Jump to content

User talk:Smartse/archive 11

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Expewikiwriter

See you're cleaning up after him as well. I'm mainly going for the flamethrower approach on the ones that lack notability; the more tricky "Yes, they're notable, but they're adverts" ones are second priority. 86.** IP (talk) 07:27, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

By the way, thanks for the barnstar! 86.** IP (talk) 07:29, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Erg. We have IPs and new accounts removing prods now, just in the hope that they'll wear us down, I think. I think we've got most of it; I'll check Special:Contributions/Expewikiwriter again once the AfDs clear through. 86.** IP (talk) 12:56, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I've left some comments at the (some?) afds. I'd be willing to bet a beer that the origin of the accounts is ClarkHuot - certainly one of the IPs complaining located to NYC didn't it? SmartSE (talk) 16:02, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
Think there's about 10 AfDs running, not all of them mine. Cleanup proved a bit annoying.
Of the remaining articles, I'd be interested in your opinion of Joy_Theater, and probably a few others I'll list once the AfDs start closing. 86.** IP (talk) 16:25, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
Jeez. I hadn't noticed how long they had been editing! Thanks for all the work you're doing. I think that we should certainly have an article on Joy Theater - there are quite a lot of hits in google books. The article is reasonably well written too - I just removed the worst piece of promotion. SmartSE (talk) 16:47, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
Also, see this. How can we possibly not have an article about a man who wrote a book about that?! SmartSE (talk) 20:50, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

I see you're aware of the works of Expewikiwriter. Regarding your note to that SPA who left a comment on the AfD for Harold J. Morowitz, I think you've just communicated with one of that account's sock/meatpuppets. Though they did have a point, I'm not sure we should be giving them the time of day. I guess they are doing a pretty good job of seeming like legit editors, but they are gaming the system. I would take: "I have no idea who wrote this" with a grain of salt. Thanks for helping out though. Valfontis (talk) 21:38, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Who knows - seemed to me much more like a meatpuppet of somebody, which isn't a problem. I prefer to AGF in case they are who they say they are - even if there is a 1% chance that they might start editing other articles it is worth it. If they start to spam then we can deal with them then. Cheers for helping out as well! SmartSE (talk) 21:50, 3 April 2012 (UTC)


Well, the Expewikiwriter mess is starting to clear out. Brooklyn Salsa Company is the one I'm really unsure about that hasn't been nominated; As fortr the AfDs themselves, well, search for Expewikiwriter in the AfD list if you want to check up. Mostly deletes, and those that aren't leaning that way are sensible exceptions. Bit under-participated, though: may get some relists. 86.** IP (talk) 14:50, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know about BSC - initially I though that CORP might just be met, but the more I dug the worse it got. I've just sent it to AfD. SmartSE (talk) 14:08, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Guy Bavli

If you're okay with User:Eclipsed/Guy Bavli, could you do a histmerge with the mainspace version? SilverserenC 05:27, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder. I've done so, but also left a note on the talk page about a few other issues. SmartSE (talk) 09:54, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

JSTOR

Relevant: Wikipedia:Requests_for_JSTOR_access. Looks like someone's on it already. Cheers! Ocaasi t | c 15:01, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Ah cool. I already have access but thanks for letting me know. SmartSE (talk) 17:19, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Article names

Why are some articles under their common name while others under their botanical name, ie: California poppy vs Cornus florida?512bits (talk) 02:46, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Happy Easter!

File:Chocolate-Easter-Bunny.jpg

Happy Easter! Hope your day is great! Yasht101 11:52, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Present

Present for you on my user page. 512bits (talk) 20:52, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Ah thanks! I'm in good company - you still have more to find though! SmartSE (talk) 09:57, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Check out

...the history of the very adverty Mills College and the history of Nathan Ballard. I think we have more socks. 86.** IP (talk) 00:39, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Jeez. More puppets than the muppets. Looks like some of it is already dealt with, but I'll try and take a better look later on. SmartSE (talk) 09:58, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Mills College

What a godawful advert... Also, bonmus: Spot the SPAs who have made it such! 86.** IP (talk) 12:37, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Expewikiwriter

Well, a few more articles up for deletion. Expewikiwriter's history is rapidly getting shorter. 86.** IP (talk) 03:01, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Young Entrepreneur Council

What do you think of this one? It's one of the few articles that might scratch by from this mess, but I've learned not to trust the sourcing, and, indeed, there are issues with most of the news articles using similar language. which seems to indicate a reworked press release. 86.** IP (talk) 17:58, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

I saw some pretty good looking sources earlier on factiva when looking for them about Gerber (that is probably an article that we should have, although I kind of agreed about G11) - e.g. the NYT. Might be best to just stubify it completely using a couple of good refs and watch it to make sure it isn't turned back into puff. As you've probably noticed I've left some comments at AfDs and started another. Gtg now though - starving! Probably won't have the time for any more despamming for a while. SmartSE (talk) 18:12, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
I agree; Gerber is notable, just that, as it was written, it had no value to Wikipedia, and the sourcing couldn't be trusted anyway. Perhaps stubbifying was also an option, but anyone writing an article on him would need to do a lot more research first, and couldn't trust what was done, so the only thing leaving it up did was give the sockpppets something to editwar over. I'm off as well, so see you tomorrow! 86.** IP (talk) 18:23, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Shooting yourself in the foot; the Expewikiwriter way

On the NewOrleans.com deletion, the socks tried to make an Other Stuff Exists argument. Unfortunately, one of the Other Stuff that existed was VEGAS.com. Which I nominated for deletion, because, y'know,, it's all press release-sourced... however, one of the press releases used as sources names as the parent company of NewOrleans.com. It's flown under the radar and stood on Wikipedia since 2007. You can almost imagine that PR company's clients wringing their hands and shouting "Stop helping me!" 86.** IP (talk) 14:12, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

You beat me!

Thanks! (but you forgot to say neener neener) :) Valfontis (talk) 17:47, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Didn't see this though - good teamwork! SmartSE (talk) 21:24, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your help

Can you tell me where I went wrong with the old AfD page for "Gianna_Jessen" and what you had to do to fix this?Other than using the old AfD discussion page..I THINK i have that figured out.(Newmanoconnor (talk) 19:23, 16 April 2012 (UTC))

(talk page stalker) I'll let SmartSE handle your question, but did you know you don't have to put parentheses around your signature? When we say "sign your posts with 4 tildes (~~~~) what we mean is "type four tildes, and by the way this what 4 tildes look like if you don't know". It's good to type a space first too. I hope that helps. Valfontis (talk) 20:27, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
WP:AFDHOWTO explains how to nominate articles for deletion. Because there had already been one discussion you needed to create a new one, rather than continuing the old one. WP:TWINKLE makes the whole process very easy - you just select a tab on the page and can then just fill in a form with your justification. The rest is done automatically (including checking whether there had already been an afd before. Let me know if you have any more questions. SmartSE (talk) 21:28, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Valfontis I am a fairly literal person at times. Newmanoconnor (talk) 23:24, 16 April 2012 (UTC) Thanks again SmartSE, I was followingWP:AFDHOWTO , but I guess I missed that step about how to create a new one when there is already an old one. I'll check out WP:TWINKLE

Expewikiwriter update

Checking his contribs, here's what's left:

Waiting out the period for deletion due to non-used fair use:

86.** IP (talk) 04:15, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

I've also opened an MfD on the supposedly-free-licensed images, because I'm not sure we can trust the image sources. 86.** IP (talk) 17:31, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
Y'know, I think he started with around fifty to a hundred articles. It's sad how few of them were any good. 86.** IP (talk) 17:17, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
Sorry for being uncommunicative. Thanks for the list - it's useful to have a to do list for things like this. Some of the articles that are being kept need some tidying up, but otherwise we're almost there. Take a look at this guy's contribs though Ed.Valdez (talk · contribs). Slightly suspicious don't ya think?! Probably got some socks somewhere too... It's never ending... SmartSE (talk) 20:14, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
Not sure it'll be socks, necesarily, but anyone using TM is probably in PR, or doing copyvios. 86.** IP (talk) 20:16, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
Oh really? And where did they use TM? Haven't seen that yet. SmartSE (talk) 20:20, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
Yep. Time for WP:SSI. Also, see below. 86.** IP (talk) 20:24, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Actually, definite copyvio. [1] is a barely-edited version of http://www.prweb.com/releases/MonaVie/Nutritional_Chemistry/prweb9100257.htm (Note: prweb.com is for press releases, so not an RS.)

