back in mid December. They mainly edited dog type articles, sometimes good but mostly unconstructive and seemed to be particularly active from the end of October 2012 until the block was placed (they had been active previously but stopped in September 2011).

Within a few days of your block, I noticed a different editor Proki seemed to start making very similar edits, again occasionally good but often unconstructive. Once more the concentration appears to be on dog articles. Proki had very little activity during the period when the IP above was especially active.

I don't know the back story to the IP block and I really am trying to assume good faith; maybe I just have an over active imagination but are these two one and the same? SagaciousPhil  -  Chat  11:27, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, if you have an over active imagination then I have too. The degree of similarity in editing goes way beyond what might be thought to be chance coincidence, so I have blocked the account. Thanks for pointing this out. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:46, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Request for the closure of FFD
Hello! sir, how are you? My request is please have a look at the following FFD pages : FFD December 19, 2012,, ,. If you think these images have to be deleted please delete them and close the discussion sir or if you want to comment to keep those images, please let me know by replying there in FFD or in my talk page or here. Thank you for reading this. Have a good day. Raghusri (talk) 12:42, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Please reply for the above sir. Thank you. Raghusri (talk) 10:01, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * At first glance, there is no obvious consensus in any of these. However, in at least some of the discussions there are suggestions that you have misunderstood or misapplied policies or guidelines. If that is true, then your statements should be disregarded, leaving consensus against you. I don't care about these images enough to be willing to spend the time and trouble it would take to check whether it is true or not. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:04, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Why you are showing your aggression on me??? Be cool, i just requested you. Doing (or) not doing is your choice according to Wiki policies and guidelines etc... etc... . Because you are a admin know!!! I didn't mean that you have to follow my commands. Raghusri (talk) 10:00, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I really did not intend to be aggressive. Also, rereading what I wrote, I don't see the aggression, but if I misjudged the tone of my reply then I apologise. JamesBWatson (talk) 20:45, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

No problem sir. I understood about (Regarding aggression issue) matter. But my humble request is : Please see that FFD once when you are free sir, because i don't want to irritate you repeatedly with my requests. That's not my intention. Happy editing sir. Raghusri (talk) 12:52, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Reply
Sosthenes12 (talk) 18:05, 14 January 2013 (UTC)Sosthenes12

tb

 * Thanks. JamesBWatson (talk) 16:22, 14 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Answered there. JamesBWatson (talk) 17:03, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, one last reply from me to see if you have the time!

Reply
Hi James, I got your note. Can you tell me on which page I edited the English incorrectly? Please answer on my user page. Thanks! 70.165.46.157 (talk) 16:57, 14 January 2013 (UTC)Sosthenes12
 * Replied at User talk:Sosthenes12. JamesBWatson (talk) 17:08, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Junkyard69
Hi, regarding user:Junkyard69 and User talk:JamesBWatson/Archive 50, I granted the open unblock request per my comment at Sockpuppet investigations/Junkyard69/Archive. I don't do a lot of unblocking and I forgot that I should have talked to you first; in this comparatively simple case I believe I understand the reasoning that lead to the block and that there is nothing I missed. If you disagree I'm of course very open to discussion. I will stay on top of their edits (if there are any, that is). Cheers, Amalthea  17:37, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I left the account blocked, because it seemed the username issue had been resolved by the creation of a new account, so there was no need to unblock the original account. However, I don't see that your unblocking does any harm, so I have no objections. Thanks for letting me know. JamesBWatson (talk)

Harry Dunn
Did you see Talk:Harry Dunn? Also, discussion was had with the AFD-closing admin (although the reasons given on the Talk page should have sufficed to avoid the incorrect speedy). -- JHunterJ (talk) 17:43, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, I saw both, and I thought very carefully about them before deleting. However, I'm afraid I don't agree that it was "incorrect". In any sort of borderline case, where an administrator has made a judgement as to consensus, it is reasonable to approach the administrator who made the decision, and suggest reconsidering that decision. However, this was not a borderline case, as there was a perfectly clear and unambiguous consensus at AfD. No administrator, nor even a pair of administrators discussing the matter and acting together, has any more right to overturn an unambiguous consensus than any other editor. I am sure that you acted in 100% good faith, but I believe that you were mistaken in using your admin tools to reverse the outcome of consensus at a community discussion, and deletion review is the correct step if you think there are good reasons for overturning that decision. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:27, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * The problem was the speedy, which claimed that the re-created article was "substantially identical" to the deleted article. It obviously wasn't, and the difference (the addition of the citations to meet the general notability guideline) was also what kept it from being a simple overturn of the consensus, which was to delete an article that obviously didn't meet the general notability guideline nor the football notability guideline). But I will raise of deletion review of the speedy. -- JHunterJ (talk) 12:02, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I've asked for a deletion review of Harry Dunn. Because you closed speedily deleted this page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. -- JHunterJ (talk) 12:22, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

