Jump to content

User talk:Tyros1972/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7

Re: C++ Primer

Yeah, now that it is at DRV there's a whole other process that needs to be run through. That said, there's some good advice there about the use of G11 to delete "promotional" articles. The articles themselves need to be worded in a manner that would be considered promotional - using lots of peacock terms and the like. Using Wikipedia to promote a product or idea is also frowned upon and SPAs who come here just to do so are often tagged as WP:NOTHERE, but the resulting articles are not always G11 candidates. That the intention was to promote something is not enough for G11. Some promo-spammers know this and draft promotional articles using encyclopaedic language. Those articles might not qualify as G11 candidates but should be considered for AFD, if the subjects fail WP:GNG.

On the DRV process itself, if the speedy deletion is overturned, one of the DRV admins (those who are there quite a bit) might list it at DRV. If they don't but DRV decides it should be recreated (speedy overturned), you can always nominated it for AFD yourself. Stalwart111 08:33, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

It was overturned and recreated. I suggested the merge since the author seems to have some notability. I will keep an a watchful eye on it. Tyros1972 Talk 08:40, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
No, it hasn't been recreated yet, nor has the speedy deletion been overturned yet. This discussion will continue much like an AFD discussion (except that DRV is generally a lot more bureaucratic) and then will be closed by an admin with a formal decision to either overturn the CSD and allow recreation, endorse the CSD and leave the article deleted or list at AFD for discussion (there are other possible outcomes, but those are the "regular" ones). All that has happened so far is that an admin has restored it so that people at DRV can assess what was there before it was deleted (instead of conducting a "blind" discussion or a discussion only between admins who can see deleted content). You probably shouldn't propose anything for the article (merge or otherwise) while it has only been restored temporarily and is still being discussed. Stalwart111 09:21, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
Oh I misunderstood I see. I undid my merge suggestion. Am I able to take part in that discussion or is it just for admins? I really have nothing to add but good to know for future ref. Also I think I should withdraw my AfD on Homo Academicus as the article needs work but it appears to be notable. I wasn't clear on the requirements of it being written in English but I think I should, what is your take on it? Tyros1972 Talk 09:30, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, you can participate - it's not just for admins. You should be aware, though, that it probably requires a more advanced understanding of WP deletion policy than AFD, because it's essentially a review of deletion, rather than a question of deletion or not. I'm not suggesting you don't have that understanding, just be aware. Many of the arguments hinge on the various interpretations of WP policy. Many people take their deleted article there thinking its AFD, Round 2 and that they will have a second chance to make their AFD arguments. They won't. The question there is usually whether the closing admin's interpretation of consensus at AFD was correct or not or whether a speedy deletion rationale was technically accurate or not. As you'll see from some of the other ones there, overturning a speedy deletion does not prevent a future AFD nomination (in fact, I would say it's often the likely result).
Homo Academicus might be notable - there are a few sources - but it's up to you. Might be worth having a read of WP:NOENG either way. Stalwart111 10:35, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the info, yeah it's well over my head at this time and not sure that I need to know the issues that well. It doesn't sound like something I really want to be involved in. OK can you please close the AfD on Homo Academicus? I believe it is notable and posted that I withdraw my nomination. Tyros1972 Talk 11:56, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

I didn't get back to WP last night to see your message and close your AFD, but someone else did so it's all okay. Keep an eye on that one - if it doesn't improve, have another talk to the original author. Stalwart111 23:07, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
OK thanks. Yeah I have it on my watch list so will do. Tyros1972 Talk 06:01, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

help

Hi my dear friend.

Could you please make me understood of this text. would you mind to paraphrase that. thanks a million. please use positive verb in the last sentence. << The study indicated that greater boredom in year seven predicted significantly less satisfaction at year 16. In addition, greater satisfaction in year seven did not significantly predict less boredom in year 16. >> Alborzagros (talk) 12:41, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

hi again. I mean there are two negative points "did not" and "less" in the last sentence. They made me mixed-up, in the other hand the text deals with psychology which intensifies the problem. thanks my friend your truly. could you please translate all text in simple english.Alborzagros (talk) 13:20, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

June 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Entertainment Software Association may have broken the syntax by modifying 4 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:01, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Wlinkster isn't advertising

