User talk:Peridon/Archives/2011/May

Springs Window Fashions (Bali and Graber Blinds)
I'm new to adding articles to Wikipedia and I am doing this simply as a request by my employer to provide more information on what our company has to offer. Springs Window Fashions is currently the second largest blinds and shades seller in the world, Hunter Douglas being the first. I did not feel as though my articles were advertisements in any way since they provided a pretty detailed history, as well as a list of our location and product information. There was no promotional information anywhere in the articles. Could you please explain to me why you deleted these articles and what I can do to improve them for posting to Wikipedia? Springs Window Fashions.
 * "I'm new to adding articles to Wikipedia and I am doing this simply as a request by my employer to provide more information on what our company has to offer." Have a look at WP:COI which is to do with conflict of interest - editing things you have a close connection with. Also look at WP:SPAM which is to do with promotion and advertising. Now, the articles. First, if you say 'we' that SHOUTS spam (so does using ® and ™ - it may be a registered trade mark, but Wikipedia doesn't use them). Second, you almost totally use company or linked sites as references. Not good. See WP:RS for what are and aren't 'reliable sources'. Own sites don't count as reliable. Nor do blogs, forums and Wikipedia for the reason that anyone can edit them. (In the case of Wikipedia, accuracy is maintained by other editors reverting or amending, but there's always that little gap...) You say you are the world's second largest - you have to prove that independently of the company's own site. "The Bali brand has long been providing beautiful, quality window treatments to customers around the world" - again, this shouts advert. Would you say that to someone? (OK, you might - I don't know you....) Would it be found in a brochure - yes. WP:PEACOCK. If you've got a copy of what you put up, have a look at it again in the hard light of this message. Pretend you're working for Hunter Douglas and looking for a way to get this article off Wikipedia. Have a look at their article Hunter Douglas (on which I've just stuck two tags complaining about the referencing...) and see if it fails any of the policies. (If you think it does, let me know. It was first created before some of the current tightening up came in.) When you've done all that, get back to me. (If you haven't got a copy, let me know. Peridon (talk) 16:41, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
 * BTW In my opinion, only one article would be needed for the company as a whole. You repeated a lot of stuff in the history. If a main article passes muster, a redirect can be put on for the main brands so people looking for them can be taken to the main article. Peridon (talk) 16:43, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. I will take a look into this and see what can be done to accomodate your recommended changes. This article truely isn't meant to be promotional. The goal is to simply to provide information about the company. Of the suggestions you made, is the biggest problem the sources or is there a lot of other strikes against the article (other than comments you posted about trademarks and particular statements, which should be easy to take care of)? Legally I had thought I had to use trademarks - I take it this is irrelevant for Wikipedia? Levelor and Hunter Douglas were the pages used as "inspiration" so to speak as to how to format the articles - I will take a look at these again. Also, is there any way you could re-instate the draft stage of the Springs Window Fashions article? I won't be posting it until all issues are resolved but it would be a lot easier to re-work and have comments posted directly to the drafted article. I will look into combining the three into one, so the Bali and Graber articles are fine being deleted but life sure would be easier if I could get the Springs article back. Thanks again for your help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brandter (talk • contribs) 17:20, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Little procedural note: when on talk pages, please sign with ~, and indent posts in a thread with a : at the start to make it easy to see what's where. (Obviously, :: and ::: make it deeper.) Your draft is at User:Brandter/Springs Window Fashions. Peridon (talk) 17:27, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Gendai
Hi there. You deleted the page Gendai. I think the idea of whoever marked it for deletion was that Gendai (disambiguation) would be renamed to "Gendai". I'd do it but I don't know how. Tesspub (talk) 20:25, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Atego (disambiguation)
Atego (disambiguation) was (speedy) deleted. For a consistent approach the established page Aonix must be deleted also. I suggest to undelete Atego (disambiguation). It could be that the lorry Atego is primary topic, but a deletion of the disambiguation is too rigorous. Now it is more difficult for a user to find any information about the company called Atego. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chjb (talk • contribs) 20:57, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
 * How about moving the Aonix article to Atego? The Merc one is Mercedes-Benz Atego. A hatnote can be put on the Aonix based one for the Mercedes lorry. A disam page for an article starting Mercedes and one called Aonix would look silly. Aonix would stay as a redirect. Peridon (talk) 21:05, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
 * But not tonight - did something to my back lifting and repotting a rather large cactus. Bath and bed for me... Peridon (talk) 21:16, 2 May 2011 (UTC)


 * moving the Aonix article to Atego sounds good. It could help to improve the Aonix/Atego article. ...and in fact the disamb would not be necessary. -- Chjb (talk) 08:21, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 2 May 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 23:36, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Please have a gentlelook!
Sir, please join and give your opinion! Thanks Rirunmot (talk) 19:21, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Boubaker Polynomials (some information)
Dear Peridon, your neutrality and impartiality were the single pretty things in the last discussions.