A move
Hi you attempted to decipher an RM for me a week or so ago. Much of the move details are currently here Talk:Henry van Rensselaer (disambiguation). Problem is the two other most active editors in the conversation seem to be deliberately going against normal guidelines in hopes to get me upset enough again to get into an edit war. In the process of correcting the looks of this DAB i brought in a WP:3O who decided that it should not look as it currently does (and has been reverted to with simple (undo) even replacing sentence-like details for an entry. The problem I have been running into with a particular editor has resulted in a complete mess of several namespaces used for redirects directly as a result of their WP:wikihounding my edits and 'correcting" them on the basis of their misunderstanding a capitalization rule for Dutch names. I have getting this person to  stop [] to no avail the other person involved in the revert to incorrect format issued a "final warning" because one time I lost a bit of cool and got rude over their misunderstanding. I have even asked for a MOS to be written even if it is not enforced it would still be enough to hopefully slow the errant "corrections" being made to my edits. My talkpage exhaustively details our encounters. I don't want to go into a shaggy dog story right here but if you you can help, please do. a close look should show that the first time I got banned for edit-warring (not a problem i did it and got blocked) What was a shock to me is suddenly with NO warning such as "you are never to touch that page again" when I made corrections someone decided it was a "war" all over again and blocked me for a week, even though nobody was involved at that point. It is my guess tey depend on this problem being such a tangled bowl of spaghetti it wouldn't be worth it for someone looking into it.

...JGVR (talk) 18:00, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
 * This post threw a boomerang into the air, resulting in an indefinite block. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:01, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Talk access restored
Just a courtesy note to say I've restored talk access to User talk:Wikiforyou123, following an unblock request at User talk:Wikiforyou789. Looking at the user's history of unblock requests I'm not hopeful of seeing anything useful, but you never know.  An  optimist  on the  run!  12:25, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * That's fine. Thanks for letting me know. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:17, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Revoking Deletion of a Page Rahul Easwar
Added a lot of substantiation to pages of Rahul Easwar, unfortunate that no replies was there to talk page and was deleted. (Alex.mathews (talk) 14:07, 9 January 2013 (UTC))
 * Mostly YouTube, minor mentions, promotional pages not independent of the subject. Very little in the way of substantial coverage in reliable independent sources. The sources cited did not come near establishing notability by Wikipedia's standards, though they certainly did an excellent job of showing that there is a very active campaign to try to publicise Rahul Easwar's work. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:13, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Would like to humbly convey Sir, There was enough references in India's leading media houses Cnn-Ibn, Times Now, Ndtv, The Hindu etc. I am sad that there is a tinge of cynicism from such a senior wikipedian. Would like to discuss & also take advise from you how to revoke deletion, pls (Alex.mathews (talk) 14:28, 9 January 2013 (UTC))

I hope you would humbly give the opportunity to present counter arguments, Thank you (Alex.mathews (talk) 14:29, 9 January 2013 (UTC))


 * I have to go off line now, but I will try to remember tomorrow to check the sources you gave again, and tell you what I make of them. (Incidentally, I have no idea what makes you refer to "cynicism": as far as I know I was simply giving a brief and dispassionate summary of how the cited sources related to Wikipedia guidelines.) JamesBWatson (talk) 14:50, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for that response, Sir. I really value it as a very junior wikipedian. Sorry, if any wrong usage came, Was a bit surprised as i was putting some of the more credible Links to News Channels in our Nation, India. Pls check this when your time permits 5 Best Credible Links.

1. Times Now Video Page - Rahul Easwar - http://www.youtube.com/user/timesnowonline/videos?query=rahul+easwar (Please Note : This is Official Times Now Page, not individual page)

2. Cnn-Ibn describes him as Auhtor & Researcher - http://ibnlive.in.com/chat/rahul-easwar/the-legacy-of-sathya-sai-baba/631.html (Official Cnn Ibn page - www.ibnlive.com)

3. Ndtv - http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/news/sabarimala-stampede-frantic-search-on-for-missing-children/187806 (Direct from NDTV News Website)

4. Economic Times Article - http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/features/special-report/leadership-role-and-spirituality-in-corporate-realm/articleshow/7434202.cms?prtpage=1

5. The Hindu write up - http://www.hindu.com/mp/2006/02/18/stories/2006021802420100.htm

Just a Word to add, Sabarimala is 1 of the Largest Pilgrimages in World with more than millions of devotees visiting. Mentions in BBC, MSNBC, Forbes Traveller etc. - (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30072128/ns/travel-destination_travel/t/worlds-most-visited-religious-destinations/)

would request humbly to re evaluate your position, Sir..Thanks (Alex.mathews (talk) 16:02, 9 January 2013 (UTC))


 * I see that, rather than wait for me to get back here, as I said I would try to do, you have gone ahead with creating a deletion review. See my response there. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:51, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Dear Admin,

I created a page for mr. rahul easwar today on wikipedia. Mr. Easwar is an author and activist of well repute in our country.

I am a very late wikipedian and dont know the reasons of the page being deleted. The reason cited was suspected promotion. The links i had provided were all accurate. I can provide you with even more links, that will again prove that Mr. Easwar is a person identifiable as a notable personality by even wikipedia standards, as detailed in the website. i avoided all those links for brevity. Mr Easwar is the spokesperson for Sabarimala, which is the largest pilgrimage in the world (ref from wikipedia itself), and this can be substantiated by links from national media (mentioned below) in India and also from the wiki page of the family of the supreme preist of sabarimala.

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/death-toll-crosses-100-in-sabarimala-stampede/140520-3.html

http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Kochi/article1118935.ece

http://blogs.outlookindia.com/default.aspx?ddm=10&eid=31&pid=2724

Tantri_controversy

Now, the presence of Mr. Easwar in the national media can be substantiated with any number of references, as he is a panelist for Social/Political discussions in the national media, in channels NDTV, Times Now,CNN-IBN, Aaj Tak, 9XM, and other channels.

