User talk:Largoplazo/Archives/Archive 19

Rayvision
Rayvision is one of the leading render farm in the world. Rayvision was the render farm for the famous blockbuster movies Bahubali and Krissh 3 and MR Hublot the oscar winning animation movie is also rendered by Rayvision. Please check the website to know more details about it
 * Wikipedia is not to be used to promote. It is illegal to post material here in violation of copyrights. —Largo Plazo (talk) 02:08, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Please tell me
Please tell sir what I did that is vandalizing Knick7136 (talk) 02:34, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Writing, falsely, that the transcription of עברית is "Ivrit Aramaic". —Largo Plazo (talk) 02:36, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Deadly Deposits?
Im sorry to bother you but, Deadly Deposits needs to have a page because it is a NFB film and it was directed by Jay Falconer. Im so sorry about that :(. Remington Tufflips (talk) 16:17, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Allow me to explain. There is no such thing as "needing" to have an article on Wikipedia. There can be an article on a topic only if that topic satisfies Wikipedia's notability policy. I don't think any of the general or film-specific notability guidelines imply that being an NFB film or being direct by Jay Falconer establishes the notability of a film. —Largo Plazo (talk) 16:55, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Alright :( Remington Tufflips (talk) 17:07, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry! —Largo Plazo (talk) 17:10, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Knjiga Joga za nosečnice
This is the first Prental Yoga Book in Slovenia. It is important for all Yoginis all over the world and for all the countries that are still improving their yoga position in their countries.

It will be soon translated into German and English Language.

The translated title is Prenatal Yoga - Yogic Guide for safe and active Pregnancy


 * Hello. I understand, but Wikipedia isn't a vehicle for getting the word out about things that aren't already well known, even if they are intended to serve an important purpose. Wikipedia topics have to be known already. There is a policy that article topics must be notable; an encyclopedia article should be a summary of information already available in reliable sources written by third parties, people not directly connected to the topic. —Largo Plazo (talk) 21:08, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Delete the page
Delete 'The Fakir (2016 film)' John8944 (talk) 15:04, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Khalil Salem: Writer has scientific relevance, but the books, when they appear in English, should be avoided or deleted
I found some books by the author Khalil Salem in Brazilian libraries. The works can also be viewed by the National Library (Brazil) page, and attributed delicate notoriety to the author (the author has nearly twenty books). However, all the works are written only in Portuguese, except one text (a chapter) in English. Furthermore, the two books cited in the article do not exist in English. I believe the writer has scientific relevance, but the books, when they appear in English, should be avoided or deleted depending on the case. Thanks for your cooperation and scientific spirit. - Jupiter&#39;s Spiritualist (talk) 23:25, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, have you read the notability guidelines, starting with WP:N? What's useful is not to show that someone has written a lot of books, but that he's received note in appropriate sources for having done so. I see no evidence of that. —Largo Plazo (talk) 06:50, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated
Hi, I'm Okamialvis. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Dmitry Miller, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. Okamialvis (talk) 09:21, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

George Morrone Wikipedia page
If there are links that do not fall within the guideline, why not just remove the link vs the entire page (the history). It falls short of revisionist history (e.g. letting 1 bad link erase the entire historical record) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Food Follower (talk • contribs) 09:27, 4 February 2016 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, I have no idea what "links" you're talking about. The article is a copyright violation, which is illegal, and it's promotional, which isn't allowed on Wikipedia. —Largo Plazo (talk) 09:29, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Perhaps I am not understanding, how is the Wikipedia page promotional. What aspect is promotional. If there are, then delete the sections /links that appears

Star Wars rant
it is not an opinion it is a fact based on true star wars books movie and gorge lucas interviews so F you to if you and the other people on wiki won't let me put this up just like with my NFS prostreet cheets because I can always just repost then. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nico4201 (talk • contribs) 17:28, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
 * And then we can delete them again, and block you on top of it. —Largo Plazo (talk) 17:30, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
 * This material just isn't what Wikipedia is for. Getting mad about it is like getting mad at The New York Times for declining to publish your essay about your cat, or at a movie theatre for kicking you out for standing up and giving a speech in the middle of the movie. —Largo Plazo (talk) 17:44, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

