User talk:Tornado chaser/Archive August 2017

NXLog
Hi, please consider restoring the NXLog Wikipedia page! NXLog CE is a free, open source software, and while NXLog has an Enterprise version too, most of the information on the NXLOG wiki page was about the free NXLog CE version that is available for free to download on the NXLog website. It's a one of a kind log management software, even the free Community Edition version is highly scalable, and quite unique in its architecture that provides security, reliability and high performance. It's a software most in this industry should know exists and available for free, when searching for a free, high performance, scalable log management solution. So please consider restoring the NXLog wiki page that I had worked a lot and I did try to adhere to all Wikipedia guidelines. Or please advise on how to make it compliant - although I tried to do my best to adjust descriptions best fit to Wikipedia guidelines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robinersek (talk • contribs) 11:46, 1 August 2017 (UTC)


 * I did not delete the page, so I can't restore it, only an admin can delete pages or restore deleted pages, I did tag the page to alert admins to the fact that it met deletion criteria, I don't remember exactly what the page contained, but I remember it being written like an ad, even your comment on this page is written like an ad, it doesn't matter if the software is free, articles still must be written in a neutral way, see WP:NPOV. I also recommend reading WP:RS. If you want to create the page again be carful not to make the same mistakes that led to it being deleted, as it is possible an admin could block you for this, feel free to ask me any questions, but you may want to ask the admin who deleted the page. Tornado chaser (talk) 19:30, 1 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the answer. Problem is I spent over 6 hours writing up that article, tried to make it as informative as possible, and in less than 5 mins it was deleted in a snap. All my work... gone. Not happy about it at all, neither would you be, I bet! I can't even find the article anymore to get my draft back. I have no idea who to turn to, because the article is just gone without a trace. What should I do? How can I fix this article? I worked a lot on this and the guidelines do not really help me get the data back. Also, the guidelines refer to advertisements, while there wasn't anything offered... only details of a free software. I can't really put my head around what happened just yet, I seem to have lost all my work done yesterday. I am pretty upset about it right now. If you have any suggestions, please let me know. Thanks.


 * It looks to me like an admin has addressed the issue by putting the content of the deleted article on your userpage where you can make adjustments to it before putting it up as an article, If there are any other issues with this feel free to let me know. Also, even if nothing is being sold or offered, WP:NPOV still applies> As for your statements on the admin's talk page that "The guy who flagged (Tornado chaser) it doesn't even remember why he did it" and "Tornado chaser flagged the article for speed deletion without really taking the time looking into it" no, It looked like the whole thing was written to make the software sound good, when I said "I don't remember exactly what the page contained" I meant I don't remember exact words to quote to explain how it looked like an ad, not that I didn't look at the article or remember why I tagged it. Tornado chaser (talk) 02:17, 2 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your notes. I listed the features of both the CE and EE version of the software, and listed the changelog, which is nowhere to be found online and is a very useful resource to anyone who's interested in the development of the software + added some notes about the company, the history and the design & architecture. It was a quite thorough article without any false claims. But if there was any sentence that is not compliant with the WP:NPOV you should have just say so or delete it and save modification. Deleting all the work is pretty evil, since I worked over 6 hours to put all hard-to-find data together, and Wikipedia does not have any option on my side to get the article back, I can't even save my work for myself now. Even worse, the person who did delete the article User:discospinster does not reply to my questions. So if zou could just hjelp me with this: who actually has access to restore the article? Or can help me to get the full html code of it back, so I can write up another draft to try to be more compliant with WP:NPOV? Or do I need to start the whole process again from scratch?


 * User:discospinster has put the article here for you to work on. Tornado chaser (talk) 14:25, 2 August 2017 (UTC)


 * here is just a taste of what needs to be changed (don't worry, I did this in my sandbox so you still have your version) there are wayyyy too many adjectives that make the software sound good without adding facts, even removing the excess adjectives would not be enough to make the article NPOV compliant. Also, per WP:RS independent sources must be used, you can't have all (or most) of your references come from the nexlog website. Tornado chaser (talk) 14:52, 2 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks a lot for your help and pointing out the issues you found in the article! I will try to fix it, thanks for your help!


 * Your welcome and feel free to ask me if you have any questions, also, a couple more helpful tips, 1: don't forget to sign your posts, 2: it is a good idea not to use the word "evil" to describe another user or there actions. Tornado chaser (talk) 02:12, 3 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Ok, understood, thanks for all the advice. I fixed the article according to the advice and guidelines, do I need to submit, or would you please take a look and let me know if it's acceptable? Here's the link to the current version: Robinersek (talk) 15:21, 8 August 2017 (UTC)


