User talk:Peridon/Archives/2012/March

Talkback
Zad68 (talk) 03:21, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Article Liberty horn
Hello. You've reverted my tagging of the article as a hoax. I added reasoning to the talk page. While you put a message justifying the article on my talk page, that should properly (as I see it) go on the article's talk page. I would move it myself, but I don't know if that's kosher. Please put your justification on the article's talk page, and improve the article, or I will re-tag it and submit it for deletion. Robert Hiller (talk) 18:43, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Zad68 (talk) 15:44, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 March 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 16:38, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Article Meng Jiangnu
Hello Peridon, read your notice. I had also checked information on Meng Jiangnu and found some on Google, but the article does not currently have any sources or references and needs a better rewrite to become encyclopedic. As you already know, inclusion of information on Wikipedia is by verifiability and not truth. I support article development and therefore would like other editors to start editing and improve the article. Thank you. TheGeneralUser (talk) 06:12, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Deleted Article: Intergy Consulting
Hi, I've posted an article about Intergy Company where i've been working. But it has tagged to speedy deletion. I request how i can reenable to post an article under name "Intergy Consulting" http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Intergy_Consulting&action=edit&redlink=1. Please help us.
 * First - sign talkpage posts with four ~ things. That helps us know who said what. Second - to link to something on Wikipedia (when you're on Wikipedia, that is), just put double [ ] brackets round the title. Now for the article. Not every company (or individual gets an article. Policies on notability have to be met. In this case, it's WP:CORP, and the claim must be backed up with reliable independent sources WP:RS. Your site is not regarded as reliable (nor is mine when discussing me...), nor are blogs, forums, wikis, Facebook, LinkedIn, or TechCrunch. The article has to be written in a certain way. Remember - Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia not a directory. See WP:NPOV and avoid things like "also has deep expertise in open source technologies and frameworks, enabling us to deliver tailored solutions that exceed our clients’ expectations, every time" - that one is a killer! So is "realize their business vision". It says "we wrote this and we're looking for you to become a customer". Look at other (established) articles. And at WP:COI about writing concerning you and yours. No visions or solutions. They are meaningless PR jargon and have no place in an encyclopaedia (outside articles on prophets or brine, of course...). Basically, you didn't show any notability. There are thousands of software development companies, and Microsoft Partners don't seem particularly rare, so far as I can see. Never counted them, but they pop up like chess masters (it's the grand masters that count, by the way). Sit down, have a discussion with whoever - and ban buzz words from it - and see how you can show that you're better than or totally different from 'Software for Everyone (no program too big, no program too small)' (three employees and hoping to get offices next week). Peridon (talk) 10:18, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Deleted Article: Thinkup
Please restore the article thinkup so it can be expanded. Alternativly put it into the incubator so it can be expanded per the standard protocols.

It is required for discussion/specs in MediaWiki wiki and cooperation with open source community.

Thanks. OrenBochman (talk) 13:22, 8 March 2012 (UTC)


 * I dont think that restoring this article would be a good idea cuz it was too small. You should recreate it properly stating its importance


 * OR


 * In future, if you're working on an article that isn't complete yet, try creating a subpage of your userpage and creating the article there first. How to do so is explained here. Then, once you've completed the article to an acceptable standard, you can create the article properly and copy everything from the subpage to the main article. That way, you're less likely to leave half-finished articles lying around and getting deleted. Happy editing!  Yash    t    101   14:16, 8 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Since the page has been deleted I am not supposed to recreate it in my user space. I am therefore following procedure and requesting that it be restored to the incubator where I can work on it and get it some one to approve it. If I make a new version in my userspace it can be challanged out of hand when I move it to mainspace. Theis is another unpleasentness I'm trying to avoid. OrenBochman (talk) 16:12, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * No it can't. That's only when something has been deleted at Articles for Discussion, and this was speedied. You can do what you want with it after speedy - with limitations. Repeated re-creation of an obvious fail will lead to accusations of vandalism, and the 'protection' of the title. That's usually at the fifth repeat of junk. You can re-create it in your userspace with the word DRAFT at the top, and id anyone puts a G4 speedy on it, tell me. I will advise you, however, that if it's still in beta it will be liable to be regarded as non-notable - but only when moved into nainspace. In userspace, usually only spam, attack and copyvio get speedied. Things left there too long can be taken to discussion at MfD. Yasht's info and advice is quite correct. I prefer to suggest 'move' rather than 'copy'. I've done both ways myself. When you are getting somewhere with it, and before moving, ask for advice on the content and style, if you have doubts. (If you don't have doubts, ask yourself why...) Peridon (talk) 21:28, 8 March 2012 (UTC)


