Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 17:49, 8 April 2008

User talk:Bradv/Talkheader

WP:AWB

I have approved you. Good luck and happy editing! Scarian 22:58, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Please explain assertions of advertising and conflict of interest on 80plus

Since you tagged the 80plus article as advertising and possible conflict of interest, could you please explain (preferably on the Talk:80plus talk page) what you think could use improvement. I took a look at the history of the page, and it wasn't obvious whom the allegation of conflict of interest applies to. It is also not immediately apparent what would make the page seem like advertising, or that it is lacking in neutral tone. It is hard to improve the page without clear information on what could use improvement. Thanks. Zodon (talk) 02:34, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

I tagged 80 PLUS as advert and COI based on this diff - "moved 80 plus to 80 PLUS: marketing guys decided it". Its not really a problem as long as the article is fully referenced and neutral. Once that's fixed I'm sure all three tags can be removed. —BradV 15:43, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for the clarification. Some of it still needs better citations. Zodon (talk) 03:08, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Popup problem

The popup ad for FAs blocks the bottom of the page; to read the last entry, I had to click the "Edit" button! --Orange Mike | Talk 15:47, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. I've removed it until I can figure out why it didn't work for you. —BradV 15:51, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Happy First Day of Spring!

Just wishing you a wonderful First Day of Spring {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}! ~~~~

Al-kitab AFD

Hey. Just thought you might want to know that I nominated Al-kitab for deletion. You can see the AfD here. — HelloAnnyong 14:31, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Alfred Heckmann

I addressed the copy vio of Alfred Heckmann in this edit, please let me know if you see a problem. Jeepday (talk) 14:59, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 24th, 2008.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:50, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Comments by Farrukh38

Bradv15.: have you deleted article Al-kitab(Quran) by saying that it is as islamic book...but you didnot digest truth of Quran which is not same as islamic book ? Farrukh38 (talk) 15:40, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

what is wikipedea

a place where truth cannot be written about Quran. Truth will be deleted in wikipedea. as deleted Al-kitab(Quran) bradv15 is trying to impose this aritcle as islamic book article, wikipedea must not write about Quran what he will but he must write about Quran as per text of Quran. wikipedea policy for citation is not aplicable for Quran because wikipedea is a place to write falshood about Quran and not truth in the name of citation rule. it was underdiscussuon and instead of replying the article has been deleted.Farrukh38 (talk) 15:40, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

An archive of the deletion discussion is at WP:Articles for deletion/Al-kitab (Quran). —BradV 17:09, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

World Trade Centre (Melbourne)‎ - speedy declined

Just to let you know that I have declined the speedy deletion request on this article - it is about a building so an A7 does not apply. If you feel strongly about it suggest you go for WP:PROD or WP:AFD, kind regards, nancy 18:34, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. I've applied a prod template. —BradV 18:36, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 31st, 2008.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 20:34, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

bio request on Rima Morrell

Hi - the problem I see is that the article isn't an encyclopedic article but instead a PR piece. Two or three people are quoted extensively as saying how great she is. Not only are her books listed, but the French translations of those books, which smacks of puffery. It goes on about the content of the book a little much, it seems. I just feel I am too close to the subject to be objective. I also wonder where, if at all, controversy about her work goes. I consider her work to be severely flawed but obviously other people don't. Do we put in a controversy section? Thanks for your help. Makana Chai (talk) 08:27, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I've moved these comments to the article's talk page. —BradV 15:25, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

List of cities in the Americas with alternative names

template removed —BradV 16:07, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

My answer : Talk:List_of_cities_in_the_Americas_with_alternative_names#Unreferenced_? Teofilo talk 16:04, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Mark Wills

There are still a couple sources left that list his full name; this, this and this to name a few. I added two sources to the article that show that he indeed was born Daryl Mark Williams, even if AMG no longer says so. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • 21:54, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

No problem. —BradV 22:03, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey, whatever works. I don't like heavy metal, but I created an article on a metal band after one of its albums was up for AfD (the band was a red link) at the time of AfD). Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • 23:05, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Scientists who believe dinosaurs are alive

What are their names and in what peer-reviewed journals do they publish? Where do they research? At what universities? ScienceApologist (talk) 14:23, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't know, I'm not a cryptozoologist. I suggest you look at the references in the article. I'm just concerned that people want something deleted because they don't agree with it. That would be bad for Misplaced Pages. —BradV 14:27, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

We have plenty of articles on Misplaced Pages about things I disagree with. However, that doesn't mean that these things with which I disagree should creep into articles about subjects that they have little to no bearing on. No cryptozoologist is an expert in determining what is or isn't a dinosaur. So reporting their perspective on articles about dinosaurs is about as unduly weighted as you can possibly get and violates the spirit and the wording of WP:FRINGE. ScienceApologist (talk) 14:55, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

helen keller conspiracy article is valid

Using common sense and logic, you cannot possibly advocate the deletion of this article. Please try to open your mind. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smrt1vbms (talk • contribs) 18:24, April 5, 2008 (UTC)

