User talk:TParis/Archive 1

Fair use rationale for Image:The Faerie Path.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:The Faerie Path.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 21:33, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Done --TParis00ap (talk) 18:22, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Tania (The Faerie Path)
An article that you have been involved in editing, Tania (The Faerie Path), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Tania (The Faerie Path). Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Somno (talk) 05:50, 16 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi, regarding your question on the AFD page for Tania, if you would like to create a page for the author, you need to find independent, third-party sources that discuss his life and work, not obtain the information from him directly. Info added to Wikipedia needs to be verifiable, and if he is notable, then there will be numerous references either online, or in newspapers, magazines, etc. Biographies must also meet the Biographies of living persons policy.


 * Wikipedia has a lot of policies and guidelines and it can be a bit confusing - feel free to ask me if you have any questions. Hope that helps, Somno (talk) 07:51, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Your Articles
Hey, I read your articles that are currently for deletion and commented on the deletion page. I however, agree that the information should be saved if possible. Perhaps think about merging the information from your articles into an article about the book itself, and make sure it is well sourced. I do not believe those articles should stay outside of the book, though, as they do not have any nontrivial third party coverage. If you have any more questions please ask. --Banime (talk) 00:47, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:The Lost Queen.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:The Lost Queen.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:29, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Re-The Flamel Forum
Hi Tp, thank you for the reconsidering of my request i am most grateful :) is there anything else i need to do now, or am i clear to just go ahead and post the link to the forum onto the related pages? thank you so much for your advice :)Zephfya (talk) 22:27, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Well I am not an administrator or anything, I dont make the rules. But if you put it back, I won't edit it out anymore.--TParis00ap (talk) 03:12, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you tp :) Zephfya (talk) 00:56, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

The wyrds
Thanks for your note, and I'm happy to say that I think I know the answer. There are often multiple categories under which an article can be tagged for speedy deletion, but in this case I think db-music would have been most appropriate. (I don't use the numerical designations for speedy rationales as I find they confuse people.) I note in the body of the deleted article that there was a complete lack of any reliable sources and that the assertions within the article didn't meet the requirements of WP:MUSIC, which is usually sufficient for me to agree to deletion. If there's something further with which I can be of assistance, don't hesitate to ask. Accounting4Taste: talk 21:33, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * BTW, someone else had already nominated it as an A-7 and I agreed. As above, I prefer to use the written designations because they provide a more accurate comment in the associated edit summary.  Accounting4Taste: talk 21:35, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Welcome
Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! ttonyb1 (talk) 17:51, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Gianluca Vialli
Thanks for your note. It's not usually done to delete things from other people's talk pages, even if it's your own note; just leave another note to say, "It's been handled," or select the note and use the "strikethrough" tool to indicate your desire to undo your request. There is not much I can do; although it seems likely that the IP number is devoted entirely to vandalism, I am strongly discouraged from blocking an IP number for longer than just a few days because it's possible that I could be blocking half a city accidentally. I note by looking at the edit history that four or five people are keeping an eye on this article and reverting all the vandalism pretty much instantly; my experience tells me that this individual will stop thinking it's amusing soon and move on, but I'd appreciate hearing if this keeps up for longer than a day. It seems galling, but the best thing to do might be to just keep your eye on the article and revert vandalism instantly without engaging the IP-user; if they can't get a rise out of anyone, they lose interest quickly. Accounting4Taste: talk 19:17, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I've also added the article to my own watchlist and will keep my eyes on it. Accounting4Taste: talk 19:19, 26 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Roger, sorry. I'll keep an eye on it.  He got suspended for a few days so hopefully he won't care then.--TParis00ap (talk) 19:19, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: Alexis Cohen
I'm real real hesitant to include auditioners no matter what, especially since we have finalists whose articles were deleted per AfD, including Alexis Grace. Alexis has arguably had more publicity and appearances than Alexis and yet she doesn't have an article. --User:Woohookitty Diamming fool! 15:23, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll still take it to an AfD since we have several other users editing the article besides you. I don't like to revert others anyway unless it's vandalism and this certainly isn't that. --User:Woohookitty Diamming fool! 15:30, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Alexis is generally notable for coining a catchphrase -- and for being astonishingly combustible in front of tens of millions! Since her "debut," countless Americans have shouted, "TAKE IT, TAKE IT, TAKE IT!!" The viral phenomenon also lends notability, although I do think brevity is called for here.zippogeek (talk) 17:46, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Looks like the article will be kept either by no consensus or a keep vote. Like I said, I'm an admin but consensus always rules. --User:Woohookitty Diamming fool! 14:52, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
Netalarm 01:34, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
Netalarm 13:04, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of James Lanman (musician)
I created this article yesterday and it was deleted before I could respond with a hangon tag! I was told that I should note the notability of the article before I publish it.

So I proved his notability today and made note of it at the top of my article, and it was deleted.

