User talk:ReaderofthePack/Archive 9

inre User:Sshaked/Community of Knowledge
Hi Tokyogirl79, Tanks for your comments - I understand what you mean, the formulation in the translation wasn't the best. I rewrote some parts and added another source. Since this is a non-profit platform and is quite known among people in the (German-speaking) field, it is surely not meant to be promotional. --Sshaked (talk) 11:41, 26 August 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sshaked (talk • contribs) 10:03, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Well... the problem is that the subject (a non-profit) doesn't have to be promotional in nature or obscure for the article itself to come across as promotional. It's not always about the intent of the writer, but how the page seems to appear when read. For me the promotional-ish tone comes from it reading a bit like a CV or resume for the company. Bullet style writing is one of those things that sticks out as a resume/CV type thing and is somewhat discouraged in general as far as editing goes. Not only for that reason, but also because sometimes it just doesn't really flow as well as a paragraph could. I'd probably recommend asking for some help at WikiProject Internet culture on their talk page. Bullets are mostly, in my experience, used more for lists of information such as titles that an author has put out. Sometimes it can be used for products for a company, but if the list is very large then sometimes it's best to use a paragraph format and say "Apple has released various items such as the iPod and home computer systems such as the Macintosh." Since you're listing things such as objectives and projected user bases, it's usually better to say something such as "The Community of Knowledge's primary goal is to focus on making content, knowledge, and discussions related to knowledge management practices more open and available to interested parties such as service providers, researchers, and authors interested in making their work and research findings open access. The organization also features discussion pages where users can exchange knowledge and form discussions between experts and interested users. In 2012 the Community of Knowledge carried out a survey among their users regarding their background in interests and published the results. The study found that the majority of readers defined themselves as ________, while __% defined themselves as ________."


 * I'm sure that the paragraph can be tweaked, but that's sort of a basic gist of how you can phrase this instead of bullets. It reads a little more smoothly and while it certainly isn't perfect, paragraphs can often keep people from getting an immediate "resume" or "pamphlet" feel from the page. Again I have to really recommend that you look into some of the various applicable WikiProjects, as they can help you find sources and also help with working on getting the flow down. I hope you don't take any of this as an insult- I know that when I first started writing articles I had to have people say pretty much the same things to me over my edits. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   03:06, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

About Run Jericho
Thanks for your review. Technically, I don't know yet how to implement your changes. And BTW the structure of the article is based on the London Marathon, and is intertwined with existing Wikipedia articles. So can you elaborate what is the difference between an essay and and encyclopedic entry? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peter molduano (talk • contribs) 23:31, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello Tokyogirl79.
I understand what has happened was completely immature, though we all make mistakes, I hope that is something you can relate to. I sincerely apologize for my links and rants. I love Wikipedia very much. It is one of my favorite websites. I just wanted to be able to contribute something to the website that was my own work. Yes I own FileKangaroo.com. I have created other articles with no relations to links or websites and it got deleted. So i thought that it would be different if i created one based on my website. I know Wikipedia is not a place for advertising. But I thought that People could find the website better if they had a direct link to it. I apologize again if I have disturbed Wikipedia and it's users. I just really wanted my website to be connected with wikipedia. I know its really not my place to ask but. Would it be o.k to create an Article here based on FileKangaroo.com and not just two words and a external link.. If you approve of it let me know, if you say no I will not attempt to create it. I do wish to create other articles that have nothing to do with FileKangaroo.com and hope you can see past my bad behavior. Thank you and have a wonderful day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryan889 (talk • contribs) 03:44, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

inre Wikipedia;Articles for Creation/Graham Wardle
I will try to rewrite the article but the sources are published sources. This person is an actor and several of his costars in the Heartland show have articles that are less documented than the one I wrote. If you look at Michelle Morgan, Amber Marshall and Nathaniel Arcand you can see what I mean. I am not the author of any of the resources, and in fact do not know Mr. Wardle. I am just a fan that noticed he did not have a article in en.wikipedia. His list of accomplishments is valuable and notable. Any help you can give me is appreciated. I waited 2 weeks for this. By the way, Mr. Wardle gives a lot back. He participates in charity functions and is the co-founder of www.Cruisewithacasue.ca which raises funds for cancer with an event scheduled for August 31 in Vancouver,BC, CA. I will add some of his participations but actually thought that was more like advertisement. Heartlandtvfan (talk) 14:05, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello Tokyogirl. User:ryan889
I appreciate your understanding to the fullest, I learned something valuable that many battles should not be fought as they are fought. There can be be peace and civilized Behavior like what you thought me, that can ease the pressure off anyone. I thank you again for explaining how I could still Write my articles. I was just wondering though, did you remove the request for my userpage to be deleted? Thanks anyway if you didn't. Anyway I do have an understanding and I'm going to read more of Wikipedia's guidelines so that my Article creations may be more acceptable. Thank you again for being the better person. I still don't fully understand how I could Create a better Article that you will approve, even though I'm gonna read the guidelines I would understand more if you gave me a few more tips. Thank you and have a good day. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryan889 (talk • contribs) 03:06, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

