User talk:Joe Decker/Archive 6

Your HighBeam account is ready!
Good news! You now have access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research. Here's what you need to know: Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasit &#124; c 20:47, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Your account activation code has been emailed to your Wikipedia email address.
 * Only 407 of 444 codes were successfully delivered; most failed because email was simply not set up (You can set it in Special:Preferences).
 * If you did not receive a code but were on the approved list, add your name to this section and we'll try again.
 * The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code.
 * To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1; 2) You’ll see the first page of a two-page registration. 3) Put in an email address and set up a password. (Use a different email address if you signed up for a free trial previously); 4) Click “Continue” to reach the second page of registration; 5) Input your basic information; 6) Input the activation code; 7) Click “Finish”. Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive.
 * If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi.  Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
 * A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate
 * HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
 * Show off your HighBeam access by placing on your userpage
 * When the 1-year period is up, check applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.


 * Thank you! I'll sign up tonight, I did get the email.  --joe deckertalk to me 14:16, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Ahontoay
Deleting my page Ahontoay was not necessary. I read the reason for the page's deletion and the following may help you learn more information about this group of non treaty Montana Chippewa Indians. You claimed you searched for anything about Ahontoay on wikipedia. You can try searching by using the name Ahonteways but it won't work. Search by using the phrase User:Linniebc/SandBox. That will quickly lead you to the wikipedia page with A-Hon-Te-Ways. Though the phrase is a wikipedia's contributor's name, it is the only way you'll find it. That is the only wikipedia page with that name. The Ahontoay are a non federally recognized group of Chippewa's in Montana. The United States has no jurisdiction over them.

The only way to find out about this group of non treaty Chippewa's, is by using google or another search engine. Google Ahontoay and you will find that the name is spelt as Ahontoay. The wikipedia page spells it as Ahonteways, which is not the correct way of spelling the chiefs name on the historical records i have found on the internet. Don't get the two names Ahontoay and Ahonteways, mixed up. They are not two different peoples but the same people. Chief Ahontoay did not take treaty. He never lived on a Reservation which proves he refused to cooperate with the United States. You will have to deal with the obvious difference in name spelling. It is not right to delete my page because it is not a hoax. It is based on real historical events.

I will complain to your superior if you refuse to return my page. My page is not a hoax. I have spent a great deal of time on the internet conspiracy searching for all kinds of information, and to have someone as you intrude, makes it all the more worse. Your actions were not necessary. I will include racism if you do not return my page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Poesam (talk • contribs) 22:44, 19 April 2012 (UTC)


 * First, you seem to be confused about my role in this. My job in this discussion was to take note of the arguments and opinions provided in discussion, and determine consensus based on what information had been provided.  I'm sorry that our processes may be confusing to you.
 * Would you be willing to point me at a couple of reliable books, magazine articles and/or newspaper article that discusses this subject in depth? That might help me clear this up.
 * As a volunteer, I'm not particularly alarmed by your threats, although I am somewhat saddened that you seem to be misunderstanding what's going on here.
 * I would actually prefer, if this is a valid article on a topic that has recieved coverage from reliable sources, that we have an article on it, not that the article be deleted. So, I would appreciate it very much if you would provide the information that I need, that is, pointers to a couple of reliable books, magazine articles and/or newspaper articles that discuss the subject in detail.  From there I can help you more directly.
 * Despite the fact that I lack a "superior" to report to, you are welcome, even invited, to appeal my decision. The process for doing so is described at WP:DRV.  Your chances of success there will be much greater, however, if you provide directly links to a couple of  reliable books, magazine articles and/or newspaper article that discuss the subject in depth.
 * You may also wish to review WP:GNG before starting your appeal.
 * I hope that we can get this figured out and resolved quickly. Best regards, --joe deckertalk to me 23:17, 19 April 2012 (UTC)


 * I don't want you having to buy books or magazines to learn about this subject which has little written concerning it. As mentioned, you can use wikipedia to learn about this subject. I don't like doing this and you obviously know it's because of the internet conspiracy. Below are several links to information on this subject. It is not a hoax. The Ahontoay are an unrecognized tribe.
 * The only way to get this resolved is if you visit the web pages below. You'll learn that the Ahontoays do exist. They are just one of many unrecognized tribes in the United States trying to gain federal recognition. It is not a hoax.


 * [List of unrecognized tribes in the United States]
 * [Ahonteways]
 * [Ahontoays] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Poesam (talk • contribs) 03:05, 20 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Actually, I don't believe it is a hoax. the comment here and footnote four here are by themselves more than enough to provide a strong indication that the subject is real.
 * The big question is whether the topic meets WP:GNG, our primary guideline about whether or not to have an article on a subject. And if you read that guideline, you'll see that it requires the sorts of newspaper articles, etc., that I was asking for pointers to.
 * (Other wikipedia entries are not particularly useful evidence, we do get real hoaxes here, I'm sorry that our editors mistakenly took your articles for one.) Without reliable sources of the type I mentioned that provide more in-depth coverage, though, I won't be able to undelete the article.
 * I wouldn't have to buy books, although it is very kind of you to worry about that. You'd be surprised how much libraries, Google Books, various on-line references, and our network of editors can verify in the way of research material if we simply know where to look. --joe deckertalk to me 07:57, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Template messages
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Template messages. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 08:15, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia Stories Project
Hi!

My name is Victor and I'm a storyteller with the Wikimedia Foundation, the non-profit organization that supports Wikipedia. I'm chronicling the inspiring stories of the Wikipedia community around the world, including those from readers, editors, and donors. Stories are absolutely essential for any non-profit to persuade people to support the cause, and we know the vast network of people who make and use Wikipedia have so much to share. I found your username from the Highbeam application list.

I'd very much like the opportunity to interview you to tell your story, with the possibility of using it in our materials, on our community websites, or as part of this year’s fundraiser to encourage others to support Wikipedia. Please let me know if you're inclined to take part in the Wikipedia Stories Project, or if you know anyone with whom I should speak.

Thank you for your time,

Victor Grigas

user:Victorgrigas

vgrigas@wikimedia.org

Victor Grigas (talk) 23:41, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Linda Reeves
Linda S. Reeves

I think your bot may be broke. The biography has references. . . . Thmazing (talk) 03:23, 26 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks! There's no bot.  Also, the references you found were added by User:Colapeninsula after the tag was added., I'll go send a thank you note there, too.  Have a great week!  --joe deckertalk to me 05:58, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Sergio_Cerruti
Hi Joe Decker,