You have seen that the debate was not only about Maths... now you should know that Polynomials are an important thing in Maths with hundreds of related pages in WP...

You can have a look on the references i.e. Meixner-Type Results for Riordan Arrays and Associated Integer Sequences, Chapter 6: The Boubaker polynomials (by Paul Barry, Aoife Hennessy and Modelling Nonlinear Bivariate Dependence Using the Boubaker polynomials  (by E. Gargouri-Ellouze, N. Sher Akbar, S. Nadeem)... or there

and you will be astonished from the fact of deleting this page 'for non notablilty??!!'

Have a good day and give your neutral opinion, it is more valuable than 100 others, believe me! Thanks Rirunmot (talk) 19:19, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

NabiCI deletion
Dear Peridon, why did you delete the "NabiCI" article? I am the creator of this Open Source Software and the owner of the copyright and I don't see any "unambigous infriction" of my copyright in this article.

Thanks Axel (talk) 15:35, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Have a look at WP:COPYVIO. Even though it is your text, it can't be used here without a licensed release under things better explained there than I can do here quickly. Apart from this issue, the article was unreferenced (thus failing WP:V - verifiability - and needing a look at WP:RS - reliable sources). And yet again, there was no indication of any notability for the subject. The world is full of software. Why does yours get an article? You have to show us that it is of note WP:GNG. Peridon (talk) 16:35, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion of Impact BBDO
Hello, i started a page called Impact BBDO and i just wrote the beginning of the definition of it and i was wiling to continue it but it was speedy deleted. I want to create it again but i should contact you first. I would like to know if i can do it again noticing that impact BBDO is related to BBDO in the middle east region. Thank you in advance. J.Hassoun (talk) 08:25, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
 * You are welcome to re-create it - so long as you show some notability. Being established for 40 years isn't necessarily notable - a car wash might have been in business for that long but would hardly be notable. Look at WP:GNG for general notability, and WP:RS for the sort of references you should give. A good idea is to start it on a subpage of your userpage. and call it 'Impact BBDO Draft' for safety. When you think it's ready, ask someone who looks to be a regular editor for advice and an opinion. (Not me this weekend - won't be online.) If not sure how to create a subpage, ask. Someone will be keeping an eye on this page for me. Peridon (talk) 20:39, 5 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank You :) J.Hassoun (talk) 10:50, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

McFourple
Hi, you speedy deleted my page and I am not sure why. you claimed it was a hoax, but clearly it isn't as there are webpages, videos, photos, etc of it. Please do not dismiss of something because you do not believe in it. I would like to recreate the page if you will let me.

thank you user:petesmo


 * Please sign posts on talk pages with ~ . You are free to recreate it, but before you do, you should look at WP:GNG, WP:V and WP:RS. If it isn't notable, it won't get an article no matter how true it is. If it seems notable but isn't verifiable, it classes as 'weakest link'. And if there aren't any reliable sources, just forget it. Reliable sources do not include blogs, twitters, forums, your best mate, anything self-published, LinkedIn, Facebook, YouTube, MySpace, and Mrs Jones at No 43. From the search I made before deleting it, I'd say you have a tough job to establish notability, or to find reliable sources. Over to you... Peridon (talk) 22:56, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Isaacrayganfan: 9 May 2011
You had no reason to delete my page. Does it make you feel good to annoy people or something?
 * Look at WP:GNG, WP:RS and WP:COI. Also WP:CRYSTAL. Peridon (talk) 20:43, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Rrepeat deletions and contribution visibility
Hi, Peridon. You pulled the trigger on Gary george davidson—the second time it was speedied in 24 hrs. I nominated it the first time, when the content was about Gabe Kaplan rather than Michael Jordan (and neglected to warn the creator, User:Ggd200). Technical question: because the article was deleted, the edits don't show on Ggd200's contributions page, so how can I tell if that editor has created that article on other occasions? Is it flagged for you guys when a speedied article is recreated? Rivertorch (talk) 05:51, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes and no. When we click the delete button, we get a screen that tells us how many edits there in the total history, and the previous deletion history. In this case, it's been deleted twice. If you click for the user's contribs, you may find 'deleted contribs' as a button on the contribs screen, and 'contribs' as a button on the deleted contribs screen. It's in that little line of things with talk, block log and so on. Admins do, and I think anyone can too. (Can't remember...) An article doesn't get flagged for us until we're thinking of deleting it (or being nosy...). Sometimes, the same title has been deleted more than once - but not the same article. 'Joe Bloggs (Plumber)' of 2006 may be someone in the UK. But the 2008 one might be in Australia, and the 2011 one very enterprisingly setting up in Poland because all the Polish plumbers are in London, Paris and Berlin. Counting the talk page is an easy guide - do please remember to copy that little bit off the csd tag to warn them. It's a help for others as well as a courtesy. And when they get to ANI complaining, you can always say, "I told you!". Keep up the good work. Peridon (talk) 18:42, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I did notify them of the CSD nomination, but it occurred to me that some sort of warning for creating a phony article might have been a good idea. "Deleted contribs" isn't viewable for me, alas. Fwiw, it's unlikely there will ever be a legitimate article Gary george davidson with lower-case names. Rivertorch (talk) 19:45, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
 * No, you don't. (Just logged out to check...). What you can do is tick the 'deleted only' box on the contribs screen, and then 'search'. No, that doesn't work even if I'm logged in. Wonder what it's for... Someone will tell us fairly soon, I think. Peridon (talk) 19:55, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Colliers International Atlanta
Hi Peridon,

