User talk:Muhandes/Archive 4

DYK for Wyborn Reef Light
The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Jaffa Port
it is located in Old Jaffa. פארוק (talk) 22:28, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
 * You probably mean Old City (Jaffa). --Muhandes (talk) 22:33, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
 * yes פארוק (talk) 23:09, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

May 2011
yo stop bothering me —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dennissmith68 (talk • contribs) 21:34, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
 * From the nice tone I suppose you are User:75.181.137.167. I am happy you registered an account, bad I am sad you chose to vandalize my talk page. I'm afraid if you keep adding unsourced information I will have to continue to revert it and ask you to stop it. If you consider this "bothering you" then don't add unsourced material. Happy editing. --Muhandes (talk) 05:09, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Kiss and Tell (EP) cover.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Kiss and Tell (EP) cover.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. –  Kerαu noςco pia ◁ gala xies 05:27, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Re: Fever (Kylie Minogue album)
Hi. Sorry for the late reply. Actually, that wasn't a mistake. I didn't mean to be disrespectful or anything, I'm just not fond of this template, I found it rather clunky, so I much prefer the previous format. Also, I feel its usage was imposed, similarly to the chart macros.  Snap Snap  23:22, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't see why you think its usage is imposed. There was a discussion in WT:ALBUM and objections were raised and addressed, as far as I can tell. Do you have any specific objections which were not addressed? I'd be happy to try to address them. You are in any case free to use or not use it as you see fit - no one is imposing anything. The template is simply an effort to standardize on the looks, sources, and categorization of certifications. The same could be achieved through very hard editorial work, if one prefers it. --Muhandes (talk) 23:35, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
 * The template as a whole is fine. I personally prefer the  format over the one used in the template, but that's just me. Also, is there any particular reason why the word "platinum" should be capitalised?  Snap  Snap  00:32, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I see what you are saying about, I'll add that option to the template. As for capitalizing the award I just copied the common practice. I can only guess that it's done this way to distinguish "platinum" (the material) from "Platinum" (the award). English is only my third language, so if someone with authority says it's wrong I'll easily change it - see, that's another thing easy with a template, to change all the instances at once. --Muhandes (talk) 17:14, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm glad you took  into account, this makes me enthusiastic about the template. Since English is not my mother tongue either, I might as well take the capitalisation matter to WT:CHARTS. I also think parameters such as   (when the certification date is available) and   could be integrated into the template.  Snap  Snap  18:17, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ You can specify  for , see Fever (Kylie Minogue album) for how it looks. You can specify   for the certification date (  was already supported). I hope you'll find this template useful. --Muhandes (talk) 12:37, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
 * It looks great now, thanks. Some links need fixing though, such as CAPIF, IFPI (which happens to be the certifying body for Belgium as well), CRIA and RIANZ, and the link for Germany is missing. Also, do you think you could replace hyphens (-) with ndashes (–) in the  field?  Snap  Snap  22:11, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what you mean by "links need fixing", the link to CAPIF for instance seems fine to me. Can you be more specific? As for Belgium, the List of music recording certifications gives the "	Belgian Entertainment Association" as the authority, I believe they are the local IFPI representative. I fixed Germany, and replaced the hyphens with ndashes, thanks for noticing these. --Muhandes (talk) 04:38, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
 * What I meant was that links like IFPI, BVMI and CAPIF are redirects, that's why I said they needed fixing. Belgian Entertainment Association redirects to Ultratop, which is the chart provider for Belgium; the certifying body, however, should be listed as being the IFPI. According to the latter article, Ultratop was "created on the initiative of the Belgian Entertainment Association (BEA), the Belgian member organization of IFPI."  Snap Snap  17:31, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Well, there is nothing wrong with redirects, but I'll go over and move them. As for Belgium, the authority granting the certification is the "Belgian Entertainment Association", which is the local chapter of the IFPI. The fact that it redirects to something else is what should be corrected (and I'm going to correct it right now). --Muhandes (talk) 18:32, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ and I also created Belgian Entertainment Association. I'll create ZPAV some time later this week. --Muhandes (talk) 14:26, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Awesome. What about Russia's National Federation of Phonogram Producers? It currently redirects to List of music recording certifications.  Snap Snap  14:47, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Added that to my do to list as well. --Muhandes (talk) 17:21, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Vandalism - PSG College of Technology
It has also been cited and referenced with the official websites of the magazines.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Webuser0 (talk • contribs) 16:35, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Maybe now it is. But when Debasishkoley reverted it, it wasn't, so he wasn't vandalising, he was fighting the inclusion of unsourced information, a noble cause. --Muhandes (talk) 18:56, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Belgian Entertainment Association
Materialscientist (talk) 08:03, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Led Zeppelin III
Hi, The reason I deleted information about a reissue of Led Zeppelin III with an extra track (Hey Hey What Can I Do) is because this version of LZ III doesn't exist. This album has never been reissued with any extra tracks. I've looked on the internet everywhere for info on this supposed 2005 release and have found nothing. Also, members of a Led Zeppelin forum (who are LZ nuts!) have never heard of this reissue either. Please show me evidence that this version of LZ III exists. Until you do this I will continue to delete this info everytime it's reposted. Thanks Andrew Smith —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.147.144.227 (talk) 23:45, 22 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Sure thing. As I explained in your talk page, I agree with your deletion. I reverted your edits because you gave no justification for the removal of content. Now that you are providing the reason it is all very clear. In the future use the edit summary to avoid such cases. --Muhandes (talk) 05:13, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Merzbow contributions
Hi man, you must already know who i am. If not i am the guy who creates the Merzbow pages from time to time.