Hey man, my friend's page isn't advertising, it is truth, information for people. Tell me what is missing and pls don't delete that article. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Angsanley (talk • contribs) 08:50, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Please read what Wikipedia is not: WP:ISNOT also you appear to have a conflict of interest with this article as you are closely related to the owner and should not be involved see WP:CONFLICT. Additionally your website created a few weeks ago is not notable for inclusion it is that simple WP:WEBSITE. Tyros1972 Talk 09:45, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Assuming he's the same as the IP, I've blocked him for 48 hours for repeatedly removing the template, which makes it a revert war. I've left him a message on the IP's page, but I'll leave on the main user's page as well. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:10, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
Hello, Tyros1972. You have new messages at Tokyogirl79's talk page.
Message added 09:47, 13 June 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Socking

I've opened up a sockpuppetry investigation at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wlinkster007 since there seems to have been multiple attempts to create this article after having previous accounts blocked for spam. If this is the case, then the article could be deleted because it's spam that someone created after trying to evade blocks. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:37, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes I see that a new IP has also contributed this, maybe using a proxy. Speedy del and salt it. Tyros1972 Talk 11:19, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Re: Help needed for AfD Flocations

Ha ha, not sure what to do now. By all accounts, your message to me would be considered canvassing in pretty much any context. It almost prevents me from contributing to that AFD now, especially since you specifically asked for "votes" (see WP:NOTAVOTE). I know you didn't mean it that way - it's obviously a very good faith attempt at generating more discussion, which is admirable. But for those reasons, I won't comment and I'll just leave it to others.

On the AFD itself, it's just a matter of being patient. It's day 2 of a 7-day process and even then it can be relisted. People will find it and comment - there's no rush. I probably wouldn't go for speedy deletion. For G11, the wording itself needs to be promotional, not just the intent. WP:PROMO intention goes to AFD, which is exactly what you've done. I'd just wait it out. Stalwart111 09:48, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Now you can't vote can you? lol I wasn't aware of that rule thank you for letting me know. It just seemed no one was voting, I didn't ask for "good" or "bad" just for people to review the AfD. I think that is a good rule to have as it can be abused, and used to get people who will agree with you. Tyros1972 Talk 10:02, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, it's a bit of a catch-22. Because you nominated it for deletion, it would probably be assumed that you're asking for delete votes. You wouldn't likely be searching for keep votes to contradict you, right? Though in this instance I imagine you wouldn't have been particularly upset had I shown up and argued for keeping it - you just wanted it looked at! Anyway, yeah, I'm sure you'll get some people looking at it soon enough. Stalwart111 10:42, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Mostafa Mofidi

Hello, About article Mostafa Mofidi, now is it correct? He is an Iranian translator and i gave many of reference for that. Can you remove label? Tanks Mdmarashi (talk) 01:05, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Gopal Meena for deletion

This article about Mr. Gopal meena is a famous politician of Indian national congress party of india. He has been elected for Member of legislative assembly, Rajasthan, India Evidence and this article is according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines so this article should have removed the deletion tag. So please talk to me before delete this article I will give you more evidence about this. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brijesh Meena (talk • contribs) 14:51, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

The article has been nominated for Afd. The community votes on the notability of the article. If you are unable to produce any reliable source, and the majority of votes is to delete the page will be removed. You should have a look at the wiki notability guidelines. To me this person is very young and has not been involved in politics very long, and is clearly not notable. Tyros1972 Talk 18:14, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

AfD for Angelfish (Software)

