User talk:Pink Bull/Archive 2

Janice Dickinson article
Hello, Pink Bull. Just in case this article is not on your watchlist, I just wanted to let you know the reason I reverted this edit by you. As I stated in my edit summary, it is not a negative sentence at all. She is a supermodel, and she often says she is the first; it's a part of her fame. We cannot simply say she is the first. It also summarizes a significant part of the article, per WP:LEAD. If you have a suggestion for rewording it, I am open to that. Flyer22 (talk) 18:31, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
 * It's not on my watchlist, so thanks for letting me know. I don't have a strong opinion either way, but I would err on the safe side so that a reader not get the impression that we're saying she's a show-off. Sincerely, -- Pink Bull  06:19, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

ASG (band)
A bug in Twinkle, it appears. Didn't notice it at first. I fixed it. Thanks for the heads-up. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 01:46, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Hey!Thanks for ansering!From DinoMan314                                                                                                                    6/2/2010  —Preceding unsigned comment added by DinoMan314 (talk • contribs) 05:35, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

YOU GUYS ARE NICE!From DinoMan314. 6/2/2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by DinoMan314 (talk • contribs) 05:39, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Pink Bull...
So does that make you some sort of feminine energy drink or something?

'Pink Bull: the one that makes you faaaabulous! Half Shadow  03:52, 4 June 2010 (UTC)


 * I created a user name while drinking redbull, but I like pink, so I went with Pink Bull.-- Pink Bull  03:55, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * You mean people really do drink that stuff? Eesh. Half  Shadow  03:57, 4 June 2010 (UTC)


 * I no longer drink it. Now I go to sleep when tired.-- Pink Bull  04:00, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you!
Pink Bull - Thank for your participation and support in my RfA.

I can honestly say that your comments and your trust in me are greatly appreciated.

Please let me know if you ever have any suggestions for me as an editor, or comments based on my admin actions.

Thank you! 7 23:31, 5 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Your welcome. Congratulations!-- Pink Bull  20:51, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank spam!
TFOWR 21:24, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

RfA
Thank you very much for your contribution to my Rfa. I have made a comment about it at User talk:JamesBWatson which you are, of course, welcome to read if you wish to. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:09, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Editing Ta
Pink bull,

I am not sure what nationality you are or what your mother tongue is. Ta is a form of thanks in UK. If there are no references to a section, the best thing you can do is to add one. If you aren't sure, you could have just googled for that. I added up references to my edit —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hnaluru (talk • contribs) 05:41, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm American and English is my mother tongue. I guess I was unaware of the "ta" usage because it's a British, not American. Thank you for letting me know. However, it appears another editor has reverted your addition on Wikipedia is not a dictionary grounds. The sourcing used, Urban Dictionary may also not be reliable per Reliable sources. Regardless, I don't have a strong position either way. Sincerely, -- Pink  Bull  16:17, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

hi
Thanks for helping out with fixing the references for the Bidya Debbarma DYK nomination. --Soman (talk) 18:19, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. Nice article!-- Pink Bull  19:00, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Actually, I used to have a PC that with the "|" button malfunctioning, contributing to the fact that I never got used to using the cite news template. --Soman (talk) 19:38, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Deon Taylor Article
Thank you Pink Bull for your help on the article. It looks very nice, nicer than anything this noob could have done. ;) CenobiteCreepe (talk) 16:28, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
 * (responded at CenobiteCrepe talk page.-- Pink Bull  00:24, 20 July 2010 (UTC))

Clover Records
Hello. In June you added a citation to a book from the "Webster's Quotations" series published by Icon Group International to this article. Unfortunately, Icon Group International is not a reliable source - their books are computer-generated, with most of the text copied from Wikipedia (most entries have [WP] by them to indicate this, see e.g. ). This specific entry came from Wikipedia. I've only removed the reference, not the text it was referencing. I'm removing a lot of similar references as they are circular references; many other editors have also been duped by these sources. Another publisher to be wary of as they reuse Wikipedia articles is Alphascript Publishing. Fences &amp;  Windows  01:15, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. I'll try to remember that for next time. -- Pink Bull  05:35, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK x5 expansion

 * Please could you explain your comment about Rivadavia class battleship as I'm not understanding how the x5 expansion is determined in this case. The article seems to have existed for some time and it's not clear to me how we tell what was done in user space and over what time.  And I don't understand how the article was moved to this name when there was one there already.


