Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 15:58, 14 October 2010

If I left you a message: please answer on your talk page - it will be on my watchlist for at least a few days, so I will see your response If you leave me a message: I will answer on this talk page - please watchlist it so you'll know that I've answered. This will ensure that conversations remain together! Please click here to leave me a new message.

Archives

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

This page has archives. Sections older than 31 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 10 sections are present.

Thanks!

N5iln has eaten your {{cookie}}! The cookie made them happy and they'd like to give you a great big hug for donating it. Spread the WikiLove by giving out more {{cookie}}s, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Thanks again!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat a cookie with {{subst:munch}}!

oldcsd

Template:Z1

Re: GoodSearch opinion

Thank you for the information. Understand the comments and agree with the suggestion. Uptodateinfo

{{Hangon}} for Course Selection at Earl Haig Secondary School

I have once again put the {{Hangon}} Template on the article, but I'm quite unsure why this article would be moved to deletion. It doesn't seem to have vandalized the copyrighted content, and also doesn't seem to have plagiarized someone's work. I can see what you are talking about, but I think that this article shouldn't be deleted. Otherwise, I will improve this article to Misplaced Pages's standard. But thanks for your notice.

Please contact me if you have any concerns.

Besides I'm only a Wikipedian for less than 6 months so I'm quite inexperienced. However the quality and standard of my articles will improve. Challisrussia (talk)

Village with offensive name

Just looked at your referral for Kotak, a village with an allegedly offensive name. The offensive word would be kotok (which is offensive slang for penis in at least Kyrgyz. However, Kotak should be ok -- it also appears on google maps for roughly the same location shown in the article -- Google Map of Kotak. Thanks for checking up on it, though! ~~

Joyce Bender

Are you sure User:Benderwiki/JoyceBender is a copyvio of http://benderofcanada.com/bio.html ? I can't see it myself. Astronaut (talk) 20:28, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Looking again, the text is totally dissimilar. Astronaut (talk) 20:30, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Begin by comparing User:Benderwiki/JoyceBender#Background with Professional Experience, then search on "Pittsburgh Disability Employment Project for Freedom" in both articles. There's been a light rewrite, but I think that all it's done is to put so many chunks of copyvio into the text that the entire article is contaminated. I didn't check every word, but my initial impression is opposite of yours. Best regards and thanks for the inquiry, TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 20:36, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Ok. But that looks like the only similarity. The rest of the article looks quite good to me and substantially different from the bio webpage. Perhaps a bit of editing would be a better approach than slapping a speedy deletion notice on a userspace draft that is still in development. Anyway, for the time being I have removed the problematic background section - I'm sure Benderwiki can come up with some suitable non-copyvio wording to replace it. Astronaut (talk) 20:44, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

That fixes the worst of it but there are more phrases and paragraphs, but with the deletion of the Background section you've convinced me that G12 no longer applies and I'm going to decline my own speedy, unless you beat me to it. Regards, TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 20:53, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Pending changes/Straw poll on interim usage

Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:51, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikiquette Alerts Notice Response

Adminship

Interested in being nominated for adminship at WP:RFA? Quarl 07:30, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

I'm very honored that you would even ask. Yes, I think that I'd like to give it a try, and I very much appreciate the offer. I had a discussion with RegentsPark about it when my edit count was at about 3,500 and we decided that it was somewhat too soon, but I think it might be okay now that I'm over 4,600. (He might like to co-nom me, by the way.) I'd like to bring him into the discussion, if you don't mind. Best regards, TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 13:17, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

I think you'll make a great admin and would be happy to co-nom. But, I'm totally tied up with real life issues and have very little time for[REDACTED] (I try to avoid it as much as I can!). So, if the nom timeframe is a couple of weeks, I'll join in as a co-nom, otherwise I'll just !vote in the support column. --RegentsPark (talk) 13:43, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Quarl, I think we're okay to go forward, if you still feel like it's a good idea. Regards, TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 13:48, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Timing note: I'm going to be traveling and off-Wiki altogether from October 29-November 9, inclusive. Do you think that it would be best to wait until after I get back to do the nomination? I'm in no hurry. Regards, TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 15:04, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

