User talk:Phantomsteve/Archives/2012/January

The Signpost: 02 January 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 16:05, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the opportunity to make substantial valuable contributions to an article using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High. The score is calculated by combining an article's readership and quality.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 02:32, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikitest - wiki for testing various proposals
Hi Phatomsteve, I thought you'd be interested in making use of my specially created wiki to test proposals to check if they would work or if things would be possible to do, in short it is a useful tool to experiment with things without disputing Wikipedia.

This idea came to me when I wanted sowhere to play around with sysop tools and thought other wikipedeans might like to join in.

Wikipedia is not a place to be playing around with important tools for that there's Wikitest a wiki lab for carrying out experiments with mediawiki itself.

Hope you like my idea and you let others know thanks Paul 2387  chat  13:25, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for contacting me. To be honest, I don't have much time for such things (and I have my own wiki which I can do some testing on if required), but thanks for letting me know!  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 21:54, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm interested in this to a certain extent. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 11:02, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 January 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 04:44, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

why did you delete the article on patric canti?
why? i am looking for his newer work — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.48.74.23 (talk) 11:26, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
 * PErhaps you can use the Article Creation Wizard and someone can help you out? --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 11:32, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
 * The OP is not looking to create an article - they are looking for it for the information they assumed it would contain.  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 05:08, 12 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I can't find an article that I deleted about Patric(k) Canti. What was the exact title of the article, as Patric Canti, Patric canti, Patrick Canti, Patrick canti, Patric Canty, Patric canty, Patrick Canty, Patrick canty have never existed on this wiki. If you mean the actor Patrick Canty, he would not appear to meet the criteria for inclusion - most of his roles appear to either be uncredited, very minor roles, or as a photo-double. If you want to look for his newer work, might I suggest that you look at his IMDB entry here?  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 05:07, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

How am I doing?
Heya, Steve, I was wondering if you could just let me know how I'm doing. I got accused of bullying users and adding subious sources, because the link to a source I added stopped working and when an IP removed the line, I left a warning saying It is there on the page. The entire conversation is on User talk:Rsrikanth05. Please reply here, or use the email option, as I don't want Wikiality123 to think I'm influencing admins. Thank you, and cheers, --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 11:05, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
 * If I get a chance, I'll look at this in a couple of days.  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 04:57, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I submitted an SPI about the matter as it led to some mud slinging on me. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 18:26, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 January 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 06:35, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Deletion review for How Much Can We Boost IQ and Scholastic Achievement?
An editor has asked for a deletion review of How Much Can We Boost IQ and Scholastic Achievement?. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. aprock (talk) 23:31, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Dates are wrong for the Singapore International Energy Week page
Hi Steve,

I have to trouble you instead of editing this directly because I have a relationship with the organizers. The dates that are currently listed are wrong. It should be the 22-25 October 2012 as shown in the web site siew.sg. http://www.siew.sg/

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

The dates are wrong in both the info box and the text area under 2012.

Additionally, I'm not sure if you should be contacted on the Facebook community page (http://www.facebook.com/pages/Singapore-International-Energy-Week/116835925030920). Can the info page be edited manually? Or must the whole entry be laid out from the flow of 2012 to 2008 instead to present updated information to the benefit of readers?

JustCalvin (talk) 06:44, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for contacting me! I have amended the dates. I tried to find some independent verification of these dates, but all I could find were press releases from siew! However, when press coverage appears nearer the time, more can be added.
 * Regarding the Facebook page, we have no connection with that, and no say over it. Anyone may re-use Wikipedia content as long as it is adequately cited, as Facebook do. You would need to find a contact on facebook. On Wikipedia, the article goes from the oldest to the most recent (or next, in this case!) as that is the most appropriate layout in an encyclopedia - in the same way as the article on the Second World War goes from the oldest event to the most recent: it's the way chronological events are shown. Obviously you want the Facebook to be more of a promotional item (no problem with that, it's facebook after all), and so would like the 2012 event to come first, then 2011, etc back to 2008 - again, you'd need to find a contact at facebook for that. Wikipedia isn't there to put the most recent event "in your face" - it's an encyclopedia not a promotional tool - so the oldest-to-newest order will not change.
 * Hope this helps. Regards,  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 00:16, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Cheers Steve and thanks much!
 * JustCalvin (talk) 01:32, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Deletion Review of Stephanie Gannaway-Osborn
Steve,

As the original contributor of this page I believed, and believe, that I was providing relevant and biographical information on a person of interest within the science fiction community, a frequent guest at science fiction conventions and speaker on SF subjects.