I was wondering, why dont you make the pages and everything instead of me doing them??

Also, are you a merzbow fan or something like that? I would love to talk to a fellow merzfan XD--Pachon (talk) 05:14, 23 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Sorry to disappoint you, but I am not a merzbow fan. I simply saw a bunch of pages who could use my editing, so I went ahead and helped. I wouldn't know where to start with creation of new material. Besides, you seem to be doing a good job, and I'm be happy to help making it just slightly better. Best regards, and happy editing. --Muhandes (talk) 05:18, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Aw, i thought you were a merzfan. Well, im making one page a day so i have something to do for now so be sure to check for one new page you can help on. Also, i think the 13 Japanese Birds page from Merzbow may need your personal touch XD--Pachon (talk) 07:12, 23 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Added what I could to 13 Japanese Birds, let me know if you think anything is missing. --Muhandes (talk) 08:50, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

It just misses one more picture, the one of the 14th CD. But overall it looks great. I once added the covers but someone erased them because they were not relevent or something like that. Now it looks so good. Thanks.

There are a lot of Merzbow articles out there so you have a lot of work to do. (hahaha)--Pachon (talk) 18:29, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
 * If you tell me where I can find the image of the 14th I'll add it. --Muhandes (talk) 18:35, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

I think you can find it on Discogs, Important Records or on a google immage search typing the name of the album--Pachon (talk) 06:53, 24 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Got it --Muhandes (talk) 08:45, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi!
Hello. I added some references for my links for the Latin Grammy Awards. Cheers. Jaespinoza (talk) 20:47, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I noticed. I also added the year in the two cases I saw, I think it adds to the context. --Muhandes (talk) 21:35, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Certification template
Hello. I saw your edits on Kiss albums concerning certifications, and I've tried to add Finnish certificates for Animalize and Crazy Nights. The problem is, when I went to see how it looks, the table would say 0 for sales. Could you please add those certificates(or at least one) so I could see what to do in the future? Both albums were certified Gold, Animalize in 1985, Crazy Nights in 1987. Thanks. Zrinschchuck 20:42, 28 May 2011
 * For Finnish certification, one needs to add the salesamount parameter, as listed by the Finnish website. I should add error messages to the template, I never get to do it. --Muhandes (talk) 18:46, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I get it. I don't know how much it is needed for Platinum, but 25,000 is for Gold. Zrinschchuck 20:58, 28 May 2011
 * The template tries to calculate the certified figure. However, as the Finnish certification database lists the exact sales figure, this is not required. Instead the template expects it as input. As I said, better error messages are something I need to add one day. --Muhandes (talk) 19:55, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Addendum : for sales Argentina and most other countries, all one needs is the release year (relyear) or in some cases the certification year (certyear). I understand this may take time to get used to, feel free to ask any questions and I'd be happy to help. --Muhandes (talk) 23:19, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Netherlands cert
At one point, I've added the Netherlands on one of my sandboxes for an article. So I checked out the link and it looks like they revamped the site. That or I did something wrong. DJ Magician Man (talk) 00:13, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Grrrr they did. I'll have to look at it tomorrow and see what I can do. Thanks for letting me know. --Muhandes (talk) 00:16, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
 * It seems like at this point they didn't put the full DB up yet, so we will just have to wait until they do and see what we can do then. --Muhandes (talk) 00:37, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

I can just image how frustrating this is. First the RIAA made an unnecessary (and I dare a say more difficult) search and now this. DJ Magician Man (talk) 00:43, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
 * You are forgetting BVMI changing the format three times, which was what initiated my cite certification project. And we lost most of the Danish sources not long ago as well. It might still be savable in this case, we'll have to wait and see what the new format is.--Muhandes (talk) 06:52, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually I never knew did that three times. The name of the album I was doing it on was Bachata Rosa. DJ Magician Man (talk) 16:53, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

IIT Madras
Dude, I think the IITM gates was not trivial. The taramani gate is a part of the culture. Hariya1234 (talk) 16:53, 29 May 2011 (UTC)


