User talk:Maustrauser

 Please click here to leave me a new message, or click the + tab at the top of the page.

Earlier material archived here: My Archives

IF YOU MAKE COMMENTS ON THIS PAGE I WILL RESPOND TO YOU ON THIS PAGE. PLEASE ADD IT TO YOUR WATCHLIST.

Vibraimage
Please do AfD Vibraimage. I'll second it. Besides the lack of notability, the article suffers from COI issues. -- Shunpiker 07:41, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Discussion moved to Talk:Vibraimage Anthony Appleyard 07:47, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Visvesvaraya National Institute of Technology
I would like to know what part of the article, do you think seems like advertisement, so that i can try to change it. I think it has only information relevant to the institute The source of almost all the information in the article is the institute website. Please mark those points as well which you think should be referenced. I am currently a student of the institute, so i can tell u that, i have made my sincere efforts to keep the article as true as possible. Although there might some points which may not be available as reference from any web-based source but can be verified from the institute. So please guide me to help it make better. --Sarafankit 18:22, 9 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your comment. It's great that you wish to improve the article.  A few pointers for you.  The use of adjectives should be kept to a minimum, unless they are quotes from independent third parties.  For example, under 'Academics': "The institution has an excellent scholastic atmosphere which helps the students in achieving great heights in the pursuit of academic accomplishments..."  This is an assertion.  How do we know this?  If this was a referenced quote from someone then it would be fine to include, but it isn't, so it should be deleted.  Similarly, under infrastructure the article says: "The institute has a beautiful campus of about 214 acres..."  Who thinks it's beautiful?  The last sentence of that paragraph about the richness of the flora and fauna should be sufficient.  It is a fact and not an opinion and thus is acceptable.  If much of the article is taken from the website, be careful that it isn't a copyright violation.  If it is, the entire article can be deleted.  Good luck with your changes, I'll look forward to seeing them. Maustrauser 23:26, 9 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your response. I will work on the aspects you have mentioned. Regarding the source of information, i meant all the information is available on the website and it wasnt directly copied from it, the information is not in consolidated form on the website.--Sarafankit 07:30, 10 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I have cleaned up the article, please have a look at it and let me know all specific points you want to be clarified. If you are satisfied with the cleanup please remove the tags.--Sarafankit 09:53, 11 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Tags removed. Good work.  A pleasure working with you. Maustrauser 10:13, 11 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks, same here.--Sarafankit 10:18, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Sergio Calligaris
Hi, I wrote in the talk page of the article in question but was not sure whether it was the right place so I tried here as well! I am sorry that what I wrote sounded an advertisement: of course it was not my intention to make it sound like that! As for the adjectives being used (and the lack of references you pointed out), I thought the the external links under the various headings were enough. Could you please indicate me ways to improve the article? Thank you for your patience. Aquilante74
 * G'day. I'm delighted that you wish to improve the article.  A few tips to start with.  Remove all the adjectives unless they can be cited.  For example, in the first para we discover he is "world-famous".  Who says?  I reckon he may be famous amongst pianists, but he's not known in Rwanda or the Tasmanian town of Strachan.  WP is a world encyclopaedia so it has to be written from a world perspective and with a neutral point of view.  Further we find that he studied with "Renowned masters."  If they are renowned it is surprising so few of them have entries in WP.  Later we here his style is characterized by "sheer brilliance" and "detailed attention".  Who says?  Why should we believe them?  All these statements, if they are to remain need to be footnoted.  It is not acceptable to require the reader to simply go and read other reviews in the external links.


 * A bigger concern is that nearly all the information seems to be taken from Calligaris' own website: http://calligaris.carisch.it/scalen/bioen.htm This is going close to a copyright violation but also raises questions about the material's veracity.  The best sources are from independent third parties and not from the subject of the article.  With regard to the adjectives noted above, as the material mostly comes from his website it seems that it is Calligaris who is calling himself "world famous" and "renowned."  This doesn't look good.  Your best bet is to find external reviews and comments and use those, rather than Calligaris own website.  Do check how notable he really is before putting lots of effort into this bio.  He only receives fewer than 1300 google hits and thus may not even meet WP:Notability standards. Maustrauser 23:44, 9 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi Maustrauser! Thank you for your helpful and detailed reply. I know understand much better where your concerns lie and how to address them. They all make sense. I will be undertaking this over the next couple of weeks (I am very close to complete my PhD and have my mind on other things also!); so if you could remain a little patient and do not classify the article for speed-deletion I would be very grateful. In the meantime, thank you again, best wishes Alessandra 12:28, 10 February 2007 (UTC)


