Jump to content

User talk:Orangemike

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Michig (talk | contribs) at 09:11, 29 November 2008 (→Skyzoo: more). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

The Foxes Band

Please could you at least reply to my question? I have seen you reply to others after mine was asked. Thanks. Blaze42 (talk) 16:16, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you - much appreacited. Blaze42 (talk) 09:25, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ron Paul

Ron Paul has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured quality. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. --Andrew Kelly (talk) 05:16, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Foxes article

I will thank you now for your comment: "reads like it was composed by their press agent; full of unsourced vanity claims and peacock words". I would like to know your unsourced vanity claims that there are 'peacock words' and the claims are unsourced - look at the reference section at the bottom of the page! And did you put enough tags on there? I think there's just about enough space for some more, but not for the article itself!

I am not their agent, I am simply a fan - The Foxes band are self managed - as I wrote - and do not have an agent! Thanks. Blaze42 (talk) 09:43, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have added additional refrences for the supposed "unsourced vanity claims" that I added. I didn't remove any information.Blaze42 (talk) 10:32, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]


My page

Please do not touch my personal page - I can put what I like on there so long as it is not offensive; which it wasn't. There is nothing wrong with what I have on there - Wikipedia suggested that I create the article on my page first, which I did. Please do not touch it again! Thanks. Blaze42 (talk) 16:29, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image question for you

As you have been here for a while can you look this over. I tagged an image that says "Photo taken by Pinter's husband David Percy. I am uploading this photo in the presence of David Percy and he is granting the license below". I tagged the image {{di-no permission}} on November 9, 2008 however what seems to be a "fan" of the uploader objected to it and removed the tag today as it was about to be deleted, sending it to Pui saying that, because of who the user is, we should "trust the user". The image is Image:Frances pinter.jpg and the user who uploaded the image is User_talk:Johnbuckman. I am not sure what the next move is. Thanks. Soundvisions1 (talk) 23:36, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:FrankLloydGallery

Just so you know, this user (whom you recently blocked for COI/username violation) has left several messages at his talk page requesting your input. The discussion there is extremely long and tedious, so I don't want to force you to go and read through all of it, but I just thought I would let you know in case you want to comment. —Politizer talk/contribs 05:13, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He's now asked for unblock. Could you comment? Thanks,  Sandstein  07:29, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As a slightly involved user (from COIN) I endorse his unblock for the reasons stated in the unblock-request section on his talk page. ArakunemTalk 16:35, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I understand the blocking status and appreciate the patience of all concerned. I am looking forward to contributing in other areas, and with a new username.FrankLloydGallery (talk) 21:37, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey I'm New To Wikipedia

I see that you guys have deleted the first yung d page. I was just going to ask y did he or she not have the right information about that artist. I'm asking because I was going to do my first page on him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yungd360 (talk • contribs) 17:20, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's a rather orange shirt

That's a rather orange shirt, fellow worker! If I ever run into you I'm sure I'll have seen you from a mile off. :) The Wednesday Island (talk) 05:00, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like more issues over on the Violet Blue page.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Violet_Blue_(author)#The_birth_year_recently_added

Just FYI. I don't plan to do more than make this comment, but it looks like some of the folks who want to annoy her further have been at work.

It's just weird to me that you can have true information that even stands up to legal scrutiny that you cannot include in an article's mainspace. I'm tempted to put in her name, though, as that has appeared in AVN; http://www.avn.com/law/articles/32421.html But I am not sure if even that meets up with Wikipedia standards... --BenBurch (talk) 03:28, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with an admin.

