User talk:Ottawahitech/Archive 1

Speedy deletion of John Ogilvie Green Party of Ontario Canada
A tag has been placed on John Ogilvie Green Party of Ontario Canada, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia per CSD a1.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add  on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add  on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. nattan g 17:57, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Dear Mr. Tang,

I am new to Wikipedia. I am confused as to who is in charge of this page. Originally I thought someone else from Wikipedia by the name of JodyB had speedily removed my article about John Ogilvie

In any event, the current article was approved by JodyB. I hope it also meets with your approval?

Ottawahitech 04:22, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on User:Ottawahitech, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add  on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Calton | Talk 14:51, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Your message
I know your lengthy introduction is meant to be funny, but please also remember that not everyone who is forced to visit your talk page is a “criminal”.

"Forced"? How, exactly, does one "force" someone to visit a talk page? The "criminal" part is also mysterious, unless perhaps you have some rather draconian views about smoking (pace Rule #11).

And it's funny you should quote Introduction, because I have been bold and I have found an article to improve, namely the one you put up. See, those words apply to ALL editors, not just yourself. And if three different editors, independently, have doubts about an article and specify their objections, you might want to take that as a sign that they may have a point. So, in general, Wikipedia has a notability threshold -- inconsistently applied and occasionally illogical, but they're there -- and Wikipedia has been used -- quite frequently -- as a vehicle for promoting causes and candidates in advance of elections, which is completely inappropriate and heavily resisted: your biography subject hasn't done anything, it appears, which passes the first threshold and your comments -- and original title for the article -- strongly implies the second. If you disagree, you need to prove it, using -- and this is absolutely required -- multiple, independent, reliable sources.

The tags are there to alert you to these issues and give you the chance to fix them, and are absolutely standard. I myself have not nominated the article for deletion -- yet. It's up to you -- or anyone else interested -- bring the article up to minimal standards if you don't want that to happen, either because I or some other editor does so. --Calton | Talk 12:04, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia!
Welcome to Wikipedia, Ottawahitech! I'm glad you decided to join us and help out a little. I'm also glad you're trying to do the right thing by both being bold and trying to follow the rules. While I think your intentions with the article on John Ogilvie are you, the biggest problems that I think you're running into are notability (that is, Wikipedia doesn't really want articles on every single possible subject - just on relatively important ones) and on sources (that is, you need to have several reliable, independent sources to cite). Since Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, articles ought to be formatted to read that way as much as possible. Here's one that I wrote (admittedly, not very good), that might serve as a rough guide. You might also try to look at other articles more similar to the one you're seeking to write, such as Paul Martin or Peter MacKay. If I can help, please feel free to let me know. And if you have a comment or reply, feel free to leave it here (I'll watch your talk page), or you can visit my own pages. Cheers! --Folic Acid 17:32, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you Folic Acid!
I appreciate your kind words. Let me try and address your concern regarding notability.

But first I would like to explain (again) why I volunteered to write this article about  John Ogilvie.

I have never met Mr. Ogilvie in person, however we both participate in the same online public forum. The topic of the Ontario general election, 2007 came up and I was surprised to find out that Mr. Ogilvie was unable to enter information about himself into Wikipedia. I felt that this would place him at a large disadvantage with candidates of the larger parties who have extensive articles written about them in Wikipedia. It seemed to me that David should be given a chance against Goliath and I merely intended to start an article for Mr. Ogilivie and hoped that someone else would step in to fill in more details, since I am not a writer, and since I know very litte about the man.

Back to notability:

I see that the following guidelines are spelt out in regards to "politicians" (I do not see guidelines for political candidates):


 * Politicians who have held international, national or statewide/provincewide office, and members and former members of a national, state or provincial legislatures.[5]
 * Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage.[6]
 * Just being an elected local official does not guarantee notability.

I concede that, under those strict guidelines, Mr. Ogilvie is not notable enough for this purpose. But neither are most other candidates who are not incumbent, but who have uncontested pages on Wikipedia. I am also surprised that, in spite of an existing wikipedia  page that already acknowledged Mr. Ogilvie's candidacy I was questioned about "verifiablity"  by User_talk:JodyB.

In closing I would be very disappointed if it turns out that these strict guidelines are applied to Mr. Ogilvie alone, and not to other candidates who represnt larger parties.

Thank you. Ottawahitech 00:39, 27 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Well done - good for you for doing your homework, and keep it up! I really appreciate your enthusiasm for wanting to do good and for trying to stay within Wikipedia's guidelines.  You make good points, and I'd suggest that you keep at it - keep editing his article (and other articles that might interest you).  Specifically, I'd suggest rewriting his article to sound more like an encyclopedia entry, and less like a campaign advertisement.  You can put a section in there about his political beliefs, perhaps, or maybe his history in politics.  And, of course, as has been said - he's more than welcome to come edit his own article too, as long as he keeps it reasonable and encyclopedia-like.  --Folic Acid 12:13, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Election
Could you clarify what's inappropriate about it? I'm not sure I see the problem. Bearcat 00:43, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

There is a picture with an orange election sign on the right hand side right over the dividing line. I hope this makes sense?

Ottawahitech 01:51, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Update: It says under the photo: "Lawn signs for local candidates in Hamilton Mountain", and it certainly looks like an NDP sign Ottawahitech 01:55, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Alan Mercer
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Alan Mercer, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add  to the top of Alan Mercer. ponyo (talk) 18:23, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Seedplanter
Deleted, thanks. NawlinWiki (talk) 00:40, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Algonquin Times
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Algonquin Times, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process&#32; because of the following concern:
 * student paper, fails WP:GNG

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. Ironholds (talk) 20:55, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Reocities


A tag has been placed on Reocities requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. 7 01:07, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Reply to speedy deletion of ReoCities
I understand that the  reason my new  page regarding reocities was removed from wikipedia is: "This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a ... web content, does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia."

However, Reocities already appears on wikipedia (see Geocities closure) - why is it notable enough there, but not on its own?Ottawahitech (talk) 02:21, 2 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi - Please take a look at WP:WEB, for website notability requirements.  Specifically the three criteria listed.   Geocities meets multiple of these criteria, but ReoCities does not yet meet any.  While there is some news coverage it is mostly from Blogs which are not considered reliable.  Reocities may well become notable per these guidelines in the future, but we do not publish items in the anticipation that they may become notable at some date in the future.  Regards.   7  02:38, 2 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Also, as it stands now, Reocities redirects to Geocities which, as you mentioned, already contains reference to this new site. But each topic must be notable on it's own - so just because Reocities is mentioned in an article doesn't mean it's automatically ready for it's own article (see WP:NNC).   7  02:45, 2 November 2009 (UTC)


 * One of the things most people dislike on the web are dead links, links that lead to nowhere.
 * In this particular case a clickable "Reocities" link exists in the wikipedia article geocities (under the closure section) which leads to empty information.
 * If you believe that Reocities is not notable enough to be included in Wikipedia, why not make the word "Reocities" unclickable in the original article? Just curious.Ottawahitech (talk) 13:13, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Geocities criticism
How is still having a help form online a form of criticism? Please stick to actual criticisms that have been reported on by reliable sources. --Onorem♠Dil 16:45, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * OK. It's fairly obvious that you don't like yahoo. Maybe I'm missing out on WP:AGF, but please read WP:RS, WP:OR, and WP:NPOV. Keep your additions to what's already been reported on by reliable sources. --Onorem♠Dil 01:26, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I have scanned through reliable sources several times. I still do not understand why the sources I provided are not considered reliable. I have re-reverted some of the content you deleted from criticism of Yahoo I hope you will keep  this dialogue open, despite what you think I am trying to do a good job at Wikipedia (and I do like Yahoo)Ottawahitech (talk) 14:32, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

testing testing
Welcome!

