User talk:Ttonyb1/2008 Archives

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! --Elonka 20:57, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style


 * Sure thing. I know you've been helping out, off and on, for awhile now, but I wanted to give you a formal welcome. :) BTW, please consider making a user page? Especially if you're helping out with vandal-fighting, because it helps separate the vandal-fighters (blue links) from the vandals (redlinks).  And if you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask! --Elonka 21:23, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Sketches of a Young Man Wandering
Brandy Lewis (talk) 05:22, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

On my talk page you made the suggestion: Be sure to follow up in the discussion section of the article explaining why it should not be deleted.

But the article has already been deleted. I would like it to be reposted. So who can do that?

Colin Furze
Hi, I have removed tag from Colin Furze because it claims notability as a world record holder. If you still believe its not suitable article then take it to AfD. Just a friendly note, cheers! - Unpopular Opinion (talk) 19:40, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Question
What do the colored numbers mean in a watchlist?

Llamaboy1203 (talk) 23:59, 4 November 2008 (UTC)llamaboy1203

Way to go...
with this edit.  Jock Boy    ( t / c ) Sign 00:21, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

G1 tagging
Hi there. Could I please remind you to tag pages for deletion under the G1 criteria only if they clearly meet the criteria? Thanks. - NuclearWarfare  contact me My work  20:22, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

New Page Patrolling
Hello. I noticed today that you were doing newpages patrolling but are not marking some of the pages you visit as patrolled. Though this is not mandatory in any way, and should not be done for all newpages, where appropriate it keeps your fellow patrollers from wasting time reviewing the same page multiple times. In any event, keep up the good work! - NuclearWarfare  contact me My work  20:23, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: Longevity
I did not intend for that to be an insult. I looked at your userpage and saw that it was recently made (November 7, 2008). I also saw the earliest date of your talk page wasn't far back, so I assumed, obviously in vain, that you were a new user. On top of that, I haven't really seen your edits around anywhere other than today. Anyways, what I was saying in the text was that I thought you were a new user and that I hoped that one day, you would become one who has a significant impact on whatever articles or groups of articles you would edit. Thanks for bringing this to my attention, and I apologize for the fact that you thought my comment had the potential to be insulting. That's my fault. B T C 05:43, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem. You are also a respectable person. :) B T C 20:13, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

David Kinkade
Hi I removed the speedy deletion tag you added since he is allegedly a musician who played in two notable bands. This is usually enough for the musician to be notable himself per WP:MUSIC, and is certainly far more than an "indication of importance" per WP:CSD. Cheers, Amalthea Talk 16:56, 11 November 2008 (UTC)


 * And thanks to you for doing newpage patrol. :) Just so you know, I also changed that tag at Apart from here from A3 no content to A9 album without assertion of significance and no artist article, since it did have some content with the short description and the image. If the band were notable then this sould have been turned into a useful stub. Also, the Sarah Westfield-Bell article mentions that she has been "featured in Time magazine". If she was really featured or just mentioned should be checked, but it is enough of an indication of significance to get it past A7. Please try to apply speedy deletion tags by the book, if in doubt you should always give it a chance and PROD it instead. I hope you don't mind that I had a quick look at some of your recent contributions. :) Cheers, Amalthea Talk 17:14, 11 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I apologize, I didn't notice that you added your search results to the talk page. I agree that it's a judgement call if this is a blatant hoax or not, or if those assertions of notability are blatantly incredible. I take back what I said above, and PRODded the article instead, no harm done in letting it stick around for a couple of days, since no reader will ever find it anyway. Cheers, Amalthea Talk 17:25, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Heathfield School, Wolverley
I removed the speedy tag you added to Heathfield School, Wolverley and added Infobox School to it. Even if an article about a high school (or a school which includes the high school years) starts in bad shape, it's generally best to tag it for improvement than to delete it outright. -- Eastmain (talk) 19:53, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Darci Warner
I am a new user and didn't post the whole biography before it was deleted. I'm assuming it's becuase it was too short and didn't go into description. Now it has the whole body. She is notable as her DVD ranks #1 on Amazon beating Martha Stewart and Paula Deen on a regular basis. She has been on several talk shows. JMSunnyToday (talk) 08:05, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Ed Gilbert Tower
The reason why I removed the speedy delete notice from Ed Gilbert Tower, is because the speedy delete criteria you applied stated "This page may meet Wikipedia’s criteria for speedy deletion as an article about a real person that does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject". The article isn't about a real person, but instead is about a building. As a result, I concluded the criteria didn't apply to this article. I do have major concerns regarding the article, though, and I have addressed them to the creator. Hope my removal hasn't caused any bad blood. Terrakyte (talk) 21:05, 23 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I couldn't have replaced it with "with a Speedy Deletion-notability tag", as the criteria for speedy deletion regarding notability does not cover buildings. It covers a "real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content", but not buildings.  Hope that clears things up, and thanks for the no bad blood.  Terrakyte (talk) 21:31, 23 November 2008 (UTC)