[[1]]. Is this edit by an admin. over the top and is it actionable? If so , could you ask that he edit it and is it cause for a report? ThanksDie4Dixie (talk) 18:47, 17 November 2008 (UTC) It appears to be resolved.Die4Dixie (talk) 00:44, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Orangemike, when I tagged this article [2], the author admitted that he had lifted the text from other sites, and that it was 'fair use'. I've noticed that they have created other articles with copied text, but Google hits show that the contents are being used on many sites. Are these copyright violations, plagiarism, or do they indeed constitute fair use? I also have questions re: the necessity of this disambiguation page [3], which seems designed mainly to lead to the newly created article. Maybe these are all good edits, but I'm skeptical, and would appreciate your thoughts. Thanks, JNW (talk) 03:02, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy! And yes, that would be me creating and editing the articles, I'm really brand spankin new to contributing and still learning the ropes. I'd like to re-write/edit the deleted article (CCO) and have read up on how to "resubmit" with the necessary corrections, but I don't know who to ask.. you, OrangeMike? I have more references and texts, and I too would like to have a confirmation of whether or not lifting texts that are all over the internet is copyright violations, plagiarism, or fair use. (This legalese internet stuff is crazy complicated to me.) Thanks in advance for your help; I would like to get this article fixed and up and running as it is a widely-used resource in my field. Thanks! Mybihonteem (talk) 23:23, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Backwards T Productions

The page was currently being edited, to prevent speedy deletion. But you deleted it before anything could be done to it. Backwards T is a major film company and the wiki was the only current resource for fans. This is the second un-needed deletion of a Backwards T article. If Miley Cyrus can have her own article, why cant Backwards T? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dantetelfrado (talk • contribs) 04:12, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ghostbusters: The Video Game

Why was the article deleted?. --SkyWalker (talk) 07:56, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, just dropping a note that I restored the page. The information in the page was cut out and put back in by apparently a new user. I realize the appearance of the page might have looked similar to a standard G11 case (with the copy/paste and all), but a check of the history would have showed a valid diff to revert to. In any case, no harm done. Not to say that the article certainly can't be improved upon, but it wasn't really in G11 territory. Cheers, — sephiroth bcr (converse) 08:19, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, Thanks. The article will certainly improve overtime. Many thought the game would be canceled. Now that Atari has brough the game it on track to be released. --SkyWalker (talk) 08:35, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for your help! Blaze42 (talk) 13:43, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
I award this Anti-Vandalism Barnstar for your speedy efforts in protecting my page. Thanks! Blaze42 (talk) 13:43, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]


History Of Houston Astros article to be deleted

I am asking for your help in a matter. I put the speedy deletion logo on the History of the Houston Astros article for it has no citions and was an exact copy of the Houston Astros article. Another admin declined the deletion without giving a good reason. The main Houston Astros article is being upadted and frankly do we need two articles telling the story of the Houston Astros?--Mickey 19:37, 18 November 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mickeyp2814 (talk • contribs)

Username Block

WRT this username block, based on the heading you placed on the editor's talk page when you left the block notice, I assume you were aware of the RFC on the username. In the future, if you could close such discussions when blocking such usernames, it would be helpful. Thanks. seresin ( ¡? )  23:35, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Mike,

I am a Graduate Student at the University of Minnesota and am currently undergoing a research project to evaluate new interfaces in helping editors maintain quality on wikipedia. I needed some guidelines from you on how to obtain participants without violating any Wikipedia policies. If you find the time, please get back to me or leave me a note on my user page. Thanks so much

Avanidhar (talk) 22:23, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PR

Hey there. Since you were pretty clear that PR would be unblocked as soon as he unequivocally stated there was no legal threat, and that he did so, I went ahead an unblocked him with a reminder to behave. Poke me if you feel that was overstepping you. — Coren (talk) 00:28, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Social Democrats USA

It was noticed that there as been much confusion over this webpage which was revert by you:

"01:02, 18 November 2008 Orangemike (Talk | contribs) m (6,916 bytes) (Reverted 1 edit by 76.122.29.109 identified as vandalism to last revision by Skew-t. (TW)) (undo)"

Please check the facts and ask questions before making an assuming to know. It is mistakes like this that gives Wikipedia a bad name in university circles for credit of citation ability.

The website socialdemocraticpartyofamerica.org has been formally changed to americansocialistvoter.com, but may still show up in general searches for several weeks to come due to the nature of backlogged material at the website being transferred to the official Social Democrats USA website socialdemocratsusa.org under different controls. The older website, socialidemocrats.org will expire soon and be taken down; however, it may too appear in some back searches as text when the time comes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.171.114.93 (talk) 07:45, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:2010FordMustangLogo.jpg

You mind telling me why you deleted a properly tagged image? I provided a source, explained that Ford claimed it as a CC-BY image, but because the logo is trademarked, that on Wikipedia it's a logo, ergo, it's non-free, and I added the right tag. So unless you zoned in on the explanation of the CC explanation from the Flickr page, then I think you made a very grievous mistake. --293.xx.xxx.xx (talk) 09:12, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

http://flickr.com/photos/fordmotorcompany/2807601226/ Look at the link, perhaps you would understand why I only chopped it in half and didn't edit it further. I think what you should've done was ask others about the conflicting licensing problems, seeing that Ford hasn't been too good with the CC licenses. --293.xx.xxx.xx (talk) 22:23, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Ergs!

