User talk:Sandstein/Archives/2008/December

death anxiety deletion
Why did you delete the page for death anxiety? Or were you the one that created it???


 * Please provide a link to the article at issue, as explained in the box at the top of this page.  Sandstein   06:38, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Technical Problem
Hey there, I would like to divert your attention to one article "Shahid Masood", this article is not showing some of the sections which are present in the editing tab but not shown in the normal preview of the article. Plz have a look at this article and help correct it if you can. Regards.Burhan Ahmed (talk • contribs) 08:36, 1 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I can't reproduce the problem that you describe. You may be able to find more competent technical help at WP:VPT.  Sandstein   10:23, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Rename
user rename: The Mary Pearl Willis Foundation to Dembravesfan. How long does it take for the above to occur? I believe all requests have been sent, but Dembravesfans user name has not been activated. Thanks.
 * I have contacted the renaming bureaucrat.  Sandstein   06:53, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank youThe Mary Pearl Willis Foundation (talk) 07:01, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for helping. How do I retrieve previous articles created under user name The Mary Pearl Willis Foundation?Dembravesfans 04:56, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


 * If they have been deleted already, see WP:WWMPD for a range of options.  Sandstein   06:45, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi there
Thanks for protecting the page of a banned sock editor User talk:Purkunna.Can you kindly REMOVE theose personal attacks, bad faith allegations and dirty comments on me on the same page ? It is so embarassing. It is possible to delete those particular diffs by Purkunna ? --  Tinu  Cherian  -

I've courtesy blanked the page.  Sandstein  06:47, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot. We are having big trouble with and his scores of socks. He will anyways resurface with his new avatar soon. --  Tinu  Cherian  - 09:33, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

12-5-08
Thanks for telling me that copyrighted images are disabled. Blut is it okay if you upload images copyrighted by the Wikimedia Foundation? (owww...some of my body parts is disturbing me, IMHO). MH LU talk 00:07, 6 December 2008 (UTC)


 * No, unless these images have been expressly released by the Foundation under a free licence.  Sandstein   00:09, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

List of Korean war veterans

 * The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.  No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Where did "potentially over 100,000 entries" come from?" Juzhong (talk) 04:26, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * According to Korean War, there were over 1 million combatants on either side.  Sandstein   07:14, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Of whom 10% were notable —Preceding unsigned comment added by Juzhong (talk • contribs) 07:23, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Potentially so, as many said in Articles for deletion/List of Korean War veterans (2nd nomination).  Sandstein   07:27, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Like who? Juzhong (talk) 08:58, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I trust that you are able to read that discussion for yourself.  Sandstein   09:50, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I just don't trust that you are. Juzhong (talk) 10:07, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * It's clear who said these things in the AfD Juzhong. Please put your civility hat back on and stop attacking Sandstein for simply doing his admin task and closing that AfD as a Delete by Concensus.-- VS  talk 11:15, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * How about you answer the question, if it's so easy? Juzhong (talk) 16:56, 7 December 2008 (UTC)


 * This editor has a history of abusive comments even after a one day cooling off period. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.164.249.129 (talk) 21:10, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Now now, I'm being very patient, still hoping for an answer. Juzhong (talk) 09:12, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Please take this discussion elsewhere. I've said what I think needs to be said.  Sandstein   11:31, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll try the help desk, maybe they can clarify things for me. Juzhong (talk) 17:59, 8 December 2008 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Please see Requests for comment/Sandstein. Juzhong (talk) 11:57, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
 * A user conduct RFC requires that at least two users have tried and failed to solve a dispute with another user. Your request is currently malformed and not likely to be accepted. If you have a disagreement with an AfD closure, Juzhong, please open a deletion review. Glass  Cobra  12:18, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I add my concurrence to the above comment by GlassCobra. The proper place for this is WP:DRV.-- VS talk 12:41, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

DYK nomination
Hi. I've nominated Tirggel, an article you worked on, for consideration to appear on the Main Page (on or around Christmas day) as part of Did you know. You can see the hook for the article here, where you can improve it if you see fit. Thanks --Bruce1eetalk 10:06, 9 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much!  Sandstein   10:23, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Election Dec 10
Congrats. I'm glad we had the article on the date of the election! -- User:Docu


 * Thanks!  Sandstein   20:56, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Re:Kosovo stubs
The reason for the protection was that consensus was reached not to have the category as a subtype of Cat:Serbia stubs. There had been considerable edit-warring on both the templates concerned and on a large number of the articles using the templates, which - with templates used on large numbers of articles - is hardly desirable. It wasn't a case of WP:PREFER - I've personally no particular interest in whether it's a subtype of the Serbia category or not, other than to prevent the edit-warring which occured before and is likely to occur again. Russavia knows this - he was party to at least some of the discussions which ended with the decision to keep the Kosovo categories separate. Grutness...wha?  20:23, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Do you think the protection is still needed? The history of the Kosovo stub template shows no editwarring after its unprotection. Also, could you point me to the discussions to which you refer?
 * Well, the fact that Russavia's asking for changes which were soundly opposed at the time of the earlier discussions which he took part in isn't a promising sign. If it was someone else who was suggesting it, I'd be somewhat concerned, but his previous edits and discussion on this and similar subjects have often been a little fractious, to say the least. As to where the discussions are, they're all over the place, but some that have some relevance can be found at Stub_types_for_deletion/Log/2007/September/2, Stub_types_for_deletion/Log/2008/August/28, WikiProject_Stub_sorting/Proposals/Archive/February_2008, Stub_types_for_deletion/Log/2008/February/7. Others are buried somewhere in the archives of various WP:WSS pages, so may take some finding. Some indications of the problem can be seen at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Kosovo, too.


