User talk:YuMaNuMa/Archive/2

Dispute Resolution IRC office hours.
Hello there. As you expressed interest in hearing updates to my research in the dispute resolution survey that was done a few months ago, I just wanted to let you know that I am hosting an IRC office hours session this coming Saturday, 28th July at 19:00 UTC (approximately 12 hours from now). This will be located in the IRC channel - if you have not participated in an IRC discussion before you can connect to IRC here.

Regards, User:Szhang (WMF) (talk) 07:07, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

GA review
Yo. I've seen that you've never edited the OS X Mountain Lion article, meaning that you can review for it for GA status. Could you do that? Thanks. Zach Vega ( talk to me ) 23:37, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Move
There was no consensus in removing that stuff in the first place.

I put up the inuse banner because I am in the process of sifting to ind out what need to be retained and what deleted.

Returning information to where it came from is a rather different matter to deleting it. It shouldn't have been removed from the article to which it pertains directly.

Amandajm (talk) 08:27, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
 * At the very least, the protest section should be restored as it was one of the initial sections of this article when it was create. If it was to be removed, this section should definitely be discussed in the talk page before its removal. Anyways, until that happens, I'm just going to transfer the protest section to the reaction section of the film article. YuMaNuMa Contrib 08:33, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
 * And so, what did you find, when you went to the film article.. Grandma is nobody's fool! I am keeping an eye on about four articles simultaneously and attempting to prevent the insertion of  a) conspiracy theories, b) bias, c) idiocy, d) lack of balance, e) misuse of terms such as "alleged" which get shoved in by people with no comprehension of grammar.  I have been at this article for the last four days. Amandajm (talk) 09:55, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

A6
Please read up on the difference between A15 class CPU and A15 CPU before you make changes to the page.User931
 * Sorry, I misread the source and what you wrote, my apologies. Also to prevent further errors of misreading and whatnot, do you think it's more appriopriate to use the CPU class' other name, Krait instead of A15 which can be mistaken for the CPU itself? YuMaNuMa Contrib 09:27, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
 * A15 is a CPU made by ARM, possible for anyone to license and manufacture. Qualcomm just as Apple holds license both to ARMs CPUs as well as their instruction sets meaning they can either manufacture an unaltered ARM CPU, as in previous Apple SoCs or do as Qualcomm has done for many years now, build a custom CPU based on ARMs design, like Scorpion and Krait which are Cortex A8/A9 and A15 like CPUs. So Krait is not a name of the "class" but the name of Qualcomms latest CPU.User931
 * Ahh, thanks for clearing that up. YuMaNuMa Contrib 09:42, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Embassies
Did you check every one of those news reports individually? I was just in the process of doing it.Amandajm (talk) 10:23, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Also, I have requested a block on the racist dickhead on whose page you placed a warning. Amandajm (talk) 10:44, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that :), also in response to your first post, I actually didn't check the news sources itself before removing the countries hence I restored it by reverting my edits. YuMaNuMa Contrib 10:45, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Map instalation
Hello can you re-install my map into the Mohammad movie page. Thanky you :)--Camoka5 (talk) 20:41, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Wireless standards support on the iPhone 5
FYI - the CDMA iPhone 5 does support GSM and UMTS. See Apple's official specs here: official specs. Under the Cellular and Wireless it says, exactly: As you can see from the above, there is GSM and UMTS support in the CDMA model. Therefore, please do not modify the "all models" specs. Wikiliki (talk) 23:07, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * CDMA model A1429*: CDMA EV-DO Rev. A and Rev. B (800, 1900, 2100 MHz); UMTS/HSPA+/DC-HSDPA (850, 900, 1900, 2100 MHz); GSM/EDGE (850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz); LTE (Bands 1, 3, 5, 13, 25)
 * Ahh fuck, my bad, thanks for correcting me, however this article does say that CDMA models are not compatible with GSM networks 1 and I was basing my assertions on that being the case for previous models. YuMaNuMa Contrib 01:41, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * In reality there probably isn't even any difference in the hardware between the A1429 "CDMA" and "GSM" models. iFixit shows that the A1429 has a CDMA amplifier on board, in addition to the GSM, UMTS and LTE amps. That would make sense also given that the only difference between the A1429 CDMA and GSM is that the CDMA version just adds LTE bands 13 and 25. So if all it does is stack a couple of features "on top" of the GSM model, then given Apple's constant strive to have as few actual hardware models as possible, there probably isn't any actual hardware differences between the two variants (otherwise, why would apple name them the same model ID as they did?). I guess, in reality there's probably just two versions out there, the AT&T (and future T-Mobile USA [since the bands it supports will support TMO's UMTS after their "refarm" as well as their future LTE] and maybe a couple of Canadian carriers) variant (A1428) and an "everywhere else" variant (A1429). Wikiliki (talk) 15:52, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Photos, Sydney protest
Thanks for alerting me to those. I have no idea how to upload them. this is a really good pic. It would be good to have this as well.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/49283475@N00/7991799867/in/photostream/