Compare. bold is that person, italics the press release.

In early 2012 MonaVie launched MonaVie 2.0 under a product platform called MonaVie Nutritional Chemistry™ that claims to be a personalized, targeted product options to address an individual’s unique nutritional needs.

...a new product platform called MonaVie Nutritional Chemistry™ that provides personalized, targeted product options to address an individual’s unique nutritional needs.


According to MonaVie Chief Marketing Officer Jeff Cohen, MonaVie Nutritional Chemistry will make it easy for consumers to address their unique nutritional needs.

According to Cohen, MonaVie Nutritional Chemistry will make it easy for consumers to address their unique nutritional needs.

Hmm. I've given them the benefit of the doubt for the moment, but an indefinite block will be needed if they carry on as they have. It's too late for WP:SPI though - checkuser only lasts 1 month, and judging by the where the IPs geolocate to (some Egypt, some Czech Republic) they are using some form of anonymiser. (Btw you are lightning quick!) SmartSE (talk) 20:33, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
I usually check fairly often when I know someone's on. I suspect the right thing to do just now is to bring it up at an administrator noticeboard. 86.** IP (talk) 20:42, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
Meh. I don't like dramazz. I'll just keep an eye on them and take action as necessary. SmartSE (talk) 20:43, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
YorbaLindaOCMan (talk · contribs) SmartSE (talk) 21:09, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
Hmm. I'll look into it tomorrow. 86.** IP (talk) 21:14, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
User_talk:Ed.Valdez#Blocked no surprises there really. SmartSE (talk) 11:12, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Oh, yes, before I forget, have you seen the new findings at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Artie04? 86.** IP (talk) 21:15, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

No I hadn't. Thanks for the link. Only confirms what we already knew, but still it's nice to know! SmartSE (talk) 21:18, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
I'm just glad I don't need to go to WP:DR because the sockfest at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nathan Ballard caused it to be kept. 86.** IP (talk) 21:33, 20 April 2012

I've added the files into the list, so we can monitor them as well. 86.** IP (talk) 16:24, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll sort the ones at commons out later. SmartSE (talk) 11:12, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Interestingly, Exoewikiwriter's contributions fit on one page of 500. I'm pretty sure he had a few thousand before this. 86.** IP (talk) 07:55, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

So far, so good. 86.** IP (talk) 21:47, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Hey, Smartse, remmeber you said you'd deal with the image files on Commons; everything else is pretty much done with the Expewikiwriter cleanup, but I'd rather not learn an entire new Wiki's worth of policy. 86.** IP (talk) 08:33, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AEd.Valdez&diff=488389616&oldid=488382466 is good. Nicely done. --MZMcBride (talk) 01:58, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Cheers. I think that if people spent less time writing at ANI etc. and left more time to warn in their own words, things would be better round here. SmartSE (talk) 09:55, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Taibi Kahler

I thought you might be interested in this article and related ones. It appears to be self promotional and possibly a vanity page, as well as the related articles.Newmanoconnor (talk) 06:00, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

It's not entirely spammy, but more serious is that it is a copypaste of this so I'll delete it per WP:CSD#G12. Btw, tagging an article for speedy deletion isn't the same as prodding - don't worry it took me ages to work out what the difference between all our different deletion processes were. Thanks for the heads up though. I'll take a look at Process_Communication_Model_(psychology) too. SmartSE (talk) 09:54, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
That was the same deal. If you ever see language that looks a bit too perfect, it's always worth putting a chunk into google and seeing what you find. SmartSE (talk) 10:06, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the advice,I learn something new everytime I hear from you and appreciate that. I'll reread those deletion sections too.Newmanoconnor (talk) 15:06, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

We posted clear permission from the author's legal team that the content was free to distribute. The content had references, and met the guidelines for a flat description. This rapid deletion without fair warning seems unwarranted. I am not directly associated with Dr. Kahler. My company uses his products and we are trying to share the knowledge about his work. Symbology101 (talk) 03:37, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Giraffe

Thanks for the uploads. How would you be able to get me paper versions of the others? LittleJerry (talk) 14:35, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

No probs. Turns out I can also get the first. I should have made myself clearer about the paper - what I meant is that it I can go to a library where it is held in paper form, make a copy and send it to you. I suspect that someone (probably GabrielF) will be able to access the third one online, since if they are online, someone can usually get them. If that doesn't happen by mid-next week, let me know and I'll go find hard copy. Nice work with the article btw. SmartSE (talk) 15:34, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/COI#Second_view_by_86..2A.2A_IP:_Paid_editing_is_a_net_detriment._The_claim_that_.22it.27s_fine_if_it.27s_NPOV.22_shows_an_ignorance_of_basic_facts.

I can't believe I had to write something like that. Has Wikipedia gone mad? 86.** IP (talk) 11:23, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Well put. I've left a comment there. The real problem though (and why that RFC is going nowhere) is that we can't stop paid editing, but we don't want to encourage it either. That leaves us in the limbo-like situation that the project has been in for years where we get paid editors who write crap articles, and it takes ages for us to clear up after them. I had hoped that CREWE might change this slightly by us explaining what could and couldn't be done and how to go about things. I don't think it will really change much though. Have you seen this beast of a discussion (ongoing) about another form of paid editing? SmartSE (talk) 14:09, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
Ugh. I wonder if it's worth checking the users so bizarrely defensive of paid editing for paid editing patterns? 86.** IP (talk) 23:48, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

God, that RfC is full of stupid. I'm getting attacked viciously for having suggested the common-sense and guideline-backed (WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY) statement that users should have to identify themselves before editing or suggesting edits on their own biographies. If this is the quality of debate to be had on the issue, Wikipedia is going to end up with really awful policy. Probably not helped by the RfC not being advertised anywhere. 86.** IP (talk) 03:04, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Yep, it's not really going anywhere for the reasons I said before - it's impossible for the community to ever agree something on this. As to your previous comment, I don't think there are any problems with edits here, and I try to AGF wherever possible, but it may be that some people could stand to gain outside of WP (getting hired by PR companies etc.) due to their advocacy in favour of paid editing. SmartSE (talk) 09:24, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Botany intro

I've expanded the intro in order to help get it ready for GA candidacy. Improvements by you are appreciated. 512bits (talk) 18:47, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Gregory Scott Cummins

Was double checking the Expewikiwriter articles. I'm stunned by this one; it was all a great big lie. I'm wondering if it can be speedy deleted as a hoax, it's so deceptive. For example, the lead, up until right now, read:

"His acting career, which began in 1985, has comprised lead and supporting lead roles in forty-five films, including such notable films as Cliffhanger, Italian Job, Batman Returns, Switchback, Last of the Dogmen, Stone Cold, and Purgatory.