I would but this works better to get the word out because no body finds my stuff on other websites, and please don't delete my user page or sandboxand ESPECIALLY not my account becasue I can alway make a new one >:) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nico4201 (talk • contribs) 17:58, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, again, that isn't what Wikipedia is for. Not just for you, it's the same for everybody. If everyone used Wikipedia as a place to talk about whatever they wanted, then nobody would come here either and you'd be just as invisible. What a sense of entitlement you've been revealing, as though you have a right to be seen, regardless of what the rules are. And it's ironic for you to be so desperate to use Wikipedia for your purposes at the same time that you show such open contempt for what it is.
 * Anyway, there's nothing further to discuss. The rules of Wikipedia aren't going to change because of any conversation that you and I have here. —Largo Plazo (talk) 18:05, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Changing user name
hi largoplazo you get wrong I want to change my count name but i didin't know how if you don't mind please guide me how to do that — Preceding unsigned comment added by سبيرز (talk • contribs) 20:44, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi. See WP:Changing username. —Largo Plazo (talk) 20:47, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Republia times for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Republia times is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Republia times until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Mackensen (talk) 01:18, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

John Heard (actor)
I'm trying to leave you a message-I don't use this. John Heard is my ex he has no child named Taylor Mae, we have two children together Max, born 2-24-94, and Annika Rose born 10-19-95. I'd like Taylor Mae taken down he has no child of this name it was a prank. Jack (Johnny Matthew is also his son, my childrens brother). Thank you. And I want the arrest taken down that is not necessary at all. It was done by another lunatic. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Darknesslightness101 (talk • contribs) 03:10, 16 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Hmmm, IMDB says John Heard was married to Sharon Heard (the wife with whom he became father to Max and Annika Rose) from 1988 to 1996, not 1991 to 1998. I realize it could be wrong, but I'm just saying.
 * I can find no corroboration for a Taylor May, and it was added out of the blue last October with no source by a one-time editor, so I imagine it could be a prank. However, especially since you have a conflict of interest (if you really were the wife in question), it isn't appropriate for you to directly and unilaterally remove true, properly sourced, and significant information. If you'd like, you could solicit a discussion on the content's removal on the article's talk page. I don't think you'd get much agreement, but that's your prerogative. Biographies of living persons are treated with particular sensitivity on Wikipedia. It's a long read, but you might look at Biographies of living persons. —Largo Plazo (talk) 03:30, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

WP:Mordre....
Yes... we have WP:Bite...but he wasn't exactly a newbie I think. Cheeers. Lectonar (talk) 18:47, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
 * True. —Largo Plazo (talk) 18:48, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

History of the Poles in the United States
Given your high fluency in Polish, I am reaching out to you in regards to the History of the Poles in the United States article. It has no Polish equivalent, and any time you can spend towards translating in any capacity would be much-appreciated. I would be more than happy to help any way that I can.

Thank you! Pola.mola (talk) 20:13, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, but you're mistaken. I don't speak Polish at all. —Largo Plazo (talk) 20:16, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Shwas homes
Shwas home is a notable business in kochi,kerala,india — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abhilashsnair (talk • contribs) 05:43, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * But, you see, the prohibition on content of a promotional nature applies to notable businesses as it does to everything else. Also, be aware of the guidelines that strongly discourage writing about anything over which you have a conflict of interest. —Largo Plazo (talk) 06:04, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Autobiography Template
Hello, just asking a quick question, what page does the autobiography template come from? I've tried looking for it multiple times, but haven't found it yet. Thanks. JumpiMaus (talk) 19:12, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Which do you have in mindthe one that's pasted at the top of an article, autobiography, or the one warning that goes on a user's talk page, uw-autobiography? —Largo Plazo (talk) 19:26, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Oh, I actually didn't know that there were two different templates, but you did answer my question, thanks. (If wondering why I'm asking, I,run into about one a week and I generally can't do anything other than tagging them with A7) JumpiMaus (talk) 19:37, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Check out Template messages/maintenance and Template messages/User talk namespace. Also, have you read about using Twinkle to assist you with maintenance tasks? —Largo Plazo (talk) 19:48, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the pointers, I'll check Twinkle out. JumpiMaus (talk) 19:50, 26 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Hi Largoplazo- I've only edited one wikipedia article before- 9 years ago... and am rather un tech savvy. I think I created the appearance of a COI because I thought I was naming the project and actually created a username with the projects name. Not sure if I can change that.

