User talk:Ukexpat/Archive 29

The Signpost: 14 May 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 00:03, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Mail
LukeyQ1 (talk) 17:14, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

biography of Charles D Hornig
I will start a brief bio of Charles D. Hornig, creator of Fantasy Fan, soon. Ruthiecan (talk) 02:20, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 May 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 04:11, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

New Page Triage/New Pages Feed
Hey all :). A notification that the prototype for the New Pages Feed is now live on enwiki! We had to briefly take it down after an unfortunate bug started showing up, but it's now live and we will continue developing it on-site.

The page can be found at Special:NewPagesFeed. Please, please, please test it and tell us what you think! Note that as a prototype it will inevitably have bugs - if you find one not already mentioned at the talkpage, bring it up and I'm happy to carry it through to the devs. The same is true of any additions you can think of to the software, or any questions you might have - let me know and I'll respond.

Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 13:25, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Restoration of page
Hi, my apology for not correctly editing our page - the family content was removed, which was not written by me, but by our PR team. Can we have this restored? I am new here and thought I was in sandbox. thank you for bringing this to my attention.

DIMG (talk) 17:46, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Rani Agrawal
Hi,

I think doing a mainstream bollywood movie fits the bill of a notable actress. You may catch her interviews and movie trailers online on youtube and amongst a host of news papers.

Removing it would be blasphemous ! Kindly reconsider.

Thank you

Regards

J.shrey (talk) 20:44, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Contacting a Wikki user?
How do I contact Wikki user Pbsouthwood? (Jack Carlton (talk) 19:04, 27 May 2012 (UTC)) Tony
 * On their talk page at User talk:Pbsouthwood or by e-mail at Special:EmailUser/Pbsouthwood. Hope this helps.--ukexpat (talk) 21:46, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the quality of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:49, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

CRMC Picture
Thanks for the input over at the Help Desk! I cropped the picture using MS Paint and put it on the Charlotte Regional Medical Center article, if you're able to improve it in any way I'd appreciate it. Also, perhaps you could enhance of the Port Charlotte High School cheerleading squad; I took that low quality photo specifically to upload to Wikipedia, but didn't realize how terrible it was going to turn out at the moment, and retaking it wouldn't be a possibility. PCHS-NJROTC (Messages) 03:10, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 May 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 09:34, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Well done
for removing that hideous portrait (or should I say caricature) from Charles Darwin. It did have considerable amusement value though (it put a smile on my face anyhow).Rangoon11 (talk) 13:42, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Maison Martin Margiela
Hi, regarding the recent speedy deletion nomination of Maison Martin Margiela, I think you notified the wrong person. I originally created the page two years ago as a redirect to Martin Margiela's page but recently, someone (who I can only assume is associated with the business as their ID is "Margiela") overwrote it and when I reverted to the redirect, they came back and reinstated their stuff, saying (in French) about it being for the company. It is a valid redirect because "Maison Martin Margiela" is the name of the business associated with Martin Margiela and is linked to as such from 7/8 other Wiki pages, so shouldn't be deleted, but should remain a redirect until such time as a proper article about the company (which is one of the most famous Belgian high-fashion labels) can be created. I've notified "Margiela" about the speedy deletion. Mabalu (talk) 13:54, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that - Twinkle automatically notifies the original creator of the page when it tags for speedy.--ukexpat (talk) 13:58, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 June 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 10:30, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

MetalCraft Marine
As this article has already been deleted as spam, is being recreated by a user with "mcm" in their name and appears to be about a company with little or no notability, it definitely needs keeping an eye on. But I procedurally removed your CSD tag because technically it did not apply: the infobox is content. RichardOSmith (talk) 18:47, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Rather more subjectively, I feel there is sufficient coverage of the coastguard contract to make this unsuitable for speedy deletion on notability grounds either; it should probably be considered at AfD. RichardOSmith (talk) 19:03, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I give up.--ukexpat (talk) 19:04, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Help
I see that you marked a page that I created for speedy deletion. I am not sure what the G11 criteria would mean for a "substantial re-write." I would appreciate your advice as I have only dealt with notability issues with articles and not "promotional" type content. Thanks. --Morning277 (talk) 19:10, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry. The page is John Harding (lawyer) --Morning277 (talk) 19:12, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * The problem is that it reads like a CV, resume, or profile page from the firm's website - all of which are promotional in nature.--ukexpat (talk) 19:23, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I can see that. Do you have any suggestions? I see that you have over 80K edits so your advice would be appreciated. I am hoping to rewrite the article (as I did spend quite a bit of time working on it) prior to it being deleted. Thanks. --Morning277 (talk) 19:26, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I based the outline on similar articles for attorneys (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:California_lawyers). I have looked at some others closely and feel like it would read differently if I take the different "sections" and put them into paragraph form? Not quite sure but maybe collapsing the individual sections into a "biography" section would be better. --Morning277 (talk) 19:39, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Don't rely on other articles as precedent. Many of those articles have the same problems as this one. Collapsing into a single "Biography" section is ill-advised - the whole article is a biography so a biography section is IMHO redundant.--ukexpat (talk) 19:41, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