Amandajm (talk) 03:33, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I uploaded that image for you, here is the WikiCommons link. YuMaNuMa Contrib 03:45, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Softnyx logo.png)
Thanks for uploading File:Softnyx logo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 05:08, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Android (operating system)
...ICS is 25%+ now and should be easy to source for you if you can update it. Thanks ツ Je no va  20  (email) 09:04, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
 * You might need to find a source for that, the data that's in the table and graph was directly sourced from statistics that were released by Google yesterday. YuMaNuMa Contrib 09:25, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I appear to have misread this, where it clearly states Android 4, and not ICS lol. Thanks ツ Je no va  20  (email) 09:30, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Sydney edit-a-thon invitation
Hi there! You are cordially invited to a classical music edit-a-thon Saturday week (13 October) in Sydney. The theme will be Music of France, to coincide with the ABC Classic FM countdown between 8-14 October. If you are unable to attend in person, we will also be collaborating online during the countdown. Details an attendee list are at Meetup/Sydney/October 2012. Hope you can make it! John Vandenberg 09:54, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

(this automated message was delivered using replace.py to all users in Sydney)

Unreasonable reversion
There is a discussion in place on iPhone 5 talk page which you requested a response and made a statement of intent to revert if there is no response. You went and and reverted it six minutes later. Do you serious think that wait 6 minutes, declare no reply, revert is reasonable?


 * Response request

Cantaloupe2 (talk) 13:44, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
 * You reverted 6 minutes later
 * Firstly sign your comments please, secondly, I readded it because I had a further source that correctly verifies the claim (first claim), I also removed the problem that you seem to have an issue with(second claim), that is why I restored it. I honestly, didn't think that even after that you would have problems with it but clearly not. YuMaNuMa Contrib 13:34, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
 * You've been editing long enough. If you found something verifying a claim, then you know better that it needs to be cited. Not just claim you've found it so. Done playing edit warring. Sent off for RfC.  Cantaloupe2 (talk) 13:44, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the RfC, it's long overdue. And I did say in the iPhone 5 talk page that I would cite it, it wasn't cited before because I didn't think it was that much of a concern especially when references above mentioned Scuffgate numerous times. YuMaNuMa Contrib 13:51, 19 October 2012 (UTC)


 * both of you, please do not carry on your conflict on my talk page. And when you want me to look at a particular issue on WP:RS, or elsewhere, just call my attention to the  general nature of the issue, without trying to convince me. I will go by what I judge for myself, not by your arguments. After all, when you ask me for an opinion, it's my opinion that you want, isn't it?.


 * And, with my admin hat on for a moment, I strongly advise both of you to try to avoid each other, There are quite enough articles, and quite enough sourcing issues, that you do not need to work on the same ones. I am not interested n who is right or wrong, either in a particular case or in general--that's not the sort of thing I like to decide. I am interested in helping each of you avoid getting into difficulties here, and I need to warn you you seem to be heading that way rather fast.  DGG ( talk ) 05:35, 23 October 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm determined to improve the iPhone 5 article to GA status and intended to do so from the start. I have encountered Cantaloupe in the past and found his edits to be quite rational and improved the quality of the article and believe that this is probably just a one off incident - hopefully. However when issues that I find concerning do I arise, I don't enjoy sitting idly by while content from an article that I have extensively worked on gets removed for reasons that I believe are invalid. Cantaloupe initially removed paragraphs of information under the rationale of it being based only on user experience and not on scientific analysis, that is simply not how consumer technology articles are written from my experience on Wikipedia and dealing with similar articles that have now achieve GA status. Sorry if I went blabbering on again but I believe in this situation, his/her perception of the policy would restrict the comprehensiveness of similar articles that I would most likely work on in the near future. YuMaNuMa Contrib 06:04, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Comment on Cantaloupe's actions
Hey sorry to bother again, but I just want a third opinion here. Cantaloupe has been ravaging other articles after he gave up on iPhone 5, and the current place is at Pizza delivery. Do you think his claims of the article being American-centric are valid/relevant when he attempts to add "United States" after Amherst, Massachusetts, when topic of the article is already specified with the state name appended after the city name? I find it quite ridiculous. And this is just one of the types of edits he's doing. - M0rphzone (talk) 04:55, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I didn't give up on iPhone 5. In that article, it uses various articles and various stories from multiple countries. For example, you made an improper synthesis of its common for pizza delivery men to become targets based on one article about faux house in Britain. You're now using article from the US, so I just appended United States. What policy says this is improper? Cantaloupe2 (talk) 05:13, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Wow Cantaloupe, are you serious? You're just giving some confusing excuse for your weird reasoning when you added that edit. Why would there be a need to specify that Massachusetts is in the US? We don't append "England"/"UK" after Bath, Somerset or some other city. If you want some policy to "prove it" or whatever, see WP:USPLACE and WP:MOSLINK. And on your illogical comments about the viewpoints: the article about the incident in Britain gave another viewpoint outside of US topics, so how is that US-centric? There is nothing wrong with using US sources after UK sources. I find your reasoning very odd. - M0rphzone (talk) 06:11, 25 October 2012 (UTC)