 * Whether the edit warring would move to the category is difficult to tell - once the template was protected it seems to have moved to individual articles (havee a look at the |edit history of Šar_Mountains from October, for an example). The main problem is that edit-warring on one article, though a problem, is simply fixed. Edit-warring on a whole category, rthough, can be far more tricky to resolve. Grutness...wha?  00:37, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

12-13-08
Do you know how to create a message box which appears when you edit the page? MH LU talk 20:45, 13 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry to say that I don't. WP:HD may help you here.  Sandstein   20:55, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: Statement at RFArb page
Although a community discussion will be necessary on the matter at some point, I don't see any harm in enacting your suggestion accordingly. Ncmvocalist (talk) 04:35, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Romano-Dacis and Holocaust denial on AN/I
Hi. You have earlier replied to my post regarding User:Romano-Dacis and his repetitive edits. Your reply was: "I see no Holocaust denial as such here, just the sadly usual Eastern European nationalist bickering over who was responsible for which massacre. That is a content dispute and does not belong on this messageboard. Please pursue dispute resolution and use the article talkpage instead of this space."

With all due respect, I think you missed the point. To begin with, I find it quite offensive that you would attribute this to "Eastern European nationalist bickering" - it is ill-informed and prejudiced. As far as I can see, Romano-Dacis is the same nationality as I (Romanian). His whitewash edits support a nationalist POV that I should therefore be "identifying with" were I some sort of nationalist. The supposed POV I endorse is the one present in the Wiesel Commission Report (in turn based on countless reliable historical sources). The Commission was set up by the Romanian state, and its conclusions, although they have formed the basis of legislation in Romania, naturally upset supporters of fringe nationalist opinions. To give you the full picture: if those supporters of fringe nationalist opinions would express themselves in their home country with the sort of absurdities Romano-Dacis has been writing down over here, they would risk getting fined. They do equate to a denial of the Holocaust - the Holocaust for which Romania was responsible; they do so by minimizing the number of Jews and Romani people killed by the Romanian state, and by justifying their murders with the sinister claim that those killed were enemies of the Romanian state. Dahn (talk) 08:31, 14 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I apologise if I indeed missed the point and I assure you that I have zero sympathies for Holocaust deniers. That being said, what you describe remains a content dispute for which the administrators' noticeboard is not the right place. We have two other noticeboards dedicated to such issues: WP:POVN and WP:CCN.  Sandstein   11:28, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Merry Christmas


David WS (contribs)  is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy holidays! David WS (contribs)  19:45, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Kurt Weber
Per your comment as you voted against Kurt, you may be interested in this discussion. Daniel Case (talk) 00:52, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Ulteo
Hi, we have a submission at WP:AFC, but I note that you closed an AfD discussion on this topic so I would appreciate your opinion of whether this is substantially different from the article that was discussed there. You can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Submissions/Ulteo. Personally I would have created this straightaway had I not seen the page log! Thank you. Martin 21:16, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Greg Giametta
Hello Sandstein, we believe we've fixed the Greg Giametta {Greg giametta] article by including published reliable references such as Roadrunner Records and Harmony Central press releases. Please have a look and advise. We like to have the speedy deletion removed,Thanks, Electroman2007 (talk) 21:21, 16 December 2008 (UTC) Electroman2007 Electroman2007 (talk) 21:21, 16 December 2008 (UTC)


 * It seems that has already been deleted. Please refer to WP:WWMPD for further guidance.   Sandstein   06:45, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Saffron Terror
I am shocked to see the discussion was closed by you as no consensus. I thought, after majority delete votes and even altering his vote at the end was a clear indication of Delete. More, Silver seren has mentioned that he would work on the article in sandbox and would make a new article with another title at a later date. What indicates "no consensus"? --<font color="red" face="cursive">GP <font color="black" face="cursive">Pande 20:30, 17 December 2008 (UTC)


