User talk:Missvain/Archive 22

Translation notification: Fundraising 2012/Translation/Jimmy Appeal
Hello SarahStierch,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to Simple English on Meta. The page Fundraising 2012/Translation/Jimmy Appeal is available for translation. You can translate it here:
 * translate to Simple English

The priority of this page is high. The deadline for translating this page is 2012-10-31.

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising_2011/Jimmy_Letter_002/en

Last years translation/El año pasado, traducción/العام الماضي ترجمة/Прошлогодний перевод

This letter is a new translation request, but re-uses large parts of the 2011 Jimmy Appeal, with slight modifications in the second version.

If the 2011 Jimmy Letter has been translated into your language, you can probably re-use much of it for this translation. :-)

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators&lrm;, 18:43, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

wikiproject
Seen several AFC articles you have approved that were American football players. Just an FYI... WikiProject American Football League is for a defunct football league. The new football players should be tagged with WikiProject National Football League. You are just a young whippersnapper and I'm an old fart, so I wouldn't expect you youngions to know something soooo ancient. Oh, stay off my lawn. :) Bgwhite (talk) 08:24, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Our Lady of Fatima Detail.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Our Lady of Fatima Detail.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. —Bkell (talk) 17:33, 30 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Also File:Our Lady of Fatima Proper Full Front.jpg, File:Our Lady Of Fatima Back1.jpg, and File:Our Lady of Fatima Proper Left.jpg. —Bkell (talk) 17:33, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
 * these are all public domain, no notice, changed licenses. 69.255.109.248 (talk) 23:44, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Anonymouse321 (talk) 06:11, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Category:History of California by city
Category:History of California by city, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 03:32, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello Girls edit
Sarah, I ran across your edit of Hello Girls. I couldn't find any evidence on line to support the thought that she received the Distinguished Service Medal from Mexico. This website and others indicate that she received the Army Distinguished Service Medal. I wanted to check with you though before I change it. Thank you. SchreiberBike (talk) 01:49, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Hey there. I was just running Dabsolver, so maybe I "dabbed" the wrong thing. I have no emotional connection to the subject or article - so I trust you to do whatever is right! (assume good faith :D) Thanks for all you do! SarahStierch (talk) 05:48, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I'll make the change. Thanks. SchreiberBike (talk) 05:52, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

edit-a-thon
Hi SarahStierch -- I'm Laura Quilter, and at UMass Amherst we're organizing an edit-a-thon to remedy systemic bias / exclusion of underrepresented minorities & women ... so I was curious how your event went, and if you have any advice? and if you have any materials we could re-use? --Lquilter (talk) 17:33, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Laura! This is great. I went ahead and posted about it on the WikiWomen's Collaborative Facebook, which I hope you'll get involved in. A few links about events that I have done:
 * WikiWomen's History Month
 * And more specifically the Smithsonian Institution Archives [Women in Science edit-a-thon that started it all.

I've done some other events, but not focused specifically around women or systemic bias. It looks like you are already getting things situated on the page! A few words of wisdom:
 * Consider adding some online resources, if any, next to the articles you want to expand. It's helpful for getting started.
 * Also provide some articles that are stubs or starts, if any, related to the subjects you want to focus on, some folks don't like writing articles and just want to clean them up and add citations. It provides something for everyone.
 * If the library or archives has images, consider having them scan or provide some for the articles.
 * I made a template that I paste on the talk page of articles edited at the event, warning experienced editors that the article was edited on behalf of an event and might have been edited by a new editor (so be nice!). You can see an example here:
 * Talk:Peter_Birkett

Also, would you like me to send a talk page message around to everyone who lives in the vicinity of Amherst and is on Wikipedia? This will promote the event! Let me know :) Also, when the event takes place, would you like to write a blog about it for the Wikimedia Foundation blog? And finally, do let me know if you'd like to get involved with the WikiWomen's Collaborative, I'd love it, you can find more information here.

I hope I didn't overwhelm you too much :) SarahStierch (talk) 20:23, 4 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Not at all overwhelmed. I've busily copied the template -- great idea.  We've got a couple of people working on resources (handouts etc.).   I "liked" the facebook thingie.  Feel free to link the meetup/edit-a-thon wherever it seems appropriate.  As for committing to write about it for the WMF blog, maybe; or maybe we should get the new editor who proposed the meetup to do it -- I'll propose it to her.  Lastly, I might get involved w/ the WW Collaborative, but to be honest, I tend to edit / admin in fits and starts as my time, interest/enthusiasm, and work / parenting schedule permit.  So I can add to the group but wouldn't at this point be able to commit to any particular task / role w/in the group. --Lquilter (talk) 00:47, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

National Gallery of Zimbabwe
Sarah, we just received three images from the National Gallery of Zimbabwe.

I'm not active with GLAM, but know you are. I don't know whether this is something that was expected, or is coming in over the transom. In any case, I would think that someone ought to be reaching out to them with a little more than my canned thank-you in OTRS.

I uploaded the images to:
 * File:Glover_Ablade,_Painting_in_Yellow,_Oil_on_canvas,_46_x_76_cm.jpg
 * File:1961,_Selby_Mvusi,_Zululand,_1959,_Oil_on_Board,_122_x_120cm.jpg
 * File:1996,_Kashiri_Hilary_Commuter_rank_II,_Mixed_media_on_canvas,_1996.jpg

I don't know whether they belong in National Gallery of Zimbabwe, or elsewhere. -- SPhilbrick (Talk)  01:10, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks SPhilbrick! I've pinged folks in the GLAM crew. SarahStierch (talk) 01:13, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

WikiWomen's Collaborative
Hey Sarah - Thanks for the notes! And you can borrow Fredrika from the top of my talkpage anytime! :) --Rosiestep (talk) 02:53, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi am confused
What was it you wanted me to look at when you sent me the talkback earlier? Gtwfan52 (talk) 03:01, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Women's sport
Yeah. I can do that. I need some time to think about what I would write as it relates to my postdoc topic, presenting at a conference on an unrelated topic and I have a fair amount of documentation regarding that. --LauraHale (talk) 03:03, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 05:16, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