Please let me know what else i should provide for the page to be re-instated.

Carolchriskevin (talk) 17:15, 9 January 2013 (UTC)Kevin SunnyCarolchriskevin (talk) 17:15, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Since you are clearly trying to use Wikipedia to promote a cause, you should not try to write an article on the subject. Wikipedia is not a medium for promotion, and people who persist in trying to use it as such after that fact has been explained to them are liable to be blocked from editing. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:51, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Dear Admin,

I am a great admirer of Indian Culture and Spirituality. It was during my research about the same that I learned about Sabarimala Temple. From wikipedia itself I learned that Sabarimala is the largest pilgrimage in the world. I also learned that Mr. Easwar is the spokesperson for Sabarimala. He is also a person really trying to promote my culture and heritage. I did further research on him, read two of his books. All the info I have provided in the article were collected by me during my research. It was this inspiration that made me write a wikipedia page on Mr. Easwar. I was only of the intention that such a noteworthy person should be recognised. I have no intention of promoting Mr. Easwar. My only inspiration is the culture and heritage of my country. I strongly felt that Mr. Easwar's works are notable in this regard, and hence wrote this page.

Please take this into consideration.

Carolchriskevin (talk) 12:32, 10 January 2013 (UTC)Kevin
 * You say that you "have no intention of promoting" him, and yet you also say "I was only of the intention that such a noteworthy person should be recognised". Writing so that someone you have a high regard for "should be recognised" means that you were writing to promote him. That is what "promotion" means. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Dear Admin,

by saying should be recognised, i meant that he should have his due on wikipedia. He has enough recognition in the physical world. I was actually perplexed that he didn't have a wiki page. Because there are a lot of pages in wikipedia, where people of a lower notability are recognised. I felt that this is unfair to him :(

Carolchriskevin (talk) 12:55, 10 January 2013 (UTC)Kevin

Dear Admin,

This is unfair to the part of people who want to edit & also put facts & News reports & events, person in Wikipedia. Even thou wikipedia suggests of not comparing, let me point out 3 pages who dont even hav 1/5 of references & notability,

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunnykutty_abraham

2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M_V_Nikesh_Kumar (i, myself was adding reference to this page, because it was lacking

3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C_V_Raman_Pillai (another page, i was trying hard to find reference in Internet, (although he is a great literary figure in our land)

I hope a Senior Administrator will be magnanimous enough to allow adding to the repository of knowledge

(& as a New Wikipedian, i was adding to Deletion review. Pls dont take offence of tat. Thank you) (Alex.mathews (talk) 13:09, 10 January 2013 (UTC))


 * I know nothing of the other articles you link to. If, as you seem to be suggesting, they do not have adequate sources, then maybe you would like to propose deletion. As for being "unfair to the part of people who want to edit & also put facts & News reports & events, person in Wikipedia", Wikipedia's inclusion criteria are to do with reliable sources showing notability, not to do with being "fair" to people who wish to use Wikipedia to publicise something. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:15, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Dear JamesBWatson, I have apologised to you the deletion review log, I was not aware that my behaviour would be considered improper, if i put in deletion review, as i was waiting for your response.

But what u suggest seems to belittle Indian Media itself, Our National Media has given space to a person extensively & they have channels of international affiliations like CNN & Times. & Yet you think, Iam trying to for publicising. That is unfair. You should definitely delete things which are not of inline citations, but having an attitude of not giving space from things from our place is unfortunate.

I have gone thru deletion reviews, & there was a "Clever Campaign of deleting the page, in which 1 put the suggestion, another seconded it in a short time, & third deleted it. Is that kind of behaviour acceptable.

And "Notability" ?? If a person is noted in our Land's Media (India) in such a magnitude, it is belittling our media & our mind, to say that that is not notable enough. Hope you would respond. Thanks (Alex.mathews (talk) 13:42, 10 January 2013 (UTC))
 * Well, I have spent some time trying to clarify things for you. However, if you think that I was part of a "clever campaign" to delete the article, then I have evidently failed to get through to you. If you are going to assume bad faith in what I do and say, then there is probably little point in my trying any further. JamesBWatson (talk) 17:37, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Dear Sir, It is so unfortunate that iam not able to communicate my points to you. I never said, YOU are a part of campaign. Why would a senior wikipedian like you do that. You would never. I was pointing that there were some people who did that who belonged to our land. You have conveyed your points across to me well, and i have learned that. It was a learning experience. But please dont misunderstand, With High Regards. (Alex.mathews (talk) 20:40, 10 January 2013 (UTC))

Dear Admin,

I understand your concern and your passion to keep the sanctity of Wikipedia! But, i feel i am unable to convince you about the situation. There seems to be a serious communication problem between us. Mr. Easwar as such requires no promotion. Last day I was trying to get an appointment with Mr. Easwar when his secretary informed me that he's been invited to the US by US universities in connection with the celebration of 150 years of Swami Vivekananda. H will be addressing the crowd in 14 US Universities.