 * AfD discussions are not majority votes. An article is only deleted if there is WP:CONSENSUS to delete it, and in doubt, an article is not deleted (see WP:DGFA). I cannot identify a consensus for deletion in that discussion, particularly given that most contributions were pretty poor.  Sandstein   20:33, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Well I do agree that there have been some personal attacks and people not assuming good faith - but that should not void the valid arguments raised by others. What made you overlook the policy violations and other valid objections raised by the delete voters? I do not see any "poor" arguments raised by users asking a delete. --<font color="red" face="cursive">GP <font color="black" face="cursive">Pande 20:37, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * "Delete, per previous deletion discussions" - not an argument. "Delete If Hindu extremism is ever recreated, then redirect this page to the extremism page." - not an argument. "Strong Delete, Hindu Terrorism doesn't exist" - not a policy-based argument.  Sandstein   20:41, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Soman's reason is not poor considering his vote points to a policy violation of making a previously deleted article. Even week and reluctant keep voters have voted "I have a lot of concerns this article could easily turn into a WP:COATRACK" and "article suffers from a persistent POV". All I am trying to say is you need to weigh in the points raised by both sides before deciding. 1 vote raising 10 valid points should be seen at par to 10 votes with no valid points. Did you see not see more violations pointed by delete side than the keep side? --<font color="red" face="cursive">GP <font color="black" face="cursive">Pande 20:49, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, both sides made bad arguments. I read them all. That's part of why there's no consensus. If you disagree with this assessment, you may contest it at WP:DRV.  Sandstein   20:52, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Sad to hear that you overlooked number of policy violations mentioned by delete side over personal opinions raised from other side (Count of policies supporting a keep were 0). I would consider opening a second AfD instead of DRV. --<font color="red" face="cursive">GP <font color="black" face="cursive">Pande 21:03, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * A second AfD, if opened now, might be speedily closed. Consider trying it again in a month or so.  Sandstein   21:04, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Swiss People's Party
Could you please take a look at the talk page of this article, specifically the infobox discussion? Since you nominated Ueli Maurer for DYK, I figure you are familiar with the topic. The issue is whether the infobox can/should include something like anti-immigrant/anti-immigration in describing the party's ideology. I thought that it should but perhaps I am really off the mark here... Thanks, Nsk92 (talk) 21:08, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

WP:SPA
Kind of felt stupid seeing this: debate So this means I am no longer welcome on WP? Its ok if you don't want to take my opinion into account, I couldnt care for less especially on that topic. I am not an expert...I am a gamer, I stumbled upon it and thought I could contribute. But saying its WP:SPA ?! C'mon dude, it sure did take away the joy I had. I was planning just to edit gaming and coding articles but I feel now I have been marked. So I guess I got my ass banned? If so then delete my account I will move on.--Rootbeerjunky (talk) 23:10, 17 December 2008 (UTC)


 * No, you are not banned or otherwise restricted from contributing.  Sandstein   23:13, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok, so could I now ever edit or contribute anything without being called WP:SPA ? I kinda feel screwed if you get my drift. You, and admin gave me that mark as its linked to my profile....--Rootbeerjunky (talk) 23:38, 17 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Sure. As soon as you edit anything not related to Carl Lindgren, you are no longer a single purpose account by definition. There is nothing "linked to your profile."  Sandstein   05:52, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * That is my point, I was already editing other stuff not at all related to that article. So what gives? If you click on whats linked here at the toolbox it shows that page. Nvm, I just think all of this is weird. Thnx for taking time to clarify this weird process. --Rootbeerjunky (talk) 06:10, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Dyingtogethigh
Hello,

I just wrote a page for Wo/Men's Alliance for Medical Marijuana which has been tagged for deletion. If you would be so kind to move it to my subpage, or a subpage, so I can make the necessary corrections to the article.

As it is now, the page has been tagged for deletions because it doesn't have any "significance." However, WAMM has been and is currently involved in numerous lawsuits against the state and federal government, and has expanded patients rights not only in California, but the entire United States.

Please do not delete this page.

Also, the WAMM article points to a defunct radio station WAMM. Perhaps that article can contain a link to Wo/Men's Alliance for Medical Marijuana so users can find the information they are looking for.

Dyingtogethigh (talk) 21:07, 18 December 2008 (UTC)Dyingtogethigh

Is there any way to view the old deleted page? I did not save a copy of it, and would like to make the additional corrections needed for the page to meet proper guidelines. Thanks! Dyingtogethigh (talk) 21:52, 18 December 2008 (UTC)dyingtogethigh


 * It is now at User:Dyingtogethigh/Wo/Men's Alliance for Medical Marijuana. please modify it so that it reads less like an advertisement and so that it establishes notability as described in WP:N.  Sandstein   06:57, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Guido den Broeder
Required notice to all parties involved with the Guido den Broeder ban/block/discussion: I have appealed the ban on his behalf at WP:RFAR. Cosmic Latte (talk) 19:26, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Lindgren
good fair close. DGG (talk) 20:49, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: Deletion of Kretsvino
Yes but i have been there and will travel to Poschiavo again in the coming summer. And if you click in on google maps and searches for Sfazu and goes a little bit to right, you will see 6-8 houses standing together. THAT is Kretsvino. The Rolling Camel (talk) 21:33, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but your memory does not amount to a reliable source, which is what we would need to carry an article describing these houses as "Kretsvino".  Sandstein   21:37, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * If its so its better g7-delete it. I dont have any sources either. The Rolling Camel (talk) 22:24, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Raygun