What content did i delete? It was an accident
Hi, I got your message in my own "My Talk" and I did an edit to it, but I'm not sure if you will see it. You suggested i come to your page and comment and this is the only way I know how. I apologize if I'm doing it incorrectly. I'm extremely new to this. With regard to the Teahouse where I asked the question on how to post my opinion about content deletion, someone provided me help. I then wanted to reply to that person to say "thank you". I didn't know I deleted content. Can you tell me what I deleted? I do, now see the "Edit Summary" field. I missed that completely and will be sure to use that going forward. (Did you get my reply, from my own My Talk, page)? Or just this one? Thanks again and sorry for any inconveniences. Thanks again, Terster Terster (talk) 05:25, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Terster! It's okay, the bot left that stupid template, sorry if it was alarming - most of the time when people delete things it's out of spite, not accident. If you click here you can see the difference - some how you mysteriously deleted the whole page :) So perhaps your thumb just slipped ;) No problem at all. I am glad you're here, and I'm sorry if the message left you alarmed!! SarahStierch (talk) 16:22, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

ISHM?
I just found your User:SarahStierch/ISHM series through my photo of the T.C. Steele Home in Brown County. Were you aware of List of Indiana state historical markers and its county-level sublists? Nyttend (talk) 01:57, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, quite aware, thanks! This was for a Wiki Loves Monuments project....I haven't quite finished. SarahStierch (talk) 06:14, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Burning Ears?
Lonibug and I are in the Alverno College Media Hub talking about you and your awesomeness!! --Jgmikulay (talk) 17:45, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
 * HAHA! That's sweet :) SarahStierch (talk) 17:49, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the berries!!
Hi Sarah, Thanks for the delicious berries,feedback and support! Lonibug (talk) 03:07, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Organizations (important)
Hey Sarah! I have been DYING to ask you if I can make a little thing for Culture Day or any day that is good for celebrating cultures. I want to have people post about their heritage and traditions. I just wanted you to approve of this first. If you don't approve, I'll be upset, but your the boss, so it's your decision. I think this will be a very good idea. I can make a little list if you want, too. I think it will be very cute to do so. Also, you know how you left that Woman Appreciate thing on my page. I want it to be like that, except NO Facebook or Twitter should be involved because it is a one week thing. I'm very excited to hear your answer. I HOPE you accept. I'll make a little list for you, if you approve, telling you what would be best for this. PS- I hope to be as popular and helpful as you in Wikipedia. Thank you so much Sarah. You may answer on your talk page or mine. Whatever you like best. Thank you! Have a good day! DEIDRA C. (talk) 18:27, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Deidra! Great to hear from you. I'd be happy if you did whatever you wanted regarding the appreciation of about improvement about content related to any culture. I'd say go ahead and do it! Create a draft or template, or idea on wiki and feel free to hare it with me if you'd like someone to take a look. One of our mottos at Wikipedia is be bold so I'd say, go for it :) Can't wait to see what you do! SarahStierch (talk) 00:00, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

OH! Thank you so much, Sarah! I really appreciate it. I was going to do something like a list of cultures and some things about them. Thank you! It might take awhile to get everything together, but I will try to achieve it. Thank you very much! DEIDRA C. (talk) 17:34, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Contribution.
Hey, SarahStierch. Please help contribute to my celebration. This celebration is about different cultures. If you can take some time and help contribute to it, that would be very nice of you. I am starting this project this week and would like to finish by next week. Please help me with this project. Thank you very much. Please answer on my talk page because I might not be able to keep track of who is contributing and who is not. I would like you to also share your culture. If you can give me a little summary about your culture such as, foods, lifestlye, holidays, traditions, e.t.c, that would be extremely helpful. Thank you. So if you would wish to contribute, please reply on MY talk page. Happy edits! Have a great day! DEIDRA C. (talk) 19:05, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks and two suggestions
Thanks for your invitation. I'm very busy in real life, so I have little free time, but I'll remember about your initiative. Now I would only like to suggest two corrections of your message, as the subject of the sentence must be taken into account:
 * 1) "As a WikiWoman, we'd love to have you involved!" (subject: "we") could be replaced by "As WikiWomen, we'd love to have you involved!" or "We'd love to have you involved as a WikiWoman!"
 * 2) "We can't wait to have you involved, and feel free to drop by..." (subject "we") could be replaced by "We can't wait to have you involved. Feel free to drop by...". Best wishes on this project :-)Sylwia Ufnalska (talk) 06:15, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Speedy Sarah
Are you trying to set a record for number of edits in a certain time period? ;) --Pine✉ 08:29, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Blog thoughts
I was thinking about doing a blog for the wikiwomen's initiative about transgender people on wikipedia. I would love to hear your thoughts. Thanks.-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 07:19, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Rainbowofpeace! I'm so glad you thought of this idea! The focus of this project is to engage and inspire women and transwomen to edit Wikipedia and participate in the movement. So, if your blog will - in the end - make that the main focus (perhaps the important and unique contribution transwomen can make, or..), then I'd love to see it drafted for the WikiWomen's Collaborative. If it's going to be a more general blog not focusing on women, then it'll be up to the folks at the Wikimedia Foundation to consider it - since I only curate content about women and transwomen. What do you think? If you're ready to get started you can visit this page to learn more, and you'll find a link to the drafts area on meta where all blogs need to be placed. Once you get it started and ready for review, let me know and I'll take a look! Can't wait to see what you cook up! SarahStierch (talk) 16:44, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: September 2012
Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 18:43, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
 * From the team: Results of the This Month in GLAM survey (part 2)
 * UK report: GLAMcamp London; brief news
 * Spain report: Edit-a-thons in Spain
 * Italy report: Smithsonian Institution, Brooklyn Museum and WikiAfrica
 * Germany report: WikiCon; GLAMcamp London; Science 2.0
 * Sweden report: Sweden report
 * Switzerland report: Botanical Garden Lausanne;CERN
 * India report: Wiki Loves Monuments 2012 in India
 * Mexico report: Edit-a-thon at the Salón de la Plástica Mexicana
 * Africa report: A month in Africa's GLAMs
 * Open Access report: Open Access per default; Open Access Media Importer tests finished; Preparations for Open Access Week
 * Calendar: October's GLAM events

