User talk:MadeYourReadThis/Archives/2009/June

Mustafa Ulgen
I am trying to add a new Article, a biography of my father. He is a notable retired Professor in Dentistry in Turkey. His academic books are still yet to be read in all Dentistry Faculties in Turkey. (please check the e-books for reference). Could you please help me. What do I need to do next? Alpsays (talk)

I have the following note on my entry (Mustafa Ülgen - Mustafa Ulgen) could you please help me. "It is proposed that this article be deleted because of the following concern: non-notable person" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alpsays (talk • contribs) 21:01, 31 May 2009 (UTC)


 * You shouldn't be creating articles about your father since you have a conflict of interest, if he's notable, someone will write one about him. You could request it be created by someone over at WikiProject Dentistry.  I've placed some information about  conflict of interest on your talk page, please look it over.--RadioFan (talk) 11:28, 1 June 2009 (UTC)


 * RadioFan: I've read your comments at Alpsays' talk page and the AfD discussion. I've also commented at Alpsays' talk page.  I don't see why Alpsays shouldn't create the article (though obv. it's for other editors to decide whether this guy is actually notable - the present consensus amongst other editors is that he is).  WP's policy of independent, verifiable sources means that so long as Alpsays can back it up, he should feel free to write the article.  After all, Alpsays openly admitted the relationship with the subject (which he needn't).  We should surely not penalize openness (doing so could lead to sockpuppetry in the worst case)!  My view is that balance needs to be reached here, and that the possibility of a conflict of interest should be noted, and WP:V more carefully followed as a result for this article. Alpsay's motives seem genuine, and there is no suggestion that he/she is distorting facts. A.C. Norman (talk) 12:01, 1 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Alpsays has a conflict of interest and needs to follow the WP:COI guidelines in order to contribute to this article. Ideally Alpsays should not contribute at all and instead work with someone from the appropriate project (dentistry in this case) to create the article. I dont think Alpsays meant any harm and is just new here but I also dont think we should ignore COI guidelines because this person is new, there are other paths available.--RadioFan (talk) 12:06, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Rules, schmools, here's another one. riffic (talk) 12:50, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * While I agree with WP:IAR, it doesn't apply here, this article is a copy and paste of a CV and not encyclopedic at all. I also agree with WP:BITE but also believe it should be used to encourage new editors to understand the guidelines, it should not be used to give a excuse articles which do not enhance wikipedia as a whole The issues with this article have been identified.  If this editor (or someone else) can rewrite it and make it into something encyclopedic, I'd gladly change my !vote. but as it stands the article should be deleted.  --RadioFan (talk) 12:58, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * WP:IAR isn't relevant in this case, and I agree that the style is unencyclopaedic. I think WP:BITE partly applies, in that the issues here are due to ignorance rather than malevolence.  I am hopeful that Alpsays will clean this up in the next 24 hours or so (though due to the COI issues identified, ideally someone else could help; I shall flag it on the WikiProject Dentistry talk page).  If this article does get deleted - and if someone doesn't improve it soon that will be the right course of action - I would favour copying it to Alpsays' user space, so that he/she could work on it there. A.C. Norman (talk) 13:19, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

World Market Media
Hi, I was wondering what constitutes/what criteria is needed to avoid this as a reason for speedy deletion: "an article about a company or organization that didn't assert the importance or significance of its subject."

I had been working on the World Market Media page, and I'd like to make it work according to Wikipedia's guidelines, but am confused as to how to "assert the importance or significance" of this company. What all is necessary to avoid this?

Thank you Aragsdale (talk) 22:30, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


 * There is some good information on your talk page at the top. Additionally you'll want to look at WP:ORG for information about the notability of organizations.--RadioFan (talk) 00:21, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Demonstrations
I prod'd this article because it appears to be little more than a dictionary definition. Can it be expanded further with more citations referenced?--RadioFan (talk) 12:06, 3 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I understand the concern. Let me see if the Mil-Hist Task Force has some people who would like to help expand it. My situation is that multiple people have questioned the use of this term in American Civil War battle articles and I do not want to have to explain it in context each time. It is a specialized definition that applies only to military terminology. And there are certainly other examples of similar articles. Hal Jespersen (talk) 14:39, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Regarding speedy delete on Mark Hollmann
Help! I thought that co-creating the music and lyrics of a popular Broadway play ("Urinetown") and winning a Tony and an Obie for it qualified as: The person is ... widely cited by their peers.... The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work ... that has been the subject of ... multiple independent periodical articles or reviews. The person's work ... has won significant critical attention....

Am I mistaken?

--DAW0001 (talk) 20:57, 5 June 2009 (UTC)


 * You are correct, that would make him notable, the deletion request has been removed. Please update the article with references.--RadioFan (talk) 21:19, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

These references already appear in the article. Are these not sufficient?

Liam Deois, et al
Hi RadioFan. I noted my reasons on the article's talk page. Let me know what you think. Fergananim (talk) 11:41, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I've moved this to an AFD so other editors may weigh in. If this person is well known, there should be more siginificant coverage of them available for reference.  I'm not finding anything other than trivial mentions.  The fame seems to be mostly surounding the mention in a poem.  Perhaps this belongs in an article about the poem or the poet?--RadioFan (talk) 11:45, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * But surely wikipedia is not opposed to including stubs on people who are not otherwise mentioned on the internet? I have included my sources, and cut the information down to size. Fergananim (talk) 11:52, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Information being available on the iternet isn't a prerequisite but the notability of the subject has to be demonstrated. See WP:BIO.  I dont think that's been met here.--RadioFan (talk) 11:53, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Flight Aware link
I have reverted your addition of links to FlightAware as not being encyclopedic, can you please stop adding it and discuss if required at the aircraft project. Thank you. MilborneOne (talk) 14:24, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Please see discussion on your talk page.--RadioFan (talk) 14:25, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Dunas Park
Hi, sorry I have reverted your edit, but I put references in articles, okay? :) Affleck (talk) 23:55, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * These footnotes could still be made clearer, See WP:FOOTNOTES for more information.--RadioFan (talk) 23:57, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * References exist only in Portuguese, because that park is in Brazil. Affleck (talk) 00:06, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thats fine. While we are on the topic, is there an article on this subject on the Portuguese Wikipedia?--RadioFan (talk) 00:08, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but I'm not very good at English. In Portuguese Wikipedia there is the same article and it has the same references and there in the Portuguese Wikipedia they were accepted. Affleck (talk) 00:15, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * And the article will be acceptable in the English Wikipedia, if properly sourced.--RadioFan (talk) 00:25, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * You will delete? :( Affleck (talk) 00:29, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not an admin, I cant delete anything.--RadioFan (talk) 00:34, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the inconvenience. Affleck (talk) 00:37, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I found references in English and put them in the article, please see if they serve and if so, remove the tag. Thank you. Affleck (talk) 00:49, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Not an inconvenience at all. If you'd like it deleted, simply remove everything in the article and it will be marked for deletion by an admin.--RadioFan (talk) 00:49, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The new references (in English) that I raised are valid? Affleck (talk) 01:10, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Keyboard faces
Hello! I wanted to let you know that I removed the speedy deletion tag you put on Keyboard faces and redirected the page to Emoticon, as that is essentially what they were listing on the page, and it seems reasonable to me that someone might search for "Keyboard faces" when looking for "Emoticon". --Nick—Contact/Contribs 02:20, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Gustavo Marín references
Back to this after some time after having been too busy with my regular work load. I think I have finally put in the footnotes in proper style. Could you check and see if that part is okay now? Otherwise, I have one last question, and I hope that you can help. I have obtained scans of the Chilean authorities' release-to-exile form as well as of a letter from Amensty International stating they are taking charge of Gustavo Marín, hoping that I could add these to add credence to his imprisonment in Chile and Amnesty International's action in extracting him from prison to France. I am at a loss, however, as to how to add these documents. I browsed through the Upload file section in the toolbox, but was not able to determine even what category such scans would come under. Also, I am not sure, even once I have uploaded the scans, how to display them. In a footnote? As an illustration in the corresponding section of the article? I would be very grateful if you could point me in the right direction. Also, if I have completed the references part successfully, please let me thank you for all your help and support. Vedah Eulalia (talk) 16:32, 9 June 2009 (UTC)