OK. I wasnt bringing up (other stuff exists) as this is foolish for anyone to do. I was simply stating that I was using the format of those articles. I am not sure what is needed to make it "non-promotional" based on your G11 recommendation. He is not controversial so there is nothing to put in there about that. His notability is under the "creative professionals" of people so I guess I am at a loss. That is why I am looking for your advice. You tagged the article as you see it as promotion. Can you advise what it would need to look like for you to not have tagged it for promotion? This will help me make corrections to this article as well as keep them in mind for any future articles. Thanks. --Morning277 (talk) 19:46, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * First a more basic question (and I am a lawyer myself): is the guy even notable per WP:BIO? I know plenty of lawyers with better credentials and coverage than Mr Harding, none of whom would qualify for their own articles.--ukexpat (talk) 19:51, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Good point. I did consider that. I am not a lawyer myself as I have not yet taken the bar exam (July 2012 which is why I should be studying instead of editing Wikipedia) but I am a recent graduate of law school (and I never plan on having the type of credentials to include my bio in Wikipedia). There are attorneys that may have more credentials, but not as recognized as he is in his particular area of law. While his publications maybe "borderline" notable, the Super Lawyer award is something that I feel would qualify him under "Any Biography" (The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for one several times). The Super Lawyer award is coveted in the State of California and he has won it numerous years in a row (the award is based on recommendation from over 56K attorneys which shows that he is a peer in his field). The other notability aspect is that he is sought after as an expert in family law. He is the subject of many independent sources that quote him for his work in family law and the legal profession itself. I guess I do not see an issue with notability as much as I do with the promotional aspect which is the immediate issue that I need to deal with prior to the article being deleted. Again, any suggestions would be appreciated. --Morning277 (talk) 20:02, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

I just removed most of the self-published refs that were talking about claims ("legal expert") or about 3rd parties. Just because Harding writes something for another publication, doesn't make the reference reliable or independent. The "Super Lawyer" award is for the top 5% of lawyer in Northern California, which would make him one of the top 3,000 in Northern California. He didn't make the top 100. Not much of an award. I have to agree with Ukexpat that the article is promotional and shouldn't belong. Bgwhite (talk) 23:03, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I've declined the speedy - it's not quite spammy enough IMO, and considering how long the tag had been in place, other admins obviously thought the same. SmartSE (talk) 13:03, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Either that or no one had actually looked at it. I tagged several other articles at the same time and at least two of them have not yet been reviewed.--ukexpat (talk) 13:06, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

cdist article
Thank you a lot for you feedback. I'll revisit the article tomorrow to further clean it up and read more about the wp guidelines. Thanks again for pointing out the weaknesses!NicoSchottelius (talk) 21:03, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:COI.--ukexpat (talk) 21:05, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm trying to work through the given improvement hints on the article, starting at the notability issue. I've read Notability and again compared the cdist article to the other configuration management tools (as linked at the top of the article). As far as I can see the number of citations is pretty much equal, thus I was wondering what is expected to be added, if at all? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.14.183.249 (talk) 11:25, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Michael F. Holick
Hello Ukexpat,

I've written main parts of the article "Michael F. Holick" and I don't understand why you consider the article as promotional. It was and is my intention to summarize the most important aspects of the scientific oevre and I referenced everything extremely accurately. Why do you think the article should be deleted in total whe the pieces of information I was providing are absolutely accurate? If you think other aspects should also be mentioned, then it's in my opinion still no reason to delete the whole article. It's my first article, it was a lot of work. If you let me know what precisely should be improved, let me please know that! But I'd appreciate a litte bit more concrete criticism what exactely bothers you. For example, I agree that the references to the books could be considered as advertisment - I removed them. But I disagree with you that the whole article is promoting Dr. Holick. I simply summarize what he did - and as he did a lot of meaningful stuff, there are many positive aspects worth being mentioned. But that is a consequence of his contributions and not my intention!

So please help me improve the article but don't delete it. Would be nice to have the chance to change concrete aspects of the article instead of someone deleting it instantly.

