User talk:Unforgettableid

I welcome feedback, advice, and criticism. Please feel welcome to monitor my contributions and to provide feedback often. My goal is to learn from everyone.

This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated.

If I have left you a message: please answer on my talk page, else inform me. If you leave me a message: I will answer on your talk page, unless you request otherwise. Please click here to leave me a new message.

I usually reply to messages by cutting your message from my talk page, pasting it on your talk page, and adding my reply below your original message.

Hello Unforgettableid, welcome to Wikipedia!

I noticed nobody had said hi yet... Hi!

If you feel a change is needed, feel free to make it yourself! Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone (yourself included) can edit any article by following the Edit this page link. Wikipedia convention is to be bold and not be afraid of making mistakes. If you're not sure how editing works, have a look at How to edit a page, or try out the Sandbox to test your editing skills.

You might like some of these links and tips:

• some General guidance.
• Tutorial and the Manual of Style.
• Find out how to revert, move and merge pages.
• Sign your posts on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~).
• Add yourself to the New user log and a regional notice board
• Ask questions at the Village pump or Help desk.
• Use the Show preview button
• Provide an Edit summary
• Add the correct image copyright tag to any images you upload
• Take a look at Consensus of standards
• Create a User page

If, for some reason, you are unable to fix a problem yourself, feel free to ask someone else to do it. Wikipedia has a vibrant community of contributors who have a wide range of skills and specialties, and many of them would be glad to help. As well as the wiki community pages there are IRC Channels, where you are more than welcome to ask for assistance.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me on my talk page. Thanks and happy editing, Alf ^melmac 16:08, 16 October 2005 (UTC).[reply]

Hi there. Sorry that I temporarily blocked you. For a moment, the extremely high frequency of your edits to Treo 700w led me to believe you were a vandalbot and not a good faith contributor. My apologies. --HappyCamper 01:16, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I thought these might be helpful for your work here - Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting. They have a list of active stubs on Wikipedia which you can find here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub types. If you have any questions, feel free to let me know. Again, sorry for the block. See you around the Wiki! --HappyCamper 01:19, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

thx for explaining why u temporarily blocked me, dont worry, i can see ur point of view n i understand it was an honest mistake. i've seen wp:ss but it's easier to do trial n error. but: 1. is there some automated tool ur using that told u this, or u just saw on recentchanges? 2. am i the only person who does edit -> look at results -> edit again? Unforgettableid 01:22, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your edits on Special:Recentchanges, and wow, was the frequency of those changes ever fast!! We have had a noticible increase in vandalbot activity on Wikipedia lately. Although I was not sure about your edits, I was highly suspicious of them, and decided to block you for 10 minutes - just enough time for me to check your edits, and for me to block you longer if necessary. Turned out that you wikified one of the links on that article, so I knew you were not a vandalbot a minute later. There is an automatic bot which blocks vandals operated by another Wikipedian, but it will definitely not block your edits. I don't think you are the only contributor that edits like this, but you are certainly the first Wikipedian I have mistaken for a vandalbot. There is a "show preview" button right beside the "save page" button which you can use. If you wish to become an administrator here one day, my suggestion is to use it often - some editors consider precision in editing a valuable skill here, and will help you along your Wikipedian career.

Again, I apologize for the block. It was a first for me too, and I learned something new today. Take care :-) --HappyCamper 01:30, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, no problem :-) --> actually, you were right - I didn't have your talk page on my watchlist. It just took me a while to type up a response for you. I typically just click on "my contributions" every now and then, and basically go back to the pages that I've edited where they aren't marked with "top" beside them. That's how I knew you had a response here. --HappyCamper 01:33, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

ok. just wondering: by "If you wish to become an administrator here one day, my suggestion is to use it often - some editors consider precision in editing a valuable skill here, and will help you along your Wikipedian career." u basically meant "u wont seem at first glance to be a vandal", or i really will look careless? --Unforgettableid 01:40, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Occasionally on requests for adminship some users are criticized for using too many edits to do simple things. This is because it might be indicative that the user is not as familiar with Wikipedia as they should be when they request to be an administrator. It doesn't have much to do with vandals or carelessness. Vandals on Wikipedia tend to behave very differently - insertion of "shock material" to high traffic articles is a classic, and your edits are certainly far from that. I wouldn't worry too much about getting everything to look perfect before submitting it to Wikipedia. Just enjoy editing and the collaboration that results from working here. As you contribute more, you'll become more and more proficient and effective at editing, and the Wiki syntax will become almost second nature to you. :-) Adminship tends to be many months down the road - you are either noticed for your excellent and consistent contributions, or you take the plunge yourself and self nominate. The really important thing is to have fun on Wikipedia. My advice is to primarily aim to contribute rock solid content (whether it be articles or otherwise) and should you become an administrator one day, it will be all the more rewarding. Keep in mind that this is a Wiki, so you can participate in any activity here. You might find tracking vandalism and marking copyrighted material fun to do, for example. --HappyCamper 02:37, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I took your advice and felt free to edit your user page ; ) Alf ^melmac 09:36, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

First off Hi my name is Belphegor and I would like to be a contributor for Wikipedia.

Unfortunaly my English ain't that good, and my knowledge of how things are done here is mininal, still learning though :)

Anyway could you check out Frost Worm, and tell me what is the mistake I keep making, in other words why isn't there sufficient context for that article, what must I do to improve it. Hope you will find the time to help me.

Sincerely, Belphegor

Well fist, I don't see where it is a school IP? Second, it had 3 other instances of vandalism that day, and they had a long history of blocks. I felt a month was appropriate. -Greg Asche (talk) 21:07, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings. Belphegor 666 had been adding a lot of gamecrufty articles without proper context a few days ago, which I had also tagged, but looking at their contributions I saw what seemed like the user simply removing info from the caption in question without explanation on the talk page or an edit summary. The picture caption was already there, according to the page history Belphegor 666 hadn't added it to the article. Seanb91 had added it to the article, and 130.64.153.13 added the info that it was apparently an Ash Ent's picture. As a result of looking into it, I can see that the picture was deleted as a copyvio in August, and Belphegor 666 reuploaded it to fill in what must have been a blank space left by the picture code that was apparently not removed from the article. So, to answer your question, I did feel the test notice necessary due to some of Belphegor 666's other edits to give them (sorry about the awkward pronoun, but I'm not completely sure the user is a "he" as such) a heads up and to let them know that I had reverted their edit. I did want to imply that I felt that it wasn't a serious edit and also in the process to provide Belphegor 666 some links to some of our rationale for higher standards of editing. I can see now that there may have been a reason for the edit I reverted, but that wasn't apparent at the time, as it looked like a long standing image in the article. Belphegor 666 never replied to my message, either to explain, complain or ask for more info. I hope this helps explain what happened. --Fire Star 21:44, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, now I understand your rationale. :) ----Unforgettableid | Talk to me 00:04, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Unforgettableid, thanks for the note regarding the Take Two article & the pointers. 08:15, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

You recently added to the Scrabble variants article. Thank you for your interest in this article, but we cannot accept copyrighted text borrowed from either web sites or printed material. Your content was a direct copy from www.teleport.com/~stevena/scrabble/faqtext.html, which I will note is no longer a valid link and can only be found through Google's cache. As a copyright violation, your content was removed. If the source is a credible one, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source.

If you believe that the content was not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GFDL, you can comment to that effect on Talk:Scrabble variants. If you have a proper release, you can reenter the content at Scrabble variants, after describing the release on the talk page. However, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. --WAvegetarian 15:23, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for being courteous there. Don't you think the tiny amount I copied (basically verbatim) from that FAQ (while citing my source after each paragraph) is considered fair use? Consider also that it's an FAQ and that FAQ authors are usually not as strict as, say, the MPAA re. copyright. :) Btw the content the server is on seems to be back up. --Unforgettableid | Talk to me 17:59, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If you use something under the doctrine of fair use, the burden is on you to prove that it is fair use. You must make a note of the justification in invisible text in the article if you ar quoting text. You didn't do this. I also don't feel that you can properly justify it. From opinion of Justice Story in Folsom v. Marsh, 9 F.Cas. 342 (1841), in which the defendant had copied 353 pages from the plaintiff's 12-volume biography of George Washington in order to produce a separate two-volume work of his own:

...if he thus cites the most important parts of the work, with a view, not to criticise, but to supersede the use of the original work, and substitute the review for it, such a use will be deemed in law a piracy...