I understand that Mrs. Osborn tried today to upload some articles regarding her published novels which were tagged by one of the site spambots due to duplication of (non-copyrighted) material from other siteson the web. While I understand that that is viewed as self-promotional, I don't believe that it should result in the removal of her biographical article.

Respectfully,

Doc_W — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doc W (talk • contribs) 01:08, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Although the other articles which were deleted were deemed to be promotional, that in and of itself was not the reason why I agreed with the nomination reason for speedy deletion (promotion). The article appeared to me to be promotional - almost like the blurb which would be used on a bookseller's website! The article's references were mainly from sff.net - my understanding is that this means that all the content on "her pages" were created by her (or her representatives), rather than an independent source. The other references did not provide the significant coverage required.
 * Overall, the entire article about her appeared to me to be promotional. In the interest of fairness, before deletion I did see if I could find significant coverage at independent sources (under "Stephanie Gannaway-Osborn", "Stephanie Osborn" and "Steph Osborn") - I found 1 book review and her own site, plus several social network sites. Nothing which would indicate that she would meet the notability criteria. That is not the reason for deletion (the reason for that was the promotional aspect) but it did not help matters - I could find no evidence that she would meet the criteria for inclusion: if the article was not promotional, I would list it under articles for deletion.
 * If you really think it meets the notability criteria (general criteria here, criteria for authors here), if you would let me know which criteria she meets, I would happily restore it, although I would also probably take it to articles for deletion.  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 01:27, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * If you don't want to provide the criteria, but just ask for a formal deletion review instead, please feel free to go to deletion review, mentioning this discussion - also let me know! Regards,  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 01:30, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Steve, Thank you for the prompt response. I respectfully submit that the aforementioned references in the blogosphere suggest that Mrs. Osborn meets the first criterion for inclusion. I have also seen her independently references both as a speaker on writing (I don't know if I can find a link but she was interviewed on television station WAFF several months ago about her role as a writer and is appearing in an upcoming conference in her role as a former NASA employee discussing the history of NASA. Her appearance as a featured guest at several science fiction conventions (Libertycon, Con*Stellation, and others) provides additional information.  What I don't know is whether I could identify any independently published biographical material other than the information in the program books for said conventions, which might also be viewed as promotional. I do thank you for your consideration.

Respectfully,

Doc_W Doc W (talk) 01:47, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * By 'blogosphere', I assume you mean the social networks? They would not generally meet Wikipedia's criteria for independent and/or reliable sources. When I get a chance, I'll look into some of the conferences you mention - if I can find independent coverage, that might be sufficient, but as I said before, I couldn't find anything suitable in my searches, so any links you can provide would be most welcome. Regards,  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 01:55, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Steve, Please see: http://www.con-stellation.org/constell/guests.html (click on Ms. Osborn's name in the menu at right) http://www.libertycon.org/links.html (annotates Mrs. Osborn as special Science Guest at their 2011 convention, Libertycon 24) http://www.libertycon.org/flyers/lc24_mass_email.pdf (Announcement of Mrs. Osborn as science guest at Libertycon 24 in 2011). http://www.midsouthcon.org/guests/guests/literary/358-sosborn (Announcemtn of Mrs. Osborn's upcoming appearance at Midsouthcon). http://issuu.com/dragoncon/docs/2011-dragoncon-progressreport-webversion-final-3 In this facsimilie of the 2011 Dragoncon report Mrs. Osborn is named as "also attending" on page 21; no biographical information cited. http://waff.eviesays.com/event/iid/5377591/name/Space-Symposium--Our-Finest-Hour-.html Upcomging event citation on Huntsville Television WAFF Channel 48 website for Mrs. Osborn. http://conkasterborous.wordpress.com/ Convention announcement for an upcoming appearance by Mrs. Osborn. http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?124854 Mrs. Osborn's isfdb citation.

I hope this is sufficient.

Repsectfully,

Doc_W Doc W (talk) 02:36, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for those, Doc_W! I'll have to spend some time looking into those. My initial impression is that many of them appear to be PR material (either her own, or the events'). The ISFDB is perhaps not a reliable source (I can't find anything conclusive either way) - it can be edited/submitted by anyone and I can't find anything to indicate what independent checking, etc, is done by the site admins.
 * However, I will look at those properly in a few days' time when I am off work! My initial impression may well be wrong, and these do show that she meets the criteria. Of course, if you could find some coverage in a totally independent source (perhaps a national newspaper) which is 'significant' coverage (i.e. not just her name in a list of people attending an event, or a single sentence or two) that would be great!
 * One way or another, I'll let you know what I think! Regards,  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 03:14, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 January 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 18:49, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

wanderdusk deletion
Hey Phantomsteve-

I'm trying to post an article for "wanderdusk". I know you deleted the last one I tried to put up there, so I'm wondering if you might be able to give me some pointers for how to make sure that I follow all the guidelines this time.