Thanks, M--Matthias3110 (talk) 16:38, 7 June 2012 (UTC)att
 * First, I have only tagged the article for deletion, an admin will review and make the decision. I am not an admin so I cannot do that. Second, the problem is that while everything in the article may be factual, the tone makes it read like a cv, resume or website biography. It needs to be written in a summary style focussing on the salient points, not the minutiae of the guy's life and career.--ukexpat (talk) 16:56, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree that words like "leading" and "internationally recognized" sound as if I wanted to promote him - so I removed them, just as the reference to his bibliography as it might be considered advertisment. I'm definitely willing to improve the article and it's absolutely fine that you let me know this. But despite your criticism may be justified partly, a speedy deletion is not the appropriate reaction. I think my work is a good basis to modify the article that it meets the criteria of Wikipedia article more. At the same time I think I provided significant and extremely precisely referenced pieces of information. And that should also be appreciated and could be taken as a basic work that is perfectionized - not deleted. Thanks. --Matthias3110 (talk) 17:17, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
 * You should make these points on the article's talk page, if you haven't already done so, where they will be reviewed by an admin.--ukexpat (talk) 17:22, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Quite.
Yes - you beat me to it. Cheers! DBaK (talk) 17:25, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Orchestra Mozart
Hi Ukexpat, just a note to let you know that I feel you misapplied an A7 csd to this article yesterday that resulted in its deletion. There is indeed, imo, a credible claim to notability in both the orchestra is led by a notable, bluelinked conductor and has works distributed by DG recordings (tho this is not supported with references yet). I have restored the article. If you still feel that this is not a sufficient claim, please feel free to use prod or afd. Regards, Syrthiss (talk) 18:39, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Take it up with User:Alexf who deleted it.--ukexpat (talk) 18:41, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Ukexpat, inaccurate CSD tagging is a problem for both parties. That's not a particularly helpful attitude.
 * On a related note; for Astafix, two band members ex of notable bands doesn't just meet significance, but WP:BAND as well. Ironholds (talk) 03:17, 8 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm not assigning blame, just letting you know. I tag quite a lot of things, and have my tags declined sometimes too. I personally like to know why the other admin disagreed even if I don't always agree with them. So that's all this note was.  Cheers, Syrthiss (talk) 14:48, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ballyhannon Castle (aka Castlefergus)
Hi Ukexpat,

I have read your message, thank you for taking the time to explain the current situation. As I outlined in previous messages, the text I submitted of the history of this castle was researched and written by Mr. Martin Breen, local historian, as posted verbatim on the website of the castle. All I am now seeking to do, with Mr. Breen's permission (which he is independently emailing to Wikipedia to permissions-en AT wikimedia DOT org) is to post this up on Wikipedia for all to see and enjoy. In that way, the author's own words are preserved.

Once his authorising email has been received by Wikipedia, Wikipedia will then have the author's own words in the published article. Is that sufficient? I don't know how there is any copyright issue/infringement when the author authorises its publication in accordance with Wikipedia's own terms and procedures, and in Wikipedia's own authorising wording (as per the template on Declaration of consent for all enquiries).

If I am missing something, do certainly let me know and I will make sure that whatever obstacle standing in the way of publications is removed. I'm thinking that the easiest way to satisfy this impasse is for Mr. Breen to post the article himself? I was simply doing it in order to absolve him of the time and effort involved in its publication on Wikipedia, which I was advised was somewhat onerous.

I completely understand why it is, and should be, because this ensures the veracity of the information published. In this instance, however, the position is that Mr. Breen is the copyright holder and he is authorising the publishing of his work on Wikipedia, which I am simply facilitating by doing the 'physical' uploading of it. There is no suggestion of copyright infringement in this case, whereas it is being treated and adjudged as such.

Therefore, am I correct in assuming that when you receive Mr. Breen's email (to permissions-en AT wikimedia DOT org) authorising the unconditional use of his work, and to its posting on Wikipedia (as per the template on Declaration of consent for all enquiries), that I may continue with this article, and request it's reinstatement? Or are there any other conditions that must be met for this article to be approved?

Best regards, CorneliusWilliam (talk) 16:13, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Your understanding is correct -- as soon as permission is received and processed by the permissions volunteers, the article can be recreated, but please bear in mind my earlier comments at the Help Desk about tone and additional third party sources to demonstrate notability.--ukexpat (talk) 16:25, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi Ukexpat & Canoe 1967,

That's fantastic. The historian, Mr. Martin Breen, has informed me that he has emailed his permission (to permissions-en AT wikimedia DOT org), so I'm almost there then it seems!

Once the permissions volunteers have processed his permission, do they (or you) inform me so that I can recreate the article? Or since my most recent version is what I'm looking to publish, is it simply the case that it will be automatically reinstated and published without anything more being required of me? I see that Canoe 1967 says that s/he has 'created the article', which I assume is my one which was deleted?