inre Articles for deletion/Passage (2009 film)
Over at Passage (2009 film), I went ahead and followed up on your work. Thanks,  SCHMIDT,  Michael Q. 21:35, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey! Thanks for leaving a message about this and to the other person that left all that information. I've been away for vacation, but things in my own life have been a little hectic lately, so I've been somewhat ignoring my talk page for right now. :) I haven't really had a lot of energy to go around, but I'm trying to get into the swing of things.  Tokyogirl79  (｡◕‿◕｡)   10:15, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Daniel Puder
Awesome - thanks for that. I'd have removed that stuff myself, but I already did once and didn't want to get sucked into an edit war. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 16:56, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem! I gave him a warning that he had one chance and that after that he'd be blocked as a spammer. I also asked one of the appropriate WP to keep an eye on it as well. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   03:30, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that as well - basically, thanks for picking up my slack. :-)  It's nice to have some confirmation that my instincts are on the money from time to time. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 19:42, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for the barn star. Obviously I saw your note at WT:MMA about the Daniel Puder article. It's on my watchlist now.SQGibbon (talk) 12:45, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jesusween concern
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jesusween, a page you created has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace. If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements. If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13. Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 16:41, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Your article submission Jesusween


Hello Tokyogirl79. It has now been over six months since you last edited your article submission, entitled Jesusween.

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply and remove the  or  code. Please note, however, that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code:, paste it in the edit box at this link , click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. SefBau : msg  08:03, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Shelmikedmu - Wikipedia_talk:Articles for creation/Karlsruher Transfer

 * Hi Tokyogirl79!
 * Thank you for reviewing the submission (Karlsruher Transfer) and for your comments. I actually looked into existing articles about student magazines and used them as an orientation on how to improve to article before I resubmitted it. Now I'll do my best to improve it a little more, but there some things that are not quite clear yet.
 * You mentioned the [WP:NJOURNAL] criteria. I've looked into them and I don't think they are completely applicable, since the Karlsruhe Transfer is not considered an academic journal but more a student magazine. They are listed in the "Zeitschriftendatenbank"-Link-(Notes and Examples, point 6.) and in the German National Library -Link-, but since the articles are less about reporting findings but rather exposing opinions and analysis, not many quotations or citations are made on them. Academia contributing to the magazine do however list them among their relevant publications (e.g. Publikationen von Univ.-Prof. Dr. phil. Swen Körner).
 * Also, while most of the students behind the magazine do visit one of the local universities (Karlsruhe Institute of Technology), the student organization publishing it and the magazine itself are not an organ of the university. Could references 1 and 4, which mainly comments on the magazine, be considered as secondary sources?
 * Again, thanks for your help and I look forward to your comments!

Shelmikedmu — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shelmikedmu (talk • contribs) 11:23, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The problem is that even if the school isn't officially publishing it, the students have an affiliation with the university. In stuff like this it's still seen as a conflict of interest since many would see it as in the college's best interest to positively review or mention something that has something to do with their college, even tenuously. My rule of thumb for sources like that is this: You're not really going to get a good solid "yes" answer on any source that has even a potential COI/primary issue with it, so it's usually best not to rely on those as anything other than a primary source. Even if the connection is somewhat tenuous (the students attend the college but run the magazine separately) it's still considered a close enough connection to where it'd be seen as primary. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   04:27, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Resubmitted after your helpful suggestions Beatie Wolfe
Thank you for your advice. I think i took the last editors (who i since find out has been suspended) comments too strongly and used the quotes to substantiate Wolfe's aptness for Wiki but may have gone over board with the positive quotes :)

I've rewritten following your guidance to make it more neutral.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Beatie_Wolfe

Thank you for your time on this.

Nick — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ngbutterworth (talk • contribs) 10:04, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Life
i finshed reading Life (manga) and add spoilers for character's lives and please fixed grammar or don't remove this by --Sunuraju (talk) 14:07, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing Chitra (play)
Thanks for accepting the play page. I have submitted some more play pages and that being my interest area would be happy if you could check some of those when you have time. I have referred to multiple sources while creation of such pages, and would like to see some more of these accepted as stubs so that other users can edit and improve on them using their knowledge. Theatremania (talk) 19:07, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

August 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=569702713 your edit] to Sulari Gentill may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:28, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Gentill's A Few Right Thinking Men was nominated for a 2011 [Vogel Award]. {{cite web|title=Australian/Vogel award turns 30|url=http://www.theaustralian.