I need to upload a personal biography since last year it was deleted by you. I wanted to know what it is I need to do in order to get this page back up on Wikipedia English. I apologize for the prior inconveniences but I have personally fixed all of the issues that were created by employees and have now the situation on my hands and just need to properly upload my biography. I have the other biographies uploaded on their respective pages with their biographies and all the standards required. Hoping to hear from you soon in regards to a response. The biography that was deleted and need to upload again is Sergio Cerruti. Thank you very much 213.203.151.99 (talk) 09:29, 26 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Sure!  The article was deleted as a result of a discussion here, as part of our WP:AFD process.  Essentially the editors involved in the discussion felt that the article did not meet our notability guidelines, in particular, our general notability guideline.  (this is a shorter form of that guideline).  My role in that discussion was to act as a sort of referee.
 * To get the article restored, you need to demonstrate multiple reliable sources, that is, newspaper articles, magazine articles, books that talk abou Sergio Cerruti in detail, that are independent (that is, not written by Cerruti or people associated with him), and each of which discuss him in detail (rather than passing mentions. Sources such as blogs, press releases, reprinted press releases, random web pages, store product pages, Facebook pages or other social networking sites are almost never considered "reliable" for the purposes of this criteria, you really need to try and stick to newspaper articles, magazine articles or books to make your case.
 * To give an example, this article is a reliable source, but because it mentions Cerruti in passing, it would not count toward WP:GNG.
 * Anyway, after looking, the editors in the discussion above didn't find such sources, and looking now I don't see sources that meet that criteria, but if you can show a few sources that would each meet WP:GNG, I'm certain we could get the article restored.
 * By the way, sources do not need to be in English--certainly it's easier for many of the editors here if they are, but it's in no way required by our policies. --joe deckertalk to me 14:39, 26 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you so much for your reply! I have followed all the guidelines and do understand the reason why the article was taken down I have my self followed on doing all the research about the upload of the file following the appropriate guidelines and giving the page all of the references needed in order for it to be proper for the terms of use. If you see the page in Italian and Spanish I have done so my self as well (wikipedia) :::http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergio_Cerruti
 * for this reason I need to know how I can get the page restored so I can go ahead and edit it.
 * thank you again for your time --213.203.151.99 (talk) 14:56, 26 April 2012 (UTC)


 * I do not see that the sources at http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergio_Cerruti meet the criteria laid out at our WP:GNG guideline.  Can you tell me which two sources best demonstrate that the article does meet the guideline?  Note that I wasn't able to get the VOGUE link to work correctly, you may want to check that it is correct.  If you can point me at the sources that you believe do meet WP:GNG, I might be able to help clear up the issue.  Thanks! --joe deckertalk to me 15:07, 26 April 2012 (UTC)


 * I have verified what you have said to me as far as the vogue page and yes i had put the wrong address but have now corrected it with the correct one. I added an additional page of reference where it mentions him as a DJ and a producer of the label Just Entertainment (an independent italian record label). Furthermore, in the section of "collegamenti eastern" there are all the different profiles starting from his personal website to the Facebook and the discogs (which is a website for music). Let me know what I can do. Thanks ;) !

213.203.151.99 (talk) 15:36, 26 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the link fix! I agree with you that the reference "mentions him as a DJ", however, that is different than the more in-depth, ""Significant coverage" that WP:GNG requires.  I'm sorry if that was unclear.  Generally "significant coverage" means at least a paragraph or two (at the very minimum) that really are focused on Cerruti.  --joe deckertalk to me 15:56, 26 April 2012 (UTC)


 * So what do I need to do exactly to get the english version back on ? As far as personal articles there is the 5th reference where there is a personal interview where it asks him about his career as a DJ as well as later getting involved in the record label area. I would really appreciate it if you can help get this done ASAP as it is the only thing that i am missing to have this all set and clear. Thank you very much !!

213.203.151.99 (talk) 16:08, 26 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Sorry for some confusion here, I attempted to add some info and we edit conflicted.
 * The interview does not qualify, you are correct that it was "significant coverage", but as what appears to be a blog, it doesn't meet what is generally required of a "reliable source" under WP:GNG, and even by itself, it'd require a second entry.
 * If you would like to have my decision reviewed, you are welcome to do so at WP:DRV, I won't take offense. But I have repeated, several times, what is required.
 * You need to provide at least two sources, each of which meets every one of these requirements:
 * Each one of those sources must be from a reliable source (generally a newspaper, magazine, or book, or a very, well-known on-line resource with a signficant editorial process), and,
 * Each one of those sources must be significant coverage (generally at least a full paragraph or two), and,
 * Each one of those sources must be independent (not written directly or indirectly by people associated with the subject)
 * In my view, none of the sources you've provided meet *all* of these criteria, although the interview is close.
 * If you would like a copy of the original article, I can email it to you, if that would be helpful. But I'm afraid that it is likely that, barring better references, that that article will be deleted if you repost it.
 * Are there other sources of coverage that you know about that might change my mind? Newspapers that aren't on-line, etc?  I have access to a news clipping service called "Highbeam research", and I gave it a shot, but it didn't provide any additional ideas. --joe deckertalk to me 16:23, 26 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you so much for the explanation it all much more clear I will try to find more reliable sources. As of now this was all the information I had personally found I could look for other things that might not be online and then get back at you. Thank you again and have a fab day ;)

213.203.151.99 (talk) 11:17, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Barnstar
ù

Please comment on Talk:Get Smart!
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Get Smart!. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 02:15, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Name (Band) was deleted again as I was updating it
Hello,

My name is Wes Fareas. I am a member of the band Name from San Francisco, CA. I recently acquired the wiki page "Name (band)" we had after it had been made and deleted... I am still trying to figure out how this whole thing works. To be honest, a lot of this is confusing. I'm just trying to post the proper information on the band and what not. Could it please be restored and I will do whatever is necessary to avoid future deletion. Keep in mind, I am wikipedia illiterate, so you'll have to point me in a specific direction and I'll take care of it immediately. It's just hard to focus so much time on to the page, being as I am incredibly busy. I hope to hear from you soon and hope it can be restored. Thanks!!

Cheers,

Wes — Preceding unsigned comment added by Apalehorse2123 (talk • contribs) 22:34, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Wes,
 * No worries about being a bit lost here, there's a whole lot of policy that's been built up over the years and it is, in a word, confusing. I'll try and make as much sense of it as I can.
 * First, what happened? I deleted it as a result of a "deletion discussion" at Articles for Deletion, that discussion is here if you want to take a look.  I'll try and explain what's going on at the core of that discussion, and tell you what your options are going forward.
 * What's really going on in that discussion is that editors are asking themselves "Can we find multiple reliable sources independent of Name which discuss Name in detail?". By reliable sources, this usually means newspaper articles, magazine articles or books that go through an editorial process, most blogs don't count (nor do most), IMDB is usually considered somewhat questionable (we do see errors in IMDB), other Wikipedia articles aren't either.  The idea of this guideline, while it's expressed in terms of "notability", is really this--if we're going to write a fair, neutral, verifiable entry about someone or something, we need to base that on those sorts of reliable sources, and we need at least a couple of them, and we need them to talk in detail about the subject.   This test is our "general notability guideline" (explained more at WP:GNG, and for the most part, we only allow articles that meet this test.  (There's another test called WP:BAND mentioned, but it is exceedingly rare for a band to be able to meet it and yet not meet WP:GNG.)
 * Anyway, so what do you do now? If you can find 3-4 of the kinds of newspaper articles, magazine articles, references in books that talk about your band, written from those reliable sources, not republished press releases, that go into detail about the Band and its works, it will likely be pretty straightforward for me to undelete the article for you.  Without those, your chances are pretty slim, I'm afraid.  --joe deckertalk to me 06:29, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Hey Joe, You're the man. Thanks for the info. We are getting that info together right away. I appreciate the help. I'll post the links here when we have them all set. Thanks again!! Cheers,

Wes — Preceding unsigned comment added by Apalehorse2123 (talk • contribs) 02:28, 28 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Glad to help! --joe deckertalk to me 02:38, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

