User talk:Phantomsteve/Archives/2012/October

The Signpost: 24 September 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 18:03, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi wiki admin

I have extracted this from the bhagavad gita. Many people did not know that that our religion book (i.e) BIBLE,BHAGAVAD GITA,QURAN as such Management concept..why don't we make the people to know about concept and create awarness of reading the religion book and make them to follow the rules so that each and every one will have peace full life.Many of the scholars were doing research in this book and they were saying that this is the book that each and every one should follow for the business management.Many B-schools in india and in other co-untries were using this for management concept. So i have uploaded the management concept which is not in wikipedia .If u want me to do some changes i will do but delete this. I am attaching the link which will make sure regarding the topic.

http://www.krishnauniverse.com/Gita-Articles/the-seven-gems.html http://www.hindu.com/br/2004/06/15/stories/2004061500011602.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by Janani19 (talk • contribs) 16:31, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 01 October 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 21:19, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 08 October 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 21:02, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Deletion proposal
Hello. I notice you deleted this page about a year ago: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Marketing_Association

Might also want to take a look at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinan_Kanatsiz

It appears to be the guy who runs IMA. The article reads like a self promotional piece written by the subject himself. Some of the claims appear to be blatantly false (claiming that IMA is involved with creating standards for the internet, for example) and this guy seems to generally fail the notability test just like his company did.

68.5.56.59 (talk) 23:28, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I'll look at this in a couple of days when I'm off work! Thanks for contacting me --  Phantom Steve .alt/ talk \[alternative account of Phantomsteve] 04:51, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I have looked at it, and am in agreement with you. As such, I have proposed it for deletion. Regards,  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 03:56, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Pervertibles page deletion
I just stumbled upon this deletion. The discussion around the deletion shows that the deletion itself was based upon a false premise. A word whose use is restricted to a specific subculture is not a neologism, it simply falls outside of mainstream usage, in the same way technical terms specific to any discipline, scientific, meditative or otherwise, fall outside of mainstream usage but are certainly not neologisms. This is a term very widely and commonly used in the BDSM/fetish subculture. In my opinion, this page should not have been deleted and I believe strongly that it should be restored.

I'm approaching it here first, since the fact that this term is specific to a subculture creates extra challenges under the deletion review guidelines. While there are reliable citations available, from third party publishers, many are available only in print format, making verifiable online citation somewhat problematic. I believe that appropriate online citations are available and would have pursued obtaining them, had I been aware of the deletion proposal.

I have firsthand knowledge of this subject, since I personally am known as "the go-to guy in Toronto" for information regarding pervertables (yes, it was misspelled). They are my particular specialty within the BDSM/fetish community. For this reason, I used to make a point of avoiding editing this page before it was deleted... there were several comments and suggestions from me on the talk page. Since I frequently cite Wikipedia and encourage people to consider it a reliable source, I want to ensure that the page is restored in a manner that ensures the integrity of Wikipedia.

Please leave me a talkback. Thanks. CDNRopemaster (talk) 17:52, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for contacting me, I'll look into this in a couple of days when I'm not working --  Phantom Steve .alt/ talk \[alternative account of Phantomsteve] 04:52, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Having looked at the discussion, the only possible result was deletion, as all the contributors to the discussion (5 editors + nominator) agreed upon that. I should point out that the guidelines on Wikipedia specifically mention that sources do not have to be only available online - merely that they should be considered reliable and independent. Before undeletion could even be considered, you would need to provide some such sources - you belief that they are available is not sufficient, neither is the fact that you are known the the "go-to-guy in Toronto" about this subject - although that does mean that you have a potential conflict of interest.
 * If you can provide suitable sources, we can get someone to look into them, and we can proceed from there. Regards,  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 03:43, 17 October 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) 14:14, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 October 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 21:41, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 October 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 11:52, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 October 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 09:05, 31 October 2012 (UTC)