User talk:VQuakr/Archives/2010

Hi, student !
Do you speak russian? Пошёл на хуй,мудак.
 * No, English and a bit of the romance languages. Jminthorne (talk) 10:16, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

P Valsala
Thanks for pointing out my mistake in the newly added article P. Valsala. I have added references to it. --Anoopan (talk) 08:07, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Cool. I pulled off the prod-blp tag; for the record you are allowed to do that yourself after references are added. Jminthorne (talk) 08:10, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Most popular shows
Thanks for giving the important and warning message. Squidbillies and Aqua Teen Hunger Force are both Adult Swim's most popular shows are both created by Dave Willis. Cabutchikas (talk) 05:04, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok, the article said it was of Aqua Teen characters. If I misunderstood and this is meant to be a new article that does not duplicate and exisitng one, I suggest putting that information in the Squidbillies article. If there is a need for a new page, you can request a copy of the old one from the person that deleted it and re-create the article. Regards! Jminthorne (talk) 15:43, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Demonstealer (album)
Hello Jminthorne. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Demonstealer (album), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: '''A7 does not apply to albums. There is A9 if the artist has no article, but that does not apply here either.''' Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 08:14, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the feedback; sorry for the confusion. Jminthorne (talk) 15:38, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

MaksHandsun
Thanks for the help, but where should I send my greetings, you don't have a talk section really... MaksHandsun (talk) 07:11, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Bottom of the page is fine. Again, greetings! Jminthorne (talk) 16:04, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Re: Bishop Garcia Diego High School‎
I think I was the one that put the CN template next to that alumni. BGDHS has received some minor vandalization and I did some work to wikilink it to the bishop it is named for. The citation request only came this month and gets minor ghits but nothing that I would consider WP:RS. I tried to rollback the deletion but you beat me to the punch. Now I see that you reverted yourself. I would to give that request a month to be sourced but will leave that up to you. --Morenooso (talk) 05:23, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * To clarify, I didn't revert it but just completed the deletion by taking out the in-article commentary. Normally I would give more time for the citation to come through, but I am hoping that the IP editor knows something about the school and is trying to help. Jminthorne (talk) 05:28, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Doubtful. Most HSs I follow have detractors within the school and its competitors. A school with 60 years of history should have famous alumni be it priest, educators, business or civic people. Look up your high school or another that you follow. --Morenooso (talk) 05:59, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, you may be right about this guy. He is very recent and listed in 2008 articles about the football program - Montana, Oaks Christian rough up Cardinals presidiosports.com. 2008 would put him in college potentially. Still, they should have some distinguished grads. --Morenooso (talk) 06:03, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Sorry about the vandalism
Yeah, I was frustrated when my article was flagged for deletion, and I got a little carried away with my comment. I didn't know that I was not supposed to say things like that and I removed it immediately after I found out that it was vandalism. Sorry about that.. thanks for noticing my correction. blake (talk) 02:34, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Zoë Green
Hello Jminthorne, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Zoë Green has been removed. It was removed by Joe Decker with the following edit summary ' (not uns, but totally need more references) '. Please consider discussing your concerns with Joe Decker before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 09:50, 3 May 2010 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages) 09:50, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

discussion needed for a few articles I've been working on that you have given templates
where is the unverifiable information on the Red Back Mining article ? Industrial Alliance also was looked over by me and you tagged it with a template. please discuss the parts of the article that you have a problem with. I intend to have the templates on both articles removed by the time our discussion ends. we can work on them together. if you don't want to help out I can find an administrator who will give me a hand with the article and he will remove your templates. As for the red back mining article, 2 users from the administrators/noticeboards were consulted about the last template added by someone about blatant advertising. No changes had to made to the article to convince them that the other user was wrong (the changes that were made had more to do with tidying up the information). it was removed without having to bring the original user into the conversation.Grmike (talk) 12:02, 4 May 2010 (UTC)grmike
 * Sure, I will have another look at them and follow up in the article talk pages this evening. Thanks for the feedback! Remember that the templates are not punishments or anything like that; they are meant to draw attention to the articles by other authors to help improve the article. Major contributions from a number of authors is what makes on great articles on this site great! Jminthorne (talk) 05:01, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Just rereading your message, let me clarify - I am not an administrator and any editor can (and should) remove normal maintenance templates if the issues they speak to no longer apply. Also, the newsbrief (sp?) template is about looking like a corporate pr piece but does not necessary mean that the article is blatant advertising. Jminthorne (talk) 05:18, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
 * ok, but it could mean that though since it does mention it as a possibility. I know I can remove them but it would probably end up looking like edit warring since I don't think you're convinced yet that the problem is resolved.  Every section of the article other than the production section should be properly referenced now (since all the references are third party sources).  The production data of every major company is originally issued from that company, so I don't know why the production data shouldn't be allowed.  Perhaps one of the references given in that section talks about the data as fact by a third party source like . the forecasted information is still done by the company but many major news sources report it without disputing the data.Grmike (talk)grmike
 * I am not familiar with the website you linked above, so I can't comment on whether it meets Wiki's requirements for verifiability. The problem with production data and similar lists of figures is that is starts to look like a PR fact sheet, which is of course how it got the news release template in the first place. This is one of the more strongly worded "yellow" maintenance templates, but not so strongly worded as the advert template so it could have been worse. If it were me, I would leave the minor maintenance templates like copyedit and cleanup in place until it had been scrubbed by another person. You should do what you think is right, though. Jminthorne (talk) 04:01, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * if I remove 'the wording merely promotes the article without using verifiable information' would you add it back again ? i'm comfortable {and a couple other people who have looked over the page are too) with the source for the production data, if the company had been larger the data would have ended up on more 3rd party sources.  the data from 2009 looks to be accepted by major news agencies (some have referred to it before spelling out the press release).    I think that the first template makes exaggerates any problems on the page.  I'll leave the cleanup template there unless the data on each mine and 2010 estimates are removed.Grmike (talk) 18:49, 6 May 2010 (UTC)grmike
 * is the Industrial Alliance article ready to have any of the templates removed ?  the company is about evenly distributed among 11 different divisions.  unless someone writes out long articles for each one the best way to include it in the article is in the last section where earch division is given a list of businesses they are involved in.  I wrote a small paragraph at the beginning there like you asked and included relevant references.  if the only thing that's missing is more information then wouldn't that be a different template ?  if the grammar and style of the article is okay now just let me know and I'll remove the templates.Grmike (talk) 00:57, 9 May 2010 (UTC)grmike

is the grammar, style, cohesion, tone and spelling of the article SXC Health Solutions alright now?
I worked on the introduction and history in an attempt to improve the article. Can the template be removed now ? I'm satisfied with the article, all that needs to happen now is for you to check it and verify that it's okay. If not then can you make the change necessay or make a suggestion ?Grmike (talk) 20:26, 4 May 2010 (UTC)grmike
 * I had a look at it again today and made some edits. Of course you can remove just about any maintenance template if you in good faith believe that the issues it covers no longer apply. I will cover the article in a little more detail on the talk page later tonight. Jminthorne (talk) 04:18, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
 * about the article Industrial Alliance I added information that you asked for and better ordered the products business segments section. is the article alright now to remove any of the templates ?  I also worked on SXC Health Solutions and would like to know what you thinkGrmike (talk) 19:16, 6 May 2010 (UTC)grmike