Sincere thanks again for your (and your fellow volunteers') help in directing me toward the finish line. The journey is a long one, but I know that the satisfaction of finally publishing an article on Wikipedia will be worth it!

Best regards, CorneliusWilliam (talk) 18:30, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Mr Breen will be informed by e-mail when it has been processed. When he is, let us know on the WP:Help desk and an admin will undelete the article if the OTRS volunteers have not already done so. I think Canoe1967 in their message below was referring to a completely different article.--ukexpat (talk) 18:38, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Well done all round! Looking forward to seeing the article sorted. RashersTierney (talk) 20:26, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you Ukexpat and Rashers. We are on the brink of maiden publication! CorneliusWilliam (talk) 21:34, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Red link
Sorry about that. I found sources and notability so I have created the article. May I put it back as a blue link?--Canoe1967 (talk) 16:17, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Sure, no problem.--ukexpat (talk) 16:19, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Anthony Kearns
admire your tenacity. I've officially given up. Editor with a clear case of wax in the ears :( Took it off my watch list as it was destroying it, ping me if you need me. I'll watch here StarM 01:48, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the quality of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:34, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 June 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 23:09, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Query about LoCE template
Hi. I'm working on getting together a listing of all articles copyedited by the LoCE and GOCE (including when and, if possible, by whom), for purposes of comparing with which articles are GA/FA. In the WP LoCE template, there's a space for a "proofreader" as well as a "copyeditor". Do you happen to remember what function the "proofreader" performed (my current guess is reviewing the work of the copyeditor)? Thanks very much! Allens (talk &#124; contribs) 01:47, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I think your guess is correct. In the analogue world a copy-editor reviews and edits the original writer's copy, a proofreader reviews and edits the first proof off the printing press.--ukexpat (talk) 02:04, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Got it; thanks! Allens (talk &#124; contribs) 12:52, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Camila Alves
Done — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mum2harry (talk • contribs) 13:58, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

The Tea Leaf - Issue Four
Hi! Welcome to the fourth issue of The Tea Leaf, the official newsletter for the Teahouse!


 * Teahouse pilot wraps up after 13 weeks After being piloted on English Wikipedia starting in February, the Teahouse wrapped up its pilot period on May 27, 2012. We expect this is just the beginning for the Teahouse and hope the project will continue to grow in the months to come!

Thank you and congratulations to all of the community members who participated - and continue to participate!


 * What you've all been waiting for: Teahouse Pilot Report is released! We look forward to your feedback on the methodology and outcomes of this pilot project.
 * ....and if a pilot report wasn't enough, the Teahouse Pilot Metrics Report is out too! Dive into the numbers and survey results to learn about the impact the Teahouse has made on English Wikipedia.
 * Teahouse shows positive impact on new editor retention and engagement
 * 409 new editors participated during the entire pilot period, with about 40 new editors participating in the Teahouse per week.
 * Two weeks after participating, 33% of Teahouse guests are still active on Wikipedia, as opposed to 11% of a similar control group.
 * New editors who participated in the Teahouse edit 10x the number of articles, make 7x more global edits, and 2x as much of their content survives on Wikipedia compared to the control group.


 * Women participate in the Teahouse 28% of Teahouse participants were women, up from 9% of editors on Wikipedia in general, good news for this project which aimed to have impact on the gender gap too - but still lots to be done here!
 * New opportunities await for the Teahouse in phase two as the Teahouse team and Wikipedia community examine ways to improve, scale, and sustain the project. Opportunities for future work include:
 * Automating or semi-automating systems such as invites, metrics and archiving
 * Experimenting with more ways for new editors to discover the Teahouse
 * Building out the social and peer-to-peer aspects further, including exploring ways to make answering questions easier, creating more ways for new editors to help each other and for all participants to acknowledge each other's efforts
 * Growing volunteer capacity, continuing to transfer Teahouse administration tasks to volunteers whenever possible, and looking for new ways to make maintenance and participation easier for everyone.

You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here. Sarah (talk) 17:09, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Want to know how you can lend a hand at the Teahouse? Become a host! Learn more about what makes the Teahouse different than other help spaces on Wikipedia and see how you can help new editors by visiting here.
 * Say hello to the new guests at the Teahouse. Take the time to welcome and get to know the latest guests at the Teahouse. Drop off some wikilove to these editors today, as being welcomed by experienced editors is really encouraging to new Wikipedians.

