User talk:Renamed user e8LqRIqjJf2zlGDYPSu1aXoc/Archive 1

S&W Model 10
Self citation/Personal research

I looked up the policy :


 * "Citing oneself Policy shortcut: WP:COS This policy does not prohibit editors with specialist knowledge from adding their knowledge to Wikipedia, but it does prohibit them from drawing on their personal knowledge without citing their sources. If an editor has published the results of his or her research in a reliable publicationItalic text, the editor may cite that source while writing in the third person and complying with our NPOV policy. See also Wikipedia's guidelines on conflict of interest".

The citations in question are on the S&W Model 10 article and refer to a Gunblast.com article. Others I have used are from print magazines-generally VonRosen publications, GUNS Magazine, American Handgunner and occasionally from a co authored book.--Mcumpston (talk) 15:57, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Reverting
Sorry bout that, will be more careful in the future, thanks for the note, Cheers. Chris M. (talk) 04:36, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Millo
The page as it stands has no link to the Large Stone Structure, this leaves readers ill-informed. deleting the link I put in is not constructive on your part. Elan26 (talk) 00:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)Elan26
 * While I'm sure there's nothing wrong with placing a link to Large Stone Structure in the See Also section of the article, the text you added appeared to push a particular viewpoint without backing it up. Per WP:PROVEIT, I removed the section in question. --/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 00:16, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Tom Vallance
Hello, I see you're requesting deletion of Tom_Vallance_(writer).

But you haven't followed the correct procedure and have not filled in anything on the Articles_for_deletion page.

Please remove the AfD message and leave the article as it is. I think 22000+ Google hits is sufficient justification for "notability":

Google search for Tom Vallance

It would be more helpful to the community if you could create your own articles (make something new) instead of going around deleting other people's new articles which you have not yet properly researched. Thanks!

91.171.196.234 (talk) 01:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Double-check that; there's a discussion there. I also suggest you read up on Wikipedia notability guidelines (WP:NOTE, for example) yourself- sorry, the notice stays. --/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 01:21, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Body In Balance
Hello mate im kinda new to adding new pages on this site. Also the channel is not fully on air in the UK so iv added all that i know about it at present, however i will add more info when i know it at a later date. Please dont delete the page.

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Happyboiman (talk • contribs) 01:51, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

VSTEP
Hello Mendaliv,

I was just curious why you consider a game developer that has "a leading position in the European serious games industry" non-notable? The other two admins I talked to said their deletion-'toughts' was unfounded, and really just based on not knowing the subject. I was just curious about your reasoning.

cheers GameLegend (talk) 07:23, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Smokin' Armadillos and WP:TROUT
Why the heck did you tag Smokin' Armadillos for speedy deletion? The article made a clear assertation of notability by means of not one, but three charted hits on the country charts and two albums on Curb Records, which is a very notable label. Please do a little research first before tagging — I just have to WP:TROUT you for this one, I'm sorry. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 04:46, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Erm whoops... I had one too many PBRs this evening and went a-patrollin'. --/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 04:58, 31 May 2008 (UTC)


 * To quote Alan Jackson (from his High Mileage album), that's another good reason not to drink. :-P Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 04:58, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Zonal spherical function
Please do not interrupt me while I've just started editing this article!!!! Please allow at least 24 hours and not 1 minute thirty seconds before adding your inanities. And read the edit summary, which says I'm adding bit by bit. I am currently writing the reference list, bit by bit, like all my other mathematical edits. Take some time to look at them before interrupting me again!!! Mathsci (talk) 23:05, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Take it easy, friend. I marked the article you're working on while patrolling new pages. Perhaps you should mark such articles with   next time. --/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 23:10, 31 May 2008 (UTC)