The derivative work on Wikipedia will almost certainly supersede the original in internet search engines. Your small amount copied constituted a small amount of the whole, but, in that it was almost the entire section on scrabble variants was the "the heart of the book" so to speak, see Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc. v. Nation Enters., 471 U.S. 539 (1985). The case law would seem to say that you don't have a legitimate fair use claim. I don't think you ever read the copyright notice on the page, where you would have found under the Copyright heading:

This article is copyright 1993-2004 Steven Alexander. Except as follows, all rights are reserved. Copies may be made in propagating any of the entire Usenet newsgroups on which this is posted by the copyright holder. Archives accessible by ftp which collect all available FAQs or entire Usenet newsgroups may maintain a copy. Individuals may make single copies for personal, non-commercial purposes. Each copy permitted must be complete. Other than the above, no permission is granted to copy or distribute. No permission is granted to prepare derivative works.

It shouldn't be that hard to rewrite the content. I would ask that you paraphrase and add a citation at the end using Template:Citepaper, example below:

{ Citepaper | Author=Seattle Schools| Title=James A. Garfield High School 2004 Annual Report| PublishYear=2004| URL=http://www.seattleschools.org/site/siso/reports/anrep/high/14.pdf }

--WAvegetarian 20:44, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Manor Park (Ottawa) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Can you please add slightly more content to stubs like these. There's several people (like myself) who would like to see this deleted under the speedy deletion criterion "small article with little or no context". Adding some information on what one can see there and how old it is instead of just its location, would aid a great deal in avoiding having your work deleted. As an added bonus, larger articles are also more informative and helpful for users.- Mgm|^(talk) 09:47, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Belphegor (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

OK someone just trashed this article Belphegor, deleting previously made stuff and inserting some foul words. Could you restore a previous copy of it. Sincerely Belphegor 666 21:03, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I responded to your comments. Sorry for the month-long delay, got carried away with work etc. --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 08:43, 5 January 2006 (UTC) I responded to your comments. Sorry for the month-long delay, got carried away with work etc. --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 08:43, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, Wikipedia is a volunteer effort and you have no obligation to respond to all comments you get on your bot. :) Thanks for replying though. Btw, if NullC's bot can process the text of pages, why isn't it running on the IRC channels then? --Unforgettableid | talk to me 00:55, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nullcs bot gets data directly from wikimedia servers. I do not have such access. :) --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 13:09, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Then you should know better that we want more content (i.e., create Festoon (instant messenger) and Miha's Utilities) and not more web links. Thanks for your note. --Perfecto 04:17, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

see Kamelopedia_Diskussion:Sprachen --84.135.146.81 08:34, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just a copy from de.kamelopedia:
I'll keep you informed. It would be nice to have some native speaking admins on en.kamelopedia. I'm quite good in reading/ understanding english, but my skills in writing/ diction are just very basic ;)
I think, we should restart with an unlocked database, though. A locked wiki would be quite inconsistent. We'll see. --camel:Nachteule 01:51, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Regarding your suggesting about dual licensing of STS Wiki content, there was a good deal of discussion initially about which license to use. The consensus among academic participants was that the GFDL is fine for Wikipedia, but academic writers wanted more protection against the republication of their work in contexts that might adversely affect their academic reputations. As for copying content back and forth, perhaps I haven't made this clear enough (I'm going to add a clarification to the STS Wiki main page), but STS Wiki is not intended to compete with Wikipedia; Wikipedia is the place for encyclopedia-type content. STS Wiki is for stuff that doesn't belong in an encycopedia. So I'm inclined to leave the licensing the way it is, and I welcome your reply. In any case, I hope you'll participate in STS Wiki! Best regards, Bryan 22:24, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer Wikipedia due to the network effect of almost 1 million articles already, but I did appreciate your in-depth Incompatible Timesharing System bibliography. Too bad I can't transwiki it. Thanks for putting up the wiki, though - any free license is better than none. :-) --unforgettableid | talk to me 22:32, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A few months ago you requested that a template be created to automatically convert categories into navigation boxes. This isn't possible with a template alone, but as part of an effort to clear the backlog of requested templates {{Navbox generic}} was created to help facilitate what you were asking for. --CBDunkerson 17:25, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great! I appreciate it. --unforgettableid | talk to me 03:04, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Pune Institute of Computer Technology (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Pune Institute of Computer Technology, which you proposed for deletion, because I feel that this article should not be deleted from Wikipedia. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still feel the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! Mangojuice^talk 17:03, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Asoft (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Hi,

 You left a message regarding the development and usage of Wiki.
I understand that resources, and references could be mentioned when 

we write an article. If there is something that needs to be modified, I can certainly do it, and appreciate your input... --Asoft 12:23, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What I am saying is that you, as the Anandsoft web design owner, should not link to your own sites. Wikipedia is not a tool for increasing your PageRank. Cheers, --unforgettableid | talk to me 12:26, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

About half of the villages is already covered on Czech Wiki (and more than a half on German Wiki).

I plan to create standard basic stub for every single village so it will be easier to add meat later. The other approach, let he people create articles ad-hoc results in rather horror stuff.

I do not work on Czech Wiki because of situation there. It also feels more rewarding here. Pavel Vozenilek 13:32, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"The other approach, let he people create articles ad-hoc results in rather horror stuff.": I agree that that happens, but how often do people self-create some of the smaller villages (e.g. 200 people)? Are you sure your time is best spent on creating these articles, including spending the time on drawing dot maps? :-)

Also, I am curious as to what is the cz wiki situation. Cheers, --unforgettableid | talk to me 13:39, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Small Wiki (few dozens of active contributors). In such small community it is rather hard to ignore conflicts. For several years quite nasty war was waged between one of founders and group of others. Several people left disgusted. I decided I have no need to get involved in such environment. Pavel Vozenilek 14:33, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A bot is almost impossible as many names are shared among locations and could have other meanings. Also dealing with diacritics and adding support for people who cannot use diacritics makes the thing quite complex. Neither Czech nor German Wiki deals with this problem consistently, AFAIK. Pavel Vozenilek 13:38, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. You like like a veteran on this cool web site so I'll let you know about me. Yes, I did write the Zeest article myself but I used info from a media interview with the band. I have given that media service web site in the article but tell me, was what I did illegal? Let me know. Thank you.

Thanks for the compliment. As for the article, it is an ok article but you copied and pasted too much from the news interview. I removed the following text:

>>> THE ZEEST

The Zeest (or simply Zeest) is an underground Pakistani band based in Karachi which came up with the hugely popular, 'The BC Sutta song' or 'Sutta Na Mila'. This song made them popular not only in Pakistan but also in India. Although the song did not top any charts (because it was never officially released) yet developed a cult following like wild fire.

As far as numbers go, the Sutta song has had 7,600 downloads in 21 days several months back. Like a cigarette passed from one tobacco-stained hand to another, the Sutta song has been covertly sneaked across the borders, download networks and bypassed moral censors to become the anthem for “all smokers and dopers.”

The members of the band are: Skip (the founder, composer, guitarist and lead vocalist), Abeer (Manager and Supporting Vocalist), Anas (Congo), Aneel(Tabla) and Raheel(Drums). <<<

You should rewrite it using different words than the article used, or you should leave it out of the article.

Also, a note: I am not sure if the Zeest are considered "notable" on the English Wikipedia. Unfortunately, maybe someone may mark at the top of the article that it is proposed for deletion, and if that happens, it may be deleted a week later. If that happens, I cannot say anything except perhaps to try to see if they have an article on one of the Southeast Asian language wikipedias (hindi, bengali, etc: see http://www.wikipedia.org) and if they don't, you can translate and add it there. Kind regards, --unforgettableid | talk to me 14:25, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• MILSET (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello,

I am the author of the MILSET paper put yesterday. I read the proposal for deletion and I understand your concern very well.

1- Copyright concerns

Indeed the material comes from MILSET website, as I am myself working in MILSET, and starting a paper on Wikipedia was discussed with Antoine VAN RUYMBEKE, vice-president of MILSET Europe, who also maintains the MILSET website. He can be joined at <antoine@milset-europe.org>.

So putting the material there was done in full knowledge and approval of MILSET, and the material can be sourced directly at MILSET itself. We do not object to our material being reproduced, quite the opposite. And it is important to us to explain ourselves what we are doing (for instance the non-competitive, non-profit aspect which we think distinguishes us from some other science fairs organisations).

Should I explicitly sign the paper, or if not how should I make its sourcing clear ?

2- Duplication of material

I also understand that Wikipedia might object to a paper being exactly the same as an external link: why not just put the link indeed ?