 * I don't think I would be a neutral party if I got involved as Cantaloupe and I just had a fairly lengthy argument against each other and I probably developed some bias against him in the process. Sorry for disappointing. Cantaloupe, I'll be nominating the iPhone 5 article for GAN soon after it has been thoroughly copyedited, I suggest you forward your issue and/or request to the RfC forum where it will gain more exposure so we can resolve this once and for all. Furthermore, it really does look like you gave up as you didn't address the argument I presented and instead addressed something else that's quite impertinent, so if you do want look as if you didn't "give up", attack the issue at hand and take the initiative to appeal or forward discussion if arguments flow circularly. I just want to make one last comment to aid you in your disputes and edits, Cantaloupe, please assume good faith, assuming otherwise automatically creates a hostile environment in which tensions rise and rash decisions occur. From what I've notice you have a history of assuming bad faith and similar to vandalism, incivility or disruption, it can get you banned. YuMaNuMa Contrib 05:31, 25 October 2012 (UTC)


 * I put it up for RfC and so far no further comments. With just you and I messaging, it was getting nowhere. You had your own way, I had mine and you weren't receptive of what I had to say until we got DGG's input on it. From there we moved forward a bit. If I'm not editing every single day, it doesn't mean I've given up on it. Editing Wikipedia isn't urgent after all. I'll do it when I feel like it. Cantaloupe2 (talk) 06:00, 25 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Then stop trying to counter every edit I make like you did to YuMaNuMa at iPhone 5. It's like you want to "win" or something. - M0rphzone (talk) 06:11, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
 * That's a poor reason for not replying to my messages when you continued to edit other articles particularly the one m0rphzone came forth to me with, it basically comes down to two reasons, you don't care enough to settle disputes in a timely manner or you have nothing left to say, which to put it simply means you gave up. Nothing wrong with either, the disputes were regarding minor issues that could've simply been resolved by citing other references instead of removing content and checking the content and what's normally included against other good quality articles on similar topics, iPhone 4S, iPad 2 to name just a few. The real concern or wrong here is dragging disputes on for months because you "edit/do it when you feel like it", which isn't the case here at all(in terms of you editing whenever you feel like as it seems like you edit every day). I'm willing to compromise if you can provide logical reasons why with the help of Wikipedia policies - STOP, don't list them here, go to the iPhone 5 talk page and discuss it there if you wish. YuMaNuMa Contrib 06:33, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Sydney edit-a-thon invitation
Hi there! You are cordially invited to a disability edit-a-thon Saturday week (10 November) in Sydney. If you are unable to attend in person, we will also be collaborating online before, during and after the meetup. Details an attendee list are at Meetup/Sydney/November 2012. Hope you can make it! John Vandenberg 15:34, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

(this automated message was delivered using replace.py to all users in Sydney)

"Life expectancy"
I have re-organized the "calculate life expectancy" section such that it is more readable.

In my opinion, the original texts in that section were terribly unprofessional. It is not concise, and illogical. As someone working in the field, I feel obliged to organize it so that it gives the most essential steps in calculating life expectancy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.8.183.93 (talk) 07:50, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