Go try to find him in the articles on any of those movies. His role in "Batman Returns" was the memorable "Acrobat Thug One". His role in the Italian Job was an unnamed "Ukrainian". The only one where he actually appears in Wikipedia's article on the film is Cliffhanger in which he plays a expendable thug who dies early on.

I honestly am a bit shocked at that much deceit. 86.** IP (talk) 09:17, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, haven't had time to look into this properly yet. You'll notice you've been reverted. I've reported that user to SPI. I'll try and look at it later if I have time. Cheers SmartSE (talk) 19:58, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Hmm. Had a look know. The sources here are enough to meet WP:GNG so we should have an article on him. Looking at the article, there does appear to be a fair bit of info that is unsourced though and has to go. I've no idea about American Football, but some of the info seems over the top for here. Have you got any idea about this? I'm also unsure where all the film info is sourced to - as the latest source is from 2002, clearly anything after that is unsourced and IMDB won't do as a reference. I've removed some of the more obvious unsourced info, but really it needs a lot of looking over to get to a point were {{coi}} can be removed, as with most pages in Category:Wikipedia_articles_with_possible_conflicts_of_interest... I've also removed all the name dropping in the lead - I agree with you that without some explanation of the role it is not neutral. (We should move to the talk page now really, I'll add an explanation about COI and a link to this.) SmartSE (talk) 22:21, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
I cut a bunch more from the lead. I like how they claimed lead roles for 45 films, and even counting every film listed in the Filmography, with all the Psychotic Men, Ukranians, and Acrobat Thug Ones, there's only 35 listed. 86.** IP (talk) 02:06, 2 May 2012 (UTC)


Oh, it was a copyvio. Of course. Last paragraph from [2]. 86.** IP (talk) 10:31, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Decided the problems have outweighed the minor notability, and AfD'd it. This is getting to the point of "we should probably have an article on him, but not THIS one..." 86.** IP (talk) 05:43, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Young Entrepreneur Council

I'm really not sure what to do about this. It seems alright, but then, so did Cummings. I don't think we can trust it, so at the least, I'm going to need to delete anything I can't personally confirm... 86.** IP (talk) 09:29, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Similar to above, definitely notable but needs severe clean up - a fair bit of work in that though! SmartSE (talk) 22:23, 1 May 2012 (UTC)


Botany GA nom

I've nominated this for GA now. Big thanks to you for all your kind help.512bits (talk) 21:54, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

ANI request

Hi, can you please look over this ANI

This may or may not be required reading. WP:MMANOTNewmanoconnor (talk) 22:33, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

I had a quick look, but it looks as if it's a content dispute which would be better dealt with somewhere other than ANI. It doesn't seem as if any administrative actions are needed at the minute. I also have to go to bed. Hopefully somebody can help out. SmartSE (talk) 00:08, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll just ignore the trolls and hope fully convince the other MMA project guys to do the same Newmanoconnor (talk) 03:35, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Nitrospira

The issue of duplicate taxonomic names is odd, but rather common in bacterial classes (but generally classes with phyla). The trick is that the higher groupings are unofficial (the inverted commas get lost along the way) and there is no clear cut rule for class names (well, okay, there is a proposal as ugly as the ugliest hag that classes should end in -ia regardless of ending). This singular name for a class is really bad (collective nouns in English can be either, though, say a band and the Alps), but the name listed in LPSN. I like how Woese started by simply calling possible groups with simple and clearly temporary names such as the purple bacteria and relatives (proteobacteria), but was not that followed (only the "Deinococcus-Thermus group" is still called as such). From my understanding the phylum was once referred to as Nitrospira too, but Bergey's Manual changed it to Nitrospirae (although I am fairly sure spira is one of those annoying Greek loanwords in Latin which go -ai and not -ae in plural nominative), but did not mention the class (I'll doublecheck Bergey's manual when I get the chance). As it is all unofficial the phylum and class could be called "Nitrospira group" or "Nitrospira and relatives" or the class could be the same as the phylum. Regardless, Nitrospira as a class is wrong as you pointed out. --Squidonius (talk) 00:08, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Wow thanks for that! It's great having someone to explain all that. What got me confused in the first place was reading it in a paper where they do treat it as a class (or at least I think they do). If microbiologists can't get it right what hope do I have? SmartSE (talk) 10:32, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Taking a break

My willingness to put up with outright lies - such as Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:86..2A.2A_IP_reported_by_User:Masem_.28Result:_.29 - whether due to imncopetence (the more likely cause) or malice is low. Back in a few weeks. 86.** IP (talk) 15:02, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Bad_block

If I don't get a damn good apology out of this, I'm leaving Wikipedia for good. 86.** IP (talk) 00:22, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Hey. Sorry for the delay in responding. I try not to get involved in drama unless I have to. I looked at it quickly at the time and though I wouldn't have blocked someone for the same edits, Ed obviously thought differently and I trust his judgment. It seems unlikely that you will get the apology you're seeking. My advice would be to leave the guideline alone for a while and concentrate on other things before maybe going back in a few months time. Meanwhile, take a look at this: Wikipedia:COIN#Bryan_Cave - an IP from a company is dobbing in their marketing firm for adding crap to the article - bizarre! I hope you so stay around - there is always work to be done fighting spam/coi if nothing else. Cheers SmartSE (talk) 10:24, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Coordinates of points on a circle

Hey, the folks at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Mathematics tend to be a bit cryptic. I'd be happy to try to work out what it is you're battling with. For example, are you trying to write a program to calculate the Cartesian coordinates for a sequence of points, with inputs the number of points, the centre, radius and an angle for the first point? Or is there some other application? Reply here. — Quondum☏ 10:46, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Hey thanks for offering your help! I'm trying to make things a bit like File:Smartseuserpage.svg and want to be able to know the coordinates so I can code it, rather than having to draw it in illustrator/inkscape and then work backwards if I want to change anything. If there was a program to let me get the Cartesian coordinates it would be useful, but I think I can probably just pop some numbers into a spreadsheet and calculate the coordinates from there. Anything algebraic makes my head spin though so I'm always glad to have help! Cheers SmartSE (talk) 11:09, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
I'll assume an Excel spreadsheet or similar. In cells A1:A5 I have the parameter values: number of points, radius, start angle (degrees), x-centre, y-centre. In A7 I have 0. In B7 I have =$A$4+$A$2*COS(RADIANS($A$3+$A7/$A$1*360)), in C7 I have =$A$5+$A$2*SIN(RADIANS($A$3+$A7/$A$1*360)). In A8 I have =A7+1. Copy A8 into a column below it, and copy B7:C7 into the columns below them. Now you should be able to read off the point number and the (x,y) coordinate pair from each line. — Quondum☏ 11:40, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
Yep. That works really well. I'll email you what I'll use it for in a few days. Thanks again SmartSE (talk) 13:12, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Hello Smartse, thank you for your deleting the promotional page. I got a speedy deletion notification as if I created the page. I put what I wrote on the page below. It is OK, but it is a little strange to receive such a message. In short, it should have been carefully reviewed before sending me this notice. Thanks,Egeymi (talk) 17:39, 13 May 2012 (UTC)


User talk:91.20.190.160 This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Egeymi (talk | contribs) at 16:23, 13 May 2012. It may differ significantly from the current revision.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff) Thanks for adding the correct mother names and the order. Egeymi (talk) 16:23, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi Egeymi. No problem - you could have done it yourself though if you wanted to (as could the person who tagged it for deletion). The reason you got the note was because you were the person who created the talk page before someone randomly spammed it. When it was nominated for deletion, the nominator used WP:TWINKLE which is set up to inform the person who created the page as a standard. This is nearly always a good thing. I've put your comment back on the page as well. SmartSE (talk) 17:49, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
Hello again. Thanks so much. The notification on my talk page bothers me. Can I delete it or should I follow other way to delete it? Egeymi (talk) 18:23, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
Yep. Go ahead. See WP:OWNTALK. SmartSE (talk) 18:30, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