 * No problems. Good luck with the PhD! Maustrauser 12:34, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Reverts on Adam shepherd
If you just keep reverting his edits without telling him why in comments, or on his talk page, he's just going to keep doing it. At least if there are warnings on the talk page, there will be a history of this behaviour for other editors to see. NipokNek 12:19, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Quite right. Just sometimes I get sick and tired of vandals wasting my time and therefore I couldn't be bothered.  I think I'll just go to bed. Maustrauser 12:22, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Maybe this can help?
If you change those Jon Hammond tags to copyvios for "http://www.jonhammondband.com/bio.html", it's a lot harder to argue with than a Spam tag. NipokNek 12:46, 11 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you! He's creating them faster than I can tag 'em.  Goodnight! Maustrauser 12:47, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for February 12th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:20, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Who's who?
Ha ha ha. And this led me to various other silliness: this page suggests that one might keep an eye on crap pretenders to the "Who's Who" title. -- Hoary 09:04, 14 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Aren't they impressive! I was most impressed... as you can tell by the article. Maustrauser 09:13, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

pregnancy
I see you're a regular editor of Pregnancy, so I thought I'd bug you for a 2nd opinion. Shouldn't there be a disambiguation link at the top of the article for Knocked Up to pregnancy, something along the lines of 'Knocked up is also slang for ..' or am I wrong? Cornell Rockey 15:49, 14 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Quite right! I've put one in.  Cheers Maustrauser 21:22, 14 February 2007 (UTC)


 * And I got a more specific disambiguation template in there. If you want a list of them in the future, you can find them here: Template_messages/General.  Happy wikipedia-ing. Cornell Rockey 22:14, 14 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Much better than mine. Thanks so much.  There are many useful templates around here and half the time I can't find them when I want them.  Much obliged for the link.  Cheers Maustrauser 22:42, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

evolution userbox
I've got them on a sub-page; check here > User:Cornellrockey/Userboxes. The text in the evolution one is self modified (you can change it yourself it yourself) based upon a userbox I stole from someone else's userpage after the German solution was put in to place. Best of luck. Cornell Rockey 03:44, 15 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks very much. I like it as it is so I won't change it. Maustrauser 04:16, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Moose (drinking game)
Hi, please see the new comments in the AFD. Thanks --AW 16:21, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

question
Why did you immediately delete my recent contribution to the Count of St Germain page, which given the duration of the post, you didn't even have time to verify, and which does not appear to be a bot? You suggest that the deletion be discussed on the "talk" page, but you left no message there. Are you some kind of Count of St Germain protector? What is your alleged justification? Saudade7 10:52, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Nope. Just that the link added nothing more than was already in the WP article and it was unreferenced and uncited as per WP:EL.Maustrauser 11:37, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Another Question
So, if you are not using a bot, how do you *personally* make so many corrections all day long? I looked at your contributions and they are constant and occur approx every 3 minutes, and yet all the edits are marked m instead of b. And the alacrity of those edits suggests that you get some kind of feed as to where people are adding things so you can get there and check it out right away. How do you do that without a bot? And if you are using a bot why is it m and not b?

I won't add my link again. I thought it added something new after looking at what was there, but I have lot of other things I should be doing! Personally, I don't know how you can still have functioning eyeballs if you are really on here as much as you appear to be!