The Colour of Rain
Hello, I would like to know why you deleted the page The Colour of Rain. All you have said so far is that it doesnt comply with some rule (not sure). Well I checked it out and the article does contain information that is notable and the article should be kept on wikipedia. For example, one of the rules says that if two or more members of the band have performed at a venue that has recieved national coverage then it is acceptable. Two of the members of The Colour of Rain have performed at several venues, some of which have recieved coverage. I'm not sure if you think that because of their ages that you shouldn't allow them an article or because you don't feel that it is worthy but trust me, this article is very important to the many fans of them. Plus it will help give information to people who want to know more about them. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Trudrummer (talk • contribs) 15:48, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Reasonable question. I did not delete anything, but I did nominate The Colour of Rain for speedy deletion under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. An administrator deleted it after verifying that the speedy deletion nomination was correct. I did the nomination because the article did not make any credible claims that the subject was notable as defined in Wikipedia's applicable guideline. Rather than just repeatedly create the article, I suggest that you have a look around to find an article that needs work and is in your area of interest, but is established enough that it will not be likely to be deleted. Feel free to contact me if you have any other questions. Jminthorne (talk) 03:51, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Solarion
Excuse me, I am new here an I didn't notice your advice on my talk, because it´s new for me to communicate on this way. First of all I liked to link Solarion as a stub, because I think it has to be on Wikipedia like other companies with less high-tech background. It would be kind of you, if you could help me to learn more about wikipedia. Thank you.bene0815 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 08:09, 6 May 2010 (UTC).

NB
This is broken, probably because User:RHaworth moved the page, deleting several revisions of the target, presumably excluding this one. Look at the diff before and after SmackBot's edit. SB simply does not "prod" articles (although most new people articles with a lower case surname are eminently proddable), and only adds a very few tags, excluding COI and Notability. Rich Farmbrough, 07:50, 7 May 2010 (UTC).
 * Understood. I mostly found it interesting and thought it could be used to tune the bot; I was not worried that anything had gone particularly pear-shaped. Jminthorne (talk) 07:52, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Statistext
Please take a look at the new article Statistext which got slapped with the multiple-issues template four minutes after I created it. Admittedly, it is not one of the great essays of Wikipedia. But problems with tone? General cleanup? Although it's short and has only two citations, I think it's nicely written.

Only two countries are mentioned, the US and Canada, because the researchers using this term have applied it only to those two countries. As far as I can tell, the term has been used mainly in the Canadian context, so it's difficult to address the "worldwide view" concern. Many thanks for taking a look at this. Canadian2006 (talk) 04:21, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * When I first looked over it, it looked like it was written from a noticeably North American perspective, hence the worldview tag. I added the tone tag because it appeared to be critical of censuses in a borderline unbalanced manner. I have taken those tags out now; I left the cleanup tag to hopefully draw some other editors to the article to help expand it. Of course, you can always remove templates if you believe in good faith that they do not apply. Jminthorne (talk) 18:15, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Jay Cammillieri
Hello Jminthorne. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Jay Cammillieri, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Being signed to a notable label indicates importance/significance. Thank you.  So Why  10:56, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the feedback, sorry it took me a while to respond. I would agree that the former band has an indication of notability, since they have been signed by a label, but this article is about an individual not the band. How does this jive with WP:MUSICBIO, particularly part 5? Thanks again! Jminthorne (talk) 21:10, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
 * A7 does not require the subject to be notable or even any claim about such notability. The standard, which is much lower than notability, is instead called "importance or significance" and basically means that an article cannot be speedy deleted as A7 if there is any at all reason to assume that the the subject might meet the guidelines for inclusion. Being signed to a notable label is such an indication because it means that the subject in question is certainly more significant than the average person. Whether they are significant enough to be included is for the notability guidelines to decide (WP:BIO, WP:MUSICBIO etc.) but they are not the scale used for A7 speedy deletion. If you feel that an article fails such a guideline, WP:AFD is the process to use instead. For further information about A7 and common indications of importance/significance, I recommend my essay WP:A7M. If you have any other questions, please do not hesitate to ask. :-) Regards  So Why  21:20, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. Thanks again for the feedback. Jminthorne (talk) 21:22, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

unref
I have been easily finding references for some of the articles you have been prodding as BLP unsourced. Please check first, its just as easy. My guide is that if the career looks like there ought to be refs, they are worth looking for. If not, I don't usually check either.  DGG ( talk ) 00:30, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the feedback! If you see it happen again in the future, feel free to ping me again. Jminthorne (talk) 01:15, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Sir Andrew Halliday
Mahalo for your effort on Sir Andrew Halliday Peaceray (talk) 07:22, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Every little bit, right? Jminthorne (talk) 21:44, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Listing Digestion of the protein
Hi, due to what must have been an edit conflict, TW failed to add the AFD tag to this article. Thanks for beating me to sorting it out. Cheers, Fæ (talk) 22:35, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I suppose there was a lot going on between me, the page creator, and yourself. Cheers! Jminthorne (talk) 22:35, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Sorry...
Sorry I hit you with the warning tag. It looks as if there was an edit conflict. By best to you...  ttonyb (talk) 04:40, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Never had any doubt what happened; I don't get many warnings so it was a nice change. Regards! Jminthorne (talk) 04:41, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

alief (belief)
Hi there -- I don't think the alief (belief) entry should be deleted. If you look at the Dennett article, you'll see that a full subsection (section 8) is devoted to discussion of alief http://dericbownds.net/uploaded_images/McKay-Dennett.pdf. In the Bloom book (which will be published next week), nearly 15 pages are devoted to a discussion of alief. Among those are the pages that the Chronicle of Higher Education published online this week http://chronicle.com/article/The-Pleasures-of-Imagination/65678/