 * You're welcome. :)  Btw, if you didn't know, the article has been nominated for an AFD discussion, which can be found here: .  Terrakyte (talk)  —Preceding undated comment was added at 21:53, 23 November 2008 (UTC).

spammity...
Hello - an article that you had tagged as spam (Martin Randall Travel) is up for deletion review. Please feel free to join in and offer your opinion, if you would like. SpikeJones (talk) 13:51, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Everglazed
why do you want to delete the band Everglazed they actully have a song out and have big intentions of making it big! so please keep them up —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ericgo44 (talk • contribs) 04:20, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Please be careful
This contained a clear assertion of notability at the time you tagged it. Speedy deletion is only for clear cases – if there's any reasonable assertion of notability (which "winner of an international award" certainly is) than PROD or AFD are the way to go. – iride  scent  02:57, 30 November 2008 (UTC) 
 * Similarly with Mike Posner - before tagging under the A7 rationale, check the references provided, and do a quick google search. Thanks, -- Flewis (talk) 01:16, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Notenglish
Hey Tony, just a quick note, when tagging foreign language articles with notenglish, remember to follow the instructions on the tag and add them to Pages needing translation into English, they are more likely o get translated quickly there, or at least be determined if they are worth keeping--Jac16888 (talk) 22:13, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, will do. For some reason I was thinking that the category was auto tagged.  BTW - I notice that you are usually very quick about deleting my SP tagged articles...thanks for your support after I tag an article. ttonyb1 (talk) 22:54, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem. I used to think the same thing about the notenglish tag--Jac16888 (talk) 01:07, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Another thing, CSD:G4, aka repost of deleted material is for use on pages which were deleted by discussion, i.e. afd, tfd, mfd etc, speedies and prods don't count? Funnily enough that's another thing mistake I used to make--Jac16888 (talk) 02:17, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Funny you should mention that, I reread the tag and realized that was the case, but did not want to ping-pong the article. Thanks again for the "angel" advice.  It is much appreciated...it helps keep me honest.  8-) ttonyb1 (talk) 02:21, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Happy to help, you might also like these,, ,, template warnings for users removing speedy deletion tags from their own articles --Jac16888 (talk) 02:30, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I have started to use these sporadically, but I think getting a message directly from another user can sometimes have a more pronounced effect on vandals. I am only guessing here. ttonyb1 (talk) 02:36, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * That's a fair point although remember that you should be assuming good faith of people removing the tags, at least at first, they aren't necessarily vandalising. Its true that a personal message as opposed to a template can be helpful, but sometimes block warnings and capital letters can scare off potential good editors--Jac16888 (talk) 02:41, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Good point...I would like to think I don't always use the message unless there is some history of abuse by the author, but I will make sure I ask myself the question before using the talk page to convey my thoughts. ttonyb1 (talk) 02:44, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * You could also be pro-active about that and leave the appropriate notification message at the user's page, e.g.  --~ . Those will inform the editor about the nomination, ask them not to remove the speedy tag themselves, inform them about the  template, and even leave a  welcome message if it's the first message they ever recieve, to be more informative and less BITEy. That's what Twinkle and Huggle do. Cheers,  Amalthea  04:09, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Cool...ttonyb1 (talk) 05:28, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Dr. Krishnan
No problem, here. The article is being fleshed out slowly. I'm not sure it would stand a notability test, but someone else can take that on if they have issues. Thanks for being diligent! --digitalmischief (talk) 06:31, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