 * New messages at the bottom please.
 * Trivial or not, for sure it was unsourced. --Muhandes (talk) 20:04, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Edit warring
Muhandes, the validity of the rationale of fair-use of the images on 13 Japanese Birds is challenged, hence, if there is no valid rationale (and that is under discussion ..) then it is not fair use - the use of those images is in violation of NFCC - and hence, those images are not to be used until the validity is proven. Reverting those images back in is a violation of said policy, you may be using material in violation of copyright. I suggest that you first get consensus, or satisfy the fair-use rationale. I am sorry, but the use of non-free material without a valid rationale may get you blocked. Thanks. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:03, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I thought we were having a discussion about the validity of the rationale. I thought Wikipedia was about collaboration and discussion. I guess I was wrong. --Muhandes (talk) 10:14, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

No, that is still the case, it is still about collaboration and discussion. Except for some cases, inclusion needs to be discussed. Say that we have somewhere a non-free image which does not have a fair-use rationale, but is displayed in mainspace. Wikipedia is then displaying an image in violation of copyright. We can not keep the image there, and wait until consensus forms or a proper fair-use rationale is written, running the risk of being sued for violating copyright ... such images get removed until consensus is formed. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:50, 30 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Except this is not the case. All images had a rationale. There was a civil discussion ongoing about an interpretation of a specific guideline. The discussion could have been taken forward, some compromises were even suggested. It's not even like the discussion was going on for long. Until one editor started throwing block threats around and making it a revert war. I've been here for some time, and made my share of contributions (and arguments). This is the first time I see such behavior from an experienced editor. It is the first time another editor is threatening me with a block. It is the first time another editor throws block templates into my talk page in the middle of discussion. Why other editors protect this behavior is beyond me. --Muhandes (talk) 10:58, 30 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Addendum: I saw your message at the talk page, and while I still don't agree Wikipedia is better off with splitting the articles (if I'll do it I'll seek consensus that the individual album articles are notable first), I can understand the point about the burden lying on the including editor in this case. See - it can be done in a civil way, without threats and template throwing. --Muhandes (talk) 11:07, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

True, that is the case, blocking-threats should not be used, but a warning that blocks may follow when images are re-inserted without addressing the issues first is fair - I don't know if it has happened already, but one could block a user who repeatedly re-inserts images without solving the problem without further warning for repeated copyright violations. And for as far as I see, Δ used 'may' in his sentence, and a low-level remark/warning. Unfortunately, many of these cases, where Δ did not show the editors that their re-insertions may get them blocked for violating copyrights have ended up in edit-warring (and a plethora of reports to the 3RR noticeboard against Δ). I hope this explains. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:26, 30 May 2011 (UTC)


 * I probably leave dozens of warning a day. I'd estimate a quarter of my 40kish edits ( just checked, I was a bit off, but still thousands overall ) were vandalism reverts and warnings left in talk pages. None of them are left in the middle of an ongoing discussion as way to end the discussion. You seem like a reasonable editor and I'm sure you can see the difference. Anyway, I make it seem all dramatic when this is just a minor tackle. I hope I wont have to deal with the such of Δ in the future, I'm still sure the majority of editors are not like that. --Muhandes (talk) 11:48, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, I am still not sure if Δ meant it as a way to end the discussion, or in good faith notifying an editor that re-insertion without consensus to do so may get them blocked (and even if such an editor was not warned, after 3-4 reverts I may block an editor re-re-re-inserting the images - discussion or no discussion) - resulting in that the editor is not capable of discussion, or solving the problem otherwise, anymore. Anyway, you're right. Time to move on. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:00, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

From Tarun Kanti Sen
I am Jatindranath Sengupta's youngest son. Kindly restore the article I uploaded. If you want proof or want to meet me, please send a mail to my hotmail : tksen24@hotmail.com or to my son's email : jsen75@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.169.33.142 (talk) 17:32, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi. I'd be happy to meet, if you can come to Israel. I'd be in Australia in July, we can meet there if it is more convenient. Laughing aside, I have some suggestions. First, I'd be happy if you registered an account, it is hard to discuss anything with an IP address. Regarding the article, I realize you are not happy with the state of the article about your father - I know I wouldn't if it was my father. Sadly, there is little I can do. Your edits were lacking reliable sources for verification, and that's a very major requirement in any encyclopedia, and specifically Wikipedia. I realize this is a bit much to chew for a new editor. I suggest you follow the links on this message and I'd be happy to help, so feel free to ask any questions. One thing I do suggest is that you read about conflict of interest to avoid any future problems. Best regards. --Muhandes (talk) 17:45, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I thought if I give you a polite and lengthy answer, you will at least try to learn how to edit the page properly, and we could improve it together. I'm disappointed.--Muhandes (talk) 19:10, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Per se disambiguation
Thanks. I was goign to leave you a note asking if there was some problem with WPCleaner, since it reverted several edits I had made leading up to yours, and I didn't think that was your attention. Daniel Case (talk) 20:45, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, it was WP cleaner doing it when all I did was a dab resolve. The worse part is, you don't even get an edit preview with WP cleaner. I noticed the problem from your edit summary (I keep watch of every article I edit, at least for some time), so the second time I did it manually. I'll ask the WP Cleaner author what they think of it. --Muhandes (talk) 21:17, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Indeed, a bug was found involving a page being open for a very long time before sending the result (more than 24h I believe). I understand it is being fixed. --Muhandes (talk) 09:27, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I believe the bug was resolved. --Muhandes (talk) 14:58, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Reply re Filmfare
Hey friend, I'm sorry, it's my mistake - the list on the official site includes all the lists up to 2005. I've added another source. If you browse per years, you will find the entire lists of nominees, including the ones for Best Supporting Actor. Thank you for the query. Shahid •  Talk 2 me  14:57, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for adding the source. --Muhandes (talk) 15:00, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Farbod Khoshtinat
Hello Muhandes. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Farbod Khoshtinat, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: '''if he really is "better known as Fred", then that's the correct title per WP:COMMON. Please use WP:RM instead.''' Thank you.  So Why  20:28, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Abdul kalam, alumni of MIT
I don't know about your nationality, even a school child knows Abdul Kalam studied at MIT which belongs to Anna Univ. If u argue, MIT was not in Anna Univ during his time, than Mr.Sujatha's name should also be taken away. Even in wiki's pages APJ's pages it is mentioned clearly. Even I do belong to MIT. stop undoing without analysis. check out his own link http://www.abdulkalam.com/kalam/jsp/display_content.jsp?