List of things covered by a CC license
Please do not use opinion essays (WP:HEY) as a rationale to closure. Closures should be policy-based, even if you're just gonna count noses and rule "consensus" based upon the raw number of votes... Carrite (talk) 02:29, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Indeed, you're right. My intent had been to try and complement the effort, but I shouldn't have conflated that with the rationale. I will attempt to more clearly separate the two.  --joe deckertalk to me 03:56, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Amended. Happy to clarify anything that seems unclear.  Cheers, --joe deckertalk to me 04:54, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Telesma
Dear Joe, An article I created was nominated for deletion just over a week ago. The votes have been overwhelmingly to Keep; even the editor nominating it changed his mind. I was wondering if you could close the nomination. You will find it at. Thank you very much. Rosencomet (talk) 00:28, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Heh, someone beat me too it. Usually folks are pretty good about finding and closing pretty clear speedy keeps in no more than a day or two.  --joe deckertalk to me 02:10, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Kirby Bliss Blanton
Hey, I noticed you proceduarally declined my BLPPROD because of the IMDB link (which of course is non-reliable, I myself have an IMDB profile). Since articles can only be PRODded once, I nominated it for deletion at Articles for deletion/Kirby Bliss Blanton (2nd nomination) p  b  p  17:44, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree with you that IMDB is unreliable, and I have suggested various changes to somewhat tighten the nomination criteria for BLPPROD in the past, but those changes are not current policy. I left a note with a link to the relevant policy on your talk page.
 * Moreover, a PROD is totally acceptable, BLPPRODs are not PRODs for this purpose, they're a different beast. I've processed hundreds of these things and have been involved with their policy for quite a while, I can assume you that's accurate, but if you'd like me to dig up precedent, I will.   --joe deckertalk to me 17:47, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, due to a loophole in BLPPROD, it's at AfD now, so...yeah. It'll either get deleted or fixed...same as most of the dozens of other articles I've nominated for deletion  p  b  p  18:07, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks--the "loophole" was a ... very inelegant (and in some ways accidental) compromise in the creation of BLPPROD, and it's led me to have to decline BLPPRODs on the basis of passing links to the artist's own Facebook page. Ah well.  :)  --joe deckertalk to me 18:10, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:User pages
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:User pages. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 20:15, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Donnie Kennedy
Joe, could you please userfy this article, which you deleted in June? There was a lot of data there and there are a couple good merge candidates if I don't find a reason to repropose it as an article in itself. JJB 04:01, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Glad to, I've userfied it to User:John J. Bulten/Donnie Kennedy.  --joe deckertalk to me 04:09, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:User pages
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:User pages. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 15:15, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

New Pages update
Hey :). A quick update on how things are going with the New Page Triage/New Pages Feed project. As the enwiki page notes, the project is divided into two chunks: the "list view" (essentially an updated version of Special:NewPages) and the "article view", a view you'll be presented with when you open up individual articles that contains a toolbar with lots of options to interact with the page - patrolling it, adding maintenance tags, nominating it for deletion, so on.

On the list view front, we're pretty much done! We tried deploying it to enwiki, in line with our Engagement Strategy on Wednesday, but ran into bugs and had to reschedule - the same happened on Thursday :(. We've queued a new deployment for Monday PST, and hopefully that one will go better. If it does, the software will be ready to play around with and test by the following week! :).

On the article view front, the developers are doing some fantastic work designing the toolbar, which we're calling the "curation bar"; you can see a mockup here. A stripped-down version of this should be ready to deploy fairly soon after the list view is; I'm afraid I don't have precise dates yet. When I have more info, or can unleash everyone to test the list view, I'll let you know :). As always, any questions to the talkpage for the project or mine. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 23:37, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Streisand Effect
Hi Joe Decker. Sorry about that poorly reverted edit. I was initially getting paranoid today because of the vandalism and cleanups of various articles that I encountered which clouded my overall rationality on whether "Amount of traffic" if grammatically correct or not. I will be more cautious and cognizant in future when reverting edits.The Elixir Of Life (talk) 00:23, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, no worries, tiny thing compared to some of my oopsies. Thanks for the note, though!  Have a great weekend!  --joe deckertalk to me 00:27, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Hindi voice actors
Joe Decker, Is there a way to help find reliable info sources on these Hindi voice actors I found off the Internet? Please let me know, and give me help. Thanks.

- BlueMario1016 (talk) 16:05, 7 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi, BlueMario1016! Thanks for dropping met a note here, I really appreciate it.  In my experience trying to add sources to biographies that don't have them, voice actors have proven to be some of the most challenging, and Hindi voice actors may be even more difficult--but sometimes, once you find a good source, it can help a lot.  The folks who work on a lot of Anime and Manga have a pretty long list here discussing their views of different sources and how reliable they are, I don't know if there's any overlap.  If the voice actors have worked in video games, there are some resources here that might be helpful too.


 * Do you speak Hindi? I don't mean to pry, but I did want to say this, since it's often confusing, that sources don't have to be in English--if you know of magazines, books, newspapers and the like that cover a particular Hindi voice actor, it's totally cool to add them if they're reliable.  Hansika Motwani has an example of a non-English source in it, it's in Tamil not Hindi but you get the idea.  It's a lot harder to work with sourcing people where most of the coverage isn't in English, though.  :(


 * Newspaper articles sometimes mention voice artists who work in popular films, this article talks about a Ami Trivedi, who apparently did a Hindi dub  of the Harry Potter films (this has some more), this source looks probably okay for Anupam Kher, this] talks about Avdhessh Arya's voice work, and so on.
 * And *always* try looking through sources at Google News Archives, and Google Books. You have to look carefully at the results, but when I do a Google Books search on Ami Trivedi and get these results, most of them don't apply, but one of the results probably is at least a passing reference to the actress.  Google News Archives does a bad job of getting information out of a lot of the English-language Indian newspapers, so you can also try things like typing
 * "Ami Trivedi" site:timesofindia.com
 * into Google and getting results from the Times of India, you can also try "expressindia.com" instead of "timesofindia.com" for a different newspaper, etc.


 * Another good idea for finding sources is to work with other editors who are interested in the same kinds of articles. I know User:Dream Focus has an encyclopedic knowledge of Anime and Manga, and really cares about making sure we don't throw away information in the encyclopedia, so I'd certainly ask him if I had questions that were appropriate for those. Even though I don't have specific editors you might ask about HIndi voice actors, sometimes I've been able to start conversations with editors who've created or worked on similar articles to those I'm interested in.


 * One more tip: If you run into places where people (even me!) are telling you that an article has to be deleted because there's not enough sourcing, if you can't find much in the way of sources, sometimes it's possible to at least put some fo that information somewhere else in the encyclopedia. So if there was an article on a notable Hindi animated film, if you couldn't manage an article about the voice actor themselves, you might be able to at least mention them in the article about the film, where it described the character they played.  I hope I've given you a few ideas!  --joe deckertalk to me 20:54, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