My page, Colliers International Atlanta, has recently been deleted (speedy deletion) by you because of A7 in the guidelines. I was hoping you could guide me in the right direction and let me know what exactly I need to add in order to make my page acceptable?

Thank you Mholtz87 (talk) 17:20, 12 May 2011 (UTC) Mholtz87
 * You might have to get Dr Who to give you a ride back in time to change the company's history... The parent company is notable enough - looks fairly well referenced (but I've not checked them). Notability does not cascade down, and I can see nothing much in Atlanta apart from a company doing what it's supposed to and not even referenced at that. Look at WP:GNG for general notability, and WP:RS for what to use as references. Not every company gets an article, not every person does. There are many doctors who do a good job day in day out. That's what they're paid for. (Dr Harold Shipman got an article, though...) There are companies who do a good job, but nobody notices. Remember that this is an encyclopaedia and not a directory. Look also at the parent company article to see how it is done. Peridon (talk) 20:09, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Starmania (TV series)
Then please help me how to add a right deletion tag to this article. I want this article deleted because Starmania in the Austrian TV series is history and it doesn't exist anymore. Chodo Habat (talk) 09:56, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
 * William Shakespeare is dead. The Lone Ranger series is long gone. The 64,000 Dollar Question is also long gone. Should their articles be deleted? There is no speedy deletion category that will fit this article. Please stop adding incorrect tags for speedy deletion to the article. Why do you want it deleted so strongly? I will admit that it is probably not the most notable of subjects for the English language Wikipedia, but it is not suitable for speedy. You will have to use one of the other deletion procedures such as PROD or AfD. Have a look at WP:DEL. I would advise you that 'because it's closed' is NOT a reason for seeking deletion at either of those, just as it isn't at speedy. Peridon (talk) 10:16, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes ok but the Starmania series is a really unimportant TV channel from Austria which broke a long time ago. You can't compare such thing with William Shakespeare. So I guess we need important articles for the English Wikipedia and not junk stuff. Chodo Habat (talk) 10:20, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
 * As I said, look at the deletion policy, and use PROD or AfD. Speedy deletion is fairly restricted in application - a club or a company can be subject to speedy, but a particular product can't. An article about the Bloggsville Lawn Mower Co could be speedied, but an article about the Bloggsville CN45 Mk III mower can't (unless it can be shown that it never existed and nor did the company). Web-based stuff can be speedied, but not conventionally broadcast stuff. Attack is for people and occasionally companies - usually cases where libel might be involved. It's hard to libel a TV programme that's gone. Possible, but unlikely. I'm not supporting this article, but I am supporting the use of correct procedure. Your reason that it's closed doesn't work (I admit my examples were a bit more famous - I couldn't offhand remember any equivalent to this). I'm not bothered about it enough to PROD it or AfD it myself, but I won't oppose a correctly applied PROD, and won't argue for its survival at AfD. I would advise concentrating on the lack of reference and on showing lack of notability. Those are good reasons at PROD or AfD. Peridon (talk) 10:52, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Remember ...
When you accept an unblock request, you've got to actually unblock them (see subsequent edits). Daniel Case (talk) 15:21, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that. Peridon (talk) 17:37, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Removing stuff from Google
It didn't work - see User talk:Arowhun. When I used it before, the whole page had been deleted here, and the author was embarrassed that Google still found it and clicking the link brought you to the deletion log saying that she was not notable. In that case, the deletion request to Google did work quite quickly, but it's evidently no good where the problem is that Google's little summary shows bad bits of a deleted version. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 11:35, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I've posted this at User talk:Arowhun: User talk:Arowhun: "The Google update must have come right in between the two edits - talk about split second timing... I think the Google reply might be automatic - triggered by certain words in JohnCD's request. It will drop out in a couple of days or so. I get annoyed sometimes when the crawler gets there before I go back to something interesting I saw and it's gone." Peridon (talk) 12:22, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Ferencvárosi TC (handball)
Hello!

