User talk:Coren/Archives/2008/September
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Coren. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Barnstar!
Purdy barnstar hidden in the modest display case. For not biting the noobs and being extremely nice to someone that kept recreating a page, I award you this star.mboverload@ 22:09, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
- Hey thanks. I always make an effort when the editor makes one too — it's obvious that he tried hard and looked at other articles in the hope of having his stick; I was a bit saddened by the fact that the article was so far out of the range of WP:BAND that it could not possibly be kept. — Coren (talk) 22:14, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
|
The Original Barnstar | For creating User:CorenSearchBot, which is a massive help to new article patrollers. I know I already gave you a star for niceness but I have been intending to give this one to you for weeks. This is the last one. I promise for now mboverload@ 22:39, 1 September 2008 (UTC) |
Kuppenheimer
I've corrected the potential copyright issue with this page. Thanks for the notiication--Pubdog (talk) 01:12, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Restoration request
Hi Coren,
- My comment refers to Revision history of Talk:Depression and natural therapies. Can you please restore the Depression and natural therapies article with its talk pages and all the edit histories? For right now I believe it's not possible to see exactly what ended up on the cutting room floor. I want to bring this to the WP:mediation cabal's attention, but it's quite difficult in the articles current state. Thanks. --Firefly322 (talk) 02:42, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
- Actually, I did an history merge, not a deletion. You will find every revision of Depression and natural therapies in the history of Treatment for depression (which is the whole point of the merge), so you can see everything that used to be in the article there. — Coren (talk) 12:29, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
BarterZap
Hello,
I own BarterZap.com and I included an article that I had written and it was deleted. My article was published on multiple web sites and press releases. How do I use my own article and indicate to you that I wrote it so it is not deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Barterzap (talk • contribs) 04:56, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
- Please read the guide to donating your own copyrighted material to Wikipedia. Note that, in addition to copyright requirements, the article must still comply with notability guidelines, advertising prohibition and avoid conflicts of interest. — Coren (talk) 12:26, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Disambiguation page CorenSearchBot
I created disambiguation page for heater moving part of infomarmtion from original Heater page. Your CorenSearchBot found similatiries with http://getwiki.net/-Heater that is actually copping wikipedia materials and bot tells that it's me coping from there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by UrSuS (talk • contribs) 07:44, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
PUBLIB Posting
The PUBLIB community was tasked by one of the moderators/owners to create a Wikipedia entry so I did and immediately got a copyright notice. Here's a link to the PUBLIB posting giving permission to create: http://lists.webjunction.org/wjlists/publib/2008-September/118203.html
I have also asked her to put a copyleft notice on the official PUBLIB website. :)
AllenTateRocks (talk) 13:54, 4 September 2008 (UTC) Thanks, Allen D. Tate
Review Before Republishing
The page I had created for BetterTrades, which you deleted, has been userfied for me at http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User:Westcoastbiker/Bettertrades. I discovered more sources, added content, and attempted to edit what content was already there. I feel confident that notability has been established, the material is neutral, and the information is reliable. If you disagree, I will gladly hear your reasoning and work with you to alleviate the problems.
If the page seems ready for publication, I would greatly appreciate your blessing, and I'd like to know the appropriate way to refer to that approval (I'm assuming that you would leave comment on the talk page).