Now, i can cite a hundred examples of Wikipedia pages for people with lower recognition. A simple Google search on Rahul Easwar would tell you the magnitude of notability for the activism of Mr. Easwar. If you persist to stand by your stubbornness, then I have nothing more to say. Yet, it should be noted that you convey a message of belittling our nation and its media, as Mr. Mathews Suggested. Please make an arrangement so that we can constructively discuss our differences of perspective.

If i have made an errors, kindly bear with me for my lack of experience about wikipedian customs.

With Highest Regards, Kevin

122.174.201.176 (talk) 06:25, 11 January 2013 (UTC)Kevin

Would request for re instating the page of rahul eswar as i hav raised in appeal page (208.7.38.227 (talk) 18:10, 12 January 2013 (UTC))

Have written on the appeal page, hope that is ok. Please do give attention when your time permits (Alex.mathews (talk) 23:27, 14 January 2013 (UTC))

Thank you for your time and attention. It was a learning experience, and I feel because of my interaction with you and page, I have learned a lot in a shorter time. Shall I add more references as the important interviews about him and prominent media coverage was not given as reference. Pls do check when your time permits(Alex.mathews (talk) 14:21, 16 January 2013 (UTC))

Alternative medicine
Hi, An editor at ip 64.134.225.194 has reverted a couple my edits within a few minutes of me making them and is making what I think are some pretty dodgy changes to the article. I understand they asked you to take a look at their edits, my edits and the article. I haven't made any other edits in case this would constitute 3RR but I think this leaves the article in a poor state. Do I have any options other than hoping some other editors will try to improve the relevant sections ? Would be grateful for your advice. Thanks Aspheric (talk) 21:45, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
 * The first edit you link to is clearly helpful, as it consolidates two copies of the same reference into one. I cannot see any reasonable reason for objecting to it. Also, it certainly wasn't a revert of an edit of yours "within a few minutes". You had made only one edit to the article in the previous hour, and the edit you linked to was not a revert of that. I have not been able to find any earlier edit of yours that it was a revert of, either, so I wonder if you may be mistaken in thinking it was a revert of your editing. The second edit you link to did revert two of your edits, including one made within a couple of minutes. However, that fact is not in itself problematic, and the editor has given explanations of his/her reasons. As for your more general comment about "pretty dodgy changes to the article", it is not clear that you mean anything other than edits with which you disagree. Some of the editor's changes are unambiguously improvements, such as this edit, which removed clearly biased wording which was designed to promote a point of view. Some of the edits, on the other hand, are debatable, but none that I have seen have been unambiguously disruptive. I see two editors, both acting in good faith, both having some reasonable and arguable views to express. I think the best way to deal with the situation is to discuss it, not with a view to showing that you are RIGHT and the other editor is WRONG, but with a view to trying to reach agreement, or at the least an acceptable compromise. It is also essential to accept that, in a collaborative project such as Wikipedia, you will not always get your way, and will sometimes have to accept that a particular article contains content that you think is wrong, and move on to other things. If you want to, you can look at Dispute resolution for other suggestions, but I am doubtful whether anything suggested there will be more helpful than what I have suggested. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:16, 15 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks, that's actually really helpful. I guess it's easy to lose perspective. I do think the article is slow decline ( but I suppose it's possible the ip may think the same). Ah well Aspheric (talk) 22:26, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Page: David Meisel
James,

My name is David Meisel and I am trying to delete the wikipedia entry about me. It was created by a friend who was mocking me and is completely inaccurate and ficticious. If you read it you will see it is a joke.

I would like the whole entry deleted please. It undermines the validity of Wikipedia and is embarassing to me.

Could you please delete the page or if not explain how I can do so.

Thanks for your help.

Kind regards,

David Meisel — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.250.99.94 (talk) 12:04, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I have deleted the page. It was obviously vandalism. If you ever edit Wikipedia again, bear in mind that it's a good idea to give a few words of explanation, so that others can see what you are doing, and not mistake your edits for vandalism. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:10, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Reasons for posting WDCR Radio on WIkipedia
Dear James:

You wrote me an email, today, accusing me of being an "unauthorized" representative for WDCR Radio. As a matter of fact, I am the founder director and President of Westbank and District Community Radio Society, a registered not for profit group with the Province of British Columbia. We are the owners of a community and internet radio station called WDCR. I am general manager of this station. We are based out of West Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada, and we are the first radio station in the District of West Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada. yours truly, R.J. Smith — Preceding unsigned comment added by WDCR-FM (talk • contribs) 12:14, 16 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I have not sent you any email, but I did post a message to your Wikipedia talk page. That may be what you mean by an email. Alternatively, you may possibly have your Wikipedia preferences set to automatically inform you by email when anyone posts to your talk page, in which case you will have received an automatic email.
 * You may like to re-read the message I posted to your talk page. I did not say anything about being "unauthorized", but I did suggest that you might have a conflict of interest, and what you have written above confirms that. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:42, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of research institute page
Hello James, I recently created a Plants for Human Health Institute page, which you deleted last Friday for being self-promotional. Also, the account I used for the creation of that page was "PHHI," which as you pointed out was related to an organization, another no-no. I want to apologize for my seeming lack of regard for Wikipedia's policies, I felt that the institute was notable/worthy of a page, but I approached it the wrong way. After re-reading the original content, I'm embarrassed and realize how subjective the content appeared (though that wasn't my intention). To make reparations, I've created a new username consistent with your policies (JMoore501), which will be used to make contributions outside of the page in question. Also, now that I've spent the weekend reading up on what should've been done, would it be possible for you to revert the deletion so I can edit the page for neutrality? I would also seek your review for the page this time. Any feedback would be great.