Twelve Inches On Tape
You said: "If you want a copy of the page to work on and look for sources, I'm more than willing to transfer a copy onto your userspace". OK, then, do it. It's clear that Wikipedia isn't the place to have this information, so I'm just going to have to go and make my own website for it, where people can't delete it. WillieBlues (talk) 20:23, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 * It's been moved to User:Geezerbill/Twelve inches on tape. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   06:36, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

inre Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kirby: Fright to the Finish!!
I think a redirect to Kirby: Right Back at Ya! where we already have content on this compilation makes sense.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 06:35, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

hello?
u said that turophobia is real enough, rite? May I ask if u can prove another phobia is worth adding? Specifically episcophobia - a fear of bishops. Queen Victoria had it when she was a child... Visokor (talk) 08:10, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
 * If we can find proof for it, we can. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   08:13, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Please explain
Hi Tokyogirl79 could I ask you why you deleted "imprevisti su misura" from the list of improvisational companies in other countries? It's a real existing troupe in Milan - Italy, it's not mentioned for advertising, but only to enrich the list of companies. What is wrong in this? Thank you very much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Impresumi (talk • contribs) 16:08, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Ok but.....
I read your message. It's very weird. You said you're in your 30s. But it says you're still at school, or do you mean not in years. Unfortunatly, Most information is already on Wikipedia. So I have very little instrest. If you could give me any things to put on Wikipedia please send it to me. Then read it and edit it to suit the Wikipedia users needs. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goldrawer7 (talk • contribs) 19:12, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I am, I'm attending college part-time. Hmm... as far as stuff that you could put in... have you ever read the Wimpy Kid books? We can use more detailed synopses for some of the later books. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   04:42, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Perhaps the "type" parameter of the Atschool template might help clarify things. Use  for the template to say "This user is in college." Michaelzeng7 (talk) 02:30, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks for helping out with the deletes on my userspace drafts! :) --Amkilpatrick (talk) 12:45, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Business Ethics Journal Review
I've rewritten a new listing for this open access journal to account for A7 and G11 concerns. I'm happy to make changes as advised but the deletion was so fast that I didn't have a chance. Do you want to preview the new listing? Gleaman (talk) 19:36, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Horror story?
I've received a query about the NAC of the AfD Articles for deletion/Horror Story (2013 film). I am somewhat torn here. I respect you as a diligent digger in any area, Michael Q as a film expert, and Lugnuts as an experienced editor also in the film area, but I do agree with the questioner that less than 24 hours was a little short for consensus and non-admin closing. I know little about Indian films (having watched a few in total incomprehension, but owning a few CDs of Bollywood music), so it's the procedural side I'm interested in here. I'm contacting Michael Q as another involved admin, and Tito Dutta as closer, and would appreciate your views on my talk page (rather than go to a drama board), if you get the chance. Cheers. Peridon (talk) 10:32, 31 August 2013 (UTC) Never mind. Been taken care of.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 11:33, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Carlo Scevola & Partners review
Hi, I want to thank you for the great work you've done for the page Carlo Scevola & Partners, I was wondering if you can review the page before I publish it, this the link Carlo Scevola & Partners. Thanks. (Elboukharimu talk) 00:27, 04 September 2013 (UTC)
 * There are a few words that sound a little buzzy when put together, but the biggest problem is that we don't have any reliable sources to show notability. The company's website is a primary source and the other link is just a directory listing, which is more of a primary source or a routine listing, so it can't show notability either. We need stuff such as news coverage and the like. As far as the buzzwordy section, I can change that myself. It was the line "During the years 2000s, it has constantly grown in size and revenues, establishing itself as one of the most reputable international provider of fiduciary services, especially in the offshore sector." Saying "one of the most reputable international provider of fiduciary services" comes across as a little promotional, so it's usually better to avoid using phrases like that. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   04:53, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi, I've added many sources to the page, could you please take a look and confirm that I can publish the page, I don't want to have a bad surprises anymore ? Thank you very much. (Elboukharimu talk) 06:17, 09 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Hmm... the HedgeWeek source looks to be good to me. Interviews are always sort of up in the air when it comes to whether or not it can be used to show notability, so this might be a point of contention with other users. You listed two book sources, but I can't verify how in-depth the mention is in this book and in the other book it's a brief mention. Brief mentions aren't really usable as far as showing notability goes, although we can use it to back up small data. It's kind of tricky when it comes to using book sources, as where the book has been published also factors into this. For example, a book published through a publisher such as John Wiley & Sons would be considered a potential source while a self-publishing company such as AuthorHouse wouldn't. Now when it comes to this source and this one, they're both not able to show notability because they're considered to be database type entries. They can back up that the firm exists, but can't extend any notability. In the end I just don't see enough coverage in reliable sources to really show notability at this time. It's frustrating, but you can still keep working on the article in your userspace until more sources become available. You might want to try asking for help at WP:ITALY or Wikiproject Law, as either or both might be able to find additional sources to help show notability. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   08:01, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