 * You are really making it difficult to contribute.
 * I'd rather stick with official policy, otherwise we are just wasting each other's time.
 * I've recently reviewed deletion policy pages, as well as the article incubator's policy page and you are clearly in the wrong. Speedy deletion is listed as one of the routes to incubation AFD is only needed is there is a proper deletion process and the wikipedian is allowed to present a defence. For the record:
 * The page does not violate incubation criteria.
 * The page has been deleted - and a since it was speedy deleted AFD is not required.
 * That there is someone willing to edit it - namely myself.
 * There is a good reason to think it will be a success. I believe the subject is notable, for example, it is in use by the Whitehouse. In fact, the only reason it was not a success is because it was deleted while I researching the article. I've contacted the project's founder and developer team for information and to secure right to use their logo.
 * So unless there is another reason move the deleted Thinkup to the article incubator. I will consult once it is ready for publication.
 * OrenBochman (talk) 10:20, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * To be quite honest, I'm not at all sure what you are talking about. I've just told you that you are quite free to re-create the 'article' in your userspace, and that as it hasn't been deleted at AfD it is not eligible for immediate deletion under CSD G4. I don't know what you mean by "It is required for discussion/specs in MediaWiki wiki" - required by whom? If MediaWiki want it, they can contact me. "it was deleted while I researching the article" - yes, probably. That's why you should create articles in userspace, and preferably do the research first anyway. Being in use by the White House (I assume you don't mean Whitehouse magazine) doesn't necessarily give notability. The White House also uses ballpoint pens, loo roll and floor polish. The products gain no notability here from being used there. The article doesn't need incubating because it wasn't an article. It was an infobox for a product in beta. The article needs creating in userspace, notability WP:GNG showing in reliable independent sources WP:RS and then being looked at by someone who is a regular editor to avoid disappointment from premature launch. As to the logo, you cannot get permission to use the logo. If it is copyright, there must be a release under Creative Commons (see WP:COPYVIO), or it may possibly be used under 'fair use' (again, see COPYVIO and if you aren't sure, ask User:Moonriddengirl, who is possibly our most knowledgeable editor when it comes to copyright). If you don't think I'm giving you the right info, please feel free to ask another admin. Any admin can do things with a deleted article; it doesn't have to be the one who deleted it. Peridon (talk) 10:49, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Plainly - I've asked you to move the article ThinkUp, to the article incubator, indeed regardless of it current progress which is not germane to the process.
 * To clarify "this White house has collaborated with Gina Trapani and other via Expert Labs with the development of ThinkUp an open source product. You might know this and more if you cooperate.
 * Is there a legitimate reason you cannot, or will extended me this courtesy?
 * Have I not demonstrated that incubation is legitimate?
 * Have I not explained why, for me, userification is undesirable?
 * Have I not been sufficiently polite?
 * If you prick us, do we not bleed?
 * If you poison us, do we not die?
 * Is this how you usually treat new wikipedia editors?
 * Should I expect any other ops to behave any different from you?