The paper is not planned to stay like that, however, and only the lack of time made me start the contribution in this way. I plan to improve the paper by adding photos and examples...

Please let me know what you think,

Best,

Gerard Gautier

gerard.gautier@milset.org

No, then there are no copyright issues. I have removed the deletion proposal. But, the article reads too much like an advertisement. You may want to post an article on Wikipedia:Village_pump asking how to clean it up. Also, you may want to add [[wiki links]] to other articles where appropriate. Cheers, Unforgettableid (talk) 02:02, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Fire Records (UK) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

hello - my name is Clive Solomon and I am the founder of Fire Records (UK). I found the article on Fire and expanded it. No problem if you wish to delete the edited text but I bought it up to date.

If I recall correctly, it reads like an advertisement. You may want to delete some of the text mentioning, if I recall correctly, how Fire has signed some of the "hottest" indie bands and is the "upcoming" label. Although it may be true, Wikipedia shies away from marketing speak. Cheers, Unforgettableid (talk) 02:02, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello - understood but theres no mention of signing the 'hottest' bands at all. This is the text that was added a couple of days ago.

"Amongst the new records released by new label boss James Nicholls include the much anticipated return of Bark Psychosis, gothic-folk band Puerto Muerto and a range of outsider efforts from Steve Gullicks 'Tenebrous' ensemble, Nashville legend Dave Cloud & The Gospel Of Power, Virgin Passages, Tells, Sphyr, Matthew Bayot and the James Joyce Chamber Music album which includes an amazing 36 bands ranging from members of REM, Sonic Youth, Mercury Rev, Mike Watt, Bardo Pond, Kinski and so on."

I cant see anything here. All the other text has been on the site for at least a couple of years and was not added by myself. you may wish to check who added that text as i dont believe i can do that. Thanks.

Hello unforgettableid, Can one make references to a useful site that one might have been associated with, in the registered "user page" (profile)? Or is it necessary that the "user page" need to have references (if any) only to un-associated sites? thanks in advance.

BTW: I am getting one long sentence exceeding the visible screen width in preview tool. If a line break is inserted, part of the message is coming out of the shaded region. Any help? thanks. --Asoft 05:10, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and welcome back to Wikipedia. You can put whatever you want on your user page. :-) It is best *never ever* to put line breaks *anywhere* in the middle of a paragraph. Also, never put spaces at the beginning of lines. They can lead to ugly effects. What web browser are you using? Could you describe more about yout problem and exactly how to reproduce it? Cheers, --unforgettableid | talk to me 05:24, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am using IE6.0 on WIndows 2000 Prof. I just clicked on the + sign, and entered the text message without any line break. I observed that there was no problem without a leading space. The message is being displayed properly....tried with a space before commencement of para, the problem recurred. I normally put one or two spaces before starting a paragraph. This has lead to the problem. It may require some fix? thanks for suggestion. --Asoft 11:59, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So don't put spaces before paragraphs. :) A space before a paragraph means "put this text in Courier New font". --unforgettableid | talk to me 17:10, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

oh i see. thats just not exactly what you said originally but i understand....

i see the fire records page has now been edited down completely - removing the original text that has been on the site for years.

oh i see. thats just not exactly what you said originally but i understand....

i see the fire records page has now been edited down completely - removing the original text that has been on the site for years.

It seems to me the page has been deleted. Presumably this is due to the check request you saw I put at the top of the page earlier. The reason I put the request is that unfortunately, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and we must be very careful about what deserves an article - we had a lot of negative publicity in the U.S. at one point over an incident of an article that was vandalized and stayed vandalized because nobody noticed the vandalism. We generally do not have articles about smaller companies, and I presume somebody decided Fire Records did not qualify. If you believe the article should go back, please contact me. Unfortunately, it is more likely that just the bands your label covers will go back. :( Regards, --unforgettableid | talk to me 00:38, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Global Brain (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I have reverted your deletion of most of Global Brain, please see the talk page for reasons why. Captainj 22:16, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As for statuschanger, I haven't used it for a while, and am unfamiliar with it.

As for the AFD page, the bot updates the entire /current and /old pages with preset text on the server it runs from. It isn't programed to just update one block, but rather for the entire subpage, so every day the content is blanked with the new days content. That's why if someone wants to make a change that sticks, they have to contact me so I can update the text on my server. --lightdarkness ^(talk) 00:56, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IMO, Instead of a huge conference sort of thingy, a gathering of 3 to 4 people chatting and get to know each other is a better a way to spark meetups. Balancing the schedule of 4 people is easily than that of all Category:Wikipedians in Toronto. Send me a email if you are interested. I sent this message to User:Zanimum, User:Unforgettableid, User:Tyciol because they were most active at Wikipedia talk:Meetup/Toronto. I.H.S.V. (talk) 05:40, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the "{{prod}}" template to the article WP:PSS, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Importance). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree, discuss the issues raised at [[Talk:WP:PSS]]. If you remove the {{dated prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. ~ Amalas rawr ^{=^_^=} 16:18, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should all sit down and drink and eat and what not. I propose a meetup at Future Bakery, on the corner of Brunswick and Bloor, on Wed. August 16, 2006 @ 7pm. Lets discuss it. joshbuddy, talk 15:07, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering could you give me some pointers on how to further upgrade the List_of species_in_fantasy_fiction? I don't think about general, but more specific pointers on what to do to help it lose that ugly cleanup tag. So far I made Dwarf and Troll a Various race instead of a duplicate article (Dwarf (Warcraft) and Dwarf (Dungeons & Dragons), as well as deleted the duplicate article i found there. Grateful in advance Belphegor 666 19:34, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately I am on sabbatical, as it says at the top of the page, so I cannot help you. Regards, --unforgettableid | how's my driving? 21:49, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Per your request on WP:RT, if you think locations, phone numbers, and hours would be quite helpful, you may want to try putting them on the relevant page (or creating the relevant page) at Wikitravel. I'm not familiar with their rules, so you would still have to check, but it seems like that would be more helpful there. Then you could just link to Wikitravel page on the Wikipedia page. There is a template for links to Wiktionary, it may also work for Wikitravel too, if not, request it! Mr.Z-mantalk¢Review! 21:43, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re: your removal of commercial links on 'virtual platform'

I strongly disagree with your removal, since the page makes little sense without references to the major competitors in the field. The 2 links that you left, VMware and Xen, were originally listed by me as examples of a subgroup for virtual platforms.

please take a look at the 'virtual platform' page again: another contributor also thought the page made little sense and immediately added his list.

So, as a compromise: How about a list for 'Suppliers', instead of listing the commercial players under 'External Links'?

Hi,

I think I'm right in saying you added the wikified tab to the private investigators page. Whilst I agree with it being there (the whole page is a mess really!) I'm relatively new and haven't worked on a large existing piece before. Firstly, is there any particular etiquette I should follow. Secondly, the Wikified tab refers to "especially its section layout": what do you suggest could be done to improve the layout? --hydeblake 14:05, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That "section layout" bit is irrelevant. But all the general wikification guidelines apply. Cheers, --unforgettableid | how's my driving? 01:39, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Wikipedia Toolbar for Firefox.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 21:34, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I am organizing a new meetup in Toronto where it will be more convinent for everyone than the current one. Please provide suggestions and feedbacks on the talk page. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 15:40, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to talk to me, please leave a message in my talk page, many thanks. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 16:12, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Toronto Meetup Next: Art and Feminism Edit-a-Thon March 23, 2019 at Art Gallery of Ontario 2018: Art and Feminism Edit-a-Thon March 24, 2018 at Art Gallery of Ontario This box: view ‧ talk ‧ edit

Toronto Candidate City for Wikimania 2009
Support TORONTO in its bid to become the host city of WIKIMANIA 2009 Visit m:Wikimania 2009/Toronto for TORONTO's MetaWiki page and help build a strong bid.