thanks, Saudade7 12:07, 16 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes it's a worry. I suffer from WP addiction.  I don't use a bot.  I'm a fast reader.  It also becomes easy after a while spotting vandalism in the RC pages where most of my edits come from.  Cheers Maustrauser 21:27, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Kothay
FYI: User:Jobart removed your speedy delete tag from the Kothay article. He's busy editing it right now so I'm going to wait an hour and I'll watch the article to see if it becomes "notable", if not then I'll re-tag it. Thomas Dzubin Talk 13:17, 18 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that. Much obliged.  I'm off to bed! Maustrauser 13:26, 18 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately he has made it sound even more like a Myspace entry. And keeps removing my tags for speedy delete as well. Stui 16:59, 18 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Morning comes and it is solved! Thanks for the work! Maustrauser 22:08, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Talk page archive
Hello, I believe you mistakenly created your talk page archive in the main space by putting paranthesis around it. I have moved it to User talk:Maustrauser/Archives2, I hope you don't mind. - Running On  Brains  07:41, 19 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh dear. What a stupid blunder.  Thanks so much for fixing it for me! Maustrauser 09:23, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Metro Standings
Hello, I am the builder of the page as well as the starter. I noticed your question of notability and context this afternoon. I just started the article. The league in question was over 50 year old and became a famous junior A league in Ontario... I will expand and source it as I go. All information on the article is from reliable sources and they will be listed. The importance of this league is that is now 50% of the current provincial league and that it was a famous league in the Toronto area that actually Wayne Gretzky, Ken Dryden, Bryan Gionta, Mike Danton... ...etc... ... got their start in.

I realize it looks a little patchy at the top, but that is because I got a guy helping me that is very new to wikipedia that hasn't fully grasped the esthetics required for "Good Article" Status. Any questions, just throw them on my talk page. Have a good day. DMighton 19:30, 19 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I shall enjoy reading it as it progresses. The top was the bit that got me.  I couldn't even work out which country we were talking about until I got right down the article. Maustrauser 21:17, 19 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Yeah... I don't think I explained the thesis very well initially... I was more-or-less focusing on the hours of stat crunching and charting I had to do... and then NCAA Watcher started throwing partial stats from past years in... and it looks sloppy... I will attempt to clean that up a bit though. DMighton 21:53, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for February 19th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:23, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

your question to me
Welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to have a problem with another user cited as T.J. Morgan with reference to Metropolitan Registries. Please read WP policies before making attacks or allegations. You also state that the Better Business Bureau is not a legitimate source of information. Why? Maustrauser 21:40, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Amanda11"

The above message- Dear Maustrauser, Thank you for the time you have taken to respond to my request. I am just learning how Wikipedia Works. I did submit the same question and was told that I should work through the the following and I will do so:

However, since article content is not controlled by a central authority, we do not resolve editing disputes via email. Instead, please follow the steps outlined at . These steps are designed to help you work with other editors and to draw upon the help of the wider community.

In response to your questions I will work wp policies regarding the problems I am having, which was not in any way meant to be an attack or allegation. As far as the BBB Report, I can give you a little background. I was asking that the link not be allowed because the BBB states in their policies they do not allow links without their consent. We are working with the BBB to have them revise their statements and hopefully become a working partner with them. We have 75,000 active members at MWW and less than a 1% complaint ratio. We realize that all complaints are unacceptable but we have a perfect record in resolving every complaint. So I please ask for your help and do let me know what I can do to not have our company listed in this area. I would like to further discuss the networking oportunities we do provide for all our members, as well as future plans we have in place to add value to membership.

Regards,

Amanda


 * Thank you Amanda for commenting. Please be aware that you do not need to copy material from one page to another.  As I left a message on your page I will automatically be told when it has been updated.  It's best to have a discussion on only one page.  Perhaps we should make it this one as you have moved material across.  As you appear to be intimately involved with MWW then your editing of articles about MWW should be informed by WP:COI.  WP works on the basis of "no original research" and thus any comment on WP must be attributable to a reputable third party.  As far as I can tell the NY BBB is a reputable third party and thus the links from WP pages to BBB are legitimate.


 * I was unable to find on the MWW a reference saying that their website should not be linked to. Perhaps you can tell me the web reference to that.  Regardless, anything published on the internet is fair game to be linked to.  If they don't want it linked then they shouldn't publish!  May I suggest that your best recourse is to work with BBB to resolve the problems.  Then the WP article can be updated to indicate the change in status.  I'd also caution you to not add material about 'networking opportunities' and 'future plans' as they will be construed as a breach of WP:COI and WP:Advertising. Maustrauser 01:10, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

My apologies again I am very much trying to follow the rules and I made changes on the original page. I will talk directly on this page in the future. I am not debating the value of the BBB. MWW is working directly with the BBB to rectify the report. What I am stating is the following:

CBBB Terms & Conditions state that a link to the BBB must first be approved.

