User talk:TimeOfDei/Archive 5

MultiOTP PHP open source class speedy deletion nomination
Hello TimeOfDei and thank you for your contributions to WP. I'm pretty a novice about the edition of articles on Wikipedia and I have followed your advise and rewrited the article in a more encyclopedic way and by checking any links to be sure that none of them promote directly a commmercial products. I checked several other articles about the same topics and I didn't see any structure difference. Any comments welcome, I'm always interested about improving my articles in Wikipedia. Strong authentication is a hot topic, and I'm pretty sure that an open source class providing these features in a well known language like PHP is good to be known from the community.

Regards, --Hilitec (talk) 15:01, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Rugged computers links
Hi TimeOfDei,

No worries! Good call on that one actually. I think the first article referenced is probably sufficient to validate the statement.

Could use your help actually, if you're interested. A few of the references are broken & need replacing. Found this more neutral article on the same site that might be a better choice for reference 4: http://buytough.com/military-laptops-buying-guide.asp

Or maybe we should just link to something like Panasonic? http://www.panasonic.com/business-solutions/government-defense-solutions.asp

Ref 6 & 7 also need to be re-sourced or replaced.

Any help is appreciated, thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by SimpleSamster (talk • contribs) 20:57, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Buytough seems to have a history of spamming that page (see its talk page archives), and that specific link is still attempting to funnel people into their sales, so it needs to be avoided. Relying on panasonic as the manufacturer is a little better, but still problematic. What we really need are news sources or trade magazines that don't derive revenue from selling these devices. - TimeOfDei (talk) 10:48, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Agreed, thanks for the feedback. The page could definitely use some updating, and there's still some promotional stuff that needs to come off of there. Might be helpful to get some more official or third-party references in there if possible. Some of the language without citations can probably be removed.

This page is tricky because there's not a lot of "official" stuff out there on Toughbooks, & most of the noise around it seems to come from various niche forums. Wondering if it might be worthwhile to carefully pick & choose the most non-solicitous content from a couple of the more official resellers. Open to other ideas, though.

Let me know if you find any other resources for this page. I'll keep digging for better/more up-to-date info in the meantime. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SimpleSamster (talk • contribs) 15:58, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

about Frankenstein novels
why don't you take a look at this article from the American Library Association's Readers Advisory

http://www.ebscohost.com/novelist/novelist-special/horror-then-and-now

Noticed which book they paired with Shelley's Frankenstein? It wasn't Ackroyd's Casebook of Victor Frankenstein but my book which you refused to add as a derivative Frankenstein novels. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DaveZeltserman (talk • contribs)


 * I'm happy your promotional efforts are bearing more fruit elsewhere, it sounds like a good book. - TimeOfDei (talk) 10:48, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

That wasn't through any promotional efforts on my part, and I seriously doubt it got into that article because of anything my publisher did. It had nothing to do with any sort of promotional effort on my part to get Monster added to Wikipedia's Frankenstein page, because really, how many people are really going to find it there? The only reason I cared about getting it there was because it belongs up there. No other reason. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DaveZeltserman (talk • contribs) 21:44, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Simulation / Simulation in Education / Virtual Coachers
Hi TimeOfDei, I am new in trying to help to enrich the Wikipedia content but my first contribution was fully undo by you and I would like to understand what I made wrong. May you help me to understand? Thank you --Jpardi (talk) 15:54, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Declined PROD
Hello, TimeOfDei. You proposed Uranium Backup for deletion. I have had to decline the proposal, as a previous PROD was declined in July 2009, and, as you no doubt know, that makes the article ineligible for another PROD. However, you may well stand a good chance of seeing the article deleted if you take it to AfD. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:41, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Paymenex
Some time ago you nominated Paymenex for speedy deletion as spam:. I deleted the article, but, following representations from its author, I restored and userfied it. My feeling is that it is now much improved, and I have returned it to article space. However, I am just letting you know, so that if you like you can check and see whether you still think it should be deleted. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:38, 8 October 2013 (UTC)