 * OrenBochman (talk) 14:39, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I've looked into the incubator, and this does not seem to qualify. As I read the policy, it's an alternative to deletion, a sort of hospital where other people can rescue an ailing article that someone has created, not a place to build articles by yourself. That is one of the main functions of userspace. I work mainly in CSD and AfD, so please accept that I DO know what CSD G4 is about (it is ONLY for articles deleted at AfD (or the other fDs - the key word being 'Discussion') and being substantially the same in re-created form). I've declined many G4s because either the article had been speedied not AfDed, or it was not substantially the same. I've declined more G4s than I've deleted, I think. So long as you avoid copyvio, attack or blatant spam, you have no danger in creating the article in userspace. If using the logo under 'fair use', it must not be added until the article goes live, as copyright things are not allowed in userspace. As to other admins giving different opinions, you only need to look at the administration noticeboards to see that opinions can differ wildly at times. I doubt that they will differ much at all on the meaning of G4. You have been polite, as, I hope, have I. (I usually try to be...) Another admin may be along here shortly, anyway. I have a fairly large number of talk page stalkers. I won't suggest an admin for you to ask, as you might think I'm sending you to a crony who will agree with me out of friendship. Peridon (talk) 15:02, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * As to 'new editor', your first edit was before I signed up, and you have been editing more regularly since April 2009. I hardly thing that qualifies as 'new'. If you like, I will userfy the infobox (the 'article') to User:OrenBochman/Thinkup2, from whence you can put it into User:OrenBochman/Thinkup (or vice versa), and if anyone tries to use G4, let me know. You've got the title there, and the start of a real article - has there been any problem with that so far? Peridon (talk) 15:15, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and put the info box into OrenBochman's draft. Hopefully he will stop asking the same question at multiple venues now. --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:09, 9 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Peridon, I notice you deleted it as no context. But there was sufficient information in the infobox to make it very clear what the article was about. Perhaps you meant to delete as A7, which would I think have been valid on the basis of the article at the time. Giving the wrong reason confuses beginners--though it does seem from the above that this particular beginner is rather easily confused.  DGG ( talk ) 19:48, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
 * If you can remember what you were thinking last August... Looking at it, I probably did think A7 as beta software was involved. It's taken till now for any action to be taken - and he's not that new an editor. I get the feeling that there's a sudden panic stations about this - but I'll only do anything if it's CSDed G4 (which definitely won't apply). I'll leave the explanations to the next ones who tag or delete it... (Making assumptions there - it might come out as featured article standard.) :) Peridon (talk) 20:04, 10 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Just a note Thinkup is no longer in beta. OrenBochman (talk) 12:27, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I had noticed... Peridon (talk) 12:28, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Bjørn Hvinden
You deleted this article as an A7 speedy. An assertion someone is "Professor of Sociology at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology" is an indication of a least possible notability, and therefore does not qualify for speedy. Furthermore, as a member of the l Norwegian Society of Sciences and Letters he passes WP:PROF. I know I can restore it myself, but I'd rather ask you first.  DGG ( talk ) 19:44, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. Peridon (talk) 19:47, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Liberty horn for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Liberty horn 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/Liberty horn 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. Dicklyon (talk) 00:45, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary
Wishing Peridon a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talk about my edits? 10:22, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 March 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 12:20, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 March 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 14:13, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Osarius     Talk 16:00, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