iPhone 5 LTE
Hey, i had a browse through the archives and couldn't find it anywhere talking about which section LTE reception and usability should be placed. I fail to understand why the Reception of the 4G service would not be a feature as apple themselves class it as a feature on their devices (you can check the iPhone 5 feature section on here http://www.apple.com/iphone/features/). I had a quick look in the dictionary and there are few definitions for reception, one of which being 'the receiving of data or a radio/television broadcast' and the other being 'response/reaction'. The 4G service surely receives data and not a response or reaction?! If this had been discussed and settled before please could you inform of the reason to why it is in its current place? Thanks --Tacita620 (talk) 17:28, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
 * The reason I provided before is precedent, the reception of LTE in iPad (3rd generation) article is located in the reception section. This is the section that I was referring to, Talk:IPhone 5/Archive 1, I guess it's not actually considered a discussion as there is no 2nd party but that is due to another editor failing to reply to the discussion and insisting on the change after I repeating provided him reasons and him providing me nothing other than a Wikipedia essay. In the discussion, I also mentioned that the LTE reception section would be better suited in the Reception section as it's not a feature of the iPhone 5, it is however a section on how it was received by telecommunications company and their ability to integrate the device into their network. A more detailed reason for the revert is in the link I provided before. I repeatedly said to the other edit who reverted that I would be more than willing to compromise if he can provide me with a reason why it belongs in the Feature section rather than Reception section, this applies to you too, if you believe that it better suits the Feature section. YuMaNuMa Contrib 21:14, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I have looked it over and although i dont think it is completely clear, i understand the point you are coming from. I might re-write some sections of the 'LTE Reception and Usability' and see how it looks in the 'features' section (I will make it applicable to the features section without changing it to much). I will post it on here before publishing it as i am sure you will inevitably revert it! Thanks --Tacita620 (talk) 18:51, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Edit war: Talk:IPhone 5/GA1
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Talk:IPhone 5/GA1. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Tagremover (talk) 14:27, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
 * LMAO, is that all? Firstly edit wars rules generally only apply on actual articles, anything is else is considered disruptive editing, I'm sure you're familiar with that as you have been blocked for that reason. Secondly I did not even come close to passing the 3RR thus your warning is invalid, also reasons were provided for why I made the change, a GA review page is not an appropriate place to discuss ongoing disputes between two arguing editors. By the way placing invalid warnings, assuming bad faith are all considered violations of Wikipedia policy. YuMaNuMa Contrib 14:32, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Google Galaxy Nexus
Hey,

I know you're trying to make Wikipedia a better place and I am too. That's why I've modified the Galaxy Nexus page to show a better image of it, also, I figured because the Nexus One, Nexus S and Nexus 4 all have high quality press photos it would make sense that the Galaxy Nexus get a quality photo as well. Maybe we can work together to achieve this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeffery Keel (talk • contribs) 22:23, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Your work in the Google Nexus article was fantastic as it fixed many outstanding issues and errors, however the image you uploaded needs to be under the correct copyright license. I agree that the image of the phone with someone holding is of poor quality and needs to be replaced but unfortunately due to Wikipedia's strict approach to copyright, images need to be verifiably under the creative commons license, if not it's possible that the copyright owner may sue Wikipedia for copyright infringement. I hope you understand why I removed it and it wasn't because I had a thing against you or anything like that.


 * Thanks YuMaNuMa Contrib 23:47, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

iPhone 5 3RR
In a span of about 2 1/2 hours, you have directly reverted me three times. Please consider allowing some time after change for others to comment before jumping the gun and reverting.

1st

2nd

3rd

- Cantaloupe2 (talk) 10:45, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you should stop removing content that will be disputed before a discussion has been initiated, oh and stop assuming bad faith and accusing other of advancing their positions in the article. If you adhere to the custom of allowing the stable version to prevail, none of those reverts would have occurred, however you chose to make controversial edits before discussing it hence the reason why I reverted it. YuMaNuMa Contrib 10:57, 13 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Boys calm down, you just got the page locked. Congrats! (sarcasm) Ob tund Talk 17:30, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Sydney meetup invitation: January 2013
Hi there! You are cordially invited to attend a meetup being held on Thursday 10 January 2013. Details an attendee list are at Meetup/Sydney/January 2013. Hope you can make it! John Vandenberg 10:13, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

(this automated message was delivered using replace.py to all users in Sydney)

Gold Coast Image
Hi there, for the Gold Coast infobox lead image, do you prefer or ? I'm partial to the second because it shows the GC's density really well. 101.103.19.122 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 05:13, 11 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Although the first one looks a bit more attractive due to its high saturation and possibly artistic nature that makes it look like it would be featured in a real estate ad, the second one appears more informative as it shows a wider view of the Gold Coast from a neutral POV, hence the latter image should be used in my opinion, but both are fine. YuMaNuMa Contrib 05:22, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

iPhone article
I apologize for my lack of knowledge regarding the citing of sources. However, you will find that the issues with LTE are not cited or mentioned elsewhereLukemags (talk) 06:31, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Please see the LTE reception and usability section, these issues affect entire nations hence they are not exactly uncommon. That section, is well sourced with reliable references from technology oriented websites. YuMaNuMa Contrib 06:34, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

I would then suggest wording that section to suggest network incompatibility, rather than issues with the iPhone itself and false advertising.Lukemags (talk) 06:38, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I personally don't see any issues, perhaps you should quote a sentence, which you think is bias or portraying the iPhone 5 impartially. Wait I think you're referring to the lead, ill see what I can do. YuMaNuMa  Contrib 06:42, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