RE: Lipstick Prophets
Please do not delete my LP entry. I have put a lot of work into it & I will do everything I can to make it 'wiki-acceptable'. I'd really appreciate your corporation and help. I placed further details in the talk/discussion section of my article.Tallulah13 (talk) 05:18, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I only wish that Orange guy could have been as nice and polite as you. Seems he is out to get me now. :( It's times like this that I hate wikipedia. I worked SO hard on that entry today. Tallulah13 (talk) 05:49, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

speedies
Asserting that a person is a CEO of a major subdivision of Disney is an assertion of importance. Please stop marking such articles for speedy. Check them for copyright violation, though, and if you find it, you can renominate for this. . You may want to consider them nominating them for afd, but do so for the least significant people first to see what the feeling of the community is. DGG (talk) 20:48, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I've just come here to make the exact same point, having declined multiple speedy-delete nominations from you in the last few minutes, and done the same quite often over the last few days. Please read WP:CSD and only tag articles for speedy deletion that meet those (deliberately extremely strict) criteria. I appreciate you're acting in good faith, but this is starting to become disruptive. –  iride scent  20:53, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * and I want to remind you that it is considered polite to always notify the person who wrote the article. There's information above how to do it, or you can do as I do, manually--just copy the notification line from the template that will appear on the page, go to page history, find the principal author, and past it on his user page. DGG (talk) 21:28, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Points taken...thanks. ttonyb1 (talk) 23:35, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Bill Ewing
Your comments make it appear as if you !voted twice.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 19:21, 18 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Further complications... as it seems the author has mixed up his Bills and their filmologies worse than we thought... so Good Catch!. The Bill who wrote "the Christmas Child" actually may be the correct one. I have left a note asking for clarification..... then we can see just how notable to correct Bill actually is... whichever one he turns out to be. Fair enough?  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 20:58, 18 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Per the ref'd bio, I was able to find his films. I just dug through the mess and corrected the article accordingly. He's been in a bunch of stuff... now to find notability.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 21:47, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Okay... I believe I have pushed Bill Ewing from obscurity to notability. I would appreciate any input. Earlier confusions were with the confusion over his identity on IMDB, where he is listed 4 different times. I have clarified that and can correct it with IMDB themselves in the near future so as to finally have only one listed name for all activities re Bill Ewing.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 00:22, 19 December 2008 (UTC)