 * See Talk:Raygun/Archive 1. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 14:49, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

deletion of Prachee Adhikari Wikipedia page
Hi Sandstein,

i just wanted to ask and in what ground you have deleted actress Prachee Adhikari's Wikipedia page.where as in the Google throughout you can see & read about her.she is renounced actress in south Telugu Industry.it is really a matter great sadness that you have deleted the work created by some literate and educated people by writing about her. can that page can be recover back.if so than it will be a great favour to us. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.245.5.155 (talk) 15:05, 20 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Please provide a link to the article at issue, as described in the box at the top of tis page.  Sandstein   15:16, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Simon Wilde
Until I saw your comment on your edit to List of works by cricket historians and writers I hadn't realised that Simon Wilde had had an article. That the article failed to establish notability is unfortunate, as I think that he is notable. I'm assuming that the article was about the cricket writer rather than about some other Simon Wilde. Is the deleted article archived anywhere where I could look at it? I'm tempted to write a new article on him starting from scratch, which would hopefully include sufficient evidence of his notability. JH (talk page) 10:16, 19 December 2008 (UTC)


 * The deleted article was by  and read as follows:


 * Simon Wilde is a cricket journalist and author, included in whose personal canon are biographies of K. S. Ranjitsinhji and Shane Warne, and a study of the match-fixing scandal.


 * Best,  Sandstein   10:35, 19 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I agree that it failed to establish his notability. I intend to mention that he writes regularly for The Times, to give more detaila about his books and to mention that a couple have been short-listed for the William Hill Sports Book of the Year award. JH (talk page) 18:18, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I've now rewriiten the article from scratch: Simon Wilde. Hopefully it will now meet with your approval. JH (talk page) 15:06, 21 December 2008 (UTC)


 * You don't need anyone's approval to write an article, of course. But it looks good to me.  Sandstein   16:25, 21 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Yes, I know I don't need anyone's approval, but it's nice to have some reassurance. :) JH (talk page) 19:04, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aeroflot — Russian Airlines terminated destinations
Hallo! My name is Dimitri, I'm the author of the Article Aeroflot — Russian Airlines terminated destinations. I'm really tired of this "voting for deletion", because it is far from a fair game: I was accused of all existing sins without any proofs, no one of my objective reasons was taken into consideration, no one presented any suitable or adequate reason for deleting, except "borring", "useless" and, of course, "indiscriminate" - their favourite toy... The question is: what is the result of this voting? What's next? Can I improve this Article or I can work only on existing Article Aeroflot — Russian Airlines destinations? I think it is better to MERGE terminated destinations into main article and divide it into 2 sections: Terminated 1992-2004 and 1923-1992 (Soviet Era)... Thank you! --Dimitree 21:26, 20 December 2008 (UTC) P.S.: I need you help in orientating here: I do not know to whom to address when I get problems, how to sign my posts, how to create my own page - I'm very new here... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dimitree (talk • contribs)


 * The discussion ended in "no consensus", which means that the article is not deleted. You may continue to work on it, but anyone may nominate it for deletion a second time. With respect to help, I have left instructions on your talk page.  Sandstein   21:30, 20 December 2008 (UTC)


 * If so (anyone may nominate it for deletion a second time), does it worth to work in vain? I'm enough with this battle (almost alone facing this attack). The second "vote" is not for me. I respect myself, I know what I'm doing, I'm honest despite all theirs accusations and I prefer no to be involved in any kind of "voting", because here reasonnable argumnets are sunk in a bog of "useless", "borring" and "indiscriminate", spiced with an obscene language of some users... Can we find any solution? As I've said above, may be, it is better to merge this article? But, from the other side, Soviet Aeroflot had an enormous and endless domestic network as well as international one. The last could be restored (I have all necessary information), but domestic - a bit difficult... But from the third side, the main article is entitled Aeroflot - Russian Airlines, so what Aeroflot is under discussion? No clearance at all... May I ask you to explain me WHO takes decision on final result (I suppose, you) and WHAT criterion led you take this desicion? You've counted "keep"s and "delete"s or what? Just to make a clear idea for what to be ready next time... Regards, --Dimitree 23:24, 20 December 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dimitree (talk • contribs)


 * Well, it's up to you whether you want to continue to work on the article, or if you want to propose a merger for it. For information on how to do this, see WP:MERGE. With respect to your question about how deletion discussions are closed, see WP:DGFA. One final piece of advice: don't take all this so serious and assume good faith. Everyone here wants the best for the encyclopedia, just like you.  Sandstein   07:29, 21 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you! --Dimitree 16:54, 21 December 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dimitree (talk • contribs)