 * References look better, the text before the cite tags really isn't necessary however. No need to overexplain it to the reader.--RadioFan (talk) 16:45, 9 June 2009 (UTC)


 * OK, I removed most of the text before the cite tags, except where I felt it was useful/informative. What about my question on the scanned documents I would like to put up as references? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vedah Eulalia (talk • contribs) 17:16, 9 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Sorry! Vedah Eulalia (talk) 17:49, 9 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi, I hope I have reached "references standards" and you will be able to remove the tag. Thanks for your amazing work. Vedah Eulalia (talk) 09:31, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Track control system
Hey I hope you don't mind I removed your tag and redirected the page as I see you did earlier. Cheers, Otis  Jimmy  One  11:59, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thats fine, but keep an eye on the article as the creator may remove the redirect as they did once before. Previous article is a copyright violation.--RadioFan (talk) 12:00, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
 * yeah I saw that. will do. Otis  Jimmy  One  12:09, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Otter (Drinking Game)
An article that you have been involved in editing, Otter (Drinking Game), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Thank you.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Dawn Bard (talk) 03:15, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Melissa Marshall
I removed your 'unreferenced' tag cos I added a reference (I linked to her IMDB profile). Lord Yaksha (talk) 11:01, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * IMDB is not a sufficient reference. Please provide some more reliable sources--RadioFan (talk) 11:03, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I would love to, but I've honestly not found anything online beyond that. What else would be suitable then? Lord Yaksha (talk) 11:11, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * If sufficient sources cannot be located then this person may not meet WP:BIO and the article is likely to be deleted.--RadioFan (talk) 11:12, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * That's silly, the credits on every episode list Melissa Marshall as the actress playing Jenny Kelly, and the wikipedia page on The Girl From Tomorrow and The Girl from Tomorrow Part II: Tomorrow's End both list Melissa Marshall as the actress who plays Jenny Kelly in the series.
 * Please read WP:BIO, it will guide you to properly sourcing this article. Simply being on a television program isn't enough to guarantee an article here.   There has to be significant coverage in 3rd party sources.--RadioFan (talk) 11:17, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * How about these two links then? [] [] Lord Yaksha (talk) 11:27, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia articles may not be used as a references. The second one is an excellent source however.--RadioFan (talk) 11:28, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Cool, glad I found something then. But, uh, I linked from classic kids tv and nfsa, not wikipedia (not in my last comment before this one, anyway). Lord Yaksha (talk) 11:32, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I've wikified that reference as a footnote. We still dont have significant coverage however and that reference only shows that this actor was in that television program.  Still a long way from meeting WP:BIO.--RadioFan (talk) 11:47, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Speedy delete thread
Rather than offer to delete what I am trying to do, why not wait for a while until you see that I have a legitimate cause for creating a page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Moonshank (talk • contribs) 12:16, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * if you are not finished editing the article, consider adding underconstruction. This lets other editors know that you are actively working on the article and plan to improve it.  This will avoid deletion tags being placed there. --RadioFan (talk) 12:19, 11 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Also, please do not remove speedy deletion tags. Add the hangon tag but dont remove the db tag.--RadioFan (talk) 12:20, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Read WP:Athlete and relative pages
An international referee is clearly within guidelines. Dr. Blofeld       White cat 12:29, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I see no mention of referees in WP:Athlete which applies to competitors only, not officiants.--RadioFan (talk) 12:31, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

If you want to waste your life hounding every new article withint 10 seconds of posting and want to bother with AFDs then I wish you the best of luck. AN international referee in tournaments such as the World Cup, Champions League and Olympics Games doesn't take a rocket scientist to rrealise that he is a notable football official. Dr. Blofeld       White cat 12:37, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I encourage you to share your thoughts on this on the article's AFD page.--RadioFan (talk) 12:40, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Speedy delete thread Youth Youth Youth

 * Why are you trying to destroy my work, adding that "speedy deletion" tag as soon as I posted it? I was writing the references while you were adding that ridiculous "speedy deletion" tag. I added references so Please remove that tag. And also, may I suggest you get a life? Terveetkadet (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:40, 12 June 2009 (UTC).

Gustavo Marín references tag
Hi RadioFan,

I see that the "references" tag is still up although I thought I had applied your instructions (took away extra text in notes, except where I thought it was warranted). Is there still something I should do or do you think you might be able to remove the tag? Thanks again for your valuable help. Vedah Eulalia (talk) 10:52, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Mitchell International, Inc.
Mitchell International publishes many auto repair guides and auto parts information. Amazon listed 126 books as of 2009/06 published by Mitchell. It's publications are widely used by auto repair shops and auto parts shops. Its auto damage assessment information is also widely used by auto insurance companies.