 * My reason for asking is not that I have any particular beef against this article but I was wanting to review some DYK noms to balance the self-noms that I made recently. But I can't really do my bit if I don't understand how it works.  Colonel Warden (talk) 23:29, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
 * On July 14, the article was moved from user space to main space, via this edit. The article did not exist in the main space before July 14.-- Pink Bull  00:41, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * It seems from the article's history that it was created in 2007 by a different editor. This was in mainspace, was it not?  I don't see how this can be considered a new creation and so still have the impression that I'm missing something. Colonel Warden (talk) 09:01, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Good point. The first diff I linked above shows that it was moved from a user space to a main space on July 14. I understood if there was any content (besides for a redirect) on the Rivadavia class battleship article a page move would have been impossible. Thus I concluded there was no article before July 14. However, I failed to consider that the editor who moved the page was an administrator, who can move a page over content with administrator tools. I guess it is still somehow possible to determine what was created in the main space and was created in the user space, but I cannot do that at the moment due to time constraints. Perhaps we can just ask the editor that moved the page. I apologize for jumping to conclusions and will try to be more careful in the future. -- Pink Bull  15:30, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

First, I apologize for the confusion. When I moved it into the mainspace, I histmerged in the old article (you can't move a page over something, but you can delete the old version, move the new page onto the now-redlink, then restore the old version's edits). In the future, if you think this happened to an article you are reviewing, check the logs. :-)

Now, on to the 5x expansion. The 5x is not a kb expansion (what you see in the history), it's a 5x expansion of the article's prose. To see if this occurred, add the following to your .js page:

If you do this, you can see that I expanded the prose from 5000 bytes (5kb) to about 20 kb! Sorry for the confusion, I should have specified this in my nomination. — Ed   (talk  •  majestic titan)  06:52, 26 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the explanations and tips. 5 to 20 just seems to be a 4x expansion though, as it was a 15K prose increment, that's still a substantial achievement and so merits the brief highlight which DYK provides.  Colonel Warden (talk) 09:03, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Keep on Running
Hi there Pink - It seems that an article of mine has been recommanded suit for deletion and/or rediretcing to another article.Would you kindly take the time to explain why you keep redirecting it to an article that´s got substance of adjacant nature but is NOT about the same topic ? The reason why I in the first place wrote it was that i keep getting annoyed about articles on songs etc, listed as if a COVER version was the original.In this case the song "Keep on Running" written,recorded and released by Jackie (Wilfred Gerald) Edwards in 1965 and then covered by The Spencer Davis Group in november that same year, which lead them to a UK charts #1 hit.They did both their versions, and Jackie Edward`s was the original as he also was the composer.Why do those two issues keep getting mixed up ? Is it by the way at all meaningfull and fair to label a songreference ["Keep on Running" (Spencer Davis Group song)]when it´s not a product of their creative process,misleading people to beleive that their COVERversion is an original piece of work ? I beleive wikipedia needs to work on their policies on this critical issue !! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Flight714 (talk • contribs) 20:45, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I did what I did because I assumed you did not realize there was already an article about the song. Sorry about the confusion. -- Pink Bull  21:11, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi again and Thanks for your swift response.Now only remains to be clarified a few puzzling inquiries,first of all; when will my (brief yet substantial)article be back up again? Second; When using the term " the song "in your response you leave me with four questions. 1)Are you supportive to the principle that each interpretation of a work of art, regardless of it´s repetitive nature,represents a statement or manifestation in it´s own artistic right and with each their own qualities ? and if not so 2)would you agree that a song ("..the song.."),theatrical work,music etc subordinates the same sort of copyright protection as any other piece of intellectual work such as scientific ideas or newspaperarticles ?, and if so 3)- can multiple versions or interpretations of the same material cooexist side by side in an encyclopedia ?, and if not 4)which version would you say has acchieved the right to be covered ? - the original or a cover?In this case leaning towards the latter opinion would sadly deprive the article on ["Keep on Running" (The Spencer Davis Group song)]of it´s right of existence since it´s just one cover version among others.This is unfortunately becoming a common problem in wikipedia articles on works of such nature.I therefor hereby request a push forward in the developing of strict policies regarding enlisting works of art by their rightfull creators, so that wiki can eventually become a forum for accuracy rather than a playground for dedicated fans obstructing our paths to clarity and objectiveness by editing bias tributes disguised as articles.¨¨¨¨ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Flight714 (talk • contribs) 23:06, 28 July 2010 (UTC)