CSD-->AfD
Please see Articles for deletion/Wasbir Hussain. Drmies (talk) 16:52, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

RE: Setter Capital Inc. block
Just wanted to see if you could take a look at this unblock request and username change request and give some advice on what the next steps would be for that user. Thank you. Secondary123 (talk) 20:37, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

FYI
Hello Tokyogirl, I've noticed this. You can sign the block messages by adding  |sig=-  to the template. But maybe you just forgot and my message is unnecessary pedantry :) --Vejvančický (talk / contribs) 07:04, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Suspicion...
Thanks for the heads-up. The FYI comment above made me wonder if you hadn't chanced upon this super-mop? Cheers,  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  11:14, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Re: Anyone interested in userfying an article?
<div style="background-color: #BBDDFF; border: #4169E1 1px solid; margin: 2em 0 1em; padding: 0.5em 1em; font-weight: bold; overflow: auto; vertical-align: middle; background-image: -moz-linear-gradient(left, #ED7A32, white, white, green); background-image: -ms-linear-gradient(left, #ED7A32, white, white, green); background-image: -o-linear-gradient(left, #ED7A32, white, white, green); background-image: -webkit-linear-gradient(left, #ED7A32, white, white, green); background-image: linear-gradient(left, #ED7A32, white, white, green); border: 2px solid blue; textstyle = color: #6D7184;">'Namaste'', Tokyogirl79. You have got at least one new message at the Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics. Please continue the discussion there!''' Message added by Tito ☸ Dutta 08:24, 14 September 2013 (UTC). You can [ remove this notice] at any time.


 * Hi, I am impressed with your polite responsibility to notify and discuss the deleted page Sunni Students Federation. As discussed here Please re-store SSF, I would initiate to bring the article up to WP:MOS. Regards :)--Omer123hussain (talk) 10:33, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Done! I think I'll move it into your userspace so you can work on it at your leisure without fear of it getting tagged by another user. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   10:38, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Arden Leigh
I've found additional reliable sources providing reliable coverage of the subject in The Times, El Confidencial and Jezebel. I've included them in the deletion discussion and I invite you to review them and ask you to reconsider your !vote. Pburka (talk) 14:30, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

User talk:Deep Dhudiya
User talk:Deep Dhudiya - you might want to consider removing talk page access if the user is just going to repeatedly add empty edit request templates. Strange one, that guy. Begoon &thinsp; talk 03:56, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

About A World Upside Down: The Mixxtape
 Heck darn it Tg79, I started Toledo City Paper so I could use DJ Clay's exclusive interview to save it from deletion. Does that mean I'm going to have to spray-paint the Psychopathic Records "hatchet-person" logo on my Corolla before it gets a stand-alone article? --Shirt58 (talk) 10:44, 18 September 2013 (UTC) 
 * Edit: "Shirt58's strange sense humour" tags added as appropriate.--Shirt58 (talk) 10:54, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Wow, I completely missed the source. The huge table of "example" made me miss it- I was just so awestruck that someone actually went to the trouble to create a table that big full of just the word example. I'll revert the deletion for you since you're actively working on it. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   10:56, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello
I have added some additional international sources for the page that was recently moved to my talk page User:Ppt1973/UFC Fight Night: Hunt vs. Bigfoot. I did not want to move it again without adding the additional content. Thanks for the head's up. Cheers. Ppt1973 (talk) 13:32, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

