User talk:TreasuryTag/Archives/2009/Mar

Wikipedia Signpost — 2 March 2009

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 9, which includes these articles:

• Books extension enabled
• News and notes: Stewards, Wikimania bids, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia's role in journalism, Smarter Wikipedia, Skittles
• Dispatches: WikiProject Ships Featured topic and Good topics
• Wikiproject report: WikiProject Norse History and Culture
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 08:51, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Ray Joseph Cormier

As the subject of the subject, needing and appreciating all expressions of support, I thank you for your posted opinion of Strong Keep for the 2nd AfD tag placed on the article in less than two weeks after the first resulted in Keep.

I´m speculating you did not read the two archives of discussion over an 8 month period, waiting for any editor to come forward with a view to improving the article. This link may interest you.

User_talk:Clinkophonist#Ray_Joseph_Cormier

Peace DoDaCanaDa (talk) 13:51, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Confused on Deletion

I see you have marked the entry on Dr. Raval for speedy deletion. Please let me know specifically how I need to change this posting in order for it to be acceptable. Links to credible sources: CBS 4 Denver http://cbs4denver.com/health/sinuplasty.sinus.passages.2.891193.html KDVR 31 Denver http://www.kdvr.com/kdvr-eyelidsurgerygivesaliftto-5751514,0,4257698.story YourHub (product of The Denver Post) http://denver.yourhub.com/Denver/Stories/News/General-News/Story~498436.aspx Unleaded Software (talk) 21:40, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

"Masal Dunyam"

Hi, I have removed the deletion notice from the above article, as the artist does have an article. J Milburn (talk) 21:44, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Ooh, whoops, sorry! Hit the wrong button... ╟─TreasuryTag►contribs─╢ 21:45, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

tag

I like to keep my talk page with only fresh issues, I either archive it in case I may need it for the future or just plain delete it. I also hate discussion and bureaucracy, action over words etc.

However, I believe that you were trying to help and I can see how on first glance that article looks niche and unnecessary etc. So I believe that you deserve an explanation. I have already wrote the arguments for keeping it on the discussion so I won't bother to write them all here as well, instead I will explain my reaction that you seemingly have taken offence to.

Try to imagine from my side, I spent hours and hours and hours working on that list and so it is kinda annoying when someone just splashes their intention to dismiss it out of hand on the front of it, completely wasting all those hours I spent creating it. Don't think for a second though that I would waste my time doing all that if I thought for a second it would get deleted, I looked around and saw the consensus was that that type of article was a keeper before I started.

Kinda in catch 22 if it wasn't as some of the players get tagged as 'orphans', I decided to create the list before writing all the articles so decided to combat that issue straight of the bat.

So, I apologize if I offended you, I am sure you a great service to Wikipedia.

Peace out and all that.--EchetusXe (talk) 22:24, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Energy accounting software

JohnFos's comment on the talk page convinced me that the page will get fixed over time, so I declined the speedy deletion. If the page doesn't get better, and you want to nominate it for AfD (or want me to), that's fine. Keep up the good tagging work. (Watchlisting) - Dan Dank55 (push to talk) 03:38, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

OK, fair enough! ╟─TreasuryTag►contribs─╢ 08:09, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

CSD A3 tagging (no content) of Acoustic resonance spectroscopy

I noticed you put a no content spedy deletion tag on Acoustic resonance spectroscopy. When you placed it the article had no content, and you were right, but when the ip removed it you shouldn't have reapplied it, the article had content and is certainly worthy of an article. I have removdd the tag.--Patton^t/c 19:24, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I'm sorry! I just saw the edit in which the tag was removed and undid! ╟─TreasuryTag►contribs─╢ 19:26, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Dr. Arun K. Garg

Thanks for the message; however, I did not originate the article. I only moved it to Arun K. Garg. I also noted that the article was recreated an did not show the redirect. Perhaps a glitch in the software. ttonyb1 (talk) 00:20, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nadya Suleman

Since you commented the article in it's first AfD, it has since come under a second AfD. I was wondering if you'd like to comment on this one as well: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nadya Suleman (2nd nomination). Thanks! — raeky ^{(talk | edits)} 03:12, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

OK, thanks for letting me know. ╟─TreasuryTag►contribs─╢ 07:40, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Obama Bear Market

The article Obama Bear Market has the "under construction" tag, which means you're not supposed to delete it unless it has gone a few days without any editing. Didn't you see the giant box at the beginning of the article? Grundle2600 (talk) 15:44, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

JPCSP

Heya, just letting you know that I declined your A7 speedy of this article, as the criterion doesn't apply to software or products in general. I agree, though, that it might not be notable - PROD/AFD may well be a good idea, I've notability tagged it for now. Thanks. ~ mazca ^t|c 16:46, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

OK, cheers for letting me know. ╟─TreasuryTag►contribs─╢ 16:56, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Donald Macintyre (naval officer)

You added a reference and notability tag to this page (2 minutes after I'd started writing, which seems a bit quick off the mark,and despite a 'work in progress' label). I've replied on the talk page there. Xyl 54 (talk) 19:01, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: ANI post