Sathishbabu — Preceding unsigned comment added by Babuonwiki (talk • contribs) 17:53, 9 June 2011


 * Please read WP:V and WP:TRUTH, you are mixing between them. Also, please sign your messages. --Muhandes (talk) 15:00, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually MIT was merged with Anna University in 1978. Abdul Kalam graduated in the 50s. Doesn't every child know that? --Muhandes (talk) 15:04, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Sarah Brightman albums
Your contributions to the Sarah Brightman albums were truly necessary but YOU ARE deleting information that is already sourced! I know I must not delete the template updates but remember that you NEITHER are the OWNER of the articles! So, for example, Brightman's Symphony album was certified Gold in Taiwan and in Poland, you erased that information but the source was there. They were in Chinese and in Polish respectively and they were articles regarding the awards. I ask you to revert these changes and be more careful on what you delete. The same is happening with La Luna, Eden, Time to Say Goodbye albums. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.154.212.217 (talk) 21:37, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Please add comments to talk pages always at the bottom and please sign your messages.
 * For the matter at hands, I might have made a singular mistake, but certifications I removed were, to my best understanding, not sources. Specifically, the Polish certification was by EMI, not an official certification, as all Polish certifications are well documented in the ZPAV database. --Muhandes (talk) 17:53, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Shutter Shades
Dear Who ever you are i am expert in fashion and have been for over 40 years this is what i teach therfore your action to remove contents which has been sourced from fashion book and history will not be accepted and if you vandalise the page again i will report your action to wikipedia i will be monitoring the page and have downloaded the content.

therefore why you choose to carry out these form of vandalisum. let the truth be put on these pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.242.247.32 (talk) 21:50, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
 * You are replacing a cited article with a bunch of unsourced original research. Continue to do so and you will be banned. --Muhandes (talk) 21:57, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:ZPAV logo.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:ZPAV logo.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 17:08, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Don´t Delete Informations!!
If you are not enjoying my amendments (in fact I'm adding) because you deleted several names that are considered "Sex Symbols. " because you do not demand and puts the references yourself? for example: Errol Flynn was not the only sex symbol of the 30´s. is the fact that Jean Harlow and Mae West were sex symbols at the time of this decade. we all know, only you who insists on getting deleting information. as you can for example do not mention Johnny Depp and Sharon Stone have been and are today sex symbols? so why do not you research the references and adds, as one does not accept changes. just search in the google, do not be lazy! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sandra021075 (talk • contribs) 18:29, 15 June 2011 (UTC)


 * You seem to be a bit misguided, I linked the basic Wikipedia policies at your talk page. Everything in Wikipedia needs a source for verification. The burden of proof is on the editor adding material - you in this case. Don't add unsourced material, and if you do, it will be removed. Continue to do so and you will be banned. --Muhandes (talk) 18:32, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