Would you consider removing the notability tag? Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wc721 (talk • contribs) 16:15, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Nominations
Your recent nominations such as Articles for deletion/Lowestoft Corporation Tramways and Articles for deletion/Civic culture indicate that you are being too severe. Please observe the process described at WP:BEFORE before bringing such articles to AFD. Colonel Warden (talk) 09:24, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The nomination for the article on the term "civic culture" has been withdrawn. Google news searches turned up nothing but I neglected to do a scholar search which is where the lions share of the hits are.  The AFD for the tramway operator remains open and I notice that it has some comments that are dangerously close to WP:OTHERSTUFF and WP:ILIKE.   As I noted in the nominations, I did do some basic research on the notability of these subjects and was clear in why I do not thing they meat notability requirements, which is what WP:BEFORE calls for. If you disagree with the nomination, please provide specifics in the AFD as to why.--RadioFan (talk) 03:23, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

WBGU 88.1 FM
We reviewed Wikipedia:Lists carefully before including the lists of Past GMs, PDs, and Fund Drives. It is a time line of events and influential persons. I fail to see why this is considered non-encyclopedic. The lists are embedded within the article but stand alone in their headings, organized chronologically, and can be verified through BGSU documentation. I see no support for deletion of these. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Foodlovesme (talk • contribs) 00:26, 14 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia is not a directory, if there is something relavant to say about these past GMs or PDs, then say it. A list tells readers nothing.  Also there are not any citations for this information.--RadioFan (talk) 03:13, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Gustavo Marín references tag
Hi RadioFan,

In my previous "talk" with you ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:RadioFan/Archives/2009/June#Gustavo_Mar.C3.ADn_references_tag ) my question went unanswered and that section has gone into archives.

I hope you will have the opportunity of letting me know if the references in the article are okay now, and that you will feel the tag can be removed. If not, please do tell me what I should do next. I removed most of the extra "text" in the footnotes, but felt that some was warranted, so I left that. Is that the problem?

I have put some effort, with your help, into making this article comply with Wikipedia bio standards. I hope at some point the article will be allowed to appear without a tag, which makes it seem like it's not appropriate.

I look forward to your response. Thank you in advance, Vedah Eulalia (talk) 11:11, 15 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Looks much better. I wonder if the only references available are in books though.  Is there nothing available in magazines or newspapers?  This would demonstrate a current relevance as well.--RadioFan (talk) 11:19, 15 June 2009 (UTC)


 * It didn't occur to me to look, but my only source is the Internet, as I don't have access to newspaper library archives. I'll look and get back to you.Vedah Eulalia (talk) 13:31, 15 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Ok, I've added a handful of references from newspapers and magazines, which I was able to find on line. Do let me know if there is anything I sill need to do for the reference tag to be removed. Thanks, Vedah Eulalia (talk) 15:09, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

refs
First, hello! Second, I do not understand what you mean by "unclear". I am following the standard WP:CITE policies, and both title and author names are fully and clearly visible in the "Sources" section. Could you please clarify? Cheers, Constantine  ✍  23:55, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Orange County Performing Arts Center/ Segerstrom Center For The Arts
Hi RadioFan,

I am in the process of editing the entry for the Segerstrom Center For The Arts.

You removed it stating: "This concert hall is part of the larger Orange County Performing Arts Center, redirecting there. Previous article was full of promotional language, flowery praise and did not adhere to the neutral point of view required of Wikipedia articles. A separate article is not needed."--RadioFan (talk) 23:48, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

While I respect the fact that you have been editing wikipedia for quite some time, you have incorrectly edited/deleted my entry.

Please note:

• The Orange County Performing Arts Center is a part of a larger art campus which is titled "Segerstrom Center For The Arts" which is what my entry describes.

• You stated: "This concert hall is part of the larger Orange County Performing Arts Center". Upon this campus their are two concert halls, the first is titled Segerstrom Concert Hall, and the second is the Renee And Henry Segerstrom Concert Hall. My entry was not about a concert hall, but rather a legally defined (a development agreement between the City Of Costa Mesa, OCPAC, SCR and land grants by South Coast Plaza) entity known collectively as the Segerstrom Center For The Arts.

Additionally, if you look at the page you indicated OCPAC, please scroll down to the bottom section and read the following:

Organ: The Orange County Performing Arts Center's Renée and Henry Segerstrom Concert Hall, which is part of Segerstrom Center for the Arts, has a concert organ - the William J. Gillespie Concert Organ (C.B.Fisk Opus 130. It has 4,322 pipes and 75 stops, including 57 individual voices, 4 manual keyboards with 61 notes each, 1 pedal keyboard with 32 notes. It weighs nearly 30 tons and took approximately 42,000 hours to assemble and install.

I welcome the assistance in the edit and removal of any flower/promotional language, however I respectfully ask that you do not remove the entry of Segerstrom Center For The Arts.

Thank you,

OCFilmsSean (talk) 00:32, 18 June 2009 (UTC) OCFilmsSean


 * From the above it sounds as if Orange County Performing Arts Center needs to be renamed to Segerstrom Center for the Arts then. There does not need to be 2 articles.  This will require removing Segerstrom Center for the Arts to make way for Orange County Performing Arts Center to be moved to that name, sound reasonable?--RadioFan (talk) 10:00, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

There might be clean-up to do though. JForget 01:35, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
 * It would need a source for the name change, then it could be moved to Segerstrom Center for the Arts. The website of the facility is still naming it Orange County Performing Arts Center. -- JForget 13:23, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Sounds reasonable. I'd seen a reference that spoke of "The Orange County Perfroming Arts Center now known as the Segerstrom Center for the Arts" but as we dig a bit more, its not that clear what this thing should be called. Let's stick with the current naming and change if it becomes more clear. One thing is clear, we dont need 2 articles.--RadioFan (talk) 13:27, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of two of my articles
Hi, you flagged two of my articles for speedy deletion. My apologies, I checked the guidelines and yeah, they're not really valid. Thanks for bringing that to my attention!
 * No problem, sorry you put time into them and they got deleted but thanks for actually reading the guidelines. Few people actually do that.--RadioFan (talk) 13:06, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Wirtland Thanks for all your suggestions. I will try to change my user name as well, as you suggest. Witizen (talk) 13:10, 19 June 2009 (UTC) Witizen
 * Many thanks for your comment re Wirtland. Wirtland's English page is being made after several months's existence of Bulgarian page on Wirtland, which was made by other people. It was also agreed with Wiki's editors of Micronatons category.