Hello, Ottawahitech, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! or '''Substitution required. Replace with  .'''  Ottawahitech (talk) 20:53, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Manual of Style

testing testing 2
The following was shamelessly lifted from User:Zappa.jake: Welcome, ! Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for your contributions! You might like to check out our tutorial. If you have any questions, you can ask at our questions forum. I hope very much you enjoy being here with us, and I wish you luck with your contributions. - Ottawahitech (talk) 00:51, 18 December 2009 (UTC)}}

testing testing 3
Ottawahitech (talk) 21:20, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost
See: User:Martarius

Temporary deletion of your user talkpage
Forgive me for having to delete an edit from your talk page. I've removed the most recent comment, which was made by a user who was involved in an interview that didn't go as planned — I deleted it because the edit would help to identify the user's real identity. I'd explain in more detail here, but so doing would ruin the purpose of the deletion in the first place. If you have any questions, email me via Special:EmailUser and I'll reply by email. Nyttend (talk) 23:42, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
 * No idea what page has been deleted, or why. Anyway, looks like my page is just fine. Ottawahitech (talk) 21:38, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
noq (talk) 07:29, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks 4 u
Thanks 4 u 4 ur kind words Melnakeeb (talk) 08:16, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of 2010 Hawaii tsunami warning


The article 2010 Hawaii tsunami warning has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Wikipedia is not for news.

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. Cynof G  avuf 20:19, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
 * If Wikipedia is not for news how come this article: 2010 Chile earthquake? Anyway, I am just trying to help, so I will stop interfering :-)
 * Right at the time I posted the comment above I was logged out of Wikipedia and was not allowed to log back in until a few minutes ago - curious Ottawahitech (talk) 22:37, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Repo 5
A tag has been placed on Repo 5 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. SuperSonic SPEED (formerly known as ChaosControl1994). 21:07, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Criticism of Nortel
Please discuss your rationale behind the inclusion of the content you have reinstated on the discussion page for the article. It is in the best interests of Wikipedia for disputes to be resolved through consensus building. Isaac Lin (talk) 21:35, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Criticism of Nortel for deletion
A discussion has begun about whether the article Criticism of Nortel, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Criticism of Nortel until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Kudpung (talk) 07:34, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Nortel
Thanks for the heads up on Nortel's peculiar importance rating for Montreal. I've rerated it to mid, and restored Montreal's banner (as majority opinion at WPMontreal is to keep our banner as a banner, instead of being assimilated by WPCanada). You might want to rate the article for Ottawa importance. 76.66.203.138 (talk) 10:36, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi, You made a change on the page above ranking the Nortel article as "mid" for Montreal. Sorry to harp on this, but I am just curious to find out who decides what the ranking is - or is it just a matter of being bold and ranking things to see if anyone objects? (as you can see I am a newbie at this :-) Ottawahitech (talk) 16:50, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Importance ratings are generally used to rate how important an article is to the understanding of the topic of the Wikiproject, in this case, Montreal. Nortel was a major employer in Montreal, and contributed to the development of the Saint-Laurent and Nuns Island industrial parks, but it is not key to the understanding of the area, though important. 76.66.203.138 (talk) 05:33, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Generally, you should be active in the Wikiproject with which you are applying an importance rating to, and understand the topic enough to give a proper assessment, or follow the guidelines of the Wikiproject, if the wikiproject has concrete guidelines. This does cause problems, as WPCANADA has concrete guidelines, and some articles have anomalous importance ratings, being too low or too high. (like caretaker premiers who lasted a month being rated important because they're premiers, or the Lachine Canal, the industrial heartland of 19th Century Canada being rated not important because it's a canal) 76.66.203.138 (talk) 05:37, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

barnstar
Wow. Thank you! I have not received one before. --Born2cycle (talk) 21:59, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

User:Amiablecdn
The talk page history is still there. You posted to the user page. The user page seems not to have ever had much info, but typically an indef'd user will get his user page rubbed out anyway. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:04, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

WP:EAR
Your last post at WP:EAR seems to be misplaced? -- John of Reading (talk) 16:56, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, thank you. Someone else already took care of that. Apologies for the disruption. Ottawahitech (talk) 19:59, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Canada - Response
Hi Ottawahitech - the criteria for the importance assessment can be found here. Hope this helps!  PK T (alk)  20:03, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the prompt reply - will check it out as soon as I can. (should I be posting this on your talk page?) Ottawahitech (talk) 20:14, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Either way - no problem!  PK  T (alk)  00:26, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Re:Best of Wikipedia
Yes, I believe that it was removed from the talk page before it even got archived, even though it had had at least one response, one which was agreeing with me, not scolding me for leaving an irrelevent opinion. I know it was manually removed because a day or two later I searched the archives, and looked for it by date through the archives, and could not find it. Yes, it is certainly true, but it wasn't a "discussion on how to improve the article." To find it, you would have to search old revisions of the talk page. Daniel Christensen (talk) 18:07, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Manually removed? I am not a regular at Wikpedia, but it is  my understanding that comments on talk pages should never be removed by  someone other than the author. In any event, there are other strange things happening at this article, for example this strange stats page: http://stats.grok.se/en/latest/2011_T%C5%8Dhoku_earthquake_and_tsunami which only a couple of days ago boasted hundreds of thousands of views and is now showing only a couple of dozen views since the 16 of March (it has been in existense since March 11, I believe). I  don't want to comment about it on the talk page until things settle down. What do you think? Ottawahitech (talk) 00:46, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, honestly, nobody follows any real set rules here. It never quite went that way. But stuff can and always has gotten removed if it's completely irrelevent. That is the "best of wikipedia" but I'm not necessarily giving praise in that. That means that everything else is less than the best, and it is, but it's often the best thing online, as close to the accepted truth as possible. Daniel Christensen (talk) 18:32, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for your editing to Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud! Zachcnelson (talk) 21:46, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for your feedback at Talk:Ontario general election, 2011. There is another similar discussion over at Talk:Yukon general election, 2011 which I could use some help with, please. Thank you. Me-123567-Me (talk) 21:02, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Recruiting professionals
Hi Ottawahitech,

We don't really have a centralized place dedicated exclusively to discussing these things, but the archives at WT:MED will have several conversations. Making more healthcare professionals familiar with the basics of Wikipedia is an ongoing project. Some of it's simple networking around the lunchroom or e-mail list: "Hey, I was fixing something on Wikipedia the other day, and I wanted your opinion on..." There have been some specific projects. User:Doc James was talking about a project with a Canadian medical school a little while ago. User:TimVickers did a workshop at the NIH about two years ago. A couple of people have published articles in medical journals. (See Ten Simple Rules for Editing Wikipedia for one of my favorites. They published the article under a Wikipedia-compatible CC-AT license.)  User:My Core Competency is Competency gave a talk to his medical society this summer. So it's a lot of different activities, not a coordinated single program. You might want to get in touch with those users directly, and ask them for advice.

For myself, if every healthcare professional knew that whenever a patient came in with a printout of an article, that article might have been changed by a crackpot two minutes before the patient found the page, then I'd consider it a great improvement. I'd like them all to be editors (well, all of them that are any good at explaining things in plain English, at least), but I'd be satisfied if they all knew that the "anyone" in our slogan "anyone can edit" includes crackpots.

(A funny aside: at least one physician has actually been confronted by a patient waving around an article that he'd written and demanding that he follow the evidence-based protocol outlined in it.  He was nonplussed:  How exactly do you say, "I would have done that anyway:  That's what our medical guidelines demand, and I wrote the article!")

