User talk:TheRingess/Archive 4

Can non-fiction travel have a spoiler?
I note that you're re-added a spoiler warning for Yak Butter Blues: A Tibetan Trek of Faith which seems unnecessary - surely the description of the book merely expands on the title and doesn't include any surpises.--JBellis 17:38, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

thanks
Thanks for the welcome note. -David (Dchudz 17:58, 1 August 2006 (UTC))

Darian Weiss
I wrote the article. What do you mean that it is fan pov??? show me where? I've simply pointed out the stuff the kid has done. You want me to minimize them? He does ice skate professionally. He has skated with Olympic champions. What's so wrong about including that?? TripleH1976 03:48, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Hey change it back if you want.TheRingess 03:49, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Copyrights
Please look at Copyright problems. It states that the article may be reverted back to the non-copyright version. Now, this edit added the copyright paragraph but the rest of the article is not a copyright violation. I searched for it the first time I saw (and deleted) the article. You need to revert your copyright tag. Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 06:11, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'm sorry if the above seemed a bit snappish. I was at work and just getting ready to leave. I knew I wouldn't be back for several hours and wanted to try and get it fixed. Thanks again. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 15:41, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

"500 words or less"
For your information, "non-notable publication" isn't covered by Criteria for speedy deletion so I've changed it to a Proposed deletion and informed the original author. Feel free to send it to Articles for deletion instead. Thanks. --  Netsnipe  ►  07:54, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Siddha Yoga
Or "All I wanted to do was chant the Guru Gita", but they kept trying to sell me their guru? Those guys? ;-) &mdash;Hanuman Das 01:32, 22 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry. I like to chant the Guru Gita. I went to an SYF center for a while because they chant the Guru Gita (which says you need do nothing else). Most Hindus respect that you have your own Guru. If I joined a group whose Guru was, say, Neem Karoli Baba, they would be happy to have me chant the Guru Gita with them. The Siddha Yoga folk kept trying to sell me satellite video teachings from Guru Maya at, I think, $300 a pop. It got too annoying: they made it clear you were not "with the program". In other words, I might not be neutral. :-) &mdash;Hanuman Das 01:46, 22 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Actually, I did put it on my watch list, so I'll get some idea what's going on and whether I want to jump in. &mdash;Hanuman Das 01:48, 22 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Fair enough. Sorry to hear about your experience.  Actually the editor I mentioned seems to feel that I am being unduly pro-SY (my words not theirs), so they might welcome a perspective from someone who is not on "the SY side" (my words not theirs).  I think that is about all I want to say.  Thanks again.

Articles for deletion/Marvin Kwitko
I was still finishing up my nomination when you posted it. Thanks for listing it at AfD, I removed your note though. Take care, trialsanderrors 08:27, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Marvin Kwitko
Hey there. You nominated one of my articles for deletion about 20 minutes ago. At the time I had just written a couple of lines real quick to get a look at how the page editor works. I was wondering if maybe you could go take another look at it now that I've actually posted the full biography. I have yet to put all my references up, but i assure you that the facts are verifiable. I'd really appreciate it, thanks. --Beuh pudding 09:16, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
 * That was me who nominated the article. TheRingess just helped with setting it up. ~ trialsanderrors 09:17, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Shiva_Sutras_of_Vasugupta
Hello, TheRingess,

That copyrighted material was added to wikipedia by the holder of the copyright.Saiva suj 17:59, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

AVB
Hmm, it shoulda caught the spammer in the first place. Will take a look at the filter there - thanks for the heads up -- Tawker 04:32, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

An Actor's Nightmare
It would be nice if people were nice and tried to help each other out instead of mean and trying to wipe people off of Wikipedia. :) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Stewart08 (talk • contribs).


 * Nobody is attempting to "wipe people off" Wikipedia. And nobody has been less than nice to you.  There are well established criteria for why articles might or might not qualify for inclusion in Wikipedia.  One good starting point for understanding those criteria is WP:BIO.TheRingess 23:27, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

I read the guidelines and see nothing that excludes Jerome Wetzel from having an entry. In fact, search Columbus and Madison County newspapers, and you will find reviews of his work, which I believe qualifies him for an entry, per the 'guidelines' referring to multiple reviews of an author's work. --JMSWDLY 23:40, 18 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I just reread the guidelines and still don't see how the article passes. I'm not convinced that reviews in county newspapers count.  It would probably need to be a national newspaper.  However, I could be wrong.  There is a discussion going on right now regarding both articles.  You might wish to include links to those reviews so that the participants in the discussion can evaluate them to determine whether or not the article should remain. TheRingess 23:44, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Tantras
Hello,

I have only just read the article on Tantra and am very much disgusted the way that this philosophy is being portrayed. As I noticed that you are one of the editors of that article, I would greatly appreciate it if you could share some ideas of how the article should look.