Thanks for uploading Image:DSlinuxShot.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 13:55, 24 October 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Liftarn 13:55, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

--nat ^{Alo! Salut! Sunt eu, un haiduc?!?!} 00:04, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Puzzlr.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 19:04, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:MineSweeper3D.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 'image' 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 "Image" 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. BetacommandBot (talk) 20:49, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on User:Unforgettableid/SB, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[Talk:User:Unforgettableid/SB|the article's talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. --unforgettableid | talk 15:35, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Thanks for the reminder. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 17:44, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Template:Homepage requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{tranclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:21, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:BushBuck.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 03:58, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has nominated Comparison of church management software, an article which you have created or worked on, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of church management software and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 00:59, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Tome-screenshot.png. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
• That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 17:37, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"The entire system is extremely detailed (including such things as shear stress and molar weight[dubious – discuss])." I am glad you deleted that. It might be elsewhere that the game uses simulations and real physical constants, and it is not in the reference. 216.234.170.85 (talk) 15:31, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and BTW, you will get more throughput on your talk page if you respond on the poster's talk page, plus it is harder for other people to read both sides of a conversation, so your conversations will be slightly more private. 216.234.170.85 (talk) 21:05, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The complex material properties were mentioned on the dev log on 2008-12-18, specifically a link was posted to example raw files mentioning the various properties, and there are discussions on the forum about them. Personally I don't care too much about mentioning them in the article, though.--Dreiche2 (talk) 23:25, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all your messages. I now have made the word "material" on the Dwarf Fortress article into a link. The link points to the page about materials on the DF wiki. Best wishes, --unforgettableid | talk 02:46, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination at Articles for Creation — Alameda County Study — was a success, and the article was created.

• The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see what needs to be done to bring it to the next level.
• Please continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request.
• If you would to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping Wikipedia! PS:I live in Alameda County! |:-)~ QwerpQwertus ·_Talk_·(Talkback Me)· 05:07, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This conversation has moved to the bottom of Talk:Ritual washing in Judaism. —Unforgettableid (talk) 02:23, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just a comment, but your example on Template:Cite map/doc didn't list OpenStreetMap as the publisher of the map, which it should. I thought that I'd drop you a note just in case you've been omitting that detail from articles. Imzadi 1979 → 01:48, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Samsung SGH-T669, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Cheers! Stella ^BATPHONE_GROOVES 04:05, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mdann52.

• Thank you for your improvements to the "Teflon Don (rapper)" article.

• It might have been a mistake, but your recent edit to that article removed the {{COI}} and {{notability}} maintenance templates from the page. Yet the issues described in those templates seem to still be present. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as I've restored the templates.

• In case you're interested to know — I've since added more {{citation needed}} tags to the article.

• Thanks to your edits, the article is much less bad now. But it still contains far too much promotional language. It still fails WP:NPOV and probably also WP:V. And maybe it even fails WP:42. I'm curious: why did you remove the PROD tag? Might you be willing to restore the tag, since not all the issues mentioned in the tag have been resolved?

• When you reply, please notify me on my talk page. The best way to do this is to use cut-and-paste to cut this entire conversation off your talk page and to paste it onto mine. When I reply, I can do the same — I can move the entire conversation back to your talk page.

Kind regards, Unforgettableid (talk) 16:48, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It was a complete accident. I am not willing to restore the PROD, as I feel that it is fine, and the sources meet the above guidelines. Feel free to take to AFD if you want to. Mdann52 (talk) 17:08, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Danger.

• Thank you for helping out at AfC.

• Are you sure that this article which you approved met all three criteria listed in WP:42?

• Which references fulfilled the second criterion? :-)

• When you reply, please notify me on my talk page. The best way to do this is to use cut-and-paste to cut this entire conversation off your talk page and to paste it onto mine. When I reply, I can do the same — I can move the entire conversation back to your talk page.

Kind regards, Unforgettableid (talk) 17:01, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Tri-State Defender and Billboard are certainly reliable sources. The SEA Entertainment Awards is reliable for the information that it's used to source. I'm not at all invested in this article and would consider it borderline for notability. Danger ^{High voltage!} 17:25, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

the purpose of changing an article to a redirect is to refer to a more comprehensive article that covers the subject, or in some cases, to an article which lists a specific subject as one of a number of examples. It serves no purpose to remove an article by redirecting to something entirely general that usually does not mention the specific subject. For a spammy article, the best procedure is to remove the spam; for an article on something borderline notable, to merge appropriately; for an unfixable article or one on a non-notable subject, to delete. I have reverted one or two of your merges, while making at least some effort to fix the problems--the problems you identify are very real , and I applaud your efforts to keep promotionalism out of the encyclopedia--that's now my main concern here also. (I plan to check others to see if I can rescue any of them as articles. If you don't like what I am doing, please use AfD.) DGG ( talk ) 02:06, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

	The Copyeditor's Barnstar
	Great work on Monde Selection. I have removed the cleanup tag accordingly. Edwardx (talk) 08:23, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've declined MetaCarta, which you tagged under WP:CSD#G4. G4 may only be used if one of the previous deletions was as the result of a deletion discussion (i.e., WP:AFD). If all prior deletions were via prod or speedy, you have to apply a different speedy deletion category.

Now, could it be deleted under another category? It would be borderline on A7, but I found a few additional sources, so I think there might be just enough.

I think that it would be best for the encyclopedia if you re-read WP:CSD, and listened to the advice that other editors and I are giving you. Your success rate on CSD's seems quite low, and because of the potential harm in driving away good faith editors, CSD rates really should be over 90% successful--again, as was said above, they should be truly uncontroversial. Qwyrxian (talk) 06:10, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fair points. I hope to do better on speedies, and especially on music-related speedies, in the future. FWIW I often choose not to notify authors when I do speedy nominations, but I agree that even still they can drive away good-faith editors. I hope to do better in the future. Although I may seem defensive, I really do value feedback, and I really do try to continually improve my skills in general. Thank you for your note; please do feel free to watch my contributions and/or to provide more advice in the future. Cheers, —Unforgettableid (talk) 07:26, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You'll also find this page a huge help: WP:NPP. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:50, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. As a learning point, in WP:CSD, it states "There is strong consensus that the creators and major contributors of pages and media files should be warned of a speedy deletion nomination (or of the deletion if not informed prior thereto)." If you just use Twinkle, it will automatically notify the creator (assuming you leave the box checked). Qwyrxian (talk) 09:24, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll just point out that this is one of our guidelines that are almost as widely accepted as a formal policy. Any changes to them should generally only be made following discussion. If you need any help understanding all these complex notability guidelines, you're welcome to ask me, although even I don't know them all. If you're not sure if a particular article is notable, you can also ask at the Notability/Noticeboard. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:09, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Integration Technologies Group should not be speedily deleted because Gnews does reveal secondary sources and there is a credible assertion of notability --Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:16, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Shawn.

The article is just an ad for ITG, which appears to be a non-notable "provider" of IT "solutions". Most of the Google News hits are press releases.

1. It's very possible that A7 didn't apply. But I think G11 does apply. In fact, WP:SOLUTION says outright, "Public relations slang, like 'we offer solutions', is a good indication that an article is promotional and likely not notable". Do you feel that I was wrong to tag the article as deletable under WP:G11?

2. (Optional) I wonder if you could please point us to two mainstream sources which include significant coverage of ITG?

3. I have learned from experience that it is unwise to keep articles about non-notable companies. Such articles tend to get overrun by promotional language while nobody is watching. Have your experiences been different?

Kind regards, —Unforgettableid (talk) 05:49, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You may be right, but it's not a blatant example. Look at this Tribune article from a few days ago, from the Pentagon, here. There's this 1999 Wash Times piece, which we can't read for free, but also appears from the Gnew summary to be a bona fide news piece where someone from the company is quoted, here. These aren't gangbusters, I know, but it's not the sort of blatant thing speedy tags are intended for. As for the G11 thing, yes: I don't think we delete articles because of a problematic phrase or two. You were definitely wrong - imo - to have recently applied the news release tag: I can't see a single phrase in the article in its current form that is advertorial tone. It is, as of now, a rather neutral statement of facts, whatever you think of the article's notability. I also don't agree that the mere phrase "software and services solutions" is PR slang. In fact, I think you're tagging bombing, a little, but others may disagree. By all means, take it to Afd if you wish. Or for that matter, PROD it. Let it sit with the PROD tag for the period and see if anyone objects -- I'd have no problem with that. The article is making credible claims, which is why A7 is too hasty, imo. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:26, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Unforgettableid. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Edit filter/Requested.
Message added 13:52, 30 August 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Jackmcbarn (talk) 13:52, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Template:Gizgalasi et al. and contributions requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it must be substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{substituted}}</noinclude>).