All India Engineering Entrance Examination
Why cannot I use File:Central Counselling Board logo.png in All India Engineering Entrance Examination? The image is extremely relevant and the use of copyrighted image is allowed if it is used according to the fair use guidelines which I am abiding by. And why are you removing the extremely relevant external links? Isn't there even a single article on Wikipedia with more than one external links? Or is it Wikipedia's guideline to have only one external link per article? ∃  Aaditya 7  19:28, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * For the image, my concern in WP:NFCC #8. I can't see how the image "significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic" when the Central Counselling Board isn't even mentioned in the article. I mentioned it somewhere now, so it might be justified. I'll leave it be.
 * For the links, the relevant guideline is WP:EL. You can see that none of the links you provided really satisfies WP:ELYES or WP:ELMAYBE and they mostly violate WP:ELNO #19.
 * --Muhandes (talk) 07:03, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The two institutions I am linking to, in the external links section are actually an integral part of the All India Engineering Entrance Examination. Central Board of Secondary Education has started the examination and conducts it every year, without which AIEEE would have not existed. The Central Counselling Board fulfills the main function of AIEEE: admitting students to graduate courses in the country. You don't seem to be an Indian or I wouldn't have to explain all these things to you. Please avoid acting so aggressively on changes in articles that you don't know much about, that are not clear infringement of WP's guidelines. Remove external links when you are sure they are insignificant. Don't remove external links because you don't know if they are significant. Anyway, you are a great asset to WP.&mdash; ∃  Aaditya 7  13:48, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry if I seem aggressive, it is just that I monitor close to 10,000 articles, and I don't always have all the time to give thorough explanations. I trust that editors that don't agree will come to my talk page to discuss it (as you did). As a matter of fact, I edited so much in the subject of Indian high education that I know exactly what the purpose of these organizations is. The issue here is not the significance of the organizations, but the conformity of the external links to the rules - they must satisfy either WP:ELYES or WP:ELMAYBE and must not fall under any of WP:ELNO. I believe they don't satisfies WP:ELYES or WP:ELMAYBE and they mostly violate WP:ELNO #19. You can argue my interpretation of the rules but saying "they are significant" does not do that. You can also argue that the rules are not reasonable of course, that's what WT:EL is for. --Muhandes (talk) 14:16, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Article on Erl
Hi Muhendes, Thanks for editing the Thomas Erl article as per WP guideline. The article was earlier moved to AFD after which I edited the article and included citations & references that can verify the author's work. Now it has been restored to main namespace and is under discussion whether to keep or delete it. Seeing your experience in the WP, please let me know whether I can provide my comments in the discussion to keep the article or should it come from other contributors? Appreciate your help. Edited by Sanjay (talk) 11:00, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
 * You are free to state your opinion, but it would be advisable to say that you are the main author. I'd like to point out that while I have no strong opinion of the article and I doubt I will cast my !vote, I think the major problem with the article was not resolved. Namely, the article is still about SOA, not about the person. While Mr. Erl may be known for the very few which deal with SOA, the coverage he had in unrelated sources is very minimal. Take for instance the "Biography" section - it starts in 2004, when he was already 37 years old! Where was he born? What did he learn, and where? What did he do before 2004? This all points to very limited notability outside SOA. While you may have added sources about his contribution, you did not say anything about the person's background, and after all, that's what an encyclopedic article is about. --Muhandes (talk) 11:26, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Muhendes, thanks for your comment. To get personal background detail I have to reach the author and get it from him. Even if I get some info I do not know whether they can be verified as it might not have reference on the web. Hence I provided the article with info that can be verified on web through other websites, articles, book publishers, & magazines. The article is about Thomas's work for which he is notable in the IT field because of contribution to SOA & related SOA books. Edited by Sanjay (talk) 11:09, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Here lies the problem - the article is not called "Thomas Erl's work on SOA", it is called "Thomas Erl". It should not be about his work - it should be about him. That's the purpose of encyclopedic articles. The fact that you can't find background information about him might mean that no such information is available, which means he did not receive coverage in third party reliable publications, the exact definition of notability. As I said above, I am not going to !vote on this, but I do see the problem. --Muhandes (talk) 11:15, 14 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Hello Muhendes, I don´t know if I am supposed to barge in on this page Thomas Erl and add my own comments to this on-going discussion with Mr Sanjay. Forgive me if this is not the proper procedure. I have studied your explanations to Mr Sanjay and can see the points you are making. I think there are two issues there: one is the size of the SOA community which is basically the community for which Mr Erl is relevant. The question then is: is the size of the community a factor of notability? It is not mentionned in the corresponding guidelines, but it would make sense. The second issue is that, while it is true that we are interested in Thomas Erl because he originated a certain amount of concepts which seem to have become popular - as seem to think the readers of 170,000 copies sold so far -, the guidelines on WP book notability aknowledges that the number of sales has not been set by Wikipedia and it is comprehensible: 170,000 buyers of books on SOA do not mean the same as 170,000 readers of a detective thriller. So, it is becoming a little difficult for us to argue our point. Is there any existing page of a technical writer that could serve as a guide for what we are trying to do? Regards.Yveschaix (talk) 22:41, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Everyone is welcome to share an opinion, but please do so always at the end of the discussion.
 * I apologize for the length response, but I think this is should be explained in full. With all due respect, I think you are doing the common mistake of mixing notability with importance. In the words of WP:N, "Article and list topics must be notable, or "worthy of notice". Determining notability does not necessarily depend on things like fame, importance, or popularity". So if not importance, what is the criterion? Again, in the words of WP:GNG, "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject", meaning significant coverage is the main criterion for inclusion. This basic idea is repeated for biographies in WP:BASIC. The reason for this confusion is the so called "Additional criteria". For specific subjects, we sometimes assume notability even if it is not shown by significant coverage. WP:AUTHOR #2 specifically assumes notability when "The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory or technique." In essence this means that someone which originated a new concept was surely covered by reliable sources. However "meeting one or more does not guarantee that a subject should be included." What Sanjay said above, in his own words, is that there is no such coverage. That the only coverage is for Mr. Erl's work, not Mr. Erl the person. The number of people who might think he deserves such coverage is irrelevant.
 * This is, of course, my interpretation and other people may think otherwise, which is why we have the discussion at AfD. --Muhandes (talk) 06:24, 15 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Contrary to my original intentions, I did !vote for weak delete. Both of you are welcome to share your opinion at the discussion.--Muhandes (talk) 07:15, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Would it be OK for me to advise future contributors to the Thomas Erl discussion to focus their contributions on addressing effectively your concerns and then explain what your concerns are? I am afraid Thomas Erl´s supporters do not necessarily understand the issue and may think it is some kind of referendum. Regards Yveschaix (talk) 23:33, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I think I explained my concerns as well as I could. It is generally the case in Wikipedia that editors who sign up just to voice an opinion weaken the argument, see WP:CANVAS and WP:MEAT. --Muhandes (talk) 06:01, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Bros
Dear Member why are you vandlising the bros push page this site if for people to edit information and not for you to decided. the information presnet is from a the offical matt goss site www.mattgoss.com also from the bbc top of the pops which clearly stats bros held number one for two weeks i have also had reports of your abusing other pages please stop this behaviour. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.242.209.187 (talk) 09:09, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Matt goss lead singer of bros www.mattgoss.biz offical site of the history of bros and that clearly states bros went 7 times plantium now he should know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.242.209.187 (talk) 09:10, 17 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Please always add your comments at the bottom of the page, and remember to sign your messages.
 * As for Bros, if I remove content it is only because it goes against official sources. Artists are well known to exaggerate their achievements, which is why official sources always overrule what the artist said. --Muhandes (talk) 09:33, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Romances Spain cert
Hello Muhandes! I'd like you to take a look at this ref. Someone added that it was 8x cert instead of 5x cert in Spain. It also mentions that Romances is the eighteenth best selling album of all time in Spain. I need to know this is reliable or not. Thanks. Magiciandude (talk) 21:09, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. The same user also changed the Spanish cert for Amarte Es Un Placer. Magiciandude (talk) 21:16, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, I'm having second thoughts. The source did not look reliable, but I'm not sure how reliable the original source was. As I really have to go to sleep now, I opted to revert myself and have a second look tomorrow. --Muhandes (talk) 21:19, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Alright thank you. Magiciandude (talk) 21:20, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I had another look and indeed it does not seem to be very reliable. It is based on two forum posts which do not state their sources clearly (at least in a way I can understand) one of which is even blacklisted by Wikipedia. Rather than revert all edits by that editor I have made a comment at their talk page and lets see what they say. --Muhandes (talk) 10:43, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Hello, this figure of 800,000 copies sold, I think it is totally true, I have been collecting information from Luis Miguel for more than 10 years, and by that time it came on television to say he had sold between "Romances" and the collection "All the Romance"1.2 million copies, so do not think the source is wrong, since they have been extracting the data from official sources and present. You can find many sites where they say that sales exceeded a million copies, so the number of platinum and 500,000 copies x5 would be wrong. Franlm14 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 12:08, 1 May 2011 (UTC).
 * What you collected is considered Original Research and cannot be included. You "think it is totally true" and frankly - maybe so do I. But Wikipedia is not about what we think, or even about what is true. It is about what can be verified through reliable sources. You say "since they have been extracting the data from official sources", but you do not say which sources, and neither do them. Maybe they go by the artist or the label? These are known to exaggerate figures. "it came on television" is not much of a source either. I'm sorry, but if no better source can be provided, these do not seem reliable to me. --Muhandes (talk) 12:16, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
 * All these data are taken from PROMUSICAE, what happens in Spain, access to the lists is prohibited by law, the lists are not public. so we have to rely on information filtering, but would not reliably good x5 then platinum, also would be a wrong number, but then I do not care, put whatever you want I do not care. --Franlm14 (talk) 12:30, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I really don't see how or why access could be prohibited by law. However, if a list is not public, then it cannot be used, as sorry as we are for it. The data is available through the weekly charts for some years back, and if that's the only public source, then we will have to limit ourselves to it. I'm sorry that you do not like or care for the outcome, but I wish you will choose stay and continue to contribute, with reliable sources per Wikipedia guidelines. --Muhandes (talk) 12:35, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Here I have another source on the x8 disc platinum romances in Spain, is the newspaper "El Pais" an article on a Luis Miguel concert in Seville in 1999, but below say Luis Miguel with the album "Romances "has sold 800,000 copies in Spain and the compilation" All The Romance "200,000 copies. Ref --Franlm14 (talk) 02:12, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