Deletion review for Barack Obama citizenship conspiracy theories
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Barack Obama citizenship conspiracy theories. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedy-deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Sceptre (talk) 17:14, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Ex-Conism
Ex-Conism is a neologism, but every movement has its beginning and founder. This is not rubbish or all about me, but rather about the human condition. I have been unemployed for twenty years because of my past. Do you know what that's like? Ex-cons are discriminated against in employment and this has serious consequences for all of us. You probably don't care one way or another about ex-cons but someone has to speak up and this has to be one of us, an ex-con. What better way to begin this discourse, and we already have, then to introduce it on Wikipedia? I knew I'd have my critics and opponents, but why are you so against creating social justice? Few publishers touch anything anymore unless a person has multiple platforms, is already published or has tons of initials after their name. The economic situation renders many disavantaged groups even more civil and literary dead. We need a voice, a platform and a forum to educate, inform, sensitize and galvanize people like you. There are exceptions to all rules and this is one place and time where we need to let the greater good that will come from this discourse to prevail against the perceived prejudice this causes to Wikipedia.

Ritchy DubéSendakite (talk) 21:21, 21 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm sympathetic to your situation, but Wikipedia is not the place to start new ideas, no matter what their merit. It's described in WP:ENC, which I recommend you read. If you continue to use Wikipedia for something it is not intended for, you will eventually be blocked from editing it. Please consider using another Internet platform, such as a blog, for your ideas.  Sandstein   21:26, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Poschiavo settlements
Is google maps an reliable source? The Rolling Camel (talk) 22:39, 21 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, if the names are on it.  Sandstein   22:50, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, fine. But how schould i link to it. Link to a searching on gmaps for the settlement?
 * I think a "coord" link is best, as it will generate a link to mapping applications. You can generate it from Google maps by saving the code " javascript:void(prompt('',"")); " as a bookmark in Firefox, centering the map on the target and clicking the bookmark.  Sandstein   07:40, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Review block of User:DreamGuy
See User talk:DreamGuy. Normally, I dismiss such unblock requests out of hand as themselves rediculous, however, I feel as though he has a point here. There does appear to be a clear consensus established at the talk page via several days of consensus building discussions, including an RFC. The other editor blocked in the dispute is the only one who seems to dispute the inclusion of the material, and does seem to be clearly editing in contravention of an otherwise established consensus. Could you perhaps review this block in more detail, and see what you think? Thanks. --Jayron32. talk . contribs 04:27, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree. He's emailed me requesting an unblock, and I think that he edits are covered by 3RR exceptions and would like to see him unblocked. dougweller (talk) 06:12, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi Sandstein, after review the case there appears to be rather strong consensus to unblock, so I have done so. Please do not take this as an act of wheel warring, and by no means do I feel this block was abusive or improper just not needed. (We all make mistakes). If you have an issue, feel free to leave a message on my talk page, or shoot me an email. Cheers, Tiptoety  talk 06:21, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Noted, but I disagree. Reverting someone else while screaming at him is, in my eyes, the "confrontative use of reverts" that we commonly describe as edit warring.  Sandstein   07:44, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Agreed, and that was portrayed to DreamGuy. But I am not sure a block was the correct course of action. Maybe a warning? Tiptoety  talk 22:20, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Others would have given a warning, possibly. For my part, I seldom issue warnings for something the user in question has already been blocked for several times. At any rate, I am very surprised that several administrators appear to condone his actions because his reverts were made in accordance with a perceived consensus (I've not really looked at the actual content being warred over.) I had thought it to be common knowledge that edit warring is not the way to go about enforcing consensus. Moreover, the other principal edit warrior was also blocked (and I declined his unblock request). I'll not continue to argue over this unblock, which I continue to believe was ill-advised, but I don't think that I'll act differently in a similar situation.  Sandstein   22:37, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Block of Iross1000
Hi Sandstein,

with regard to the block of Iross1000, I would like to direct your attention to the following discussion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Sri_Lanka_Reconciliation#Indef_Block_of_Iross1000. WikiProject_Sri_Lanka_Reconciliation is used to dealing with disruptive editing in this area, and Iross1000's behaviour is in the opinion of some regulars to that project not worth a block. Since he is a newbie, probably from Sri Lanka, I feel that he might not really understand the procedure to appeal a block, which is why I would like to ask you to review the block in the light of the arguments given in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Sri_Lanka_Reconciliation#Indef_Block_of_Iross1000

Regards Jasy jatere (talk) 17:10, 23 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks. An admin will review his most recent request shortly. But the admin you should be talking to is, who issued the block. He's the one to decide whether it'll be lifted.  Sandstein   18:03, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings
Sandstein, my very best wishes for the festive season stay safe and talk to you in 2009.-- VS  talk 12:05, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks!  Sandstein   12:10, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * ... and to you too, of course.  Sandstein   12:10, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Haefely emc
Dear Sandstein, Regarding the article for Deletion: haefely emc.