BLP Prod
Oops, I thought there was a link to an article about him at the bottom. My bad. Thanks for cleaning up after me! :) Keilana | Parlez ici 21:28, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Heh. No worries, thanks for the note!   Have a great week!  --joe deckertalk to me 21:30, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, you too! Keilana | Parlez ici 21:44, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Citing sources
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Citing sources. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 09:16, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Question
Any reason you are deleting BLPprods and adding an AfD in relation with the Indian voice actors? Bgwhite (talk) 19:31, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Never mind. I just saw your note on the creating editor's talk page.  Makes some sense, but not complete sense. Bgwhite (talk) 19:33, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm deleting BLPPRODs? I'll take a look, but.... --joe deckertalk to me 19:40, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Crap, I did. I suspect that at least the one I'm looking at got filed in a window between when I pulled the article up to review sources and do a sourcing search and when I poked it with an AfD tag.  --joe deckertalk to me 19:42, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Double-crap. Okay, I don't even see how the second one could have been missed.   My apologies.  I'm going to walk away from the terminal for the rest of the day, not because I'm upset, but because I honestly don't see how I could have missed the existence tag on the second biography I removed it from.  Since I placed the AfD with Twinkle in both places, it would have demanded an active effort for me to remove the BLPPROD tag, and I have no memory of doing so.  --joe deckertalk to me 20:00, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm glad to see other editors do crazy mistakes like I do. It is very comforting.  No problem.  After I saw your note on the creating editor's talk page, I was thinking you did it to serve a purpose to show non referenced biographies are not ok.  I've run into this alot the past few weeks for some reason,  so I could understand that line of thought.  You've lightened up my day. Bgwhite (talk) 20:55, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you, that is exceptionally kind of you all things considered. If I can help with anything here at Wikipedia, please let me know!  --joe deckertalk to me 05:29, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Beijing city fortifications
I see that you have changed the cleanup tag of Beijing city fortifications dated April 2007 to copyedit with that date. Why is the April 2007 date appropriate, if the copyedit is being requested now, in May 2012? This is important to the Guild of Copy Editors statistics, especially when a drive to reduce copyedit requests and tags is under way. --DThomsen8 (talk) 00:04, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * It was my best guess that that's what the cleanup tag referred to. However, if it aids your work, I'm happy to reset the date with such changes. I understand how frustrating that might be.  You may see a couple more I've done earlier today, but I'm happy to cut it out going forward.  :)   The primary reason I was looking at some articles with cleanup tags is that the cleanup tag is being changed to require (in some way) the placement of a cleanup reason.  I wanted to scout through a few dozen of the backlogged articles that lacked a reason to see what, in general, the looked like, before I passed any judgment about whether 5-year-old cleanup tags without any reason parameter tended to still have any meaning. --joe deckertalk to me 00:06, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Talk page guidelines
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Talk page guidelines. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 03:18, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

New Page Triage prototype released
Hey Joe Decker! We've finally finished the NPT prototype and deployed it on enwiki. We'll be holding an office hours session on the 16th at 21:00 in #wikimedia-office to show it off, get feedback and plot future developments - hope to see you there! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 03:46, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks
I was beginning to wonder if anyone ever patrolled these protected templates, and it turn out that someone does. You! Many thanks.--Mais oui! (talk) 04:14, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh my pleasure!  I haven't dealt with that many, but that was a relatively simple change.  Cheers!  --joe deckertalk to me 04:17, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

cleanup -> copyedit
Hi Joe. When you change Cleanup to copy edit in an article, please could you reset the date to the current month? This avoids recreating old monthly categories and makes life simpler for GOCE. TIA. --Stfg (talk) 09:28, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Sure thing--Sorry for the trouble! --joe deckertalk to me 14:06, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Congratulations
Congratulations on your comments on calling on WP:COATRACK as if it had the authority of policy. I too agree COATRACK raises some interesting issues.

My attempts to get those who call upon its authority as if it were a policy to actually be specific about which passages they thought applied never get a meaningful reply. Your approach may be more successful.

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 15:26, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Why thanks! No idea if it will be successful, but I felt it was important to make the point. Have a great weekend!  --joe deckertalk to me 16:16, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Erik Benjaminsen
Hi there. Even though I came to you cause of a deleted page, I'm not here to whine - I know the drill. Erik Benjaminsen was deleted due to failing WP:NFOOTBALL, but yesterday Benjaminsen made his debut in Tippeligaen (which is a WP:FPL) when he came in as a substitute after 16 minutes in Stabæk's 5-0 loss against Molde (match report). So now that he is notable, would you be kind and undelete the article? Thank you in advance. Mentoz86 (talk) 10:16, 13 May 2012 (UTC)


 * ✅  Man, you *do* know the drill.  Thanks, and enjoy!  --joe deckertalk to me 14:04, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Mentoz86 (talk) 09:43, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

American football WikiProjects
Joe, I noticed you recently tagged the talk pages of a number of American football biography articles with project banners. FYI, WikiProject American football is intended to cover basic concepts of the game and anything that doesn't fall into one of the more specific American football WikiProjects like WikiProject College football and WikiProject National Football League. Biography articles like Amos Martin should be tagged for WikiProject College football and WikiProject National Football League and not for WikiProject American football. Thanks for your contributions. Jweiss11 (talk) 23:19, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Gotcha, thanks for the heads up! --joe deckertalk to me 23:19, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

 * Thank you kindly! This is particularly appreciated after realizing I'd flubbed something else (entirely unrelated) up badly.  Perspective, and all that.  Cheers!  --joe deckertalk to me 01:20, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Please help. The John Austin (songwriter) page should not have been deleted.
The following article should not have been deleted:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/John_Austin_%28songwriter%29

All of the information contained in the article "John Austin (songwriter)" is factual. John Austin meets the notability requirements, having worked with many artists of notability, and having released publicly documented works for over 20 years. Paste Magazine has written feature articles on John Austin, and JA's album "Busted at the Pearly Gates" received an honorable mention in Paste Magazine as one of the most important albums of 2002. Please contact Paste Magazine's editor-in-chief Josh Jackson to verify.

Please put the article John Austin (songwriter) back up on Wikipedia. Thank you. 98.117.242.142 (talk) 16:33, 15 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi. First, you need to take this up with the closing administrator, which I've seen that you've done.
 * With respect to Wikipedia's specific policies about notability, usually the core of the question is not whether we believe the notable, but what we have in terms of reliable, secondary sources. The Paste magazine feature article, and something else of that order in terms of coverage, would certainly make the case.  You claim seems sensible, e.g.,, which is far short of a "feature article" but a lot more than the editors in the above discussion found.
 * What I suggest is that you list out a three to five of articles like that. Article name, article author, magazine name, publication date.  If there's an on-line version of the articles a link is helpful, but it's not specifically required by policy.  Present that evidence to the closing administrator.  He or she may decide that the article can be recreated on that basis alone, or may take the question to our "deletion process" review for you based on that evidence.  Select the three to five articles that spend the most time talking about Austin and/or his work, the usual bar is two or three articles that provide in-depth"coverage", it's more effective if you don't dilute your argument with additional articles that provide passing coverage.  Best of luck, I'd love to see that article back, if it can be, as our policies require for living people, written based on reference to reliable, secondary sources. --joe deckertalk to me 16:49, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Sydneysider1979
Hi Joe. I was wondering how we can delete on Wiki the section where it says this page has been deleted? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Craig_graham Does it automatically update? If so, after how long? If not is there anything we can do to get rid of it, as a Twitter post on Google keeps linking to it. CheersSydneysider1979 (talk) 10:35, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
 * As I understand it, that never goes away. I don't know how to address fixing it, those messages are very helpful when working with recovering deleted articles, etc., and I'm pretty sure it's built-in.  I'm sorry if that's causing trouble.  --joe deckertalk to me 22:53, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Hey Joe. No worries. All good. I've requested with Google a url removal, so got it covered :-) Thanks very much.  Sydneysider1979 (talk) 08:38, 19 May 2012 (UTC)Sydneysider1979

Expired BLP Prod
I'm noticing that Ghufran Raghib is expired (at least the 2nd time it has been around an unreferenced BLP loop) but not appearing in Category:Expired proposed deletions of unsourced BLPs. Any idea why not? AllyD (talk) 22:44, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh yes. :)  There is a ... "wont fix" flaw in the Wikimedia servers in which categories created by templates are not updated until an article is edited, even a cache purge won't change it.  (WP:NULLEDIT, for example, notes this.)  This has been kinda a thorn in my side for the last two years, and it's something I'm actually trying to get some support for fixing, one way or another, there's a discussion I recently started here on that very subject, you might want to take a peek.
 * Category:BLP articles proposed for deletion by days left has a similar problem, things all get put in there, but the sort key never updates, and so is wrong more often than right.
 * WP:PRODSUM doesn't distinguish PRODs from BLPPRODs, and lists things in template placement time (which is kinda confusing), but does actually provide a good way to find the backlog. --joe deckertalk to me 22:50, 17 May 2012 (UTC)