The Flamethrowers
Thank you for cleaning up The Flamethrowers. Beautiful stuff! ; ) Mthwaite (talk) 13:29, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Vandalism
We have some vandalism around here. User:24.170.77.177 has been making constant vandalism by adding unsources information on on the articles List of NFL on Fox commentator pairings and List of NBA on TNT broadcasters without providing a reliable source. He has been vandalizing other pages including KSAT-TV. He has been saying that Matt Vasgersian will be filling in for Dick Stockton in week 5 without adding a source and has been adding Sam Rosen, Laura Okmin, Jill Arrington, Erin Andrews, Jennifer Hale, Curt Menefee, Chris Myers, and Jim Nantz to the article List of NBA on TNT broadcasters. I have warned him on his talk page that the next time he vandalize pages, he may get blocked from editing. I'll revert his edits and warn him one more time. Ashbeckjonathan (talk) 23:39, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Article evaluation
Hi Tokyogirl79 - I'm not sure of the history of this page, however the creator is requesting it be moved to article space if you are satisfied with the content and sourcing. Thoughts?--Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 20:55, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
 * It's still not ready. The first two sources are good. They're from the same source (CBS), but they're reliable ones. The Library Journal is iffy. Technically it's still a book review, but trade reviews are starting to get increasing guff from people at AfD because it's a trade review and by nature will be brief. I'm kind of mixed in my opinion about trade reviews. They're usually fairly easy to find, which makes sourcing easier on me, but they're so brief and almost always positive, so the reliability of them has become increasingly suspect. The rest of the sources are unusable: The MediaBistro/Galleycat source is just a notification of an event that the author participated in and the rest are all non-notable awards that would be considered vanity awards by some users. As far as the claim of being on the PW magazine cover, I can't find where they've actually featured the book anywhere. I see primary sources that claim this, but nothing from PW themselves. This means that either it didn't happen or more likely, that it was one of several, several books that were thumbnailed onto the cover of the magazine. A search for the author's name on the PW website brings up no hits, which is fairly telling. PW almost always, always has some mention of an author on their website if they were to heavily feature them. I don't think they're lying, but I think that they're sort of overhyping something. In any case, I don't see where they've actually worked on any of the issues I mentioned on the article's talk page. I've explained to them why the current sources are lacking and I honestly don't believe that this would pass an AfD if I were to nominate it straight off. I think it'd end up exactly how it is now: as a redirect. If they want to run it through AfD then I can, but it'd likely end up with the article as a whole getting deleted. I'm just a little leery of the situation, as their justifications on the talk page were kind of the type that are the epitome of WP:NOT. That they tried to go around me and persuade someone else to approve the page kind of makes me a little extra leery, as they know they didn't fix any of the issues. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   03:23, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
 * In any case, long story short... I came across the page back in September. It had some pretty serious issues with it, such as using Goodreads as a source and other unreliable sources. That this version made it through AfC was pretty awful and one of my biggest pet peeves about AfC. There were additional edits that were made to the page per the author's request. She didn't edit it directly, which is good, but the problem is that the edits weren't really anything that would show notability. I kind of let it sit for a while, but eventually decided that it would be best served as a redirect to the author's page. That's when I kind of got the "but why can't we have it, it's useful and is becoming more notable" arguments on the talk page, among the other arguments. I honestly have to say that at best it was more of a puff page than anything else. The author's page also had some puffery and unsourced bio issues with it as well and there's been some fairly clear COI editing on both ends. (It's since cleaned up, though.) I hate to sound like I'm trying to bite them, but the book's article doesn't have any place on Wikipedia at this point in time. Maybe in the future if it gains more coverage in RS, but right now? No. But like I said, if they're unhappy then I can run it through AfD, but that would probably end in the deletion of the article entirely. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   03:30, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the very thorough response. I would like to note however that the editor was not trying to get around you for another opinion, they wanted to contact you directly but are currently caught in an autoblock and I told them I would post a note here for you on their behalf. I'll certainly point them to your response while I work offline with them to address the COI issues with the accounts. --Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 16:16, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Myliking SPI
Hi. I'm one of the clerks at Sockpuppet Investigations (SPI).

You submitted an SPI request a couple hours ago regarding the user. For some reason, the SPI request page you created was malformed — there is some header information which needs to be at the top of the page (but wasn't).

I've repaired the SPI page, but I was wondering if you could let me know how you created the page so we can figure out what went wrong and how to fix it. What steps (in as much detail as you can remember) did you go through in order to create this SPI?