I again proved his notability, and you deleted it before discussing it with me? What is your problem? I'm FURIOUS with you people editing these articles. You want to get more contributions... you're not going to get anywhere if you keep deleting my work! I can't even look at history! HooshArted (talk) 00:42, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I recommended the speedy deletion of a blank article. I do not know what the article was the last time it was deleted but if you're having a problem you should try the WP:Articles_for_creation and explain your notability reasoning there.  Please dont class us as "you people" because everyone is just trying to think for the general good of the Encyclopedia.  Even though we may differ in views, we can share the spirit of this Encyclopedia.  Remember assume good faith.  No one is deleting your articles because of you, we are deleting them because in our opinion they do not meet notability.  Of course, ignore all rules and such, but this community works on consensus and you'll have to prove it to the consensus.  You can also try talking to one of the administrators who deleted your article or try creating the article and explain on the article's talk page why it is notable.  I really can't help you, what I saw was a blank article and so I nominated it for deletion.--TParis00ap (talk) 00:47, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

User_talk:67.80.106.105
Thanks for your note. I think we sort of touched on this once before, but I wanted to mention that the "rules" about talk pages are a mix of official policy and unofficial custom. The official policy stuff can be found at WP:User talk; essentially, it says that talk pages are used for discussing improvements to Wikipedia. The unofficial custom is that a user's talk page is 100% under his or her control -- so there is no basis for argument if they choose to blank it, as you noted for this user. Incidentally, I do get your point that the deleted material needs to be available. The part I think you may not have realized is that it IS available to everyone who knows how to access it, just as you did by calling up an older version. Nothing vanishes from Wikipedia forever unless it's under the most extraordinary circumstances. And if I'm leaving someone a warning like vandalism3, for instance, I would look at the page history because often vandals do delete warning messages from their talk pages; there's supposed to be a full set of warnings given before the person is blocked, and I generally check to make sure the person hasn't deleted earlier warnings in the series. There is something going on here, though, that is not obvious and I'm not certain of -- just that it looks like this individual is using his/her talk page to work on a draft of an article about a piece of fiction (book, TV programme, something) that I don't recognize. Ordinarily, according to the official rules, you can notice that someone is using his/her talk page in order to, say, post their resume or leave a draft of an article about a non-notable band in place so that it can have the colour of being on Wikipedia without actually being there. That stuff can be tagged for deletion (I'm sorry to say that I only think there's a different way of tagging it, but I'm not certain, since I've never done it; it should end up under "miscellany for deletion" rather than "articles for speedy deletion", because the second category is only used for articles in article-space). In this case, though, I would tend to assume good faith and think that the person is using his/her talk page as a kind of sandbox. If you feel like it, you can leave them a note and teach them how/point them to directions on how to create a sandbox page; that's about the limit of it, and frankly I wouldn't bother if I were you. I hope this helps. One thing you might want to consider -- and I don't mean that you have done anything wrong here in the slightest, just that I'm suggesting a course of action that may leave you happier to work on Wikipedia for a longer period of time -- is that, as a general rule, it's frequently a waste of time and mental effort to try to police other people's actions that don't affect the actual content of the 'pedia. I agree that people do behave badly here all the time, and if their behaviour hurts others, wastes administrative time or consumes large amounts of bandwidth, I'm on it like white on rice. This seems pretty innocuous, though. You are 100% right to notice these things, but I think you'll be happier in the long run if you only blow the whistle on really bad behaviour. Accounting4Taste: talk 18:38, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * However, I looked a little more deeply, trying to find out what work of fiction related to the content of the talk page. I note that the IP number has been blocked for two weeks and that his/her talk page is the only page that they can edit, due to a string of vandalism edits on "proper name" articles.  I have added the talk page to my watchlist and will take this further if it seems that the individual intends to continue vandalism; the article that I see has no reliable sources and will be deleted if it's posted in articlespace at the moment.  Thanks for bringing this to my attention; the activity is very suspicious.  Accounting4Taste: talk 18:50, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Sinusology
It isn't really a hoax, there is such a pamphlet, but I don't see a CSD category for that kind of stuff. I'd love to speedy delete it, but I don't think it qualifies. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 21:43, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

I never use PROD, it's just a waste of time since if anybody objects any time during the PROD period or any time in the future, we have to go through AfD anyway, and usually it's the creator of the article signing out and using an anonymous IP address to remove the tag. And since this article was written by Weichman, he's sure to remove the PROD, so let's just go on with AfD. I would have loved to use speedy delete. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 21:50, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

How INteresting. Think I'll MfD that User page. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 21:54, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Sinusology Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 22:01, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
Nja 247 06:41, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Sign Your Messages
Please remember to sign your posts with four tildes (~) when you leave a message on my talk page. Thanks! 207.15.63.4 (talk) 16:53, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Roger, sorry. Assumed the template would do so.--TParis00ap (talk) 16:54, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

 * Thank you for all the help that you gave me in getting This article off the of the ground. It was much appreciated and it probably saved this article from speedy deleted. If i have anymore questions I am glad that you will be able to help me. User:Smith Jones 19:45, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

To our newest Rollbacker
I have just granted you rollback rights because I believe you to be trustworthy, and because you have a history of reverting vandalism and have given in the past or are trusted in the future to give appropriate warnings. Please have a read over WP:ROLLBACK and remember that rollback is only for use against obvious vandalism. Please use it that way (it can be taken away by any admin at a moment's notice). You may want to consider adding Rollback and User rollback to your userpage. Any questions, please drop me a line. Best of luck and thanks for volunteering!  wadester 16  16:38, 19 August 2009 (UTC)