3RR

Well another edit would push me past 3RR so I'll leave it there. --Cameron Scott (talk) 19:47, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

  • Don't worry about this involved thing. I try to steer clear of it and this time around, when I was looking at RFP, I decided to go ahead and revert and warn, and possibly block, rather than protect. I would have protected after the last one I warned, but we went out to dinner. ;) Drmies (talk) 00:07, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

WROX/WNOR

On the WROX article the vandalism dates back to January of this year, on the WNOR article, it dates back to July of last year. This is ongoing and shows signs of stopping. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 20:17, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

I've checked again but I can't see anything to justify semi-protection. Semi-protection should only be a last resort and when there is "significant but temporary vandalism" which there hasn't been. I know how annoying it is reverting, but unless it gets really bad, we just have to carry on. Also, this revert today doesn't look like vandalism to me. You were probably right to revert, but the IP adding it probably did so in good faith. SmartSE (talk) 20:28, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Goodbye

Well, since consensus seems to be that complaining about errors is a problem, and that truth doesn't matter when it comes to deciding who's wrong, I'm not going to bother with Wikipedia any more. Good luck keeping the place up; if all you need to do to silence a fact-based complaint is to present them with an uncorrectable minor error, then get them to reject your proposed ridiculous offer or troll the person making it and falsely accuse them of having violated 3RR by throwing in non-3RR edits (both blocks by User:EdJohnston, by the way; so apparently said boards are beign partrolled by only the admin who cares most about style over substance), you're going to need good luck. 86.** IP (talk) 16:05, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

  • (talk page stalker) Pardon me for butting in. Since I don't really know you and I've never been blocked or unblocked by EdJohnston, I guess I'm somewhat impartial, though I've always been partial to your pretty cool username. Allow me to pontificate--sometimes blocks, even edit-warring blocks, are proper. I don't want to rub it in, but I think the second block was justified, at least at first reading. But I don't want to discuss the pros and cons of either one, though I do want to say that I don't like it when longstanding editors get blocked, even if I think it's justified.

    But I do want to say this: it's not always a conspiracy. Lots of admins "patrol" the noticeboard; I have enough faith in some of them to assume that they're not out to get you. I'll tell you what: stick around, don't leave the project, and I'll give you one free pass on my talk page. You may call me a bad name, you may bewail the current state of our guidelines on plot summary--you may even make a ridiculous or unverified claim on global warming and I won't block you or tell EdJohnston or WMC. Plus, I'll make you a pink vodka (SmartSe, this better not be a redlink!). If you do move on, happy trails to you. Drmies (talk) 23:42, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

    • 86 - It's not the best time for me to comment, but I hope you come back at some point. Echoing Drmies, I find it hard to criticise EdJohnston as over the years the blocks I've seen him make have been good. I haven't checked his other recent blocks but I will try to find the time to at some point. We've all encountered people we disagree with here, but as I said before, when it happens it's best just to move onto something else - there are plenty of areas to work in. Your investigative skills are great and keeping WP clean is an important job! Hopefully I'll get a chance to give you some triple cooked chips.
    • Doc - keep up with the times it's P.i.n.k Vodka! SmartSE (talk) 00:01, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Tobuscus Page

Toby Turner is an internet celebrity with hundreds of millions of views combined on his videos. Why would his page require deletion? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DylanLeeBlanchard (talk • contribs) 23:24, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Millions of views on youtube doesn't mean that we should have an article on them. Unless newspapers, magazines etc. have written about someone then there won't be sufficient reliable sources to create an article. WP:BIO explains what is required. The reason I deleted Toby 'Tobuscus' Turner was because it was almost exactly the same as the version of Toby Turner that was deleted following this discussion, meaning that it qualified for deletion under WP:CSD#G4. SmartSE (talk) 23:33, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Please fill out our brief Teahouse survey

Teahouse logo
Teahouse logo

Hello fellow Wikipedian, the hardworking hosts and staff at WP:Teahouse would like your feedback!

We have created a brief survey intended to help us understand the experiences and impressions of veteran editors who have participated on the Teahouse. You are being selected to participate in our survey because you edited the Teahouse Questions or Guests pages some time during the last few months.

Click here to be taken to the survey site.

The survey should take less than 15 minutes to complete. We really appreciate your feedback, and we look forward to your next vist to the Teahouse!

Happy editing,

J-Mo, Teahouse host

This message was sent via Global message delivery on 01:18, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Champions League 2015

why did you delete the champions league final 2015 ? thanks for that — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.166.15.229 (talk • contribs)

Because all it said was "The 2015 Champions League final 2015 is yet to be hosted!" making it qualify for speedy deletion per WP:CSD#A3. SmartSE (talk) 16:58, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Lindsey Pavao

The AFC wasn't declined. Look at the bottom of the page at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Lindsey Pavao. I stated that the process is much easier of Lindsey Pavao is deleted before I accept. How many admins are going to decline that deletion request before someone actually takes a look. The AFC meets the notability guidelines at WP:Notability (music). Specifically, "Has won or placed in a major music competition." Ryan Vesey Review me! 21:13, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi Ryan. When I looked (and when I checked again) all I can see at the AFC is two big red boxes saying it is declined, and a big yellow box saying that it is on hold. I can't see a note from you explaining it has been accepted anywhere - you haven't ever edited that page either... That, combined with the fact that I am very certain that we don't need an article on every single contestant on reality TV programs, is why I didn't move it to mainspace. If there is any useful sourced content, it would be better dealt with in the main article about the show. Cheers SmartSE (talk) 21:20, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
So much work trying to assist this editor. I'll let them deal with it then. Do you want to decline the AFC if you feel it inappropriate? I felt it notable due to the guideline I provided. Pavao would have been final 8, which IMO is a "placing" figure. I initially argued for a not notable (yet) but was shot down (on IRC). Ryan Vesey Review me! 21:27, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for trying to help them, but as I've already said I don't think we need the article. If I had found it in mainspace then I'd AFD it as there is no way WP:BIO is met and categorising The Voice as a major music competition is questionable. SmartSE (talk) 09:43, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguating Sergey Kozlov

I added an argument to Talk:Sergey Kozlov for keeping the disambiguation page I created earlier. Its content appears purged from history because you moved the cinematographer's page under the generic name. Cheers! ilgiz (talk) 00:03, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi Ilgiz. There's no need for a disambiguation page when there is only one article at the moment. Even if an article on the other Sergey Kozlov is created, it should be linked to from Sergey Kozlov using a note at the top. Wikipedia:Disambiguation should explain all of this. Let me know if you have any questions though. SmartSE (talk) 09:18, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
Can you send me a copy of my last edition of the disambiguation page? It consisted of a link to the cinematographer's wiki page and another reference to the children's writer's obituary. Your change deleted the history. ilgiz (talk) 16:34, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
The relevant content was this:
  1. ^ Acclaimed Russian children's writer Sergey Kozlov died of pneumonia on January 9. He was 70., Ekaterina Godunova, The Daily Telegraph, February 4, 2010
(By the look of it, Daily Telegraph should be changed to Rossiyskaya Gazeta) SmartSE (talk) 16:51, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Tropical plants

Hello, How are you? I need your help. I thank you your help in the articles. I ask you: Can you find more people willing writing in tropical trees, genera and families? I ask you if you could enlarge some articles making better known this group of trees in Wikipedia, adding links to genera and families and writing information and asking people if they are interested in writing about topics as tropical trees articles, tropical forest articles or botanical or biodiversity articles. Do you know Wikipedia forums that could be interested about these type of articles? They are welcome too. I thank you very much.