User talk:Lifeinsurance123
U deleted a page created by this user under g11 which was Shah & Shah Group.

This user recreated it with different name, which is Shah & Shah. I have tagged it under db-multiple (G11 n A7)

Please look in this and do what is needed. Thanks!   Yash t  101   09:47, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks - DGG got it. I've cautioned them. Peridon (talk) 19:06, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Deleted Page
Hi Peridon, i created a page name: Pallab Kirtania, one of the leading Bengali singer, actor, director & writer. you deleted that page. why? plz u see the link: https://www.google.co.in/search?rlz=1C1CHHV_enIN397IN397&aq=f&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=pallab+kirtania

Hi Peridon, I am an actor trying to put a wiki online which you deleted today - this will ultimately help me as an actor get work - the page is Lorne MacFadyen - could you please undelete this? I've never created a wiki before so if it's because of me not including some sort of verification I would appreciate you letting me know what to do. Thanks!

Hi Peridon, you deleted 'No Respect for Beauty'page today. I'm sorry but, can you easily explain to me why? I can't understand reason.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Backers87654 (talk • contribs) 12:40, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

My List
I have created a list and i have included ur name in it. I hope u dont mind that. You can view it over Here!  Yash t  101  :)  04:04, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Keep on asking people - and above all keep on watching and listening. :) Peridon (talk) 08:54, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes Sir. I am always willing to improve!  Yash t  101  :)  08:56, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

The Good Must Suffer The Wicked
please undelete the Album page for Carceri's The Good Must Suffer The Wicked. there is a wiki on them Carceri (band) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Metalmeister555 (talk • contribs) 12:05, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
 * But the album itself is not independently notable, which is a requirement ( talk→  BWilkins   ←track ) 12:18, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, that appeared after I deleted the album. (I did check first, including possible variants...) To be quite honest, I can't see the article on the band shows any notability. It's unreferenced, like the Dutch article (which seems to have survived an attempt at getting it deleted in January). Unlike some of the other Wikipedias (so it seems to me, at least), the English language one does insist on referencing. Playing at Deathfest is the best thing I can see there, and while there are bands like Napalm Death and Behemoth there, there are also others without articles here. I would concentrate on getting the band article up to scratch before it gets spotted by a patroller. If I restore the album, it's going to go again if the band article does - and that's likely as it stands. Peridon (talk) 13:16, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

i will add the references asap

Metalmeister555 (talk) 15:15, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

AfD
Reconsider? — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 15:45, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * There's still nothing I would consider as a reliable independent source, I'm afraid. You've tried hard, but I don't think there IS anything out there. It's a bit like yeti hunting. You know it's there, but can you find it? Despite having been told off for it, I still sometimes put things to AfD in the hope someone will find something I haven't. I'm always happy when something is rescued - I've rescued a few myself against the odds. Here, I think the yeti is just a snowman in the fog... Peridon (talk) 16:24, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * PS Thanks for archiving me again. I never remember, and feel guilty about not having thanked you before. Peridon (talk) 16:24, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * :D — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 17:08, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Do we have something against Slovenian newspapers? I think if the guy wasn't a New Age nut then the coverage, as currently given in the article, would be sufficient to establish minimum notability at least. :/ — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 17:08, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Nothing against Slovenian stuff. However, I'd already covered that one earlier when someone else mentioned it. It's not coverage of him, it's a spiel by him. It's a recital of his beliefs, not an independent review of him. I've nothing against New Age things. I don't read them any more because I've read the interesting bits and seen through a lot of it already - especially the people making money out of it. As to notability - there's enough to pass A7, but not enough (to my way of thinking) to merit an article. If you, me and DGG can't find anything in three weeks, that probably says something. I don't know if you know DGG - he's fair minded and knows the rules better than most. He commented, then came back a week later. He's looked for stuff, and can't find it. There have been occasions where I gave up and someone else found refs - Bragod was a case. But if the contributors to the AfD can't find anything better than Yunshui's third one (which I hoped someone would find the original of - that leads to a pay site. I can't even get the buy document link to operate (not that I planned to...). Might work for you if you're on something other than Firefox. I don't advise wasting your money. The bit visible isn't enough by itself. Keep digging - doesn't look like anyone is going to close the AfD in a hurry. Peridon (talk) 20:36, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I think I give up. But to me it still seems we have an anti-nutcase bias. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 21:49, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Only when the nutcase doesn't have RS. Believe me, I'm not against the odd things in life. I did a rescue job on an article about a bus shelter once. Today I added a ref to an article about two people who remove rattlesnakes from people's houses (lost that one...). I've even rescued an article about a rapper! That I consider our subject's beliefs a load of cobblers is neither here nor there. I consider a lot of beliefs to be that. And if people knew what my beliefs were, they'd probably think that of mine. I delete metal bands as readily as I delete rappers, too. Peridon (talk) 22:01, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * If I was a delete-hammer yielding admin, I'd be secretly biased against various sports-related articles. (I just clicked on the random article button and got a hockey player. Wikipedia is full of this stuff.) Both rappers and metal bands wouldn't exactly be favored either. Lulz. (Being a non-admin though, I'm free to not concern myself with the stuff I don't care about. w00t.)
 * I wasn't actually referring to you but the (other) delete!voters. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 23:11, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia for World Heritage
I need your assistance in developing and spreading a wikiproject. Can you help me in developing and spreading this page in wikipedia: Wikipedia for World Heritage