"The Chronicle of Higher Education has long been the giant in the field. Founded in 1966 by Corbin Gwaltney, a former editor at Johns Hopkins University who still owns the publication, it quickly established itself as a must-read for college administrators and faculty. The Chronicle now has a print circulation of just over 85,000 and its Web site gets more than 10 million page views per month." (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/14/business/media/14education.html) —Preceding unsigned comment added by SimonStevin (talk • contribs) 16:47, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I see you also contributed to the AfD discussion, so let's let any discussion occur there. Thanks! Jminthorne (talk) 16:49, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

OK, I'm over there now —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.36.203.123 (talk) 17:09, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Gran Tierra Energy CSD
You CSDed Gran Tierra Energy with A7. "Significance" is a lower standard than Notability. Note that there are reliable sources in the article to support the facts, and if you do a quick online search, there are plenty more. As a company that is listed on a major stock exchange AND has a market cap of over one billion, surely the company would at least meet the "significance" requirement? Gary King ( talk ) 22:17, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Removed it, thanks for calling for the second look and sorry for the inconvenience. Regards! Jminthorne (talk) 22:19, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Message from 68.49.188.131
I am strongly disappointed to see the comment you left on my page. There was nothing wrong with that article. I have previously (for numerous years) been on Wikipedia. I wished to change my username, and so changed my account to do that. It is highly inappropriate to respond how you have. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.49.188.131 (talk)
 * I am genuinely confused as to what you mean, but if you will give me additional details I would be happy to follow up. It is never my goal to behave inappropriately. Jminthorne (talk) 00:32, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Philadelphia Redevelopment Authority
Does the Philadelphia Redevelopment Authority article need additional categories? If not, I will remove the template. --DThomsen8 (talk) 12:55, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Help with Manuel Espinosa
Could you help fix up the page, what do I do about the boxes at the top?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Espmone (talk • contribs) 04:23, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I took out the verylong tag, but I think the others still apply. I will take a pass at some fixes to the page if I have time this weekend. Thanks! Jminthorne (talk) 04:27, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. I want to fix up the article. How does the signature thing work? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Espmone (talk • contribs) 04:32, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Penrith Panthers
hi,

You put a speedy deletion tag on the Penrith Panthers line up page.

I believe it is great source so that people can see their line ups for each week.

Some weeks penrithpanthers.com.au posts the Windsor Wolves squad and their U20 squad.

If you fing other reasons to delete this page then go for it

mgt98
 * I proposed a speedy deletion for this page under CSD#A10 because it appeared to be a duplicate from Penrith Panthers. Why does it need to be there twice? Jminthorne (talk) 05:03, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * For clarification, I put the CSD tag on Penrith Panthers Squad Line Up. Jminthorne (talk) 05:03, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I removed the speedy based on your comment on the article talk page. Jminthorne (talk) 05:36, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Verdiem
Please can you clarify what it is about my Verdiem article that reads like an advert. I work in the IT industry and am familar with that product but do not have any association with the subject. I spent a lot of time collecting information to create the text so would appreciate details of how I could improve it please. Fionacampbelly (talk) 18:39, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'll discuss on the article talk page. My response may be not be right away. Regards! Jminthorne (talk) 03:19, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I pulled the tag and added a comment on the article talk page. Regards! VQuakr (talk) 05:12, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

PowerMAN (Software)
Similarly, please can you clarify what it is about my [[PowerMAN (Software)]] article that fails your test for notability. I am very familiar with this subject and plan to expand on it later when I have time. I put a lot of effort into collecting the references so I am a bit disappointed that your saying its not notable. Surely something used in multiple countries and the subject of several academic research projects is notable? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fionacampbelly (talk • contribs) 18:44, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Similar to above, I will have a second look and respond on the article talk page tonight. Jminthorne (talk) 03:19, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks like the notability tag has been taken down, and the article has some references now. Sorry for the delay in responding. VQuakr (talk) 05:15, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

YooHoo & Friends
Hi there -- I'm wondering why you thought notability guidelines were not met for this page, YooHoo & Friends. Unfortunately, I did not see the email warning about the 7 days notice, and the page was deleted without contest. But I spent a lot of time writing it, creating references and posting it to the wiki...at the least, I would like to learn what would make it satisfactory and prepare for undeleting the page or posting a new version. For the record, I really tried a neutral tone, and sticking to solid industry references where I was able to base the information for the article. thank you. Lambadical (talk) 01:10, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * YooHoo & Friends looks like it has been userfied for you to work on it. I should have been more specific in my PROD; I apologize for that. At least one of the references is to a blog that does not represent an adequate source; several of the other sources appeared to be from very low-copy internet sources rather than major news organizations. In addition, despite your efforts to keep it neutral there are portions that look advert-y to me, such as the use of external links in the lead section, mention of the company's social networking sites, and use of the company's/products web site in several locations in the article including section headers.


 * However, I didn't mention these things in the PROD and should have, so sorry again for the limited explanation. In my opinion, if you fix the issues I just mentioned it would probably survive as an article, though it would be nice if there was a reference to a better third party publication. VQuakr (talk) 05:31, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

IFAA
Hello. I will follow your instructions and try to improve the article. Please, don't forget to read SILAT and thanks for your help. --Giselle Chamorro (talk) 20:29, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Reviewer granted
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 05:46, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Oxygen paradox
Thanks - I asked for it to be incubated [didn't know about the incubator till now - excellent idea!] Melba1 (talk) 03:20, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * No problem. VQuakr (talk) 05:34, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

CSD G11
Please re-read the definition at WP:CSD; if an article is both informative and promotional, it cannot be deleted under this criterion; rather, we remove the promotional material such as over-detailed listing of products & branch offices, and names of executives other than the CEO and Chairman, and get change promotional language such as puffery and adjectives of praise. There's no firm line here, which is one of the things that makes G11 a tricky criterion--I tend to use it rather conservatively, because a great deal can be done by rewriting. Some other admins seem to use it in a broader way than I do, some in a narrower.  DGG ( talk ) 04:22, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the feedback! I will watch out for that. Jminthorne (talk) 02:04, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Question on your flag
I posted my first article Independent Online Booksellers Association, and it was flagged as advertising and also for lack of sources. I agree on the sources, and am working on finding extra sources besides the self-referencing ones I have. But I don't understand the Advertising flag.