I agree with you that similar approaches would likely be effective with other professions. I've heard in the past that attorneys worry that posting on Wikipedia would make them legally liable for whatever information they post, so that might be a tougher group to interest than others. I suspect that they will be more interested if they see editing Wikipedia as a way to solve their problems, e.g., writing a decent article on something that clients usually misunderstand, so that fewer of them will come to your office with serious misconceptions. Information in Wikipedia has a way of (slowly) changing the world, even for people who don't directly read Wikipedia. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:48, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Hello
Hello Ottawahitech, Just wanted to let you know that I saw that you created the new article Tim Morse--The layout of the article makes it very clear. It would be great if you could also Wikify the related article Morse. Happy editing! Hope your day is going well and you are having fun.Jipinghe (talk) 21:36, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Randall Denley for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Randall Denley is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Randall Denley 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. Cind.  amuse  (Cindy) 23:16, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Randall Denley
The proper place for biographical information on a candidate who doesn't warrent their own page would be an article on candidates for each party, examples would be Ontario New Democratic Party candidates, 2011 Ontario provincial election, Green Party of Ontario candidates, 2011 Ontario provincial election. The only information that belongs on Ontario general election, 2011 (candidates) is the candidate's name and a redirect, if applicable.Mr. No Funny Nickname (talk) 17:24, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
 * MNFNN: I believe Randall Denley warrants his own page, however, both our opinions are irrelevant. I have explained further at User_talk:Mr._No_Funny_Nickname. Ottawahitech (talk) 02:43, 27 September 2011 (UTC

Ont general election "Target Seats"
Discussion is ongoing on the issue I have brought up and two editors have indicated they support my position that the section is unsourced and needs to be changed. There is no consensus to revert my edits, please discuss on the talk page, there's no need to start an edit war on this. Reverting the page will not make the issue disappear, it will just prolong the time it takes to fix it. Vietminh (talk) 23:25, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I have no wish whatsoever to engage in edit warring, and I hope you feel the same way. You are the one who started this reversion cycle less than a day before the polls open to the voters. In my opinion thids reversion is damaging to Wikipedia. Ottawahitech (talk) 00:29, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Your opinion doesn't matter in and of itself, Wikipedia operates on consensus and 2 editors have expressed an opinion that is in agreement with the edits I have made. You have also failed to engage in discussion at the talk page despite my request that you do so twice in edit summary and once here on your talk page. I also did not start this reversion cycle, I made an edit, others agree with it, and you have reverted it 3 times without contributing to the discussion. Please stop doing this and discuss it on the talk page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ontario_general_election,_2011#Target_Seat_Section). You have no basis to revert on grounds of a lack of consensus, consensus is achieved on the talk page on not on edit summaries: WP:CON. Vietminh (talk) 00:45, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
 * The issue has been resolved and consensus has been established between myself and two other editors. Next time you encounter a situation like this, I suggest you not engage in a senseless edit war, if you had reverted one more time you would have broken the 3RR rule and I would have reported your actions on the relevant noticeboard. This whole thing would have gotten solved sooner if you had just participated in the discussion. I suggest you read up on consensus, wikiquette, and dispute resolution procedures before you continue editing, you may not encounter someone as patient as myself in the future. Vietminh (talk) 02:22, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
VQuakr (talk) 04:46, 11 October 2011 (UTC) And again! VQuakr (talk) 06:01, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
v/r - TP 23:12, 16 October 2011 (UTC) x2 x3 x4

Speedy deletion nomination of Gary Sawatzky


A tag has been placed on Gary Sawatzky requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject of the article is important or significant: that is, why an article about it should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you can assert the importance of the subject,. Clicking that button will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit |the article's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. You may freely add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

See the guidelines for specific types of articles: biographies, websites, bands, or companies. Olaf the Shakinglord: Mailbox, ??? 17:08, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
v/r - TP 00:43, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Ralph Richardson (Chancellor)


The article Ralph Richardson (Chancellor) has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. Ironholds (talk) 03:36, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia articles are not considered reliable sources. Ironholds (talk) 01:01, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of David Kenny (CEO)


The article David Kenny (CEO) has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. GB fan 13:25, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Suggestion
I think it might be a good idea for you to create articles in your userspace and then when they are ready for publication move them into the article space. Just looking at your talk page right now you have created two one sentence articles today about living people with no sources. This isn't a constructive way of adding to the encyclopedia. GB fan 14:01, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Morning!
Hi, I noticed what you wrote on your user page about being discouraged and wanted to say hi. Please let me know if there is anything I can do to help. One thought I had is that you might want to participate in the user adoption program, as I think it may help address some of the issues that are causing you frustration. There are resources available! VQuakr (talk) 07:55, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Scott Bass


A tag has been placed on Scott Bass requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. User:Goldblooded (Talk/Discuss)(Complain) 08:15, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Mellanox
After this article was deleted, I created a new, different version, which got approval by experienced editors over at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation. Since you seemed to oppose the original deletion, you might want to contribute to the new article, here: Mellanox. Jeff Song (talk) 23:27, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
 * The new article has just been nominated for speedy deletion. Your input would be helpful. Jeff Song (talk) 17:34, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Peter Ufford


The article Peter Ufford has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. Ironholds (talk) 02:07, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Fred Fountain


The article Fred Fountain has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. Sparthorse (talk) 09:09, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Carleton Student Engineering Society


A tag has been placed on Carleton Student Engineering Society requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. → Σ  τ  c. 20:35, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
VQuakr (talk) 23:21, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of G. Raymond Chang


A tag has been placed on G. Raymond Chang requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Dipankan001 (talk) 14:50, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Matilde Artero


A tag has been placed on Matilde Artero requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. GB fan 15:02, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
I also replied to your comment about a copyright violation earlier in the thread. Regards! VQuakr (talk) 20:09, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Carleton Student Engineering Society
If you click on the "redlink" above you will see the deletion log. The article was deleted in April 2006 after Articles for deletion/Carleton Student Engineering Society. That was appealed at Deletion review here but deletion was endorsed. The article was posted again in 2009 and deleted after Articles for deletion/Carleton Student Engineering Society (2nd nomination).

Your recent version was deleted as having essentially no content but a link to the society's website. If you want to take time building an article, see Help:Userspace draft for how to start one in your userspace, which you can work on until it is ready to post to the main encyclopedia.

Student societies are not generally able to meet the notability standard, which requires evidence of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". See College and university article guidelines, particularly the section Student life.

Regards, JohnCD (talk) 15:23, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of L. Jacques Ménard


The article L. Jacques Ménard has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. GB fan 22:05, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Matilde Artero for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Matilde Artero is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Matilde Artero 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. GB fan 22:13, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Marjorie Magner


The article Marjorie Magner has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. GB fan 22:17, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Libby Burnham


The article Libby Burnham has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. GB fan 22:17, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Resource Clips


A tag has been placed on Resource Clips requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 16:56, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Anna Toth
Hello, Ottawahitech, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia!

I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you worked on, Anna Toth, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:


 * 1) edit the page
 * 2) remove the text that looks like this:
 * 3) save the page

It helps to explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you have any questions, feel free to ask on the Help Desk. Thanks again for contributing! ArglebargleIV (talk) 17:12, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of S. Donna Geernaert


The article S. Donna Geernaert has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. gwickwire (talktome) (contribs!) 00:23, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Harvey Secter


The article Harvey Secter has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. Eeekster (talk) 02:28, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Joanne Cuthbertson


The article Joanne Cuthbertson has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. Eeekster (talk) 02:28, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I came across the article while stub-sorting: as you'd added the ref you could have removed the prod tag too, as it says above. But please, when you add a ref, format it properly rather than leaving a bare url. Thanks. Pam  D  08:45, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of William E. Andrew


The article William E. Andrew has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. Eeekster (talk) 02:29, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Chancellors etc
Hi, Could you please remember to put the stub tag after everything except inter-wiki links (see WP:FOOTERS) - it makes it easier for stub-sorters if we can find it in the right place and amend it there. Also, perhaps slow down a bit - in your mass creation of articles for chancellors you're leaving out little words like "of the". Please give geographical context (ie ", Canada"). Thanks. Pam D  09:28, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

AFD Categories
Please don't add categories to closed deletion debates, as you appear to have done on at least a dozen debates dating back to 2006. This diff is one example. The categories are only used for open debates; once closed, the category is removed. Ignoring that, the category is added via a template in the nomination, so adding them using hotcat just makes it more difficult to track them down. If you see an uncategorized debate that's still open, feel free to pitch in and sort it - but please follow the process at CAT:AFD when you do. Thanks. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 15:25, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of William E. Andrew


The article William E. Andrew has been proposed for deletion. The proposed-deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ~TPW 14:19, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Re: Missing Wikipedians
No worries, these mistakes happen to all of us. Graham 87 14:20, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

2011 Vancouver Island earthquake
Has been nominated for deletion, I though you might be interested having worked on it. LoveUxoxo (talk) 22:19, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

DRV and Userfication

 * WP:DRV
 * WP:Userfication

 Purpleback pack  89  ≈≈≈≈  16:06, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Arvinder Singh Bubber


The article Arvinder Singh Bubber has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. AllyD (talk) 16:08, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