I've nominated you: WP:Requests for adminship/TransporterMan. Please take a look at WP:GRFA and also some recent successful and unsuccessful RFAs, if you haven't already. Regarding timing, I think now is fine (the process runs for 1 week), but you're welcome to wait to accept it later. To accept, 1) edit WP:Requests for adminship/TransporterMan to say so, answer the questions, follow the instructions about the end date; 2) transclude the page by adding {{Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/TransporterMan}} to WP:RFA. I'm not sure if it's important to opt-in to edit counters or not as there are plenty that will give statistics without any kind of opt-in. Quarl 00:34, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

It's ready to go, but I'm holding off entering the acceptance and doing the other steps, waiting to see if RegentsPark has time to co-nom. Thank you very, very much for your confidence in me. — TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 17:37, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

• I've done the needful and closed your RFA. Don't be too discouraged, A1 is the bane of RFA candidates everywhere. I think you'll do well if you choose to stand again in the future. Best regards, –xeno 13:19, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Well, that's too bad. I think you'll make an excellent admin. We need polite, thoughtful people with the good of the project in mind and, in my book, you fill that description admirably. Why people get so fixated over CSD tagging, which, IMO, are always open to interpretation, escapes me completely! Don't give up and I'll be there to write a better co-nom the next time. --RegentsPark (talk) 14:07, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I guess we did this too soon. You should try again. Quarl 18:52, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

PH Flexible Packaging

You undid my removal of the spam notification on this article. While I agree that this article is lacking in terms of encyclopedic quality and needs more work to establish notability, I fail to see why it is considered spam. I think we all know what spam is when it hits email in-boxes. I have no quibble if the issue is notability, and agree that more work needs to be done. Enquire (talk) 18:36, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

I undid it because the creator of a page is not allowed to remove a speedy deletion tag, whether they disagree with it or not. It has to be left in place until a sysop declines the nomination or deletes the page or until an experienced user who is not a sysop declines the nomination. I respectfully disagree about whether or not the page is spam, but we'll let a sysop decide. If you disagree with the speedy nomination, put a {{hangon}} tag directly beneath the speedy deletion tag and explain why you think that the article is not spam on the article talk page. Please see my notes on the article talk page and on your user talk page about why Sealed Air is probably notable, but PH may not be. Best regards, TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 18:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

I did not realize previously that a page creator cannot undo a speedy deletion tag, but understand why that might be. I did note, however, that the spam notification was placed by an unregistered (though) active user who goes by an IP address... I should add that I have no vested interest whatsoever in this company and only created it because, previously, Jiffy bag (which they make) was previously redirected to Sealed Air who manufacture a competing product Jiffy Rigi Bag. I do not wish to be seen to be promoting PH Flexible Packaging but I does seem that if Sealed Air is notable, then quite probably PH Flexible Packaging is too. Please see my comments on the Talk:PH_Flexible_Packaging. ~ Enquire (talk) 19:34, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Davis & Shirtliff

Hi Transporterman, I saw your excellent post at Talk:Davis & Shirtliff - thanks for your continued support in defending our policies. I had the original article, Davis & Shirtliff Group speedy deleted, which he immediately recreated as Davis & Shirtliff. The creator has left a message on my tp refuting policy decisions, and I have replied on his tp at User talk:GeorgeVaulkhard. You are welcome to make any follow up you deem necessary. I may shortly be taking it have taken it to AfD for lack of a better process - the article is IMHO blatantly promotional and the only references are a long list of spam links, and to a totally irrelevant link to a university.--Kudpung (talk) 00:43, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Your RfA