I left this comment. I hope it makes you feel a bit better after everyone "told you off" ;-) Scarian^{Call me Pat!} 21:03, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! You too buddy! Scarian^{Call me Pat!} 21:22, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Powers and abilities of Nagraj CSD (A1)

You might want to recosider your CSD (A1) tag for Powers and abilities of Nagraj. Nothing personal; it's not that good an article, but "Articles lacking sufficient context to identify the subject of the article.... This applies only to very short articles." Hmm, probably not. - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 13:22, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

I've just replied on the talkpage, actually, and PRODded the article instead. ╟─TreasuryTag►contribs─╢ 13:22, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I see that now. I must type faster in future. - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 13:23, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

GetGreat.com

I saw that Cal Ripken launched a new instructional website, and it's not every day a hall of famer does that. MLB has been promoting the hell out of this site for days, so it seemed pretty important to me. If no one agrees, then no one agrees. It's not like I'm married to the idea that this article MUST exist. I added a comment to the article's talk page (essencially saying the same thing I'm saying here). I take it you would like to add an opinion as well. Let the debate begin...--Johnny Spasm (talk) 13:35, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: Welcome

Any editor can remove any tag if they so see fit. Unlike you I did a Google Scholar search on the term. Also, if a building is on the National Historic Register it is inherently notable, per Wikipedia precedent. I would encourage you to slow down on your tagging. Slapping notability tags on articles less than an minute after they have been created is just divisive. Please think about building the encyclopedia, rather than driving editors away. Thanks for your welcome. 152.3.245.97 (talk) 15:10, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, I guess as your just doing it to "make totally sure" it's OK then. See ya round. 152.3.245.97 (talk) 15:22, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

AfD discussion

I have added a reference links to the debate to answer your concern about the Cellebrum Technologies article. Could we kindly have your views on these? Raj Kumar Machhan (talk) 15:45, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm afraid I have to stand by my original assessment, and that of most people voting on the page. I genuinely don't think it's a notable concept, sorry. ╟─TreasuryTag►contribs─╢ 15:47, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Its quite all right. Raj Kumar Machhan (talk) 15:58, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: Speedy deletion of Utente:Codicorumus/monobook.js

Sorry, I forgot to translate the namespace, editing the corresponding it:wiki address.
So, thanks & bye. -- Codicorumus  « msg 16:06, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Monitoring as a service

Any thoughts on the monitoring as a service AfD? I see you voted on Simple Event Management Protocol. -- samj _in^out 09:07, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I'll take a peep :-) ╟─TreasuryTag►contribs─╢ 09:09, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Henry Mortensen (actor)

Please see my comment on your vote at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Henry Mortensen (actor).--Avant-garde a clue-hexaChord² 09:20, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Pinging me to let me know of your snide comments isn't necessary, I keep an eye on AfDs I vote in, thanks! ╟─TreasuryTag►contribs─╢ 09:21, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

"The Classic Strugle" tagging

Just a note to say - the account is very new, and has done nothing but create such articles... I think speedy-tagging is justified. ╟─TreasuryTag►contribs─╢ 16:37, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost — 9 March 2009

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 10, which includes these articles:

• News and notes: Commons, conferences, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Politics, more politics, and more
• Dispatches: 100 Featured sounds milestone
• Wikiproject report: WikiProject Christianity
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 01:26, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Cricket Articles

Hello, using Cricinfo or Cricket Archive as the source for information on cricketers is the established practise on the site. They are held to be definitive and quite sufficient in themselves for basic information of the type in the Claire Whichcord article. If you think that every article needs more sources than those then there are several thousand articles you need to start tagging. Good luck with that. Blanketing a short article with 3 tags is less than useful sometimes. Originally [1] you tagged the article as unreferenced, when it was referenced to her page on Cricinfo and possibly not notable, if you don't think that international cricketers are notable then perhaps you'd be better off leaving those articles alone. Nick mallory (talk) 09:58, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't think that that was helpful or constructive, and I'd suggest that you glance over WP:CIV and WP:AGF. I'm trying to help, and taking the tone of "perhaps you'd be better off leaving those articles alone," and "there are several thousand articles you need to start tagging - good luck with that," is completely uncalled for. ╟─TreasuryTag►contribs─╢ 12:59, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Supernova Cult

Hello! I will try to improve the article that you flagged, and was wondering if you could give me some input on a few things to make it better:

1- reads like an advert: I tried to avoid adjectives that would sound like promoting the company, but visibly I failed. Is there any phrases or paragraphs in particular you think I should revise?

2- references: the problem with Luxembourg is the number of different languages uniting in this country, and references are in multiple languages. I based much of my Wiki entry on Supernova Cult on newspaper articles and magazine reviews and interviews, mainly a two-side article in the newspaper Woxx and a special report taken from Zillo Magazin, the leading monthly magazine for gothic music in Germany. Both are not in English, so I was unsure if I should cite them as reference or not. The second concern is, none of these magazines has online archives, so if I reference these, people who don't own a physical copy can't read up.