Thanks so much! JMoore501 (talk) 17:49, 14 January 2013 (UTC)JMoore501
 * I have posted a message about this at User talk:JMoore501. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:01, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Many thanks, James! Your feedback was extremely helpful. I'll work on the new page and let you know when it's ready for your review. JMoore501 (talk) 20:44, 17 January 2013 (UTC)JMoore501

Shah puri dialect
Shah puri dialect article containing nine references is being continuously reverted and redirected by user Kwamikagwami without any reasonable argument. Protection of article and blocking of Kwamikagami requested for persistent childish behavior and wasting others time Fantasyworld99 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fantasyworld99 (talk • contribs) 06:42, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Edit by blocked sockpuppet. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:44, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

English WP - Reply
Hi there JAMES, AL from Portugal "here",

by your message i guess you mean my conversation with User:Marcospace. I would like to do so (write in English) at ALL times, not my fault that users such as this one have poor skills in the language required, so what are my options besides write in his ("their" thinking of "foreign" users in general) mothertongue? The only thing i'm lacking i guess is that i should provide a message in Portuguese/Spanish/whatever followed by the English translation, i'll work on that.

Don't know if you meant it or implied it, but i'm not writing messages "not-in-English" to avoid scrutiny and/or keep matters private, as i've explained above. Moreover, whenever requested i can provide a translation (if i fail to add one to the "letter"); last but not least, there's always google translator.

All in all, sorry for any inconvenience - --AL (talk) 14:56, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Not for a moment did I intend to suggest that you were trying to avoid scrutiny, and I am sorry if I gave that impression. A Google translation is sometimes useful, but sometimes not much better than nothing. I do understand your point about communicating with others who do not have good English skills. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:00, 16 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Naw, i know you're in good faith James, i was just trying to make everything clear when i wrote that "scrutiny" bit. Speaking of (lack of) English skills, in retrospect i should not have written "Don't know if you meant it or implied it", but rather "Let there be no confusion", my bad! Obviously you got the impression i was "accusing you of accusing me", sorry mate.

Keep up the good work - --AL (talk) 15:34, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of "Nitram Charcoal" page
Good morning, I noticed that the Nitram Charcoal page had been deleted. I was hoping I could get clarification on what portion appeared as promotion and would be happy to alter it. Thank you for your time, Christina — Preceding unsigned comment added by Christina119 (talk • contribs) 15:07, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid that I can't really specify "what portion appeared as promotion", because it was the general tone and character of the whole article, rather than any specific part of the article. Such language as, for example, "With Gros’s experimentation and innovation, Nitram has developed into the product it is today" reads like marketing copy, rather than like dispassionate third-party reporting.


 * I advise you to think carefully before you put any time and effort into trying to rewrite the article. If promotion were the only problem, then it would be possible to write a non-promotional version of the article, but if the subject does not satisfy Wikipedia's notability guidelines then no matter how the article is written it is likely to be deleted. My investigation suggests, I'm afraid, that the subject probably does not satisfy those guidelines. The vast majority of what I have been able to find about it has been advertising, and the rest has largely been such stuff as posts on forums or blogs. None of this goes anywhere towards establishing notability under Wikipedia's terms. Before considering whether to put more time into rewriting this article, I suggest that you look at FAQ/Organizations. Also relevant are Notability, Notability (organizations and companies), and Identifying reliable sources.


 * Finally, if you are connected to the business you have been writing about, then you have a conflict of interest, and you are not the right person to write about the subject. It can be very difficult, or even impossible, for a person closely involved in a subject to stand back from it and see how their writing will look from the perspective of an outsider, and very often people in such a situation are quite unable to understand why their work keeps getting deleted, as they sincerely cannot see why it looks promotional to everyone else. This problem is particularly severe with people who work in marketing, PR, etc. It seems that they get so used to everything being expressed in promotional terms that they become desensitised to marketing-speak, and often cannot see it when it is staring them in the face. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:40, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Gaba p again
Sorry but he seems bent on disruption and has started a thread on WP:ANI, I would be grateful if you could comment. Wee Curry Monster talk 16:10, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion of page on John Ertler
I was dismayed to find that the wiki page I was creating for Mr John Ertler has been deleted before I have finished adding material to it.

Can you please send me a copy of the deleted material as I have spent hours collating the material.

I thought I saw somewhere that I had up to 10 days to create the needed references etc. This page was deleted in a matter of just hours despite me indicating on the talk page that I intended to add to the material.