 * Thanks RadioFan. It is your right to delete my article, of course. I can, however, try to meet all the requirements which were listed. A micronation is a micronation, and one cannot expect a macro attention to them. However, Wirtland has got TV coverage in two of world's countries when it was just six months old. There are also endless articles in non-English countries, particularly in Bulgaria, and Bulgarian wiki article has been in place for several months now. Also, I wanted to tell that I tried to follow the model of ATLANTIUM article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantium), and I have consulted with its author George Cruickshank. He seems to be one of editors of Micronations category. Without his approval I would not have spent so much time in creating this article. I hope this time will not be wasted. Thanks and I hope you give Wirtland a chance. Regards, Witizen (talk) 21:47, 19 June 2009 (UTC)Witizen —Preceding unsigned comment added by Witizen (talk • contribs)
 * Macro attention is not necessary but it's got to meet WP:N and in grey areas, its got to be able to pass the scrutiny of an AFD. Personally I don't know if it needs to be deleted or not, that's why I brought it to that discussion.  The references do look much much better though, thanks.--RadioFan (talk) 13:32, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

P.S. I tried to change my user name as you suggested, but could not find such an option. Sorry for not being an advanced user -- it takes time :-)
 * Thanks for your edits. We have now added the needed references and sources on Wirtland. Regards, Witizen (talk) 08:14, 20 June 2009 (UTC)Witizen.
 * take a look at WP:RENAME

Talkback
- Dank (push to talk) 15:12, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Michael Jackson Video Game
The source that I used clearly says (if you read it) "Source: MJ Licensing LLC / MJJ Productions LLC" and that further details will be announced soon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mclarenaustralia (talk • contribs) 12:50, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Your source appears to be a blog, which are not appropriate references. If you could provide a link to a press release from the licensing company, a newspaper or magazine article or something else more reliable, that would be must better.--RadioFan (talk) 12:54, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * How is it a blog? if you clicked on "Back to latest news" it gives you http://www.mjdatabank.com/english_version/news/news_main_eng.htm. I have contacted the site for a source. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mclarenaustralia (talk • contribs) 13:07, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I have just contacted Sony MusicMclarenaustralia (talk) 13:26, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Let's take this to a deletion discussion so other editors may weigh in. You may share your thoughts on it from the link on the top of the article.--RadioFan (talk) 13:31, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Sea Crest Villa
Could you wait me for completing the article of Sea Crest Villa first? Ricky@36 (talk) 13:08, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * If you are actively working on an article, consider placing the underconstruction tag at the top. Otherwise it's not possible to tell it from an article which has been started and forgotten about.--RadioFan (talk) 13:09, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, could you remove the notibility tag first? The article is unrelated to the company, and the tag may be wrong. Ricky@36 (talk) 13:16, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm having difficulty seeing how this housing complex will meet Wikipedia notability guidelines. I tagged it with the notability tag to give it a chance to develop a bit more but it may be tagged by myself or other editors for deletion if not improved.--RadioFan (talk) 13:24, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * If you put notibility tag, you could help improve it. The principle of writing this kind of article is similar, why do you tag this article only, but not others? Ricky@36 (talk) 13:35, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Again, I dont see it as notable so dont see that it needs to be improved. I put the notability tag on there as a first step to give you (or other editors) a chance to improve it.  If not improved, I plan to mark it for deletion.  Please review Wikipedia notability guidelines and see if it can be brought up to these standards.  As for other articles, they are subject to the same guidelines and may be marked for deletion as well.  This article came to my attention when it was created.--RadioFan (talk) 14:11, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * A number of other articles in this category have been tagged with notability concerns. Some were not tagged because they already had references to reliable sources. Thanks for bringing this category to my attention, it's a bit of a mess.--RadioFan (talk) 14:48, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Staircase incident
I noticed that you Proded this article, and it was removed by the article creator. I would like to send it to afd but I can't create pages, so I can't finish the process. Any chance that you could do it for me? 24.99.242.63 (talk) 13:31, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Better yet, I tagged it for speedy deletion.--RadioFan (talk) 13:35, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

The Dukeries College‎
I see you declined this move delete. Could you expand on why on it's talk page? The need for the move is described there.--RadioFan (talk) 12:20, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah, I didn't see the talk page comment. It's deleted now. For future use, try . Stifle (talk) 13:01, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Will do, thanks for the help.--RadioFan (talk) 14:06, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Adminship?
Given the large number of high-quality edits, you might want to run for adminship at your 6-month anniversary, which looks like September to me. (Watchlisting) - Dank (push to talk) 18:27, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I've been giving that some thought, thanks for the note. I'd appreciate your support and a nomination when the time comes. --RadioFan (talk) 18:52, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Sometimes RFA voters insist on knowing previous usernames, sometimes they don't ... and I don't have a clue whether they will or won't in this case. For instance, a lot of voters were willing to support Majorly without finding out the names of two of his alternate accounts.  That might mean that RFA will never work for you ... on the other hand, it might mean you can run sooner, if you reveal the previous username and there are sufficient edits under that username. - Dank (push to talk) 19:08, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * P.S. I've never nommed or co-nommed at RFA, and I don't want to start. I'll be happy to give you a strong support, though, based on what I've seen so far. - Dank (push to talk) 19:10, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Understood, thanks again for the suggestion. I'll try not to get banned between now and then ;) --RadioFan (talk) 19:19, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Looking at the next section ... if you don't mind talking about the previous username, you might be able to run for RFA soon-ish. If you do mind, I can hunt up an oversighter to ask their advice on removing the edit that mentions the username and getting it erased from the history of this page. - Dank (push to talk) 19:40, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Also ... these questions can be difficult, especially if RFA is in your future. I see your email isn't enabled, but mine is, in case you want to discuss any of this privately. - Dank (push to talk) 19:56, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Something of Interest
Going back through my watchlist looking for something, I came across a block on your old username. According to the block log it is for "abuse" and was issued by Nishkid64. The block was was issued on June 19th, though you haven't edited on that name since February 19th. Just thought I would bring this to your attention. -  NeutralHomer •  Talk  • 19:24, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up, had no idea that had happened. I pinged the blocking admin for more info.--RadioFan (talk) 19:35, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that one left my scratching my head as well. If you find out what the reason was, I would be curious to know as well. -  NeutralHomer  •  Talk  • 19:48, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Aberdeen Middle School
Hey, I noticed that you deleted this article rather quickly. If you looked through Harford County Public Schools Template Page you would have noticed that there has been a Bel Air Middle School for some time now. I understand that people rarely go through the primary schools, but why would one be there and not the other, I see no point.