Thank you and Happy editing!  Yash t  101  :)  06:55, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Thinking about it... Peridon (talk) 08:36, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 March 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 00:43, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Deleted Page- Leah Campos Schandlbauer
Peridon- a couple of days ago you deleted a wikipedia page for Leah Campos Schandlbauer. I am willing to update and make it more neutral. Before the only information I had was her bio. Well she announced her candidacy today, and there are numerous articles talking about her, her CIA service, etc. (you can google her name if you don't believe me, she is in numerous papers here in the Phoenix, AZ, USA area). Should I just start the page over again? Or can you undelete and I can still use some of the internal links and just make it more neutral? Azcatracho (talk) 06:02, 27 March 2012 (UTC) I created the new page. Feel free to tell me what you think. I think this one is more worthy. Leah Campos Schandlbauer Azcatracho (talk) 07:45, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I still don't think it shows notability or significance outside the candidature. And that is needed. Being a CIA operative may be interesting - but not notable unless of particular importance (which would probably not be revealed/revealable at present anyway - we're not WikiLeaks...). The candidature publicity can't count to notability WP:POLITICIAN - for an article there must be something outside that. The AZcentral ref is a mention, the Capitol Times one better, but both are only there because of the candidature. Peridon (talk) 08:30, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Need advice about a copyvio
Hi, Peridon! I need advice about how to respond to what appears to be a massive copyright violation - or maybe I just need to punt the problem to someone with more clout than me. (You, for instance.) It's the article Women's History Museum and Educational Center. Over the past few weeks a user named User:Womensmuseum (clearly a newbie, an SPA and a COI) has added massive amounts of text, so that the article lists a full bio of every woman ever inducted into the museum. All the text for all the bios comes directly from the museum's website, http://womensmuseumca.org/whof/Inductees/InducteeByYearWEB.php. What should probably be done is to delete all the bios and just leave the names. But I just don't have the nerve to delete nearly 90,000 bytes of text! much less to try to explain to a well-meaning newbie what the problem is. Thoughts/help/advice? Thanks! --MelanieN (talk) 19:47, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I thought this had been dealt with some while ago. Nothing in this user's records, though. I've removed the copyvio from the article, and blocked for username. And warned about copyvio. I don't think this newbie is new. There's definitely been a very similar problem with a very similar name in the last couple of years. I've hidden the edits from view - saving the names of each would have been tricky. I don't often use this gadget. A list of names would be acceptable, but the bios would be a bit much. If they have an article already, it's not needed elsewhere. If they haven't, either they should have, or they're not notable enough anyway. Makes a change you asking me for help - I'm usually trying to unload something or someone onto you!. I'll have another look sometime tomorrow if poss, there was another name and they just would not listen for ages. I've put the article on my watchlist, but if you find 'someone else' posting the same stuff again, let me know or scream SOCK at any handy admin. Peridon (talk) 20:26, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Going offline now - the computer doesn't work very well in the bath... Peridon (talk) 20:28, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks - I certainly asked the right person! (And I don't mind you sending me clueless newbies - I'm pretty patient with them.) Now that I have had my attention drawn to this article I think I will research whether the organization is really notable enough to have an article here. --MelanieN (talk) 21:19, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Preliminary search suggests that it is not. I may AFD it in the next day or two. --MelanieN (talk) 21:30, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * It's definitely been here before, but the title's not quite the same. I remember some of the inductees from a previous occasion. Trying to think of an easy way of finding it.... Peridon (talk) 08:17, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I nominated it here: Articles for deletion/Women's History Museum and Educational Center. --MelanieN (talk) 18:29, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I've notified the author. Same time as I deleted their userpage... Peridon (talk) 18:46, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Deleted Page - Dawsons Music