I am from Spain and my mother language is not English language. Many country side areas, and Natural areas and Living beings are in Countries where population cannot collaborate with Wikipedia, but their Natural World and its highly economically valuable species are very important too in the human knowledge and developtment of the mankind. People should have information because these matters are important, not just a curiosity only. This unknow world is from Poles to ecuator, in unoccupied oceanic areas closely to Europe, in Deserts as Sahara, or whatever. But to me the main aim is to gather the abundant information disperse about living communities and living beings that have existed for millions of years because they are disappearing and in 20 years they will are not longer exist. Curritocurrito (talk) 12:46, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi Curritocurrito. Thanks for your note. Are you asking for me to find people who already edit WP to contribute more about tropical plants or for me to find new editors to contribute? I've written a few articles about tropical plants myself but unfortunately don't really have the time at the moment to spend time researching and writing articles. I agree wholeheartedly though that we need more coverage of tropical plants so I would be willing to help out where I can. Give me a few years/decades and I'll get round to it myself! SmartSE (talk) 09:51, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Pricing Partners

Hi Smartse, I have put some comment on the Pricing Partners deletion page to give more feedback. Thanks --Paul.cabot (talk) 01:30, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
Hi Smartse, I also noticed that you reverted my changes for Calypso technology but it seems to me these are true facts with reliable references. The page was quite poor and I have tried to make my best to make it more reliable with more references. This may look not as good as other wikipedia pages but I have spent time on this. And the assumption of conflict of interest as raised for Pricing Partners is not relevant as like for Pricing Partners I am not affiliated to this company, I am not a shareholder. I know that you are spending time reviewing and improving the quality of wikipedia so I do not want to blame you but I honnestly think my changes for Calypso technology are worth it. Thanks for your consideration. --Paul.cabot (talk) 01:49, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
Hi Smartse, to solve the issue what about deleting Eric Benhamou (Pricing Partners) and keeping Pricing Partners. The page on the company is making sense as this is a real company with facts that can be checked over the internet thanks to the reference but we remove Eric Benhamou (Pricing Partners) for not enough notoriety. Does this make sense to you?

Thanks --Paul.cabot (talk) 06:20, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

I've replied at the PP AFD. I've never edited Calypso Technology - as you can see from the page history two other editors removed what you added. Drop a note on the article talk page if you disagree with it and invite those other editors to comment by leaving them a note on their talk page. Cheers SmartSE (talk) 11:26, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Stuxnet

Please Smartse! re my edit here, which you reverted here, :-(. Please take another look.
At the very least I removed tautology from the lede of Stuxnet, as I said in my summary, the same information is/was there in a more NPOV form at the end of the lede, thus:

"On 1 June 2012, an article in The New York Times said that Stuxnet is part of a U.S. and Israeli intelligence operation called "Olympic Games", started under President George W. Bush and expanded under President Barack Obama.[23]", the ref is another article by Sanger who also wrote the NYT article.

Surely, no newspaper article is proof that either Israel or the US-of-A is responsible for Stuxnet! (Of course it could be true!)

Secondly, it now says:

"Stuxnet is believed to be the first sustained effort by one country to destroy another’s infrastructure through computer attacks"
which doesn't really make sense as the 'allegation' is that two countries (US-of-A & Israel) were involved. (I had "Stuxnet is believed to be the first sustained effort to destroy a countries infrastructure through computer attacks." Better? No?)

Slightly off subject, I am surprised that there seems resistance, like here, to saying "It was reported by/that ... or "XYZ paper said ... "--220 of Borg 10:47, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Sorry I didn't notice when I reverted you that it was already included at the end of the lead. I thought from your edit summary that you might have been removing it because it wasn't referenced. Now that you've pointed it out, I've self-reverted. Regarding the "reported by" bit - this depends. Just "reported by" is a bit pointless as that edit summary points out, but "reported by the NYT" is useful, as it tells the reader that it was reported by a very reputable newspaper. That should be discussed on the talk page though. SmartSE (talk) 16:19, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Leander Deeny

Could you please give me the text of te article that you had deleted? I'm sure that Leander Deeny is enciclopedic as writer and as actor, may be that the page should be improved, and I will try to re-write it. --Kasper2006 (talk) 16:25, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi Kasper. I deleted the article under WP:CSD#A7 as not demonstrating its importance. Simply being an actor is not a claim of significance and neither is appearing in one film. That's not to say that Leander Deeny doesn't meet WP:NACTOR, WP:AUTHOR or WP:BIO, in which case we can have an article, but you need sources to demonstrate why he is important. I've has a look for sources and this is the only source which could be useful. Without more, it would be best to include the info in the article about the film and create a redirect to it from his name. I'm happy to userfy the version of the article I deleted into your user space though so you can carry on working on it. Let me know if you want me to. SmartSE (talk) 16:36, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
Tnx, you've been very clear. You ca use User:Kasper2006/Sandbox6. ;-) --Kasper2006 (talk) 21:28, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
No probs. That's  Done. SmartSE (talk) 21:33, 5 June 2012 (UTC)


White light interferometry

SVG image showing a bug

.

Hello Smartse,

You deleted the page "White light interferometry" because of copyright reasons (if i understood it correctly). Which copyright did i violate? Is it possible that the source i probably copied is also from me meaning that the copyright i violated is of my own? Where can i find the deleted article if i want to publish it again? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karaya2-1 (talk • contribs) 06:04, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi Karaya2-1. The White light Interferometry article appeared to be copied from this source as the majority of the text in the article was exactly the same as that found in the document. If you created this yourself and own the copyright, then please visit WP:DCM and follow the instructions on how to donate the material to be used on Wikipedia. Only administrators can access a copy of the deleted article, but as it is a copyright violation, I am not able to userfy it for you. I'm happy to provide a copy via email if you wish. If the source was not written by you, then please be sure to read over WP:COPYVIO before contributing more articles. Let me know if you have any further questions. SmartSE (talk) 13:17, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I was surprised to see a wikilink to this article turn red in Interferometry, an article that I am actively working on. Even though I had nothing to do with the writing of White light Interferometry nor do I recollect using any material from it, I was wondering if you could email me a copy of the article as well? Thanks! Stigmatella aurantiaca (talk) 17:26, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