 * PS, want me to take care of that particular article? --joe deckertalk to me 22:55, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that; I didn't know about the null edit and it worked a treat. (If this particular article reappears again, I will probably take it to AfD rather than have it stuck in an eternal recurrance of BLP prodding and re-creation.) I take your point in the discussions, it does seem daft to have time-based category aging that doesn't actually work. AllyD (talk) 19:33, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Heh. I've salted that article title for you, given the timing of the recreations and the continued unwillingness of the creator to discuss the question (so far as I was able to determine), I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a third and no more successful attempt.   --joe deckertalk to me 19:37, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:The need for coordination
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:The need for coordination. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 17:15, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks, and thanks to you and Ultra for asking a great question. Cheers!  --joe deckertalk to me 23:35, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

New Page Triage/New Pages Feed
Hey all :). A notification that the prototype for the New Pages Feed is now live on enwiki! We had to briefly take it down after an unfortunate bug started showing up, but it's now live and we will continue developing it on-site.

The page can be found at Special:NewPagesFeed. Please, please, please test it and tell us what you think! Note that as a prototype it will inevitably have bugs - if you find one not already mentioned at the talkpage, bring it up and I'm happy to carry it through to the devs. The same is true of any additions you can think of to the software, or any questions you might have - let me know and I'll respond.

Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 13:31, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Liz White (animal rights)
Hi Joe, I've just created the above article about a Canadian animal rights advocate. She's a well-known AR advocate in Canada, and former director of the Toronto Humane Society, but there aren't a huge number of sources, so she's borderline notable for WP. I've just read through the AfD – Articles for deletion/Liz White (politician) (2nd nomination), which you closed as delete and merge – and didn't realize it was so recent, so I thought I should let you know as a matter of courtesy.

Can the article stand as it is, or should I go through DRV? I would like to keep it because we lack articles about women in general and Canadian women in particular. This would be the only article we have (that I know of) about a Canadian woman animal rights advocate. SlimVirgin (talk) 20:04, 21 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Hey Slim!  Thanks for the courtesy, and I totally understand how you could have missed the AfD with the disambiguator.  I really would prefer you go through DRV unless you have a little more in the way of sourcing, it's a little too close (in terms of what's shown in the way of sources) for me to feel it wouldn't meet the same fate in a similar discussion.  Sorry for the extra lap, please let me know if there's anything I can do to help, and I'll try and take a look myself for additional sources tonight when I have a little more time.   --joe deckertalk to me 23:02, 21 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi Joe, thanks for the reply, and I do see your point. I'll take it through DRV and see what happens. I may not have time to do that this evening, as I'm in the middle of trying to find sources for Animal Alliance of Canada, but if not tonight, then I'll do it tomorrow. SlimVirgin (talk) 23:57, 21 May 2012 (UTC)


 * That's great, there's no deadline. It may be morning before i get to looking myself.  --joe deckertalk to me 04:50, 22 May 2012 (UTC)


 * I've opened the DRV (hope I've done it correctly). I'll leave the template at the end of your talk page as instructed. SlimVirgin (talk) 19:53, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Drake Jensen Questions
Hello Joe,

You seemed to be the fairest person I have seen comment on this so I thought I would ask you about it.

I am really sceptical of Wikipedia right now. This Drake Jensen article seems to be a no brainer to me. I have checked out all the sites that mention any claims and they all seem to be publicity sites designed to make claims for people. He states he has gotten air play on over 100 radio stations... but every reference to that I find on the internet is a verbatim statement that he himself releases. His producer who is supposed to be of note does not have him listed on her production page and she claims to have been a sound engineer for the Beatles besides others and yet she does not have a Wikipedia article? Also, some of the people who commented on the delete page appear to be Gay rights activists. I mean, I don't care who people sleep with but this seems to be almost shameless self promotion at this point. None of the keys points mentioned as to why it should be kept seem to be verifiable. The websites that post information about him are of dubious bias at best. I really didn't think I needed to post that strong of an argument. I do not want to put the article up for deletion now and I realize that maybe my tact wasn't properly set for a debatable deletion, but can you at least independently look at the claims in the article and see if you can find ANY real backing for them. I cannot. The only thing I can verify for sure is that he is a gay country singer. He seems to self produce albums that seem only available for download. And he seems to claim to have been played on 100 radio stations but the evidence I have of that are websites quoting almost verbatim the claim itself without sources. It seems like a vicious cycle of "it's true because this says it is".

Anyway, I understand if this is outside of what you want to do as a causal user of Wikipedia, but I am seriously debating leaving the platform if clear bullshit can stick because a few people say it is good.

-Kirkoconnell (talk) 16:50, 22 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi Kirk, thanks for the note. I'm sorry you're feeling disappointed.
 * Wikipedia is a bit of a bureaucracy, and that has both very positive and sometimes negative effects. We do get, mostly, a degree of consistency in the level of our coverage out of the policies and guidelines we have around inclusion and exclusion of articles from that system, but with it come a bunch of rules and processes that can seem impenetrable, and sometimes feel at odds with common sense. Our deletion discussions are particularly laden with unspoken assumptions based on our complex policies and precedents.
 * In terms of whether we keep an article or not, almost everything comes down to a standard, WP:GNG, which may be too tight or too loose in most cases. (This standard is about whether to have an article or not, *not* about what's in the article if it's kept.)  It doesn't require much at all, two independent articles with non-trivial (e.g. a paragraph or so) of coverage that's independent--this should exclude reprinted press releases, but glancing through, I'd be surprised if the CBC and Ottawa Citizen articles weren't considered up to that standard *just having glanced at it*, but I don't could easily be wrong. More importantly, though....
 * While I personally disagree with the encyclopedia's inclusion of some articles on the basis of these policies, and disagree with the exclusion of others, mostly (over thousands of articles I've touched), we come pretty close, and when I think the community makes a mistake, mostly I just move on to the next thing. Better for my blood pressure!


 * In terms of what's *in* the article, well, that's a different thing. We generally try and handle "this shouldn't be in such an article" by fixing the article, not deleting it, (pure attacks and copyright violations are notable exception.) There, "this statement not backed by a reliable source", say, the 100 radio stations claim from what you tell me, is a pretty good argument, and the relevant policies are WP:V and, when talking about living people, WP:BLP. But the process of going back and forth and arguing through an article on the talk page is tiring and frustrating at times, so I try and save that energy for places where the worst damage is being done.