Peridon, Yesterday you deleted the wikipedia page for Dawsons Music, The page can be changed to comply with the rules, providing you explain to me what is 'advertising' as far as wikipedia is concerned. Please consider this request as this page is entired for the history and what the company 'Dawsons Music' does. I am an employee of this company and thus have the rights to produce this page on their behalf.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jordanharvey3 (talk • contribs) 15:47, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
 * No, you don't have 'rights' to produce a page for a company. Please read WP:COI (conflict of interest - editing about subjects close to you - and WP:OWN. OWN explains that you do not own an article. No permission from the subject is required, and the subject cannot avoid other people editing. This sometimes leads to what I will call interesting situations, when information that the subject did not want displayed here was added to an article, and as it was very well referenced could not be removed. That is unlikely in the case of Dawsons, so far as I am aware. On places like AboutUs and directories, the subject has control of the 'article' or profile. Here, no. As to what is advertising, if you read the policies I gave you, you will get some idea. Anything originating in the PR department should be binned. I found one the other day that said they were passionate about bottle-free water coolers or something like. Worrying. It got worse. You must not be passionate, committed, dedicated, or focussed, or provide (or worse, offer) solutions. Excellent, unique and their friends are out. "The Dawsons staff are on-hand to give jargon-free advice and great service" - no, not like that. Straight out of an ad. If you can find a reference for it, and word it a bit more neutrally, it could be a notability point. But take the tip 'jargon-free'. Ditch the PR jargon. Be absolutely serious and encyclopaedic. Write about Dawsons as if they were Rushworths (the big name in music in Liverpool before Dawsons arrived there, and sadly gone for good). Be neutral. You are not working for the company, you are writing an article for Wikipedia. Read the policies, try a draft where I suggested and put DRAFT UNDER CONSTRUCTION at the top. If if gets tagged, you got it wrong again - badly. If it doesn't, ask for an opinion. AND FIND THE REFERENCES. Read other articles. Write like I do on talk pages, and you'll be tagged for something. Instead, write like a librarian cataloguing books, or a historian describing the Mongolian Bean Crisis of 1768. (Don't Google that - no-one HAS written about it yet...) Peridon (talk) 17:19, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Chase Northcutt
Peridon, you deleted the article Chase Northcutt, I'm new to wikipedia and was gonna make changes to comply with the wikipedia standards but can't cause you deleted it. Busch1818 moved from wrong place by Peridon (talk) 09:00, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * When posting a new thread on a talk page, please do it at the bottom. Also, please sign your posts with four ~ things. If you have anything that would comply with our requirements, tell me. As it stood, he was a college student, who was producing an hour show on a local station of a network. That's not enough, and your reference was to the station site, not to a specific item containing the subject. Apart from that, that wouldn't be enough as a reference anyway. You have to show that he has been talked about in reliable independent sources. Not blogs, forums, wikis, own sites, MySpace, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, etc. And not just passing mentions. Remember that Wikipedia ia an encyclopaedia, not a directory or a notice board. LinkedIn might be a better place, as that is for professionals to display profiles and to network. If you do have something, let me know here what before putting the article up again. You can do that, but without one heck of a lot more, it would just go again. Peridon (talk) 09:15, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