My article (OHIM board of Appeal)
Hello,

I believe you recently reviewed my article on the OHIM board of appeal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/OHIM_Board_of_Appeal). I have updated the article with a few more references, as requested, but for some reason the ability to re send for review has been taken off. Are you able to review the article again, or help me with the process of assessing the article and re submitting? Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Prufrok11 (talk) 13:24, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Look what I found while welcoming
A golden nugget named User:212018825 Elana. Perhaps she is a candidate for your special brand of outreach. ```Buster Seven   Talk  14:33, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

WikiWomen's Collaborative user talk page template
Hi there. I noticed your posting about the WikiWomen's Collaborative on User talk:Quandongjam, I'm not sure if you are aware (if you are, feel free to disregard this), but you almost verbatim duplicate your last sentence ("[...] We can't wait to have you involved [...] Can't wait to have you involved!"). Maybe it's just me, but it also feels like as the template goes on, it gets more pushy; it goes from wanting the person to be involved to almost fostering an expectation of involvement. I'm not sure if that was your intention. Either way, best of luck with it. — cdwn 18:47, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

query about article
Regarding the article, "International Astrostatistics Association" (IAA) You decline my article due to references. I have asked others on the chat site and checked the article. It appears that you looked at my older version and not the new one. I have reubmitted the new version, which has references directly from the information page about the association, its history, officers, terms, etc on the Associations web site. I also have references of other sites mentioning and giving the same information. The primary web site I give is https://asaip.psu.edu/organizations/iaa/international-astrostatistics-association-overview/view, which is on the Dept of Astronomy, Pennsylvania State University sponsored "Astrostatistics and Astroinformatics Portal", on which the main astrostatistics association sites are located. It is the web site for the IAA, the International Astonomical Union (IAU) astrostatistics working group, and International Statistical Institute's (ISI) astrostatistics committee site. The IAU is the world governing body for astronomy and ISI is the world statistics association. I referenced the new President's website as well. The IAA was created from the ISI astrostatisics Network, and is the world association for this discipline. The references are all university sites or association officer sites.

I am quite sure you looked at the older version since when I went to access the article that is what I saw. Please take a look at the version that is intended to be reviewed. The previous denial was that it sounded like an article rather than encyclopediac. I agreed. This is my first article, but I have edited before. I want to do a lot more in statistics since it is lacking in good articles. This is my area of expertise (PhD). Articles on associations for geostatistics, envitronmental statistics, and other areas really need to be done for completeness in this area of research. Also major figures in the area. Thanks for your help, M Brown. Brownstat (talk) 22:11, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

EdwardsBot input pages
Hi. Sorry, couldn't help but notice your tests. EdwardsBot reads input lists by looking at the links as the database sees them. Whenever links are saved to a page, MediaWiki updates its database records so that it knows to purge these pages when a link changes state (for example, if the page "Bob" is deleted, every page that links to "Bob" has to be re-rendered so that it's now a red link instead of a blue link). A side benefit to this tracking is that users (and bots) can query the database directly for the links on the page, sorted by namespace.

EdwardsBot looks at every User and User talk page link on a specified input page. It de-dupes (so if you have "User (talk)", it'll only deliver once) and then it follows any redirects that may exist (usually due to user renames, but any type of redirect is followed). The links themselves can be stylized, bolded, put in a numbered list, put in a bulleted list, collapsed, whatever, as long as they're still links. The database doesn't know the difference.

Global lists use m:Template:Target and global lists (used in conjunction with the global bot) are all run from Meta-Wiki. --MZMcBride (talk) 01:35, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

The recipients input can be a page or a category, it can't be both. I just re-read the code and category is used by default. If there's no category specified, then the bot tries a page input list. I'm not sure if this is properly noted in the bot's instructions. I'm also not really sure what the correct behavior here is. I guess it could use both lists? Don't know. (The real answer is to build a proper interface/system for doing this kind of thing. (-:)

Anyway, the bot will run on the category in a minute. Then you'll probably want to re-run the delivery with the page input list. I guess you should use the same key, but use "really start" instead of "start" (after removing the category input list from the /Spam page, of course). Hope that helps. --MZMcBride (talk) 00:14, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, that does help! Ok, I was wondering. I saw both slots so I thought "ooh, maybe it will work!" and I appreciate your update that it didn't ;) I also was wondering the second half of what you said - well if that doesn't work, can I use the same key and deliver it to the list. I'll give that a go! Thanks for looking after my Edward-experiments :) SarahStierch (talk) 00:16, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Right, the key is only really necessary as a means of duplicate post detection. The bot checks the page source for that key before posting to the page. So if you someone is in the category and in the page list and you use different keys, you'll hit them twice. If you use the same key, you'll get an error about using a duplicate key. If you use the same key and "really start" (instead of "start"), you'll bypass the duplicate key restriction. --MZMcBride (talk) 00:50, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Wikiproject members
I see you have been editing some Wikiproject member pages (good job)! You may find our project tool very useful ... Active WikiProject members (Attempt to fix inactive members from a wikiproject).Moxy (talk) 17:41, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Hey! Thanks Moxy. That's actually what I've been using. I've been doing some research about some folks involved in projects, and cleaning up banned users as I go ;) Dispenser has some pretty awesome tools. SarahStierch (talk) 17:45, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Deletion review for The Elephant House
An editor has asked for a deletion review of The Elephant House. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. &mdash;Kww(talk) 21:22, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