I patterned this article after other similar booksellers association articles, particularly Antiquarian Booksellers' Association of America, which has exactly zero external references, and yet that article is not flagged. I do have a lot of information, but I don't think I've got any puffery in there. I'm not saying the article subject is a wonderful organization, or asking anyone to join. I guess one question I have is: if everything I said in the article were verifiable, is there anything in there that would turn it into advertising as opposed to the simple facts I believe it to be?

Second question...how do I fix it enough so that it remains until better sources can be found? I'm not really sure what happens when a flag is on an article like this.

Thanks for any guidance and advice. I'm still finding my way around the Wikipedia help files...so much to read, so totally overwhelming!

Roxxette (talk) 01:47, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
 * WP:OTHERSTUFF applies here; there is no shortage of articles needing attention on Wiki. It is possible for everything in an article to be cited and true but still be advertising. The mission and governance sections look to me too detailed to be appropriate for an encyclopedia article; I would personally like to see this information replaced with objective information about what the organization does and how it has been significant to the field. This is where third party sources will be handy.
 * As for what the tags mean, they mean that the article is more likely to attract attention from other editors who will try to improve the article. They are not badges of shame or targets for attack. VQuakr (talk) 05:43, 23 June 2010 (UTC)


 * OK. Thanks for the additional insight. IOBA actually does some noteable and newsworthy things, but they may be buried in all the other stuff. I will play with it some more. Roxxette (talk) 11:47, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Angela Ismailos
Hi, I was writing to you to confirm that the Angela Ismailos wikipedia page - is not a fan page, and the notability is credible. Do not delete. All information is credible and there is no bias in anything written. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AngelaGD (talk • contribs) 14:01, 23 June 2010 (UTC) AngelaGD (talk) 18:40, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Greetings. I will expand my discussion start on the article talk page; let's keep discussion of the article there. Thanks! VQuakr (talk) 14:08, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Knights In Paris
Hello VQuakr, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of Knights In Paris - a page you tagged - because: Formed by a notable musician. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. (talk) 12:47, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I missed that statement in the article; thanks for the reminder. VQuakr (talk) 17:09, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Yaanb and Yaanb Mobile
What is the problem in add a Public Search Engine in Wikipedia information, what i know have Google, Yahoo, Bing, ... in Wikipeida.. this is a censorship? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Altlinux (talk • contribs) 19:14, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I recommended that these pages be speedily deleted because the articles do not indicate the importance or significance of the web product. See WP:CSD for more information. If you disagree that these articles are valid candidates for speedy deletion, please add a tag to the article as described on your talk page and explain your reasons in the article talk page (though it appears that you may have already done this). You may also want to read WP:FIRST for more hints about starting a new article. VQuakr (talk) 19:20, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Happy Tree Friends: Slap Happy
Hello VQuakr. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Happy Tree Friends: Slap Happy, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 does not apply to software. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 02:52, 28 June 2010 (UTC)


 * FYI: I PRODded the article instead. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 02:55, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the feedback. I thought it was a website but I see from the article that I misread. VQuakr (talk) 02:59, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Deletion request of misplaced Articles for creation submission
--Alpha Quadrant (talk) 19:51, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I did read the template, thanks. Per my explanation on the article talk page, I nominated it for deletion because it was a duplicate with the article already at AfC. The creator generated the articles in both locations. VQuakr (talk) 19:53, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Oops, sorry about that. --Alpha Quadrant (talk) 19:56, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: North General Hospital
Hello VQuakr. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of North General Hospital, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Article claims coverage in reliable sources. Thank you.  So Why  09:42, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
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. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 18:22, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Iberian Latin American Symposia Terminology
Hello. I have make some changes. Please could you see it. Thank you very much. --Giselle Chamorro (talk) 23:16, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I had a look and modified some of the maintenance templates. Thanks for all your hard work! It still needs a lot of development; I would focus developing the article into a smaller number of well developed paragraphs and improving the lead. The references need to be modified into a consistent style, but that can come later. Regards! Jminthorne (talk) 04:09, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for your valuable help. My native language is Spanish so I can therefore also need help in grammar and other linguistic issues. Thanks again.--Giselle Chamorro (talk) 19:57, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Regards. If you want, you can add templates to your user page from WP:BABEL to indicate your proficiency in various languages. Jminthorne (talk) 20:01, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok. Thanks.--Giselle Chamorro (talk) 20:30, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Hello. I have make some more changes. Please could you see it. Thank you very much. Bye. --Giselle Chamorro (talk) 22:15, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Hello. I made some corrections. Even so, remain all templates. It would seem that there is no improvement. What should I do? --Giselle Chamorro (talk) 21:03, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Article "Stefanie Gork"
Hello VQuakR, thanks a lot for your message! Sorry for the mistakes I did!!!!! Got problems by adding references.... Maybe you can help me? Thx in advance and sorry again! Regards, George --George KKC (talk) 17:39, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure, have a look at what I did to the references section on Stefanie Gork to get rid of the error. The article needs some work to get rid of the lists and convert them to prose, but I think it is coming along well. VQuakr (talk) 17:43, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for ur help! I'll try to follow ur instructions!!! Bye bye and thx --George KKC (talk) 18:29, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Hello, could you take another look on this article, please? I’ve make some changes & added prev series. Thanks a lot! --George KKC (talk) 20:24, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

New AFD
Since you tagged the article with "unreferenced" and other tags, I thought you may want to comment on the Articles for deletion/Star Licks AFD. Thanks &mdash; Timneu22 · &#32; talk 17:32, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Boy Better Know (2nd nomination)
Just to let you know that the above AfD, which you participated in, has been relisted due to some significant sourcing being done since you commented. If you have time to review the changes made, it would help form a consensus one way or another - if you feel it's still insufficiently notable, by all means say so. ~ mazca  talk 11:34, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