I'm still adding citations currently. any advice would be appreciated. NeuroproteXeon (talk) 20:40, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

I sure understand your perspective.

With respect to Anschutz Small Bore Target Match 54 Action,

I just learned within the 20 series square receiver section,

in addition to the standard run of 2007/660 in stock 213 Aluminum manufactured during 2002,

There's a specific model of Anschutz target rifle called a 2007/660 with a stainless steel barrel and a color Aluminum stock, a marketing test series manufactured by Anschutz and marketed in the U.S.

There were six of this model, two in red, two in blue and two in black.

I'm just trying to add to the previously blank page with only the title 2002/660 in stock 2313 Alu.

Maybe I'm just confusing you more.

Does this help at all ?

Bill

I sure understand your perspective.

With respect to Anschutz Small Bore Target Match 54 Action,

I just learned within the 20 series square receiver section,

in addition to the standard run of 2007/660 in stock 213 Aluminum manufactured during 2002,

There's a specific model of Anschutz target rifle called a 2007/660 with a stainless steel barrel and a color Aluminum stock, a marketing test series manufactured by Anschutz and marketed in the U.S.

There were six of this model, two in red, two in blue and two in black.

I'm just trying to add to the previously blank page with only the title 2002/660 in stock 2313 Alu.

Maybe I'm just confusing you more.

Does this help at all ?

Bill

Flemish
Flemish is a word with too many meanings, too many definitions, too much history of change. I re-added current so that the reader can be aware that while the language of Belgium may not officially be Flemish, there are still Flemish speakers in the world. They may wonder why "current" is repeated and pursue their question. There is a discussion at the articles talk page. Buster Seven   Talk  18:45, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
 * "Flemish" means "that which relates to Flanders", whether it's the Flemish countryside, Flemish industry, Flemish literature, Flemist art, or Flemish cuisine. Is there a language called "Flemish"? No, linguists today don't consider the varieties/dialects/types/whatever-you-want-to-call-them of Dutch spoken in Flanders to be one or more separate languages from Dutch. The varieties of Dutch spoken in Flanders are, by definition, Flemish varieties of Dutch. But this was also true in 1961, and 1960, and 1959, and 1958, and so on, your latest edit summary notwithstanding. Neither your edit summary nor anything at Talk:Flemish explains why the word "suddenly" is either meaningful or helpful at the location you chose to insert it. —Largo Plazo (talk) 20:21, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The word inserted was "current", not that I expect that to make any difference to you. I'll be on my way. Nice to meet you. Buster Seven   Talk  21:30, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
 * That was a typoI meant to write why the word "current" is suddenly either meaningful or helpful. —Largo Plazo (talk) 22:00, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Nevermind. Buster Seven   Talk  22:13, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

in response to question re: Modern Cafe
You wrote that the Modern seems to have been around since 1946 in relation to Nanaimo Bars. Nanaimo Bars have been around significantly longer than that; some reports state that they were actually an ENGLISH dessert that was shipped to Nanaimo where there was a coal mine in which many British men came to work. Nanaimo Bars could survive the trip. (Apparently they didn't use the same butter-based middle that I do now, I'm just saying). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.140.45.175 (talk) 08:04, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, I don't see where I wrote anything about the Modern Cafe. —Largo Plazo (talk) 13:55, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