Sorry to bother you, and thanks for any help. — Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 05:48, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
 * That's strange... I thought I'd created it like normal. I don't remember putting anything into the header field, but that's because I didn't see one. I'd started the SPI off as usual, entering in the suspected main sock into the box on the main SPI logging page. From there I put the other potential socks into the various fields and gave a bit of evidence. Other than that, I don't recall anything else- it was pretty standard as far as the SPIs I've done go. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   05:54, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Hmmm. OK, thanks for getting back to me.  The mystery continues, I guess.  I've seen something very much like this twice during the past week.  I'm sure we'll figure it out eventually.  —  Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 06:08, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm trying to think if I had any extra spaces or whatnot in the first step of SPI, but I can't honestly remember. I usually just cut and paste the suspected sockmaster's name in the first field, so I don't know if that got an extra space in it that would mess up anything. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   06:10, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Need help with an article move
Tokyogirl79, could I bother you to delete a page for me? I need to reverse a move I made from Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Audiovisual Translation to article space, and unfortunately I made some intervening edits. It's getting late here and I would like to clean up the mess I made before I turn in. DPRoberts534 (talk) 07:00, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Done! Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   07:07, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much! DPRoberts534 (talk) 07:08, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

More non-notable Christianity-related pages created
I think we have faced "conflicts of interest" from editors who have no idea about "notability" obviously. Links to documents by Pontifical Council for Social Communications can help you navigate. --George Ho (talk) 15:06, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
 * The issue with this is that they're all for a school project. I thought I'd asked the user to work on them in their userspace. All I can do is warn them and maybe move them. You might have to bring this up on AN/I if all else fails. There's only so much I can do. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   09:36, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Request for complete concealment of edit giving child's name and address
Hey, please can you - if it's something you can do? - completely block/hide the revision for 16:49, September 26, 2013‎ by 90.211.17.73 on List of fashion designers? It appears to be a kid putting their name and the address of their school out there, which is information that REALLY shouldn't be available. Mabalu (talk) 17:30, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Just checking to see if you saw this, apologies if it's not something you can do as an admin... Mabalu (talk) 09:16, 27 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Sorry! I'd missed it! I've left the user a warning and removed the information from the edit history. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   09:30, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Cheers! Do you know if there's a quicker way to go about flagging these up should it arise again? Mabalu (talk) 10:19, 27 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Not really- you just have to chase down an admin as far as I can tell. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   10:26, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Finding an active admin who's listed at Category:Wikipedia administrators willing to handle RevisionDelete requests usually results in quick action, as does a request via IRC .--Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 16:11, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

User talk:Roksenberg/The Whip (novel)
Hi Tokyogirl79, thank you for all your help thus far. I was hoping to re-add the cover of the novel again that was once there but wikipedia won't let me. Karen Kondazian has full rights to the cover by artist Jeffrey DeCola and this was established months ago before the page was taken down. The only other item I added under reception was it won Best Western/Best Historical Fiction by the 2013 Global Ebook awards and cited the page - http://globalebookawards.com/2013-global-ebook-awards-winners/

One other thing I wanted to see if it was possible to add general information about an audio book being released in November 2012 narrated by Robin Weigert who has a wikipedia page as well - []

Lastly, I want to link the mention of the novel "The Whip" on Karen Kondazian's wikipedia page to this page. []

Those are all the edits I would like to make before submitting it to you for approval. Can you please advise me on how to do this? If one or none of these edits can be made - that's okay, so long as we get the page up that you are comfortable with.