 * I still think the article reads a bit like an ad, for example "satisfies the highest IT requirements of any organization and enables them to achieve regulatory compliance, easily identify security risks and policy breaches or analyze operational problems". Also ALL 6 references are primary sources, per WP:RS independant sourced are needed (eg not all from the nexlog website), also inline citations are good so the reader can see what facts are sourced from wich ref (ask me if you don't know how to do this). Tornado chaser (talk) 21:08, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Premature tagging
Please don't tag articles within seconds of creation as you did with Wanda Lesisz, particularly as an under construction tag had just been placed. I note also that you didn't read the article either as it already stated the subject was dead and you added a BLP unsourced tag. Give people a chance please. Philafrenzy (talk) 10:59, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Tornado chaser (cool name!). Funny, I was coming to your talk page for the same reason as the above note. I wanted to mention something I saw at the article James H. Flanagan. You tagged it as BLP PROD, an unsourced BLP. The author removed the tag pointing out that the person is dead. You restored it with the edit summary "Undid revision 794117273 by Murcielago (talk) the tag is about the fact that there are no references, it has nothing to do with wether he is dead or alive." Please review WP:BLPPROD before you do any more tagging. In fact it has everything to do with whether the person is dead or alive. The term BLP stands for "Biography of living person" and this tag can be applied only to living people (or in some cases very recently deceased people). It can be appropriate to tag articles about non-living people with regular PROD or various speedy tags, but not BLP PROD. Thanks for your work to improve Wikipedia; I just wanted to pass this one tip along. --MelanieN (talk) 01:57, 7 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks for pointing out my errors, I admit I should probably have deleted the unsourced tag when I saw the construction tag, (the construction tag went up literally 1 second after I added the unsourced tag). I am (and was at the time of tagging) quite aware that BLP stands for "Biography of living person" and this tag can be applied only to living people, the aforementioned cases were mistakes in which I meant to click the "unreferenced" tag, wow, I made quite a fool of myself with this edit summary "Undid revision 794117273 by Murcielago (talk) the tag is about the fact that there are no references, it has nothing to do with wether he is dead or alive."


 * P.S note that I did not propose deletion at either article, I tagged so other users would see it and add references. Tornado chaser (talk) 03:15, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
 * The tag went on after the under construction notice according to the page history and when she was already shown as dead. You don't seem to have quite absorbed the point that tagging articles with anything within seconds of creation is unlikely to be productive as articles generally tend to take a number of edits to expand to a form where they can be assessed. Why don't you try creating an article, I see you never have, as it might give you some useful insight into that part of the process? Philafrenzy (talk) 09:09, 7 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Like I said above, I knew she was dead, I meant to use an "unreferenced" tag. At Wanda Lesisz I clicked "tag" when no construction tag was visible, as a clicked the back button to leave the page the construction tag and my tag showed up, meaning the construction tag went up while I was reading the article but before I tagged it, pages don't constantly update, but only when the reload button in clicked, so I didn't see the construction tag as soon as it was added. I didn't realize that maintenance tags should not be added too soon, I will stop immediately tagging articles with anything, (except for G1 G3 G10 G11 and G12). Tornado chaser (talk) 14:27, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for this decision, Tornado chaser. I do think you need to get a little more familiar with the various tags - and maybe with the tool you are using to apply them. Case in point: you said above note that I did not propose deletion at either article, I tagged so other users would see it and add references. Maybe you MEANT to add an "unreferenced" tag ( Template:Unreferenced ), but what you actually added was a BLP PROD tag ( Template:Prod blp ), which IS a proposal for deletion. --MelanieN (talk) 15:08, 7 August 2017 (UTC)


 * These  are not BLP PRODs, they are BLP unsourced tags, they are erroneous tags, as "unreferenced" is more appropriate for dead people, but they don't propose deletion, so why do people keep saying I proposed deletion? Tornado chaser (talk) 16:46, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I apologize, I was mistaken. I found that page while patrolling speedy deletion nominations, and while removing the speedy tag I saw there was also an unsourced BLP tag, read it as a BLP PROD, and removed it. Sorry to bother you; you are correct. --MelanieN (talk) 17:06, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

New section
Whoops! Sorry! Thanks for letting me know however! IsaiahTSE (talk) 01:06, 8 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Your welcome. Tornado chaser (talk) 01:08, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Vaccine controversies.
TC,

it turns out I failed to notice the word "schedule", which clarifies the sentence's meaning. No need, therefore, to modify the article. Thanks for answering. :) 82.50.226.41 (talk) 20:24, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

Last Warning
Please stop your vandalism. If you continue your disruptive editing, you may be blocked entirely from editing Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xenios55 (talk • contribs) 16:55, 14 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Could you tell me what edit(s) of mine were vandalism? Tornado chaser (talk) 16:57, 14 August 2017 (UTC)


 * you deleted my page Xenios55 (talk) 16:58, 14 August 2017 (UTC)


 * I tagged your page for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy, an an admin then deleted it, this is not vandalism, what is not allowed is removing a speedy deletion tag from a page you created yourself, and editing while logged out to circumvent rules by looking like a separate person is strictly prohibited and can get you blocked from editing wikipedia. Tornado chaser (talk) 17:05, 14 August 2017 (UTC)