LoudLizard
Hi, I see you warned a user about creating inappropriate pages regarding the article LoudLizard. Could you tell me what was on that page, please? It seems to be about me. Thanks, LoudLizard (talk) 19:22, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I don't recall what was on that particular page. —Largo Plazo (talk) 23:42, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Money Boy
I know a lot of editors don't seem to be aware of general references, and think a link is only a reference if it has an inline citation (of course, if the link doesn't support the article, then it isn't a reference). I've been looking through the unreferenced articles categories and a lot of them actually do have sources. The no footnotes template is more appropriate for those articles, but as there are so many of them, it would be a hell of a job to put it right. Adam9007 (talk) 17:21, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Personally, I think the threshold for adding a BLPPROD tag should be the same as the threshold for removing one: the presence of one independent reliable source that supports at least one assertion in the article. I don't know the background behind the disparity. So I would have liked to put a BLPPROD tag on that article. But, unfortunately, the YouTube page supports the claim that this guy exists and that he's a rapper, and WP:BLPPROD states "To place a BLPPROD tag, the process requires that the article contain no sources in any form (as references, external links, etc.), which support any statements made about the person in the biography." So there we are! —Largo Plazo (talk) 17:39, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I think it's the "no sources in any form" part that people overlook. I think tagging such articles violates both BLPPROD's letter and its spirit. Adam9007 (talk) 18:13, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Jogranito2002 vandalism
Sorry about any confusion. I saw the editor had made some further vandalism, but got distracted IRL when doing the diff. When I got back quite a while later and reverted, the revert failed due to later changes but I didn't initially notice and added a vandalism note. Thanks for catching it and reverting more! Stephenb (Talk) 16:28, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Sure, I realized you'd missed part of that user's damage. It was spread out over a number of edits. No problem! —Largo Plazo (talk) 18:20, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Крамонд (стоянка)
It was my mistake, sorry. I agree with deleation of article "Крамонд (стоянка)" from en.wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VSL56 (talk • contribs) 21:07, 9 March 2016 (UTC) VSL56 (talk) 21:14, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Functional food definition by FFC
Possibly, changing the title of the article “Functional food definition by FFC” to “Functional Food Definition” since the title is too over precise would be beneficial. Although similar, "functional foods" and "Functional food definition" are different subjects. Functional food definition brings attention to scientists, governmental agencies, and the food industry to have the same correct understanding of the subject, so that government can then regulate the issues related to functional foods and related to that of health claims. The Functional Food Center (FFC) has been working in this area since 2004. Also, I changed the article outline and provided other definitions and history of outcome of functional food definitions. Functional food definition could include more extensive history or regulations added later.

Published scientific articles mention FFC's definition as opposed to others’ definitions. Surely, more could be added to the full the article of functional food: it's history, status and regulations of functional foods in Japan, EU, as well as in USA. DanikMartirosyan (talk) 18:41, 11 March 2016 (UTC)DanikMartirosyan

About "Persian alphabet".
Hi

I'm new to wiki and I noticed some errors in "Persian alphabet".

The table in section Letters is a mess. The Unicode codepoints for contextual forms are used arbitrarily. Some isolated forms are the "basic letter" codepoints but some are from "forms codepoints".This is a bad edit that's not been undone although the next edit from the same IP has been undone. I corrected a letter order problem there but I think it needs a good cleanup.

I'm a newbie and this is a large edit(I guess?).

My question is, can I make the changes myself or should I send them to someone, like you, to apply?

Thanks

Jvd fa (talk) 06:11, 17 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Greetings, and welcome to Wikipedia. Since you have a good idea of what sort of edits you want to make, I encourage you to make them. Since you're new, though, and since this does sound like a possibly complicated set of edits, you might want to copy the wiki code to subpage in your own userspace and edit it there. There, you can experiment and test your edits without disturbing the article. Once you're satisfied with your work, you can replace the wiki code in the article with your revised code.


 * The one thing I'd suggest is that, before replacing the existing content in the article, you check whether anyone has made changes to it in the meantime, and incorporate those changes into your copy before moving it all back to the article, so you don't end up wiping out someone else's efforts.


 * As for the userspace page, you might call it, for example, User:Jvd fa/Persian alphabet. Or even User:Jvd fa/draft, whatever works for you.


 * Good luck, and let me know if you have any questions. —Largo Plazo (talk) 11:08, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

I'll edit the Frankie Moreno page now to be neutral and not show a conflict of interest
please give me 5-10 minutes before deciding to deactiviate — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrsRichelle (talk • contribs) 20:04, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Again, see the guidelines about writing with a conflict of interest. What you're doing is a misuse of Wikipedia. —Largo Plazo (talk) 20:06, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

March 2016
Hello Largoplazo. Thanks for patrolling new pages – it's a very important task! I'm just letting you know, however, that you shouldn't tag pages as lacking context (CSD A1), content (CSD A3), or significance (CSD A7) moments after they are created. It's best to wait at least 10–15 minutes for more content to be added if the page is very short, and the articles should not be marked as patrolled. Tagging such pages in a very short space of time may drive away well-meaning contributors, which is not good for Wikipedia. Attack pages (G10), blatant nonsense (G1), copyright violations (G12) and pure vandalism/blatant hoaxes (G3) should of course be tagged and deleted immediately. Thanks. - MrX 20:15, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Michelleagy
Hi Largoplazo,

I have included a credible reference on the wiki page I created. Thank you.