Just a friendly note on The Ergs!. I had to decline the speedy request because there were definitely claims of importance. Weak, granted, but they're there. However, I won't be broken-hearted if you prod or take it to AfD. :) --Fabrictramp | talk to me 16:09, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ANI Discussion

I started an ANI discussion on an old friend of ours, User:DrummerMike. Feel free to comment there as you see appropriate. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 22:27, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Join The Impact

Join the Impact has gained total public attention recently by orchestrating hundreds of thousands of people to protest in the matter of a week. This is a notable phenomenon that comes on the wings of the Obama victory using the same technology. There are articles about the group and the protests all over the news, including the four page NY Times article I sourced. I feel the deletion of this article without discussion is an abuse of that function. I know others would have found this to be worthy of inclusion. I do not appreciate spending time on an article and having it deleted WITHOUT even any discussion. That is HIGHLY undemocratic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leftylib (talk • contribs) 22:20, 20 November 2008

Third opinion project

Your request for a third opinion has been edited to comply with Wikipedia:Third opinion#How to list a dispute. If your entry as originally worded contained information vital to an understanding of the dispute, please add those details to the article talk page where the dispute exists. Thanks. — Athaenara ✉ 16:16, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Barack Hussein Obama II

I have cleared the page. Feel free to delete it at User:Barack Hussein Obama II. Thanks, ~electricRush (T C) 04:57, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Marie Maas

RoyalBroil suggested that I bring to your attention the Marie Maas article with a possible COI for a speedy deletion.I came across the article at the new WikiProject Wisconsin section. I hope your wife,family and yourself are doing well.Thank you-RFD (talk) 11:40, 23 November 2008 (UTC) A clarification:an indenpendent review of the article will be just fine.I was a little hasty in suggesting a speedy deletion.I am a little concern the editor wrote the bio about herself.Thanks-RFD (talk) 15:01, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you-I hope everyone is well-RFD (talk) 13:50, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Loctite

This article needs help - can you look at it? Thanks!Trout Ice Cream (talk) 17:37, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

user:Pedophile333

Hi. You just blocked this user. His talk page said "I am a pedophile" and gave a phone number. I blanked it, but perhaps you should delete it. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 17:41, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and deleted it. Odds are it was somebody else's phone number as a target for harassment. Acroterion (talk) 17:44, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Texas station gambling hall deletion

Did you read my response before deleting this. It was moved from another article that was never contested. More than one opinion needs to be taken into account before delteing an article--BoldSolitude (talk) 18:24, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Coming Home Network

Hey Mike,

I am wondering why you deleted the article so quickly without considering the notes to my hangon? I would appreciate any advice, as The Coming Home Network is a valuable ministry to tens of thousands of people. The information we collect is used by most people when research is done on the topic of conversion. The Network is visited by over a million online people a month.

The page to Marcus Grodi details the life of arguably Americas best known convert. Who is known around the world through his show on EWTN, radio, speaking and books. He is an inspiration to thousands of people looking to make the same bold step he made, let alone his witness has caused Lord knows how many people to look deeper into their faith.

Please advise me. Thanks in advance.--R Rodgers 23:05, 25 November 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by CHNI (talk • contribs)


Unigo

Hi Orangemike,

I was hoping that you could unprotect Unigo so that I could start the article. It was previously deleted because the article did not indicate its significance and then you protected it from being recreated, rightfully so at the time (over two months ago). I was hoping you could unprotect the page because since the deletion, Unigo is now very notable and I'd like to create the page to demonstrate why. The Unigo site has been a topic of conversation in higher education and has been written about in several publications including The New York Times, Forbes Magazine, and blogs such as Mashable. During its first week of launch the Unigo site had more than 1.3 million page views. The site is backed by many notable people including ConsumerSearch founder Carl Hamann. Unigo's founder is Jordan Goldman, who was featured in The Gatekeepers, a non-fiction book on higher education written by journalist Jacques Steinberg. Goldman also wrote a bestselling college guidebook published by Penguin Books. Unigo is the first of its kind -- a free online college resource and student platform covering every four-year college in the United States and is used by high school students, college students, parents and counselors worldwide.