Maalouf
I responded to your post. Not sure if you read the articles or not. Why not just edit them? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ehaddad1 (talk • contribs) 17:09, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Have you read the Maalouf Ashford & Talbot article? What makes you believe it is advertising?  Please support your claim, the article passed AFC. 76.23.138.49 (talk) 17:20, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, I have read it. It is all a question of tone - both articles read like profiles that you would expect to see on the firm's website, the very purpose of which is to promote the firm to potential clients.--ukexpat (talk) 17:22, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I did not make any overstatements and they are supported by third party sources. What kind of tone do you consider acceptable for such a company?  Perhaps there is an article of another company which you can direct me to?
 * And as a side note, I see that you edited wikipedia: Anthony Kearns at 13:49 and at 13:51 you edited wikipedia: John J. Maalouf. So, what you are saying is that in the matter of three minutes, you went to another article, read it in its entirety, made a judgement as to whether it was appropriate for wikipedia, and then added an advert tag to it?  I'm sure all of us on Wikipedia appreciate what you are doing, but when you make a judgement call in 3 minutes, especially on an article that passed AFC, it doesn't show that you are using your discretion with care.Ehaddad1 (talk) 18:03, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi Ukexpat and thank you. I noticed you made some corrections to the article. Please let me know what I can do to help and speed this process up. Ehaddad1 (talk) 18:12, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 June 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 03:46, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Two Articles
Hi Ukexpat, what specifically can I do to make those articles npov compliant? John J. Maalouf and Maalouf Ashford & Talbot — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ehaddad1 (talk • contribs) 04:47, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

your talkpage comment confused a stalker :P
you seem to have missed the opportunity to discuss your deletions on it could have been handled better. Penyulap  ☏  16:05, 20 Jun 2012 (UTC)
 * I replied to their question at Media copyright questions with appropriate advice.--ukexpat (talk) 16:10, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
 * You are quite right, I'm sorry. I'm a bit protective of a good new editor, and did not know it had been discussed, and couldn't find any links in the templates you had used on his talkpage. Penyulap  ☏  16:37, 20 Jun 2012 (UTC)

User:Exitblur
Just wanted to help clarify a discussion over at Help Desk you took part in. I've posted once on the issue over at Talk:Holyoke Catholic High School. As I stated there, I believe his creation of Robert S. Prattico was an attempt to gain support in the controversy. If this is true, it seems that he is seeking the removal of the deletion log to avoid having his efforts embarrassingly backfire. Also, it seems he's uploaded a picture that was used in the article (see File:Robert S. Prattico1.jpg and File:Robert S. Prattico.jpg). Would you know if there's a process for deleting a picture used only in a speedily deleted article? Thanks, Kithira (talk) 16:53, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Those images are on Commons, so you will need to ask about this at the Commons Help Desk.--ukexpat (talk) 17:01, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Kithira  (talk) 17:04, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Request for undeletion of the page created by me
Hi,

The page I created was deleted. The content is genuine and so I request you to undelete the page asap since it is really very useful for the community living in China.

Thanks for your kind attention.

Chitra Hong Kong — Preceding unsigned comment added by 42.98.27.221 (talk) 02:31, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I have no idea what you are referring to. I am not an admin, I cannot delete pages.--ukexpat (talk) 02:34, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Articles for creation/IdeaWork Studios, Inc.
Hello Ukexpat! I have modified the entry for IdeaWork Studios. (Note that I did message HappySailor about this too, but it's been nearly two months and I've not yet received a reply from him/her.)

[|IdeaWork Article for Creation]

It is virtually identical in set up to existing approved agency listings, so I'm hopeful that this meets your/Wiki's criteria! I look forward to your feedback.

Many thanks, --ARouleau (talk) 20:29, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 June 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 07:43, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the quality of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:56, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

BLP problem
I work for an elected official featured in Wikipedia. Someone posted a recent photo of her that is not her official photo. How can I remove that photo and upload her official photo. Bammapublicinfo (talk) 20:52, 26 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Tell us the title of the article and we'll fix it. SmartSE (talk) 21:18, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 July 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 13:22, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Ian Sayer Page
Dear Ukexpat,

I have reworded this article and added external links, how do I get the tags at the top of the page removed?

Radavie (talk) 15:57, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Please comment at Ya Kun Kaya Toast's ongoing peer review!
Since you have listed yourself as a peer review volunteer interested in copyediting articles, would you like to support the quest to counter systemic bias on Wikipedia by giving a thorough review of the short, but interesting, article about Ya Kun Kaya Toast, a multinational kaya toast chain and Singaporean cultural icon? Thanks! 谢谢！Terima kasih! நன்றி! --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 10:09, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the quality of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:07, 10 July 2012 (UTC)