Looking forward to your response,

RickNightCrawler (talk) 19:37, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

from Cynthia Brian RE: Be the Star You Are! for TEENS
Hi Radio Fan: Please don't delete the information about the new book, Be the Star You Are! for TEENS. I own the copyright, I placed the text. If you have any questions, email me, please via my web site at cynthiabrian.com. Am new to wikipedia and find it really difficult to navigate. Thanks, Cynthia Brian, Author of Be the Star You Are! for TEENS
 * There are a number of problems here. Unfortunately we'll need more than "I own the copyright" to simply cut and past the press release into a wikipedia article, Copyrights is a good starting point for this sometime complex topic.  As the author, you have a conflict of interest and shouldn't be editing this page.  Also, wikipedia is not here to promote you book. If it can meet notability guidelines someone will create the article.  If you could sign your post above, I can provide some more information on Conflict of interest that may be helpful.--RadioFan (talk) 20:12, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Rtphokie
The block wasn't meant for you. Unfortunately, your previous account "Rtphokie" was recreated by a banned user ("08:58, 24 March 2009 Rtphokie (talk | contribs | block) new user account") and subsequently used for e-mail spamming. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 19:59, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the info. I'll file this away for later as I'm considering applying for admin privledges and I'm sure this will come up.--RadioFan (talk) 20:06, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Speedy Delete
You speedy deleted a new page I just created. Please explain why you felt the compulsion to do so. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ChiRed (talk • contribs)
 * what article are you referring to?--RadioFan (talk) 20:29, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The user is referring to this article. I left them a comment on the talk. MS   (Talk | Contributions)  21:04, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the help--RadioFan (talk) 21:08, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

He Merry Thoughts

 * I have reverted this deletion as we are still waiting on the page move from He Merry Thoughts to The Merry Thoughts after the page move goof. -  NeutralHomer •  Talk  • 03:21, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thats good too.--RadioFan (talk) 03:22, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * When the page move is complete, I will readd your deletion template for He Merry Thoughts. -  NeutralHomer •  Talk  • 03:23, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I have moved the pages back to where they belong at The Merry Thoughts and tagged the "goofed" redirect, He Merry Thoughts, with the PROD tag you added previously to both the article page and talk page. You can update the tags as necessary now. -  NeutralHomer  •  Talk  • 04:16, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Upcoming Broadway Shows
The created removed the PROD tag and I submitted for a speedy deletion. If you want, feel free to leave a comment on the talk page. Just so you know I'm not looking for you to agree with me. I'm only asking you if you have something to add because you were the one who originally filed for deletion. MS  (Talk | Contributions)  04:19, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Pat Roberts Intelligence Scholars Program
So you drive-by merge tag the three-minute old article, and then in response to my pointing that out on the talk page, (I also noted that I expect more information), you not only don't remove the tag, but slap a WP:OWN template on my talk page, and then complain I didn't use an "under construction" template for a page tagged "stub". WP:BITE, much??? I'm an experienced contributor, this merely annoys me, how do you think a newbie would feel? Perhaps you're spending too much time on RC Patrol (a skim of your history suggests a *very* large proportion of doing that), it's extremely healthy to take breaks from that and do other Wikipedia things. regards, Disembrangler (talk) 05:57, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * We aren't talking about a deletion tag here, we aren't talking about removing or significantly reworking portions of the article, we are talking about a discussion on merging the article into an existing article. I'm having problems seeing how this fits WP:BITE.  Dont take any of these the wrong way, the merge tag is a suggestion that needs discussion, the underconstruction tag is also a suggestion, it helps avoid problems like this and that was a reminder about ownership of articles, not an accusation.  Lets focus on the article and discuss the merge on it's talk page. --RadioFan (talk) 11:26, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Stub vs Expand
No need for the expand template, it's implied, given the stub template. I think that's on Expand somewhere. - Jarry1250 (t, c, rfa) 11:14, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Apologies if you were merely drawing attention to the programming problem which resulted in the and so forth. - Jarry1250 (t, c, rfa) 11:17, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that was my intention. There were a lot of these articles created this morning.  The stub tag does imply expansion is needed but it's often forgotten.  Since this was a particular problem I thought it worth adding the expand. --RadioFan (talk) 11:19, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for fixing up those problems. Just wanted to make sure they didn't get forgotten.  It's hard to tell if articles are being actively worked when newly created or added and then forgotten.  Tags help us keep up with what needs to be done to make them the best they can be.--RadioFan (talk) 11:22, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Power spikes
There was already a relatively adequate article on this topic at Voltage spike, so I converted the prodded article into a redirect. --  Blanchardb - Me•MyEars•MyMouth - timed 14:42, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Good find, I completely agree.--RadioFan (talk) 14:45, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Walter Henry Snell
Walter Henry Snell article was requested as high priority at --Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:14, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
 * It still needs to pass notability guidelines.--RadioFan (talk) 13:16, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

I noticed that you put a speedy delete on it 2 minutes after I created it. It has references and the subject is certainly notable.--Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:17, 27 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Please read the tag, it is a proposed deletion not a speedy deletion request. If this person has made significant impact on his field, they might be notable but that's not clear from the article as it stands. Please read WP:PROF for notability guidelines for professors. --RadioFan (talk) 13:33, 27 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Okay, go ahead and zap it. They guy also goes by the name Wally Snell. --Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:50, 27 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Good catch, I've redirected it to the existing article. If you have additional info to add on his work as a scientist, add it to that article.  That section is rather limited as of now.--RadioFan (talk) 13:57, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Tova Magnusson-Norling nominated for speedy deletion
Did you look at the provided external link to her entry at IMDb before nominating the article for speedy deletion? --Bensin (talk) 14:38, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, IMDB isn't considered a reliable source for wikipedia articles. Please refer to WP:BIO for guidance on how you might be able to make this article meet notability guidelines.--RadioFan (talk) 14:39, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, I think that refers to the info on IMDb's trivia-pages. The entries for films are accurate enough. The 38 entries on Magnusson-Norling's page is not pure fabrication :-) She is a well known actress in Sweden. --Bensin (talk) 14:54, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
 * If she's well known, then certainly there are reliable sources that you can use other than IMDB? IMDB is not considered reliable because, like wikipedia, anyone can edit it.--RadioFan (talk) 14:58, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I disagree with you somewhat as I don't think IMDb should be totally discarded. IMDb is not as easily edited as WP. I did however add a source to a newspaper. --Bensin (talk) 15:10, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Museum of Wisconsin Art
Just saying thanks for the cleanup! Suggestions welcome.NathanielS (talk) 15:13, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem. This could be a good article, keep updating it.--RadioFan (talk) 15:14, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Richard Southern (theatre designer)
Let me tell you, User:RadioFan - I had written a pretty extensive page with highly relevant bio info (nowhere near complete, but extensive and showing notability) - and didn't Create the page because I was so involved in adding to it (and am under pressure with a neglected RL deadline). And then, oops, I closed the browser tab, being still unfamiliar with the newly downloaded IE 8. All that work needs to be reconstructed with time I don't have. I created a skeleton with links chock-full of notable content and hit "Save" before going on to work on the Selected bibliography. That's when I got your so-proper message. Give a girl a break, huh? I'm going to remove the tag and spend more precious time plugging in the most notable content. Take a look, please, at Talk:R. W. Southern that was the start of all this (and posted to the Humanities Ref Desk to recruit help from other knowledgeable editors). A lot of work is going into this; too bad my edit summaries weren't worded effectively to satisfy your standards. I'll know better for the future. -- Deborahjay (talk) 14:52, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry this upset you but this article must be treated like any other article. If this person is notable, then so be it but it doesn't appear so at the moment.  I opted for the less harsh proposed deletion rather than speedy deletion to give you or any other editor 7 days to improve the article to the point that it might meet WP:BIO.  I encourage you to read that guideline for information on the standards used to determine what stays and what goes when concerns are brought up.  Before you get too upset, I also encourage you to read the proposed deletion notice at the top of the article to understand exactly what this means.--RadioFan (talk) 14:57, 27 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you - I had read the "proposed deletion" regimen and realized that this was a procedure that gave me some slack to preserve the work I'd put in. I hope you realize from the tone of what I wrote above (smack in the midst of reconstructing lost work, something that "never happens to me") that the timing of your intervention was the proverbial "adding insult to injury"... so I chose to take the time now rather than pile up any more impossible tasks. Sadder but wiser... Cheers, Deborahjay (talk) 15:29, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Monique Lanier
sorry, I know & have not used the data.