 * If the article was deleted I don't have the ability to put it back because I don't have access to the deleted material. You would have to put it up again. Sorry. Your other questions will be difficult for me to answer because I'm not familiar with the subject matter. Reading up at WikiProject Songs or starting a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Songs will most likely yield better answers to your questions. -- Pink Bull  05:18, 29 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Actually the article is still around: Keep on Running (a song by Jackie Edwards). I removed the speedy deletion template.-- Pink Bull  05:47, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Editing Madame PD Cagliastro,
The Title madame as of the definition is Madam, Madame, ma'am, or Mme is a title for a woman. It is derived from the French madame (see different meanings of madame here), the equivalent of Mrs. or Ms., and literally signifying "my lady." The plural of madam in this sense is mesdames. The French madame is a fusion of Ma Dame (My Lady) which is in turn derived from the Latin mea domina meaning 'my mistress' of the home (domus) it is their for Not honorific,

Grazi Mili


 * Responded at User talk:Vedatrip123. -- Pink Bull  13:06, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Pestifer (band)
A tag has been placed on Pestifer (band) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for musical topics. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Jimmy Pitt  talk  16:02, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I only moved the page.-- Pink Bull  21:01, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Church of the Week(band)


The article Church of the Week(band) has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Article was moved to Church of the Week.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing  will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Tckma (talk) 20:36, 11 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I only moved the page.-- Pink Bull  21:01, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Please stop
Hey, I just created Minister of Textiles (India) and within a day you moved it to Minister of Textiles under WP:NAME because no other minister of textiles articles exist. I also created lots of other stubs in the same format. Give me a few weeks. I will cover government positions in other places and I do not want to have to ask an admin to disambiguate them back to the way I originally named them. If it bothers you a lot then Google the title and create stubs for government positions in the other countries; it would not take you much longer to do this than moving the articles. It would be nice if you could undo what you did when you are free and save me the trouble of arranging someone else to do it.

Do you have other ideas about how this should work? If so, please share.  Blue Rasberry  21:04, 11 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I moved the article so that its name be in compliance with WP:NAME. If you don't agree with the moves, I will try to avoid moving articles that you create. However, the same way I moved it, another editor can do the same. As for the specific move you mention, I think you can just move it back to your original name. Administrator intervention is not required.-- Pink Bull  21:30, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I know why you moved it and you are within the rules but in some cases this rule inconveniences people and does not make anything easier for anyone, and this is one of those cases. If I move it myself then histories do not get merged because now you have created a new article.  So to save history, an admin would have to delete your article, then move the other article, then either they would delete the original and let me make a new disambig page or else I would have to explain that I want to turn the original into a disambig page.  So, trouble.  Please WP:IAR when they get in the way - this is something you might see again.  Blue Rasberry  21:41, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I moved it back. If the edit history is only a redirect, it can be moved back and forth without affecting any edit history.-- Pink Bull  22:31, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Way cool! I did not know that.  Thanks.  Blue Rasberry  00:29, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * No problem. If you think I may be of assistance for something else, don't hesitate to contact me. -- Pink Bull  19:36, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

The article on Otto Wilhelm Nilsson
I don't quite understand the problem of the article in the first place. It's about a guy on YouTube, who is a small celebrity there. He asked me to write an article about him, and so I did. You then wanted me to post a believeable source, which obviously would be his YouTube channel. When I did, that link was almost immedietly taken down. What shall I do? M3dion (talk) 14:54, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia has notability standards, which Nilsson does not meet. See WP:BIO.-- Pink Bull  15:00, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

OK, I understand and apologize for the misunderstanding. You may remove the article at any time you want to. M3dion (talk) 15:10, 12 August 2010 (UTC)