Regards, Tannoy K3838 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tannoy K3838 (talk • contribs) 18:11, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I have restored the history of the article, and it is now at User:Tannoy K3838/John Ertler 2. I have no idea where the ten days figure came from, but an article that satisfies one or more of the speedy deletion criteria can be deleted immediately. JamesBWatson (talk) 20:00, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Time warp
Apologies. In haste I had forgotten to look at the date. You are correct. Daniel Case (talk) 18:40, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

If you get a moment...
... would you mind taking a look at the recent edits of User:76.20.90.53? I ran across it whilst looking into a help request and popped over to their talkpage to advise them about misuse of the template, but a closer inspection got my duck-detector buzzing... The IP was blocked as a Timmy Polo sock about a year ago, and recent editing seems to show that it's still being used by the same individual - I'm tempted to block on sight, but since you're familiar with the case (or at least have dealt with it before) I wondered if you'd mind having a gander to see if you agree. Cheers, Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  08:11, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Searching through the editing history, I had no memory of the case at all, and I thought you might be mistaken in thinking that I "have dealt with it before". However, I see that I posted a message to the IP talk page nearly a year ago, so you are clearly right.
 * It is immediately obvious that the recent editing has been by the same person who was editing when the previous IP blocks were put in place. It was not so immediately obvious whether it was Timmy Polo, but extensive comparison with the editing of checkuser-confirmed sockpuppets left me in no doubt. There are several give-away signs. I have blocked the IP address for a year, and I was tempted to make it longer than that. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:54, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Grand, thank you for looking into it so quickly. Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  08:59, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Block appeal
Hi, this user would like you to look at their block appeal. Thanks FiachraByrne (talk) 09:09, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅ Thanks for letting me know. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:03, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Need Help !!
To User:JamesBWatson I am the User:ImmortanSpartansImmortalSpartans (talk) 10:46, 17 January 2013 (UTC). I am new on Wikipedia and i can edits articles but lacks knowledge about creating new article. I want a create article name "Hanwant Singh Deora" that's why i asked help from User:Hell in a Bucket but as he did not understand Hindi language & he was unable to read and understand references i send to him. Can you tell me about any Wikipedia registered user who can help me in creating this article and who has reading ability of Hindi language.
 * You could try asking at Help desk for someone with a knowledge of Hindi. However, I can find no evidence anywhere that anyone named Hanwant Singh Deora satisfies Wikipedia's notability criteria. If not, then any effort you put into such an article is likely to be wasted, as the article will probably be deleted. Also, if you are related or otherwise connected to the person, then you have a conflict of interest, and should not be writing an article on the subject. My advice is to forget about creating new articles for now, and instead make small improvements to existing articles. Doing so, you will learn what is acceptable and what isn't, until after a while you will be able to write new articles without fear of their being deleted. (That is, of course, assuming that you are here because you wish to help improve the encyclopaedia. If, on the other hand, you are just here to use Wikipedia as a medium to publish pages about yourself and your family, then you would be better off using a social network site.) JamesBWatson (talk) 11:03, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
hello :)

Jesslovesharrypotter (talk) 16:53, 17 January 2013 (UTC) 

Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Canada
It looks like we tripped over each other; I protected this page for 3 days at the same time you blocked the IP for 3 days. I see User:108.174.174.246 was already blocked and unblocked once today for edit warring, so if in your judgement the block should stay in place, I'll defer to that. Just wanted to make sure you knew about the protection. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:00, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes. I discovered you had protected it just after I blocked the IP. Normally, I would not think there was any point in doing both, but this time I decided to leave the block in place, to convey the message to the IP editor that I meant what I said in my earlier message, when I reduced the length of the previous block. JamesBWatson (talk) 19:05, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
 * OK by me. I'd like to keep the protection in place too, however, as I'm fairly unimpressed by the edit warring by multiple editors, on both sides of the dispute. See if this will make them use the talk page. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:07, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

help me
hi dear. pls help me to write Anthropology and Culture thanks. i have many refrence. قاسم منصور (talk) 12:39, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Lori Bakker
Why did you delete this Lori Bakker page? She has a book on Amazon so she is more than just the wife of someone. I am trying to get some information about her in reference to the book that she has written. 76.188.166.123 (talk) 12:53, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletetion
Hi, you recently deleted an article i created on Vygon (UK) Ltd, would you be able to point me in the direction of an editor who could help contribute to the article in my sandbox to bring it inline with WIKI guidelines. Just to notify i'll be rewriting the article within my sandbox so please let me know if this causes any issue.

Thanks

(Murklemark (talk) 12:35, 17 January 2013 (UTC))
 * Here's a suggestion by a talkpage stalker: if the parent company doesn't have an article, subsidiaries likely won't. The entire company as whole may warrant an article - it could include a small small portion of the contents of the UK subsidiary.  Start big. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 12:41, 17 January 2013 (UTC)


 * That is a good point, but from a local level there is alot of interest in these companies within the area of Wiltshire, so I thought having pages on them would help improve the knowledgebase for local and national interest. (Murklemark (talk) 12:55, 17 January 2013 (UTC))


 * Local interest does not equal Wikipedia's requirements for notability as an inclusion criteria. Wikipedia is not a local encyclopedia - it's worldwide (✉→BWilkins←✎) 11:10, 19 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Bwilkins is absolutely right. My searches have failed to turn up any evidence that the subject satisfies Wikipedia's notability guidelines. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:19, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

A heads up
Hi. While I never have any problems with a neutral administrator reverting or changing some administrative action I performed, I would appreciate a heads up about it. Thanks! Tiptoety talk 05:53, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, I should have let you know, and I apologise for failing to do so. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:07, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
 * No worries! And thanks for the knock-knock joke! Have a great weekend, Tiptoety  talk 02:00, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated
Hi, I'm FreeRangeFrog. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Humaniqueness, and have un-reviewed it again. If you've got any questions, please ask me on my talk page. Thanks, FreeRangeFrog — Preceding unsigned comment added by FreeRangeFrog (talk • contribs) 02:20, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Copyright Issues
Hi James,

I have a copyright question for you and no you did not flag anything. I just thought to ask you because you have helped me before. I uploaded 4 pictures I took of book covers not knowing that it was possibly a copyright infringement. So I wanted to ask if make my pictures low-resoluion pictures would solve the problem? Or if the fact that the books in the pictures are books created for free mass distribution makes any difference. The link is: and the pictures in question are entitled: The Economy of God, the Normal Christian Life, and the Recovery Version Holy Bible. Thanks for the help. And it would be nice if you answered on my talk page but do whatever is easier for you. I will check both your talk page and mine.