I "plugged" it in as I have written to the lady herself & wanted a base to start from
 * I'm sorry but I dont understand your comment above, could you expand on it?--RadioFan (talk) 15:31, 27 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I wanted something to start from as I have asked Monique to provide me with the actual list. My deletion was neither Hostile or Vandalism, your remarks upset me as i as trying to do my best & I don't feel it warranted it

I have removed your prod
Hi there, I've removed your prod from Murder of David Lynn Harris, on the basis that the page is not a news report. It is a notable event (try some google searches, the results are massive). Please feel free to AfD, but do read Notability (news events) and/or Notability (criminal acts). Cheers - Kingpin13 (talk) 15:38, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note, I've taken it to AFD, lets get some other opinions on it.--RadioFan (talk) 15:41, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Chefs
I declined your speedy on one of these chef articles, as there is the faintest hint of notability and further investigation is probably warranted for all of the articles listed there. Cheers, - Jarry1250 [ humourous – discuss ] 15:55, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I dont doubt that there is some possibility of notabilty here, but what about the copyright concerns? Have you removed the versions from history in each of these articles which include copyrighted material?  --RadioFan (talk) 16:39, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
 * All the "copyrighted" material was (having been legitimately tagged as such) released under GFDL and CC via a message on the website in question, so you needn't worry about that. - Jarry1250 [ humourous – discuss ] 16:42, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Are you referring to the claim of Creative Commons Sharealike license made here: Talk:Zack Grumet, I and another editor have concerns about that. There is no evidence that such a license applies to these pages, in fact there is a copyright notice at the bottom of the pages that were originally copied from.  I have no problem with the articles being rewritten to conform to wikipedia standards rather than deleted if thats what you feel is best but all offending copyrighted versions need to be removed in that case.--RadioFan (talk) 16:45, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
 * No, the one now placed on all appropriate web pages. - Jarry1250 [ humourous – discuss ] 16:47, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Wow, that's new, makes me wonder about COI now that got updated so quickly. Thanks for clearing that up.--RadioFan (talk) 17:15, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Hugo Debaere
Hello RadioFan. I was adding some extra references on this page. Can you remove the banner, please? Thank you very much--Vingerhoet (talk) 09:21, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for adding those but for clarity they need to be footnoted rather than just bulleted in one big section. This allows readers to know which of these items was used to reference the information you placed in the article.  See WP:CITE and WP:FOOTNOTE for more information.--RadioFan (talk) 13:13, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Never did such thing, but I will try it later on--Vingerhoet (talk) 14:19, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

ExtUSB
Hello RadioFan. I was simply trying to create a new page for ExtUSB as what applies to USB for data transfer also applies to ExtUSB, but I found that the USB page was already incredibly long and adding a log of devices that use this proprietary plug, the pinout, the use of the different pins, revision of the new ExtUSB format and etc. would simply make the USB page longer without being directly relevant to the USB page (since it is about ExtUSB).
 * I think it would be best to discuss this on Talk:Universal Serial Bus before creating a new page or adding that kind of information. Since this is a proprietary technology, there may be copyright concerns with details such as pinouts.--RadioFan (talk) 13:07, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion of Berry Street
Wow! That really was a speedy deletion!! I hadn't even had a chance to come back to tidy it up and add additional content. Berry Street is one of the oldest charities on the planet. You seem to have quite an itchy trigger finger there RadioFan!! Is there some way to restore what was previously done so I can continue with my edits??Blippy (talk) 01:56, 28 June 2009 (UTC)


 * You seem to have quite an itchy trigger finger there RadioFan!!


 * I couldn't agree more.... There is a huge difference between people starting edits & the finished article & I don't believe that you always see this. We all add articles to Wikipedia for free & in the main with the best intentions, I can only assume that you enjoy deleting other people's hard work.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tentheagle (talk • contribs) 08:07, 28 June 2009 (UTC)


 * ... And I agree too. Please reserve the template for speedy deletion for the cases where it is really warranted and consider using cleanup-templates instead where applicable. In the case of Tova Magnusson-Norling above perhaps would have been a better choice? If an unfinished article is deleted then someones work is lost. If it turns out the article actually did meet the criteria for inclusion, then the time spent on the article is lost. That's time better used on improving articles. We all work on the articles on our spare time and no one wants to see that time go to waste. :-) --Bensin (talk) 13:29, 28 June 2009 (UTC)


 * This is probably not the place for such a discussion, however, I feel it would be best to put a time frame on the speedy delete notice. When someone spends time to create an article and then sees this big red notice, they get upset. They may also feel that it may be deleted any second. If the notice states 48 hours to demonstrate the article is worthy, I think people would feel better about it.--Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:57, 28 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Also, RadioFan, I know you have a tough job. Your are like the executioner for Wikipedia. People come to your dungeon to plead for the life of their child. It's a dirty job, but somebody's got to do it, and without pay. So folks, please don't be too hard on RadioFan. A tough vetting process is vital for Wikipedia.--Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:57, 28 June 2009 (UTC)