I just read your comments about the Keep votes on this AfD. I have no idea if it was the correct action, but I had already opened a sockpuppet investigation for Ooni. Since I have not encountered this situation before, I was not sure of the correct action, but the behavior is highly suspicious. User226 (talk) 21:04, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes that's what it appears to be. I am glad you did and yes that's the correct action or ask an admin to do it, either way works. I also requested a "speedy delete" under G11, not sure if that will be denied but it can't hurt. I reported User:Impunity as an advert only account since it appears that the account has his bio/resume and is used to promote. I also asked someone who handles AfD's to look into it, so everything should be fine. We will just wait and see. Thank you for opening the AfD, I thought I did but guess not? I do so many on a daily basis I can't always keep track. Tyros1972 Talk 21:11, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
Glad to see you put it up for G11 Speed Delete. I was starting to wonder why the article was not eligible for a speedy delete. How do you report advert only accounts? It is possible? I have encountered another user with what appears to be advertising purposes. I posted a message on Tokyogirl79's Talk Page but did not hear anything about it. User226 (talk) 21:17, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
I use Twinkle tools since basically all you do is turn it on in your preferences. Then when on a user page, you select TW -> ARV - Report to admins, then make your selection. One is advert only account. Well, keep in mind that unless you have strong evidence they are usually ignored but it can't hurt mentioning it. Tyros1972 Talk 21:28, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
I didn't know about Twinkle, but just enabled it. It looks very helpful so far. I have wished that the Page Curation tool was available all the time. This looks like a good solution for the time being. User226 (talk) 21:38, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes I find Twinkle useful for quickly tagging, submitting speedy and AfDs. Since I tend to focus on Vandalism and notability, I review newly created articles by new members. You can view them by going to Special:NewPagesFeed and setting the filters as you wish. That's what I mostly focus on as there is a lot of junk submitted daily, and of course many new editors are in need of help. Tyros1972 Talk 09:17, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

CSD G11

Purely factual articles about organization, such as the article for Hong Kong Institute of Urban Design are not promotional.For a page to be deleted as G11, it must be entirely promotional with no encyclopedic content worth saving. There's general agreement that the criteria at WP:CSDare applied narrowly. Please check them. DGG ( talk ) 17:29, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much David for letting me know. Sometimes I have a difficult time in knowing if they are G11 or not, I will read up on that. I am pretty much sticking to AfDs these days mainly because there's nothing wrong on a consensus and that recent SPAMMERS more and more are removing PROD and Speedy tags anyway. Would it be wrong if I just do AfDs all the time? What's your opinion on that? Thank you for your help. Tyros1972 Talk 17:48, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
AfD is a good way to learn, because you see other opinions. But when you're certain, use speedy. Prod is indeed of no use against someone who is sure to remove it, and best used when the person is unlikely to return, as is true of many people who simply don't understand the purpose of WP. Everyone including myself makes mistakes, or occasional aberrant judgments, but this shouldn't prevent us from acting. It's only necessary to avoid being too stubborn about one's own view DGG ( talk ) 21:23, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
OK I think when in doubt I will use AfD since I am still learning all the rules. Sure there is rather obvious times I see speedy should be used (i.e. article recreated that has been deleted via the AfD etc.) Thanks again for your help. Tyros1972 Talk 12:13, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Re: Rollback Rights

Rollback and Twinkle diff

You're using Twinkle, right? When you look at a diff, don't you have the rollback options above it? (See picture at right.)

That gives you three rollback options, each produces a different edit summary and there are automated functions for each that bring up the talk page of the person you are reverting so you can Twinkle message them with a warning or advice.

The other option, of course, is to ask for rollback rights at WP:Rollback. You'll need to specifically request it and your request will be assessed by an admin capable of adding that user right. The user right rollback reverts without a custom edit summary and you need to manually warn/advise the person you're reverting. Does that make sense? Stalwart111 12:05, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes twinkle does provide that option and I have used it, but I thought that was just an undo? Why would I need rollback rights if twinkle does it? I don't fully understand.
Undo: just reverts the last edit. Rollback (TW): samething w/ a custom message.
Does rollback rights like you have enable you to rollback 3 or 4 edits back? That's what I would like since it makes it easy when "undo" won't work as I have to copy and paste. Again not sure why rollback is a protected option? Tyros1972 Talk 13:51, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
Just tested on my sandbox, ah OK looks like Twinle will do that. Obviously I don't need Rollback rights. Tyros1972 Talk 13:58, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, they function in exactly the same way. You can "undo" a string of edits from the same editor. In that sense you don't "need" the user right and of course you can get in trouble for mis-using it all the same anyway. Happy vandal hunting! Stalwart111 15:42, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

I understand now. Yep I always enjoy hunting for vandals! Tyros1972 Talk 20:06, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Tyros1972/Archive_4&oldid=1138921630"