2.	The CBBB may consider and approve in its sole discretion other link requests from the following types of organizations: o	commonly-known consumer and/or business information sources such as Chambers of Commerce, American Automobile Association, AARP and Consumers Union; o	dot.com community sites; o	associations or other groups representing charities, including charity giving sites, o	online directory distributors; o	internet portals; o	accounting, law and consulting firms whose primary clients are businesses; and o	educational institutions and trade associations.

see BBB terms bbb.org/about/terms.asp and a full explanation regarding permission to link.

Thank you for your help in this matter.

I also saw a statement that had MWW listed as a vanity publication. You stated not according to the BBB. However the BBB lists MWW as a Professional Organization.


 * Thank you for your response. I have now gone and read the BBB terms.  Frankly, I think they are a joke.  They must be dreaming if they think that they can stop people linking to their pages.  The only way not to have people linking is not to publish the material.  I have no control over what links people put into articles and I personally believe that if the link provides context or evidence for a claim made on WP then it is valid.  If BBB wishes to do anything about stopping WP from linking to it then it will have to do something about it itself.  I'd also hazard to say that WP is a 'news service' and thus meets criteria 1 of its terms.


 * I personally know nothing about MWW. If you don't believe it is a vanity publication then remove it from the article.  Be Bold.  Some editor may well put it back and then your best bet is to debate it with them on the article's talk page or on their talk page.  I can't recall what originally started our correspondence (I do many edits per day).  I suspect I reverted one of your deletions.  I tend to do that when the deletion is made without any attempt at a good explanation of why the deletion was made or if it looks like the person is trying to whitewash a bad report.  I suggest that you put a comment on the talk page of the relevant article along the following lines: "I intend to delete XXX from the article as it YYY.  Does anyone have any concerns with this?  I'll delete it in three days time so if you have any concerns, just report them on this page and we can discuss it."  That way, you avoid what is called a 'revert war', you follow due process, you look professional and the discussion is done in good faith.  Not many people use this approach and then they end up in messy edit wars and complaints.  Good luck Maustrauser 22:27, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello Again Maustrauser, I thought somewhere in here I had said that I changed another article before reading what you had written, if I didn't I meant to & I do apologize. You had let me know specifically that I had a vested interest & therefor I should not be making statements. I do respect that. So yes, out of frustration you saw what looked like an ad, which was my way of giving a full explanation of what we at MWW would describe of our company. So yes of course remove the ad,(although I'd love it if you didn't, ha ha) I am starting to learn each time I log on a little more of the how to's in Wikipedia. Thank You for that.


 * G'day Cindi (you like changing names!) Advertisement removed! Maustrauser 03:52, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Next, even though you do not agree with the BBB on their policy, I do have a legitimate claim on that end. Can I remove the link w/out any further changes at this point? I will debate the rest when I learn Wikipedia's practices much better. Although I would like the opportunity to submit documentation to you that proves our membership packages start at $69.


 * Feel free to remove the link. Some other editor might put it back though!  The best place to 'prove' things is on the talk page of the relevant article (the talk page is actually called 'discussion' but we all call them talk pages).  We are currently writing this discussion on my 'talk page'.  Maustrauser 03:52, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

In the next week or so, the BBB will be changes the report, we are in the middle of negotiations with them. If I then show you supporting evidence that we have a good report with the BBB will you allow me to remove the statement?


 * I guess the question is, does MWW 'sell' entries in biographical publicatons without rigorous analysis of the credentials of the applicants? I can't answer that.  I have had to rely on the BBB report.  I imagine I know how you will answer that.  If your view is that the statement is inaccurate then of course you should remove it.  If, it is an accurate statement, then removing it would be an incorrect thing to do.  Frankly I don't care if MWW has 'problems' with BBB.  I'm only interested in knowing if MWW 'sells' biographical entries.  If I find evidence that it does and isn't rigorous in its screening, then I'm likely to put it back. Maustrauser 03:52, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

And my last question to you is I do not understand this statement "I intend to delete XXX from the article as it YYY" What do you mean by this?