Just wanted to say thanks for you quick and constructive answer on the Ferencvárosi TC (handball) article. I'm going to create the male's side and make it to a disambugation site, as you suggested. Thehoboclown (talk) 13:56, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

speedy
Thanks for telling me. I saw that on his talk page. Wilbysuffolk  talk  17:23, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Editor
Please help me with the Mohammad Shaikh page. You have formerly edited or deleted this page in April of 2011. I would like this page back up please so that I can finish editing it. Thank you kindly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mindingthequill (talk • contribs) 19:50, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
 * All I did was to delete the talk page which was left over by mistake - I was tidying up. I can't do anything against the Requests for Undeletion decision. Your only course now is to go to a Deletion Review, and I must advise you that I think you have very little chance. Peridon (talk) 20:36, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mindingthequill (talk • contribs) 22:08, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 May 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 01:53, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Sun Connect
Hi Peridon, I'm wanting to get a little more detail from you in regards to the speedy deletion of my page. You say that the page is in contravention of G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion: A7: Article about a company which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject. In regards to G11, I made sure that I created the article from a unbiased standpoint, at no point does the article bias Sun Connect in anyway. please see G11 note below Note: An article about a company or a product which describes its subject from a neutral point of view does not qualify for this criterion. In regards to A7, Can you provide some advice in regards to this, I can send you pages of a dozen competitors of Sun Connect that have Wikipedia pages in the same style that have been approved... Looking forward to your feedback. User:Jimmygreen_voice
 * Please sign with ~ . OK. First, "How does it work?" and "you" are killers here. They scream "SPAM!!!". You seem to be keener on showing people how they can make or save money through your products than in talking about the company. Second, your references are rather more quotes from the company than independent reviews of the company. They are a step ahead of press releases, but only really establishing existence. Third, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Either the others have better referencing and more notability shown, or we haven't caught them yet. There's three and a half million (give or take) articles on Wikipedia. Fourth, Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a directory. Not everything gets in. We can't have a spot check on all solar power companies to see how they fit in. We deal with things when they get spotted. (Like a minor hoax that hadn't been spotted for three years that had me scurrying off to the Portuguese language Wikipedia to tidy up some loose ends...). Look at WP:NPOV and at other articles. Read WP:GNG and WP:RS. First and second person (I/we and you) are only allowed in direct quotes. When you re-create the article, put it on a subpage of your userpage (ask any regular editor if not sure), and then ask for advice and opinion. Label it as a draft for safety... I may not be around, but there are people that watch this page (not sure why, but it takes all sorts... 8-) ). Best place for new messages is at the bottom of a talk page - that's where we look first. Peridon (talk) 20:30, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Paul Dorian page
Hi I just noticed that you removed the speedy deletion tag on this page and then undid it... why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by NanaRobins (talk • contribs) 14:53, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Because I thought at first it was about a different person from the one deleted at AfD, but it wasn't. Same person, but different article. As I hadn't time to go into the matter closer, I reverted myself and left it to another admin to sort. Peridon (talk) 16:09, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Reviewer permission
I have asked at AN what should be done about WP:Requests for permissions/Reviewer. Perhaps you have an opinion. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 17:42, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Living it Big
A mildly amusing fake but nowhere near as well constructed as the Upper Peninsula War article! Bradley0110 (talk) 17:52, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Jamie Raeburn
User talk:MikeBeckett Please do ask questions! User:MikeBeckett  18:04, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Ian Stewart Black
Moved to Barnstars section on my User Page. Peridon (talk) 13:09, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Sean O'Boyle (Composer)
Not sure why it was deleted with such a short notice. I only created a stub article as the composer was featured in the ABC Classic 100 Symphony and did not copy from the articles claimed for its deletion.

Splouge (talk) 20:26, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 May 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 02:08, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Ill Met by Moonlight
Hi

thanks for your explanation - my point is that the book is in fact much more important than the film so I want to make a page - Ill Met by Moonlight (Book) and a separate page for the (film). what is the right order/method etc for all this? Huguº 20:38, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Crandyberry
I did, but I don't see why you pointed me to it. Could you explain more fully what you mean? Nyttend (talk) 03:51, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Please Stop Deleting Brooklyn Tabernacle Article
This article should not be arbitrarily deleted because Brooklyn Tabernacle is a large social institution which should have its own encyclopedia page. These constant deletions of the pages about this institution reveal a personal vendetta against the church by some Wikipedia admins, rather than the actual value of a page about this institution. Please stop deleting pages about the church. You are depriving the public of information about a large institution. Just the fact that this church has 10,000 members and has existed for 40 years in the heart of the largest city in America is enough to prove the worthiness of such an article. Please restore the article.--Sanya3 (talk) 08:24, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 May 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 20:03, 31 May 2011 (UTC)