Michelleagy (talk) 06:04, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Ross Tomson
Hello Largoplazo, there are now 21 citations for the Ross Tomson article. Please assist in the removal of the deletion request and aid in verification and cleanup of the article, as you have been doing. The article should be in compliance and we only strive to provide accurate information regarding who Ross Tomson is.

Thank you. Tomsontech (talk) 20:06, 21 March 2016 (UTC)Tomsontech (namechange pending)
 * Hi. As I noted on the deletion discussion page, "A number of sources have been added to the article, but most of them are connected to Tomson, press releases, or simply "Ross Tomson said" attributions in a discussion of something else." In other words, they aren't the "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" called for by the general notability guidelines. Since then, you've added one more from PRWeb, therefore a press release and not independent coverage; a page that doesn't contain his name; and a page that quotes him once and otherwise doesn't mention him, which isn't "significant coverage" of him, but of whatever he was commenting on.
 * You also added a number of citations of his papers, but those don't contribute to notability. Citations of them may, but the Google Scholar listing indicates few citations of his works. —Largo Plazo (talk) 20:27, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Anyway, just to be clear, it's the deletion discussion page that's the place to participate in the discussion of the article's deletion. —Largo Plazo (talk) 20:29, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

There are numerous citations to articles written by others about Ross Tomson and his companies. See the Houston Business Journal citation, Rice News citation, Offshore magazine citation, Energy.gov citation, and the Texas Bar citation -- all of which are independent sources not tied to Tomson, but written about him or his companies. Tomsontech (talk) 20:34, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, but you still aren't picking up on the part about how, now that the deletion discussion has been launched, that's where you need to be making your arguments. You can discuss it all you want here, but it won't change the outcome there.
 * However, for what it's worth:
 * Rice: A single sentence out of an entire article, "The Rice team is working with project leader Brine Chemistry Solutions LLC, a Houston company founded by Tomson’s son, Rice alumnus Ross Tomson" isn't substantial coverage of Ross Tomson. Nor, when this Rice project is written about on Rice's own website, is it independent. —Largo Plazo (talk) 21:57, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Offshore: This is an example of one of the scenarios I already noted. He is merely being quoted. Though the article is about his company, it isn't about him. (Notability is generally not considered to be inherited.)
 * Energy.gov: This can hardly be considered significant coverage of him when neither his first nor last name appears on the page.
 * Texas Bar Association: It's a routine database listing that, at best, verifies that he's a lawyer.
 * Of all these, the Houston Business Journal is the only one that comes close. —Largo Plazo (talk) 21:57, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

WP:AFD versus WP:PROD
Sorry about that! I'm still learning some of the nuances of Wikipedia. Thank you for the correction! --Erick Shepherd (talk) 01:51, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
 * No problem, you're welcome! —Largo Plazo (talk) 02:15, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Decoriya


A tag has been placed on Decoriya, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Mean as custard (talk) 15:50, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Anoomi speedy Deletion
Hi Largoplazo,

I am new here and want to be a contribute to Wikipedia. but why to delete a new page that I just created? Is a website with thousands of fans cant be included in Wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eyalshalom (talk • contribs) 15:56, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi. Under Wikipedia policy, article topics have to be notable, which generally involves the availability of significant coverage of the topic in independent reliable sources. If an article doesn't even give any indication as to why one might expect there to be an article about it in an encyclopedia ("credible claim of significance"), then it can be deleted without even putting it through a group discussion.
 * You should also know about Wikipedia's guidelines concerning the contribution of material over which you have a conflict of interest. Wikipedia may not be used for the purpose of drawing attention to anything. It isn't a web host, social media, or networking site. —Largo Plazo (talk) 16:02, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Largo,

I believe the Classic Learning Test does meet the notability criteria of Wikipedia. The CLT is accepted as a standard for admission at eight colleges, some of which are very notable, such as Thomas Aquinas College, which is rated 30th by U.S. News and World Report for "Best Value Colleges". The article does not promote the test, it simply provides some unbiased information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JeremyTate14 (talk • contribs) 13:58, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

re Literature Bunshinsaba
Same BLP content posted as Tennis Federation Bunshinsaba by same author. Previously posted multiple times as Carp scale, and as Carp scales. I have opened an SPI on as a likely sock of. FYI, regards --220  of  Borg 10:01, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