Thanks for your time. Roksenberg (talk) 19:57, 26 September 2013 (UTC)Roksenberg
 * Really and truthfully, we can't really merit more than a few sentences on Kondazian's page and just a brief mention on Weigert's page. I've added a bibliography section that says he narrated it, but we can't justify any more than that. We don't include lengthy sections on each book that a person has narrated. To be honest, we can't entirely justify a lengthy section on The Whip in Kondazian's page either. I've placed "In 2012 Kondazian published The Whip, a novel based upon the life of Charley Parkhurst." in the lead, but that's all that we can justify having. Anything other than that would be putting undue weight upon the book. That's all that I can justify having in the article for her. I hate to be blunt, but when it comes down to it most books only have a brief, BRIEF mention on the author's page. It's not up to Wikipedia to give lengthy mentions and sections to each book that someone puts out. That not only puts undue weight upon the book, but it also runs the risk of being promotion for the book. That's not what Wikipedia is for. The book has as much mention as it merits on Wikipedia at this point in time. If it ever gets more attention in the mainstream media then we can justify having an article and a lengthier section, but at this point it's inappropriate to create lengthy sections on a book that doesn't pass notability guidelines. The award that she won just isn't considered to be one that gives notability per Wikipedia's guidelines. I understand that you want people to know about the book that your friend wrote, but it'd be better off if you worked the blogging circuit rather than use Wikipedia to post more information about it. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   04:17, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi Tokyogirl79 - thank you for your response and looking into this deeper. Is it possible that per your instructions, I can submit the wiki page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Roksenberg/The_Whip_(novel) for consideration to be put back up onto mainspace? I got rid of the award that you said was inappropriate and included nothing about the audio book. Can we put this back up or please provide me with instructions how to re-submit for consideration? Thank you for time. Roksenberg (talk) 22:39, 29 September 2013 (UTC)Roksenberg
 * Honestly, the problem is that ultimately the book does not pass notability guidelines for books. The coverage isn't enough to show that it's notable outside of the author. There's nothing to be done for it until she gains coverage in sources that we consider to be reliable. You can keep asking, but the problem with notability will still be the same. What kept it from being notable wasn't the award's appropriateness but rather that overall there isn't enough coverage. It just isn't there. I know you want to promote your friend's book, but at this point I don't know how many times I can tell you that it isn't notable enough for it's own entry. It would really be better if you just let it rest at this point and wait for it to gain more coverage. Wikipedia's rules for notability are pretty set and regardless of how nice it would be, they aren't going to change anytime soon. You've kind of got to learn when it's appropriate to stop pushing to have something posted on the mainspace, as is the case here. It just isn't notable and I'll be honest... if by some chance you do manage to talk someone into re-adding it, I'll nominate it for deletion. It's nice that you're trying to help out a friend, but you're not really doing her any favors at this point because it almost comes across like you're trying to use Wikipedia as a promotional outlet for the book. That might not be your intent, but the problem is when you're told multiple times that something doesn't pass notability guidelines but still keep trying to get it added without actually adding anything that would be usable as a RS, after a while it just sort of comes across badly. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   23:44, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Let's put it this way: apart from several newspapers such as the New York Times, San Francisco Chronicle, or SF Weekly reviewing the book and/or writing about it, there's not much that can be done at this point to show notability. Get Kondazian to supply them with review copies and try to get them to write about the book. Once those appear, then we can talk about getting it re-added. Again, at this point it just kind of seems like you're trying to use Wikipedia as a place to promote the book and it comes across a little like spam. And again, this might not be your intent but that's what it's coming across like. You've got to know when continuing to push the point hurts your cause more than helps it. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   23:49, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. I appreciate all your help on this matter. Roksenberg (talk) 17:17, 30 September 2013 (UTC) Roksenberg

Al Tamimi Investments
Greetings. Ty for your suggestions on the talk page of Al Tamimi Investments. I intend on expanding the article further. The thing is like you said, many of the resources are in Arabic for this company. I also saw your suggestion for creating a standalone article for the event this company organizes. The thing is that this company has multiple subsidiaries and each of those subsidiaries is notable (reliable source coverage and all). I think it would be better to have an article about the parent company that discusses all the subsidiaries rather than having an article for each subsidiary. Let me know your thoughts.Muhammad Ali Khalid (talk) 05:54, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
 * You just have to make sure that you have sourcing for the article to show that it's notable outside of the contest it runs. As long as you can prove that by independent and reliable secondary sources, the article should be safe from deletion fears. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   05:55, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Spare a minute...
Salutations! I've recently converted many of Hitomi Yaida sub-articles into redirects to the parent page, on the basis of only inherited notability. It didn't seem controversial and I tried to finish the job (converting the remaining double redirects too) Would you kindly look through what I've done and see if I've not overlooked anything or done something stupid? Thanks, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 09:35, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Looks good from what I can see at first glance. I like that you remembered to remove the linking- that's something I many times forget to do! Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   09:39, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi, can you also review this again too: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Angelo_Perrella Thanks, Gliesian (talk) 20:19, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Re: Help with an AfD history merge?
Hey! in this case it's best to move the old page history and talk page out of the way to preserve them, which I've done in this case. I moved "Fluffy bunny" to Talk:Fluffy bunny/Old history and its old talk page to Talk:Fluffy bunny/Old talk page, in both cases without redirects. I then moved the disambiguation page (along with its talk page) to the undisambiguated title. One advantage of this procedure is that the moves are easily reversible if it ever comes to that. Graham 87 06:12, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Esw01407 (talk) 17:28, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Ozu Abam
Thought I'd create a proper stub for that, without all the nonsense § FreeRangeFrog  croak 05:24, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank You
Thank you for fixing my Article for Creation page! I'm new here and was confused.1982vdven (talk) 05:33, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!
Yes! Great job on the sourcing, especially finding Casuistry and Modern Ethics: A Poetics of Practical Reasoning as a footnote for Ilsa. --Arxiloxos (talk) 15:53, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