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page's talk page, where you can 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, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Qwyrxian (talk) 22:44, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to say thank you to you for your incredible fairness. I deliberately kept away from the AfD after putting my two pennorth in, and I am glad that the result was keep, but more glad that throughout you led the discussion without letting your own opinions creep in (opininons are fine but back them by the facts as you know them, yeah?). That is just a great example of being a great Wikipedian and I just wanted to say thank you for that. I would say the same if it happened to go delete or usify. Si Trew (talk) 19:04, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I declined your G11 speedy deletion request on SugarSync. G11 should, at least as how I see it, used for articles that are obviously "spammy" in nature. The article appears to have extensive history and while the notability could be questioned, it's at least striving to look like an article and has some references in it. If you feel those references should be questioned and this article doesn't meet notability criteria, please take it to Articles for Deletion. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 10:35, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also, ditto with InfoStreet and SkyDesktop. Please use this rule of the thumb in future: If it looks like someone just copy-pasted a marketing copy on Wikipedia, G11 it away. If it even marginally looks like an article and you think there's even a little bit of room for debate, stick it to AFD instead. I don't think it's justificable to invoke speedy deletion unless it's incredibly obvious that article creators aren't playing by Wikipedia's rules. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 10:49, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thanks for reviewing the page for DRI Capital. You had some concerns. On the Notability issue: The WikiProject Private Equity guidelines on notability establish that private equity funds with more than $1 billion in assets under management meet the WP Notability guidelines. Because DRI Capital has more than $3 billion in assets under management, it meets the WP criteria for notability. You also wondered whether the entry sounded too much like a News Release. In going over the article a second time I see what you mean. I read over it several times with your objection in mind and took out any promotional language. Please have a look. I'd be grateful if you could detail any remaining objectionable language on my talk page. Finally, I've appealed to the membership of the WikiProject Private Equity to further evaluate the article's objectivity. Thanks for your work on this. Hankstmpr (talk) 05:45, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for going over the entry for David Chiswell. You added a notability tag, a COI tag and a news release tag. I will deal with each one of these in turn. First, the notability. If you consult WP:ANYBIO then you'll notice the guideline says that someone is notable if "The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for one several times." David Chiswell meets WP standards for notability because he has been admitted to the Order of the British Empire, one of the most prestigious awards possible for a British subject, and also has been included on Reed Elsevier's list of the Top 100 Living Contributors to Biotechnology. There's also the fact that his co-founder of Cambridge Antibody Technology, Greg Winter, has quite a lengthy WP entry. Next, the COI tag seems misplaced. It seems as though you're suggesting I have some sort of connection to David Chiswell. I do not, and since I created the article four WP users have assisted with the entry's editing. Finally, the press release tag. I have read over the entry with this in mind and cannot find anything overly promotional about the entry; it really does stick to the facts. Can you point to anything specific about the entry that seems overly promotional? If so, please not on either my talk page, or on the talk page for the David Chiswell entry. Hankstmpr (talk) 03:53, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just a heads up, but someone has requested undeletion, so per the PROD rules I have done so. You are free to nominate the article for deletion at WP:AFD if you like. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:52, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to you, too re the discussion. I thought the "lipo" line was apt. Some people use "cruft", but I don't, because it slams both edit and editor. --Lexein (talk) 20:34, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I love the image on top of your page here. Anyway ... I removed the speedy tag, because the World Bank is not a spammer. The book might not be notable, however, and if you think so, please send it to WP:AfD. I also am afraid its speedy deletion might be controversial. Thanks for your patience in this matter. Bearian (talk) 22:27, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Unforgettableid. I am just letting you know that I have converted the speedy deletion tag that you placed on Holistic Massage Training Institute to a proposed deletion tag, because I do not believe CSD applies to the page in question. Thank you. œ^™ 22:35, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Unforgettableid. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of BioScale Inc., a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Unfortunately BioScale Inc. does not meet CSD G11 either. I'm curious.. do you suspect there's paid editing going on? Thank you. œ^™ 22:49, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've noticed that many long-term editors prefer to have no user page, hence a redlink. Just sayin'. --Lexein (talk) 03:05, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just thought you might like to know I prodded this article which you earlier tagged. I expect the author will de-prod but then I'll take it to AfD. I hate spammers. andy (talk) 11:09, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello unforgettableid, I see that you have nominated most of my created articles for deletion. Please have a look again at my edits, as per paid promotional article writing is concerned I have already explained myself here. I know its important to avoid such situations and deal with them strictly, but we should not also not forget the ultimate aim of wikipedia, to enhance knowledge. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr RD (talk • contribs) 16:16, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Unforgettableid,

Assuming that Textron is on your watchlist, I will be making significant edits to this page this week adding factual information about the company and re-writing some of the segments. Please be patient as this page is updated. If there are items that you feel should be edited or cited in a different manner, please advise me before it is done. Again, this is purely to list factual information about the company and not for solicitation or marketing purposes. For any questions, please feel free to contact me directly.

Thanks, Saabin23 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saabin23 (talk • contribs) 20:07, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Unforgettableid. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Burn It Down Tour, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Does not meet the criteria for A7 or G11. Thank you. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:26, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Unforgettableid...Thanks you reviewing my page and leaving a message. I read all the links in the message you left. I do not have a conflict of interest with the group Seventeen. If you look at my contributions, I have worked on many articles regarding Kpop and Cpop entertainers and groups. I do not understand which part of the article contains a biased point of view. I did not use any weighted words and only gave information on the group's debuting process (much like the group Winner and their status as the second biggest boy band in korea. Also under Wikipedia:Notability (music)#Criteria for musicians and ensembles the group qualifies for 12.for Has been a featured subject of a substantial broadcast segment across a national radio or TV network. and 8. Pledis Entertainment is one of the more important idie labels with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are notable. A member has also been nominated in Hong Kong Film Award. Thank you again for reviewing this page. If there is any specific parts that I need to change please notify me. I didn't remove the speedy deletion tag. User:DESiegel deleted the Speedy deletion nomination stating "not wholly promotional; print sources are not required; I don't care who wrote it"  SmileBlueJay97  talk  09:13, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know about the situation with Filemail. It certainly looked promotional to me, but I didn't know about the paid editing / sockpuppet angle.

Thanks, too, for pointing out the Twinkle preferences to me. I hadn't even been aware there was a preferences panel, and will look into enabling PROD logging and CSD logging (and other things, maybe). TJRC (talk) 01:15, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It was pretty obvious that Sourov0000 (talk · contribs) was a paid editor since the first articles created by that account. See my comment on his talk page from back in August. Paid editing isn't a violation of any policies, and he does a decent job with articles about people, but doesn't do well when writing about companies. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:18, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WP:42 is intended as a rule-of-thumb for users interested in creating articles on Wikipedia. New editors who create articles should understand what these definitions mean on Wikipedia to make sure the article their writing doesn't get deleted. However, what a user interested in deleting articles should be introduced to is the different reasons for why we should delete articles, and the cases in which we shouldn't delete articles. WP:42 doesn't discuss deletion at all. Rather, it defines what is generally acceptable as a topic for Wikipedia. Important for a new editor trying to figure out if the subject their writing about is OK; not very useful for an editor who wants to learn about deletion. Furthermore, a lack of notability is only one of many reasons an article could be deleted, and the deletion policy lists all the other valid reasons for deletion allowed by policy (as a matter of fact, it is the policy). Moreover, the deletion policy also describes scenarios in which an alternative to deletion should be pursued instead. All of this information is perfect for introducing new deletion-workers to the process, which is the reason why I don't think we should be using WP:42 in {{Afd-welcome}}. Regards, Mz7 (talk) 02:02, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, deleted as spam Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:12, 14 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I hatted your question on the Science Reference Desk as being a request for medical advice. As mentioned there, even if the question is, actually, purely speculative, the only answer would still constitute medical advice, something we cannot provide.Phoenixia1177 (talk) 08:15, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please explain why you re-posted the information on the Danish Meta Study? Your last message asked the 2 parties to reach out and discuss this to come to a conclusion.

Your information about the Danish Meta Study should not be on our page, it should be posted on the "physical examination" page.

I am going to remove this until you engage in a proper dialogue on why it should be posted on our Wikipedia listing. You are publicly refuting and slandering the ideals of our business on a medium where you have no right to. Wikipedia is about facts - the Danish meta study is not factual - "casts doubt" is used in the explanation. That means they aren't certain that physical examinations are useful.

Please stop trying to police Wikipedia, and let facts be facts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amrgalal (talk • contribs) 15:17, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your business has no "ideals", it is a for-profit enterprise.

The term "slander" has a precise meaning. Your recent edits could give Wikipedia contributors the impression that you may consider legal or other "off-wiki" action against them, or against Wikipedia itself. Please note that making such threats on Wikipedia is strictly prohibited under Wikipedia's policies on legal threats and civility. Users who make such threats may be blocked. If you have a dispute with the content of any page on Wikipedia, please follow the proper channels for dispute resolution. Please be sure to comment on content, not contributors, and where possible make specific suggestions for changes supported by reliable independent sources and focusing especially on verifiable errors of fact. Thank you. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:26, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Unforgettableid, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Peiker Acustic, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The reason given is not a valid speedy deletion criterion. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 07:04, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Here you have a kitten. Hope you pass good time with your new pet. Greetings.