 * INRE "My only concern is that we now have multiple IMDB entries supporting this article"...
 * Well the problem is not ours, as we only have one article about one person. It rests with IMDB and was caused by seperate production companies submitting informations about their projects without confirmeing with Ewing just which entry was his. However, this can be easily corrected and I expect to see it corrected within 10 days... maybe a week. As I wrote the author about this same concern, I will submit an update/correction to IMDB to have the AKA of William added to Bill (I), and have the entries for Bill (II) and Bill (IV) merged to Bill (I). It is more important at the moment to make sure the article we have properly reflects all the works of this one individual, and once my submission to IMDB is checked by them and implemented, I will personally make sure the Wiki article is updated to reflect this. Fair enough?  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 06:21, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Piper Reese
Howdy. I just wanted to ask if you would reconsider your Speedy on Piper Reese. The article has been Speedied before, and the author has communicated extensively on their User talk page with several editors and an admin about this article. It has been significantly improved, including references in Parenting and the Baltimore Sun. I think we can give it a pass, or move to AfD. Best regards. -- Oliver Twisted  (Talk)  05:17, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Bill Ewing
Lots of confusions: The article in question is about the man named William 'Bill' Ewing, the president of Every Tribe Entertainemt. The Dove Foundation biography is of someone named Bill Ewing of Every Tribe Entertainment in which it is confirmed that the man in the biography was crew on Meteor (IMDB's Bill Ewing (I)), was in Korg: 70,000 B.C. ((IMDB's Bill Ewing (II)), wrote and produced The End of the Spear (IMDB's Bill Ewing (IV)), and directed Christmas Child (IMDB's William Ewing). Being able to connect the dots and then properly place all 4 IMDB names in external links because they are the same person makes sense and falls within guideline. I have sent a request for corection/combination of these 4 names to IMDB and have provided them with even greater proofs than I have Wikipedia. If/when the change there is made, I will adjust the article accordingly. Fair enough?  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 03:33, 21 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I have removed the IMDB links to satisfy those editors who do not understand WP:EL. Specially since they do nothing to confer a notability. Per the significant coverage in multiple reliable sources Bill Ewing passes WP:CREATIVE. As just noted at the AfD, I will wait until IMDB combines the 4 identities before even considering their return. And that still does not address me being accused of violating a Wiki policy. Harumph.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 06:36, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Prem Dhoj Pradhan
Hi, thanks for the message. I've deleted the article in the end because it was a copy of this (except, I think, for an error in the year of birth, which was given as 1983 and not 1938) and thus a probable copyright infringement. Cheers, --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 18:26, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Go away
Consider not bothering me. Thanks. ► RATEL ◄ 22:53, 21 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Despite its lateness, I have warned User:Ratel for incivility in relation to this message. This is not acceptable. Thor Malmjursson (talk) 05:14, 1 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I admit that I did react with irritation to this user's actions on the Cord lock page. In future, Ttonyb1, take note of whether the page is under current edit, as it was when you tagged it for a quick delete. The criteria for speedy deletion (WP:SPEEDY) explicitly states that Contributors sometimes create articles over several edits, so try to avoid deleting a page too soon after its creation if it appears incomplete. Also, follow the rules and guidelines, as per WP:DELPRO, which include inserting a "good comment in the reason for deletion field". Your comment("Marked for Speedy Deletion"), does not meet this guideline in any way at all. Since you seem to spend a lot of time tagging articles for deletion, it may be a good idea to actually read the policies in relation to deletion tagging. ► RATEL ◄ 09:47, 1 January 2009 (UTC)


 * No one is disputing or denying your right to be a little irritated, only the rudeness in which you responded.
 * If I contributed to that irritation, you have my apology.
 * I have read the criteria for Speedy Deletion and other policies you mentioned, well before you suggested I do so.
 * The article you posted was only a picture and had no text associated when I marked it - a common mistake made by new users.
 * A simple sorry would have been sufficient to have closed this matter, in lieu of that I consider it closed.
 * I wish you the best in the upcoming new year.
 * ttonyb1 (talk) 16:40, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Murattu Kaalai

 * Can you not add useless tags and remove sources. Thanks. Universal Hero (talk) 20:35, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Dwight Lauderdale/Editnotice
Ttonyb1, you tagged that page with  a speedy notice. I'm going to revert it, as this is not a blank or a stub as you've tagged it. It's part of the Dwight Lauderdale article. The Editnotice pace places a custom notice on the talk page when "edit" is clicked, therefore it's intented to be a very sparse page. I know you meant well by it tho ! :) Thanks! &mdash; Kosh Jumpgate 01:12, 29 December 2008 (UTC)


 * No problem, Ttonyb1. You no doubt saw the effect of /Editnotice on my page (the custom message that appeared on my talk page when you clicked on "edit" )  :)

Galli potter
Hi there. "Notability not established" is a valid not a valid speedy rationale. In the future, please tag such articles with a PROD. NuclearWarfare  contact me My work 03:35, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm guessing that NuclearWarfare wanted to say that it's not a valid criterion. :) -- Amalthea 18:12, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Uh, yeah :P Thanks for catching that. NuclearWarfare  contact me My work  19:44, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I had assumed it was a typo. Thanks...ttonyb1 (talk) 20:25, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Darian O'Toole
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Darian O'Toole, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process
 * No evidence of notability

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Raven1977 (talk) 18:54, 31 December 2008 (UTC)