 * One way you can follow up on getting some of those sources removed, if you think they're reprinted press releases (fine if you're getting someone's birthday or something pretty uncontroversial, but not necessarily fine for claims of airplay) is to get some neutral opinions on the subject at WP:RSN. But it's entirely fair if having to dig in and fight line by line on an article is too frustrating! --joe deckertalk to me 23:13, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Deletion review for Liz White (animal rights)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Liz White (animal rights). Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. SlimVirgin (talk) 19:53, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I'll take a look.  Cheers!  --joe deckertalk to me 22:33, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Hey, nice work!  Cheers, --joe deckertalk to me 23:46, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Please help. Stacy Lynn Mar (poet): Was edited?
I would like to know how to add references or sources. She is still alive and need some help getting everything worked out.--Kymikey2012 (talk) 14:23, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Sure!   Here's a basic outline.
 * Find a couple reliable, secondary sources, y'know, things like newspaper articles, magazine articles, references in books that discuss the poet, and that also verify some of the facts in the article. It's best, particularly because our WP:BASIC policy, to have at least two such sources. And it should largely be sources written again by an *independent* source--not the person's web site, their gallery, their reprinted press releases, etc., which is why we tend to focus on reliable newspapers, magazines and books.
 * For key claims in the article verified by a source, you add a reference by putting some text in "ref tags", e.g., &lt;ref&gt;Footnote goes here&lt;ref&gt;. Insert that text right after the fact in question. The footnotes will be automatically added in a section at the bottom of the article. So you might add:
 * &lt;ref&gt;Fine, Fred, New poets 2012, Boston Globe, p. C19, 13 April 2012&lt;/ref&gt;
 * ...to an article if there was an article by Fred Fine in the Boston Globe, well, you get the idea. Include a URL if it's an on-line source if you can. This text won't show up where the "ref" is in the article is, you'll just get a footnote number and brackets, the text will be placed in a list wherever you've placed your Reflist template (see below).
 * There are some templates that can help you format a reference. Thomas_Kapielski is a short article that has some examples of how they're used, if you want to have them appear in a standard style. BUT: Style and formatting are less important here than the actual underlying information.  Someone will always be happy to come along and touch that up, but lacking references, biographies of living people are often put up for potential deletion.
 * It's also necessary to have a Reflist tag or the equivalent at the bottom of the article to indicate where the footnotes should go, but you've already got that.
 * Please let me know if I can elaborate on any of this! Cheers!  --joe deckertalk to me 15:12, 24 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Oh, one further tip. It's easy to confuse what we expect from "external links" from "references".  External links are good places to put one or two pieces of information that are helpful but not "independent" necessarily.  References are more about showing the reader why they should believe what's written, an appeal to "Hey, the New York Times" is reliable, and specifically verifying particular facts. Typically a link to the person's official home page is a good external link to include, but not a full listing of someone's social media presence.  (You haven't done that, it's just that some people do.)  I hope this clarifies things, and sorry, I realize our guidelines can be a bit overwhelming at first.  Cheers!  --joe deckertalk to me 15:20, 24 May 2012 (UTC)---

Okay, I am still working on finding some articles on her. I know her personally and I never thought it was that hard to get her on wiki. Give me some time.--Kymikey2012 (talk) 15:23, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Of course!  Even if someone proposes this for deletion, it is likely that they'll do so with a process that would give you seven or ten days to respond, there's no hurry.  And once you have a reference or two, if I can help you with the mechanics, well, I'd be glad to.  Cheers, --joe deckertalk to me 16:05, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Deletion review for Jurij Moškon
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Jurij Moškon. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Eleassar my talk 10:29, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I've replied there, thanks for the notification. In cases like this it's usually best to ask the deleting admin first if they're willing to allow recreation, a lot of times when new information is available it's a no-brainer and doesn't need a full review. No harm done, though.
 * While it appears at the moment that DRV will allow recreation of the article, do what you can to provide evidence of the significance of the Vesna award, etc. It is possible that the article will end up in a deletion discussion again, and the clearer the significance of the Vesna award is to the editors participating, and/or the more in-depth coverage you can find of Moškon in reliable, independent sources (newspapers, magazines, etc.), the more likely it is that the article will survive in the long-term. --joe deckertalk to me 14:14, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:Official website
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Official website. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 06:15, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

WP:RFBOT
Your recent bot approvals request has been approved. Please see the request page for details.  Rcsprinter  (yak)  20:15, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks! --joe deckertalk to me 00:49, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Tanya Ryno
As a contributor to this article, you may be interested to know I've nominated it for deletion. Your comments are welcome at Articles for deletion/Tanya Ryno. Robofish (talk) 20:19, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Reliability
Thank you. History2007 (talk) 22:45, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Sure! It's a very, very hard problem, but perhaps we can make a constructive difference!  --joe deckertalk to me 22:50, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 21:23, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Trans woman template
We worked hard to create a trans woman template, but please note one more thing to do; see the template's talk page for info. Georgia guy (talk) 19:26, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Replied there. The next step is widely applying this.  I also added Template:MOS-TM. --joe deckertalk to me 20:04, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

William Rudolf Lobkowicz
(I) William Rudolf Lobkowicz has been slated for deletion, but has not been placed on the AFD log. (II) Everything on his page can be referenced from the page about his father. So, since you're more experienced, you could make that reference. (III) Unless the page doesn't have enough content or the person doesn't seem notable enough. BLEAKGH - БЛЕАКЬ - بــلــكــغ - בּלכּג - 뱍가 - ᚷᚲᛇᛚᛒ 22:35, 14 June 2012 (UTC)


 * The English Wikipedia has several deletion processes, this article isn't at AfD at all, it's "BLPPROD", which is explained at WP:BLPPROD. This explains why it is not at the AfD log.  If you would like the article to note be deleted, simply add a reliable reference to the article and remove the tag, no worries.  Let me know if you require assistance.  Cheers!  --j⚛e deckertalk 02:31, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
TOW talk  01:27, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Tim Dog
Joe, I wasn't sure how to reply to you so if this is the wrong way, sorry. But anyway, thanks a lot for looking at that copyvio section on Tim Dog! I didn't know how to fix it/deal with it. I have some questions, though, about the two sentences (quoted below) that you did not remove. (1) Those two sentences you left are also plagiarized completely (verbatim) from a news source, just like all the other text that you removed. So shouldn't they be removed, also? (2) The two sentences are redundant not only by the way they start (with the part about Tim Dog also being Timothy Blair), but also by the content. One just says he was convicted of grand larceny and the other says he entered a guilty plea for grand larceny. IF you're going to leave any info from those two sentences, shouldn't it just be combined to remove the redundancy and summarized. For example, "On August 3, 2011, Tim Dog was convicted of grand larceny in DeSoto County, Mississippi, for defrauding a woman out of thousands of dollars."? (The "S" in DeSoto should be uppercase.) I'll let you make any changes since you're the expert on something complicated like this. Thanks, again! - "On August 3, 2011, Timothy Blair aka Tim Dog was convicted for a felony of Grand Larceny in Desoto County, MS. Former 1990s rapper Tim Dog, whose real name is Timothy Blair, has entered a guilty plea to grand larceny in DeSoto County Circuit Court for defrauding a local woman out of thousands of dollars." 76.189.101.150 (talk) 07:38, 15 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Indeed.  First, yes, this is a great place to discuss this.
 * The source I found when I looked for the article included the text I marked but not the text you marked, and you hadn't originally indicated where you thought the text had been originally copied *from*. I'll take another look when I get back to my main computer.
 * And yep, those seem redundant, I'll clean that up when I get back to my main computer, but you are welcome to yourself, too--changes in wording and stuff don't really require an expert, but there's no harm in being very careful with text that says contentuous things about a living person. --j⚛e deckertalk 14:54, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Update on Tim Dog article