You are missing the point. Certifications are not synonymous with sales or shipments. Certifications are something given by a specific organization by their own rules. For example, there are rules about the place in which it was sold and the price in some counties. The only way to be certified is that the organization gives you the certification. This source is good for showing 800,000 sales - it says nothing about certification. --Muhandes (talk) 17:44, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Not related, but the guy who kept adding wikilinks to dates did it again despite you giving him the warning and don't know the appropriate place to report it. DJ Magician Man (talk) 00:54, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
 * First warn the on their talk page and revert the edits. After four times try at WP:AIV and if it fails try WP:ANI. --Muhandes (talk) 06:56, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Okay, so after I get the article thoroughly copy-edited, I plan on getting the article nominated for FA (this is my first time). I'd just like to know if the certification table looks fine prior to nominating it. Thanks. DJ Magician Man (talk) 06:11, 19 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I have no real experience with GA/FA on albums, the articles I write are usually on other matters (I just edit albums) but it looks fine. I would be interested to know what they think, if they maybe require a source for the numbers too (I can do that, it just might be a lot of work) or do they think the template it enough. Please let me know if there was any comment on that and I'll try to help. By the way, why not GA first? --Muhandes (talk) 06:36, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I withdrew the GA, see if I could get an A-article (since a GA is not required). But I didn't know that WikiProject Albums did not support A-class ratings. Well at any rate, wish me luck, and I'll let you know if anything wrong with the certifications arises. Thanks. DJ Magician Man (talk) 14:41, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