 * I meant by this that before deleting things, you should put a statement on the talk page saying something like: "I intend to delete the reference to MWW from the article as it is an inaccurate portrayal of MWWs activities. I will delete it after two days.  If you disagree with me doing this, then please give me your reasons here."  By doing this other editors won't consider you a vandal.Maustrauser 03:52, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I know that I have frustrated you some so just bear with me a short time longer and hopefully I will disappear, never to bother you again. Ha Ha.


 * No problem. We all have to learn.  It's been a pleasure discussing these things with you. Maustrauser 03:51, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Again Thank you for your understanding and patients, Cyndi

temporary reply
temporary reply can be found on my user page Respectfully, BenedictX 02:53, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

American Biographical Institute
Amanda11 21:38, 21 February 2007 (UTC)I believe here the comment about MWW should be removed. We have no affiliation with the American Biological Institute.


 * Hi Amanda. See my earlier comment above about how to go about deletions so as to avoid conflict.  Maustrauser 22:28, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Calligaris: the work begins!
Dear Maustrauser, I have finally been able to start on the article. By the way, thank you very much for your "good luck" in relation to my PhD: YES! I handed it in and now it only a question of time before the viva. Yuppie! Anyway, let's talk about "serious" matters now. I have started cleaning the article from the many adjectives. I hope it now sounds more acceptable. However, I know that there is still a lot of work to do: one of this is about referencing. Here I got a slight problem and would be very grateful to have your input. Problem 1): there is one information that I gained from the composer directly:  "In his youth he had been a pupil of Luis Angel Machado who, in turn, had been personal assistant to Paul Hindemith." Since Machado is a minor figure, so to speak, in composition, there may even be a question of whether quoting him or not. Should I put a footnote like "personal communication" or something similar?

Problem 2: in a passage like the following, where I list the characteristics of his music: "the vivid opposition between "elegiac" and "flamboyant and wild" themes; a dramatic use of rhythm; a disciplined and, at the same time, extremely complex master of counterpoint; the adoption of "classical" composing forms (see, just as an example, the use of form in the Prelude, choral, double fugue and finale op. 19)",

should I put a footnote for each review (or more than one) where these features are being discussed?

Problem 3: you pointed out that not many of his teachers have an entry in WP. Apart from Jorge Fanelli, however, all other are listed in the Baker's Biographical Dictionary of Musicians (Jorge Fanelli is mentioned in Calligaris' entry in the same work). Shall I put a reference to the Baker's (or to other dictionaries) for each of them (or at least for the ones without an entry in WP?)?

I am sure these will not be the only questions from me to you, but they would make a good start for me! I also hope I am not over-stretching your patience! A rileggerci presto, Alessandra 16:09, 21 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Congratulations on your submission. A great achievement.  Let's hope that the examiners aren't too rough!  To business.  Whilst Pers comm is quite acceptable in PhDs etc, where original research is encouraged, WP has a policy of NO original research.  So I think you had best delete that bit - unless you can find a third party who has said it.  As for problem 2, you definitely need to reference such statements, otherwise it sounds as though you are making them up.  Problem 3.  Easily solved.  Write the articles for them!  Now you are not working on your PhD, you will have heaps of time!  :  )   But do reference where you get the data.  Any more questions, do ask.  Best wishes, Maustrauser 10:52, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Party article
Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Some of your recent edits have been considered unhelpful or unconstructive and have been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. User:  Hdt83  |  Talk/Chat  01:25, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
 * NOTE: Sorry, that was a bad revert unfortunately. From this edit difference http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Party&diff=next&oldid=110450716 it appeared you had added nonsense but then I double checked the history and found out that it was part of the article. I changed it back. Sorry about that! User:  Hdt83  |  Talk/Chat  01:35, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
 * No problems. Easy to do! Maustrauser 01:39, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Glen Williams
The problem with several different lists of judges, is that the names sometimes get spelled differently for the same judge on two or more lists. I try to catch this when it happens. Alas, this one slipped through. Sorry to bother you, but I don't know what else to do. Respectfully, BenedictX 02:46, 24 February 2007 (UTC)


 * No worries. But I'm not sure what your question is. Maustrauser 23:27, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for February 26th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:24, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