I GIVE UP ON THE ELEPHANT
I have never even seen this artwork in person. I just hate seeing good public art get deleted when I know it deserves to stay. I'm just going to disconnect myself from this conversation. At least I went down with a fight! SarahStierch (talk) 21:36, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Strong Winds trilogy
Hi Sarah, thanks for tagging Strong Winds trilogy. I have removed the tag on notability as a search on google.co.uk for the term strong winds gives Strong Winds trilogy as the first suggested search term. This is, I believe, clear objective evidence on the article's nota bility. Your other concerns on single source etc and suggestion to merge with the article Julia Jones (writer) are valid points. However, I note that you have not initiated discussion on these matters in the talk pages mentioned in your tags. If you would care to do so, other uses can respond to your concerns and merger suggestion. If no such discussion ensues in a few weeks I will remove the remaining tags. In good faith, Nankai (talk) 02:09, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
 * ...well I just checked google.co.uk again and it was the fourth-highest suggested search term. So maybe a little less notable! Nankai (talk) 02:15, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
Thanks for inviting me to the WikiWomen's Collaborative! I'm so excited :)

biancasimone (talk) 03:02, 12 October 2012 (UTC) 

Articles for deletion/Adrianne Ahern (2nd nomination)
Although you're not explicit, I'm kind of assuming you speedily closed this as WP:CSD. But the new article adds a significant source not present during the original AfD, so the first discussion can't be re-applied. See the very recent discussion here. Additionally, you really shouldn't speedy delete an article under a criterion that it's already been declined under, which is only a smidgen away from wheel warring, even if you think it applies. (Well, except maybe G10 and G12, which are special cases - but even then, you should bring it up with the original admin). I'll suggest you should probably re-open and relist the AfD. Wily D 07:24, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks
One by one, the 13% (or is it 20%?) grows! Nice to meet you. Tvoz / talk 20:14, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Translation notification: FDC portal/Proposals/CentralNotice2012
Hello SarahStierch,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to Simple English on Meta. The page FDC portal/Proposals/CentralNotice2012 is available for translation. You can translate it here:
 * translate to Simple English

The priority of this page is high. The deadline for translating this page is 2012-10-15.

This banner will invite logged-in editors on all projects to participate in the current public review phase about funding requests by 12 organizations, regarding more than 10 million US dollars of donation money.

(Questions about the translation notification system can be asked at, and you can manage your subscription at .)

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators&lrm;, 08:07, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