 * No problem. Sorry about giving you a hard time, but if I would not tag the article, it will be undoubtedly be tagged by another editor. At this time, the article is under discussion, and will only be deleted (assuming that is the consensus) at the end of the discussion which may take a number of days. As the creator of the article you can have it deleted earlier by placing at the top of the article. Sincerely, -- Pink  Bull  15:17, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Gina's Boobies
Hi. I hope you don't mind, but I changed the CSD reason on Gina's Boobies to G10:Attack page, as there seemed to be a strong possibility it was targeting a real person. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:54, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * No, I don't. I did not choose G10, figuring there is no last name so no person will actually be "attacked." -- Pink  Bull  15:57, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Ray Scruggs
Hello. I don't see the attack component. Dloh cierekim  22:47, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
 * The Michigan Militia is somewhat of a terrorist/white supremacist organization. I erred on the safe side and assumed that the Detroit Michigan Militia is part of said group.-- Pink  Bull  22:51, 18 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Scratch that, it's a bit overboard. I think it would be more reasonable to say that the organization is not seen in a positive light by mainstream Americans. Perhaps then it's not much of an "attack." There appears to be little to substantiate notability, so it may be deleteable as an A7 as well. It's your call.-- Pink Bull  22:59, 18 August 2010 (UTC)


 * My thinking as well. It asserts significance via the NRA, but is unsourced. The militia group is defunct according to the article, so notability is unlikely by that route. Something new to me is the BLP PROD. I find no G-hits. I laid on a BLP PROD. If it turns out to be notable and verifiable and all, great. The creator has 10 days. If not, it will be deleted. cheers, and happy editing. Dloh cierekim  23:05, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you. That seems like a reasonable resolution.-- Pink Bull  19:35, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Maryam diallo
A tag has been placed on Maryam diallo, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to an article talk page, file description page, file talk page, MediaWiki page, MediaWiki talk page, category talk page, portal talk page, template talk page, help talk, user page, user talk or special page from the main/article space.

If you can fix the redirect to point to a mainspace page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you are fixing the redirect. If you think the redirect should be retained as is for some reason, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your reasoning on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Bhockey10 (talk) 23:28, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I only moved the page.-- Pink Bull  00:10, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

AetherPal
I have opened an afd for this article and I noticed you had previously tagged it for CSD, but that is missing from the article's history. I'm wondering if this article is a recreation of deleted content.--Torchwood Who? (talk) 19:31, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I CSD-tagged it yesterday. -- Pink Bull  21:41, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I think the page was recreated a few times. I have it on my watchlist in case it pops up again.--Torchwood Who? (talk) 22:24, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you. It may have to be protected from recreation if it continues to pop up with the same problems.-- Pink Bull  19:34, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

David Farr (writer/director) / David Farr (theatre director)
Hi, if I am correct in interpreting the history, you moved David Farr (writer/director) to David Farr (theatre director), the author has apparently disagreed with this, and has removed the redirect on David Farr (writer/director), with the result that we now have two separate, almost identical articles on the same person. I'm not sure what to do about this (obviously one of the pages needs to be made a redirect), so I thought I'd kick it back to you to deal with it, since you obviously had a rationale for making the move in the first place. Thanks, Quasihuman (talk) 14:36, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * David Farr (writer/director) is now a redlink, so it looks like it's been resolved already. Thanks, -- Pink Bull  19:32, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

SxDx Journal
Hi, I have changed your PROD for a Speedy Deletion. If you see crap like this again, don't hesitate to slap a CSD A1, A3, G1, G2, G3, or G4, - whichever is appropriate. --Kudpung (talk) 03:36, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't have a problem with that. However, I have seen that editors at RFA's can be strict about misapplying speedy deletion tag, so I try to be careful to apply them strictly.-- Pink Bull  04:48, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Altered speedy deletion rationale: Patricia Lentz
Hello Pink Bull. I am just letting you know that I deleted Patricia Lentz, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. Kimchi.sg (talk) 05:54, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I could not decide between a1 and g1, but g1 is probably a better criteria under the circumstances. My thinking was that since the article was just gibberish it was "lacking sufficient context to identify the subject of the article", as required under a1.-- Pink Bull  06:00, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Concerning article Mehdi Hosseini
Alexey-spb (talk) 07:38, 7 September 2010 (UTC) Hi, thank you for your mention to it. Concerning the article which I am working on Mehdi Hosseini, I have to say that as I was trying to creat a new version and it is ready for the mainspace (you can check it anyway); http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alexey-spb/Mehdi_Hosseini. Please help me as I don’t know how to moved it from my userspace to mainspace. I am truly thankful for your support! Alexey Alexey-spb (talk) 07:38, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * At the top of each Wikipedia page there is a "Move" tab. Click on the move tab at the top of the page that you want to move and follow the instructions. -- Pink Bull  07:41, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Alexey-spb (talk) 08:03, 7 September 2010 (UTC)Thank you so muchAlexey-spb (talk) 08:03, 7 September 2010 (UTC)