I think your copy of Twinkle hiccuped
Because it warned me for a db-hoax for a page I had tagged but not created. Perhaps it's because I had made the page a redirect. I also know nothing about Twilight, which probably didn't help in terms of me knowing that the page was a hoax in the first place. Proof I need more Wikipedia in the first place. Oh well. Happy editing.  elektrik SHOOS  07:33, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, sorry for the hiccup. Ducking a trout may be in my near future. VQuakr (talk) 07:35, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Theory:101-The Deadline
Hello VQuakr. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Theory:101-The Deadline, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The band has an article now, although it's been nominated for deletion (AfD). Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 21:32, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the follow up. VQuakr (talk) 21:34, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Alvaro Guttierez
Any insight into why you think that Alvaro Guttierez was an attack page? Clearly it is a poorly written page, but it isn't an attack. If you search, you will see that the content is taken from The Proud Family. Thanks. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 23:04, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah, I think I interpreted it as about a real person. I do not recall if I interpreted the attack to be on the subject or someone else mentioned in the article. VQuakr (talk) 00:05, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi VQuakr
I put the Hang on tag on the article "Girl Talk Inc." because it had already been deleted. And it was deleted over night (US Eastern Standard Time) while both the writer and I were sleeping. I'm hoping this doesn't happen again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Georgiasouthernlynn (talk • contribs) 12:03, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
 * It is not appropriate to put the hangon tag on articles that have not been nominated for speedy deletion. If an article is speedy deleted while you are away, ask the deleting admin to userfy the page so you can work on it without it being deleted. I notice that this article has not been deleted before; was it deleted under another name? VQuakr (talk) 16:17, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Redirecting of IP Intelligence to Web Analytics
Can you please help me understand why the IP Intelligence page was redirected to Web Analytics? Suzanne Moccia (talk) 14:26, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Because the page at IP Intelligence read like an advertisement and the subject did not appear notable enough to me for its own article, but the title was a reasonable search term. VQuakr (talk) 02:46, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

About The Heroes of Olympus
At what points does this article count as advertisement? There are plenty of sources backing this article up. ~ Alec scheat (talk) 01:15, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
 * The entire stub actually reads like a press release to me. It probably does not help that the books have not been published yet. VQuakr (talk) 02:49, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, the first two chapters has been released on http://www.camphalfblood.com/ (password newhero). And there is also an article on the first book in the series (The Lost Hero). The article might need cleaning up, but it doesn`t need deleting. ~ Alec scheat (talk) 06:04, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Generally agree - I didn't nominate it for deletion. VQuakr (talk) 06:55, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Then who did? ~ Alec scheat (talk) 07:19, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Just like to note that I`ve editted the article, but still don`t know if it is advertisement still. Can you check to see if it is or not? ~ Alec scheat (talk) 10:34, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I was not aware that there had been a previous deletion discussion of this book that resulted in delete. The reason for deletion there was that the book is not published yet, and it still is not published. VQuakr (talk) 16:16, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Hey
Thanks for being a new page guardian tonight. --mboverload @ 07:07, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
 * No problem. Spammers seem to be on overdrive. VQuakr (talk) 07:08, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

inre Articles for deletion/Saad Adam
Per my improvements to the film article  The Lives of Mount Druitt Youth, might you consider a redirect of Saad Adam to the film article as an acceptable option?  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 06:14, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Added a comment on the AfD page. The redirect seems reasonable with the improvements to the movie article. VQuakr (talk) 07:12, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I appreciate your looking in.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 13:02, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

inre Articles for deletion/Free Fall (film)
I appreciate your having looked in at the original article and your having tagged it with your concerns. Further, your comment at the AFD was quite sensible when considering the state of the original article. However, I have done some digging and discovered just which film the term "crashes of Trans Regional Airlines" belongs to. I learned it has been released on television and video under several different names and in several different languages and countries. So far, I have been able to improve the 2-sentence unsourced new article into something a bit more encyclopedic: Free Fall (film)... and thought to stop by and ask if you might yourself be able to assist in translating the non-English sources revealed by searches under its alternate-language release titles. Thanks much,  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 01:55, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Chroma Cnife
Hi VQuakr,

can you please check once again the CHROMA_Cnife article? A lot of changes and new references are made. Uskitchen aid (talk) 13:51, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of List of improvised weapons
An article that you have been involved in editing, List of improvised weapons, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Thank you.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ahunt (talk) 22:05, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Swinggeek
Hi VQuakr, I already improve and perfect the guidline of TWaver. Please let me know whether it is to the purpose. I think I can add more detail objective information later once I learn more about TWaver. Thanks.Swinggeek (talk) 01:41, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * There are no references yet in this article. If you believe this article meets the requirements in WP:GNG or WP:PRODUCT, you should explain why at WP:Articles for deletion/TWaver. Thanks! VQuakr (talk) 01:45, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Merge discussion for Foot odor
I have proposed that Smelly socks be merged to Foot odor. Since you contributed to the recent AfD on Smelly socks, you might be interested in participating in the discussion to merge at Talk:Foot odor. Snotty Wong  spout 05:23, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

could you help with the sxc health solutions article ? someone added the proposed deletion tag
you're one of the users who did some work there. I checked over what the administrator listed as problems and wasn't sure what to do. notability seems to be established and references include some third party sources of its history which discuss it. some help would be appreciatedGrmike (talk) 06:03, 22 July 2010 (UTC)grmike
 * It looks like you made some changes and removed the PROD; thanks for explaining your reasons. I would re-read WP:GNG, WP:RS, and WP:COMPANY to verify that you think this company meets the criteria for inclusion then focus on adding a few high-quality sources (in contrast, adding a link to every website that mentions SXC Health Solutions would not improve the article). VQuakr (talk) 18:25, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
 * thanks for responding. just wondering, why do articles like Argus Health Systems, Allion Healthcare, Caremark Rx, Catalyst Health Solutions not have deletion tags ?.  also do google search results carry any weight ? for example sxc health solution  gets over 2 million search results many are probably redundant but it has to show some kind of general interest in the subject by the public. thanks for pointing me to pages discussion rules and criteria.Grmike (talk) 22:32, 22 July 2010 (UTC)grmike

Enix home computer games
Hi. I have replied to your deletion proposal at Talk:Enix home computer games. Please reply, thanks! Jonathan Hardin&#39; (talk) 07:10, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Replied on the talk page. Regards! VQuakr (talk) 07:17, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Klebesadel
Hi -- My reference to Ray Klebesadel seem to have got lost in an edit conflict with you over BLP. I have restored my text, somewhat expanded, and removed your unreferenced BLP tag. I think it should be OK now. This fixes a bunch of red-links scattered about. Thanks -- Wwheaton (talk) 18:33, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks great, thanks for the feedback and sorry for the confusion. VQuakr (talk) 18:35, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

James Umar McConnell
Question: John, what is your interest and expertise in Sufism and this persons Bio, James Umar McCOnnell? Have you read the talk page or discussed the matter there? I do not think you are qualified to judge this articla as it deals with a subject even most Muslims do not understand. The introduction expalins this very well, yet you insist on going down the recogniton road. Could you please tell me what an Ijaaza means and if not understanding it well, defer to others who do. Lets not make this a battle of egos and stick to what we know - military and engineering issues.