I would actually like to publish this page to the case-sensitive name "BetterTrades" by the way, as opposed to "Bettertrades." This will be a continuity issue for the discussion, but any help with keeping the flow clear would be exceelent. Thanks again for keeping the dialogue open. Westcoastbiker (talk) 18:45, 4 September 2008 (UTC)Westcoastbiker
Gabrielle Bell
Hi, I believe I resolved the issue with Gabrielle Bell. Please review, and if you agree, remove the copyright violation/speedy deletion tag. She's an important alternative cartoonist who merits a Wikipedia entry. Thanks Stoshmaster (talk) 21:56, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
Dan Butler (actor)
Apparently, I was attempting to move the Dan Butler page to Dan Butler (actor) but I did not use the {{db-move}} tag. I will add that tag to the new page.OSC Flunkee (talk) 05:04, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
Plus One
If you check the Plus One page now you'll see that its now a disambig page and the former contents are now at the (band) wiki.brob (talk) 10:56, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
Calgary Co-op
I completed a revision to move the Calgary Co-op article from the name Calgary CO-OP on the recommendation of the community. Seems to have confused CorenSearchBot. The original page Calgary CO-OP now redirects to the new page (with title caps corrected). Calvinhrn (talk) 01:12, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
Done as requested
Hi, as instructed[1], I've done my bit. Since I've never done this before I hope what I wrote it is in line with expected content and format.Thanks.--Stor stark7 Speak 18:03, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
Savoy
How did you know that I used a fan page for info before I referenced it?Sposato (talk) 22:42, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
permission to use
i copied my own material for the page on artist Joseph Wolins. (Terryjoanmarks (talk) 23:05, 6 September 2008 (UTC)).Terry Marks
leave the message
thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Internation Centre For Economic and Social Research (ICESR) (talk • contribs) 11:42, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Dejan Rusič
I move article from unappropriate name Dejan Rušič to Dejan Rusič (this is his real name) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Neznanec (talk • contribs) 22:20, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Carlos Eire
Edited the text and now it shouldn't cause any problems. I had originally copied some of the biographical information from Waiting For Snow in Havana and didn't realize the information was copyrighted (or indeed, that it had been copied from another location). Long story short, that article needs editing or a copyright tag. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lobbyknees (talk • contribs) 19:28, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Nahum Shahaf ban
Hi, I've replied on my talk page. As I say I'm not going to argue over any ban as it's kind of like demanding to be returned to a lunatic asylum, but your reasoning is factually incorrect, for example the reference to "numerous warnings". I am also somewhat confused as to why you have not even contacted or warned any of the editors who were involved in (succesfully) edit warring material out of the article. That information was being put there in an attempt to create balanced coverage about an individual who holds a genuinely controversial and minority viewpoint (and indeed whose notability mostly derives from the fact that he has publicised those views, not on any other supposed achievements). --Nickhh (talk) 16:46, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
- I'd still be grateful for clarity as to what these "numerous warnings" were - as I recall I have no block record, no history of being repeatedly warned about anything at all, although like many others, yes, have had the ArbCom I-P notice posted on my talk page (a total of twice I believe, and only on one occasion in response to any particular problem that might relate to me personally). I am also still waiting for you to post warnings about edit warring on the page at issue to other users' talk pages. Although it is the admin's privilege after all to wield their power in an arbitrary fashion and on the basis of things they have simply made up, following a simple and cursory glance at the situation in front of them. --Nickhh (talk) 17:37, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
- It's not a case of arbitrary so much as it's a case of "not worth the trouble", insofar as delving even deeper in the I-P mess lies far outside my interests. You'll note that you still do not have a block record either, which is why a simple topic ban was quite sufficient and nothing further.
An unrelated matter might be misbehavior by others. If you feel someone's behavior is ergregiously bad, feel free to point it out to me with supporting diffs and I'll look into it to see if sanctions are also warranted— I do not trawl articles looking for people to sanction, I simply act when I notice something incidentally or when someone brings specific behavior to my attention. — Coren (talk) 17:53, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
- It's not a case of arbitrary so much as it's a case of "not worth the trouble", insofar as delving even deeper in the I-P mess lies far outside my interests. You'll note that you still do not have a block record either, which is why a simple topic ban was quite sufficient and nothing further.