I don't understand your comment that "no sources are found in the article or on Google to prove that this is a notable company", what exactly should pop up when you do a search because there are hundreds of articles and information that pops up when you do a Google search, could you please clarify? Do you need some further references from us? (please help us understand). The reason we want an article about our company, is because there is a list existing in the "Electromagnetic Compatibility" article with the main EMC Test equipment manufacturers, a few of which are only small players in the "test" manufacturing business. We proceeded to enter our name in the list, and we wanted to add an article about our company. Understanding that Wikipedia is not used as a promotional tool, we understood that we should just enter some basic info about our company, what we do, our history, information about EMC with links to other articles in Wikipedia, and a link to our page if someone wants to find out more. We actually used the Rohde and Schwarz article (listed also in the manufacturer list, this is a company we also partner with) as a guideline on how the article should look like, and we don't see any difference. We want to make the changes that are necessary to keep an article on our company in Wikipedia, but we are finding difficult to figure out what exactly needs to be changed. We are finding it difficult to figure out what exactly needs to be changed, as the guidelines on what shouldn't be included and what should be included is complicated. Who can help us on what needs to be changed? Thanks, martin —Preceding unsigned comment added by Martinyiap (talk • contribs) 10:12, 25 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi. There are several problems with :
 * It was written on behalf of its subject. Our conflicts of interest guideline strongly discourages companies writing articles about themselves.
 * It does not reference reliable published third-party sources for its content. That's a problem because:
 * The lack of such references makes the article unverifiable as defined by our policy WP:V.
 * The lack of such references makes us unable to determine whether the company is notable enough for inclusion in Wikipedia, as described in our guideline WP:ORG.
 * If these problems are addressed before the ongoing deletion discussion, Articles for deletion/Haefely emc, concludes in about five days, it ma be kept. I advise you, however, to wait for someone else to write an article about your company instead of doing it yourself. Your company may help Wikipedia editors to do so by reporting substantial press coverage about your company on your website (which will help to establish notability) and by publishing content on your website under the CC-BY-SA licence, which will allow it to be reused on Wikipedia.  Sandstein   10:25, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Haefely emc
We have made several changes to the article "haefely EMC". Please let us know if it is ok now. We appreciate any support and advise from your side to help us keep an article about us on Wikipedia. We are new at this and we are doing our best to follow the wikipedia article writing rules. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Martinyiap (talk • contribs) 10:30, 25 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Sorry, these changes do not address the problems outlined above. No reliable sources have been added, and the article is still written by a company representative.  Sandstein   10:35, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Angels Heap
Angels Heap is a single and I think is notable enough to have an article. If you think it is badly written re-write it rather than simply redirecting it to Finn! This is the same template as I used for Suffer Never and you have no problem with THAT! Will (talk) 14:37, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I do have a problem with that, too, but frankly I don't care much. If you want to write articles about songs, please first check whether they meet WP:N and whether there's actually something to say about them. An article that just says "this is a song from album X" isn't really worth creating. Also, "their" is spelled "their", not "there".  Sandstein   14:40, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Header inserted here
You put a comment on the bottom of my talk page which I am responding to. I genuinely don't understand why you put that comment there, could you please explain to me what you believe is problematic about the edits I made? You said that the edits I made to the Bat, Generation, and Dream articles bordered on vandalism, but I have no idea wht would give you that impression. I believe that the facts I used in those edits were correct, and reflect common usage. The facts for the Bat and Dream page I found on this web page: http://www.davesdaily.com/interesting/40-interesting-facts.htm. I have no reason to believe that the facts on this page are innacurate. I think interesting but relatively unknown facts like this are helpful contributions to Wikipedia articles. The edit I made on the Generation page reflect what I believe to be a consensus about these generational demarcations. Even if I accidntally got one of these facts wrong, I was certainly acting in good faith. I just checked on Wikipedia's vandalism article and it says: "Any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism". I want to continue to be a helpful editor on Wikipedia, so if I am somehow inncorrectly editing, please tell me specifically what I am doing that is incorrect. I don't believe that I have engaged in vandalism of any kind here, but just in case I have, I would like to know how, so I don't do it again. Thank you.TreadingWater (talk) 21:18, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Replying on your talk.  Sandstein   08:06, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Season's Greetings



 * Thanks, and to you as well!  Sandstein   15:44, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Badger Drink
May I ask why you deleted User talk:Badger Drink as G8? I'm slightly confused. Cheers, –Juliancolton <sup style="color:#666660;">Tropical <sup style="color:#666660;">Cyclone  16:26, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

G8 of Badger Drink's talk
Seriously, what? G8 doesn't even apply! <font face="Trebuchet MS">&mdash; <font color="#5A3696">neuro <font color="#5A3696">(talk) 16:27, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
 * That was a misconfiguration of WP:TW. It also deleted the talk page after I deleted User:Badger Drink per G3.  Sandstein   16:35, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay then, although I might add that blaming the software does not exempt you from policy. Have a nice day! :) <font face="Trebuchet MS">&mdash; <font color="#5A3696">neuro <font color="#5A3696">(talk) 16:38, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I never claimed it did, of course; it was a mistake.  Sandstein   16:41, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I wonder if my previous comment (16:38) may have came across as a little too harsh. If so, sorry, it was only intended to be a reminder, not a slap on the wrist. <font face="Trebuchet MS">&mdash; <font color="#5A3696">neuro <font color="#5A3696">(talk) 17:05, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Noted; thanks.  Sandstein   17:46, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

ISMB
Sorry about the ISMB apparent copyright violation.