 * Joe, early this morning I updated the "Personal" section on Tim Dog with the information regarding the June 16, 2012, Dateline NBC episode about his legal issues. Today, user 76.175.157.240 removed ALL of the text I added (the entire paragraph), with no explanation, and replaced it with text about that blogger (Jackey Jasper I had asked you about previously; the one where I asked you if his blog/site qualifies to be used as a cite on Wikipedia. And he used the blogger's own site as the 2 cites for the text he added. So essentially, 76.175.157.240 removed all my text replaced it with text saying that Jasper is the one who broke the case, not NBC. The Dateline NBC episode did indeed say that the Jasper broke the story. So instead of just supplementing my text with a brief statement about Jasper's involvement before NBC took it national, and using proper citations, 76.175.157.240 instead chose to simply delete all of my text, which summarized the TV episode and case in a few sentences, and included proper cites. The last thing I want is an edit war, but isn't it vandalism, or something similar, when someone simply removes and entire paragraph of legitimate well-sourced text, and with no explanation whatsoever? Maybe 76.175.157.240 works for or has some other connection to Jasper. I don't know. Thanks, Joe! 76.189.101.150 (talk) 00:05, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Additional info: Joe, I just discovered that the text 76.175.157.240 entered (to replace my text) was the identical text that an editor (Jokestress) had removed yesterday. He just pasted it back in. It's the Jasper info with cites to Jasper's own blog. Thanks. 76.189.101.150 (talk) 00:20, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi, I'm just about out the door on a short trip and won't be able to look at this for at least a full day, you may want to follow up at WP:BLPN if it's urgent. Sorry!  --j⚛e deckertalk 00:22, 17 June 2012 (UTC)


 * OK, Joe. Thanks. I wrote for help. I saw on the Talk Page of James Mojo (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:James_mojo) that he was warned before for exactly the same thing he's doing today... typing the URL to Jasper's blog in the article. I don't know if he is also user 76.175.157.240. It appears it is, or they are working together because they're entering the same information. 76.189.101.150 (talk) 00:59, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Jacky Jasper article
Joe, I didn't know if I should write you about this or do a Help Me request. So I'm doing both just to make sure.

Here's my text from the Help Me I sent on my Talk Page: It appears the Jacky Jasper article is being used for promotional purposes (read the 4th paragaph for a great example), sourced very poorly (or not sourced at all), and potentially defamatory. Should the article be removed? Contributors to the article have continually typed Jasper's blog name and URL ("Hollywood Street King (diaryofahollywoodstreetking.com)") directly into numerous Wikipedia articles and were warned to stop doing it. But the blog name and URL currently appear twice in the Jacky Jasper article (see paragraphs 4 and 6), and who knows how many other Wikipedia articles. And half the cites in the Jacky Jasper article are to Jasper's own blog. But overall, most of the article has no cites. And ones included are invalid. Read the first four paragraphs; there are zero cites to back-up any of that information. One significant claim in the article, in the 3rd paragraph, is that Jasper won "his first Grammy with Ike Turner for Blues Album Of The Year in 2005". First, Ike Turner won a Grammy Award in 2007 (for Best Traditional Blues Album, titled Risin' with the Blues), not 2005. Second, Ike Turner won the award; no one else. So IF Jasper had any type of role on that album, he did not win a Grammy Award for it and there's no information to support that claim. In the 5th paragraph, there is potentially defamatory text about someone named Mister Cee, with a cite being to Jasper's own blog. This potentially defamatory information is also included in the Mister Cee article in the Biography section, and the cite is to Jacky Jasper's site. And although this is the least of the problems, the Jacky Jasper article is poorly written with bad grammar and usage. The bottom line is that the Jacky Jasper article is being used to promote him and his blog. And some of his contributors continue to attempt to sneak Jasper's blog name and URL into other Wikipedia articles. Should the Jasper article be deleted? Thanks for looking into this and handling as you see appropriate. I will leave it in your hands. Thank you. (By the way, I have written to an editor (Mdann52) regarding problems with two of the contributors - 76.175.157.240 and James Mojo - (who may be the same person). 76.189.101.150 (talk) 01:13, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

UPDATE: Joe, Mdann52 replied to my Help ME regarding the Jacky Jasper article and he made a few edits. But I am very dissatisfied with the edits he did NOT make, some I believe that are quite substantial. I wrote him back to let him know my concerns.

Here's what I wrote to Mdann52: "I saw the edits you made on Jacky Jasper but I'm sorry, I am not satisfied at all with the edits you did NOT make. They include the following: Paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 are completely unsourced. The 3rd paragraph makes the outrageous, uncited claim that Jasper won a Grammy Award, which is completely false according all the research I did including reviewing the complete lists of Grammy Award winners. (You can also Google the topic - Jacky Jasper Grammy - and you'll see all sites which say the Grammy claim is false and where he's been asked to prove it, which he's never done.) By not removing this, it sends the message that anyone can make the claim, with no proof, that they've won a Grammy (or Oscar, Emmy or Tony) and it will be allowed to stay in the article? The 3rd paragraph also has "RICK JAMES" in it (all caps). The 4th paragraph is completely promotional language about Jasper's blog, but you didn't touch it except for removing the URL to his blog. It says, "Instead of using this outlet to create only his own success he teamed up with industry leaders to bring much needed resources and information back to the street. Jacky serves up daily industry news, exclusive interviews,and reviews almost everything!" In the 5th paragraph, the first sentence details sexually explicit arrest charges of a living person that are based solely on a citation from a tabloid site? The 5th paragraph is also obviously very poorly written (grammar and puncutation). I feel the entire article warrants being removed. However, if that's not going to be done I am asking that you please at least make edits based on the above substantive ojections. The article is obviously written from a fan's perspective and is being used for promotional purposes. Thanks for your continued help on this."

Joe, I'm hoping that you can help to faciliate getting my concerns addressed properly? When I asked you for help on the Tim Dog article, I was very happy with the way you assisted. You were great. So I wanted initially for you to handle this matter, but I know you were busy. That's why I sent the general Help Me request on my Talk Page. Thanks! 76.189.101.150 (talk) 11:17, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I can't speak for the other editor, but I'm my current opinion, expressed at AfD, is that we'd be best off deleting this article, and that as it stands I don't see signs of notability under WP:GNG. --j⚛e deckertalk 20:30, 18 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks a lot, Joe. I did some research and found information that says "Jacky Jasper" is not even the guy's real name; that it is actually the alter ego of a guy named Greg Comeau, who has/had several other aliases. Google it. You won't find any information on this guy from a "credible" source that will qualify him as being notable. Of all the completely unsourced claims on the Jasper page, the one that is most amazing is the false claim that he earned a Grammy Award! Yet it still remains in the article. Or the promotional line about Jasper's blog: "Jacky serves up daily industry news, exclusive interviews,and reviews almost everything!" (with exclamation point included). Is it a Wikipedia article or a billboard? In any case, it appears that Jasper completely fails the rules of notability. So based on that criteria alone, hopefully the article will be deleted. Then, the many other violations in the article itself won't matter any more. 76.189.106.160 (talk) 01:03, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

More inappropriate content added to Tim Dog
Joe, Bigtommy33 just added this non-cited, subjective, and potentially defamatory information to the Tim Dog article: "Dateline NBC portrayed Tim Dog as a predator who trolls dating websites in search of vulnerable women whom he can con out of their life savings to fuel his false image of a successful entertainer." Bigtommy33 is simply giving his own personal interpretation of what the TV show was saying, and doing so with no citations. And even though the episode likely made Tim Dog out to be a bad guy in the minds of many viewers, none of Bigtommy33's volatile words and phrases about this living person - such as "predator," "trolls" and "his false image of a successful entertainer" - were ever used by NBC's host/reporter in the episode. User Materialscientist removed the sentence, but then it was added back. 76.189.101.150 (talk) 01:43, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I've removed that again. Sorry for the slow response times, real life has been in the way and may be again the next few days, you won't be stepping on my toes if you get help elsewhere but I'll try and do what I can.  --j⚛e deckertalk 20:12, 18 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you, Joe. 76.189.106.160 (talk) 01:05, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Configuration Workgroup deleted article
hi Joe,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:F%C3%A6#Configuration_Workgroup_deleted_page

can you assist me?

thanks! Doceddi (talk) 17:26, 19 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Sure, I'll be happy to userfy that for you. But you do have a task ahead of you -- to return to Wikipedia with the full status of an article, you'll need to show that the article meets WP:GNG, which previous editors have believed not to be possible.  To meet that guideline, you'll have to include references to multiple, reliable sources, independent of the workgroup, each of which discuss the workgroup in detail.  Once you've done so, I'll be happy to discuss returning the article back to article space.  Best of luck, and let me know if I can help with anything, or answer any questions about the process.