Thanks

BeNothing
 * I did reply on the talk page prior to nominating the article for deletion. The requirements for establishing notability and using citations are uniformly applied to all biographies, and discussed in policies such as WP:BIO, WP:N, WP:V, and WP:GNG. Establishing notability does not necessarily require discussion of academic credentials. VQuakr (talk) 17:05, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Hello John,

Did you read up on being a murid and did you see the alternative to McConnell Bilal Phillips? I wrote some more about the issue on the talk page for deleting the article. Hope you take a look and vote for inclussion. Any idea why Empty Buffer is gone. Did he/she make the changes or you. If you did, thanks, it looks much better. BeNothing (talk) 00:44, 27 July 2010 (UTC)


 * It looks like Empty Buffer spent some time working on the article; he deserves the credit. The problem with notability on James Umar McConnell remains as it has been, that there do not appear to be any references that meet the requirements of WP:BIO. Please note that references are different than academic credentials. VQuakr (talk) 04:25, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

wikipedia dyslexia project
Thank you for correcting my error, due to my communication disability I sometimes make these types of mistakes unknowingly. Thanks dolfrog (talk) 13:15, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Happy to help. Regards! VQuakr (talk) 17:58, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

re Jimmie Binnie
Right, it was near-similtaneous I guess, I cleared it up. Herostratus (talk) 05:28, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it seems like Twinkle could have a sanity check for the tag already on the page. VQuakr (talk) 05:30, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Douglas Herbert
Hi. I made some additions by using some different sources and adding some external links. Please let me know if I should add anything more.  NMP Dice  02:39, 30 July 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by NMP Dice (talk • contribs)
 * Ok, I will reply on the article talk page. VQuakr (talk) 02:40, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Proposed merge for index (economic) and Index number
I support your suggestion that these two pages be merged. I have revised some of the language in index (economic), but the entry is still very skimpy. I doubt that many people will search for index number. I would be happy to perform the merge if you like. Shall I proceed?

thanks

Wikigratia (talk) 16:03, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Fine by me, looks like the "couple of days" I suggested in the article talk page has been extended a bit. Let me know if you would prefer for me to do the merge; I have done a few before. VQuakr (talk) 17:24, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Organic Diversion
Hi VQuakr. Thanks for the heads up on the external references on the new Source Separated Organics page. I cleaned it up a bit and welcome further suggestions. Another Portlander, Iknowtrash (talk) 21:51, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Minor edits
In the future please only mark edits as minor which are actually minor. Tagging articles is not a minor edit. See MINOR for further information. Continually marking non-minor edits as minor can be seen as disruptive, which it seems you've made a habit of. Also, please provide reasoning for your inclusion of this template. You've failed to explain it and the three sources present cite the most relevant information about the individual. Do you see some unsourced contentious information? If so, perhaps you could tag it directly using the fact tag.--Crossmr (talk) 06:43, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Using the default setting of Friendly is not really a "habit." I did tinker with the settings a bit, but it appears to still be sticking to its standard of marking tags as default. Given the precise edit summary it provides, I think the potential for harm is pretty minor. I will have another look at the article, as I recall all the sources were not in English. VQuakr (talk) 07:30, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * The sources not being in English are irrelevant. They're reliable national news sites and news papers. Your constantly marking non-minor edits as minor is, and has lead to the block of several users in the past wh have persisted. The potential for harm isn't in the edit summary it is in the way they are marked, which is why you aren't to mark them as minor.--Crossmr (talk) 08:00, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * For reference, I would be interested to read any ANI or similar discussions that resulted in a user being blocked solely for marking good faith maintenance template additions as minor. That being said, this is the first time someone has brought this up and I am looking into getting Friendly to cooperate with the custom changes. VQuakr (talk) 08:10, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * For reference you can see the arbcom decision on the matter Requests_for_arbitration/C68-FM-SV. You don't often get blocked for marking non-minor edits as minor, you get blocked for being disruptive, which this is. You've now been informed so there shouldn't be any excuse for continuing doing it. As for a block resulting from it, see here Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive624. The user was told to stop doing this, they continued, they were blocked.--Crossmr (talk) 08:32, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I do not think adding tags goes against the spirit of the RFAR, since it does not add or remove content from the article. The ANI page you referenced clearly discusses contributions more significant (and potentially disruptive) than maintenance templates. I the help page to which you pointed me is not a policy, and even if it was I believe WP:IAR is valid here since I am attempting to improve Wikipedia. The fact that Friendly edits include a very precise edit summary is absolutely germane, since the accusation of disruptive activity implies that I am attempting to add maintenance templates unnoticed. I urge you to use more discretion in choosing when to accuse other editors of disruptive activity.
 * That being said, your request that tag additions not be marked as minor is reasonable, and I repeat that the reason I have not already done so are technical. Since I do not see how any user would have any difficulty seeing exactly what changes were made from the edit summaries created by Friendly, I see no issues with continuing to use the tool while the issue is resolved. Thanks! VQuakr (talk) 08:50, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * IAR is not a shield to do whatever you want. It only means you don't have to be aware of the rules to edit. You can't simply invoke it as a defense. Otherwise both parties could and it gets you nowhere. IAR means you can make edits that you view as improving the encyclopedia, and there is a potential that they may not conform completely to the encyclopedias rules, but if you're called on them, you have to defend them. this is a subject that has come up many times and the community consistently agrees that misuing minor edits is disruptive. Anyway, I must be off. Thanks for considering it--Crossmr (talk) 08:53, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree on your description of IAR. I do not view it as a free pass to do whatever I want; I view it as a valid reason to do what I described in my last two posts. VQuakr (talk) 08:58, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok, technical issue resolved. I changed my Friendly settings to not make tag additions minor, per your suggestion. VQuakr (talk) 01:45, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Re: Mickwitz talkback
Thanks for the heads up! I'm on it. - Vianello (Talk) 19:58, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Greg Erwin
Let me guess - for fun you screw with people by deleting their articles? I've responded to tag here: Talk:Greg_Erwin --Hutcher (talk) 04:38, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Good job improving the article. Please review WP:AGF. VQuakr (talk) 06:18, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Revert
Props on assuming good faith,, but FYI edits in the near future by this IP can be immediately reverted:. Thanks.  Jujutacular  talk 14:42, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Regards! VQuakr (talk) 14:45, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

NPOV tag
Have endeavored to rewrite NoPort Southport article as objectively (yet accurately) as possible per your NPOV tag. This organization has substantial credibility (and contributors) in the region regarding a topic of significant regional concern.