I did have permission from ISCB to put text from the ISCB web site into Wikipedia, but the ISCB website admistrators have not updated the copyright notices for the "press-release" material yet.

I should have put the stub under the full title "International Society for Computational Biology" anyway. I'm putting an edited stub there (one that shouldn't trigger any copyright problems).

The ISCB is starting a project to add content to Wikipedia about our conferences, our prize winners, and other subjects of interest to our members. Much of this material is currently on the iscb.org website, and we'd like to get it into Wikipedia without triggering speedy deletion. Any suggestions?

Kevin k (talk) 17:15, 27 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi. To begin with, we strongly recommend that organizations do not write about themselves on Wikipedia; see WP:COI. Accounts that are determined to be dedicated solely to promoting someone or something, even a non-profit organization, may be blocked from editing. Articles should also contain references to third party publications to prove that their subject is notable.
 * To allow others to use the content of your website in Wikipedia, please add a disclaimer to the website stating that the content is licenced under the CC-BY or CC-BY-SA licence (a permission just for reuse on Wikipedia is not enough because we only accept freely licenced content; see WP:C.). The website must then be cited as a source in the article, with reference to its copyleft status. We particularly appreciate high-quality images or other media suitable for illustrating encyclopedic topics. Thanks!  Sandstein   17:45, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, we've got a group of bioinformatics researchers who want to improve the bioinformatics content of wikipedia, including adding entries for the main bioinformatics organizations, some of the notable bioinformaticians, conferences, and journals, as well as improving some of the pages on bioinformatics topics. For example, we want to put up or edit bios for the annual winners for the ISCB Senior Scientist and Overton Prize awards (several of them already have Wikipedia entries, though not all mention these prizes). I believe that the intended edits do not trigger any conflicts of interest.

Question: does the license used by PLoS meet Wikipedia standards? Some of the material we want to post has previously appeared in PLoS Computational Biology articles---it would save time if some of that could be reused without extensive rewrites.

Kevin k (talk) 18:44, 27 December 2008 (UTC)


 * According to our article on the Public Library of Science, they use the CC-BY licence, so that would be OK. Wikipedia uses a slightly different licence, the GFDL, but I believe that should not be an obstacle in practice, especially as Wikipedia will probably soon chance to CC.
 * Note, though, that scientific papers may need changes (apart from wikicode formatting etc.) before being imported: Wikipedia articles (or at least their lead sections) should be written at a level accessible to the educated layman, which may not be the case with scientific papers.  Sandstein   19:06, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

SlangSlang
Did you read my talk page? I've noticed you've yet to delete the entries for other dictionaries found under slang. I was curious what makes those articles different?? Snowmaninthesun (talk) 18:32, 27 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Please provide a link to the article at issue; see the box at the top.  Sandstein   18:35, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Zionandbabylon
Hi there, I am fountainsofwoodvillewake. Recently you blocked my other account Zionandbabylon, stating "vandalism" as a reason. I would appreciate it if you could unblock zionandbabylon, along with my other accounts: samthemaniloveut, alowciousbeaudelay and marcustheostrichfamer. Thankyou

Fountainsofwoodvillewake (talk) 20:12, 27 December 2008 (UTC)'Italic text


 * Please request unblock with your principal account. See WP:GAB.  Sandstein   20:58, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Rouge adminning
First Lankiveil, now you? When will the rougery end? Badger Drink (talk) 04:02, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Could you please explain more fully...
You deleted the article Rafiq Bin Bashir Bin Jalud Al Hami early. 5 x 24 hours is the rule. I was working on my opinion. Geo Swan (talk) 10:10, 28 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for notifying me. I have undone the closure.  Sandstein   10:22, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you!!
Thank you for reinstating my editing privileges! This marks the end of a sporadic but lengthy battle. Thanks! (tobobo (talk) 10:16, 28 December 2008 (UTC))

Ettore Pozzoli
Hello Sendstein. I have re edited the page Ettore Pozzoli changing the text according to the indication that came out after you saw it. The text I used was the only one in english that I had found. Anyway, I hope that now it is acceptable by Wiki. Thanks. --Vpower1962 (talk) 13:07, 28 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi. Ettore Pozzoli doesn't seem to be a copyright violation now, so it's all right.  Sandstein   13:19, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

db-r3
Hi. I found these as part of a pattern of strange redirects from bizarre titles. There is no CSD criterion per se for these (since they were not recently created) however I would have expected you to use your admin discretion which you have been entrusted with. Consider whether these redirects serve any value whatsoever or whether they are simply placed as an act of vandalism or mischief. I rest my case. Zunaid 23:20, 27 December 2008 (UTC)


