This is an old revision of this page, as edited by I dream of horses (talk | contribs) at 07:38, 4 October 2014 (→A barnstar for you!: new WikiLove message). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 07:38, 4 October 2014 by I dream of horses (talk | contribs) (→A barnstar for you!: new WikiLove message)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
|
slakr's life is currently frolicking with chaos, so his activity and response times to queries will be highly variable. Leave a message and he will respond whenever he gets a chance— that is, assuming he gets a chance. Cheers =) zOMG!!! I need urgent assistance!!!1!! — banana? — kiwi? |
Ideally, please use this link to post new messages at the bottom. If you can't find something you recently posted, I might have moved it down there or it could have been archived if you posted it over 7 days ago. Cheers :)
Welcome to my talk page. Please sign your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end.Click here to start a new talk topic
| Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) | |
|
Regarding slakr: Why did my page get deleted? Please see Misplaced Pages:Why was my page deleted? first. I have no idea what you're talking about. What's vandalism? If you received a warning from me and you're not logged in, you might have gotten an old warning I sent to someone who shares your IP address. On the other hand, if you've made recent edits and received a recent warning message from me and you genuinely believe that it's not vandalism, don't fret-- simply drop me a message below, because I could have simply made a silly mistake. :)Regarding SineBot: Why does SineBot keep signing stuff I've already signed? All comments should have a signature that includes both a link to your user page (slakr) and a datestamp (05:12, 20 August 2007 (UTC)) (per signatures - internal links). This is most easily generated by placing four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your contributions, which makes something like "slakr 05:12, 20 August 2007 (UTC)".If you have an interwiki-linked user page, consider either creating a user page on enwiki that redirects to your preferred home wiki or simply opting out of automatic signing. If you're still having problems after trying that, post a message below. Be sure to include diffs to make sure I can reference the problem. I don't want my comments signed by SineBot. How do I get it to ignore me or my talk page? Please use one of the opt-out methods listed on its user page. SineBot forgot to sign something it should have signed. Usually this happens because the bot isn't sure if it really should sign something, so it defaults to not signing it (e.g., in cases of complex edits). It does this to avoid being annoying. Other times, a comment might be made when the bot is down for maintenance, so the bot simply never sees it. SineBot signed something that it genuinely should not have signed. Please let me know-- especially if you think it's not a one-time thing. Be sure to include diffs to make sure I can reference the problem. Is SineBot's source code available? Not currently. I'm signing with four tildes (~~~~) but it's still saying I didn't! You likely enabled raw signatures. Open your preferences, click the "User profile" tab, make sure that "Treat the above as wiki markup" is NOT checked, and click Save; it should be fixed. If you have an interwiki-linked user page, consider either creating a user page on enwiki that redirects to your preferred home wiki or simply opting out of automatic signing. |
 Archives |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
2000 A.D.D.
Howdy, I went to DRV about a close to an AfD you did earlier this year. I did so before notifying you, I had intended to notify you as it went to DRV. Please accept my sincere apologies, I must have forgotten to post here on your talk page. Again, sorry about that. The discussion is taking place here: Misplaced Pages:Deletion review/Log/2014 September 11. I thought the DRV route would be the simplest route, since the close was a simple delete. I would still like your input on it though, I would've likely made the same decision you made in closing it largely based on the lack of participation in the AfD. But, I think that overturning that as of now, and maybe re-listing for AfD if need be. I'm honestly unsure what to think about that AfD, so your input would be appreciated. Smile Lee (talk) 19:37, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
- @Smile Lee: Lol, no prob. In fact, on AfDs where there's no input like that, you can typically assume a "delete" means "soft delete," which means you can just ask someone at WP:UNDELETE (or really available and willing admin) to restore the article for you and you don't even have to deal with the hassle/delay of DRV. Normally I try to stick a "(soft)" on the end of a close like that for extra emphasis, but it must have slipped my mind on that one. On a related note, I've gone ahead and restored the full page history for you if you wanna get started on any changes. :P Cheers =) --slakr 03:50, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
- @Slakr: haha :D Its all good partner, I figured you intended a soft delete. I can't believe I forgot to message you at the outset of the DRV. <badJoke>Honestly, I think that album title got to us, ADD.</badJoke> Smile Lee (talk) 13:46, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
inre Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/The Brides in the Bath
With the nom's withdrawal and (now) keep vote, do you really believe a relisting was better than a close as keep? Schmidt, 03:19, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
- Yes. Actually, no-consensus could have been an appropriate close in my opinion, but not keep. Seeing as AfD was backlogged and there was continuing activity on the discussion, it made sense to relist to get some post-changes/post-sourcing feedback for a more clear result (hopefully "keep" in this instance). If you'd like to help with the backlog, please see WP:OLD. -slakr 04:59, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