Ann E. Wehrle
this is bradly294 you left me a message about my thingy i left on Ann E Wehlre talk page. I wanted to get feed back on my proposed edits I'm planning to do to her page. do you nave any suggestion to where to put this proposed edits where i can get feedback from the community? this is my first time editing wikipedia. I'm doing it for a class. thank you for helping. --Bradl294 (talk) 20:33, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi! You were in the right place, but I didn't get what you were doing. You just loaded a block of content there at Talk:Ann E. Wehrle, and didn't ask any questions or inviting any discussion. If you're more specific about what you're looking for from others, that would help. Also, if there's a lot of content, as there was in this case, a good idea is to keep it separate from the discussion by putting it into a user subpage under your own name (like User:Bradl294/Wehrle content, for example). Then, on the article's talk page, you can point people to your content on your subpage, ask them to review it, and ask them questions about it. This will make the discussion easier to following, without the content itself getting mixed up into it. Does that help? —Largo Plazo (talk) 20:49, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Mushin al Musawi Article
Thank you very much for your reply! I am trying to edit the content and it keeps giving me an error message. Can you please tell me what I am doing wrong so I do not receive the error messages anymore?

Thanks! Manar


 * What kind of error messages are you getting? Are you trying to edit it at the location I moved it to, Muhsin al-Musawi? By the way, please WP:SIGN your posts in discussions, like this one and on any Talk page, by adding four tildes, ~, at the end. Wikipedia will convert this to a signature when you save your edit. —Largo Plazo (talk) 21:56, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Distance of Shadows
Way too fast my curvy pink butt. It was clearly going to be an aoutobiog of a nudnik, as additional edits proved.TheLongTone (talk) 14:40, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't disagree, but there was almost nothing there at that point, and WP:BITE. It could have been about, at least purportedly, the greatest gamer ever (even though I wasn't expecting that). It was worth the few extra minutes for the situation to become crystal clear. —Largo Plazo (talk) 14:41, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Point taken, but in my experience an article written about a gamer... or indeed anybody by themselves is going to be a CsD candidate.TheLongTone (talk) 14:49, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Mostly for cases like this, I've created this list and added some code to my common.js file so that a link appears at the top of the page that I can click to add the article I'm currently viewing to the list. It prompts me for a comment and for the number of days I want to wait before I check back on the article. When I'm itching to delete but the article is only a few minutes old, I do my best to resist temptation and add it to my list instead.
 * By the time I check back, it's usually a red link, so I know that someone else eventually took care of it. When it isn't, on some occasions nothing has changed and I've gone ahead with deletion. On others, I find that the article actually turned into something useful. That's the least frequent case, though. —Largo Plazo (talk) 15:20, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

I respect that and have the highest respect for wikipedia for checking sources and editing posted articles or notes. It does indeed make it relevant. However, I think there is a big difference between posting something that is non-factual and posting something which you (or any administrator) deems not important enough, or that you simply don't think meets the guidelines for wikipedia. When an episode about one of the most notorious stalkers in the US is about to air I don't see why creating a page about the actor is irrelevant.

Quite frankly, wikipedia is not just about facts and history as an encyclopedia is, but goes beyond this to find out about significant events or people and indeed even the ones portraying the people. Why else would there be a page about some local politician named Tom Bates, as there is for a Berkely, CA politician. Not a significant player for encyclopedic literature, but is in the world of wikipedia. Because it is an invaluable source for getting to know one another.

I respect that and have the highest respect for wikipedia for checking sources and editing posted articles or notes. It does indeed make it relevant. However, I think there is a big difference between posting something that is non-factual and posting something which you (or any administrator) deems not important enough, or that you simply don't think meets the guidelines for wikipedia. When an episode about one of the most notorious stalkers in the US is about to air I don't see why creating a page about the actor is irrelevant.

Quite frankly, wikipedia is not just about facts and history as an encyclopedia is, but goes beyond this to find out about significant events or people and indeed even the ones portraying the people. Why else would there be a page about some local politician named Tom Bates, as there is for a Berkely, CA politician. Not a significant player for encyclopedic literature, but is in the world of wikipedia. Because it is an invaluable source for getting to know one another.

I respect that and have the highest respect for wikipedia for checking sources and editing posted articles or notes. It does indeed make it relevant. However, I think there is a big difference between posting something that is non-factual and posting something which you (or any administrator) deems not important enough, or that you simply don't think meets the guidelines for wikipedia. When an episode about one of the most notorious stalkers in the US is about to air I don't see why creating a page about the actor is irrelevant.