I've sent it to you as requested, although you may as well have just looked at the source linked above. Incidentally, I had a quick look at Interferometry and noticed that you had created diagrams in inkscape, and uploaded them as .png. These would be better uploaded as .svg (the standard file format in inkscape) as this lets them scale to any size without pixelation. As an example compare File:Photoinhibition.svg with File:Photoinhibition_and_PSII_repair_cycle.jpg (jpg are similar to png). SmartSE (talk) 18:13, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
The librsvg library used by Wikipedia has bugs. See Commons list of pictures showing a librsvg bug. If an SVG image that I create includes any bitmapped elements, the rendered image often has big ugly black rectangles. Likewise, certain fonts are not kerned properly and also give the ugly black rectangles. Here is an example which is being retained for Bugzilla reporting. Nowadays, when I am uploading, I squint very carefully at the thumbnail image of my SVG drawing, and if it shows any abnormalities, I substitute a PNG rendering. That saves on a lot of speedy deletion requests. I think I've requested speedy deletion on three or four uploaded images because of the SVG rendering bug, and I don't want to make a nuisance of myself. Stigmatella aurantiaca (talk) 18:39, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
My originals for figures 4, 5, 7, and 12 are mixed bitmap/vector, and I had problems with black rectangles when I uploaded them. Even though the original for Figure 11 is pure vector, I had font problems. The SVG original for this image is File:Twyman-Green Interferometer.svg and I uploaded six times on April 7, because I couldn't get the fonts to show up on Wikipedia the same way that they display locally on my machine. Text kept spilling out of the thumbnail edges, and when I tried to switch back to non-proportional font in my last upload, the result was inconsistent fonts - note the mixed proportional and non-proportional fonts as displayed on Wikipedia. I assure you that the original SVG image does not look like that locally on my machine. The original for Figure 3 is pure vector and will probably render properly, but I think that I had gotten burnt too many times to even bother checking. I do have SVG images on Wikipedia, for example File:Fizeau interferometer testing optical flat.svg and File:MMX with optical resonators.svg, but these are pure vector images. Sorry if I sound annoyed, but you are like the fourth person to point out to me that I really shouldn't be exporting the SVG images to PNG. Stigmatella aurantiaca (talk) 08:53, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
Sorry for the slow reply. I know myself that WP doesn't deal with svgs very well, but didn't realise that that was why you have used pngs. Have you tired converting the problematic elements into paths? I've done with this with text using inkscape before and it worked fine. The downside is that the text is no longer editable, but that can be got round be uploading the version with the problematic code before the final version. And fair enough for being pissed off if I'm not the first person to say about it - I'm not physicist, but it looks like you've done a pretty good job on the article. SmartSE (talk) 15:37, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for teaching me about paths. I'm very much a beginner in using Inkscape. So far I've learned only just enough to do what I want to do. Being able to convert any object into a path sounds like a really useful capability. My latest addition to the article is my own re-interpretation of one of the images that I remembered seeing in White light Interferometry. The image is available on Commons, but the status of the Commons image being questionable, I needed to draw my own. Since it is pure vector graphics, I had no problem uploading File:Twyman-Green interferometer set up as white light scanner.svg. Stigmatella aurantiaca (talk) 16:25, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
By the way, thanks for the compliment on Interferometry! The GA process as it stands is pretty idiosyncratic, since it depends on a single reviewer. In the GA review for Michelson–Morley experiment, D.H and I ran into a reviewer who quick-failed for invalid reasons ... like some of our sentences were too short, and others too long??? "In many places, the prose is quite choppy, with extremely short, one-line sentences (on my 13-inch-screen laptop) in one paragraph and three-lined sentences in the next. In addition, functional elements which are not ideal are used, such as the en-dash or even the hyphen." Oh, well. Stigmatella aurantiaca (talk) 18:15, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
No problem, I've had a lot of problems before using svgs here but now I think I understand it (kind of!) Have you seen Commons:User:ZooFari/Rendering? I just remembered that this is where I learnt about making text into paths. That new diagram looks good though even without it. GA can be a bit hit and miss - apart from a few paragraphs without references, Michelson–Morley experiment looks pretty good to me. SmartSE (talk) 21:18, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi smartse,

i sent the copyright license via email to 'permissions-en@wikimedia.org'. I could not place {{OTRS pending}} on the article's talk page because the article has already been deleted. Please send me the original content via email if possible. What do i have to do next if i want to get the article back online?

Best regards! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karaya2-1 (talk • contribs)

I'll be glad to link to your article again! The one that I was forced to switch to is inferior. Stigmatella aurantiaca (talk) 14:16, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi Karaya2-1. Thanks for letting me know about that. I have now undeleted the page and placed {{OTRS pending}} on the talk page for you. You don't need to do anything. Cheers SmartSE (talk) 21:18, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Simon Turnbull

Hi SmartSE, first I want to thank you for your denial of deletion for the above. I am doing my best to change the tone from an advertorial tone to a more policy compliant version. I may need a few more days to do this. Is that ok? Further to the above, is it possible to make an assumption that the above is similar to the older version without seeing it, as appears to have been the case with the initial objection? I thank you for your help, and will do my best this end to correct the issues. Warm regards, Ted Mitsuya (talk) 13:08, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi Ted. Apologies for my slow reply. Me declining deletion was purely procedural as it did not fit the criteria for which it was nominated. The main problem with the article is that it lacks references which demonstrate that Turnbull has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable sources such as newspapers and books. This is required per WP:BIO for us to have an article on somebody. Unless these exist, then it is likely that the article will be deleted again at some point. Please let me know if you need more advice on what you need to do. Thanks SmartSE (talk) 21:22, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi SmartSE, I have sourced a high number of news stories from NewsText.com.au (http://www.newstext.com.au/pages/main.asp), but they need to be subscribed to in order to read the full articles. For these do I simply add the 'Subscription required' after the newspaper's name, as one editor has already done? In the meantime another archive has a free service and also a high number of newspaper stories (Eg. http://newsstore.fairfax.com.au/apps/viewDocument.ac?page=1&sy=nstore&kw=simon+turnbull&pb=all_ffx&dt=selectRange&dr=entire&so=relevance&sf=text&sf=headline&rc=10&rm=200&sp=nrm&clsPage=1&docID=SMH060310CH13M7RIM6H ), which I will put up tonight or tomorrow, once I have retrieved them them all. Ted Mitsuya (talk) 13:28, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi SmartSE, I forgot to thank you very much for your help. Warm regards. Ted Mitsuya (talk) 13:33, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi again. That source looks like more what we need. The best way to cite news article is using {{cite news}}. Add something like this and fill in the blanks: <ref>{{cite news|title=|publisher=|date=|author=}}</ref> If it requires a subscription then you are right - you can add {{subscription}} inside of the <ref> </ref> tags to add a note to that effect. If the articles are available for free, then add a "|url=" field to the cite news template and it will link to the article. Let me know if you're unsure about any of this. Cheers SmartSE (talk) 16:33, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi SmartSE, I have put up several news citations, and am going through others I have retrieved from the above sources. I also have sourced some TV news and current affairs stories/segments and am wondering how best to present them. I have noticed some people have presented the new YouTube TV channels as a neat way to present such news items. Could you please advise? Warm regards. I appreciate this educational experience very much. Ted Mitsuya (talk) 14:26, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi SmartSE, I have added reliable, secondary sources as required, along with additional citations for verification, including inline citations. Is it possible to have the templates above the article removed? Warm regards Ted Mitsuya (talk) 13:30, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Ted. Sorry I missed your last message (almost missed this one too). I've removed one template, but the others need to stay for now. Admittedly I haven't checked every source, but reading through the reference list it doesn't look as if Tunrbull is the subject of any of the articles, as is required by WP:BIO. Maybe ask at WT:AUS to see if anyone can find some better ones? There is also too much about psychics in general that is not about him e.g. "People tend to want to confirm their own intuition about the difference between what they feel and what they think they feel" and "Deja vu is an area psychics were often asked to explain" - none of this tells the reader about Turnbull. SmartSE (talk) 18:18, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi SmartSE, I will go through some more articles for more related biographical data. There are also a large pile of biographical information in magazines that exist. Do they need to be scanned and then a link put to them, or should the material be linked to the publisher who published them using their ISSN or ISBN number? Warm regards, Ted Mitsuya (talk) 11:16, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi SmartSE, regarding TV and magazine biographical material, I have sourced some TV news and current affairs stories/segments and am wondering how best to present them. Could you please advise? There are also a large pile of biographical information in magazines that exist. Do they need to be scanned and then a link put to them, or should the material be linked to the publisher who published them using their ISSN or ISBN number? Warm regards, Ted Mitsuya (talk) 06:33, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

COI essay

I was just giving Dennis Brown a list of usernames of folks I know are interested in the subject of COI, who may want to contribute to a new essay. I think the direction is to give specific instructions to inexperienced marketing editors who want to contribute in non-controversial ways most Wikipedians would support in language they would understand. I spotted your name somewhere and thought I would ping you.