 * If they're not subject to a CSD, there's no discretion to exercise and you are generating unnecessary work for admins. Please use WP:RFD if you think these redirects are useless.  Sandstein   08:12, 28 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Wow, talk about an abrupt response. You could have instead looked at the merits of these redirects rather than the mere technicality that they weren't found out recently enough after their creation. It just means that they were missed by RC Patrol on creation and that they've been sitting undetected for far too long. Imagine we had that attitude to other types of vandalism too? Nonetheless I'm not here to argue, you may wish to comment on the rfd's at Redirects for discussion/Log/2008 December 28. Zunaid 06:38, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Church of the Transfiguration
Hello! If you have the time please take a look at my nominee for DYK, the Church of the Transfiguration. Thank you! --Fipplet (talk) 20:47, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

DYK credits not given
Hello! The previous slate of DYK candidates from today, including one that included my article A Daughter of the Congo, did not receive DYK notices around 14:51. However, the articles did receive templates -- I assume there is a bot problem. Can you please send out DYK notices to the editors whose work was honoured earlier today? Thanks. Ecoleetage (talk) 21:05, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I wouldn't know how to do so, or which articles are concerned. I don't think that I have had any involvement with the DYK processing of A Daughter of the Congo.   Sandstein   21:14, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The articles involved are from 20:55, 28 December 2008 -- all are listed in the archive. I am not certain who is responsible for this -- User:Dravecky put the list together, but I am not certain whether this is his bailiwick (he has not been online for several hours -- I only contacted since you appear to be the only DYK-related admin online at the moment). Thanks. Ecoleetage (talk) 21:34, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

inre |my DYK entry|my DYK entry}}
The article on Daniel St. Pierre has now gone through some substative changes and additional sources have been added. I would ask you to consider either removing the notability tag you have placed on it or send it immediately to AfD so this matter can be resolved.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 01:24, 29 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Soemone seems to have removed the tag already.  Sandstein   07:41, 29 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes. I noticed. It happened a few minutes after I posted a response update at the DYK page and my notice above. There are a few admins and project co-ordinators who keep a watch-eye on my work and I appreciate their proactive assistances. However, you have ensured that I will never do a DYK submission ever again. Happy Holidays. See you at the AfD.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 16:21, 29 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Your editing intentions are none of my business, but I think it's your loss if you take disagreements with respect to the application of our guidelines that seriously. I don't intend to AfD the article; the notability tag has served its purpose in that the notablility of the subject is now a bit clearer.  Sandstein   17:01, 29 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you for acknowledging the improvements. However, and with respects, I'll stick to the occasional article and continued rescuing and forego any further considertaions of DYK submissions. Best regards.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 17:42, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Email ping
Hi there Sandstein, I've just emailed you - it's nothing important, but it'd be great if you could have a read when you've got a spare minute. Regards, -- Ryan Postlethwaite See the mess I've created or let's have banter 19:23, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Indefblock notice on B'command
Hiya. I was wondering if per Nixeagle the indefblock notice could be left off for now? It's sort of inflaming the situation, and I'm trying to help BC calm down a bit and find a way to return productively. I don't want to just revert because I don't want to start an editwar. // roux  <span style="border:1px solid #00009C;-moz-border-radius-topright:10px;-moz-border-radius-bottomleft:10px;padding:0px 7px;font-size:30%;">  22:41, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Likewise, this was previously done - which drew this response from me. While consensus seems to be heading in the indef block direction at the moment, it may be acts like this that may reverse that position. I would prefer if you were to undo the edit. Thanks. LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:53, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem; done.  Sandstein   22:56, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:57, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you. // roux  <span style="border:1px solid #355E3B;-moz-border-radius-topright:10px;-moz-border-radius-bottomleft:10px;padding:0px 7px;font-size:30%;">  23:01, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Prosecco
Impressive work! :) AgneCheese/Wine 05:35, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks!  Sandstein   07:01, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Please add back the Miss Pakistan World document. Here are sites for proof:
http://misspakistanworld.com/ http://misspakistanworldofficial.blogspot.com/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.253.210.90 (talk) 08:57, 30 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Please provide a link to the article at issue; see the box at the top.  Sandstein   09:06, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

found the article... miss pakistan world
http://deletionpedia.dbatley.com/w/index.php?title=Miss_Pakistan_World_(deleted_17_Jun_2008_at_18:39)

http://deletionpedia.dbatley.com/w/index.php?title=Sonia_Ahmed

(Sonisona (talk) 09:29, 30 December 2008 (UTC))


 * Please see my request above.  Sandstein   10:18, 30 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I guess you mean . The above links do not address the cause of its deletion, which is nonnotability, as determined at Articles for deletion/Miss Pakistan World. The request for restoration is declined.  Sandstein   10:20, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Miss Pakistan World cause for deletion
Problem with the article was the people who were writing it started adding only the controversies.. and not the idea and the idea of the event. they did not want anything with a blalance besides saying that its controversial. So it was deleted... and no one has written an article on it with a balanced note. (Sonisona (talk) 10:56, 31 December 2008 (UTC)).


 * That also does not address the issue of its notability.  Sandstein   12:04, 31 December 2008 (UTC)