AfD for a page which has been up for 10 minutes

And which has references, is a bit much. Where does discussion on this topic (AfD Hadley Corner) belong? - Denimadept (talk) 18:27, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

The building does not meet the notability requirements at WP:N. If it is not significantly improved to meet those requirements in the next 5 days, it will be deleted. You can save the article if you can provide reliable, third-party sources (such as newspaper articles) that show significant coverage of the subject. Once you have done that you can remove the prod notice from the top of the article. —BradV 18:30, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

There already are such references on the page. Normally, there's an AfD discussion location. Where is it for this article? Oh, also I overstated how long the article was there before you AfD'd it. - Denimadept (talk) 18:34, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I didn't bring the article to AfD, I tagged it for proposed deletion. And there are guidelines at WP:N that preclude this sort of information.

If you would rather have a discussion on AfD, remove the PROD tag and I'll take it there. Cheers. —BradV 18:39, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

What's the difference between PROD and using AfD? All previous such discussions I've seen have been AfD. - Denimadept (talk) 18:40, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

WP:PROD - it's all explained there. —BradV 18:41, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I see. Yes, I disagree that it's a clear candidate for deletion. (1) I just created it, (2) I created with "underconstruction", and (3) no crystal ball is required since it's under actual construction. - Denimadept (talk) 18:44, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

trigger happy

You seem to make a habit of nominating other people's work for destruction. You didn't even leave an excuse for your decision that my weeks of research was beneath contempt. Filmography pages are quite valid on WP, if I had embedded it, the Yakima Canutt article would be of a prohibitive length. EraserGirl (talk) 19:10, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

It's a prod. If you disagree you're free to remove it. —BradV 19:15, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

So you really HAD no excuse to want my work deleted. Do you guys get points or gold stars for this kinda of nonsense?EraserGirl (talk) 19:17, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I explained why I felt it should go in the deletion notice. Obviously you disagree, and your rationale makes sense, so I've removed it. I certainly wasn't trying to upset you. —BradV 19:26, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you.EraserGirl (talk) 19:24, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I know you weren't. But seriously it took me 5 hours to format it properly, after 2 weeks of trying to figure out HOW to best represent the data. I look around and see millions of WP man hours spent denoting each and every fart of a science fiction tv show, every time someone wants to dismiss my work on biographies of people who are no longer in the pop consciousness, it makes me really really angry. I really wish that people would just ASK creators: "why is this significant?", before they slap deletion tags on things. EraserGirl (talk) 19:30, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I think you may be overreacting a little. That's what prod is for. It gives people five days to answer the questions or resolve the issues mentioned. And I wasn't suggesting your work be destroyed, I was suggesting it be placed into the main article. I'm still not sure it warrants a separate article, but I'm not going to force it either. —BradV 19:35, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Actually proposing something be deleted is having it destroyed, the article is presently 24K and I am not done, and the filmography is 34k. Do the math, embedding a table that size just isn't done. I DID my research, I looked at similar pages and similar situations and extracting it to a separate page IS how it is handled. Did you think that I typed for 5 hours on a whim? tables don't just magically construct themselves. I work on biographies of obscure dead people I am finding that unless someone is still famous, your work is judged differently. EraserGirl (talk) 20:06, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Chronology (album by Bryn Haworth)

I have no problem with this one being speedily deleted, if needs be. It's only a compliation album. But could you please explain which of the other Bryn Haworth albums are likely to be tagged in the same way, before I bother creating articles for them? In fact what are the exact criteria for an album by ANY ARTIST to be notable? Thanks Martinevans123 (talk) 19:49, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I believe you'll find the answers to all your questions at WP:MUSIC. —BradV 19:58, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, neither your beliefs nor WP:MUSIC are wholly enlightening. Which of the criteria for non-notability described at (Albums) are you applying to Chronology (album by Bryn Haworth)? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:04, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

This one: Album articles with little more than a track listing may be more appropriately merged into the artist's main article or discography article, space permitting. Is that a fair solution? I've removed the speedy tag for now to let you work out how you think this should be handled. —BradV 20:08, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

What a puzzle now give me! Like I said, this album is a compilation, so does that mean tediously and wastefully copying all the personnel credits from all the other albums from which the tracks have been taken? The same goes for producers, engineers, recording studios, etc., etc. Or would a album cover picture do? Or what else? And what about my second question? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:14, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm really not an expert on how to handle this. I guess you could try create all of the albums as separate articles, but you would need to show in each article how that album is notable (reviews, sales rankings, etc.). If that can't be easily done perhaps you could create a separate discography article to hold all the information on all his albums and singles. —BradV 21:04, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

OK. Thanks for the advice. I'll just do the ones which seem most significant for now. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:47, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Born Again Demo

Hi,

You had tagged the article Born Again Demo for speedy deletion under criterion A7; however "A7 applies only to articles about web content or articles on people and organizations themselves, not articles on their books, albums, software and so on." Thus, I have removed the speedy deletion template from the article; if you feel that the article should be deleted, please use PROD or AfD instead.