I Have To Read WP:SOURCES
I have found this information in a newspaper and also in magazine of Delhi Times. The article was with the name Vivian 's seeing vahbbiz.So i have edited that but i don't know what to mension in the sources and which cite .But i think it was my mistake.Sorry 4 that... Adi21124 ( talk2me   —Preceding undated comment added 06:27, 17 June 2011 (UTC).
 * See WP:CITE. --Muhandes (talk) 07:52, 17 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Now what i have done u r talking about.... Adi21124 ( talk2me   —Preceding undated comment added 15:28, 17 June 2011 (UTC).


 * You are repeatedly adding the material without a source. If you found it in a reliable source, add the source for verification. --Muhandes (talk) 23:23, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

I Have Proof
I Have Proof! A music video premierd yesterday, and it said exactly what I put down! Watch Me Zendaya And Bella Thorne! Included on Shake It Up Break It Down! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Patrickmgaddis (talk • contribs) 23:18, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I believe you. In fact, I never claimed you are wrong. However, the Wikipedia verification guidelines requires reliable sources, and without such a source the material will be removed. See this guidelines on how to add citations. --Muhandes (talk) 23:21, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

RE: Summary Style
Thanks for the heads up. I actually was not aware that the attribution licensing of Wikipedia required that. I was picturing more expansion of the new history page, (I still have a few sections of information I will be adding and still need to do a proofread of the entire thing), so it will be substantially different soon. I will also go back and try to reduce the old section a bit into the "Summary style". I will be doing this later today / in the next few days. It seems people normally put the template on the talk page, so I will do that. If necessary I could also put a note in the references section, but it doesn't seem that is required. Thanks Danski14(talk) 16:05, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, attribution template go to the talk page, no need to put anything on the page itself. As for summary style, I believe the original section should be reduced to one or two paragraphs summarizing the main issues. --Muhandes (talk) 16:58, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

List of Indian Engineering college rankings
Hi, with due respect to the changes you have made (from Outlook 2009 to 2010), I'd like to point out that the 2009 rankings give a far more comprehensive view than the 2010 one (due to the large number of colleges not participating). Hence, I felt it better to rank them according to the 2009 rankings as opposed to 2010. Awaiting your comments on this. Thanks!  Lynch 7  16:19, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid I don't agree. In the matter of academic ranking, the latest ranking are what matters. The fact that some institutes choose not to participate is their own problem. --Muhandes (talk) 16:56, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, 'Tis true, but quite unfortunate. Anyways, nice talking to you. Have a good day!  Lynch 7  18:10, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Sex Symbols Topics
...continue

all my quotes have sources, you just check. who should be banned because it is you leave the topic without deleting texts and information all the time. (Example: 30s). there should be a senior manager from Wikipedia to see what you are doing, because you're wrong! you ruined a topic that was very organized. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sandra021075 (talk • contribs) 16:43, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Dear Sandra. By "sourced" we mean "has a source that verifies the claim", in this case, the claim that a person is a sex symbol. The sourced you added do not verify that claim. Anyway, it is better to discuss matters of content on the page's talk page than on another editor's talk page. --Muhandes (talk) 16:53, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Motive Motion Page
I am wondering how i can get the article Motive Motion to abide by Wikipedia standards. What information should I get to help this article out. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tim101 (talk • contribs) 02:41, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * You need to show that one of the conditions in the Criteria for musicians and ensembles is satisfied. --Muhandes (talk) 06:58, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