"Despite being advertised as LTE compatible, issues with connecting to LTE networks in some regions have been noted." This sentence says there are "issues" connecting to LTE networks. This implies there are inherent issues with the iPhone, when it is simply an issue of network incompatibility. When it says it is "despite being advertised as LTE compatible", it implies not only that the iPhone is not compatible with LTE networks, which is not true. In reality, the iPhone is compatible with LTE networks, just not all of the different bands in the world. I would suggest changing it to something such as the following: Worldwide, the iPhone 5 is available in three variants that are compatible with different LTE bands, but variants available in certain countries are not compatible with the LTE bands used in those countries.Lukemags (talk) 06:51, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
 * It's an issue nonetheless, whether it's with the LTE network or the iPhone 5, an issue exist and that term is neutral in the given context. I reworded the first part of that sentence into something that I perceive as more neutral. YuMaNuMa Contrib 06:59, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

I wouldn't consider it an issue. Incompatibilities might as well be missing features, so you can hardly judge them if the band is simply not compatible on that device. It just doesn't have that feature. It's like saying the Galaxy S III has issues with running iOS apps because it is only compatible with Android apps. Some people don't like it, but it's not a problem because it is not a specification that the device has.Lukemags (talk) 07:04, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't think you understood me, the fact that the iPhone 5 can't connect to some LTE networks is an issue. What you're saying is like saying that the lack of an input feature (lack of buttons or touchscreen) is not issue. Another example would include the iPad (3rd generation) overheating, the designers failed to proper cool the device to an adequate level by using heatsinks or fans, hence it's an issue. Sources and experts cited are also referring to the incompatibilities as an issue. 1 YuMaNuMa Contrib 07:15, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

You may not like that it does not have support for certain LTE bands, but it's not as if it just won't connect. The radio itself is not compatible with those networks. If it just wouldn't connect, it would be an issue, but in this case, its lack of a certain LTE band that makes it incompatible with a region's or carrier's LTE networks, not a problem with its software or a manufacturing error. It is sold as having the specific LTE bands it does support. The "feature" in this case is LTE support in that region. Apple is not advertising the iPhone 5 as being compatible with LTE in the regions where it is not supported. I agree that the heating issue with the iPad is an issue, because being cool is not a feature, but rather, an expected characteristic. Issue≠Dislike or wanted feature that isn't implementedlukemags (talk) 07:27, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
 * In my opinion it's an issue as it is attributed to a lack of thought in the R&D stage of the iPhone 5 and a lack of consideration for global networks due to whatever reason they had in mind, much like how the lack of flash on iOS devices is considered an issue. The issue personally doesn't bother me as the device is fully compatible in Australia. But honestly this is an extremely minor issue(wording) and it doesn't seem to affect the article either way, so i made the appropriate changes. YuMaNuMa  Contrib 07:43, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Close
Howdy! Thought I should let you know that I removed the CSD tag from Articles for deletion/Faylian (which was then showing up on the log page) and non-admin closed it instead. It should just disappear into the archives now. Didn't think you would mind but I thought a courtesy note might be nice. Let me know if you have any concerns. Cheers, Stalwart 111  01:09, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking the time to let me know. :) YuMaNuMa Contrib 01:13, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion of ArchE17
ArchE17 is a Linux distribution based off Arch Linux. Just like all the other open source software listed on Wikipedia, ArchE17 should also be allowed to explain what it is in Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mickeeyone (talk • contribs) 01:58, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested: ArchE17
Hello YuMaNuMa, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of ArchE17, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 does not apply to software. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. FrankDev (talk) 02:08, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for notifying me, it was my mistake for not reading the criteria clearly enough. Cheers. YuMaNuMa Contrib 02:11, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Please allow Afterlife Sessions to exist
We are seriously a show with a dedicated crew. Please make my night and make this easy for me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Afterlifesessions (talk • contribs) 05:57, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Narcosis (Peruvian band)
I declined the speedy, as it asserts significance. Feel free to AfD though. Viridae DON'T PANIC  08:59, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