I'm sorry I did not get around to voting on your RfA. It all happended so quickly and then you withdrew while I was still tackling the subject of my post above. I would probably have !voted 'oppose' too, but only to give you more time to be prepared for another RfA which I certainly hope you will make again in a few months time. We all make mistakes at CSD, even the voters at RfA. The main thing is that you have already shown that you know what ought to be deleted. Occasionally using the wrong tag is forgivable. FWIW,; You know what I would do with this : this ? There is no criterion in the CSD list that matches it, so I would first PROD it using exactly the same sentence used in the A7 rationale. The PROD tag is almost certain to be removed by the creator without comment, and I would then take it to AfD suggesting 'Delete & merge to school district or locality as per usual procedure.' In Misplaced Pages, only high schools are de facto notable; primary and middle schools are just too numerous to justify an article unless they have done something extraordinarily notable. You were right in assuming it should not be in the encyclop)die, biut it was the wrong way to go about it. But it was also wrong for the opposers to suggest that your error in tagging is a demonstration of blatant lack of understanding of our policies. Pile-on opposes due to one or two isolated, innocuous errors are just not fair, but the closing 'crat can't do much other than count the votes in such a situation. Some of us are working in the background to find a way of fixing these anomalies in the RfA process. Perhaps you would like to help. You don't need to be an admin to join in the discussions. --Kudpung (talk) 17:43, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your kind comments, and I apologize for not responding to your prior post re Davis & Shirtliff, the issues regarding which were just a little too complicated with all else I had going on. I'll take a look at the RfD when I get a little breathing time, and thanks very much for your tips. Best regards, TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 18:28, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

RFA

T'man, sorry to see you withdraw your RFA nom. I think you would have made an excellent administrator. I thought your comments to the "opposers," especially on the CSD issues were right on. Please do try again after the passage of some time. I'd nominate you. Regards. Saebvn (talk) 18:12, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind words and for your support, I really do appreciate it very, very much. Best regards, TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 18:30, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

I have to agree with everybody else, I am sorry to see you withdraw from the RfA. They are also correct in stating you would be a good admin — I have no doubt about that. I would like to encourage you to re-apply when you feel the time is right because we need good people like you. Best regards. -      Hydroxonium (talk) 04:58, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Best regards, 17:45, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Thanks for the prompt action

Thanks for the prompt action on Bill Green. Philadelphia City Council members are, to my mind, inherently notable, and sometimes infamous, but several Council members have gone on to be Mayor. --DThomsen8 (talk) 00:02, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Forensic mitigation

Why not add it to the main debt relief article? There's not really enough to warrant it's own article. HalfShadow 20:20, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

I for the reasons stated in my AfD nomination, I don't think it even gets that far. The creator appears to be a law firm which specializes in this and I've put a username warning on their user talk page. Best regards, TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 20:26, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Eh; just trying to be fair about it. HalfShadow 20:27, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

declining speedies

Just a hint. When I decline a G11 as not hopelessly promotional, or a A7 as having some claim to importance, but notability is dubious or it clearly needs improvement beyond what I've given it, I also tag it accordingly. I certainly add an unsourced tag when appropriate. The person who placed the speedy would probably do so anyway if they're keeping track, but I think this facilitates further improvement. (and I've found it helps to make it very clear that I know it's not actually a good article). DGG ( talk ) 00:11, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the tip, I very much appreciate it. Best regards, TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 00:17, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

3O

Hi TransporterMan. Your recent non-3O is being discussed on the 3O talk page. FYI. --RegentsPark (talk) 01:32, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

3o issue

Hello, TransporterMan, thank you very much for responding to the 3o issue at Talk:Erhard Seminars Training. If you check the archives, you will see that there has been extensive back-and-forth discussion with this user MLKLewis (talk · contribs) over inappropriate use of sourcing for POV promotion of the organization, whitewashing of factual history, etc. I have already notified MLKLewis (talk · contribs) and requested that they engage in discussion at the article's talk page. That is why there actually has been significant prior talk page usage and discussion, and why I went to WP:3O. Would certainly appreciate your input, at Talk:Erhard Seminars Training. Thank you very much for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 20:45, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