There are many valid links and information proving this in the article. What exactly needs to be added? Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tim101 (talk • contribs) 18:42, 15 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I have linked the relevant guideline twice now, here is the third time: Criteria for musicians and ensembles. For a band to have an article, a source showing at least one of these conditions is satisfied needs to be included. At the moment, none are. --Muhandes (talk) 07:11, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

So I can find one of these for this article but where exactly can i place them in the article? As a foot note? or a reference? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tim101 (talk • contribs) 15:07, 16 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Facts establishing notability are usually mentioned in the lead (with reliable sources of course). They are discussed in the relevant part of the article. If you let me know what you mean I might have a better answer. The articles deletion discussion is linked at the top of the article. What's the fuss though, are you in any way related to this band? --Muhandes (talk) 15:16, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

No I am not but I would have liked to contribute. as for now I cant find anything on it. But for future ref can other users find any information can the article be un-deleted and edited? Thanks!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tim101 (talk • contribs) 17:43, 21 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I think administrators can restore deleted files, but not being one and never asking for undeletion I can't say for sure. --Muhandes (talk) 17:49, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Panjab University, Chandigarh
Please explain the reason for removal of information about the hostels. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarvpriye (talk • contribs) 00:08, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
 * My edit summary was very clear. The material was copy pasted from http://hostels.puchd.ac.in/ thus violating the copyrights of the university. Wikipedia cannot use copyrighted material without explicit permission. I did not look thoroughly at all the text in the article, but from a quick glimpse it seems like more of this page was thus pasted, which should also be removed promptly. --Muhandes (talk) 18:07, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Polish Society of the Phonographic Industry
The DYK project (nominate) 18:04, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

An Invite to join the WikiProject Education in India
naveenpf (talk) 02:32, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I might as well, seems like that's most of what I'm doing these days. --Muhandes (talk) 05:09, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
 * And quite a good job at that ;)  Lynch 7  05:10, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for joining WP:INEI naveenpf (talk) 05:47, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Naveen Jain
I reverted you here, but only because I think you misunderstood the situation. I want to invite you to take part in the discussion on the talk page of the article.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 13:00, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I was not aware of the amount of bad blood on this silly issue. It seems like a clear case of healthy head/sick bed, so I'll step out. --Muhandes (talk) 13:25, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
 * :-) I have never heard that expression, "healthy head/sick bed".  I do invite you to join the discussion, though, because the article needs people from outside past difficulties to make sure things stay moderate and up beat!--Jimbo Wales (talk) 13:31, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
 * It's in Yiddish originally, "laig zich nit mit a gezunter kop in a kranken bet" (don't lie down with a healthy head in a sick bed). From the look I had at that talk page it seemed way past moderate discussion, and I have so much things better to do than to enter a fight I am really not that interested in. But you have a point, I'll keep watch and if it remains civil I'll donate my 2c. --Muhandes (talk) 13:47, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

A little recognition...

 * Redundant but important? Thanks I guess. --Muhandes (talk) 11:52, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Ha, I meant it must be redundant for you to make all of the moves to so many pages not that the result was redundant. It was meant as nothing but praise, thanks for the work you do. J04n(talk page) 13:36, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Right you are, it is redundant for me. All in good spirit :) Thanks. --Muhandes (talk) 13:57, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Light vs. lighthouse
"Lighthouse" is common use. This is reflected in the fact that all the subjects say "the X light is a lighthouse". I won't push the issue, but there is something strange about calling them "lights". It's like not using "traffic" for a traffic light (which is much more common) - it's just lazy, and results in pages titled "Reading light". And BTW, none of the references provided in the articles use this term. --Sreifa (talk) 04:24, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Sreifa, trust me, the subject has been discussed to death over the years at the lighthouses project. Charts, lists of lights, and marine people in general, always call them lights. Think about it, a navigator at night has no way of telling if there is a lighthouse there or not - all he sees is a light. Land people who never use them may call them lighthouses, especially when the light is not active. The result of multiple discussions in the WikiProject is an understanding that we don't move an article that another editor wrote unless there is an extremely good reason. --Muhandes (talk) 05:20, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * that why I won't push it :-) (how like wikipedia) --Sreifa (talk) 15:36, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

vandalising
Dear sir what give you the right to alter information can you provide the qualification you hold in music as you rthink you know it all if you fail to supply i will pass your information to the information commissioner who regulates sites like this one and also you could face criminal proceeding.

i await your responce — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.242.241.70 (talk) 12:19, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * You are a funny boy/girl, so I'll humour you. All certifications I bring are from the BPI database. That's the most reliable place for BPI certification (see the connection? BPI database for BPI certifications. Who would have guessed?) You keep bringing unsourced numbers, which I have to revert. Please stop, it's getting old. --Muhandes (talk) 12:53, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, and I do so wish to meet the "information commissioner who regulates sites like this one", you might have heard of him, he's called "anybody". And I could be facing criminal proceedings, oh my. Is that a legal threat? --Muhandes (talk) 14:49, 29 June 2011 (UTC)