RE: Closing of Articles for deletion/The Elephant House (2nd nomination)
I have to question your closing of the AFD for The Elephant House. Although the subject had admittedly very little discussion, both my and the only other respondant's arguments were advocating deletion. Additionally, both actually presented arguments about why it should be deleted, and were not just a vote. Instead of relisting the AFD again, or even closing as a "No Consensus", just deciding on your own that it should be kept because you think that it is "surely notable", and that there must be more sources to add (despite both myself and Tokyogirl expressing our difficulties in finding anything additional) seems to completely defeat the purpose of using AFD to establish a consensus. What is the point of even having an AFD discussion if the end result could just be that an admin decides to just close it however they want, no matter what the actual consensus was leaning towards? If you had an argument for keeping, you should have posted your argument as a participant of the AFD, rather than deciding to be the closing admin. I also question your closing statement that you are keeping based on the previous AFD. The previous AFD never reached a consensus, as the nomination was withdrawn after only a few days. In addition, the Keep votes that had appeared prior to the withdrawl did not actually argue for Keeping using any Wikipedia policy, and were merely "I Like It" votes. I question what about that AFD you were actually basing your decision on. Rorshacma (talk) 17:49, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * The article meets basic notability guidelines (significant coverage in multiple reliable sources) and AfD decisions are based on the discussions provided, not consensus, from what I understand. I apologize if my closing was messy, but, as a public art scholar and a co-founder of WP:Public Art, I've been fighting the good fight for public art for quite sometime. If this article gets deleted, and it does pass notability guidelines, then the majority of content written about public art on Wikipedia probably should be, too. SarahStierch (talk) 19:26, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * The issue I bring up isn't whether or not the article meets the notability guidelines, its that the AFD appeared to have been closed inappropriately. If you had a strong argument in favor of Keeping, you should have presented the argument and the sources you found as a participant, in order to allow the other participants time to review it accordingly.  There is a very good chance that both Tokyogirl and myself would have changed our vote/withdrawn the nomination if given the chance.  By closing the AFD in the manner that you did, and then not adding in the sources to the article until hours later, it made it appear as if you simply decided to ignore the arguments presented in the AFD in favor of just closing it the way you wanted.  I applaud your work at actually showing the notability of the artwork, and I apologize if my initial comment seemed overly confrontational.  I was merely very concerned about what appeared to be an admin closing an AFD without following proper procedure.Rorshacma (talk) 20:04, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * To Orangemike below, I checked out deletion review, and it said there that you should make an attempt to contact the closer directly first, so that's why I brought it here first. I'm satisfied from Sarah's response that, despite the closing appearing sloppy, there was no malicious intent, and as she has improved the article drastically, making my initial argument for deletion moot, there is no longer any need to bring it up to Deletion Review.  Rorshacma (talk) 20:04, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Rorshac, I'd say you've made a good case, but one that should be made at Deletion review, not here. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  19:40, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Just say this - the term "The Elephant House" is much more famous as the  coffee shop were JK Rowling did her interview ...Personally dont see notability of either, but us using the name for a personal property over a registered company is a little off.Moxy (talk) 19:50, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * That part's easy: The Elephant House (Toronto) or summat. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  20:02, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * there's only one source that's titled "Elephant House" and in the body of the source, it never says that is it's title is it's formal name. In fact "Elephant House" is never mention in that article or in any other of the references given. MathewTownsend (talk) 20:10, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * The sculpture is actually a part of a collection called An Elephant in the Room perhaps we should redirect the article? It's probably best to bring this up on the talk page for it. I think it's a good idea. I'm even happy to tweak the article to read more like that, as that's how we do it in WP:Public art! SarahStierch (talk) 20:12, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * We could use Elephant in the Room (sculpture) but as seen here the names is used by a much more famous sculpture. Perhaps Elephant in the Room (Canadian sculpture). Moxy (talk) 20:55, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Naming convention wise with the public art project we usually would do it location based, if there is already a more notable sculpture - Elephant in the Room (Toronto, Canada) - I believe. I'm going to ping a fellow Wikipedian in the project to see what she thinks...it could go either way! SarahStierch (talk) 20:59, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * But how do we know it's even in a room? In source pictures, it's outdoors. A source says: "The sculpture, a thesis project by OCAD student Matt Donovan, sat in his parents’ basement until he gave it away to his buddy, James Lawson." What makes this "public art"? MathewTownsend (talk) 21:03, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * In one "source", it's called a "lawn elephant". MathewTownsend (talk) 21:07, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * According to one source the artist called the piece An Elephant in the Room - it was part of an exhibition at his university. I'd take that to be the proper title. I'm happy to email the artist, but that would fall into OR. :-/ Again, this is my art historian side talking: calling it by this title seems the proper thing it do. SarahStierch (talk) 21:11, 11 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Please do not close AfDs fourteen hours early, like it appears that you did here. Unscintillating (talk) 14:46, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
 * The close was not early: the 7-day clock begins with the original listing, not with any subsequent relisting.&mdash;Kww(talk) 16:17, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Do you have any references to say that? Also, did you fact-check your work?  By your rule, I calculate that rather than being fourteen hours early, the closing was sixteen hours early.  Unscintillating (talk) 19:33, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Re: Advice on article
Dear Sarah, I don't know whether this is the correct place to leave a post, but I have a quick question to ask you about an article I posted: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/June_Caravel. I understand that you rejected this article for lack of references and I have since made these amendments. Are there any further amendments which I can make in order to ensure that the article is accepted? Thank you. Regards LordKrabo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LordKrabo (talk • contribs) 03:40, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi there LK! (I hope you don't mind me calling you that ;)) I've taken a look at your improvements, however, I am still concerned about the notability of the subject, and the sources used. Please don't take my suggestions personally, it's based on long standing Wikipedia policy. Ok, first, the citations you used aren't reliable. The only reliable source used is the BBC one. Reliable secondary sources are first, sources that aren't related to the subject - so they don't have content that is provided by the subject, for example. Here is a breakdown of your sources and why or why they don't work:
 * Sellaband - Crowdfunding websites like this are considered primary sources because the pages and projects are developed by either the creators (in this case, Caravel) or someone perhaps related to the subject (Caravel's manager). Primary sources don't support notability.
 * Triple June Earthed - again more content created by the artist or her representation. Can't use it.
 * Her own website - can't use it.
 * Festival of Voices - a website related to something she's involved in, and there is press material in it probably provided by her management. Can't use it.
 * So, the BBC is the only one that is reliable - because a journalist took notice and decided to write about her. Now, what does notability mean in this situation? We have notability guidelines - because, not everyone and everything can have an article on Wikipedia. It's an encyclopedia - so, for example, my grandmother was a beautiful woman and a philanthropist. But, she was not famous enough (despite being a model when she was younger) to warrant herself a Wikipedia article because the media didn't write about her. So, May Bence doesn't get a Wikipedia article. We have an entire list of guidelines specifically for musicians, like Caravel, here. Just reading through the list and comparing what I have learned about Caravel, she does not pass our notability guidelines. I even went through 10 pages of Google hits to find reliable sources and I only found one another aside from the BBC. This basically means, Caravel isn't famous enough yet to merit herself a Wikipedia article. I think, no matter what you do, we won't be able to have an article for her. Not until she meets one of those notability guidelines and the press takes note.
 * I hate to rain on your parade! Is there another subject you have interest in writing about perhaps? We surely do need more coverage about women musicians and I'd hate to have you abandon editing because of this. Thank you so much for your efforts. You can also find faster, additional help at the Teahouse. SarahStierch (talk) 18:45, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Ward Bennett
Hello! Your submission of Ward Bennett at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! ♦ Dr. Blofeld  23:13, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Afc request on WaterML 2.0 article
Hi Sarah,

I've noticed you removed the afc request from my submission (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Peterataylor/sandbox&oldid=517813948). Could you provide me with some details please?

I have revised this article based on feedback from a previous submission. I believe it is now sufficiently referenced and significant to warrant inclusion.

Many thanks,

Pete.

Peterataylor (talk) 04:03, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

The Golden Wiki Award


I must confess that prior to your RfA, I honestly had no clue who you were. It blew my mind that it actually broke WP:200, whereas most people probably knew it was going to end up with an exceptionally high support tally before it even began. But now all of a sudden, it's as if your name pops up everywhere! And after noticing you around enough, I can definitely see why you had the support of such a large segment of the community in being granted adminship. Now I even feel compelled to say something more, as I believe your efforts warrant special commendation. In recognition of your numerous outstanding contributions to this site, and in particular for all the hard work you've put into getting more women actively engaged in the project, I hereby award you the Golden Wiki Award. I cannot even articulate how grateful I am for all the things you've been doing here. You are an absolutely indispensible asset to Wikipedia and I can hardly think of anyone more deserving of this. Kurtis (talk) 03:17, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Kurtis. Wow, I don't even know what to say! I'm speechless, and I'm a crier - and this turned on the wiki-water-works. I am flattered, and humbled. I don't know what more to say than thank you. Thank you. SarahStierch (talk) 17:00, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Well deserved. —Tom Morris (talk) 17:03, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Congratulations! Now grab that golden mop ;-] --Slashme (talk) 17:36, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Like it! :D -- RexRowan Talk  18:43, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
 * There are few editors around here more deserving of being stuck with the Mop-and-Bucket! I didn't even participate in the RfA because I would be so prejudiced. Now to draft User:Lquilter, and maybe Mikulay.... -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  21:28, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Ah, gee thanks everyone, and thanks Mike - uber kind from the Orange legend! :) I agree, +1 to Lquilter and Mikulay :) SarahStierch (talk) 21:30, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Adding a belated agreement to the opinions expressed above about this award to the person I call "Madam Passion-in-Action". Whiteghost.ink (talk) 03:21, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Questions about improving The Art of War
Hey SarahStierch,

So I was hoping to get a little more feedback for improving this article. I do think it's valid as well as verifiable, but I was wondering what about it read like an advertisement. There's only one small comment about the reception, which I suppose definitely sounds biased, though I couldn't really find any bad reviews. Did the synopsis sound like an advertisement? The Blood Event? The Art Exhibition? I'm just curious as to what was advertisement sounding so I could go back and fix it.