"Heritage Who's Who's"
The word "heritage" always makes me feel queasy, but something about the statement "2007 COO Walt Sorensen Selected for the 2007-08 Heritage Who's Who's publication" in Business Resource Center SLC looked as if it might be something of unintended amusement value to you. Have you heard of this one? -- Hoary 23:01, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up. I see it has been changed to IBC.  As soon as I see an IBC or ABI claim I question the notability of the article!  Only the non-notable seem to claim ABI or IBC affiliation.  Thanks for the amusement. Maustrauser 01:00, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

BenedictX and judge stubs
Hi Maustrauser. What is your opinion on 1) BenedictX's many stubs about judges generated by collating info from several Wikipedia articles into one place and 2) Rebecca deleting them? I know it was a week or two ago, but I only just found them. --Scott Davis Talk 10:00, 4 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I liked your comment on his user page. I suggested to BenedictX that he read WP policies before getting to work on the stubs.  He did rather late and I think that he was frustrated with finding out WP had a bunch of policies related to what he was doing.  I do feel that Rebecca was a bit harsh with him.  I hope he reads your comments and returns.  He was very thorough. Maustrauser 10:46, 4 March 2007 (UTC)


 * My thoughts too. I hope Rebecca answers my comments to her at user talk:Rebecca, and maybe we can reinstate the articles. --Scott Davis Talk 12:38, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

LoF/AMM
Looks good; in fact the vandals would probably like the bit about the medal being awarded for attending meetings. I found out a bit more about the medal with a google search. Archie Kalokerinos was also given it at the same time as Dettman. I don't know anything about these guys, but it looks like the AMM gives their controvesial work some sort of official credibility. I can't imagine a right wing paramilitary group is really qualified to evaluate scientific research and bestow prestige on anyone. I'll try and add some more when I get a chance, though it might not be for a while. Cheers, Bobanny 01:07, 6 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, good old Archie. His WP bio mentioned the AMM for a little while and then it was edited out.  I haven't worried about putting it back as it seems to mislead people rather than enlighten them!  Don't work too hard!  I'm trying to have a bit of a WP break, but it's strangely addictive. Maustrauser 01:33, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 5th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:28, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Sergio Calligaris
Dear Maustrauser, hope you are well and not too "wikibonded". I also hope I will not aggravate your condition with my comments.

I tried to justify most of "my" statements (and especially those who could be subjected to criticism) by listing the relevant source. Hope you find it more acceptable now. But then of course, as it is in the custom of people like me who suffer from an instict of "over-explaining" everything, I overdid it and now I have some footnotes like the one on Loesser, Leschetitzy and Agosti that are more stub articles than footnotes and therefore need to be sorted out. But for me the important thing, at this stage, was simply to have the "advertisement tag" removed (I know it was fair, bu I didn't like it very much to be honest! :).

I also hope that the other tag about references can go now (about references I made a bit of a mess because I consulted the two version of Slonimsky on different days in different libraries; once I manage to retrieve both I will decide which one to set forth as THE Slonimsky's reference. I also miss other three references but I could not find the works in the libraries - and that's outrageous because we're talking about reference works - and do not want to quote stuff that I do not check personally).

Anyway, hope you don't have an headache at this point of my message?? I will carry on improving the article and perhaps adding a few stubs on the other people mentioned here and there, so every suggestion for future (and present!!) improvement is more than welcome. Take care of yourself, have a great day and....thanks for your patience. Alessandra 12:59, 7 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Dear Alessandra — damn fine work. I have removed all the tags.  You can never have enough references in my view.  It buttresses your article against attack.  I have made one minor and one not-so-minor change that I'd like to explain.  Firstly, I moved your quote and improved its layout to after the intro.  The intro should always remain short, sharp and to the point.  I think it looks better just after the intro.  Secondly, I removed reference to the International Biographical Centre award of Musician of the Year (or century or decade).  IBC is a vanity press and as main contributor to the IBC article, I can say it only makes Calligaris look like an idiot. which is not what he is.  I think you can let his achievements stand as they are without claiming an IBC affiliation for him.  Anyone can get an IBC award, if they ask.