Sosthenes12 (talk) 18:15, 18 January 2013 (UTC)Sosthenes12

Fort Hood terrorist attack
Your speedy deletion didn't stick, as, one of the vocal advocated for retention back at the original RfD, reinstated it. Tarc (talk) 23:04, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Reply
Please see User talk:MarcusBritish. Cheers,  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh {chat} 23:21, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I hope you're going to indef block him, per Harassment? He has admitted to socking and stalking, also.. so he hasn't a leg to stand on in his defence.  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh {chat} 03:49, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I thought that had already been done, or I would have done it as soon as I saw the post on your talk page. I must have accidentally looked at some other account which was blocked. Anyway, done now. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:05, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks kindly. Will wait for his next psychotic account to appear. I think this is going to be like a game of Whack-Attack.. he'll keep popping up in random places and we'll keep knocking him on the head. Put like that, almost sounds like fun.. ;)  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh {chat} 12:33, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Blocking 109.174.115.255
Hi James. I saw that you blocked User talk:109.174.115.255 a couple of days ago. For this block to become effective, you might need to block User talk:109.174.115.63, User talk:109.174.115.127, and User talk:109.174.115.191 as well (possibly more). I saw these IPs to repeatedly insert factually wrong or questionable contents into similar articles over the past month, so I'm quite sure it's the same user. Thanks and greetings, --Matthiaspaul (talk) 02:03, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, although there are similarities, there are also differences, suggesting that the IP addresses are used by more than one person, making a block undesirable. However, at least on of the IP addresses has a large enough proportion of disruptive editing to justify a block, but there has been a lack of warnings, so I have just posted a warning instead of blocking. It does help if editors post warnings to disruptive editors when they see them: all too often they just revert, without posting any message. JamesBWatson (talk) 02:36, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that's right, I agree. Actually, I usually do that (and also see that many editors do not), but somehow I didn't do it in this case. The IP's total unresponsiveness to other people's warnings and reverts left a feeling that it would be just wasted energy trying to start a conversation with that IP. But you're right, we should always give it try.
 * If this user continues inserting his wrong information, some form of page protection (pending changes protection or blocking IP editing?) might do the trick as well, I guess. --Matthiaspaul (talk) 03:17, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

English
My English is not enough good, so when i need help i have to use my native language. --Backij (talk) 11:15, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
 * In a collaborative project, being unable to communicate with the other contributors is a serious handicap. I have a significant knowledge of French, a reasonable knowledge of Italian, and fragmentary knowledge of Russian. However, I do not feel that my knowledge of any of those languages is good enough for me to feel confident that I would be able to communicate adequately with other editors in the Wikipedias in those languages, so I stick to editing Wikipedia in my own native language. I see that you have made a number of contributions to Serbian Wikipedia: perhaps you can manage better there. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:27, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I respect your opinion, but i feel free to do what i want :P --Backij (talk) 15:05, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Aire Athletic FC
Hi, may i ask hy you have decided to delete the entire Aire Athletic F.C. Page? As club secretary, i have just spent the last 4 hours trying to learn how to create pages on Wikipedia. I have created a part for the local football club, a club that has since it's creation risen through the lower league tables and is currently 5 promotions away from professional league football. I do not believe that the deletion fair in any way, i have been trying to add pieces of information to the page during the night, and the article was not yet finished. I cannot understand why he article was speadily deleted. All the work dded to the site was my own work, in my own words. What have i done wrong. What may not seem important to you or Wikipedia, is important to the locals in Bingley, Bradford, local residents, fans and players. We are very disappointed by our actions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AireAthletic (talk • contribs) 21:29, 19 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I will try to clarify three of the points that have already been mentioned on your talk page. I hope this will help you to understand the reasons for the deletions.


 * 1) The content you posted to your user page was a copy of content published elsewhere. The onus is on you to show that its copyright owner has released it for reuse by anyone anywhere in the world, in its original state or modified, for commercial or non-commercial use, under very broad licensing conditions. We cannot just assume that it is, because someone creates a Wikipedia account and claims to be the copyright owner.
 * 2) I could give you links to instructions on how to donate content to Wikipedia. However, doing so would merely be encouraging you to waste time and effort, as the content would be deleted again as promotional, as I have explained on your talk page. Wikipedia is not a medium for clubs, businesses, or other organisations to publicise themselves and promote themselves.
 * 3) Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information on anything. It requires a topic to satisfy certain notability standards in order to be the subject of an article, and I'm afraid amateur sports clubs usually do not satisfy them.
 * I do fully sympathise with you. No doubt, like many people, you sincerely thought that "anyone can edit Wikipedia" meant "anyone can add anything they like to Wikipedia", and thought this was an ideal way to get a web page for your club. I can well imagine how frustrating it feels to find your work thrown away. However, Wikipedia is not a medium for clubs to get free web space, and you will be more likely to get a successful outcome if you turn to one of the many web sites that do provide free web hosting for this kind of thing.