 * That is not what I normally do. Now please just leave me alone. Look at my mathematical edits. I am not a 12 year old school kid and when you see the start of a mathematical article, have the humility not to intervene, particularly when the edit summary makes it clear what is going on. You left less than 2 minutes before putting in templates, which I regard as rather unintelligent. Try to be more patient and learn a little common sense in future. Mathsci (talk) 23:19, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Well I'm sorry for that, but considering it's Wikipedia, you should expect someone to come along and edit the article you've helped write. If you want an incomplete article to have some degree of protection you might want to consider placing it as a subpage in your userspace until you consider it "ready to go". Let's try to assume good faith here; I'm just trying to make sure the good articles stay in and the bad articles stay out. I figured yours was going to be good at some point. --/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 23:34, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Not one and a half minutes after its creation, when the edit summary says "more to follow"!!! Either you are an expert in semisimple Lie groups or you are being completely disingenuous. I am an experienced editor of mathematics articles, as you can quite rapidly find out. If you have not edited any higher mathematics articles yourself, please keep your thoughts to yourself. If you have no expertise in representations of semisimple Lie groups, you will have very little to contribute to this article. Now try to be a little more patient. Mathsci (talk) 23:40, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
 * If I may, both of you have a point, and both are normally pretty good editors, but seem to have run into a bit of a conflict here. Mathsci isn't being particularly civil in how he expresses it, but it is true that it's normally better to give an article more than 90 seconds before tagging it. Mendaliv, when I'm on new article patrol, unless I see something egregious (like obvious spam, attack pages, or nonsense), I normally give it at least 24 hours to flesh out before tagging.  Especially if it's being created by an established editor. It's simple enough to scan Special:Newpages and dip into the day-old articles (let me know if you'd like help on that).  And Mathsci, I understand that you're upset, but could you please tone things down a bit? Mendaliv is performing a very useful function here, patrolling new articles. He was definitely a bit quick on the draw with the tags for your particular stub, but he was acting in good faith.  --Elonka 03:23, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Ahh okay; good to know, thanks Elonka! I'll try to be more careful in the future. --/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 03:25, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

TCC Tychy
Help! You’ve recently marked my article, and I was wondering if you could help me deleting it. There is nothing wrong with the article itself, but I’ve made a village boy of myself and made a typo in the article title :(

TCC Tychy should be TTC Tychy

I have now created the appropriate page (TTC Tychy) but I am at a loss as to how to delete my own entry. Help please! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael J. Nowak (talk • contribs) 07:56, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I've turned the old page into a redirect to the new one. Basically that's what would have happened if you did a standard rename (using move up next to history). --/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 08:02, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Is it possible to delete the other page entirely? Because I don’t think anybody is going to use it, unless they make the same typo I did. Michael J. Nowak —Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael J. Nowak (talk • contribs) 08:09, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Mmm... yes you can ask for it to be deleted (though to be honest it doesn't really hurt to have the redirect... you never know what typo someone's going to make). You could blank the entire page and replace its content with  ; an administrator will come by and delete the page entirely at some point. --/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 08:11, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your help! Really appreciate it. Michael J. Nowak —Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael J. Nowak (talk • contribs) 08:31, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Steve Allday
I added some references to Steve Allday. You may want to revisit Articles for deletion/Dr. Steve Allday. --Eastmain (talk) 23:04, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I haven't been involved in that article or the deletion discussion... I think you've contacted me by mistake. --/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 01:14, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

PictureStart editing
I am the copyright holder of the entries that were added to the PictureStart Film Festival entry. These were deleted for lack of permission. How do I get them reposted or is that not permissible. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gsegal0 (talk • contribs) 04:20, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Read WP:C; there's information on what you would need to do there. Otherwise I don't know. --/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 04:23, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Re:sausage
Hi - sorry about the revert mixup - you reverted just as I pressed the button :)  Vishnava talk  23:22, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Eh it happens, no biggie. --/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 23:23, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

K and A Engineering
Just for future reference, when the creator of an article blanks that article like happened here, rather than restore it and warning the creator you would be better to tag it for Speedy deletion under criterion G7 (Author request for deletion). -- Mattinbgn\talk 23:27, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah, my mistake. I hit the button a little too quickly. Sorry about that! --/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 23:57, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

America's Best Dance Crew
I see it now. I'm not sure exactly who really won becuase several realiable sites claim different positions on the issue. Either way, I requested protection temporarily so someone can find a reliable source. --♣ẼгíćЏ89♣ (talk) 00:02, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Business systems development
I saw where you put a speedy tag. That's what I had done as well, but the author removed most of the blatant advertising. It's still a mess, but I don't know if it qualifies for speedy any more. Let me know if what you think. Cheers!  TN ‑ X - Man  00:39, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I pulled the Speedy tag since you've got an AfD up; you're right it's not so much spam anymore. I think there's probably enough context to avoid other speedy templates, and it's not about anything in particular so it avoids notability. I'd have suggested starting with a Proposed Deletion, but AfD might not hurt. You've got my support on it. --/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 00:41, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the assist. I thought about putting up a PROD tag, but based on what had been happening, I guessed where that would have ended up. Cheers!  TN ‑ X - Man  00:44, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Queen of Bollywood
Hi. I have revamped the article, and I think it's now a credible stub. Please take another look at the article, and see if your opinion has changed. Best,-- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 21:26, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Call-girl
You seem to take great pleasure in destroying other people's work. I understand one must fight vandalism, but I found your action on my article quite rude. Hours of work, if my article does not please you, first talk to me.

- The problem could be that I added content on the wrong section ?.. I'll then create a new section proprely and put back my article.

