User talk:Ombudsman/Archive 6

 This archive page covers the dates between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2010.

Notification
Notification: WP:AE--Tznkai (talk) 07:06, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The result of said discussion is that you are blocked for 3 weeks for disruption, and banned permanently from all pages relating to vaccinations and autism. This ban includes talk pages, templates, categories, and images as well as articles. Violation of it will result in an instant permaban. Moreschi (talk) 21:56, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of National Autism Association
I have nominated National Autism Association, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/National Autism Association. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. - Eldereft (cont.) 17:30, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Autism Treatment Trust
I have nominated Autism Treatment Trust, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Autism Treatment Trust. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. - Eldereft (cont.) 16:17, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

An article you created maybe deleted soon: Tools which can help you
The article you created: Autism Treatment Trust  may be deleted from Wikipedia.

There is an ongoing debate about whether your article should be deleted here:
 * Articles for deletion/Autism Treatment Trust .

The faster you respond, the better chance the article you created can be saved.

Finding sources which mention the topic of your article is the very best way to avoid an article being deleted Findsources3:
 * Find sources for Autism Treatment Trust : google news recent, google news old, google books, google scholar, NYT recent, NYT old, a9, msbooks, msacademic ...You can then cite these results in the Article for deletion discussion.

Also, there are several tools and helpful editors on Wikipedia who can help you:
 * 1) List the page up for deletion on Article Rescue Squadron. You can get help listing your page on the Article Rescue Squadron talk page.
 * 2) You can request a mentor to help explain all of the complex rules that editors use to get a page deleted: Wikipedia:Adopt-a-User. But don't wait for a mentor to respond to you before responding on the article for deletion page.
 * 3) When trying to delete a page, veteran editors love to use a lot of rule acronyms. Don't let these acronyms intimidate you. Here is a list acronyms you can use yourself: WP:Deletion debate acronyms which may support the page you created being kept.
 * 4) You can vote to merge the article into a larger or better established article on the same topic.

If your page is deleted, you still have many options available. Good luck! travb (talk) 20:33, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:William G Steiner.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:William G Steiner.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the media description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stifle (talk) 11:04, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of God complex
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article God complex, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process&#32; because of the following concern:
 * There is nothing in this article;moreover, this term is slang, and not used in psychology. At most a redirect is needed, but not an article.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Ismouton (talk) 22:45, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Dispute process involving territorial/possessive editing
Is there any pointers to lead me to look at the process dealing with an editor who is territorial/possessive about the articles, even the person may be a minor contributor? Samuelsenwd (talk) 17:22, 3 April 2009 (UTC) Found the necessary articles dealing with this. "Wikipedia:Ownership" Samuelsenwd (talk) 19:45, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Request for comment
Hi Ombudsman. Per the stipulations at WP:CANVASSING, I've pinged your talk page to "appropriately canvass" you wrt the deletion discussion currently taking place at "WP:Articles for deletion/Home and family blog." (Note that I've also pinged the talkpages of all of your fellow participants at last years deletion discussion at "WP:Articles for deletion/List of blogs," to ensure that my notifications are to are small number of wiki-contributors that have been neutrally selected.) I hope you'll consider taking part in our discussion. Thanks.  ↜Just me, here, now … 07:34, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of SafeMinds
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article SafeMinds, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process&#32; because of the following concern:
 * No indication of WP:ORG notability...a mention in a red-linked book doesn't quite cut it.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. &mdash; Scientizzle 16:57, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Walt Stack


The article Walt Stack has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Non-notable subject

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing  will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

File source problem with File:Belli And the Children Shall Lead.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Belli And the Children Shall Lead.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 06:21, 30 August 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Salavat (talk) 06:21, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Stealth-adapted virus
I have nominated Stealth-adapted virus, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Stealth-adapted virus. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Irbisgreif (talk) 05:48, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Ombudsman! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 4 of the articles that you created  are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to insure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the list:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 22:06, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Gary Brooker -
 * 2) John Allman -
 * 3) Brian Hooker -
 * 4) Richard Kunin -

Articles for deletion nomination of Autism Action Coalition
I have nominated Autism Action Coalition, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Autism Action Coalition. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message.  MBisanz  talk 03:51, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Chantek.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Chantek.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:20, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Vicky Vette Article
i am not sure i am in the right area to file a grevance against this Hullaballoo Wolfowitz who without any previous discussion decided to undo a number of valid inserts. Since I am a novice I seldomly involve myself and frankly may not again but his assertions were false, misleading and incomplete. His/her interpretations inaccurate as I had worked out a number of the issues with Dismas some time back (along with some editing).

So, I wish to file a complaint on this matter as well as his unilateral decision to block my edits as I was undoing his error of judgements.

If I am in the wrong place please send the link where to go. Db54 (talk) 22:23, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Fukuoka Marathon
Hi Ombudsman. This may be a bit neolithic for you, I have removed a section you added to the Fukuoka Marathon three years ago. It is far too close to the wording of the original source and constitutes plagiarism. I assume this was inadvertent? I will look to have go of summarising the history in the near future, unless you want to rewrite it yourself? Thanks. SFB 17:59, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * huh? uh, lol?  you seem to be contradicting yourself, first you indicated the wording is close, then you make an outright accusation of plagiarism.  not sure exactly how that type of facetious gamesmanship has become par for the course here at the Wiki, but shouldn't at least that sort of nit picking abuse of process be left to the articles hounded by spin doctors?  Ombudsman (talk) 05:51, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I was merely suggesting that the plagiarism was unintentional. I am not contradicting myself: close-paraphrasing is a form of plagiarism. Take the following examples:
 * "the first Asahi marathon, predecessor of the Fukuoka International marathon was held...in Kumomoto, hometown of Shizo Kanaguri, the godfather of marathon running in Japan" (all copied from source verbatim)
 * Also compare:
 * (Your version) "was sanctioned by the IAAF and changed its name to the Fukuoka International Marathon Championships. The driving idea behind the name change was to invite the winners of all the major marathons around the world to a year-end race to crown the best marathon runner of the year"
 * (Original source) "was sanctioned by the IAAF and changed its name to International marathon Championships. The underlining idea being to invite the winners of all major marathons world wide to a race at the end of the year to crown the best marathon runner of the year"
 * I'm not trying to be facetious or nit-picky, hence my asking you if you wanted to rewrite it yourself. I did not really leave you a message to admonish you, but more specifically to clarify why I had wholesale removed some of your work – something most people like an explanation for. The work was not compliant with licensing. It has been removed. Perhaps we should just leave it at that. SFB 01:46, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Meade Emory


The article Meade Emory has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Seems to exist only as a Scientology related coatrack. Orphaned and long term unreferenced material. Not notable

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Scott Mac 16:18, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Meade Emory for deletion
The article Meade Emory is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Scott Mac 09:25, 17 December 2010 (UTC)