"Are newbies encouraged to participate here?"
Hello,

I saw your comments on the Articles for Deletion talk page and wanted to encourage you to participate in any discussion you want to, and also want to offer to help answer any questions you might have. You've actually been editing longer than I have, but I've been more active, with nearly 15,000 edits. So, I've become pretty familiar with Wikipedia jargon and subculture. I would be happy to discuss any concerns you may have. Visit my talk page at any time. Your contributions are valuable and appreciated. I wish you well.  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  19:47, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Liliana Ramos


The article Liliana Ramos has been proposed for deletion. The proposed-deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. red dog six (talk) 17:50, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Purplebackpack89's mass nominations
For the purposes of full disclosure I want you to know I have nominated the actions of User:Purplebackpack89 at Administrators' noticeboardLuciferwildcat (talk) 08:14, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In Bill Grimmett, you recently added a link to the disambiguation page MPP (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. For more information, see the FAQ or drop a line at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:29, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

My AFD explaination
Which part of it don't you get? And yes, it is unelected who decides who participates in AFDs; any individual editor can participate in as many or as few AFD discussions as she wishes. It's not some exclusive club (that's what a cabal is; they have those elsewhere but not here). The only people who can make unilateral actions are administrators, and they ARE elected; and their decisions can be reversed by other administrators. If you still don't understand, please ask someone else, because I'm not sure how to explain it anymore. Ask Cullen...maybe he can. Oh, and read the stuff he suggested  Purpleback pack  89  ≈≈≈≈  17:02, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about Liliana Ramos
Hello, Ottawahitech, and thanks for contributing to Wikipedia!

I wanted to let you know that some editors are discussing at Articles for deletion/Liliana Ramos whether the article Liliana Ramos should be in Wikipedia. I encourage you to comment there if you think the article should be kept in the encyclopedia.

The deletion discussion doesn't mean you did something wrong. In fact, other editors may have useful suggestions on how you can continue editing and improving Liliana Ramos, which I encourage you to do. If you have any questions, feel free to ask at the Help Desk.

Thanks again for your contributions! red dog six (talk) 15:41, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Bruce H. Mitchell


A tag has been placed on Bruce H. Mitchell, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia for multiple reasons. Please see the page to see the reasons. If the page has since been deleted, you can ask me the reasons by leaving a message on my user talk page.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. AKS (talk) 10:45, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Status and Advice
You're going to have to add some more to that article to show its importance. Start by making one on the company.  DGG ( talk ) 15:15, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

more important advice-
Come back, please, you've let yourself bye chased away by people who are opposed on principle to articles on businesspeople. I do not know if you are writing them with some degree of COI or not, but the heads of major corporations are unusually found notable, if the company is major enough, and the chancellors of educational institutions always are. Since your short articles are attracting deletion nominations, it will help to make more extensive ones, including references to show notability at the very first edit.  DGG ( talk ) 15:21, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Interesting that Wikipedia has no interest in heads of major corporations. After all these people control our lives so even if one hates money one must understand who controls the money and what makes money tick? Ottawahitech (talk) 14:03, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Accounting scandals, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dunn (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:51, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Barnstar
Many thanks for the barnstar - this was an unexpected and most pleasant surprise!Raellerby (talk) 14:41, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Nortel (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to OSC and SEC


 * Guylaine Saucier (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Institute of Chartered Accountants


 * Winding-up and Restructuring Act (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to BIA

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:20, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Edward DeMarco


The article Edward DeMarco has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 03:48, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Username sounds like an organization
Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. However, I noticed that your username (Ottawahitech) may not meet Wikipedia's username policy because It sounds like a role account (specifically, the name of an online forum) which we don't allow. You should take the time to read WP:COI and WP:ADVERT. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. As an alternative, you may ask for a change of username, or you may simply create a new account to use for editing. Thank you. as you seem to be here to constructively contribute and we'd hate for you to have an unpleasant experience like finding yourself blocked from editing. Best regards, Toddst1 (talk) 19:37, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't mean to be disrespectful, but who are you? - You use terminology such as "we"/"our" and finish by what sounds like a threat: "we'd hate for you to have an unpleasant experience like finding yourself blocked from editing". Ottawahitech (talk) 15:57, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm an editor who has a concern about your username. I don't believe we've interacted with each other before - at least not that I remember.  Are you connected with the online forum Ottawahitech?  Toddst1 (talk) 16:06, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * It is still not clear if you are here in an official Wikipedia capacity or merely as a Good Samaritan? Ottawahitech (talk) 20:25, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * It doesn't matter. Are you going to discuss your username or not? Toddst1 (talk) 20:32, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, it matters. When someone wearing a uniform shows up at your home and demands you let them in to look for something illicit, they should provide a search warrant, let alone display a badge. Ottawahitech (talk) 12:43, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * We don't do warrants here. We discuss - with users, admins, buraucrats or IP editors alike, which you have unfortunately avoided.   I am done attempting to discuss this matter with you. Given this association,

This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia because your username, Ottawahitech, does not meet our username policy. '''Your username is the only reason for this block. You are welcome to choose a new username (see below).''' A username should not be promotional, related to a "real-world" group or organization, misleading, offensive, or disruptive. Also, usernames may not end in the word "bot" unless the account is an approved bot account. You are encouraged to choose a new account name that meets our policy guidelines. Alternatively, if you have already made edits and you wish to keep your existing contributions under a new name, then you may request a change in username by:
 * Adding on your user talk page. You should be able to do this even though you are blocked, as you can usually still edit your own talk page. If not, you may wish to contact the blocking administrator by clicking on "E-mail this user" on their talk page.
 * At an administrator's discretion, you may be unblocked for 24 hours to file a request.
 * Please note that you may only request a name that is not already in use, so please check here for a listing of already taken names. The account is created upon acceptance, thus do not try to create the new account before making the request for a name change. For more information, please see Changing username.

If you feel that you were blocked in error, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Toddst1 (talk) 16:37, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

More correctly, you have been notified that your username doesn't meet our username policy as it appears to be related to a group, organization or a role. Toddst1 (talk) 18:11, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * With respect, Ottawahitech has been registered since 2007. I don't remember when the organization naming part came into practice, but considering that they haven't been blocked until now I don't see them as being a disruptive user with intent to advertise their online forum. Syrthiss (talk) 18:25, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree. i searched the name up on google. There is no organization or group with the name "Ottawa Hi Tech". Plus the user is a perfectly good contributor! Your accusations arent completly unfounded, but do alittle reasearch, man! This should be taken to Wiki Court! Hoyle Casino Man (talk) 18:29, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Given this user's history of positive contributions, I was prepared to unblock them promtly, but this unblock request ruined it all (and it is consistent with their earlier combative reply to Toddst1, I must add). One simple request saying "no, I don't promote this discussion group anymore, can I retain this username cause I've been using it since times forgotten?" would have been an instant hit. I'm still willing to unblock, but a constructive response would have given me much more confidence. Max Semenik (talk) 18:32, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, I'd have my back up if someone came to me and started asking questions about my name 5 years after the fact. I'm seriously not the softest person on conflicted usernames by a far cry, but I can't see this as a reasonable block (or at least a good excuse to IAR regarding names associated with some 'organization'). Syrthiss (talk) 18:37, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * +1 to Syrthiss here. Daniel Case (talk) 18:44, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Looking further, it looks like we discussed the organizational restriction in 2009 here and the wording of the discussion seems to say that we didn't have any language in the policy at that point in time. Syrthiss (talk) 18:47, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Good find Syrthiss.  I have no doubt that the editor is generally constructive (combative interaction above notwithstanding) and this isn't a popularity contest.  However, The editor has early edits (now deleted) non-admins can't see.  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/OttawaHiTech/ does indeed exist and that editor has promoted it.   The disappointing and combative refusal to discuss made the matter rather simple.  Toddst1 (talk) 18:51, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I did see those edits. I don't consider anything not publicly viewable as objectionable, unless you are talking about something other than his userpage that was deleted back in 2007.  I think that should Ottawahitech wish to change their name, they are welcome to...but should be under no burden to do so. Syrthiss (talk) 18:55, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Had the user been willing to discuss, I might have come to that conclusion. Given the flat refusal to discuss, I didn't and don't. Toddst1 (talk) 19:06, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * But when you threaten people - as you did - then that does rather tend to stifle the resulting discussion. You said: "and we'd hate for you to have an unpleasant experience like finding yourself blocked from editing".  That kind of language might be suitable for the mafia, but hardly for a wikipedia editor!Telanian183 (talk) 19:21, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