RomanLier (talk) 03:08, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There's no clear-cut way to delete an article simply based on the suspicion that it was created by a paid editor. If the article meets one of the speedy criteria then that can be used, but unless you have copious proof and an SPI and whatnot, paid editing is very hard to rationalize as a reason for deletion. In this case it might be that the creator worked for the company - still COI but not as bad as the ones that are created for profit by a hired spammer. The ones that look extremely professional right off the bat (infoboxes, citations, etc) from someone who has three edits total are the ones that are almost always paid-for (again as opposed to an employee of the company having done it). Unfortunately under the current COI guidelines, there's no way to delete the article unless it simply fails notability, or is eligible for speedy under some other criteria. Cheers! §FreeRangeFrog^croak 20:16, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I came pretty much to say the same thing. Just use G11. If it is unmistakably clear from the history that it was by a specific banned editor, use that as an additional reason for deletion, G5. As FreeRangeFrog says, although we cannot currently use speedy deletion for undeclared paid editing, almost all such articles will fit quite nicely into G11. A7 is a little trickier, because there are usually references--the references will usually not be references providing substantial coverage from third-party independent reliable sources, but rather press releases or mere announcements -- however, that's a reason for PROD or AFD. And for promotional articles, it always helps to check for copyvio--when found, list it as the primary reason. DGG ( talk ) 00:30, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

FreeRangeFrog, DGG, thank you both for your thoughts.

Please note that this guideline section says: "If another editor objects for any reason, then it's a controversial edit. Such edits should be discussed on the article's talk page." Well, I object to all edits by paid editors, and so I declare them all to be controversial edits. Perhaps this argument is a stretch, but I would argue that, unless we get talk page consensus, perhaps we can undo them all — by deleting the articles created by spammers. Ha ha, only serious. :)

I'd argue that an editor who works for the company is still a sort of "paid editor". They're just paid a monthly wage instead of an hourly consulting fee.

About the CSD rationale I used when nominating the Planate article. My rationale was: "This 'article' is actually a press release created by a paid editor. Using Wikipedia for advertising purposes is forbidden. Please delete per CSD G11 and WP:NOTFORPROMOTION." So I did invoke G11. I just added some extra ammunition to my argument by also mentioning paid editing and WP:NOTFORPROMOTION. I know this extra ammunition was weak ammunition, since neither paid editing nor NOTFORPROMOTION are reasons for speedy deletion. But it might help influence an admin who was on the fence regarding whether or not the article met G11. And probably the extra ammunition was unneeded; but I think that's okay. I think it's fine to take a bad article down using extra bullets; it only requires that the deleting admin spends a small amount of extra time reading and thinking about my deletion rationale. (But if you disagree, I would be interested in hearing why.)

By the way, I see the Planate article is deleted now. Thank you FreeRangeFrog. :)

Cheers, —Unforgettableid (talk) 15:54, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, can I check why was the Bee Cheng Hiang article reverted back to the original stub? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bee_Cheng_Hiang I was one of the writers that worked with the original poster to put up the article on 08:36, 24 February 2015‎ 08:36, 24 February 2015‎, and we felt that there was useful information on the company that had been removed and the article had been supported with newspaper articles as well. If the issue is more to do with the tone of the article, we would like to have the opportunity to revise it to suit Wikipedia's guidelines. Please advise, thanks! Heynubcake (talk) 08:56, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dear @Heynubcake: Hi! It seems you have never edited that article. Who is "we"? Also, do you have any connection to Bee Cheng Hiang — and do you have any connection through which can reach the company or such to ask them questions directly? Cheers, —Unforgettableid (talk) 14:09, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

make unsupported allegations that a signon belongs to a paid editor, not even in edit summaries. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 21:21, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dear @Sminthopsis84: Good point. My allegations were probably true, but if they were actually false, it might be very bad. Can I say "likely-paid" though? —Unforgettableid (talk) 15:31, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, "likely-paid" would be almost as likely to cause offence, I think. It could have been done by someone who is merely a keen hospital supporter and not very confident in their own writing skills. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 15:54, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Sminthopsis84: I hear. They might want to boost the hospital, and if they aren't a confident writer, they'd rather do so by copying and pasting. Still, at least "likely-paid" might not be libel. :) How about if I write "COI SPA" instead? —Unforgettableid (talk) 16:55, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That account was active for less than a month more than four years ago and made only 15 edits, include a revert of their own addition, so calling them SPA is not warranted. Alleging that they have a conflict of interest without proof is contrary to WP:AGF. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 21:07, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your wholesale deletion at The Hospital for Sick Children should have been discussed first on the talk page. Magnolia677 (talk) 21:55, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 23:35, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Sulfurboy was:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:SleepBot and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also get Wikipedia's Live Help real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Sulfurboy (talk) 22:39, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Unforgettableid, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Sulfurboy (talk) 22:39, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I notice you're on Wikipedia:List of administrator hopefuls. Wikipedia would benefit from more admins. If you have been editing for more than 12 months (preferably 24+ months), and have been editing fairly consistently for the past 6 months (preferably 12+ months) with at least 100 edits a month (this tool will help) - or an explanation for any gaps, and haven't been blocked in the past three years - or a good explanation for a recent block, don't have a recent history of edit warring or arguing with other editors, feel you can explain why you wish to be an admin, can demonstrate some understanding of Wikipedia's procedures and processes, or know where to go for guidance, and are confident enough to go through a RfA, please get in touch with me. We can talk about it some more, and if all looks OK, I'll nominate you. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 09:37, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I notice you haven't responded. No worries. I'll mark you down on my list as not interested at the moment, but if you do change your mind, please do get in touch on my talkpage or by email. No promises as I've not yet looked into your contribution history, but I do like that you are willing to put yourself forward as an admin, so I'm prepared to give you support and advice when you're ready. Regards SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 09:27, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Xwrits is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Xwrits (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Safiel (talk) 16:00, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notes to self:

Source?: [1] It looks like there's nothing else in Google Books. I didn't look deep into Google Web Search.

Wikipedia:Notability (software) didn't exist back during the last AfD. Wikipedia:Software notability did. It's true that consensus can change, but maybe I can request a deletion review and ask to get the article grandfathered back into Wikipedia.

Dear @Safiel: Do you still remember?: Why did you want the article deleted in the first place? Was it picking up too much vandalism too often or something? Was it simply poorly written?

—Unforgettableid (talk) 18:53, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It has been eight months, so my memory is a bit fuzzy. However, my general reason for deletion was that this was simply too insignificant and obscure of a linux application to warrant having its own article. It wasn't the quality of the article or vandalism. Safiel (talk) 19:16, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Safiel: Disk space is cheap. I think I usually only nominate articles for deletion when I believe they were made by a paid COI editor, or when I believe they're likely to attract spammy paid edits. Why would you ever want to delete a good-quality article about software which you believe to be insignificant? Cheers, —Unforgettableid (talk) 11:58, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Comparison of Canadian-tax preparation software for personal use is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of Canadian-tax preparation software for personal use until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 15:05, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I recently removed a speedy delete tag that you had placed on Steve Kuhn (executive). I do not think that Steve Kuhn (executive) fits any of the speedy deletion criteria  because Could use improvement, and perahsp AfD might delete, but not a G11 level of promotion, and G5 does not apply to editors LATER blocked. I request that you consider not re-tagging Steve Kuhn (executive) for speedy deletion without discussing the matter on the appropriate talk page. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 04:27, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Unforgettableid, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of User:Unforgettableid/sandbox2, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The reason given is not a valid speedy deletion criterion. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. —Unforgettableid (talk) 06:27, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Unforgettableid. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of User:Unforgettableid/sandbox2, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The reason given is not a valid speedy deletion criterion. Thank you. —Unforgettableid (talk) 08:53, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Unforgettableid, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of User:Unforgettableid/sandbox2, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: No reason given. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. —Unforgettableid (talk) 06:14, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You recently asked me why I have contributed about 80% to Machel Waikenda page. Yes, you are right. First, I didn't create this page, second I have no any affiliations with the said person. I have created several pages and edited many more - see my history. I only focus on some of these pages because they draw my interest. I was actually shocked that the page was flagged because some 'undisclosed payments' were made to edit the page. I have always edited the page because its information was scanty. Kindly remove the Flags, as I feel that they are somewhat biased, particularly regarding my contribution to this page. Thank you.