 * The article has been userfied to User:Doceddi/Configuration Workgroup. --j⚛e deckertalk 17:40, 19 June 2012 (UTC)


 * thanks for the speedy reply! i'll see what we can come up with. Doceddi (talk) 18:47, 19 June 2012 (UTC)


 * My pleasure! Cheers!  --j⚛e deckertalk 18:48, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Articles of living persons who are not notable
Joe, I believe that all or some of the following five articles should be deleted. They do not appear to meet the criteria for notability. Numbers 1 to 4 are alumni of the same high school and are listed on the school's Notable Alumni list (Taylor_Allderdice_High_School). Number 5 is the husband of number 1.

1. Sara Alpern: She is simply a college associate professor. She's no more notable than every other associate professor in the United States and, by rank, less notable than every full professor.

2. Gary Graff: His claim to fame is that he was a journalist for a big-city newspaper for 13 years. Does that make him notable? Poor references.

3. Richard Pacheco: An ex-porn actor. It reads like someone just copied his entire bio from some other site and pasted all the info in. There are zero citations!

4. Edgar Snyder: Does simply being a lawyer who has name-recognition in his own city (because of his TV commercials for his law firm) make him notable? There are thousands of lawyers - many very prominent and high profile - in his city. The only difference is that almost none of them run TV commercials. Poor references.

5. Peter Tarlow: The husband of Sara Alpern. It seems like someone just decided that there should be husband-and-wife Wikipedia articles for this couple even though they are not notable.

Joe, can you look at these articles to see if they meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines? And take the necessary steps to have them deleted. I think the lack of notability for most of these people will be very obvious to you. Thanks!

76.189.106.160 (talk) 04:54, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I see at least a couple of those are going to pass our various notability in one way or another, so I'm going to pass for now. I don't have time to do the research to sort through 'em right now, and incautious deletion nominations are a sure highway to drama. No worries if you want to ask elsewhere for someone to make the nominations for you. As you've noticed before, I'm having a period of being busy in "real life.", and there are 1000+ other admins here.
 * BTW, this would be a fair bit of work for you, but if you're really interested in learning more about the ins and outs of our notability guidelines, processes and precedents I can, over some time, work through these five with you one at a time, have you do some of the legwork, and show you were some of the ambiguities lie as well. But that'd be over a period of time, and it's fine if you're just looking to get those nominations up. (I'd probably also ask you to create an account.) Your call, totally fine either way. Have a great week!  --j⚛e deckertalk 06:33, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:User access levels
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:User access levels. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 20:39, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Mark Labbett
Hello. I write because you closed the AFD on Mark Labbett as a merge to The Chase (game show). I think that was the appropriate decision -- the article was in a poor state with inadequate referencing. However, I have, this evening, redrafted the article: User:The JPS/Mark Labbett. You will see that this version is significantly different from the version you redirected. The referencing, most importantly, is pretty watertight, and notability is established via the increasing number of newspaper articles. As I don't wish to start wheel-warring, I would appreciate your opinion before I post this new version. Thanks. The JPS talk to me  00:32, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
 * It's certainly a big improvement over the article that went before, I don't think you should have any problems defending it against a speedy. On the merits of WP:BASIC,  sure looks like significant, reliable coverage,  looks close to one, and I while I haven't looked at all the sources, particularly those with paywalls, ... sure looks like it would likely survive an AfD.  In any case, you certainly have my encouragement to put move it to mainspace.  Nice work!  I tried to add a couple ref:urls and fixed a title, but please  feel free to revert/correct anything I messed up.)  Cheers, --j⚛e deckertalk 06:10, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Many thanks for your comments and improvements, Joe. Much appreciated. :) The JPS talk to me  17:49, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Notability (academics)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Notability (academics). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 15:16, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Can I send you articles, magazines and other press cuttings to prove my article was genuine?
Hi Joe, My contribution about Brazilian journalist Marcio Rodrigo Delgado was deleted by you in April/12. Since then I was gathering every page of printed information to submit to wikipedia and to show my article was genuine and accurate. How can I submit it and have it undeleted? Thank you for you help. AM — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anamariasmith (talk • contribs) 17:56, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Sure, you can link them here, etc. The deletion was not just a matter of whether Delgado is a journalist, I'm sure he is, the question whether he meets our basic notability guideline.  So what I would need to see is two or more sources, each one from a reliable source, which is not him or anyone associated with him, each source must be *about* him rather than by him (this is often difficult with journalists), and each must actually go into deep detail about him.   WP:BASIC and it's cousin WP:GNG explain all these restrictions in more detail, and this is sort of a short-and-simple summary of what they say.  So I hope that helps you select articles which would most clearly make the argument for recreation.  Let me know if I can answer any questions.  Thanks!  --j⚛e deckertalk 18:11, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Autopatrolled
Thanks for your flattering vote of confidence in giving me "autopatrolled" status. You mentioned that your attention was drawn by a comment I'd made at AfD; if it wouldn't be too much trouble, could you let me know which one? I'm relatively new to the AfD process, and it'd help me to know when I've done it right, in the view of more experienced editors. (I'll also try to respond appropriately to criticism, but I much prefer compliments.) Thanks. Ammodramus (talk) 03:21, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Sure, it was your "embarrassed comment" at Clint Coley, which I felt a proactive and responsible response to a minor (and apparently rare) mistake. In looking through others where your !vote ended up different than consensus, I saw things like this one, and again, clue seemed evidenced. (I didn't focus on AfD, so this shouldn't be considered a strong review of all that work, but the few examples I looked at confirmed the general impression I got from the rest of the edits I observed.)--j⚛e deckertalk 03:28, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply. I'm glad some good came out of my Coley screw-up.  (Since I've created an average of less than ten articles a year, I don't suppose that the autopatrolled status is saving the new-page patrollers a lot of work; but every little bit helps.)  Ammodramus (talk) 03:35, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
 * If that's what you call a screw-up, you're doing a lot better than most of us. And yeah, it doesn't make much of a difference individually, but over a couple thousand people it definitely adds up.  --j⚛e deckertalk 03:40, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Wrong protection level of Ashneel Prasad
I am not a sysop, but you fully protected Ashneel Prasad. Only sysops who request protection can have the capability to fully protect pages. Adjkasi (discuss me) 06:33, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm confused by your statement, perhaps you could explain more? I'm a sysop, and in reaction to a request for create protection (that is, WP:SALT) for Ashneel Prasad I selected appropriate protections for such a repeatedly recreated article under both names, and in doing so also matched the preexisting protection levels of Ashneel prasad (note the lowercase p).  Anyway, I'm off to bed, but if you could explain more what your concern is I'd be more than happy to reevaluate in the morning.  Cheers, --j⚛e deckertalk 06:59, 26 June 2012 (UTC)