I agree completely with Syrthiss. Ottawahitech has been contributing constructively since 2007. Even if his username is now deemed inappropriate, he is clearly acting in good faith, and the aggressive bullying that he received from Toddst1 was completely disproportionate to the perceived offence. Furthermore, Ottawahitech had every right to ask who Toddst1 was and in what capacity he was asking those questions. I find it sad that Toddst1 still doesn't seem to acknowledge that if he adopted a less aggressive and more constructive manner and treated Ottawahitech with some basic respect, then Ottawahitech might then have been more forthcoming.Telanian183 (talk) 18:55, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * How nice of you to join us, Telanian. Nothing suspicious there. First edit in a year? 18:58, 3 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Toddst1 (talk • contribs) tho likely just a mistake in tildes, since it is properly timestamped


 * Well, for what it's worth, I would agree with his or hers main points. In what way does it improve the encyclopedia to block a productive user over a technicality? WP:U is one of our least well reasoned policies; we shouldn't let it get in the way of building the 'pedia.  henrik  • talk  01:11, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

I am not a group, yey
At least according to today's version of Username policy Ottawahitech (talk) 14:49, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Admins blocking each other
Just by sheer coincindence I saw that one admin blocked another by error.
 * The blocked admin jokingly(?) complained:There goes my clean block record!
 * The blocking admin apologized profusely.
 * A third wikipedian was wondering if there was a way to expunge blocks from the record?

Ottawahitech (talk) 14:01, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
 * That happens more than you'd think: Toddst1 (talk) 14:54, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Notice of discussion at the Administrators' Noticeboard
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.. The section is Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents. Syrthiss (talk) 19:20, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know, Syrthiss . I finally has some time to track down the discussion at: Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive738, and I must say I am still confused. It sounds like tmy block was overturned only because the participants thought my case was too complicated.
 * So, as it stands I still don't see what my "sin" is. I repeat: I am not an organization, a role or a group. So what was I being accused of? Ottawahitech (talk) 15:07, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Sheila Fraser, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page FCA (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:45, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Kinneret Savitsky


The article Kinneret Savitsky has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. Darkness Shines (talk) 21:13, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Ray Siderius


A tag has been placed on Ray Siderius requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 19:04, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
 * see my comments here Ottawahitech (talk) 19:37, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Copyright problems with Kinneret Savitsky
Hello. Concerning your contribution, Kinneret Savitsky, please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/people/person.asp?personId=8011457&ticker=BLRX:IT. As a copyright violation, Kinneret Savitsky appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Kinneret Savitsky has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License (CC-BY-SA) then you should do one of the following:


 * If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Kinneret Savitsky and send an email with the message to . See Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
 * If a note on the original website states that it is licensed under the CC-BY-SA license, leave a note at Talk:Kinneret Savitsky with a link to where we can find that note.
 * If you hold the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the CC-BY-SA and GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Kinneret Savitsky.

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. While contributions are appreciated, Wikipedia must require all contributors to understand and comply with its copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright concerns very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Thank you. — Cactus Writer (talk) 19:27, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I did not include an image AND I did use my own words, I think. However, you have removed my text so I cannot be sure, sigh... Ottawahitech (talk)
 * If they were your own words, they were very very very close to the original. Where it gets into a grey area is some of the stuff that was close to the original was things like "Dr. Kinneret Savitsky PhD has been the Chief Executive Officer of BioLineRx, Ltd., since January 2010." (theirs) and "Dr. Kinneret Savitsky PhD has been the Chief Executive Officer of BioLineRx, Ltd., since January 2010." (yours).  While people cannot copyright facts, those two sentences are identical. Syrthiss (talk) 11:53, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your help, Syrthiss. I will make sure my next article submission changes those words. Ottawahitech (talk) 15:32, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

WP:CORPNAME section title
I've reverted this edit of yours since it changes a section title when that title is linked to from many places. I think the body of the section sufficiently addresses the detail. If you think this change should still be made, let's discuss it on the policy's talk page since it will take a bit of work to update all of the incoming section links. --Chris (talk) 05:08, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Anat Cohen-Dayag, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Compugen (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:55, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Ray Siderius


A tag has been placed on Ray Siderius requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 14:18, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Ray Siderius


The article Ray Siderius has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 17:49, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Ray Siderius article
Hi Ottawahitech. I notice you added a reference to the Ray Siderius article, and that it's from a reiable source. Unfortunately, it doesn't go far enough towards establishing the notability of the subject. I urge to read the Wikipedia guidelines for notability at WP:GNG and WP:BIO, and find independent sources that cover the subject in-depth, so to establish that he is notable enough for an encyclopedia article. I'm willing to give you some time to do this, and I'm removing the WP:BLPPROD notice as you've added a source. However, if there are still question marks over notability in a few days, I'll be recommending deletion at Articles for Deletion. Cheers. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 23:25, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Ottawahitech (talk) 23:51, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Check the WP:BLP issues
You recently added a category to Margaret Thatcher that violates WP:BLP. Please don't confuse a dramatization which may contain fiction with a WP:RS. Either way, such claims must be solidly cited. Toddst1 (talk) 23:29, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Toddst1, looks like we meet again :-)
 * Are you saying the wsj is not a reliable source? Ottawahitech (talk) 00:09, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * No, it just needs to be included in the article. It appears you've fixed it. When you added the category, it was only the reference to the movie that talked about alzheimers. FWIW, it wasn't me wo reverted your edit.  Cheers. Toddst1 (talk) 00:29, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Realtytrac


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

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Jeancey (talk) 21:43, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for notifying me of this proposed speedy deletion, and no, this is not my first article, not even the first article that has been proposed for deletion :-)
 * In any event the following is a copy of the text I posted contesting this deletion:
 * T"his article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because this company has been quoted extensively by pretty much every single media organization in the USA, if not the world over, in regards to foreclosures/ Subprime mortgage crisis ‎/ mortgage defaults/ Category:United States housing bubble/ what have you. Surely it is notable enough for Wikipedia? &mdash; Ottawahitech (talk) 21:58, 16 February 2012 (UTC)"
 * Hmm, interesting: this article simply disappeared. I believe it is wp:notable - shouldn't  it be allowed go to wp:afd? Ottawahitech (talk) 15:21, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

AfD and PROD notifications
Hi Ottawa. In December you got either an AfD or PROD notification, and it was during one of the template testing project's experiments. If you could go here and leave us some feedback about what you think about the new versions of the templates we tested (there are links to the templates), that would be very useful. (You can also email me at swalling@undefinedwikimedia.org if you want.) Thanks! Steven Walling (WMF) • talk   01:04, 17 February 2012 (UTC)


 * The template versions (default and new) we tested are...


 * PROD: new version, default version
 * AFD: new version, default version
 * Even if you don't remember seeing them, your opinion about the new notifications is most welcome. Thanks, Steven Walling (WMF) &bull; talk   18:52, 23 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I realize your intentions are good, but I thought I explained clearly the reason for my reluctance to participate in your study. You are only compounding the problem by trying to get more Wikipedians involved in an endless discusion instead of spending their time building up Wikipedia. Ottawahitech (talk) 14:53, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Note to self: (Sorry for the late reply) was posted to my talk page on 14 March 2012‎ by Steven (WMF) Ottawahitech (talk) 15:29, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

A Query from D34throse Darklight
I wanna know why when I added the following to Power Rangers Samurai which any observer of said program can see for themselves to be fact but Acalamari and Ryulong claim it to be a personal opinion and blocked me for a period of 24 hours and threatened to make the block permanent if I ever re-added it to Wikipedia, I suspect them to be bullying me but I am not sure. Could you please help clarify the situation, thanks: Strangely enough for a group of samurai, they are all basically gaijin even their sensei/shogun is portrayed by a New Zealander, for none of them are full blooded Japan-born Japanese. — Preceding unsigned comment added by D34throse Darklight (talk • contribs) 16:27, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Group Health Cooperative (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Scott Armstrong


 * J Robert Verdun (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Share


 * Nortel (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to CBC

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 20:07, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Ray Siderius for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ray Siderius is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Ray Siderius 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. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 22:06, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
 * You have been (sorry to use this term) hounding me about this article since I created it on Feb 9. See:
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ottawahitech#Speedy_deletion_nomination_of_Ray_Siderius
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ottawahitech#Speedy_deletion_nomination_of_Ray_Siderius_2
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ottawahitech#Proposed_deletion_of_Ray_Siderius
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ottawahitech#Nomination_of_Ray_Siderius_for_deletion
 * I would love to be able to devote time to expanding this article, but with all the extra work I have to do to just keep it alive, I find less and less time to actually do productive work at Wikipedia.