FPV GT R-spec page
Hi, page "FPV r-spec" changed to a redirect to FPV GT R-spec. FPV R-spec isn't fitting as a title.Space alligator (talk) 11:23, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I've removed the speedy deletion tag from the nominated article, however you now need to either nominate the article with the incorrect title for deletion or less preferably redirect it. YuMaNuMa Contrib 12:04, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

sandbox article
I tried to write an article through sandbox but apparently I lost it. That information might be important later.
 * Try checking the article history to recover your work, you may then create a sandbox under your user namespace, here is a quick link to it. User:FarukEbuAhmet/sandbox YuMaNuMa Contrib 12:47, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Cristispira
I copied the content of article Cristispira from my blog. It had been deleted thereafter. Can I rewrite the article?--Sabarni sarker (talk) 15:58, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
 * If you own the copyright for that content, you must provide Wikipedia and other parties clear permission to use and alter it. Please see WP:PERMISSION for more detail. YuMaNuMa Contrib 16:02, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Maroof Raza is a very important former Indian aarmy offficer.RS are coming
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because... (the person maroof raza is a very important person of india belongs to indian aarmy. i will provide more RS) --Abhinavname (talk) 17:10, 14 January 2013 (UTC) User talk:Abhinavname 17:45, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot,YuMaNuMa. Even few minutes back, i was watching Maroof Raza on Newshour debate on Times Now with Arnab Goswami. and Happy Wikipedia day tomorrow. Wikipedia becomes 12 years older since 2001  User talk:Abhinavname 17:55, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

VICENÇ MATEU
Please do, I made a mistake on the name, his name is VICENÇ MATEU, I have created that version with reference to his position and official bio, thanks
 * Article seems to meet notability guidelines based on the claims in the prose of the article and the external link that was added after I tagged it, however it needs more inline references and a thorough copyedit for cohesion. YuMaNuMa Contrib 17:26, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of List of universities in Isfahan Province
You're the right thing, it's a duplicate. So, delete it please. Thanks

Speedy delition contested: Jiří Hájíček
Hi, just letting you know I contested your speedy delition on Hájíček's page. I added some of his achievements and supplied some references supporting those claims. TheBedla (talk) 11:31, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I retracted the speedy deletion tag as the article no longer meets A7 criteria due to your improvements to it. Articles without any references can still be nominated for proposed deletion or "articles for deletion", so further improvements are necessary. YuMaNuMa Contrib 11:36, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 15
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited IPad (1st generation), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Wired (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:47, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Brad Peterson
Hi, I've reverted the A7 speedy tag since the article asserts notability, but more sources are needed to show notability, or it may need to get prodded or AFD'd. Thanks, Altered Walter (talk) 15:59, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated
Hi, I'm Mkdw. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Prime Studios, and have un-reviewed it again. If you've got any questions, please ask me on my talk page. Thanks, Mkdw
 * Creator of the article removed a speedy tag that I added, which caused it to appear as if it was reviewed and accepted on the NPP list. YuMaNuMa Contrib 04:50, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I saw that. I viewed the page before you re-added the CSD. Just funny timing. Mkdw talk 04:52, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated
Hi, I'm Lgcsmasamiya. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Dark skin, and have un-reviewed it again. If you've got any questions, please ask me on my talk page. Thanks, Lgcsmasamiya
 * I have no idea why you decided to unreview that page, as it was well referenced, well written and no obvious problems were present. In addition, it meets all notability criteria and I'm frankly pretty staggered that there wasn't an article on that subject prior to its creation. YuMaNuMa Contrib 01:14, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I am new
Sorry, I am a newbie and have unintentionally deleted the message.

Thanks for your patience and understanding. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Livelaughlovehi5 (talk • contribs) 03:37, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
 * It's understandable, however it's vital to check your talk page if a new message is posted on it, hence the reason why we have such conspicuous new message tags. YuMaNuMa Contrib 03:46, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Reason you should not delete is because
He is getting ready to run for US Congress and will need to establish himself. Now I understand under different circumstances however what else would make sense? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amnra2013 (talk • contribs) 04:14, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Re:I have unreviewed a page you curated
What's the problem with my curation for Bangladesh agricultural development corporation? -- Pr at yya  (Hello!) 09:54, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

'''Please give me a talkback message
 * The article simply had too many issues, which include a poorly written prose with a paragraph that appears to be a poorly formatted list, its lack of references and the possibility of the article meeting speedy deletion criteria g11 and a7. It's clear that the author has no idea how to format the article to meet Wikipedia standard, hence it should remain unreviewed until someone either fixes it up or nominates it for deletion. YuMaNuMa Contrib 10:01, 18 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Please do not tag that as deletion. Save that article from deleted. I'm from Bangladesh and I know about Bangladesh agricultural development corporation. I can edit that. So can I move that article to the creators user page with a friendly message?-- Pr at yya  (Hello!) 10:05, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes if the article really does meet notability guidelines, you should either rewrite it or rectify the issues, or submit the article to articles for creation. Generally editors there can help the submitter find sources and format the article correctly. YuMaNuMa Contrib 10:09, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

IMDEA Nanaoscience
I would like to know the reason for deleting the page. --Siya.sherif (talk) 10:30, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
 * The article from memory had many issues, including its tones, which breached WP:NPOV, copyright infringement and possibly its lack of significance. Please see the cited links for more information on what not to include when you're creating an article in the future. YuMaNuMa Contrib 10:34, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Kayı Construction Inc.
This page should not be speedily deleted because this is not a promotion. This is an encyclopedia article.