Finally, I think the company is relevant on two levels, nationally, because it is the largest modern fashion company in the country, has largely contributed to the creation and proliferation of underground fashion, and finally, it was and still is to this day one of the only companies from this country to have success outside of national boundaries, which is very much noteworthy for a country whose population is less than half a million. On international level, Supernova Cult's gothic store is one of the top 5 business in that market, worldwide. And while it is a niche market, it is a very large niche, and is therefore reelevant to a multi-million audience across the globe.

Which is why I would like to make this entry good enough for Wiki standards, and hope that you can give me a few hints on how to improve it.

Thank you in advance for your time and efforts!

--Skehrkrow (talk) 13:11, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but you've read and understood my rationale for deletion. If you can't fix the problems that I've found, then that probably means that the rationale is a "correct" one. Having references in different languages isn't a huge problem (I think that there are actually some templates out there that you can use to indicate non-English links), but I just genuinely don't think that the company is notable, and unless you provide sources to that effect (the onus is on the creator to provide citations) then I'm afraid that my request for deletion must stand. ╟─TreasuryTag►contribs¦─╢ 16:55, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Good News Bible

I've answered your reference desk question on the Good News Bible drawings here. - Thanks, Hoshie 03:07, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know! ╟─TreasuryTag►contribs─╢ 08:07, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Peace?

                    ===========================NOTICE!============================
                    |                      NO RUDE COMMENTS                      |
                    |                 NO IMAGE DELETION NOTICES                  |
                    |                   NO UNSIGNED COMMENTS                     |
                    |                     NO RfA THANKYOUS                       |
                    |        DELETE EVERYTHING YOU SEE HERE BEFORE SAVING        |
                    |                             ~                              |
                    |                          THANKS!                           | 
                    ==============================================================

I am really trying to remain calm, but another editor is modifying my talk page, my user page, etc. and basically being a pain in my backside. I have asked him 3 times to leave me alone. Aside from reporting him to ANI if he harasses me again, do you have suggestions on how to best handle the situation? Thanks. Erikeltic (talk) 22:27, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

(Signpost failed to put a header)

Unsubscribe · Single-page · Full edition »

  — 16 March 2009

• News and notes: License update, Commons cartoons, films milestone, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Manufactured scandal, Wikipedia assignments, and more
• Dispatches: New FAC and FAR appointments
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 00:13, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Fix archiving bot. ╟─TreasuryTag►contribs─╢ 18:02, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

(archive-now) ╟─TreasuryTag►contribs─╢ 17:44, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Python sketches

You seem to be routinely violating WP:BEFORE by failing to consider alternatives to deletion. This action seems contrary to our deletion policy and will waste much time on tedious discussion rather than article improvement. Please reconsider these disruptive actions. Colonel Warden (talk) 11:40, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

(archive-now) ╟─TreasuryTag►contribs─╢ 17:44, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

A note on canvassing

"Canvassing is sending messages to multiple Wikipedians with the intent to inform them about a community discussion. Under certain conditions it is acceptable to notify other editors of ongoing discussions, but messages that are written to influence the outcome rather than to improve the quality of a discussion compromise the consensus building process and may be considered disruptive."

That's the first paragraph of WP:CANVASS.

I informed one editor. It will improve the quality of discussion and the sourcing in those articles that can be sourced. On the whole, I don't think I have anything to apologise for on this occasion. 212.32.120.163 (talk) 12:20, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps, but I stand by what I said (which was "borderline canvassing"... not necessarily crossing the actual threshold - also note that I didn't ask for an apology, and didn't expect one! ╟─TreasuryTag►contribs─╢ 16:19, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

(archive-now) ╟─TreasuryTag►contribs─╢ 17:44, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 23 March 2009

• From the editor: Reviewing books for the Signpost
• Special report: Abuse Filter is enabled
• News and notes: Flaggedrevs, copyright project, fundraising reports, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Alternatives, IWF threats, and more
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 04:44, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar of Integrity

		The Barnstar of Integrity
		In thanks for your withdrawal at AFD - a commendable example of efficiency and forbearance. Since we have shot your fox, please accept this barnstar in recompense. Colonel Warden (talk) 18:13, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank-you, I'm touched! ╟─TreasuryTag►contribs─╢ 07:42, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Your RfA

Unsolicited advice: At this point, the best thing - for you and other editors - would be to withdraw your candidacy. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 15:19, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the thought, but as I said on the page, I would like to see it run its course. Everything written on that page provides much food for thought, and cutting it off abruptly and early isn't necessary to protect my emotions! I'm not sure how it would affect other editors, and for that reason, I will not be withdrawing. ╟─TreasuryTag►contribs─╢ 20:35, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Your choice, though someone else may decide to end this per WP:SNOW. Personally, I think almost everything that's going to be added is just going to be duplication, but I guess that those who decide to comment probably won't feel that way. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 00:01, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry I couldn't support, but if I were in your shoes, I'd find plenty of encouragement and, best of all, practical advice in the words of contributors of all 3 stripes. --Dweller (talk) 10:52, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 30 March 2009

• From the editor: Follow the Signpost with RSS and Twitter
• Special report: Community weighs license update
• News and notes: End of Encarta, flagged revisions poll, new image donation, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Censorship, social media in schools, and more
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 20:42, 31 March 2009 (UTC)