- If there's the least problem, then let's find an agreement and communicate : franzbrentanno@hotmail.com

I read :

"Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Call girl. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you"

My contribution shows important legal issues on call-girl activity worldwide and I there isn't anything personal in it (please read me again). The previous ones were allready tagged as "not neutral". That wasn't for mine. This article was indeed needing more objective and down-to-earth information, and that's what I think I added. Anyway (even though that's patently not my case) personal analysis are welcome on Wikipedia, as far as they stay neutral to a certain extent. Without personal analysis Wikipedia would be but contentless (wich is twice as true for society issues like this one).

Don't make people lose time, that'd be of great help : it's getting harder and harder to publish on Wikipedia. You're a graduate linguist. You should add content rather than destroy any. Create new sections to move the article properly, correct it if needed, but don't you flat destroy serious contributions like that one.

ps - I have slightly modified the article. I don't think there's any personal view in it, only straight, objective legal issues and information concerning the EU, and it is referenced. If any problem (like needing more references) please contact me. I'm trying to help make a good and informative article from that junk. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.65.25.31 (talk) 17:31, 18 June 2008‎ (UTC)
 * All I can see that you've modified is that you reintroduced the text that I removed before. It's just as POV-slanted as before, and still doesn't have any sources. It violates both WP:NPOV and WP:NOR. I appreciate that you want to help improve Wikipedia, but the way you're doing it is not the way. Your statement that your information is objective is simply not true, for example:"One must also take under consideration that 'escorting' activity is plainly considered as prostitution (i.e. offering sexual services for money) by criminal codes in any country worldwide." This is from here. That sentence has a clear negative attitude towards both escorting and prostitution, and regardless of your opinions thereof, is not acceptable for Wikipedia as it pushes a point of view. I hope you understand now why I reverted your edits. I won't at this point, as you say you're going to improve the section. I hope you do so within the guidelines of Wikipedia. --/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 17:58, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Look, thanks for not removing it, just take it easy. I'm trying to understand you, hence I'm commenting the sentence you emphazise :

"One must also take under consideration that "escorting" activity is plainly considered as prostitution (i.e. offering sexual services for money) by criminal codes in any country worldwide."

You write : "That sentence has a clear negative attitude towards both escorting and prostitution"

There's nothing negative on making clear what "escorting" means for justice. As far as sexual service is offered for money no juridiction makes a difference, therefore people expose themselves to similar juridical misfortunes if they practice either one, not to mention that such reminder ought to be useful for the girls themselves. My add tends to be down-to-earth, but that's not beeing negative. On the other hand, previous contributions do in fact denote liberal points of view on those issues. Mine is not vulgar to begin with, and avoids depicting such a grave subject as prostitution in dulcinated colours. Mentioning criminal code isn't accusing, it only allows for a serious tone where such a tone brings back the cold, hard reality which is what prostitution is in fact about. We're handling a serious subject here.

Legal issues on internet pimping should certainly be welcome, at least as much as tidings on how to ultimately depict Cum-In-Mouth on an internet add and other uncomely (and yet POV-angled) info.

I've mentioned a source mind you, on a recent European law concerning public soliciting. I'll try and find the correlate laws for the other countries I mention, and I'd generously offer the missing english translations. I'm well positioned to handle it, for I precisely know what escorting involves, be it only for Europe (I'm not aware of the US correlation), beyond its edulcorated aspects. We're talking about a modern phenomenon few people are aware of what it does in fact implie in terms of large-scale, organized frauds and crime, you're among them, and I'll help spread light on it.

I'll certainly make efforts to fit the standards, and I agree with you on that my contribution needs to be developped and referenced, I just ask you please help me, rather than make me spend more time here than on the article.

Regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.65.25.31 (talk) 23:26, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Marilyn Stokstad
To see if an academic is notable, it is useful to check Google Scholar--and also WorldCat. Incidentally, a widely used textbook by itslef meets WP:PROF,& she's done a lit more than that. DGG (talk) 14:21, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Hm alright, I appreciate the advice. The article looks a lot better now too. --/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 17:54, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Cell (2009 film)‎
Please be careful when doing reverts. You were certainly right to restore the speedy tag and to warn the user, but the author did not simply remove the tag--he made some other additions that you also deleted as part of the revert. I have restored this other material. What he added isn't likely to save the article from deletion, but it was a good-faith effort and should be treated as such. Thank you for your time. -- Finngall  talk  20:37, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah, sorry. Thanks for the notification. --/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 21:12, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