 * okay I'm sorry. can you help me get the page back? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xenios55 (talk • contribs) 17:34, 14 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Only an admin can un-delete the page, I am not an admin so I can't bring back the page, but you could ask the admin who deleted the page (I wouldn't recommend it, as the page did meet deletion criteria). The problem is that the it looked like you were just using the article to promote yourself, promotional articles are not allowed on wikipedia. Tornado chaser (talk) 17:57, 14 August 2017 (UTC)


 * I'm not Xenios Thrasyvoulou. Where is the promotion part so I can fix it? Xenios55 (talk) 19:07, 14 August 2017 (UTC)


 * I can't see the article, since it has been deleted and I'm not an admin, I wasn't the one who decided it was promotional either. I recommend either starting from scratch in your sandbox or asking the admin who deleted to restore the article to your sandbox (although he might think you'r a vandal, as he tried to delete one of your comments on my talk page) if you have an article in sandbox I could help you fix it before putting it up as an actual wikipedia page. Tornado chaser (talk) 19:22, 14 August 2017 (UTC)


 * You got heart, Tornado chaser. Thank you very much! :) Xenios55 (talk) 00:07, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Question
How do I archive pages? Tornado chaser (talk)


 * See Help:Archiving for a description of the various methods. Huon (talk) 19:59, 17 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I figured it out. Tornado chaser (talk) 20:39, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

User:PBS
They are my initials. It is only misleading if you are an American and you do not know that they are the initial of many notable things (see PBS (disambiguation)! In the UK the public broadcasting service is called the BBC, in Australia ABC, in Canada CBC and New Zealand TVNZ. -- PBS (talk) 06:44, 23 August 2017 (UTC)


 * This makes sense, now that you explained it I don't think there is anything wrong with your username. Tornado chaser (talk) 13:21, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello
Reverted changes on C Klein page. Your changes appear to be your personal opinion and removed relevant links and articles. Thank you for your contribution and please let us know if there are other changes we can make to the page that would help users understand the subject matter. Refrain from opinion based changes as this page has already been subject to vandalism. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Truthtellers19 (talk • contribs) 04:10, 25 August 2017 (UTC)


 * I removed material that either: had no source cited, made the article sound promotional, or was irrelevant and unencyclopedic. Saying "award winning" in the lead sounds promotional, but awards should be mentioned in the article, so I created an "awards" section, as this is a more typical way to describe awards in wikipedia. The part about how she was called one of the hottest seemed WP:UNDUE. If you think someone is making opinion-based edits, don't accuse them of vandalism, per WP:VD content disputes are not vandalism, but opinionated editing does violate WP:NPOV. Tornado chaser (talk) 13:08, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

New section
Well I used to work there. I have photos and videos of it so erm...Yeah thanks! JLames (talk) 17:00, 25 August 2017 (UTC)


 * You must cite a WP:RS for anything you add to wikipedia. Tornado chaser (talk) 17:28, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

New section 2
Hi Tornado Chaser, I'm wondering why you feel the need to hyperlink LSD in Michael Capponi's living person's biography. Don't you feel his early life section discusses drug use enough without highlighting the words? I don't think it's neutral at all. He did a lot of things in his early life. Made 10K while still in HS, raced BMX bikes, appeared in ads for Twix and Coca Cola, rented an apartment on his own, his father broke a world record swimming the english channel. Why can't any of those sentences stay? I feel there is undue weight to his past drug use. Check out the Amanda Bynes article, no mention of her past drug use, arrest, or crazy tweets to Drake. Settherecord (talk) 23:40, 25 August 2017 (UTC)


 * The hyperlink is to make it easy to get from one article to another, LSD is something that would normally be hyperlinked, but the link doesn't change the wording of the article, I suppose it makes the word more noticeable, but a link isn't really meant as emphasis. Also, I never said any of the other stuff had to go, that is also notable, all I did was restore the link. Tornado chaser (talk) 02:40, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Edit war warning
You have been informed of the discretionary sanctions on pseudoscience already. Anti-vaxxers are promoting pseudoscience.

Your recent editing history at Robert Sears (physician) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Jytdog (talk) 19:47, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

WP:AN/I
Not sure if it was done intentionally, but this kind of action is highly against WP:TPO. Alex ShihTalk 03:15, 28 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Oops I meant to put the new report under the old one, not the replace it. Tornado chaser (talk) 13:15, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Josh Gordon response
Gordon has been suspended since 2016 for violating the league drug policy. He is still listed on the Reserve/Suspended by commissioner list on the Browns' roster (at clevelandbrowns.com), and a cursory search through the news (via Google) shows that while he intends to apply for reinstatement in September, he is still suspended.


 * Ok sounds good. Tornado chaser (talk) 13:16, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:Infobox scientist
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:Infobox scientist. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 30 August 2017 (UTC)