It is hard, if not impossible, to downplay the notability nor significance of NoPort Southport in the face of what they accomplished.

comment added by Wikiwriter1111 (talk • contribs) 15:29, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your effort. I see another editor has taken down the tags. Many people have strong feelings on this subject, so maintaining a neutral viewpoint for this family of articles is a challenge. VQuakr (talk) 03:29, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Gravitation_water_vortex_power_plant
Hi,

since your last check I did some modifications. Please check again and tell if something is still to improve or remove the remarks.

Thanks, Skyrun
 * Ok, it looks like the issues were addressed. Happy editing! VQuakr (talk) 16:51, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

John Wayles
I will re-visit the John Wayles article that was deleted due to a possible copyright issue. Although there was no intent to plagiarize, better care should have been taken to assure that the original material is recognized as only a source. I would then like to work with you or other editors to remove re-direction and permit re-posting of the article. Thank you.Tonymartin (talk) 15:50, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
 * John Wayles was not deleted; I merely blanked the page to remove the copyrighted content and replaced it with a redirect. Feel free to continue editing the article in your own words. If you want to start a page at User:Tonymartin/John Wayles instead, I would be happy to have a look at it before it is moved to article space. VQuakr (talk) 16:14, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

I will take your advice and follow through on that. Thank you.Tonymartin (talk) 17:31, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

I have re-written the john Wayles article and would like to submit it for your review and re-posting: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Tonymartin/John_Wayles Tonymartin (talk) 03:25, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

NoPort Southport
This article looks to be as objective as it might be considering that it is about a public advocacy group in opposition to the North Carolina State Ports Authority's efforts to create a megaport in a pristine natural setting in the lower Cape Fear.

As for notability, the success of NoPort Southport to muster, in short order, the support of all of the communities in the lower Cape Fear, as well as the US Congressman for this district, to support it in its efforts to stop the NC State Port Authority's Megaport initiative is a MAJOR accomplishment. Its effectiveness was even acknowledged by its opponent, NCSPA CEO Tom Eagar (as cited in the article). Then there is also the financial support of nonprofit organizations ($15,000 to date) to fund studies by University of North Carolina faculty to develop independent analyses of both the economic and environment aspects of the port proposal (to be presented in Sept 2010).

What does it take to get this tag removed from the NoPort Southport article? Skyler69 (talk) 01:00, 8 August 2010 (UTC) A. G. Hering
 * I will take a look at the article. Note that it is very difficult to write a NPOV article alone on a controversial topic about which you have strong feelings. VQuakr (talk) 03:53, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

RE:Charles Darwin
WP:AGF. I did it mainly because of the fact you modified the paragraph after your addition which was actually very good. but the modification about his death wasn't necessary. You could of left the death paragraph alone and added the new paragraph with the very RS and it would of been accepted, it was just the fact that the modification to the death paragraph was not needed.

Many Regards, Yousou (talk) 17:16, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Replied on your talk page. If you don't mind, please keep the discussion there for continuity. Thanks! VQuakr (talk) 03:12, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

I prefer to reply on your talk page so you know when you get the message but you can respond here on your own talk page if you so wish, anyway you don't have to be that harsh with me, I make mistakes from time from time,and when I say AGF, I am basically saying 'If this revert/acceptance is wrong, then sorry' because I am Assuming Good Faith. Many Regards, Yousou (talk) 10:14, 17 August 2010 (UTC) People make mistakes from time to time. Many Regards, Yousou (talk) 20:19, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Re: John Wayles
I have re-written the John Wayles article and would like to submit it for your review and placement in article space. The page is in User:Tonymartin/John_Wayles Tonymartin Regards,Tonymartin (talk) 16:44, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks good to me. I have requested that the existing redirect at John Wayles be deleted to make way for the move from user space into article space. VQuakr (talk) 19:54, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. I really have appreciated your help throughout.Tonymartin (talk) 18:22, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Mary Kay Letourneau
Thank you for moving the subpage to Talk, which was where I had intended for it go in the first place! :-) -- — Keithbob • Talk  • 00:04, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Any time. Cheers! VQuakr (talk) 00:15, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Clerk elections
Hi, this is just to inform you that elections for Clerkship at WP:UAA have started on the talk page. You have been sent this message because you were recently active in handling submissions or discussions. Discussion is ongoing and you are encouraged to voice your opinion on the candidates.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Fridae'sDoom (talk) at 06:42, 14 September 2010 (UTC).

Re: Loga Ramin Torkian
Thanks for your assistance with the Loga Ramin Torkian article. I don't know how I managed to get through all the research for the article without managing to get the guy's name in the right order. Lord of laziness (talk) 05:33, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

sig
thanks   DGG ( talk ) 00:20, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * NP, I'm always nervous editing other people's posts so thanks for double-checking. VQuakr (talk) 05:26, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Peace dove
 I dream of horses @ has given you a dove! Doves promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day happier. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a dove, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past (this fits perfectly) or a good friend. Cheers!

Spread the peace of doves by adding {{subst:Peace dove}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

--I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a message on my talk page. @ 17:48, 20 September 2010 (UTC) Thanks! VQuakr (talk) 05:25, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Howard Rubenstein
Just wondering why you tagged this article the moment it was created? Did you actually read it or check the citations? Philip.marshall
 * Greetings, and thanks for your contributions! At the time I added the tags, the only references were translations by the subject of the article. Since the references did not confer notability, I tagged it for notability and improve references. To answer your other question, I did not read the references (books and plays he has translated), but I did read the article. Regards! VQuakr (talk) 02:03, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