AfD related discussions
Do you have a tool for categorizing AfD related discussions or do you do it by hand? I'm a noob when it comes to tools; having just discovered Twinkle, I'm having a blast patrolling New Pages! Madcoverboy (talk) 03:48, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Hey there, yep I have a tool and it's based on Twinkle. It isn't perfect (I think it's missing a few AfD categories). You can find it here: User:Jayvdb/Deletion sorting tool. Happy sorting! --/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 03:51, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the info, I'll do what I can to help as well! Madcoverboy (talk) 04:14, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Good luck
I have to go, and you seem to be the only other person using huggle at the moment. Good luck with that. :P --Closedmouth (talk) 09:33, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Lovely... time for a battle cry methinks. Excelsior!!! --/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 09:34, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

why do you keep deleting my edit on the lost years of Jesus.
What exactly is your objection? I am new to editing articles so I am quite possible missing something.

Yet this was a brief and relevant addition to the topic.

Regards, Ben —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.123.64.93 (talk) 10:01, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Ljubo Milos
Adding valid references and citations is very constructive way to improve article - please avoid edit war for no reason!--72.75.24.245 (talk) 03:17, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * User 72.75.24.245 is puppet of banned user. He is not allowed to edit so his edits do not exist (you can delete all his edits without edit war, 3RR rule or anything similar)--Rjecina (talk) 14:16, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * You can see that IP user:72.75.5.121 and user:72.75.18.173 has been blocked in 2006 or 2007 because of sockpuppets of banned user. Because his new puppet user:J. A. Comment has been banned on my demand on 20 June he has started again to edit from IP. Until now he has used IP range 72.75.xx.xxx and 71.252.xx.xx (example of blocked IP from this range:user:71.252.83.230 and user:71.252.101.51). --Rjecina (talk) 14:47, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Alrighty, I figured it was something like that but I decided to err on the side of caution and contact a more involved editor. I thought this IP seemed a little too knowledgeable of our internal processes. --/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 18:45, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I really do not understand that user. If you are interested about war criminals you can look another article which is edited by him. This is article Miroslav Filipović. I can't understand why he is using his "books" when we are having respected internet source about this criminal. This source is USHMM--Rjecina (talk) 20:50, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * User:72.75.24.245 is blocked but he will come again, and again and again....--Rjecina (talk) 00:22, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Aylesbury
lol That's fine. D0762 (talk) 10:11, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

China had an Emperor, not a King
Please don't change my correcting edits. Thank you.99.243.193.100 (talk) 00:49, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * You're incorrect. The title Emperor of China did not come about until Qin Shi Huang. All prior dynastic rulers were called Kings. --/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 00:53, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

WP:FILMS Welcome!
 Welcome! Hey, welcome to WikiProject Films! We're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of films, awards, festivals, filmmaking, and film characters. If you haven't already, please add User WikiProject Films to your user page.

A few features that you might find helpful:
 * Most of our important discussions about the project itself and its related articles take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you [ watchlist it].


 * The project has a monthly newsletter. The newsletter for May has been published.  June's issue is currently in production; it will be delivered as a link, but several other formats are available.

There is a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:


 * Want to jump right into editing? The style guidelines show things you should include.
 * Want to assist in some current backlogs within the project? Visit the Announcements template to see how you can help.
 * Want to know how good our articles are? Our assessment department has rated the quality of every film article in Wikipedia.  Check it out!

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask another fellow member, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Nehrams2020 (talk) 18:24, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Info
Ljubo Milos article:

The reference given there are very valuable testimonies of survivors and collection of documents. Both books are reference books and cannot be used outside libraries. To locate these books in the American Univ. libraries - use this Google search

http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/171287229&tab=holdings?loc=Chicago+IL http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/12962342&tab=holdings?loc=Chicago+IL —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brzica milos etc (talk • contribs) 14:09, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * No, sorry. I don't consider those valid sources. Also, the article has received semi-protection to prevent your sockpuppetry. Thanks! --/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 23:35, 25 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Problem is that User:Mangojuice is supporter of WP:AGF policy and I am supporter of WP:DUCK policy and WP:AGF has become unblocking reason.--Rjecina (talk) 21:58, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * There has been proposition that I start new case and so...You are invited to Suspected sock puppets/Velebit2--Rjecina (talk) 19:40, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the invite, but as I told, I'm backing off from this now that I'm seeing how deep the situation goes. --/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 02:04, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Theo Marcuse image
Hello...can you explain why my screen shot of Theo Marcuse was deleted? I am wanting to find a way to post images of deceased actors, and I thought I had found one in taking screen shots. Any help you can give me would be greatly appreciated. Why are screen shots not permissible, and what kinds of images of actors are? Thanks, David Daviddaltonagency (talk) 01:11, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I've responded on your talk page. Good luck in the future! --/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 02:02, 1 July 2008 (UTC)