FYI
FYI (at the bottom), and best regards. This is C o l t o n C o s m i c. 9:32 AM, EST. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.254.176.212 (talk) 13:34, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Acid Rap
Hey Tokyogirl79, I would like to point out to you that the same user is hijacking Acid Rap again, and copy-pasted the article to Acid Rap (album). Both you and me have told him enough times that he cannot change the subject of the article, copy-paste moves are completely inappropriate, and that he should just create the article at Acid Rap (genre) or Acid Rap (music genre), but he refuses to heed our advice.  STATic  message me!  14:48, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Tokyo Girl, I appreciate your concerns as I am sure they are legitimate. However, if you have any questions or comments regarding the genre, please leave them on the article's talk page. To be fair, Wikipedia is the encyclopedia anyone can edit and I will make constructive edits in accordance with WP Policy to the best of my ability, to ensure the information I see here is accurate. I don't like to seem like a Genre warrior, but this article in fact concerns an existing underground music genre and new albums should be moved or parenthesized per WP:ALBUMS. Thanks Ben0kto (talk) 15:16, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

I would also like to point out that the article was not copied word for word and the article has since been moved using the move button. Ben0kto (talk) 15:20, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Please for the love of God, stop making this article until this has been fully discussed! Making even a move to another page is considered a controversial move and this can be seen as a revert war action! I hate to do it, but I'm reporting you to ANI as this needs further people coming in. I'm officially feeling too involved to really make a non-partial decision here. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   15:25, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

If I need to stop making constructive edits to the genre's article to avoid being blocked by you and other admins, or having my work deleted, I will do so. Please provide a fair warning (I appreciate this) and for the love of God, use the talk page yourself when making controversial edits. Ben0kto (talk) 15:30, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
 * You've been warned. Several times over by several different editors. People have tried to explain proper procedure to you and you've flat out ignored people. I've reported you to ANI. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   15:32, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I have been warned, but sometimes warnings (especially in the Edit summary) are easy to overlook when trying to make multiple edits to the article itself. Please forgive my inexperience, and if you have anything meaningful to contribute to the genre's discussion, please do so on the article's talk page. Ben0kto (talk) 15:54, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
 * You've been warned several times on your userpage. At this point you should be carefully reading over the messages posted on your talk page as well as in the summary edits on the pages in question. Inexperience isn't an excuse now, especially if the reason you are continuing to make controversial edits is because you aren't paying close enough attention to what people are trying to tell you. That's when it goes past inexperience and becomes negligence. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   16:07, 10 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Even after our additional comments on the talk page, including my recent response that basically debunked everything he said. Guess what our friend Ben0kto did again :).  STATic  message me!  15:05, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Rent My Vacation Home USA
Hey Tokyogirl. I almost never ask this, but could I ask you to put this AfD out of its misery if you have a moment? It's been up for request at WP:ANRFC for a bit now. I, JethroBT drop me a line 09:11, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

User:Penwatchdog/sandbox
Hi Tokyogirl, you helped me not too long ago with deleting a redundant sandbox for the René Moncada article I was working on (which also caused a confusing deletion of the actual sandbox to which I'd moved the work-in-progress. Confusing again? I've since then completed the article and moved it into mainspace/article, BUT... it's still appearing in my sandbox, and not only am I wondering why (meaning, did I do something wrong?) but I also have my next article I'd like to start inputting there. At your convenience, can you look into it and blank my sandbox (AND delete that second redundant sandbox which I believe also still exists?) OR forward my request to someone better suited to deal with such things? I'm only coming to you with this because I recalled your previous help, and I'm so bad with these things! This link should take you to the main sandbox: and this to the redundant sandbox:  (I hope the links actually link!). Thanks in advance and sorry to be a bother! Penwatchdog (talk) 04:00, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Copy of deleted page List_of_games_with_mutable_rules
Hi – I understand that you deleted the page List_of_games_with_mutable_rules. I understand that it was because it was a "Lists or repositories of loosely associated topics ". Fair enough.

However, I found the content useful. I can't get to that valuable information currently, as I don't have permission to view deleted pages. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Undelete/List_of_games_with_mutable_rules

I presume that, as the person who deleted it, you can get at it. I wonder if you might be able to drop the last revision (ideally, more than one revision, as I don't remember it as simply a list) onto my talk page, or somewhere else that I can see it.

Cheers - Catafalque (talk) 08:46, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Sounds reasonable. I'll move a copy into your userspace for you to work on. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   10:11, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Xavier Ramirez
I have undeleted Xavier Ramirez, an article you contributed to the proposed deletion of, after the deletion was contested. You may wish to take it to AfD instead. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:06, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Request for comment
As you previously participated in related discussions you are invited to comment at the discussion at WikiProject Articles for creation/RfC for AfC reviewer permission criteria. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:08, 18 October 2013 (UTC)