 * "Your are like the executioner for Wikipedia. People come to your dungeon to plead for the life of their child. It's a dirty job, but somebody's got to do it" FAIR POINT Steve Bowen (talk) 16:45, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Anabuki Construction
You tagged Anabuki Construction for speedy deletion. Could you please explain? --Apoc2400 (talk) 21:48, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The article does not meet notability guidelines, specifically WP:CORP. If you disagree, please read the tag for instructions on how to proceed or the article will quickly be deleted.--RadioFan (talk) 21:56, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I know the notability guideline, and Anabuki Construction definitely notable enough. The article is short, because I don't have time to write a longer one now. --Apoc2400 (talk) 22:02, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
 * You should probably wait until you have the time to write an article which demonstrates the notability of the subject, or wait for someone else to.--RadioFan (talk) 22:06, 28 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Why would I have to do that? Stubs are useful too. Novella nelson and Harry Roseland that you tagged are also notable. Please pay attention before you tag articles for deletion. --Apoc2400 (talk) 22:16, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Harry Roseland
Would it be too much to ask that you give someone, oh, say, five minutes to work on an article before you prod it? If you're that concerned that an another editor (with years more experience and twice as many edits as yourself) might be posting a piece of trash, then why don't you put it on your watchlist and come back later? For pete's sake. Un sch ool 21:44, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Please look at it from the point of view of other editors. It's impossible for anyone but you to tell that you are not done with the article unless you make that known.  As it stands it looks like so many other articles that are created with the most basic information, and totally without references.  If you intend to improve it and bring it up to the point where it meets WP:BIO, you should consider adding underconstruction so editors like myself can tell it from an article that someone intends on making meet wikipedia guidelines and one which was created and forgotten.--RadioFan (talk) 21:53, 28 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Post it as "under construction"? Maybe if it was by some newbie editor who created his account five days ago and has 23 edits to his name, but given my tenure here, it's a lot more reasonable for you to presume that the article was under construction in the same minute that it was created.  You prodded it literally one minute after I created it.  How many articles are created en toto?  90% of articles get multiple posts done on them by their writers in the first hour.  That's why I say to put it on your watchlist and come back.


 * Everyone has their own style of working on Wikipedia. Let me tell you something about mine.  When I see an edit (or article creation) that is questionable, but which might be legit, I take 30 seconds and dig a little further.  How established is the editor in question?  If it is someone who has a few hundred edits, I might go ahead and revert or prod or whatever.  But if it is someone who has 30,000 edits and has been around for several years and a clean block history, then I either watchlist it to come back later, or I go to their talk page and alert them of my concern.  Often they have a plausible explanation that I could not see at the time, if not, then I go ahead and take the steps I think are justified.


 * What you did is simply rude and unnecessary. You made the assumption that I don't know jack, despite how long I've been around, and threw mud at my article.  And now, instead of working on the article, my time is being wasted replying to your completely unnecessary prod.  Thanks a heap.  Un sch ool  22:08, 28 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry you feel that way. I've added the underconstruction tag so other editors wont make the same mistake I did.   If your style includes posting incomplete articles, perhaps you should consider creating them under your Username (i.e. User:Unschool/Harry Roseland) until they are ready for the main article space.  Notabilty guidelines apply to all articles regardless of the experience level of the creator.  This is a prod so all you need do is remove the prod with a brief description that you plan to continue editing it over the next few hours/days.  I agree that arguing the point here is less productive than improving the article, let's focus on improving the articles.--RadioFan (talk) 22:17, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

--RadioFan (talk) 22:13, 28 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Okay, I'm a bit less agitated now. I was dealing with thunderstorms cutting out my power; very annoying.  I invite you to look at Harry Roseland and if at this point you wish to prod it, I will respect (and respectfully disagree with) your decision.
 * I've thought about our exchange, and I'd like to share my thoughts, in the interest of helping one or both of us develop into better editors.
 * If you intend to improve it and bring it up to the point where it meets WP:BIO, you should consider adding underconstruction.
 * This was a reasonable suggestion, one which I should not have dismissed so quickly. I simply knew that I would have taken additional steps that would have resulted in my not placing the prod, and so presumed that you should have done the same.  An unfair assumption, for which I apologize.  I will probably take this step next time.
 * perhaps you should consider creating them under your Username (i.e. User:Unschool/Harry Roseland) until they are ready for the main article space
 * This in fact is the practice, of course, of many editors. It is also not the practice of what I perceive to be an even greater number of editors.  As you know, there are many editors who peruse the new articles that pop up.  Some of them seek to delete garbage (an entirely honorable—indeed, vital—function), whilst others look for article building in which they can participate.  I love watching other editors collaborate in the building of a new article with me; that is one reason why I do not choose to develop in my userspace.  At no time is an article's content and format more fluid than when it is originally created, and other editors have sometimes moved my projects in directions I had not forseen.  And in fact, while my power was out, two or three other editors came along and made significant contributions to this article.  They saw that it was fertile territory to which they could add, and they did so.  That would not as likely happen if I created it in my userspace.  Mind you, I don't depricate the creation of articles in one's own userspace, it's just not the style that I follow.
 * If your style includes posting incomplete articles.
 * Hmmm. This was a bit snooty on your part, wasn't it, mate?  When has any article—new or otherwise—been "complete" on Wikipedia?
 * Notabilty guidelines apply to all articles regardless of the experience level of the creator.
 * Well of course they do, but I said nothing otherwise. I merely pointed out that the liklihood of a newbie posting a proddable piece of crap is higher than that of an experienced editor.  Look, if I was to be walking down the hallway of a building and found a man with a knife poised to cut into the throat of a man lying on the floor, my reaction would be completely different if he was dressed and smelled like a homeless bum (my reaction:  shove him off the prone man and start kicking him anywhere I could) than if he was to have a stethoscope around his neck and was dressed in a doctor's white lab jacket with a nametag that said "David Jones, M.D." (my reaction:  ask the man with the knife what is going on, or perhaps ask if he could use some lay assistance with the tracheotomy).  Sure, sure, the cops would understand my explanation if I kicked the doctor in the head and rendered him unconscious, but they'd also wonder why I hadn't exercised some discretion.
 * It's clear to me that you're an intelligent, articulate, and well-intended editor. So nothing that I say here should be construed to mean that I think you have done anything wrong.  But we can all stand to learn more about how our fellow editors operate, in the interest of reducing future friction, n'est-ce pas?  Happy editing, RadioFan. Un sch <font color="7ED324">ool  01:12, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