Quite frankly, wikipedia is not just about facts and history as an encyclopedia is, but goes beyond this to find out about significant events or people and indeed even the ones portraying the people. Why else would there be a page about some local politician named Tom Bates, as there is for a Berkely, CA politician. Not a significant player for encyclopedic literature, but is in the world of wikipedia. Because it is an invaluable source for getting to know one another.

TomBates101 (talk) 18:43, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

criticism you have previously been given
Also Largoplazo, I refer to criticism you have previously been given, and do note that my article did not violate any copyright, have any blatant nonsense, or have any attack in it. But do review critiques you have been given please:

March 2016

Information icon Hello Largoplazo. Thanks for patrolling new pages – it's a very important task! I'm just letting you know, however, that you shouldn't tag pages as lacking context (CSD A1), content (CSD A3), or significance (CSD A7) moments after they are created, as you did at Rupayan Dey. It's best to wait at least 10–15 minutes for more content to be added if the page is very short, and the articles should not be marked as patrolled. Tagging such pages in a very short space of time may drive away well-meaning contributors, which is not good for Wikipedia. Attack pages (G10), blatant nonsense (G1), copyright violations (G12) and pure vandalism/blatant hoaxes (G3) should of course be tagged and deleted immediately. Thanks. - MrX 20:15, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

TomBates101 (talk) 18:49, 1 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Is there a point to your copying this here? —Largo Plazo (talk) 19:18, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
 * For what it's worth: The guidance against deletion too quickly targets the situation where an author, possibly new to Wikipedia and uncertain about how to do things, hasn't even been given a chance to get to the meat of the matter on the article he's creating before someone swoops in and writes "There's nothing here!" In this case, what you had already written looked pretty clearly like the meat of what you'd intended to write. It would have been unusual if you'd started by writing that you were known for a small collection of either minor or future parts in single episodes of TV series, before getting around to mention that you'd played, say, the lead character in an HBO series over the course of six years. The fact that you'd written "known for" was an affirmation that you had, already, written what you had expected would convey your significance as an actor. —Largo Plazo (talk) 19:52, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Translation of English Version
Hello

Thanks for your helps but i have translated the main document to spanish version as its not exist and should be listed under spanish version.
 * Hi. This is English Wikipedia, and articles here are in English. If you want to create articles in Spanish, you can do that at Spanish Wikipedia. —Largo Plazo (talk) 16:08, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 10
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Solutions Resource, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Bellevue and Washington. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:59, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Art Resilience movement
Hello Largo Plazo, thank you for information. Best regards. --AlexArago (talk) 16:46, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Dato Sri Tahir listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Dato Sri Tahir. Since you had some involvement with the Dato Sri Tahir redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Alexander Iskandar (talk) 02:12, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Ranganathancse
Hi Larg

You have deleted page which i created early. Please tell me where you find the promotional content in my article. https://en.wikipedia.orgwiki/Helpchat — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ranganathancse (talk • contribs) 05:40, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, I'm not an administrator, so I don't have access to the deleted page and can't tell you from memory how it read. The chances are that it was because the article was written to convey how great Helpchat is and to entice people to use it.
 * Besides that, I now see that an article on Helpchat was deleted last year following a full discussion, on the grounds that it doesn't meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. This means that, unless Helpchat has become notable since then, there can't be an article on it. —Largo Plazo (talk) 14:19, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Why did you write to me if you were going to ignore my answer, as I now see that you've done? The article is still promotional, being entirely about why people should want to use it rather than about any significance it might have in the world. Even so, I requested deletion under the terms of WP:CSD G4 as an article already deleted as the outcome of a full deletion discussion. —Largo Plazo (talk) 16:19, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Please check the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Helpchat page. give me suggestion for writing. I wrote what what ever that app is doing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ranganathancse (talk • contribs) 15:07, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * That's written much better. However, the article will still qualify for inclusion only if Helpchat is notable. Read the notability policy and the general notability guidelines that explain what's necessary to demonstrate that a topic is notable. If you can provide sources in the article that demonstrate notability (an article on another wiki like the one you've cited isn't a reliable source), it will help. —Largo Plazo (talk) 15:41, 25 April 2016 (UTC)