 * Great work and I look forward to reading your other articles as you write them. With best wishes, Maustrauser 22:01, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Uao! I feel flattered! Thank you for removing the tags and for your recent improvements to the article, which sound very sensible. I did not know about IBC, and whilst I am grateful that you removed the reference for Callig., I am starting thinking that I may get one for myself! Should still choose the award though :) Anyway, thank you again and hope to read you at some other point. Have a good day. Alessandra

An intriguing AfD
is this one. -- Hoary 11:41, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the tip off. I've visited the article and AfD. Cheers Maustrauser 22:39, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 12th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:32, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 20th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:18, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 26th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 14:07, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

TCIA deletion
Hello

On March 15, you removed my post for the TCIA under Arborist Organizations in the Arborist article. Why? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jhughestcia (talk • contribs) 19:44, 27 March 2007 (UTC).


 * As explained in the edit summary, your addition read like the only people reading WP were North Americans. This is an international collaboration.  It also sound like an advertisment for the organization rather than a dispassionate statement.  If you think it is really necessary, place it under its own US-based heading, rather than implying that the data applies to the entire world.  Thanks. Maustrauser 03:46, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Kama Sywor Kamanda
Hi,

I just put back « preface by » in Kamanda's article without noticing you had previously deleted this change. Please explain why you consider the English expression « preface by» inappropriate in that case. In have found many occurrences for « preface by » and « preface from » on Internet. I also thought this wording would be more understandable for an English reader. I am wrong?

CM 2007 04 01


 * Hello. Having reviewed my edit, I simply removed your reference to a Japanese website.  As this version of WP is the English version, a Japanese website is not appropriate.  I have looked at your new changes and I can't understand why you are listing who wrote the preface.  Frankly, who cares?  It adds unhelpful information to the article.  I'd remove the preface info. Cheers, Maustrauser 10:21, 3 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Please don't remove the preface information. It is indeed very useful to know that this author's books have been prefaced by many of the most famous poets of this time. How many weiters have been prefaced by Senghor? This is very useful information for anybody studying seriously literature. Cheers,

CM 2007 05 09 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Christiane.melancon (talk • contribs) 22:15, 9 May 2007 (UTC).

Signpost updated for April 2nd, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:05, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Zombie Comedy
A page you participated in creating, Zombie comedy, has been nominated for deletion. See Articles for deletion/ for the commentary. Captain Infinity 17:45, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 9th, 2007.
Special note to spamlist users: Apologies for the formatting issues in previous issues. This only recently became a problem due to a change in HTML Tidy; however, I am to blame on this issue. Sorry, and all messages from this one forward should be fine (I hope!) -Ral315

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:10, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 16th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:12, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 23rd, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:50, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 30th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:33, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 7th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:25, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 14th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:52, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 21st, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:25, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Plethystic algebra
fits the criteria for speedy deletion for the following reason: A one line stub with no edits since inception a year ago; no definition; context vague; no other articles link here; probably an A1 --Android Mouse Bot 2 20:57, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 28th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:37, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 4th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:39, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Notability of Keith Wilson (author)
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Keith Wilson (author), by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Keith Wilson (author) seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Keith Wilson (author), please affix the template to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Keith Wilson (author) itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 02:47, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 11th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 02:47, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 18th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:54, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Bobsmith319
I've RfCd him, if you could come comment, that'd be appreciated (I noticed him trying to remove the image again,and when he became hostile towards me, I just went ahead and did it.) Kuronue 20:34, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 25th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:50, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 2nd, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:58, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 9th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:57, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 16th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 19:31, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 23rd, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:30, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 30th, 2007.
Apologies for the late delivery this week; my plans to handle this while on vacation went awry. Ral315

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 00:14, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for August 6th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 09:05, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for August 13th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 20:43, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for August 20th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:29, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for August 27th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:19, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for September 3rd, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 04:08, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for September 10th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 20:36, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for September 17th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 03:19, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for September 24th, 2007.