 * Would you be kind enough to explain your rationale. Thanks in advance. Ottawahitech (talk) 14:32, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
 * The rationale for deletion is at the deletion discussion page. You are, of course, more than welcome to contribute to the discussion, which will last for 7 days from when I nominated the article. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 15:59, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't believe there is any point in participating in the afd discussion - no one participating there is interested in trying to preserve, let alone improve the article. I spent well over an hour today looking for more references, but instead of working on the article I had to spend time in this fruitless discussion. Ottawahitech (talk) 15:45, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
 * What really wastes time is adding articles about unnotable people to an encyclopedia. If you spent well over an hour looking for sources and still didn't come up with anything that meets the requirements (and none of those references in the article prove notability), then you should consider that maybe he isn't notable. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 16:02, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Why are you so convinced that Ray Siderius is not notable: in 2005 he was successful in having the state of Washington Estate law declared unconstitutional - is this just a minor accomplishment in your opinion? Now he is involved in a class action suit against a "non profit" health care insurer who is accused of overcharging policy holders. Is this also of no consequence as far as you are concerned? Ottawahitech (talk) 09:25, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Psst
Thought you might want to see RealtyTrac. Fences &amp;  Windows  22:50, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I see now you also wrote an article on it and that it was speedily deleted. While I do dislike speedy deletions like this, Beef up that first revision and Put a little effort into it spring to mind. Fences  &amp;  Windows  22:57, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I was just going to check my talk page before signing off for today (after just leaving a thank u note on your talk page btw:-)...
 * As far as the Realtytrac article that I started, yes, it was minimum effort, as are many of the other articles I have attempted at Wikipedia. No sense of putting a lot of work and emotion into it when the chances for survival are pretty slim. Ottawahitech (talk) 05:00, 23 February 2012 (UTC)


 * You sure have a lot of deletion nomination messages on your talk. :) I dislike those templates; I wished we could/should/did write real messages instead of what the problem was, giving articles and authors a chance. Actually.. I think the WP:AFC procedure with reviews and a chance to explain and fix issues before the article "going live" more widely used would be a big improvement for those who doesn't create perfect pages from the get-go. henrik  • talk  15:53, 23 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your comment Henrik. I think I am starting to understand why I am having so much trouble with deletions, and unfortunately having an AFC process will not address my type of issues, which i am sure are shared with many others. I don't believe in memorizing rules that make no sense and are contrary to the spirit of Wikipedia. Saying that living lawyers can never be notable makes no sense to me.


 * I am sure this has to do with the phobia about spam, but I believe the remedy chosen by Wikipedians is worse than the disease itself, and will end up driving  away editors, especially those who bring diversity to the project.


 * Just my $.02 Ottawahitech (talk) 21:07, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * "No sense of putting a lot of work and emotion into it when the chances for survival are pretty slim". That seems like a self-fulfilling prophecy. Despite articles on RealityTrac being speedily deleted six times, once I'd had a good search for sources I was sure that it is a notable company and that it was worthwhile writing a proper article about it. Any AfD on the article I wrote is bound to fail, the chances of survival are, I think, guaranteed. It is neutral, well sourced, provides evidence of notability, does not advertise the organisation. Searching for sources was not trivial, but if you want to write a proper encyclopedic article then you have to be willing to put that work in. Superficial efforts might have been sufficient in 2001, but not these days.
 * And if you think the article needs editing, please don't drive-by tag like you did. It is frankly an insult to my writing ability to say it needs copyediting. If you want to format it by adding section headings, just do it. Don't be part of the drive-by mentality problem that leads to your own work getting deleted. Fences  &amp;  Windows  18:03, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I sincerely apologize coming across as criticizing the article you wrote on Realtyrac. Nothing could be further from my mind - all I was trying to do was give it more visibility and give others a chance to improve it even more, but I did  not mean for this to be taken as being critical of your work. Sorry for giving the wrong impression. Ottawahitech (talk) 00:11, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Nortel (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Yves Fortier and Halifax, Nova Scotia


 * Astley v. Verdun (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Clarica


 * J Robert Verdun (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Founder

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:40, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of John Sheridan(executive)


A tag has been placed on John Sheridan(executive) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Mean as custard (talk) 08:35, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
 * This article was speedily deleted even though I contested the deletion - is this a new policy at Wikipedia? Ottawahitech (talk) 02:51, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Ian Bourne


A tag has been placed on Ian Bourne requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Mean as custard (talk) 08:38, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
 * This article was speedily deleted even though I contested the deletion - is this a new policy at Wikipedia? Ottawahitech (talk) 02:50, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I believe this has been normal practice for years. Per the deletion policy: The tag exists to give you some extra time; the page may still be deleted if it meets the speedy deletion criteria. Articles deleted under A7 can normally be restored to your user space for development into a more complete draft; I can assist with the process if you would like. VQuakr (talk) 08:38, 28 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Ian A. Bourne: On top of being the Chairman of Ballard Power Systems and a member of the CPP Investment Board he has now also been appointed  CEO of SNC-Lavalin  the Canadian scandal-ridden company, but still no page available for him on Wikipedia, sigh… Ottawahitech (talk) 18:25, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * What a missed opportunity for Wikipedia to gain more Canadian wikipedians! The article SNC-Lavalin jumped tenfold in popularity yesterday, and the page on its chairman twenty fold, but the link to it's new interim Chief Executive Officer is still red. Ottawahitech (talk) 12:54, 27 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi, you left me a talkback, but I think you've got the wrong admin. I deleted Ian A. Bourne, a redirect to Ian Bourne. The latter was deleted under A7 by, and you would have to take that deletion up with Y. I avoid A7 (and most speedy deletion), but if what you say above is correct (and those statements wee in the article), I can't see how A7 would be applicable. HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?  00:13, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of KLM Meet&Seat for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article KLM Meet&Seat is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/KLM Meet&Seat 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. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 19:49, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

 * Lol, looking through your talk page I see I have already given you coffee. Which, I think is tells much about myself since I am a bit of a caffeine junkie! In any case, let me know if there is anything I can do to assist. Regards! VQuakr (talk) 08:47, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Astley v. Verdun - references
I agree with the references problem for Astley v. Verdun. Personally, I hate even citing to the case law, because it is a bit of a primary source issue, but I can't find any secondary sources beyond the Law Times article that does any kind of comprehensive analysis. Most of the news reports I found were in relation to the launch of the lawsuit. Some do talk about the damages, but they don't go really into any depth. Unfortunately, because my background is criminal law, not tort law, I don't know if there are law books, etc. that talk about the case...

BTW, on a completely different topic, have you thought about joining WP:CANLAW? Singularity42 (talk) 21:22, 28 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Tell me about it! finding any references in the media about this case is like looking for a needle in a haystack. I believe that major press outlets are simply too scared to touch this hot potato in case they end up being dragged into the fire. The only other topic I have had as much difficulty with finding info about was John Roth the ex-CEO of Nortel who had tons of coverage when Nortel was a high flyer, but now that Roth has filed a one billion $ creditor's claim against the nortel estate, everything about him suddenly disappeared.Ottawahitech (talk) 00:32, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Badgering commentors
Your badgering of every commentor on Articles for deletion/Ray Siderius‎‎ is in my opinion WP:TE. You really need to let people express their opinion in discussions without belittling, or otherwise being confrontational. Toddst1 (talk) 00:50, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
 Yash   t    101   09:26, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 4
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Astley v. Verdun (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Superior Court of Justice


 * Clark County, Indiana (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Marysville


 * Marta Andreasen (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to British

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:04, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 11
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * J Robert Verdun (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Executive, RBC, Profit and Disclosure


 * Adeptol (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Product


 * Amanda Sainsbury-Salis (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Anorexia


 * Earl Jones (investment advisor) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to CBC


 * Eva Kwok (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Dean


 * Guylaine Saucier (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to CBC


 * Manulife Financial (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to CBC

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:22, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Ahmed Adel El Mogy


The article Ahmed Adel El Mogy has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Seems a violation of WP:BLP1E. At a minimum, this article needs to be able to be created with more biographical information, but no additional sources appear to exist.