FWIW, there has now since been a comment added to the thread by admin John Carter (talk · contribs), so I think we are all set for now. Feel free to comment if you wish. Thanks for your contributions to WP:3O, I know it is often a thankless arena. ;) Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 20:53, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Cirt, I just reverted my removal, having missed the archives. If you think that the dispute is settled, please remove the listing at 3O. I couldn't give a 3O, anyway, under the project guidelines since you and I have had prior dealings, so I think I'll abstain. (And on second thought, I probably shouldn't have been the one to remove the listing, either.) Thank you for the thanks. Best regards, TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 20:57, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

If our only prior dealings were you giving a different WP:3O, in a particular case where both parties agreed to your 3O, then I do not really see that as an issue precluding you from participating. Of course, recusal is totally your call and I will not object, but it is up to you. -- Cirt (talk) 21:00, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

AGN International page deletion

I have been notified that you (TransporterMan) put a speedy deletion notice on the AGN International Article. Once this was put on to the site I have had to check the page on a daily basis as more than once there has been a note for speedy deletion.

On this request it has been done under section A7 of the criteria because the article appears to be about a person, organisation (band,club, company)or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant. AGN International is similar to Baker Tilly and Grant Thorton and these articles on Misplaced Pages have not had speedy deletion put on them. Please can you advise on how we are able to keep our article on Misplaced Pages without deletion taking place. Your help would be very much appreciated. Thanks Sarah —Preceding unsigned comment added by AmyGNorris (talk • contribs) 15:16, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

The most recent deletion was not a speedy deletion, but was the result of a deletion discussion at Articles_for_deletion/AGN_International, which I did, indeed, initiate. The article was deleted because it did not cite any "reliable sources" and none could easily be found for it. (The reasons are set out more fully in the discussion.) You ask, "Please can you advise on how we are able to keep our article on Misplaced Pages without deletion taking place." The short answer, and please forgive me for being blunt, is that it may not be possible to do so at this time. Misplaced Pages is not MySpace, Facebook, a blogging site, or the like where anyone who wants to put up a page is generally free to do so. It's an encyclopedia and subjects of articles must already be publicly recognized as being important or significant before an article about them can be included here. Misplaced Pages judges public recognition by whether or not "reliable sources" can be given for the subject. If "reliable sources" exist, then the article is "notable" and, in general, ought not to be deleted. I've put quotation marks around "reliable sources" and "notable" because you can't judge them based just on the dictionary definition of those words. They have very specific meanings in Misplaced Pages and you're probably going to continue to be confused and frustrated until you get a grip on what they really mean. The meaning of "reliable source" can be found in the verifiability policy and expansions of it, and its reflection in the concept of "notability", can be found in the Identifying Reliable Sources and Notability guidelines and their various subpages. In very general terms, before a person, place, thing, organization, or idea can be included in Misplaced Pages it must have:

• already been recognized
• as important or significant
• by objective, independent, and provable third party sources
• with a established reputation for fact-checking
• which are independent of both the subject of the article and of Misplaced Pages itself
• and which are not just publishing trivial facts, passing references, or repetitions of press releases.

That's just a plain-English generalization of the actual rules to give you an idea of what's going on here, so don't rely on it but refer to the actual policies instead. (For a great analogy illustrating these concepts, see WP:SCRABBLE.) Without a working knowledge of Misplaced Pages policy it can be very frustrating to try to write an article that won't be deleted. I've tried several times to write a better introduction to editing than can be found at the Article Wizard and Your First Article and I can't. Don't be tempted to skip past sections of either one, they're full of solid gold information. Also, if you've not done so already, you need to read the Notability, Verifiability, No original research, What Misplaced Pages is not, and (especially, since you are affiliated with AGN) Conflict of interest policies from beginning to end. Good luck with your editing, TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 15:58, 14 October 2010 (UTC)