 * Another point is that your username indicates that the account is being used to represent a club, but Wikipedia policy is that an account is for an individual, and may not represent an organisation. JamesBWatson (talk) 21:45, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

It's a shame that every other football league team gets the opportunity to have a Wikipedia Page. I'm sure that nobody has ever questioned the pages of these clubs regardless of how large or small they are. May i add, that we have more paying fans than many conference national teams (all of which bizarrely have wikipedia pages). I'm sure these pages were "created" by someone not affiliated with the team in question. Just another case of the smaller clubs getting shafted once again. You mention that amateur sports clubs do not satisfy getting wikipedia pages, i can give you over 20 examples within 10 minutes of searching, where your claims are simply wrong. By the way Albion Sports A.F.C. a team that are 2 divisions below us have a wikipedia page and have had so for a number of years. Due to your frustration actions, which seem to be based on personal choice rather than common sense. We will never use or promote Wikipedia again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AireAthletic (talk • contribs) 22:00, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing out Albion Sports A.F.C., which I have now nominated for speedy deletion. It is only when someone notices such an unsuitable article and points it out that it can be assessed, and among the 4000000 plus Wikipedia articles, there are, unfortunately, many such articles. It is not true that "every other football league team gets the opportunity to have a Wikipedia Page". I can assure you that over the years many self-promotional pages about football clubs have been deleted. As for your claim that my decisions were "personal choice", two other other Wikipedia administrators have deleted your article. In fact, I could easily have deleted your article, but instead chose to nominate it to be assessed by another administrator, so as to get a second opinion. JamesBWatson (talk) 22:12, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Just letting you know I've declined the speedy of Albion Sports A.F.C. as it not "2 divisions below" a 3rd division pub league team. It is part of the National League System (5th tier). Although I haven't checked each individual league, it appears all of the nearly 300 teams at that level have articles. I think AireAthletic may have been a bit vindictive with their mention. --Michael Greiner 07:48, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I wasn't sure, and wanted a second opinion, which is why I just tagged it for speedy deletion rather than deleting it myself. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:50, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

98.16.236.166
Hi. In the past you blocked for persistent vandalism. S/He returned again to add blatant misinformation to articles, listing false credits to songs. I added my report to AIV half hour ago, and since then, s/he continued. None of the recent edits are valid and are almost BLP violations. Can you reblock it? This problem started on 31 December. Tb hotch .™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions.  21:52, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅ JamesBWatson (talk) 21:59, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much. Tb hotch .™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it!  See terms and conditions.  22:03, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Junebea1
Despite your warnings, and those of others, continues with his/her (now tendentious) behaviour. Perhaps some time on the naughty step would be appropriate? --Bob Re-born (talk) 22:30, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes. It's what I expected, unfortunately. Thanks for pointing it out to me. JamesBWatson (talk) 22:47, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Can you handle?
See this. Moriori (talk) 06:39, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I have posted a message to the latest IP's talk page. In case he/she has moved from that IP address and never sees it, I have also posted a similar message to the article's talk page, and made a dummy edit with an edit summary calling attention to it. If the problem continues, I will semi-protect the article. I would much prefer to block the IP editor, but I don't know any way of blocking an IPv6 range. I would prefer not to revert myself at this stage, to avoid risk of being accused of being "involved" if I do take admin action later. I see that you have reverted just once. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:13, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Moriori (talk) 02:58, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Suffolk County (Somewhere) Police Department
EEng (talk) 10:55, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of Ariix
How come Ariix was deleted by you? Despite the fact that the article was created by the CPO and somewhat creating a COI, I'm sure she didn't mean to use it as "blatant advertising". Is there any way to incubate, userfy the page or enable a new page to be created from scratch that conforms to NPOV guidelines (I ask because User:RHaworth deleted a page only because he thought the industry was "immoral" )? Thank you. Original link here. Edwardw818 (talk) 00:07, 21 January 2013 (UTC)


 * What is "the CPO"? To me, it means only "Chief Petty Officer", but checking on Wiktionary I find it can also be "County Prosecutor's Office" or "Chief Procurement Officer". None of those seems to make any sense in the context.


 * In assessing proposals for deletions, we do not try to assess the motivation of writers, but only the outcome of their writing. Thus, whether the writer of the article meant it to be advertising is irrelevant, and what matters is whether it read like promotion. Dennis Brown, who is an administrator, thought it looked like promotion, and so he tagged it for speedy deletion. It also looked like promotion to me. It was not such blatant spam as some articles we get, but the overall tone of the article was clearly promotional.


 * It is possible to userfy the article for improvement, but it seems to me more straightforward to just write a non-promotional article from scratch.


 * I have read the message from RHaworth that you refer to, and it is a gross misrepresentation of what he says to assert that he "deleted a page only because he thought the industry was immoral". He does not suggest that he has even taken morality into consideration in any deletion he has made, let alone that he has deleted an article "only" for that reason. All that he says is that articles about such businesses tend to be treated more harshly at AfD, which is a very different matter altogether. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:02, 22 January 2013 (UTC)