Any help or advice would be super awesome,

kingofbreakerKingofbreaker (talk) 16:02, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
—Tom Morris (talk) 18:23, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

WikiWomen's Collaborative
Glad to have the invite, I don't see a role for myself as yet. I did a great deal of focused editing of women's articles a few years ago, but i got tired of the wikipedia bullies and walked away. Now I only edited sparingly. All my ambitious WP projects still lay unfinished. I'd be afraid to do intensive article production again, the struggles are draining. I will join all the social networking and keep an ear out. EraserGirl (talk) 16:10, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi EraserGirl! You don't have to write about women's articles to be a WikiWoman :) I do hope perhaps this social community can help support your project development and more. Feel free to ping me if you need anything - or stop by Facebook and drop a line for a motivator! :) SarahStierch (talk) 16:14, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I realize I don't have to write Women's articles. My concern is that women's contributions already overlooked in history will become even more obfuscated if they aren't addressed in Wikipedia either. I had a plan to work in women behind the camera in early Holly

wood, starting with Screenwriters. I may go back to that project one day when I have more time. EraserGirl (talk) 17:13, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi Sarah! Thanks for the invite. I did not know that WikiWomen existed and it's quite exciting. I love editing articles on women artists and art historians whenever I get the chance, and I'm eager to see what other people are working on. Just joined the Facebook site and am getting inspired!--Arthistorygrrl (talk) 20:45, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Hey - thanks for the wikiwomen's invite...but. I'm here on WP because of my expertise & experience in the topics I edit, not because of my gender. I'd rather keep to the facts and the open knowledge than engage in activism. Sorry - I understand that you were likely looking for a different response, but this is what I think is best for WP & women in general. Kerani (talk) 01:47, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the invite. I don't do much editing, but I do use Wikipedia a lot and it's nice to be contacted by others out there. Lstanley1979 (talk) 16:36, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi Sarah. Thanks for the warm welcome and invite to WikiWomen's Collaborative. I am still finding my feet as a Wikipedia editor but definitely want to get more active and involved. Please keep in touch and let me know how I can help. Gina.Hogue — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gina.Hogue (talk • contribs) 13:15, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Section: Upset
'''Hello, SarahStierch. You have new messages at RAIDENRULES123's talk page.''' You can [ remove this notice] at any time. DEIDRA C. (talk) 21:27, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for that
Hey Sarh. Thanks for making me feel better. I just feel like I don't fit in. I know you're not mad at me, but I'm sort of a dissapointment to others. Also- when you reply, it would be nice if you indented and left a talkback message. Thanks Sarah. You're a really good person to me. Thank you. :_) DEIDRA  ( C.   —Preceding undated comment added 22:08, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Teahouse
How experienced are Teahouse hosts supposed to be? Go  Phightins  !  00:47, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi there! Glad you, or someone you know, has interest in hosting at the Teahouse. Looks like you've been editing for a while - and that doesn't necessarily matter, but I'd say you have experience :) Just take a look here and see what you think. I'd take a look at the expectations page, if you feel comfortable and confident with that, then sign up! :) -- SarahStierch (talk) 00:54, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll take a look. I can usually find out the answer to questions, even if I don't know them off the top of my head. Go   Phightins  !  00:56, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Declined ...
Hi Sarah ~ recently you reviewed my article for submission "Articles for creation/Aaron Robinson" ~ I used the following articles already approved on Wikipedia to model my article by ... they are/were: Cindy Bullens, (if you review her wikipedia article, it has two references for ALLMUSIC ~ something you said was not a reliable source ~ and also her own website! ~ which seems to be a stark conflict of interest and frowned upon by Wikipedia ~ if Wikipedia approved this article on these references only, then mine should have been approved ~ the album for Grease is not a reliable source: the only reference cite to a "Grammy" is a reference to her own website ... ??? There are many other accomplishments, awards and notable doings that Maestro Robinson has done, but since I did not personally have reliable cites, I did not mention them ... should I have included them and hope that someone else could cite them? as I see sometimes in articles: citation needed ~ they would have met your guidelines for being a "famous musician") John Wulp,(Reference #1 doesn't even exist ~ another merely has a cite to being a marine even though he is listed as a "scenic designer" ~ Wulp uses the same style Database [Broadway/Film] ~ yet you said it was not reliable on mine, and 3. reference is to "ON THIS ISLAND" which combine reference to all three creators: Bullens, Wulp and Robinson, and yet Wulp was approved) William Bolcolm (they both share the same reference in the New Grove book for composers) ~ and Aaron Robison (this article doesn't even cite references! and it was approved ~ does he meet the guidelines for "famous musicians"?). Wikipedia has already approved the creation of "Black Nativity - In Concert: A Gospel Celebration" which Maestro Robinson created, conducted and recorded (one of just many notable accomplishments) ~ and this had very little reliable sources ~ as did the above mentioned articles (Bullens/Wulp). Could you please specifically tell me and show me what I would need to do in order for my article to be approved? Simply saying, "This is not a reliable source" is not helpful, as with the other articles, there are few very if none at all reliable sources, and yet they were approved. If you can approved the work Mr Robinson created, "Black Nativity", how on earth can you decline my submission on him? Please advise. There are several reliable sources in my article: NY Times, Boston Herald, Mr Robinson's Memoir "Does God Sing", etc, etc, etc ... He is a well-known composer, conductor, author, and recording artist. He is far more notable than the above mentioned article pages that were approved. Please do not penalize Maestro Robinson just because you find fault with how I write an article. If Wikipedia accepted Cindy Bullens, John Wulp, Aaron Robison, you should have accepted mine. However, that being said: two wrongs don't make a right ~ so help me make mine right. Thank you for your specific comments and detailed advice. Tell me what I need to do and I'll do it. I read your detailed comments on the above article from the Oct 14: "RE: Advice on Article" and if you apply what you wrote to LK regarding the Cindy Bullens or John Wulp article, then they should have never been approved. If you can defend those article and in the same breath deny mine, then a precise explanation must be supported. Thank you. Impromp2music Impromp2Music (talk) 13:52, 15 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi there. First, please keep in mind, this is nothing personal against you or your subject. Wikipedia has pretty strict guidelines, and articles need to meet them or they will be deleted. The reason I declined your article as failing to have reliable sources is because most of them are not. Reliable sources are independent of the subject - therefore things like IMDB - which is a database like Wikipedia where anyone can add information, is not reliable. Also, websites for musicals and movies he's been involved in are not reliable - because they are not independent of the subject. Here is a break down of why the sources work or don't work:
 * Portland/Phoenix - the link is dead
 * Take a Bough Productions - this source is not independent of the subject because it's a performance he was involved in.
 * PBS - This is content that was written by the film producer and maker, not independent of the subject.
 * The opera's website - Not independent of the subject
 * IMDB - not reliable
 * Wikipedia links - not reliable sources because they also are created by the public, like IMDB
 * Another IMDB - not reliable
 * All Music - it's a discography which is supplied by the artist or his representatives, not reliable.