DELETION OF ARTICLE SANT JAGJIT SINGH HARKHOWAL IS NOT RIGHT
I am a high rank officer back in India and i request you to not delete this article as it is regarding a person of very high repute and name in India . Thanku — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suchasoorma (talk • contribs) 22:49, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
- I marked it as a soft deletion, meaning it can be undeleted by any admin that agrees with you or recreated, hopefully addressing the concerns that people raised in the AfD to avoid someone re-nominating it. --slakr 08:30, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
Error in deletion
You have recently deleted The Canadian Business Journal. You should have probably edited the page instead of deleting it. Among others, I had also edited the page. It had some errors that should have been corrected, but I don't think deleting it makes much sense. So, how do we undo this. If you are going to apply the rules across[REDACTED] in this overzealous way, then not only you should find the time to delete half the articles here, but you also become another big brother just like Google, dictating to others what you think is notable or not. Being notable does not and should not mean that unless you are a big, powerful, and rich media organization, you will not be considered notable. The Canadian Business Journal page was up since 2009 and it mainly consisted of a brief description of the publication. A six years old publication that has interviewed Premiers, celebrities, and Big business CEOs is a notable entity despite of what you may think.
More details http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Stesmo
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.81.55.170 (talk) 19:48, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
- I wasn't the most recent deleter which prompted you to come here; another admin agreed with the fundamental problems in tone. Follow that link, read the applicable policies and guidelines (e.g., neutral point of view, advertising, conflicts of interest, and notability of corporations), then proceed to create an incarnation of the page that agrees with them (if possible). Check out our business FAQ for several frequently asked questions, as well as your first article for information on creating articles. --slakr 08:41, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
- Also, a frequent tip I give to people in this situation is to pretend you truly hate whatever you're writing about but are forced to write an article about it anyway. It'll put you in the mindset to write with a more neutral, encyclopedic tone. --slakr 08:45, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
You have not addressed a simple question.
Is this considered a reliable third party reference. The CBJ was the first all-digital Canadian publication to qualify and be audited by BPA Worldwide. In my opinion, this was a good start. You have to give a small organization a chance to grow.
Is a big corporation somehow more notable than a small publication.
If you go by these guidelines you've mentioned, neutral point of view, advertising, conflicts of interest, and notability of corporations. There is only one section here that applies to Lending Tree's article which is notability by the way of their advertising on TV.
As of the time of this posting, I see still the same old reference links on their Misplaced Pages page LendingTree. As I pointed out to your earlier, one is a paid writer, the other two consist of the companies own website and a press release issued by them. All I have been trying to point out there is that whatever the guidelines are, they have to applied in a fair way. Fairness is important!
The magazine article link is still active on the Canadian Magazines page. While the CBJ page is in the process of being relisted, I think it should be removed from List of Canadian magazines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.81.55.170 (talk) 20:31, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
WP:Articles for deletion/Rock Revolt Magazine
I don't see a consensus to delete here, soft or not, refundable or not. Rather I see an AfD with a true consensus of all three editors involved.
This is related to your close at WP:Articles for deletion/Crown Hill, Indianapolis, which IMO also had a consensus to incubate, and was discussed here. Your comment there twice stated that incubate is "asking for delete"...no, incubate means incubate, not delete. Your comment argued that incubation wasn't needed because editors could have improved the article while it was at AfD...no, AfD is not cleanup, while incubation provides a place for cleanup outside of mainspace. Your comment argued that incubation "keep things that are unqualified for mainspace around indefinitely"...no, the life of an article in the incubator is shorter than the life of a userfied article. Some userfied articles are now eight years old. Your comment argued that userfy is preferred to incubate, but the policy at WP:Deletion policy#Incubation states, "Incubation provides several benefits over the previous practice of moving such articles into user space." Twice your comments did not reply to the question, "Do you agree that incubation is a process to improve the encyclopedia?".
Please explain your close. Unscintillating (talk) 14:10, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
- So I'm guessing you're requesting that this be undeleted, so I've gone ahead and put it at Draft:Rock Revolt Magazine for you. Cheers. --slakr 03:38, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Technical Barnstar |
| I'm not sure if I ever left you wikilove for SineBot, but I've been receiving a lot of messages from new users lately. Needless to say, SineBot has been busy on my talk page! I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 07:38, 4 October 2014 (UTC) |