An article you deleted is up and running again, again
--Shirt58 (talk) 13:58, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
 * 10:00, 31 March 2012 Peridon (talk | contribs) deleted page Talk:Gabriele Perucca (G8: Page dependent on a deleted or nonexistent page)

Please help preserve the Emily Austin Perry page
Peridon, please help. The same fellow from Australia-- perhaps a newbie-- who wanted to delete a Stephen F. Austin-related article also wants to delete Emily Austin Perry. My Wiki-mentor, Draeco, is in medical residency and taking a "Wikibreak" so I am appealing for help from you who have already denied a deletion to this Crusoe fellow. This article about Emily Austin Perry is possibly the best single account of the known history of her life, and among the most detailed records of any woman in Texas in the 1800's-- in a time when women were inferior to men under the law. She literally helped found the State of Texas. The marked for deletion notation is a slur on her significance to Texas history. When this article was first conceived, it was marked for deletion and other Wikipedia higher-ups found the article had merit. This would be a great loss for Wikipedia. Can you please help preserve this well-constructed article about the known details of this pioneering woman at the forefront of the settlement of Texas. Thank you for your help. Bull Market 14:02, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the tip off. I don't support on demand or request, but on merit, and I'm happy to see I wasn't the first there. Peridon (talk) 16:28, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks for your comments on the media richness page- pretty sure the sources should be fine but I'll double check to make sure they aren't too closely paraphrased. Also good idea on emoticons! I still have a couple sections to go and probably will add something about them and also newer media than is not mentioned in the original theory. I'm new to Wikipedia so thanks for being nice and helping out :) RoxanaK (talk) 16:19, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. You'll find that most of the admins and regular editors are friendly and willing to help. (There are some grumps, but a quick look at the user page and talk page tells a lot.) As for the theory, a lot of it is basic common sense dressed up fancy. Face to face is fine, but written can tell more sometimes. A lot of humour in books is lost in filming, because it's in the author bits between the character speech and without having a narrator (when did you last hear of a film with a narrator?) it's typototally lost. Blood and guts books, no problem. And some current communication isn't. Look at people holding mobile phones to their ears. How many do you see that are listening? I mean listening for long stretches. The vast majority of the ones I come across are talking. So why do I rarely see listening? Just a thought... Peridon (talk) 16:46, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Also thanks from me! Always glad to see friendly folks helping out the students in my USEP course, a nice change from some of the newbie-biters I have to deal with on occasion. :-) MyNameWasTaken (talk) 20:32, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
 * On occasion, we come across newbies who use the "This is for my coursework, you can't delete it!" line, or the "This is what my tutor said we must do! You can't delete it!" line. Unfortunately, we can. And do. (Especially if the tutor is supposed to have approved copy and paste from somewhere copyrighted.) I usually ask them to check with the tutor, and if the tutor really DID say that, to get them to contact me. (No takers so far...) I also point out that this is an encyclopaedia, not an exercise book. Newcomers like Roxane are a pleasure to deal with. Another editor who is very patient is User:MelanieN, and one involved with education in China (but who would probably help if she has time) is User:Anna Frodesiak. Friendly admins are User:Drmies and User:Boing! said Zebedee. There are many more - these are ones I tend to dump things on and/or help out. Some may add themselves - this seems to be a popular page for stalkers (I know you're reading this). I'm debating whether to add a cartoon strip or horoscopes... Some new patrollers can be a bit bitey, and one or two of the old brigade can too. I can, when the occasion demands - such as the single purpose account who knows everything except that his article is pure spam for a totally non-notable one man band outfit. Anyway, keep up the good work - the more people who know how to edit properly, the fewer vandals we'll have. Peridon (talk) 20:58, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Great! I'll add those folks to my list of friendly admins for the future. That's exactly why I became an ambassador, its really rewarding to see the great stuff students can contribute and to see them learn so much about Wiki-culture and editing. MyNameWasTaken (talk) 23:27, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Squash TM
Hi, I edited the Squash TM page after you deletion. I hope it is better now. keep up the good work MagP (talk) 09:48, 11 April 2012 (UTC)