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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Liv it ⇑ Eh?/What? 16:43, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Ahmed Adel El Mogy for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ahmed Adel El Mogy is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Ahmed Adel El Mogy 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. Dennis Brown (talk) 16:43, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Ahmed Adel El Mogy


A tag has been placed on Ahmed Adel El Mogy requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Zad68 (talk) 16:45, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
I see what you mean; you can remove old notifications from your talk page if you want. I replied in more depth on my talk page. VQuakr (talk) 05:14, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your continued interest. Yes I know I can remove/archive stuff from my talk page. But why would I want to?
 * By the way, thanks for the elaborate comments on your talk page, they really help in understanding some of the backgound. I tried following some of the links you provided, and found out I was so fascinated, I spend my wiki-allotted-time reading there, instead of doing what I came here to do, which is adding material to the "article namespace" (I hope I am using the right terminology?)Ottawahitech (talk) 19:12, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I thought you might want to for usability; as a practical matter it takes a while to scroll past the old notifications. The terminology sounds fine to me. VQuakr (talk) 18:15, 17 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Just to continue our little talk about the deletion of Ahmed Adel El Mogy: when I first saw your suggestion that the contents should have been added to Virginity test it made sense to me. But the following two articles seem to follow a different set of rules:
 * Robert Bales
 * Trayvon Martin
 * Is it because:
 * They are Americans, not Egyptians?
 * Does the race of the subject play any role?
 * Does it have anything to do with systemic bias?

I would value your views. Ottawahitech (talk) 19:08, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Category:Companies with patent assets
Category:Companies with patent assets, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. 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. LeSnail (talk) 21:05, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Light Reading
I thought I'd give it a go. Not as easy as RealtyTrac to find sources for it, but see what you make of Light Reading. Fences &amp;  Windows  21:47, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Nice work - looks like both articles are getting a reasonable amount of traffic, considering they are both new. Hopefully they will soon start getting contributions from other wikipedians as well. Ottawahitech (talk) 15:36, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Category:Commenting available on articles online
Category:Commenting available on articles online, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. 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. __meco (talk) 20:33, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Plummer v. State
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have on for deletion. The nominated article is Plummer v. State.

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Articles for deletion/Plummer v. State. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You are welcome to edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. --Guy Macon (talk) 19:44, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Category:Companies acquired by BCE
Category:Companies acquired by BCE, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. 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. LeSnail (talk) 21:10, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Category:Online commenting available through Disqus
Category:Online commenting available through Disqus, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. 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. LeSnail (talk) 21:17, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Astral Media
Astral Media shouldn't be added to until the deal is explicitly approved by the CRTC. Unless and until that happens, it's still just a proposed acquisition, not a finalized one, because in the meantime the possibility still exists that the deal will get denied or otherwise fall through. Bearcat (talk) 22:56, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 18
Hi. When you recently edited Property tax in the United States, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page State (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:42, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Canada’s top one hundred employers


The article Canada’s top one hundred employers has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * WP:NOTABILITY - organization only gets 64 Ghits, zero gnews hits. Article sourced only to organizations own site.

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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Nat Gertler (talk) 23:37, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Lack of creator notices on CFD
I saw in this discussion that you thought it was inappropriate not to notify the creator of categories when they were listed. I couldn't agree with you more. Although putting a notice on the category will likely appear on the Watch List, I'm watching so damn many things now it's hard to keep up. Unfortunately, the current consensus is that a notice only needs to go up on the actual category. RevelationDirect (talk) 03:55, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Khamnigan Mongol
Thanks for digging up the refs. Interesting what you find when you start filling in red links! — kwami (talk) 04:26, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Tax uncertainty


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing inappropriate pages, such as Tax uncertainty, is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 19:28, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Tax uncertainty


The article Tax uncertainty has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Appears to be a summary of a newspaper current events article rather than an encyclopedia article

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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ArglebargleIV (talk) 19:28, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Tax uncertainty


The article Tax uncertainty has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * This is a summary of a current events newspaper article (http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/taxes/story/2012-03-22/impact-of-tax-uncertainty-businesses-taxpayers/53708328/1) -- although "tax uncertainty" might be a good subject for an article, I don't believe that this is it.

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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ArglebargleIV (talk) 19:31, 23 March 2012 (UTC)


 * I have posted this at Talk:Tax uncertainty with the following comment: "article needs rescue, I don't have the time":

but I will be surprised if this article survives, sigh... Ottawahitech (talk) 18:42, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

There should be a WP:ESSAY "WP:TORTOISE"... oops, there already is...
Hey Ottawahitech. Yep, I think this might have been an error of judgement on my part. Thank you for the very constructive feedback. --Shirt58 (talk) 10:43, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Removal of articles from categories and the category itself
It seem like categories are still the wild-west of Wikipedia. Apparently anyone can simply decide to remove articles from a category ( one of many examples) and categories can be removed without discussion. Ottawahitech (talk) 13:11, 27 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Samira Ibrahim is not a virginity test. I didn't think any discussion on that point was necessary, since it is self-evident. The category is under discussion here; I think that overall it is problematic, for BLP and other reasons. Good Ol’factory (talk) 20:38, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

another one
On 17 April 2012 I created Category:Retired chief executives (I believe - but it has been wiped off my contributions page) and added  Jim Balsillie ‎ to it. On 23 April 2012  user:Good Olfactory deleted  this category for  (C1: Empty category). It is not clear to me how the category became empty and why it was deleted with no discussion. Ottawahitech (talk) 16:22, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Reply
GoingBatty (talk) 16:58, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Your re-cat
Can you please clarify why you did this? It is pretty clearly in line with the category.LeadSongDog come howl!  21:48, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * LeadSongDog, sorry for the delay in responding.


 * To answer your question: the reason I removed the article Alzheimer's Disease from the category Category:Aging-associated diseases is that it was already included in a subcategory (Category:Alzheimer's disease) of a subcategory (Category:Dementia) of Category:Aging-associated diseases


 * I was merely attempting to remove some of the clutter and redundancy. However, I am starting to wonder if it  would be better to remove the subcategories and leave only the articles themselves in this category?  - I would value your input.  Ottawahitech (talk) 13:40, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Ah, that makes sense now. It would be helpful for similar cases in future to indicate in the edit comment, e.g. "already in subcat" or some such. Cheers, LeadSongDog come howl!  04:40, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree a hundred percent - only wish there was a way to leave comments when using Hotcat. Ottawahitech (talk) 14:07, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Hmm, you might ask the maintainer or at WikiProject Categories. I really don't understand how a lot of these gadgets work. I suppose I ought to study up. LeadSongDog come howl!  15:42, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 4
Hi. When you recently edited SNC-Lavalin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Controller (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:49, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Yahoo!
Any time. :-) Nightscream (talk) 16:13, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 11
Hi. When you recently edited Yahoo! Labs, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CTO (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:10, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Looks like Dab solver should be tested first before being released for general use :-) Ottawahitech (talk) 15:58, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Yahoo!
I have recently noticed that the suite of Yahoo! articles is neglected, as at least one of the major contributors has "retired" from wikipedia. I have been trying to get things a bit tidied up, and in the process introduced a few new categories. The names of those categories correspond to what is currently in the article and its infobox.

It would be nice the wikipedia category-police would put renaming proposals for the Yahoo! categories on hold, at least until the dust settles on the real-life reorg taking place at Yahoo!