You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 02:20, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for October 03, 2007


Automatically delivered by COBot 02:37, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for October 15th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 09:50, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for October 22nd, 2007.
Sorry for the tardiness in sending the Signpost this week. --Ral315

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 14:29, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for October 29th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:53, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for November 5th and 12th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:00, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for November 19th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 10:24, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for November 26th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:21, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for December 3rd, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 09:37, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for December 10th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:43, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for December 17th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 19:15, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for December 26th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 13:34, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 2nd and 7th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:59, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 14th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:38, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 21st, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 00:08, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 28th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 03:57, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for February 4th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:18, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for February 11th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:53, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Kerreen Reiger
A tag has been placed on Kerreen Reiger requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Dr Tobias Funke (talk) 17:14, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for February 18th and 25th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:18, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 3rd, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:06, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Derrick Wright
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Derrick Wright, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add  to the top of Derrick Wright. Aervanath (talk) 03:41, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 13th and 17th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 23:19, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 24th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:45, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 31st, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 21:30, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 7th and 14th, 2008.
Sorry, it seems that the bot quit before completing its run last week. Here is the last two weeks' worth of Signpost. Ralbot (talk) 08:40, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:40, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 21st, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 16:07, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 2nd and 9th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:07, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 12th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:08, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 19th and 26th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:57, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 2, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:17, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 9, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:09, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 23 and 26, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:42, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 30, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 03:40, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Removed from Signpost spamlist
Hi! I'm Ral315, editor-in-chief of the Wikipedia Signpost. It appears that you have not edited in at least a few months. To avoid spamming your talk page any further, should you be on leave, your name has been removed from the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to continue receiving the Signpost on your talk page, please leave a note on my talk page to that effect, and I will restore your name, and keep you on the list indefinitely. Ral315 (talk) 07:11, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Michael J Vernon.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:Michael J Vernon.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sdrtirs (talk) 06:55, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Roy Stephenson
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Roy Stephenson, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Cheers, CP 17:04, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Murray and Vern
A tag has been placed on Murray and Vern requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company or corporation, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for companies and corporations.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the article or have a copy emailed to you. Skomorokh 06:23, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Maustrauser! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 8 of the articles that you created  are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced. If you were to add reliable, secondary sources to these articles, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the list:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 21:12, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Tracy Reibel -
 * 2) William Weir (author) -
 * 3) Kerreen Reiger -
 * 4) Paul Addison -
 * 5) Uta Ranke-Heinemann -
 * 6) Alan Sharpe -
 * 7) Tony Matthews -
 * 8) Anthony Bailey -

Articles for deletion nomination of Tracy Reibel
I have nominated Tracy Reibel, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Tracy Reibel. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Peripitus (Talk) 11:34, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Alan Sharpe


The article Alan Sharpe has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Can find plenty of links to his books, but nothing about the man.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing  will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. The-Pope (talk) 12:36, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

I noticed that you created the entry on Howard Reid, the British filmmaker. Do you have any sort of connection with him or know of a way to contact him? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Canofwater (talk • contribs) 16:37, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Nicholas Humphrey (author)


The article Nicholas Humphrey (author) has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Doesn't meet WP:N, WP:NBIO, WP:NAUTHOR, WP:BLP

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Le petit fromage (talk) 17:10, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:59, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

RC Patrol-related Proposals in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey
Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:


 * 1) Adjust number of entries and days at Last unpatrolled
 * 2) Editor-focused central editing dashboard
 * 3) "Hide trusted users" checkbox option on watchlists and related/recent changes (RC) pages
 * 4) Real-Time Recent Changes App for Android
 * 5) Shortcut for patrollers to last changes list

Further, there are more than 20 proposals related to Watchlists in general that you may be interested in reviewing. (and over 260 proposals in all, across many aspects of wikis)

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Note: You received this message because you have transcluded User wikipedia/RC Patrol (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.

Best regards, — Delivered: 01:11, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Simon Cox (author)


The article Simon Cox (author) has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "I cannot find proof that this author passes GNG or NAUTHOR, despite a couple of books with a real publisher--no reviews, for instance."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Drmies (talk) 02:46, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Howard Reid (filmmaker)


The article Howard Reid (filmmaker) has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp/dated tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. Snowycats (talk) 23:23, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of William Weir (author)


The article William Weir (author) has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "I can’t find any reliable independent sources to support this article."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Mccapra (talk) 07:06, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Douglas E. Krueger


The article Douglas E. Krueger has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Non-notable writer and academic"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Thebiguglyalien ( talk ) 14:39, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of John Kingsmill (actor) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John Kingsmill (actor) 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/John Kingsmill (actor) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished. Boleyn (talk) 12:40, 31 January 2024 (UTC)