User talk:Phantomsteve/Archives/2012/March

Midwest Motor Express Article
The article "Midwest Motor Express" was deleted.

The reason stated: A7: Article about a company, corporation, organization, or group which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject.

I would like to resurrect this article, but wanted to run it by you before I tried to do so.

I believe that this company is significant. It a multimillion dollar company that has been in operation since 1918, performing national LTL shipping in sixteen states with interline partners like Saia and New England Motor Freight to expand service to all of the US. It is involved international shipping to all major international ports.

Of particular note, Midwest Motor Express is known for standing up to labor unions, most notably the Teamsters, and successfully broke the Teamster strike in 1991.

Additionally, this article would not be an orphan; four pages link to this deleted page (granted that one is a disambiguation page, and another is a talk page). Both the Bismarck, ND and Teamsters pages link to Midwest Motor Express. This page could also link to the Saia article, which is currently an orphan.

Finally, if you would find it more appropriate, legally Midwest Motor Express is the primary branch of MME, Inc., which is the incorporation of Midwest Motor Express, Midnite Express, and Express Cartage. Perhaps the resurrected page should be MME, Inc. rather than Midwest Motor Express, which could redirect to the MME, Inc. page.

I am sure you will give this due consideration. Thank you for your time, and for the work you do for Wikipedia.

- Devon Waldron

PS: If you'd like to see a sandbox article first, I'd be happy to generate one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chronofied (talk • contribs) 16:26, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for contacting me. What you would really need to do to create a new Midwest Motor Express article would be:
 * Show how Midwest Motor Express meets the notability criteria, and especially the criteria for businesses and organisations
 * Provide citations from reliable sources which are independent of the subject, which demonstrate that they meet the criteria. Good sources are significant coverage in national/international newspapers/magazines - not just brief one- or two-sentence mentions, or as part of a list of organisations. Also, articles which are basically only interviews of staff at the company are not generally sufficient. It is important that they are independent sources - so press releases, company websites, etc are not suitable - and social networks are not counted as reliable in nature.
 * If you could provide these, we could move on from there! In the original article, there were two references - one was to Manta - where companies can submit their own information, so not independent, as I can see no evidence of editorial oversight. The other is Hoover's, which does use in-house editorial staff, bit I'm not sure that the coverage available is sufficient for Wikipedia's purposes, as they would be considered "standard announcements" (staffing, valuations, etc).  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 09:15, 2 March 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) 03:12, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 March 2012

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

The Signpost: 12 March 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 12:21, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Restore request
Would it be possible if you can restore the deleted pages of Wide left and Harbaugh Bowl with their full edit histories in my userspace? I am planning on forming discussions regarding them, and I want them to be visible somewhere, since I will likely refer to them and want people participating in the discussions to be able to see them. Hellno2 (talk) 16:28, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I assume you are referring to discussions regarding a deletion review? If I remember, a review was held, and the outcome was that they should remain deleted. Also, why do you need the full edit histories? I need more information to enable me to make an informed decision on your request. Regards,  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 09:30, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Incidentally, if the discussion is about re-creating the articles, you might be better off initially find reliable, independent discussion of the subjects, showing that they meet the criteria for inclusion. That was the issue over which they were deleted, was it not? The actually articles are not required for that - if you can demonstrate the coverage required for notability can be found, we can go from there.  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 09:32, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 March 2012

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

The Signpost: 26 March 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 00:44, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

UBCDS article decision and a few observations about non-indexed pages
This is a gratuitous "Good judgement call!" message.

Background
I am a fairly active member of Web of Trust (WOT), the browser safety extension (company is based in Finland, hxxp:// my wot dot com), as well as here on WP. WOT is sort of like Wikipedia in that most of the work is done by anonymous (though IP registered) volunteers. Anyway, I was trying to figure out what the story was with UBC Debate Society, the entity and the website.

Mystery of UBCDS
There were a lot of inconsistencies in Domain Tools WHOis for the site, as well as contextual and fact-related oddities e.g. inconsistent naming, sometimes Debating Society, other times Debate Society, poor grammar and punctuation on the website, which shouldn't be the case for a university debate society, I don't think!

I noticed that AboutUs dot org, the website directory, noted UBC Debate Society with several listings in Wikipedia. That, along with a DMOZ listing and a Y! directory listing, are indicators of reputable websites with a decent history. But the DNS, reverse IP, screen shot history etc. was not looking too good. I checked on WP, saw the decision you helped to effect, specifically, to delete the Wikipedia entry as not notable. Good decision, by you and all the others who participated (I read the discussion log entry). While the society may have a lengthy history, it acknowledges on its own website that it was part of McGill University's Debate Society for a long time, not an independent organization. More important yet, it is not actually an official Univ of BC student society or club, but rather, a member of the UBC alumni organization's roster of clubs (despite being a club for students, not alumni). But worst of all was this language that I noticed on the UBC Debate Society website FAQ page:""

WP non-indexed pages are indexed more than one might think
I was puzzled though. Pages of the sort that I would have thought were non-indexed are actually showing up in Domain Tools site inquiries for UC Debate Society. There shouldn't be any English Wikipedia entries for that website at this point in time, should there? However, there were at least four, and all led to pages on WP that aren't articles, but rather, Article talk pages, or archived pages etc. I don't know if this is a problem or not, but wanted to mention it.

Summary and closing
If you want any further details (as though I haven't left you a lengthy enough comment!), please let me know. Just to make certain that this is clear, I am not requesting any action from you! I'm only here to say thank you and actually interact a bit, which I haven't done much of in my time with Wikipedia. If you would be so kind as to let me know that you received my message, at your convenience, no rush, because I read your user page and noted your many other commitments, that would be great. But I'm happy to be your very lowest priority! --FeralOink (talk) 14:09, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your message, which has been read and its content noted.  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 09:25, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

PHantom Steve
Hello Phantom Steve. Well there's nothing wrong with writing the Wiki biographies if I leave my own article citations out, including Saddoboxing. Can the Henry Hascup entry stay up now without the Saddoboxing citation? Robert AKA Cocoruff
 * Please read the messages that I have left you. Short answer:No it can't stay, as it's still a copyright violation.  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 22:29, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

UTRS tool request
I confirm that I have requested an account on the UTRS tool.  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 09:27, 19 March 2012 (UTC)