The site has had several inquiries as to why it is not on Wikipedia, both from users of the site and from bloggers/writers doing posts and stories about the site. I believe that I could start the article appropriately now that it is notable and have many, many sources I would be able to use to create it. Thank so much Orangemike. pradoec (talk) 20:12, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for replying so quickly. Here are the reliable, independent secondary sources I mentioned above which demonstrates significant coverage of Unigo -- "The Tell-All Campus Tour" The New York Times, Sept. 19, 2008. (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/21/magazine/21unigo-t.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=unigo&st=cse) -- This was a 3,500-word feature written about Unigo for the The New York Times Magazine. -- "Generation YouTube" Forbes Magazine, Oct. 7, 2008 (http://www.forbes.com/technology/2008/10/06/unigo-theunet-youtube-tech-personal-cx_hs_1007unigo.html) -- This article also talks about some of Unigo's notable backers. -- "Unigo Puts Users in Charge of College Reviews" Mashable, Sept. 19, 2008 (http://mashable.com/2008/09/19/unigo/) -- The Unigo site was reviewed by a notable tech blog. I have other independent sources that I would be able to use for the article, including The Chronicle of Higher Education. Please let me know if you need anything else. Thanks again for discussing this with me Orangemike! pradoec (talk) 11:24, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for helping me fix my references. This is the first time I've created an article and will continue to work to get it right! If you have anything specific you'd like to have me improve, I always appreciate pointers. Thanks again Orangemike. pradoec (talk) 20:01, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spam

Orangemike, "Spam" has to do with intent. If you checked the revision history of Willowick Place, Houston you will find that I wrote the article. Mike, I am not a spammer. I am a longtime Wikipedian who has been here since 2003. I wrote about this neighborhood because publications like the Houston Chronicle and the Houston Business Journal wrote about it. Now, you could suggest something to rewrite - what do you think should be rewritten? WhisperToMe (talk) 18:20, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, let's look at this: "Blatant advertising. Pages which exclusively promote some entity and which would need to be fundamentally rewritten to become encyclopedic. Note that simply having a company or product as its subject does not qualify an article for this criterion." - How is this promoting an entity? As the CSD criteria says, simply having a product as its subject is not enough. It has to be written in a promotional manner. How is this written in a promotional manner? It doesn't have statements like "Buyers will surely find luxurious, voluptuous spas that everyone will surely enjoy" or something like that. WhisperToMe (talk) 18:22, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I've made a *ton* of neighborhood articles in Houston. Those that are "good article"s are Gulfton, Houston and River Oaks, Houston

When I make neighborhood articles I add school info for every neighborhood or community from Pleasantville, Houston to Briargrove, Houston. Education sections typically list schools by attendance boundary and any private schools within the community or listed by community websites. I must also add that Lamar and Lanier get kids from all over Houston, not just the wealthy areas; Lamar High School (Houston) and Lanier Middle School (Houston) give more detail about that.

I don't see how it fits the speedy criteria; generally that is to be used when its clearly an advertiser who only intends to promote his community.WhisperToMe (talk) 20:21, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • 1. Thank you for withdrawing the speedy :)
  • 2. Generally I judge notability based on how often a subject appears in reliable sources. The Houston Business Journal had an entire article about how City Council voted to close a street so that this development would open. The Houston Chronicle also had an entire article about this area. I'll see if I can find more sources about this community so I can further establish notability.
  • 3. The differences between the Milwaukee neighborhood articles and the Houston neighborhood articles may be partly due to population. Milwaukee has 602,782 as of 2006 while Houston has 2,208,180 people as of 2000. There are more neighborhoods and there are strong neighborhood identities. What I do is often consolidate multiple subdivisions into the same article if the subdivisions have the same homeowners association (i.e. Braeswood Place and Sharpstown). Also Houston includes some areas that used to be distinct unincorporated communities, such as Almeda, Genoa, Kingwood, and Mykawa - Also from sources like the Chronicle I can gain information about unique cultural and political information about each neighborhood, such as voting information and annual events. Having said that, I would encourage those participating in Milwaukee articles to see if some neighborhoods with strong identities that have not broken off from the main article can be expanded and broken off. WhisperToMe (talk) 20:39, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding blogs, Myspace, etc.