Saiva suj 19:36, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Mediation
Thanks for helping me mediate the GNU case. -- Selmo  (talk) 22:40, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome. TheRingess 22:54, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Numbers & Professions
I've added the "prod" template to the article Numbers & Professions, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree with the notice, discuss the issues at Talk:Numbers & Professions. You may remove the deletion notice, and the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached, or if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria. TheRingess 15:55, 1 December 2006 (UTC).
 * Fine. Do as you wish as I have not interest in the matter though you shall find many books on the subject. Thank you for your message. --Bhadani 16:39, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 * By the way, presently I do not have much time to waste on what you may have written as I am sure that you must have done to the best of your abilities. --Bhadani 16:42, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Please do not be upset, I really did not write the above, the above was the result of a standard temple. TheRingess 16:44, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

User:Bhadani/Contributions
I would enciourage you to please recommend some more for deletion and merger as many of them may be fit for deletion in your view. Regards. --Bhadani 17:02, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Please delete and be happy --Bhadani 17:16, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I still think that you are taking this too personally. I only encountered this article while searching Wikipedia articles that use too much passive voice.  I have no desire to go over your contributions and state opinions on all of them.  Please do not continue this discussion here.TheRingess 17:29, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Tantra
OK, I am assuming good faith, but still think that if a paragraph is cited, it should not be removed (or changed for that matter) by someone who hasn't checked the source. Unless it is completely off-topic or the source itself is questionable, that is. :-) -999 (Talk) 17:33, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Good point, I will keep that in mind in the future.TheRingess 17:34, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Your "+ who" templates in Mari (goddess) article
What's the meaning of adding such templates when we are talking of legends? "It is said" can only refer to the people who orally transmitted those legends. In this case it is not a weasel word but a correct usage. See the bibliography for sources anyhow. --Sugaar 04:48, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * My bad.TheRingess 05:01, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Nath
Thanks for the B-rating (I started the article and I think most of it is still my work). What's it need to get to A? &mdash;Hanuman Das 01:35, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks. I'm sure there are plenty more detail which could be added to it, but I mostly used pretty general sources... &mdash;Hanuman Das 02:04, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Prod for Javed Iqbal (serial killer)
I have removed the prod tag that you placed at the article. I believe that the subject satisfies WP:Notability, being the most notorious killer in Pakistan's history. He admitted and was convicted on the charges of killing about 100 people. voldemortuet 09:11, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Gartner
Gartner had previously survived prod, so I've moved it to AfD. NickelShoe (Talk) 04:40, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
 * This article has several references now. Please see Gartner and Articles for deletion/Gartner. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 05:01, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Stop with the PRODs!
Your PRODing of StarFire led me to do a little poking about and I am finding that a large number of your edits are PRODs or similar warnings. In every example I looked at you left boilerplate text as an "explanation", thereby explaining nothing. That's very bad form, all tags should be accompanied with at least some discussion, and a link to policy pages that you had no hand in creating does not suffice. Further, in all of the examples I looked at the PROD notice was highly suspect (with the exception of Instance, which should be speedy deleted not proded, and I will), and many of the articles seemed more than notable, and few, if any, were ad-like. PRODing should be considered a "nuclear" option. It results in deletes due to inaction, which is unfair to everyone. I, for instance, was on holiday when you PRODed StarFire. There was a slim chance that the article would be deleted simply because I was having fun skiing. That helps no-one, least of all the wikipedia readers.

To the receiver, an unclear PROD can easily be mistaken for something very much like a smack in the face. Combining the potential for upsetting people and the delete-on-inaction, PROD should therefore be used only in the very most obvious cases. None of the examples I can find here fall into this category. And as I have seen in the past, this is resulting in a series of messages from various authors here on this page. To date they have been fairly friendly, but I think this is due largely to luck. If you would like to see what can happen if you PROD the wrong article, I would be happy to send you a few links.

I would highly recommend that you use PROD as a last resort only. There are more appropriate tags for all of the examples here, please use them.

Maury 17:04, 16 December 2006 (UTC)