PS - I was just looking at your Talk page. The incident with expewiki looks nightmarish, but the thermodynamics of pizza is just hilarious. User:King4057 15:07, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi David. Thanks for letting me know about the essay - I had already noticed it as it happens. I think it is pretty good, but considering that there are already an abundance of COI guides, I'm not entirely sure it's going to change much (maybe I'm too cynical). I'm not around here much at the moment and have never been one to get too involved in policy discussions so I think I'll leave it to others to sort out. And yes Expewikiwriter was a complete mess. Was stalking you back and was interested to see something about Starbucks - I happened to stumble across that same article by Bowman a while back resulting in a hefty trim of PR fluff that had accumulated there. SmartSE (talk) 16:28, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
I made similar comments regarding the exhaustive number of COI guidelines and essays already in existence. One suggestion I made was possibly creating a COI task force to consolidate, improve and eliminate contradictions in COI instructions, including the COI guideline. However, this is a nearly impossible task. Another is a survey to establish consensus.[3]
Meanwhile, the CIPR published their guidelines today[4][5] and I think getting instructions from an institution like that may be more digestible for this audience. Hopefully PRSA and other bodies for marketing and SEO will follow suite.
Thinking about the Starbucks example, I seem to find the most dubious advice among SEO professionals, but I have heard from those in the SEO field that they have a yearning for ethical guidance. User:King4057 15:54, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Dracaena cinnabari

On the talk page for Dracaena cinnabari you said you had a .zip of references that you could send me. If you could email it to me at the2crowrox@yahoo.com I'd appreciate it. Thanks, The2crowrox (talk) 01:19, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Sure thing. I'll try and get round to it tonight. SmartSE (talk) 11:28, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

User:Ligos/sandbox

I think Ligos may need a little help. I've tried discussing the issue with him but either he doesn't understand the issue or he's the copyright holder and just hasn't mentioned it yet. Regardless, he recreated the copyvio article, G12 template and all. OlYeller21Talktome 16:56, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Bath salts (drug)

Hi, nice to meet you. Thank you for contributing to the article, you are improving it! I copied the first paragraph to the talk page and I am soliciting editors, to help me build a consensus on it's content. I hope you will participate and improve it. JunoBeach (talk) 12:54, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi Juno. Nice to meet you as well. Thanks for starting the article. I will keep an eye on it but I'm quite busy at the moment so might not be able to do as much as I would like... The main thing that needs improving is the sourcing - newspapers and news websites are not always reliable and as the article is about a drug, we should aim to follow WP:MEDRS as much as possible. This means using academic sources, which you may not be able to access. If you would like copies of some journal articles, such as the two I added yesterday, let me know and I will email you copies. Cheers SmartSE (talk) 13:06, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

For your interest: * Taylor, Russ. (2012). Bath Salts: An Inside Look At The Synthetic Drug Phenomenon. CreateSpace. ISBN 1469932660 JunoBeach (talk) 21:05, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

That's a 24 page self-published book. What use is that? SmartSE (talk) 21:16, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Justin Bieber on Twitter for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Justin Bieber on Twitter 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/Justin Bieber on Twitter 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 template from the top of the article.

Informing you of this nomination because of your previous participation in the Justin Bieber on Twitter merge into Justin Bieber discussion.--LauraHale (talk) 03:03, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Citation

Bath salts (drug) DYK nom

Hi: I've reviewed the nomination and the only substantive issue I have is with ... the accuracy of the hook. I've suggested 2 alternates (I decided not to propose the Miami cannibal as an alt, since the article makes clear no 'bath salts' ingredients were found in him.) Yngvadottir (talk) 19:34, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the review. I'll hopefully have time to improve it a little more this weekend and will ask you to take another look once I have done so. SmartSE (talk) 21:35, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

RE: Speedy deletion declined: OldVersion.com

Hi, I checked out that site (for the first time) and found out how useful it is, although sites like FileHippo keep old versions of popular software for download, they are not as comprehensive as OldVersion.com in terms of number of programs covered. Anyway I apologize you for nominating that page for deletion without carrying out enough research about it. :) JuventiniFan (talk) 15:38, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Woops. Were do the days go? Anyway - no problem. As a general rule, if articles have some solid references you shouldn't tag them for speedy deletion, but use AFD if you don't think WP:WEB or WP:CORP is met. Thanks for patrolling those old articles though - I'm sure some should be deleted. SmartSE (talk) 17:57, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

HKAGE Page (Eng and Chi) Deletion

I would like to claify that the page is not an advertising or promotional page.

The HKAGE is an non-profit organization which provides free of charge service. As such, it is useful for the public and readers to know more about the basic information of this organization.

Secondly, all details on the page are the facts and writing in a neutral perspective. No promotional or exaggerated wordings are used.

Thirdly, most of information are from news reports and Hong Kong Education Bureau website which are the reliable source.

Base on the above, I hope that you can relaunch the page. Or please kindly let us know which part we need to amend if you think it's not appropriate.

Many thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smt2012 (talk • contribs) 10:12, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Smt2012. I deleted the article The Hong Kong Academy for Gifted Education as being unambiguously promotional as it looked much more like the HKAGE's own website, rather than an encyclopedic article. We don't need lists of teachers, headings like "Key Areas of Services" etc. I'm not certain whether HKAGE meets our 'general notability guideline' which determines whether or not we should have an article about it or not. If you think it does (i.e. there are multiple, independent sources about HKAGE) then please start a new article (maybe in a sandbox like User:Smt2012/HKAGE) using these as the sources of most information. The article may start off very short, but it can be improved later on. Your points about HKAGE being non-profit etc. are unfortunately irrelevant - we treat every organisation equally. Please let me know if you have any questions. SmartSE (talk) 18:06, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Dear Smartse, Thank you for your update. I would like to clarify the meaning of "lists of teachers". They are not the lists of teachers. They are like the management people and board of director in the university. It is to raise the transparency of the organisation and so that people can know who they can contact if there's any query of certain area. Besides, the "key areas of services" is more like the faculty/ department in the university. Maybe I will change the title a bit to make into "division". The article will be uploaded with fine-tuning. Hope you will consider my point. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smt2012 (talk • contribs) 01:58, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Local Splash

Hello Smartse. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Local Splash, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Article claims coverage in reliable sources. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 22:44, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Dear Smartse,

I deleted the flag after I inserted an internal link and the following is what I wrote in the talk section of the article, which to the best of my understanding is where it was supposed to go. JeffBordeaux (talk) 21:01, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

"I cannot understand why the extremely similar article OrangeSoda remains unbothered by flags and issues but the Local Splash page is considered to not meet the requirements. How deep does a ranking need to be? This article meets the guidelines and criteria otherwise I would not have posted it. I added an internal link and will be removing the deletion proposal flag.JeffBordeaux (talk) 17:39, 18 July 2012 (UTC)" — Preceding unsigned comment added by JeffBordeaux (talk • contribs) JeffBordeaux (talk) 21:30, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/bath salts (drug)

Hi. Can you comment on Template:Did you know nominations/bath salts (drug) so we can move the review along? If you're no longer interested in having the article appear as a DYK, can you comment on the DYK to say so that way we can close it? Thanks. --LauraHale (talk) 03:19, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Your talk page

Hi Smartse I reverted a user warning EcuadorPete (talk · contribs) left on your talk page, hope you don't mind. Regards, Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 21:00, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

No probs. Thanks SmartSE (talk) 14:15, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Comment you left on Manustella's page re: SPI