It takes a few edits to complete an article, and in future I think you need to hold fire a bit before tagging an article the minute a first cut appears: also before making arbitrary judgments on what constitutes a "reliable" source. But thanks anyway. Philip.marshall (talk) 12:48, 24 September 2010 (UTC)Philip.marshallPhilip.marshall (talk) 12:48, 24 September 2010 (UTC) And I certainly endorse this staement: "Tagging anything other than attack pages, copyvio, vandalism or complete nonsense only a few minutes after creation is not likely to be constructive and may only serve to annoy the page author." Have you created any original page conent yourself?
 * Noted. You may prefer to edit BLP articles in your user space until they meet WP:BLPSPS and other content policies. Yes. On an unrelated topic, you may want to adjust your signature as it seems to parse twice at the moment. VQuakr (talk) 03:44, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Bolitas
Hope you don't mind the speedy removal and AfD nom at Luzon Moo Duk Kwan. It's time to put that article into a deletion context that the creator cannot modify (i.e. if he removes the AfD tag, that's not going to stop the AfD from going forward, unlike a speedy or a PROD). Best regards,  T RANSPORTER M AN  ( TALK ) 13:21, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Not a problem at all. I hoped to avoid a block for the user in this case by engaging them, but it clearly wasn't working since they just kept removing the tags. VQuakr (talk) 16:15, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Troy Nickerson
Why was the Troy Nickerson article deleted? I was supposed to have ten days to provide references. It took me less than 30 minutes to put the references on the page, but you deleted it out of hand before it could become complete. TobusRex (talk) 04:29, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I didn't delete anything. It looks like it was deleted per speedy deletion criterion A7; you may want to discuss the reasons for the deletion with the administrator who performed the deletion rather than repeatedly recreating the article. VQuakr (talk) 07:35, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Don't touch it
No one cares what is the IP belong to. Only it's the dynamic IP is OK--125.25.35.0 (talk) 06:39, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
 * If you are on a dynamic IP, then it really isn't your user page, it it? VQuakr (talk) 06:41, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Welcome message
Thank you for the welcome message which you sent me on my first contribution. It is nice to be assigned a mentor to help with this new (to me) project. You will see that my article is a scan of an existing manual, and I have credited the source (I hope correctly). Is the article the correct format for this type of work? Before I go too far.... I would also like to scan some of the diagrams and insert them into the article, can you tell me the best way to do that, and to provide the suitable links from the text to the diagram?Dwarner30uk (talk) 09:56, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Greetings, and welcome! Actually, I am concerned that the subject of this article may not really be appropriate for an encyclopedia. I started a discussion thread on the article talk page, here. Probably the best thing is to start a "deletion discussion" to draw a broader opinion on the article. However, this material appears to be an excellent source for information in such as ICBM and LGM-25C Titan II, however. As to your question about pictures, instructions on how to upload photos can be found here. Be sure to explain that the source is (if I understand correctly) a declassified US Air Force manual in the public domain so it is not deleted for copyright infringement. To insert a photography, use the following syntax in the edit window: [[Image:Filename.ext|options]], where "filename" is the name of the image and "options" are things like saying the picture dimensions and locations. More information can be found here. Regards! VQuakr (talk) 04:53, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for this info. I would like to start a "deletion discussion" to get some more ideas, can you tell me how to do this please? David | Dwarner30uk (talk) 09:54, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * You can go to WP:AFD for an overview; the process is convoluted so you might prefer to let me post it. I also responded to your post on the article talk page; I suggested that moving it to your user page could be the best solution. BTW, you can use the manual as a source whether or not it is available on the internet. VQuakr (talk) 05:09, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * It is already listed there, see Articles for deletion/T.O. 21M-LGM25C-1 for the discussion.  bahamut0013  words deeds 16:22, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

T.O. 21M-LGM25C-1 may be a good candidate for Wikisource. Since you have a copy of the work, would it be possible for you to scan its pages? We would want to collect all the images of pages into a "djvu" file, which allows us to easily store and access the page images and allows readers to verify the text of the document. --Spangineerws (háblame)  19:17, 7 October 2010 (UTC)


 * To clarify, User:Dwarner30uk is the one with a copy, not me. I am not familiar with the Wikisource process so please guide him through the process. VQuakr (talk) 19:53, 7 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes; apologies for the confusion. --Spangineerws (háblame)  20:46, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Re: Welcome from Annak123
Thanks for the welcome message and advice. The idea of getting 'adopted' seems a good idea. Both of us (wife and husband) are still on a learning curve with this. Annak123 (talk) 04:24, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * No problem; again, welcome. The two of you should use separate accounts per Wikipedia policy; see WP:NOSHARE. Let me know if you need any help! VQuakr (talk) 04:32, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Oopps, thanks for that! I wasn't aware of the no share policy...still learning.  I will set up a separate account for my husband. I assume having the same IP address is not an issue then? Annak123 (talk) 05:06, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

ANGELA ISMAILOS PAGE
I was trying to make a page for angela ismailos, a personal/fact page on wikipedia. This page was reverted back to her project "GREAT DIRECTORS " page. How do I maintain the new page separate from the film page? Why are there so many alerts? how do i get rid of them? PLEASE HELP!!

Anismafilms (talk) 19:25, 12 October 2010 (UTC)ANISMA
 * I originally changed the article to a redirect to the director's film because the subject does not appear to have much notability beyond the single film. The article is tagged for notability for the same reason, for fan site because it appears to have been written to promote her, and conflict of interest because it was created by someone with a conflict of interest. I also notice that your user name appears to be based on the name of a film production company; please be aware of the conflict of interest policy and the policy on editing on behalf of a group. Thanks! VQuakr (talk) 01:17, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Tristan Couvares
Hi, I have reverted your redirect based on 1E as I believe there may be an argument for sufficient impact that requires an AfD rather than redirecting on one person's opinion. Thanks, Fæ (talk) 08:41, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note! VQuakr (talk) 16:21, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

ProfessorBangho
Thanks for flagging this account. I've indefinitely blocked it. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 19:21, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure thing. VQuakr (talk) 19:24, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Phil Davison
I have contested your speedy deletion tagging of this article, since it is a notable subject that has received persistent coverage in reliable sources.--William S. Saturn (talk) 19:33, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the message. I notice your reason for contesting the speedy deletion is very similar to your keep rationale in the AfD. Has something changed about the subject of the article in the last month? VQuakr (talk) 19:45, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * The coverage has now become persistent.--William S. Saturn (talk) 21:13, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I changed the G4 to an AfD, since this clearly isn't uncontroversial. Regards! VQuakr (talk) 21:54, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much.--William S. Saturn (talk) 22:12, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Mpaulo arthur johnson
Hi. I know you  were exercising  caution  with  your PROD, but  in  this case there was no need. A Google search revealed no  sources, and there is a clear COI. I have changed your PROD for a CSD A7. Cheers, --Kudpung (talk) 08:59, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, I thought someone might in this case. Regards! VQuakr (talk) 17:42, 17 November 2010 (UTC)