What you need to do in order to be deleted?

i read every document for creating a page. i think this content okey with this rules. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ferhatyarikkaya (talk • contribs) 11:17, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
 * You need reliable sources that are independent of the company, preferably from reputable publications such as a major newspaper to verify the notability and significance of the subject. Also the article must adhere to WP:NPOV, which means it should be written from a neutral point of view. To ensure your subject meets notability guidelines, please refer to this guideline; WP:ORG. YuMaNuMa Contrib 11:23, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Please Sir/Ma'am
Please Sir/Ma'am you should not put it for Speedy deletion because he is a famous cricketer also he is my brother. Why are you saying like this? Do you have any benefit by deleting this article? I am very upset! Also I have a question to all of you administrators! Are you having any revenge with me? Every time I have messages like this! Speedy Deletion or Proposed deletion! One is sure that I am the most hard-working Wikipedian in this Wikipedia. I am kindly requesting that Please you should not delete Vaishak Uthaman. Kindly Requested by Whitetararaj 18 January 2013 17:18 (UTC)
 * Firstly I'm not an administrator, I'm just a regular user, anyone with editing privileges are able to tag an article for deletion if they feel it's necessary. I tagged your page as it currently lack references and does not need meet notability guidelines for sportsmen and athletes. No one is taking revenge against you, any article that lacks notability or meets the speedy deletion criteria are nominated for deletion. This applies to articles written by anyone, whether it be Jimbo Wales or a new editor. The best practice before creating an article is to ensure the subject meets notability guidelines by checking it against WP:ATH. YuMaNuMa Contrib 14:29, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

FONIS article
Hi, you told me that you tagged FONIS article for deletion. I have not finished it yet and it will take me another hour to finish it. I don't see why it would be deleted so fast. It will be done in about an hour Thanks in advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by VukSrb (talk • contribs) 23:16, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Articles that are a work in progress should be created and worked on in your own username space or sandbox. Please ensure your article meets WP:ORG before creating it in the future. Once it meets Wikipedia guidelines you can either create the article yourself or submit it to Articles for Creation, where they will assist you in improving the format and/or referencing more reliable sources. Here's a link to your sandbox User:VukSrb/sandbox. YuMaNuMa Contrib 23:24, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

iMac Article
Hey, since you are now back editing Wikipedia and the iPhone 5 article has reached GA statuts, would you be interested in editing another apple product article?. As the title suggests it would be the iMac series articles. All these articles have a huge amount of potential, with information all over the web. I have tried doing some editing but I have neither the time to edit nor gather knowledge on actually fully 'refurbish' the articles. I have tried reaching out to others but the articles are pretty much unmaintained. Thanks and hope you are interested --Tacita620 (talk) 19:33, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll see what I can do, however since the article includes information that dates back to when the iMac was first released in 2000 or so, it will probably be quite difficult to find reliable sources as technology blogs did not exist at that time and news publications generally archive articles that are older than a certain number of years. That's also the reason why I want to get all the iPad articles up to Good Article status. YuMaNuMa Contrib 00:40, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