In reading over the A7 reason, "relevance", I'm trying to figure out what exactly I need to do in order to make sure that I don't get the article deleted again.

I'm going to copy the article below- I've already made a few changes in the text. Any help you can give me would be greatly appreciated.

wanderdusk are an American electronic music group based in Denver, Colorado. Formed in early 2011, wanderdusk consists of liitlefoote (vocals, sampling, keyboard, lyrics), txtyle (drums, sequencing, keyboards), sayonara (bass), and amoeba (visuals and art). Their sound is a mixture of electronica, punk, and pop with influences from dub and rock music.


 * Early History*

wanderdusk formed in early 2011. After months of rehearsals and recording early demos, they played their first show at Unit E Gallery as a warm up for their appearance at the 2011 Denver Post Underground Music Showcase the following week.


 * phonetic EP and First Tour*

After releasing a series of single demo tracks throughout summer and fall 2011, wanderdusk digitally released their first EP “phonetic” on December 6, 2011. That same night they played a tour kick off show at the Hi Dive in Denver, opening for national act Love Inks. Prior to the official release, two preview mixes from the EP, “Picturescreen” and “The VeHIcle” were released, the former in a video posted on Youtube featuring conceptual art.

Their first tour featured dates in Salt Lake City, Oakland, San Francisco, Santa Cruz, Anaheim, and Albuquerque. . wanderdusk distributed the "phonetic EP" using dropcards with a specific code on each card that can be used to download the music from their website for free.

Their first show back from tour was at Unit E, opening for Sole and Rubedo featuring Ikey Owens from the Mars Volta and Free Moral Agents on keyboards. Wanderdusk is currently working on their second EP and a video for their song “Picturescreen”.


 * Discography*

phonetic EP (2011)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnsmithlone45 (talk • contribs) 00:43, 28 January 2012


 * Thanks for contacting me. I have altered your draft slightly for layout on this page. The problem was that there was no indication of the significance or importance of the band. Looking through the draft and the deleted article, I see nothing showing that they are important or significant. I also see nothing to indicate that they meet either the general notability guidelines or the band-specific guidelines. The references provided here do not meet the criteria for independent and reliable sources:
 * Soundcloud: People/bands upload their own music, with no editorial oversight. As such, it does not meet the reliable-source criteria;
 * Official website: Not independent;
 * UMS: This reads like a press release, rather than an independently written piece;
 * YouTube: Not considered a reliable source, as anyone can upload anything there with no editorial oversight;
 * Facebook Not considered a reliable source, as anyone can upload anything there with no editorial oversight;
 * All in all, the sources do not meet our criteria for reliable, independent sources - and the band do not meet our criteria for notability. Let's look at the BAND criteria for notability:
 * Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable and are independent from the musician or ensemble itself. ❌
 * Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart. ❌
 * Has had a record certified gold or higher in at least one country. ❌
 * Has received non-trivial coverage in independent reliable sources of an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one sovereign country. ❌
 * Has released two or more albums on a major label or on one of the more important indie labels (i.e. an independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are notable). ❌
 * Is an ensemble which contains two or more independently notable musicians, or is a musician who has been a member of two or more independently notable ensembles. ❌
 * Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability. ❌
 * Has won or been nominated for a major music award, such as a Grammy, Juno, Mercury, Choice or Grammis award. ❌
 * Has won or placed in a major music competition. ❌
 * Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, e.g. a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, inclusion on a notable compilation album, etc. (But if this is the only claim, it is probably more appropriate to have a mention in the main article and redirect to that article. Read WP:BLP1E and WP:BIO1E for further clarifications) ❌
 * Has been placed in rotation nationally by any major radio or music television network.
 * Has been a featured subject of a substantial broadcast segment across a national radio or TV network.  ❌
 * As you can see, the band does not currently meet any of the criteria, and so the article cannot be created at this time. I hope this explains what we are looking for, and why it was deleted. Regards,  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 20:32, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Requests for comment/F&aelig;
A request for comments has been opened on administrator User:F&aelig;. You are being notified due to your prior participation in ANI, RfA, or RfC discussions regarding this user. Thank you, MadmanBot (talk) 19:49, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 January 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 03:51, 31 January 2012 (UTC)