You said, in relation to The Foxes "ONE official site; no blogs, no Myspace, no Facebook; ONE)"

Actually, as per WP:EL Myspace, Facebook, Blogs etc are acceptable as long as they actually are official and belong to the said party. The quote about links to avoid says "Except for a link to an official page of the article's subject—and not prohibited by restrictions on linking—one should avoid:" WhisperToMe (talk) 19:10, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Query on your deletion

Hallo...you've just deleted an image I uploaded yesterday Image:Bermudian Pound Bank Notes.jpg. This was marked for speedy deletion by another contributor almost immediately, as he protested that I had obtained the image (or accompanying text) from another website or printed source. When I pointed out that this was not true,that I had photographed notes in my own collection, he said (today) that his actual objection was that while i created the image, the designs on the notes (and other currency units) were copyrighted, and that I should re-license them as non-free and provide rationales for the uses of the image. i've no sooner figured out how to do this and complied than you've deleted the image. I'm starting to think that a lot of contributors, on Wikipedia, delight in deleting the uploads of others for reasons that may or may not be spurious. Could you possibly have entered into a dialogue as to what in my rationales were lacking, or perhaps suggested how I might better present a rationale? Or was your sole interest the immediate deletion of the image? I think you owe me some constructive criticism.

Aodhdubh (talk) 21:24, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Query on your deletion

Hello you deleted my article Slurpee Capital of the World claiming I was advertising, could you please explain how I was advertising?

--Daniel (talk) 01:52, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of We R One

Thanks for nailing this recreation, Orangemike. Do you think you could just check the deleted article please, and tell me the name of the user who recreated it? I am requesting a CU against this user, since I have reason to suspect the recreator was a user abusing a multiple account. Thanks, Orangemike! --Thor Malmjursson (talk) 23:36, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for that information Orangemike. It will get put to good use in about 30 seconds flat :) Cheers. Thor Malmjursson (talk) 23:41, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hitler game

I don't believe this was a speedy candidate. It's a Six degrees variant and I turned up google hits for it but all of them appear to be blog and forum posts. I was about to send it to AFD. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:07, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sergio Bernadin

A note on notability: My article on a certain Sergio Bernadin was deleted (quite speedily) because it lacked notability, despite its seeming to meet all of the requirements under A7 and the criterion for notability. Although young, he is a public figure of note with multiple published articles available (referenced) and one that would be considered a figure of note by well over 1,000 people. There are at least four other people ready to work on his page, and I was surprised to have found it a candidate for speedy deletion. That said, I was wondering what exactly led to the deletion of his page. Thanks in advance,

Agentsmith1818 (talk) November 28, 2008 —Preceding undated comment was added at 00:24, 29 November 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Granted, in the grand scheme of things, he may be less-than-notable. Your bio does indeed suggest that you lean towards 'deletionism' so I suppose the article's deletion is arguably reasonable. My question then is, how does a new article become flagged for deletion? Did you sift through new articles to find Sergio Bernadin, or did the page's word count/reference count render it "non-notable" before you even came across it? Addendum: is there a system in place for targeting the less-than-noteworthy articles already on Wikipedia? (e.g. John "Beatz" Holohan, Gabe Rotter) If, of course, you have the time to answer such questions. thanks for the prompt response.

Agentsmith1818 (talk) 00:52, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NorthShore University Health System

In regard to this article, I don't believe it should have been deleted as a WP:CSD A7 as non-notable. Would it be OK to restore the article? I think that additional sources can be provided. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:16, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Skyzoo

Hello. Please restore this article. I don't believe it was a speedy candidate. Thanks.--Michig (talk) 07:30, 29 November 2008 (UTC) Looking at the previous AfD, it looks like the article that was deleted back then was lacking in significant coverage. The new article that I wrote certainly wasn't.--Michig (talk) 09:11, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Orangemike&oldid=254760356"