‎grievance
"I have to copyedit almost every single edit you make, Cantaloupe. Please take more care in the future" It's not like I do it intentionally. Sometimes I make errors and sometimes we don't agree on writing style. I can say the same about your editing where your editorialized summary adds distortion and bias into prose and other editors and I have to go through and fix it. Cantaloupe2 (talk) 17:04, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * You did take note of the "please take more care in the future part" right? I'm almost certain that your native language is English and that you are capable of writing grammatical sentences as evident in our discussions, however for some reason that I have yet to understand, you can't do the same when editing articles. The issues I'm referring to isn't a matter of writing style, as they are simple grammatical issues that could have been avoided with care. The message I left was a friendly reminder yet you chose to assume the worst in me, and no the alleged "bias" in my work is something that seems like only you can perceive. No other editor other than the unresponsive Tagremover have raised any issue with the content that I've added, however unlike you he was disagreeing with the entire concept of reception. I have no idea how you interpreted my benevolent reminder as a provocative message that begged you to highlight a nonexistent issue with my editing. Please assume good faith in the future. YuMaNuMa Contrib 00:14, 21 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I disagree that your "bias" is something only I see. Other editors have agreed in the past when I objected to your edits that I felt were improper editorializing. I observed that they emphasized something that showed your biased perception or use of biased loaded language. An example is you writing supposed events as factual events, because you believe it to be factual even when sources do not support it; or inserting unreliable or self published sources because you personally trust the source. Cantaloupe2 (talk) 04:16, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Please cite an editor who believe what I wrote was considered bias. All the source that I have cited are reliable, your lack of knowledge of them or the entire topic of consumer technology for that matter does not make a source unreliable. What you are doing is cherry picking words that are ever so slightly more "loaded" than the word you used to replace it with. I strongly doubt any editor will consider my wording as deliberately "writing supposed events as factual" when provided with my edits as evidence. Furthermore you tend to cherry pick info in sources and claim that a certain idea isn't represented in it when it clearly is, see Stock Prices for example, the evidence was clearly there and yet you chose to ignore it. Frankly I assert that you're the one with the bias, you attempt to get ideas that portray the device in a negative manner by claiming either that the source is unreliable or the wording ever so slightly makes the statement more "loaded" and then removing the entire sentence or fill it up with pointless frivlous tags in attempt to wait for me to remove it myself, as I have done during the GA review. Why on earth am I arguing your perception of what is bias with you? Take a good look at your track record, you've been reported to ANI four times in the past three months since I encountered you, several times of those times for disorderly conduct in your attempt to push what you believe is considered "Wikipedia policy". I've lost count of how many times in total you were taken to the RSN because you disagreed with a source that was clearly reliable. Actually, don't bother citing, I'm frankly sick of your shit, don't post here again, if you want to pursue matters further, take it to ANI, I'll happily provide them with evidence of your conduct and cherry picking behaviour. I've been beyond patient with you and your behaviour, warned you about assuming bad faith, informed you about what types of sources are considered reliable and even took the matter to RSN to get it verify. You insulted me and refused to apologise after I unhesitantly apologise to you for making a remark that strangely enough offended you in a way that you can't even explain, claimed I deliberately insert bias information when I genuinely attempted to insert a neutral view of the matter, wasted my time by taking days or even weeks to reply to simple message that actually do beg an answer from you and then coming back to raise many more of your silly nonsense when a reviewer committed himself to assessing the article - twice. YuMaNuMa Contrib 05:18, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

GA Review
Just so you know your iPad GA review is still on hold. Thanks!Retrolord (talk) 23:01, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion - Chelyabinsk Meteor Shower
Hi, you marked this for speedy deletion. I can see why, but I couldn't find the other articles earlier, though Google has indexed them now. It may be better to turn it into a divert to [] as Chelyabinsk Meteor Shower is more liklely become the popular name for the event. The Yowser (talk) 10:06, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
 * If you believe the name you suggest is more appropriate, you may want to discuss it or initiate a proposal on the Russian meteor event talk page. If the proposal is successful the articles will be merged. YuMaNuMa Contrib 10:18, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Kashmirbox


A tag has been placed on Kashmirbox requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content or organised event, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that your page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the page be "userfied" or emailed to you. Mudasirahanger (talk) 10:32, 15 February 2013 (UTC) plz help me my article


 * I nominated your article for speedy deletion as it does not signify why the topic is important, and is not supported by reliable third party references. As per WP:NOT, Wikipedia is not repository for random pieces of information, hence articles must pass notability guidelines in order for it to be safe from deletion on Wikipedia. For articles on organizations, ensure that the topic you wish to write an article on meets WP:ORG, otherwise the article may still be nominated for deletion even if it asserts significance. YuMaNuMa Contrib 10:57, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Table
The revised table over at Talk:iPad accessories is finished. Zach Vega ( talk to me ) 02:12, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

All Student Asociation
Yes, the reason I mistakenly AfD'd it was that I was remembering that you can't CSD an article which has already had a CSD nomination removed ... forgetting that in this case the article had been deleted and re-created, which puts it into a different category! Dreadful article in all sorts of ways including mis-spelling of the title. Pam D  17:51, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Reviewer
YuMaNuMa, just wanted to let you know that I have enabled reviewer on your account. Please see WP:RG for how to use the reviewer tool and its relevant guidelines. If you no longer want the reviewer right, you can let me know and I will remove it. Happy editing!  Malinaccier ( talk ) 00:28, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 17
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited I Need Your Love (Calvin Harris song), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Biker (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:44, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Protection Policy
You took part in a previous discussion on the protection policy talk page about the reference to "uncontroversial" edits. A survey is now in progress on that page in response to a request for comments. You may want to visit that talk page again and provide your input to try to obtain consensus. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:44, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

File:Calvin Harris-I need your love ss.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Calvin Harris-I need your love ss.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 18:14, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

User:....ummm, "You know who"
I must admit to wondering why his username became a concern after 5 years and, while this is a first offence for socking, it isn't the first offence. He threatened to continue to edit disruptively as an IP in 2008. Given the recent disruption as multiple IPs, I'm a little concerned that he may be back. He's done it before. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 15:23, 27 May 2013 (UTC)