A_Net_Station
Hi RadioFan. I created A_Net_Station some time back. It's the Antarctica-based station. Please don't delete it! Ha ha. Just joking. As you are a radio fan, I was wondering if you could perhaps give it a quick visit and tell me if I am missing any thingies (radio-related see alsos, tags, cats, etc). Thanks.--Anna Frodesiak (talk) 14:04, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Since its an internet station, there isn't much from the traditional radio station articles that can be added. You've got enough there to demonstrate notability, so it should be safe from deletion, but there are some unreferenced claims in there that need some attention.  I'll wikify the references.--RadioFan (talk) 21:23, 28 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you kindly for taking the time, especially with the references. I am very grateful.--Anna Frodesiak (talk) 02:11, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Novella nelson
For what it's worth, I agree with your call on this article. But note, it doesn't even tell what the article is about (let alone establish notability), and it was the first and only edit ever made by the editor in question.<font color="52A249">Un <font color="23CE40">sch <font color="7ED324">ool 01:54, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Gustavo Marín references tag
Hi RadioFan,

I'm afraid I'm getting kind of confused here. My User-contributions page says I contributed to your User-talk page on June 15th, but when I search your User-talk archive, all I can find is my last comment on June 10th: .

Whatever the case, the No-footnotes tag is still displayed in the article,

so my question remains: Have I reached Wikipedia references standards? If so, could you remove the tag? If not, what can I do further?

Sorry for my insistence! I'd just like to know whether I've done the job properly and be able move on to something else. Thank you for your reply, and forgive me if you have already replied elsewhere (but I can't find where).

Vedah Eulalia (talk) 10:08, 29 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Your comments were not on my talk page any longer because my talk page is periodically archived when a section is unchanged for a period of time. I've removed the footnotes tag and wikified the sections a bit.  I would suggest that the list of external links be footnoted if they were used as sources in the article at all. Also, the book references are fine but the others would be more readable if you use the cite tag, see WP:CITE for more information.--RadioFan (talk) 11:25, 29 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for everything!Vedah Eulalia (talk) 13:13, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

999 Refutation
Hey there. I noticed you marked my new page for deletion. Please don't dismiss things just because you disagree with them. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nameuserrandom1234 (talk • contribs) 03:45, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The issue isn't whether any editor agrees with it or not, it's whether it's properly referenced so that it meets wikipedia notability guidelines. An admin agreed with this proposed deletion and removed the article.  You commented in this article that you couldn't find references and didn't have time to look.  Please don't leave the task of properly sourcing articles you create to other editors, it will only lead to the article being deleted.--RadioFan (talk) 11:15, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Persson Motorsport
Hi there! The reference that I have added to Persson Motorsport is not a primary reference, as you seem to be suggesting. Auto Evolution has profiles on teams participating in all major motorsport categories across the world, and therefore is not a primary reference. In fact, I couldn't give you a primary reference even if you wanted it because Persson don't have their own website. Cheers Petera93  (talk)  11:57, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note, the tag has been removed. The article still needs additional references to verify it's notability however.--RadioFan (talk) 11:59, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks - I'll see what I can do - Petera93  (talk)  12:01, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Marking Adam Kennedy (Programmer) for deletion
Hi RadioFan,

Thank you for your speedy concern in flagging this new article for deletion due to WP:BIO, but Adam Kennedy is indeed a significant contributor to the Perl community and many references are cited.

Please advise how you would like to see the article improved.

Stennie (talk) 12:17, 30 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I've heard of him myself but without references to significant coverage in 3rd party verifiable sources, unfortunately he wont meet WP:BIO--RadioFan (talk) 12:36, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi RadioFan,

Can you clarify what references are needed? Love to oblige, but not sure what you're after.

Would have thought that included links to:

- CPAN leaderboard: http://thegestalt.org/simon/perl/wholecpan.html - Ohloh contributions: http://www.ohloh.net/accounts/adamk ( 3430 commits to CPAN modules, 822 to Padre, ranked 1107 of 225821, ..)

.. etc, would sufficiently demonstrate the vast scope of contributions and impact on the Perl community?

Stennie (talk) 12:54, 30 June 2009 (UTC)


 * These sources are bordering on self published. I'm not finding reliable sources in more mainstream sources such as newspapers, magazines, journals or books.--RadioFan (talk) 13:17, 30 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Hrm .. pretty hard to fake thousands of commits or module releases, but I guess those are necessarily self-published.
 * Some tangential references in:
 * http://www.zdnetasia.com/news/software/0,39044164,62035846,00.htm
 * http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/270267/-z_programming_languages_perl?pp=3&fp=&fpid=
 * ... but guess there's only support for pedantic qualifiers, so go ahead and delete if you must.
 * Stennie (talk) 14:14, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * ... but guess there's only support for pedantic qualifiers, so go ahead and delete if you must.
 * Stennie (talk) 14:14, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Stennie (talk) 14:14, 30 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I dont have the power to delete articles, only bring them up for discussion. An admin deletes articles once the discussion is complete.--RadioFan (talk) 14:16, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

page redirection
Hi! You redirected the page which I made today-"What do you see" single. But your redirection is not properly, because there is no any concerning to the "Cause and Effect (album)" by Human Drama. This is a single by Cause and Effcet synthpop band. It was taken from their first album "Cause&Effect". Please undo your correction. Thanks. Romazan (talk) 14:49, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I think I understand what you are saying, check the redirect and let me know if it's correct now.--RadioFan (talk) 14:54, 30 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Sorry for my english, it's not very good. Now redirection is good, BUT I have made the page with information about band's single, like track listing, producers and ect. You redirection takes to the album, not to the single. I think it don't need redirection. I think you have made the redirection at the same time I have typed some info in it. Now I put it back.

Romazan (talk) 15:13, 30 June 2009 (UTC)


 * The single doesn't meet the guidelines at WP:NSONGS and should be redirected to the album as a result.--RadioFan (talk) 16:22, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

question regarding notability and deletion
I recently created a page in which you raised a question on whether it met notability guidelines. If the notability issue is ambiguous and I, as the creator of the page wish to delete the entry, please let me know if I can do it myself.

donnavt —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.170.36.66 (talk) 19:29, 30 June 2009 (UTC)


 * If you are the only substantial editor on the article and you blank it, it will be marked for deletion. Which article are we talking about?--RadioFan (talk) 20:04, 30 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Anant Sundaram. After I saw your comments, I did edit it, but I think I should delete it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Donnavt (talk • contribs) 20:11, 30 June 2009 (UTC)