Thanks in advance. Ottawahitech (talk) 17:46, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Looks like the category police pays no attention to requests from minor editors such as myself:
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Yahoo!_Software&action=edit&redlink=1
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Yahoo!_software&action=history
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Good_Olfactory#talkback_-_Yahoo.21
 * Too bad. Ottawahitech (talk) 19:49, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Recent Re-Edits
[Thanks for adding info to Scott Thompson (businessman). (Just for your information I have noticed that some of the refernces you add to pages create a "bad" url) Ottawahitech (talk) 15:37, 13 April 2012 (UTC)]Original Message

Hey Ottawahitech, great catch there! I didn't realize the links were failing but I corrected the ones that led to a 404.

These are the links I fixed:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corbis#References

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brad_Grey#References

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Chambers_(CEO)#References

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Thompson_(businessman)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guerrino_De_Luca

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Read#References

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Meyer#References

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_Stringer#References

HollywoodAllstars (talk) 00:31, 14 April 2012 (UTC) Thanks again for the catch — Preceding unsigned comment added by HollywoodAllstars (talk • contribs) 20:19, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Re: Thank you ...
I have not done much to it ... but I'm glad you liked it. Probably, the Find sources, Find sources 2, and  Find sources 3 templates/tools could help us on finding good sources and news about Yahoo! Travel, and on expanding it a little bit more: Happy editing! –p joe f (talk • contribs) 19:04, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Category:Yahoo! Groups
Category:Yahoo! Groups, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. 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. KarlB (talk) 14:16, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
 * "nominated for discussion" - Is this the politically correct way of saying deletion?
 * In any event I wonder why Facebook has a similar category (much smaller) which goes unchallenged?
 * BTW thanks for informing me. Ottawahitech (talk) 15:37, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
 * So, I should thank you for the nomination of Category:Facebook groups ; – FYI, I created that category, and just posted my response to the nomination there. This argument may be helpful for you, if you can find articles about organizations whose defining characteristic, as stated in the article lead, is that it is a Yahoo! group. -Wbm1058 (talk) 15:16, 20 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi, just nominated that for deletion too. Thanks for letting me know about it. Also the message above was auto-generated by Twinkle; since you created the category, it informs you automatically. So while I appreciate your 'thanks', I can't really take credit, as the software notified you automatically. Further discussion about this is best held on the CfD page referenced above. cheers, --KarlB (talk) 15:42, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Category:Online commenting available through Facebook
Category:Online commenting available through Facebook, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. 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. KarlB (talk) 15:44, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Hey!
How are you doing? Please tell me about yourself in my talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sean Brown dangeroustaco (talk • contribs)

Hi I wanna you guys to update Operation blue star topic.
This page has wrong information regarding dates 3–6 June 1984  instead of 2-6 june 1984.

83 soldiers killed and 248 injured (officially). Possibly more than 800 is also wron 15307 soldiers were killed and 17892 were wounded. For reference you can Check Gen K.S. Brar's book "Operation Blue star: A true story". I will be more than happy if you guys can correct information on this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GurpreetKaurBrar (talk • contribs) 03:33, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 18
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Yahoo! Consumer group (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Producers and ROI


 * Gary L. Wilson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to IRR


 * RealtyTrac (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Brandon Moore


 * T. Sher Singh (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Advisory Council

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:26, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Category:Read online by subscription
Hi, I note that you created Category:Read online by subscription as a sub-cat of Newspapers, but (i) it's not clear from the category name that it is for newspapers, and (ii) it is now becoming so common for newspapers to require an online subscription that this is probably not going to be considered a defining characteristic, in which case the category is likely to be deleted if it gets discussed. If you consent, I could just delete it anyway. What would you like to happen to it? – Fayenatic L (talk) 22:15, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Fayenatic london, thanks for asking. To answer your question, no I do not wish to have this category deleted.
 * By the way, congratulations on your L . Ottawahitech (talk) 02:19, 2 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that! Meaning no disrespect, I have started a discussion on the category at WP:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 May 2, so please join in there. – Fayenatic L (talk) 08:51, 2 May 2012 (UTC)


 * I have recreated this category - hope you don't mind? Ottawahitech (talk) 20:43, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Category:Yahoo! Groups
Category:Yahoo! Groups, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. 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. KarlB (talk) 19:20, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Discussion at Category_talk:Facebook_groups#criteria
You are invited to join the discussion at Category_talk:Facebook_groups. KarlB (talk) 22:16, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

New Page Triage prototype released
Hey Ottawahitech! We've finally finished the NPT prototype and deployed it on enwiki. We'll be holding an office hours session on the 16th at 21:00 in #wikimedia-office to show it off, get feedback and plot future developments - hope to see you there! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 03:49, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I have no idea what this posting is all about - I suspect it is a result of signing up for a newsletter somewhere on Wikipedia - wish I cold remember where so I could remove my name from from the list. I am surprised this type of posting is not considered spam at Wikipedia. Ottawahitech (talk) 14:28, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

New Page Triage/New Pages Feed
Hey all :). A notification that the prototype for the New Pages Feed is now live on enwiki! We had to briefly take it down after an unfortunate bug started showing up, but it's now live and we will continue developing it on-site.

The page can be found at Special:NewPagesFeed. Please, please, please test it and tell us what you think! Note that as a prototype it will inevitably have bugs - if you find one not already mentioned at the talkpage, bring it up and I'm happy to carry it through to the devs. The same is true of any additions you can think of to the software, or any questions you might have - let me know and I'll respond.

Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 13:34, 22 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Same comment as above - why am I receiving these  (unsigned) messages that I  have no interest in? Ottawahitech (talk) 15:40, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Category:Major shareholders of Yahoo!
Category:Major shareholders of Yahoo!, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. 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. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:47, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of John D. Hayes (businessman)


The article John D. Hayes (businessman) has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * The only sources I can find are routine news stories about him being hired by Yahoo, and a couple that give his opinion on marketing matters. None of them give the significant coverage required by WP:BIO.

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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — Mr. Stradivarius  (have a chat) 13:51, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
 * It appears someone saw fit to take this article to AFD and it was deleted a week ago - all this without notifying me. The article was deleted with only three pariticipants with:
 * 2 delete votes
 * 1 weak delete vote
 * and no one corrected the the nominator saying that John D. Hayes (businessman) was a past member of the board of Yahoo!, a very significant company.
 * Is this how consensus works at AFD? Ottawahitech (talk) 13:55, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

User:De Administrando Imperio
Hi, I've reverted your addition of to Missing Wikipedians. He or she didn't leave voluntarily: I blocked them for an indefinite period after it became apparent that they'd been posting huge numbers of copyright violations into articles (including many which ended up being linked from the main page). This required a major clean-up effort, which occupied a lot of my time, as well as that of several other editors. The inclusion criteria for Wikipedia:Missing Wikipedians seems a bit unclear to me, but I don't think that it should serve as a memorial to people who caused a lot of damage. Nick-D (talk) 23:31, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know - I see that the the next edit I made to WP:MW was immediately removed by another Wiki-admin, this time with no edit summary to let readers know why it was removed/reverted. Ottawahitech (talk) 14:07, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
 * The next edit was not removed and an edit summary explaining why was used. They moved the name to the proper place alphabetically. --Onorem♠Dil 14:24, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Spencer Stuart


The article Spencer Stuart has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * No claim of notability, being hired by Yahoo! does not make a company 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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 20:35, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Cats
I havent seen any sign in en space about change in policy or practice having parent and child cats (categories) gtogether - so for the one I have seen - Perth, I am reverting - trust you understand - SatuSuro 00:47, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
 * oops - my bad I have reverted self - I thought the australian part would be up the teree - looked at the structure - I was wrong - sorry about the intrusion in our good work - I had thought it would have country as the part of the tree and it hadnt. SatuSuro 00:52, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Category:Demographics of Canada by province
Category:Demographics of Canada by province, which you created, has been nominated for renaming to Category:Demographics of Canada by province or territory. 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. -- Black Falcon (talk) 04:27, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Alpha_Quadrant  (talk)  08:50, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 22
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Satyam Integrated Engineering Solutions (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Media, Telecom, Verticals and Consulting

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:39, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

adding category that does not exist
Hi Ottawahitech, you added a not existing Category:Cisco people to Sandra Lerner and Leonard Bosack. This is not helping much other editors, so I have reverted these changes. Kind Regards, SchreyP (messages) 05:15, 23 July 2012 (UTC)