Hello Unforgettableid. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of International Drinks Festival, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. Thank you. GedUK  10:35, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Unforgettableid. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of The Leadership Council, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. Thank you. GedUK  10:35, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Unforgettableid. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Transnational Corporation of Nigeria, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. Thank you. GedUK  10:37, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Unforgettableid. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Heirs Holdings, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. Thank you. GedUK  10:37, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Unforgettableid. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Transcorp Hotels plc, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. Thank you. GedUK  10:38, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Unforgettableid. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of The Tony Elumelu Foundation, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. Thank you. GedUK  10:38, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Unforgettableid. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of United Bank for Africa, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. Thank you. GedUK  10:48, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

First, I am not sure, but I think that they are the same person. This raises a competence question as to why the current draft was submitted, since his BLP has been present for nine years. Second, I have made a report at COIN. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:17, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I removed the templates you added to this article. I also see you've done similar to a few other articles. I'm 100% with you on removing adverts and paid-for content, but I'm unclear what basis you are using to determine both. I do not see anything overtly promotional on the Playgendary article (and certainly nothing that a quick fix couldn't resolve), and I don't see any obvious paid-for editing either.

So your G11 criteria for SPD doesn't appear to apply. What made you think it did? Thanks. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 12:23, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Escape Orbit!

Playgendary was created by Dartmessiah, who has an editcount of only 32. Dartmessiah's very first edit created a substantial Pixonic article, including infobox, all in one single edit; this signifies that the creator may have created a brand-new secondary account in order just to post this one article. The article is about a privately-owned company. It includes possibly-spammy phrases like "top 10", "exciting", "fun". It includes a forbidden external link in the lead section. The "External links" section includes links to Pixonic's Facebook and Twitter pages. And remember, it was created all by one single edit by a user account's very first edit. Therefore Dartmessiah is probably paid.

Playgendary was also created in one big edit, including infobox. The article is about a privately-owned company. It includes possibly-spammy phrases such as "more than 350", "more than 30", "App Store Top-10", "number one free-to-play title", "Top-10 most downloaded", "Top-3 world companies by number of downloads", "most downloaded 2019", "passed the 1-billion-installs mark", and "Top-10 world mobile publishers". The big edit also includes links to Playgendary's Facebook and Instagram pages. And remember, it was created all by one single edit by a fairly-new user who seems to only care about creating articles about privately-owned companies. Any one of the above red flags alone might not prove that the article is spammy, but all of the above red flags taken together strongly suggest that the article is probably spammy.

Trying to fix spam articles about non-notable companies is unwise. Even if you do it, spammers may come back and make the articles spammy again. A better solution is probably to delete the articles altogether. G11 or PROD often work.

I shall retag Playgendary, but if you are unconvinced by my above rationale, please feel free to remove the tags.

Are you now convinced that Playgendary should rightfully be tagged?

Kind regards, —Unforgettableid (talk) 10:52, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You might be correct in your analysis, it could equally be someone from Cyprus with an interest in local gaming companies. There is nothing to prove that they received payment for it. But either way, there is little evidence of this in the remaining article today. I usually feel it's the resulting article that counts, rather than how it got there. I think the company passes as notable (just). But I won't dispute if you want to PROD it. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 11:23, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for you message this is my first time using Wikipedia

I made the draft page for Robert K Naviaux ( a scientific collaborator )

Based on your message I've now made a request for a page to be created at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requested_articles/Medicine/People_in_medicine#Medical_scientists

I link to the draft page I created, hopefully that will help an author create the page? Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonm4024 (talk • contribs) 20:29, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Edgardo M. Latrubesse (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Amazon3112 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Dear Unforgettableid It looks like you have a conflict of interest; you are very interested in lessening Latrubesse's biography. All modifications/additions that I did I put references, links, etc. However, it is not enough. Please enlighten me since your purpose is not very well clear. Why did you delete his awards, external link, career description if it is all backed by the links? Are you the administrator of the page? Are you entitled to block any edit made by another person unless it is with your approval? Also, I can assure you I'm not receiving any monetary contribution related to the edits. ~Amazon3112~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amazon3112 (talk • contribs) 03:05, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I've replied at Talk:Edgardo M. Latrubesse#Amazon3112's edits. —Unforgettableid (talk) 09:26, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Parker Russell International Ltd. isn't eligible for WP:G5. AleksandarVicky (talk · contribs) wasn't blocked as anybody's sockpuppet, nor does the CU comment at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/A112484011388 say AV is a sockpuppet, "(which is a UPE account)".

Its text uses a first person pronoun "consider the effects of our work" which is a strong indicator that the text is a WP:G12-able copyright violation, but their webite won't load at the moment, so I can't find the source.

Your talk's getting big, please consider archiving - Help:Archiving a talk page.

Hope that helps, Cabayi (talk) 06:54, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Republic TV (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Arnab Goswami (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello Unforgettableid,

Thank you for the welcome, as new user it takes some practice to be neutral :). I am asking for your help, here is the draft, I have re-edited the information that i wanted to add to Republic TV Article:

New Section - Business Deals Arnab Goswami is a journalist who has also made headlines because of his business deals, with his company being valued at Rs. 1200 crores just within 2 years of launch. Arnab Goswami through business moves has built a healthy balance sheet. The company appears to be well funded having access to a balance of liquid investments and unutilized fund-based facilities (as on 30th June 2019). It has seen a growth in revenue at Rs 198.9 crore as against Rs 154.9 crore in 2019. The financial valuation of the Company is centered on its fiscal discipline in the way it manages its operating expenses within its revenues, showing a trajectory that the valuations will sustain and build further.

I didn't how to add citations here, I have links to every sentence here. Let me know what you think

--Lisa.Corden (talk) 07:52, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lisa.Corden: No worries! Please see WP:BPCOI. For proposed edits, please use the article talk page, not my talk page. What made you interested in writing about Mr. Goswami and Republic TV? —Unforgettableid (talk) 12:56, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What made me interested was the way, the article was written. You keep stressing that the article should be neutral and there is nothing neutral about both the articles. What is highlighted is the cases and negatives. But if you see Republic TV as a company you see how well they are doing financially, and I didn't see mention of it there, hence I did my research and thought of adding these points. Also the Talk page of the article has discussions highlighting the same and wants someone to rewrite the article in neutral way. Lisa.Corden (talk) 07:10, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Arnab2305 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Draft:Happy Child High School, Rehabari (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello! I hope that you are in good health.

I saw that you reviewed my Draft:Happy Child High School, Rehabari today, but you stated that you couldn't pass the article because it seemed more like an advertisement. Hence, following WP:NSCHOOL, I removed each and every paragraph, which seemed like an advertisement to me.

My school was feeling the necessity of a Wikipedia article since a long time. I have resubmitted my article for review. So, it is my humble request to you to review my article for one more time. It would be very kind of you if you let me know about any more changes to be done in the article. Thank you! Arnab2305 (talk) 05:17, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Arnab2305. No worries!

Page is still problematic. For example: "flying colours" "continuous progress" "40 students securing 90% and above, 71 students securing distinction marks (83% and above) and 21 students securing star marks (75% and above)" "The students of this school have also secured State Ranks in the HSLC Examination several times".

What is your connection to the school?

—Unforgettableid (talk) 06:59, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I have removed the statistics of performance of the school. I just kept the number of students who appeared for the matriculation. If there are any more problems, please do inform me.

My connection with the school is immortal. I have spent thirteen years of my life in this school, from the age of 3 to 16. I don't know whether I would be able to contribute something in the future to this school or not. This article is just a small tribute to my school. Arnab2305 (talk) 07:48, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! OK it was kind of you to disclose. I've quoted your disclosure on the draft talk page and added a message for you there.

If you are willing to do so, please set your gender at Special:Preferences, and either add your pronouns or a gender infobox to your user page.

When replying, please either indent your replies correctly or use reply-link. Reply-link will indent correctly for you and will also automatically ping the recipient).

Thanks! —Unforgettableid (talk) 14:39, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done! Thank you so much for the cooperation and the guidance. Otherwise, I would have taken months to find out the faults.

The problem is that, I took the help of other articles to make my own article. I thought that adding the "Dress Code" section would be right because I saw that the article mentioned below has information about their dress:

[2]

No problem. I have learnt many protocols while creating this article. Thank you! Arnab2305 (talk) 03:15, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Arnab2305, no worries!