Hello... I saw that on Manustella's talk page, when you notified him of the block, you also noted that he should have been made aware of the SPI. I was the editor who initiated the SPI, and checked pretty thoroughly about notifying people when I filed the SPI, and all I found was the following at WP:SPI... (Notification is not mandatory, and in some cases may be sub-optimal. Use your best judgement.) I guess I'm wondering why you said he should have been notified, as I am relatively new. Thanks. MsFionnuala (talk) 14:00, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Hmm. Well it might not be mandatory, but generally speaking it is a good idea to drop someone a note if you report them to any kind of noticeboard so that they get a chance to defend themselves. Looks like I am technically in the wrong though in this case! SmartSE (talk) 14:03, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Well, I wasn't trying to prove you wrong or anything like that... just looking for some knowledge. thanks! MsFionnuala (talk) 14:06, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Don't worry I wasn't thinking that you were :) Thanks for asking when you didn't understand. SmartSE (talk) 14:11, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

HighBeam

Hi, I saw your great tip on the HighBeam talk page about using the special:linksearch. WhatamIdoing suggested someone with Toolserver access could do a retrospective search for March 20th to get data from before the accounts were given out. Do you know how I would go about that or who I would ask? Also, where are you getting the cumulative numbers from the special:linksearch, i.e. the 16,000? Thanks so much! Ocaasi t | c 15:56, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Ocaasi. Regarding your first question, someone listed at Wikipedia:Toolserver like Dispenser might be able to help. If you don't get any luck that way, perhaps ask at WP:VPT? For the second, I don't think there is any easy way of doing this - you just have to play around with the "offset=" in https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:LinkSearch&limit=500&offset=18000&target=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.highbeam.com%2Fdoc%2F1 until you get to the end. It's at 18086 at the minute. SmartSE (talk) 16:39, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the tips! I asked at VPT. Cheers! Ocaasi t | c 17:16, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
No problem. SmartSE (talk) 17:46, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Wolong Electric Group Co. Ltd.

This article was deleted due to lack of notability. The company is notable: 1. It is listed on the Shanghai stock exchange. 2. Reuters has information on it : http://www.reuters.com/finance/stocks/companyOfficers?symbol=600580.SS 3. It has a market cap of over 3000 M CNY. http://www.bloomberg.com/quote/600580:CH/key-statistics

Therefore please undelete.

--Robin of locksley (talk) 17:16, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Robin. I deleted the article because it did not explain why the company is significant enough to be included. That is different from not being notable, although I should note that none of those three points demonstrate notability either. You should read WP:CORP to find out what is required for a company to be notable - we need coverage in depth coverage in multiple, independent sources. SmartSE (talk) 17:46, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Smartse. WP:CORP says "There has been considerable discussion over time whether publicly traded corporations, or at least publicly traded corporations listed on major stock exchanges such as the NYSE, NASDAQ and other comparable international stock exchanges, are inherently notable. Consensus has been that notability is not automatic in this (or any other) case. However, sufficient independent sources almost always exist for such companies, so that notability can be established using the primary criterion discussed above. "

Thus there is a presumption for the company to be notable, since it is listed. The only problem here is that it is a Chinese company and information in English is scarce, but it exists: 1. http://www.reuters.com/finance/stocks/600580.SS/key-developments/article/2537834 2. http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9FT3M580.htm 3. http://www.forbes.com/lists/2006/24/biz_06bub_Wolong-Electric-Group_HU1C.html

Since these are three independent sources, I think this warrants an article.

Furthermore, Wolong recently bought ATB group (which is notable enough to have an article on German wikipedia: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATB_AG , see also http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/19/atec-wolong-idUSL5E7LJ3HJ20111019.

Since ATB is multinational group with a presence in the UK, I do think that there will be more press articles on Wolong in the future.

At http://www.chinesestock.org/shlistd.asp?id=600580 the annual reports are available, unfortuntately only in Chinese, which I do not understand. Maybe some Chinese wikipedians can help. To sum it up, if you absolutely must leave the article deleted, then please userfy it for me such that I can use it in the future. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robin of locksley (talk • contribs) 18:35, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Surely there is no presumption of notability - it is not automatic. It's saying that if a company is listed then it is likely that sources exist that will demonstrate notability. In this case I still don't see it - while the links you've given are secondary sources, only the Forbes link comes close to the in depth coverage that we require. As we require multiple in depth sources, it's still not enough. That a page exists on the German Wikipedia also isn't any help - they may have different standards, or simply no one has noticed the subject lacks notability yet. We call it WP:OTHERSTUFF. I have userfied it though per your request to User:Robin_of_locksley/Wolong_Electric_Group_Co._Ltd.. If you can find Chinese sources then these are fine to use - you could ask someone at WT:CHINA to help. SmartSE (talk) 16:04, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Smartse, I accept your argument. Thanks for userfying the article, though.--Robin of locksley (talk) 23:32, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

deleted anadolu efes company page

hello,

We'd like to create a page for one of the companies we represent.

therefore, i created Anadolu Efes Company page but it's been deleted.

All of the information at the page i created was taken from the official website of the company and i paid attention not to give any kind of self-promoting attitude in the articles.

The page was not completed yet.

now, i ask for your help to republish the page.


All of your suggestions to make the page is more credible are wellcomed.

best regards.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Demirkilic (talk • contribs) 15:30, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Demirkilic. I deleted Anadolu Efes Company because it was a copyright violation - as you say you copied the content from the companies website. This was not the only problem however as the text you copied was not neutral, which it is important for Wikipedia articles to be. If you represent the company, then you should be aware that our conflict of interest guideline states that you should "exercise caution" when creating new articles when you have a financial conflict as you do. That doesn't mean you can't create an article, but you need to be extra careful. You should read WP:FIRST about writing your first article and then create the article in a sandbox like User:Demirkilic/sandbox where it won't be deleted. Please let me know if you don't understand any of this or have other questions. SmartSE (talk) 16:10, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Declined speedy for JavaTC

It describes itself as javascript and runs in your browser, so it sounds like web content rather than software (and therefore within A7)? DMacks (talk) 03:23, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Bath salts (drug)

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:03, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of Adobe Shadow as a G5

Hi, just reaching out with a quick question... and rather than type it out all here, it'd be great if you could take a look at this thread. Anyhow, you deleted the page as a G5 even though not just the sock had contributed to it - I had also added content and an image. Just curious as to why you classified it as a G5, when it was not just a blocked user creating a page. Thanks! Theopolisme TALK 18:23, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Theopolisme. G5 allows pages created by blocked/banned users which don't have "substantial edits by others" to be deleted. I did notice that you had made an edit to it, but I did not consider it 'substantial' so it still qualified. I would consider adding content and references to be substantial, but a copy edit and adding a logo not to be. I'm happy to restore it to your userspace if you would like to add references etc. SmartSE (talk) 20:30, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Hey, that would be great - thanks. Simply because I'd like to help finish out the Adobe Creative Suite collection of articles. Thanks! Theopolisme TALK 20:41, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Here ya go: User:Theopolisme/Adobe Shadow. SmartSE (talk) 21:07, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Talk:ResearchGate

Hi Smartse. It appears that you restored the ResearchGate one day after it was deleted by someone else, but that you did not restore Talk:ResearchGate. It is clear from the history of ResearchGate that there has been some very significant discussion on Talk:ResearchGate that is now unavailable to non-admins. Would you please restore the Talk page so that the discussion can be used to improve the article? Thanks, --BlueMoonlet (t/c) 13:51, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. I've restored it now as you asked. Sorry for missing that the first time. SmartSE (talk) 19:26, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks! --BlueMoonlet (t/c) 00:27, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Smartse/archive_11&oldid=1080763997"