All of these sources are primary sources - written by someone involved with the subject. They don't help build notability for the subject, and they are not reliable because they are written by people related to him. I have just browsed Google to see if I can find reliable sources - news stories, etc - I went through five pages of Google results and I cannot find a news story about him. It looks like, at this point, Mr. Robinson isn't notable enough to merit inclusion in Wikipedia. Perhaps wait until he gets more press attention for his work. I hope there are other subjects you have interest in editing about and don't let this deter you!


 * And in regards to Black Nativity - In Concert: A Gospel Celebration I don't know how that was approved - the subject is also not notable. And Cindy Bullens has coverage in media sources and John Wulp won a Tony, so it's not quite the same thing as Mr. Robinson in regards to notability SarahStierch (talk) 17:39, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Just FYI: the dead link is just a typo; there's a trailing slash that's causing the link to be dead. The correct link is: http://www.portlandphoenix.com/music/other_stories/documents/04301692.asp . Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 17:44, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks Writ, that makes it the only reliable source! SarahStierch (talk) 17:46, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, Sarah ~ I appreciate your attempt for justification. However, I'm not seeing the media coverage links via references on the article page for Cindy Bullens ~ just links to her website. Regardless of searching on "Google" which in itself is not a reliable source since much is physically printed in articles, books, newspapers, magazine, etc ... I'm still not seeing how Aaron Robison (a ballet dancer) is notable over Aaron Robinson ~ and media sources for Bullens is not evident on her Wikipedia Article except through her own website. Is not the NY Times, New Groves Dictionary of Music and Musicians, Boston Herald, which are not on Google or Online, sufficient? How does one sight non-online sources? simply searching Google should not allow a reviewer from approving or not ... how does one cite published materials to back up a notable source? and how can this be a guideline for a musician, and not include Mr Robinson? "This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, books, magazine articles, online versions of print media, and television documentaries" ... there are two mentioned documentaries about Mr. Robinson cited ... he has also written TV themes, has been placed in rotation nationally by a major radio or music television network, has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style, has been a featured subject of a substantial broadcast segment across a national radio or TV network .... these are all notable guidelines and meet with Mr. Robinson ... what can I do to elaborate or include them? Impromp2Music (talk) 18:18, 15 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia loves paper sources. Please cite the books, magazines, etc.  I've tried a Google Books search, which is often very useful in cases where someone is mentioned in such sources and not on the web, but I can't find anything about the Maestro, although I can find Black Nativity itself:  No independent coverage of the musical, though, so it would fail my quick notability check. --Slashme (talk) 07:14, 16 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Hey there. I didn't take a look at Aaron Robison, but he is notable according to Google searches - he's a soloist for a major ballet and has international media coverage about his work. I did tag it for lacking reliable sources, however. Cindy is also notable, just by googling her. I tagged her article as needing improvement also due to poor sourcing. You can learn more about citing non-online sources here: Offline sources. I would also read the notability guidelines for musicians/composers. For further help please visit the Teahouse, it's a space on Wikipedia I co-designed to help new editors like yourself. Good luck! SarahStierch (talk) 18:20, 15 October 2012 (UTC)


 * If I may butt in again: Citations don't actually have to be online to be used. It's understandable how that could be assumed, given how much Wikipedia uses online sources, but you're right: many sources aren't online, and we'd be crippling ourselves if we disallowed them. You do still need to cite them, though, and you have to be careful  Check out the cite book and cite news templates; they're pretty helpful in formatting references, and can be used with offline sources just as easily as online ones. Feel free to ask if you need help using them! Just be sure to put as much information in as you can, and you should be fine. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 18:21, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, Writ ... I was really beginning to feel a bit annoyed with the idea that all a Wikipedia reviewer has to do in order to deem a subject "notable" is to Google them for 5 pages ... I find this incredulous at best and now realize why Wikipedia gets so much damaging press for their own "reliability" ... simply Googling a name might not bring you reputable information unless teamed with specific additional key phrases. I will follow your advice and make sure I go by the strict guidelines for citing published (not online) sources. I will not be "declined" again. I did find this a "personal" reviewing that seemed biased and self-appointing in their power to deem a subject notable. You should be judged on what your articles states and references, not what a reviewer takes upon themselves to Google ... that's why Wikipedia is a separate entity from Google.