That article includes one sentence about the dress code, which is probably fine. Your article included about 700 bytes about the dress code, which is almost surely too much. :)

Regards, —Unforgettableid (talk) 05:21, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• David Kerr Munslow (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Draft:Cortus (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi David Kerr Munslow!

• Now that I've moved the article from mainspace to draftspace, you may edit it yourself. You no longer need to request edits; you can do the edits yourself.
• If the article ever makes it back into mainspace, you will once again have more restrictions on editing it, as before. There may be more information on these restrictions at WP:BPCOI / WP:PSCOI / WP:COI. You again may need to request edits for certain edits.
• COI editing can be a huge hassle for you, the editor: again, please see WP:BPCOI / WP:PSCOI / WP:COI.
• It may be difficult or impossible to ever get the page moved back into mainspace. You can find a summary of our notability bar at WP:42. If Cortus passes the bar, all you need to do is prove this to us. However, Cortus might never pass the bar. If this is the case, there's nothing that can be done, and the page can never be moved back to mainspace.
• It might be simpler to just leave the page alone. If everyone leaves it alone in draftspace for more than six months, it will automatically get deleted. You can still edit Wikipedia for fun: for example, you can edit articles about your favorite hobbies, or your favorite cities, or any other of your interests outside of work. But COI editing can be difficult and is perhaps not worth your effort to bother with.

If you wish to reply, feel free.

Kind regards, —Unforgettableid (talk) 04:44, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Unforgettableid, I understand. David Kerr Munslow (talk) 06:15, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Axcient, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Axcient and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Draft:Axcient during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Nathan2055^{talk - contribs} 19:53, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#Thecapitalking
• Thecapitalking (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Hi please I replied your message on my talk page, can you please check it out? Thank you Thecapitalking (talk) 06:05, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've restored several articles to mainspace that you had moved to the draft namespace. Per WP:DRAFTIFY, this process is not to be used as a backdoor to deletion, and is therefore inappropriate for articles that have a significant history, are more than a few months old, or where the original author is no longer active. I have not evaluated the notability or suitability of these articles, and will leave it to you to nominate these for AfD as appropriate. Some of them probably do need to go, but they still need to go through the Deletion process. – bradv🍁 18:40, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ahmass Fakahany is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ahmass Fakahany until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Nathan2055^{talk - contribs} 23:02, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notifying you as most recent draftifying editor. Nathan2055^{talk - contribs} 23:02, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Unforgettableid. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of The Violin Guild, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. Thank you. GedUK  11:03, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Unforgettableid and Ged UK: I have instead PRODd it as non-notable, feel free to either contest or endorse as you see fit. Nathan2055^{talk - contribs} 18:11, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What you did at WP:COI does not make sense. It's also a large change to an established policy page, which needs concensus. Please discuss at the talk page.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 15:52, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ThatMontrealIP! WP:PGBOLD says, in part: "Although most editors find prior discussion, especially at well-developed pages, very helpful, directly editing these pages is permitted by Wikipedia's policies. Consequently, you should not remove any change solely on the grounds that there was no formal discussion indicating consensus for the change before it was made. Instead, you should give a substantive reason for challenging it and, if one hasn't already been started, open a discussion to identify the community's current views." (Emphasis mine.) Kind regards, —Unforgettableid (talk) 15:59, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I gave you a reason: your changes did not make sense. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 16:17, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dear ThatMontrealIP:

I still think it makes sense, and I shall tell you why. The guideline is heavy and long. It may be difficult for brand-new Wikipedians to understand. I think it makes sense to offer a short unofficial summary, in order so that new Wikipedians can more easily know what to do. You think it does not make sense. But:

• A) Why do you think my reason is mistaken?
• B) Why do you think it does not make sense to offer an unofficial summary?

Kind regards, —Unforgettableid (talk) 16:24, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Start a discussion on the WP:COI talk page, which is the appropriate place for the discussion.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 16:25, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dear ThatMontrealIP: According to WP:PGBOLD, it probably would have been more correct for you to do so. But I have now done so myself. Please see Wikipedia talk:Conflict of interest § Adding an unofficial summary just above the guideline. Kind regards, —Unforgettableid (talk) 16:59, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Carflo213 (talk · contribs)

Hi there, though I appreciate your attempt to provide a softer warning here, I want the warning to be sharp because copyright violations are intolerable. You should also be aware that you shouldn't be refactoring other editors' talk page comments unless for something minor like indentation, or to redact personal information. Changing someone else's comment to have it say something other than what was intended is considered disruptive, which I absolutely know was not your aim. Please see WP:TPG. If you want to add a note or subsequent clarification about copyright issues on that user's page, feel free. Thanks and regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:50, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cyphoidbomb!

Copyvios are a very serious problem, but as far as I can tell, the user may have never been warned before.

I think it makes sense to assume good faith — for a user's first copyvio, only. (Once the user has been warned once, I think there may no longer be any need to assume good faith.)

I refactored your comment first, and started writing to you next, because the matter was somewhat time-sensitive.

I see you reverted my refactoring. I do not plan to undo your revert, but I do encourage you to do so. This is because, as far as I can tell, the user may have never been warned before.

Your thoughts would be welcome.

Kind regards, —Unforgettableid (talk) 23:57, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have a low tolerance for copyright violations, and I want it to be clear that they're not acceptable so that we don't do down a path of repeated misbehaviour, which opens Wikipedia up to potential legal liability. I feel that most people are taught pretty early on that copying of any form is wrong. On the contrary, if someone adds simple unsourced content early on in their editing, climbing up the warning tree with increasing "no we really mean it" tone would be more appropriate. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:17, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cyphoidbomb!

It looks like Carflo213 may be from India.

In Canada and the US, it's true that just about every high school graduate has been taught that copying is wrong. In India, I'm not so sure.

I did a bit of Google searching, and it looks like plagiarism may be a bigger problem in India than in Canada or the US. See, for example, Scientific plagiarism in India, which attributes part of the problem to "a lack of proper training".

Maybe Carflo213 thought that small copyvios are "fair use" or "fair dealing".

Kind regards, —Unforgettableid (talk) 00:58, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome.

Fylindfotberserk (talk) 07:40, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I was wondering why you deleted a few of my pages. I didn't check Wikipedia for some time as I wasn't able. because of my illness. Please advice how I can get them back and what I need to change. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joostwijnberg (talk • contribs) 03:19, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Rather than bombard you with the usual Twinkle boilerplate, I've set up a discussion for this template in the usual place. I'm not convinced that these days it is a net positive for the project. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 14:41, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Curious about why removing a notice was left on my talk page. Seeing as mods have ascertained that the subject was, in fact, notable, this may be a moot point, but curious regarding your rationale for threatening to delete the subject's page because you disagree with an edit?OrangeFruitBowl (talk) 00:12, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Don't worry, you're not the subject of the ANI. This is regarding JitazG and their edits at Zubeen Garg. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:36, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
I saw that you recently reviewed Draft:Sukez (video director) and declined it. Another new account just moved it to mainspace and removed those tags however. I've moved it back into draftspace and tried to reinstate your comments, however I would appreciate it if you can check that I added all of them. Thanks! Merry Christmas! Asartea ^{Talk Contribs!} 09:32, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just a heads up, Phalombe just removed your cleanup tags, incuding the coi notice. I'm going to restore them. Thanks for your time. Opal|zukor^(discuss) 13:58, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Are you a freemason? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.176.101.218 (talk) 19:51, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User wikipedia/Administrator someday, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:User wikipedia/Administrator someday (2nd nomination) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Template:User wikipedia/Administrator someday during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Firestar464 (talk) 10:21, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Unforgettableid:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running until 31 July 2021.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.
There is currently a backlog of over 1800 articles, so start reviewing articles. We're looking forward to your help!

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for Creation at 21:54, 7 July 2021 (UTC). If you do not wish to recieve future notification, please remove your name from the mailing list.[reply]

Hi Unforgettableid! You're receiving this notification because you were previously listed on the AFC's participants list, but you haven't made any edits to the English Wikipedia in over 6 months. Because of your inactivity, you have been removed from the list. If you would like to regain access to the AFCH script, you can do so at any time by visiting WT:AFCP. Thank you for your work at AFC, and if you start editing Wikipedia again we hope you will rejoin us. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:01, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect 3-D acceleration and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 8#3-D acceleration until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 08:03, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect 3-D animation and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 8#3-D animation until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 08:50, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Sir William Parker(1781-1866) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 January 5 § Sir William Parker(1781-1866) until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 22:44, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]