Thank you, Black Falcon 22:23, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

CSD tagging

I believe that the article has been turned into a redirect per this AfD. Singularity 00:27, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I wasn't aware of that. Looked like POV to me. I've fixed it. —BradV 00:29, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Antarctica Roads

I think I might be, yes. Thanks - I'd forgotten it was there, though I knew it long ago. --User:AlbertHerring 01:45, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Marking pages as patrolled

Hey, would you mind marking pages as patrolled when you mark them for speedy deletion? It'll save those of us monitoring New Pages some time. Thanks! TheMile (talk) 01:53, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

My reason for leaving those as unpatrolled was that if they aren't deleted they still show up in the unpatrolled pages. If it's easier for you I'll do it the other way. —BradV 01:54, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Sandrew Sevans

That was not a personal attack. It was all fact. I do not know the subject. DaDASHDevil (talk) 04:27, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion: Jamaluddin, Abid Hussain

I am sorry that despite "hangon" and additional material and references, the pages on Ustad Abid Hussain Khan and his father Jamaluddin Khan were deleted. In continuation I was about a make an entry for Abid Hussain's grandfather, Beenkar Reza Alli Khan.

I humbly submit that Indian arts are based on the principle of impersonality and true artistes practice this even today. It was only interaction with west that made fine arts noticeable and worthy of documentation. Indian music is still a mystery, even to its practitioners; only a few of whom attain the moment of enlightenment. Unless one understands development of Indian music within the Gharana system, the term "descendent of Tansen" would hold no meaning, at least not as a reason for 'notability' or lack of it. I shall be grateful, if in consultation with an editor knowledgeable about Indian Classical Music the deleted pages are reviewed and restored. Both pages refer to a reliable secondary source, Prof. R.C. Mehta's book, Eminent Musicians of Yester Years. Both the artistes, father and son represent crucial points in evolution of North Indian Classical Music.

Please encourage people to add knowledge to public domain; it has been a fundamental belief of ancient Indian teaching system that "knowledge should be given to the deserving alone" and gave birth to caste-system based on intellectual discrimination. Pupils spent life-time devoting themselves to the whims and fancies of their Guru in order to gain Guru-mantra (grains of wisdom). The merit of such beliefs are no longer recognized. In a democratic world let not its champion Misplaced Pages prove that indeed, knowledge must be given only to the deserving. Best wishes, Ghanonmatta (talk) 16:53, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

A Walk Through Salem

Hello, Can you please clarify for me what is advertising and what is not? The whole section on tourism on the page seems to a laymen as myself as advertising. Granted it only covered the wealthiest in the trade. Any suggestions would be appreciated. Cheers, Chris Docspond (talk) 17:23, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

The point is Don't advertise on Misplaced Pages. It's inappropriate, and you've been warned on your talk page, on the AfD discussion, and at deletion review. Advertising is editing Misplaced Pages in order to advance a particular product or service. —BradV 17:35, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Super Relativity

Hello Bradv,

I assume that you are the editor that will decide if the Super Relativity article will be allowed to exist within Misplaced Pages. If you should decide to keep the article I will expand it and add sources. I am somewhat reluctant to continue until I know for sure that it will not be deleted. I am busy writing the book and trying to meet those deadlines so I am dedicating effort to that until I know your decision. Please notify me by email. My email is mmfiore@tampabay.rr.com

Best Regards, Mark Fiorentino superrelativity.org —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mmfiore (talk • contribs) 23:22, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Kürt

Thanks for tagging, but I'm afraid I had to remove your speedy tag from this article as the tag specifically excludes from "nonsense" material not in English. --Dweller (talk) 16:11, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

What should I tag it as then? It obviously shouldn't be kept. —BradV 16:12, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, my Turkish is non-existent. Is it a hoax? About a non notable subject? --Dweller (talk) 16:14, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

It's a non-English article in the English Misplaced Pages. - Denimadept (talk) 16:17, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Freemanville, Alabama

Hi!

I agree the article was created for the wrong reasons (vandalism) but, since it does exist and there are Misplaced Pages articles already linking to it, I thought I'd take it upon myself to clean it up.
Peace! 17:49, 8 April 2008 (UTC)