Sarah, although I am new to this, I feel confident in saying that perhaps as a reviewer of articles you may be mistaking the "notability" of a subject with its "citable" sources. "Notable" means that the subject is WORTHY of inclusion in an Encyclopedia ... Citations merely support the facts within that article. For example: if a young, teenage rock-band has 5 pages of Google mentions, does this make them "notable"? No ... it only means that their manager is very good in booking them in venues that yield reviews. Likewise, if (hypothetically speaking) Beethoven only had one book ever written about him, because of this lack of "citable online sources", would he be deemed not "notable" in your estimation? I am disheartened that you choose subjects by what you can find on Google as to their notability, rather than assessing their accomplishments and what is actually written within an article. A 26 year old ballet dancer is not notable in my estimation; and shame on you for saying that "Black Nativity - A Gospel Celebration" is not notable. It IS a notable subject ... just poorly cited. This is no way to review for Wikipedia ... Impromp2Music (talk) 20:33, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
 * please read Ignore all credentials and other such writings. e.g. "please keep in mind that I am a professional museum curator and researcher" - no, that is not the wiki way. Do read Essjay controversy - claims of expertise over others are out of place. MathewTownsend (talk) 21:28, 15 October 2012 (UTC)


 * @Impromptu: Actually, that's another common misunderstanding about Wikipedia. Notability, in a Wikipedia sense, actually does mean citable sources.  The exact definition of notability varies based on the subject, but at its most basic, it's demonstrated by the golden rule: "Articles require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject."  This is complemented by the language in the notability guideline itself: "Information on Wikipedia must be verifiable; if no reliable third-party sources can be found on a topic, then it should not have a separate article."  Coverage in reliable sources is absolutely core to what we do here, because it's the only standard of accuracy we can provide. Without reliable sources, we have nothing to write about, because our information is only ever as good as the sources that back it. Thus, our policies on notability are built around the existence and use of reliable sources. There are other reasons that notability revolves around reliable sources (like objectivity vs. the subjective weighting of "what achievements makes a person notable"), but verifiability is the key one. So, no, Sarah wasn't wrong in conflating notability with reliable sourcing; the two are meant to be paired that way. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 21:49, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm just complaining about any editor who claims "extra" expertise or "credentials" as a reason for being right. MathewTownsend (talk) 22:16, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

There are articles about Robinson in local papers, most, unfortunately, seem to be behind paywalls. This Google search gives us the Bangor Daily News - Oct 6, 2001, "A tale of two islands North Haven musical hits home with..." etc. and other articles that appear to be about performances in Maine directed by Robinson.

I think it's worth pointing out the difference between the notability requirement and citations per se. For example this is a perfectly good supporting citation that Robinson directed Into the Woods but it is (almost) useless for supporting notability.

All the best. Rich Farmbrough, 03:00, 19 October 2012 (UTC).

‎

Abar Bochhor Tirish Pore
Hi Sarah ~ recently you reviewed my submission "Abar Bocchor Tirish" pore and marked it for deletion. It would be helpful if you can please point out the specific objections in the article. I see the whole page marked for deletion but there are no specific point is the article earmarked for the same. A similar tribute concert article "First Rock Concert - Remembering Mohiner Ghoraguli (2007)" was written by me and friend Aryasanyal earlier and this is about a similar tribute concert held in Kolkata. Also i would like to point out that in Bengali - "Bochhor" means years and I see Braincricket has corrected it as "bochor" and redirected the page. There is no such word in Bengali. I would like to make the necessary changes in the article so that the article is preserved. The group was pioneer in Indian band music and it was formed in the early 70s when such a thing was alien in India. In that respect this tribute concert was significant and was attended by who's who of Bengali Music. It would be helpful if could you please specifically tell me and show me what I would need to do in order for my article to be approved? prat (talk) 15:06, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Hey there. It has no sources, the article that is. We need reliable third party sources to make this event notable. Anything that isn't cited with a reliable source can be removed - the entire article has no citations. Reliable sources include magazine and newspaper articles about the event. Hope this helps! SarahStierch (talk) 17:42, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

There was an external link, where a leading newspaper in Kolkata had captured the event details but was removed by "Braincricket". Please refer: http://www.telegraphindia.com/1080105/jsp/calcutta/story_8729275.jsp. It's sad the so called custodians of Wiki are resorting to selective editing. This being a vernacular/local indian event, for obvious reasons, the coverage was mostly in the local media, some of which don't have enough online presence. That's precisely the reason for it to be uploaded on wiki, to help preserve the events as there isn't enough online presence. Also, I guess some of the terminologies are in local vernacular language (bengali) and is beyond people who don't know the language, but that shouldn't give someone the license to modify or delete the terms without thinking of the implication. I have a brocheure of the event which captures the details, but i can't really upload it as it has logos of the sponsors. Also, request you to check out this video of youtube of the event: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIb_Xc5NdJM. Would also request you withdraw your recommendation of deletion of the page as i am trying to find out more resources which can be provided. Please also help me understand how can we provide these citations and references. I am back in wiki writing after a long gap of 5 years and lot of things seem to have changed :) prat (talk) 03:44, 16 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Certainly Bengali coverage can be used to establish notability. The important thing to remember is that it is notability we are trying to establish, though, not simply that the event occurred. The citation you gave says "Event: Aabaar Bochhor Tirish Porey, a philharmonic rock concert featuring songs of Mohiner Ghoraguli When: Today; 5 pm onwards Where: Nicco Park"  which is scarcely enough to do that.  Really we need a minimum of a couple of reviews of the concert, to give it any chance of surviving AfD. Rich Farmbrough, 04:07, 19 October 2012 (UTC).