- I'd still be grateful for clarity as to what these "numerous warnings" were - as I recall I have no block record, no history of being repeatedly warned about anything at all, although like many others, yes, have had the ArbCom I-P notice posted on my talk page (a total of twice I believe, and only on one occasion in response to any particular problem that might relate to me personally). I am also still waiting for you to post warnings about edit warring on the page at issue to other users' talk pages. Although it is the admin's privilege after all to wield their power in an arbitrary fashion and on the basis of things they have simply made up, following a simple and cursory glance at the situation in front of them. --Nickhh (talk) 17:37, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
- If you are not willing to delve even slightly deeper into what you correctly describe as the "I-P mess", then - to be honest - you are not qualified to hand out bans on the basis of edits in that area. And if you "incidentally" noticed my edits, and were acting as an impartial arbiter, you must surely have already noticed the edits of others around them - I should not have to point those out to you. By contrast, if someone brought the issue to your attention off-Wiki (as it is fairly obvious that they did) then you should at least have had the intellectual and moral decency to have looked at the other side of the issue before flying in. Oh, and still waiting for clarification of the "numerous warnings". Let's see those "supporting diffs" etc. --Nickhh (talk) 18:19, 4 September 2008 (UTC) [insert sig]
- Nickhh, issuing attacks at Coren is not helping your case. For the record, I am familiar with the I-P mess, and I support the ban. I was a bit surprised at the length (60 days), as I probably would have issued something a bit shorter. But 60 days isn't completely out of line either, especially considering your aggressive response, and that from even a quick look at your contribs, it was clear that you had become too focused on that one article. You're not a SPA, but over the last month, you've definitely been acting like one: Nickhh (talk · contribs). If you want the ban shortened or lifted, the best way to do it is to acknowledge the concerns that led to the ban in the first place, promise to do better in the future, and in the meantime, show that you can work in a cooperative manner with other editors, on multiple articles, not just the one that's in the middle of a controversy. --Elonka 00:47, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
- FWIW, 60 days is a figure I mostly pulled out of my ass by a quick eyeball of comparable sanctions. I would not be opposed to a reduction to 30 given that it will likely take your focus away from the article and let you simmer down on the topic just as well. Elonka, you are more familiar with the general area, and I'll leave that to your judgement. — Coren (talk) 01:23, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
- I think it's best to leave the 60-day ban in place for now, and then re-examine things in a week or so. As an example of a way to proceed, we have another editor in the topic area, Tundrabuggy (talk · contribs), who was placed under a lengthy 90-day ban by User:MZMcBride, and was then mentored by a couple admins. Tundrabuggy responded well and did some excellent work on other articles, so after consultation, we eventually modified the ban and then lifted it entirely, with a caveat that Tundrabuggy is still strongly encouraged to find at least a 50-50 balance between edits at the first article, Muhammad al-Durrah, and other work (see Talk:Muhammad al-Durrah#Admin log). If Nickhh could do the same (show constructive work at other articles), I think it would be reasonable to modify and/or lift his ban as well. --Elonka 05:59, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
- I have made clear I am not going to make the effort to contest the ban, or go back to that article, so this is all kind of academic. I will leave that article and other related ones to those people here who seem to have some kind of political agenda to bolster their favoured version of the al-Durrah event. What I have an issue with (and was quite forthright in saying so) is the principle here of administrators wielding their big sticks to "punish" (only) one side in a dispute, on the basis of some vague and ill-defined charge, with no detailed evidence being presented to back it up. I have still not seen any supporting diffs which reveal the "numerous warnings" I supposedly received, nor any evidence that other users who were edit-warring over the material in question from the other side have even had a friendly note on their talk page, let alone a page ban. Equally I am now subject to the bizarre accusation that I am a virtual SPA, as well as comments that I need to "acknowledge concerns" and "promise to do better", as if I were an errant schoolchild facing a particularly prissy schoolteacher. Elonka, if you had read the comments on my talk page, linked above, you would have noticed that in fact I immediately acknowledged edit-warring (and made clear I had backed away from it) and also accepted that I have occasionally stepped out of line in edit summaries. I am also astonished that you still seem to see yourself as some sort of impartial referee in this area of controversy, given the RfC and recall debates and given that you have quite clearly taken sides on these pages, unwittingly or otherwise, in favour of those pushing the agenda referred to above, and have also involved yourself in editing content. You even participated in the very edit war in question. --Nickhh (talk) 14:34, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
- I think it's best to leave the 60-day ban in place for now, and then re-examine things in a week or so. As an example of a way to proceed, we have another editor in the topic area, Tundrabuggy (talk · contribs), who was placed under a lengthy 90-day ban by User:MZMcBride, and was then mentored by a couple admins. Tundrabuggy responded well and did some excellent work on other articles, so after consultation, we eventually modified the ban and then lifted it entirely, with a caveat that Tundrabuggy is still strongly encouraged to find at least a 50-50 balance between edits at the first article, Muhammad al-Durrah, and other work (see Talk:Muhammad al-Durrah#Admin log). If Nickhh could do the same (show constructive work at other articles), I think it would be reasonable to modify and/or lift his ban as well. --Elonka 05:59, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
- FWIW, 60 days is a figure I mostly pulled out of my ass by a quick eyeball of comparable sanctions. I would not be opposed to a reduction to 30 given that it will likely take your focus away from the article and let you simmer down on the topic just as well. Elonka, you are more familiar with the general area, and I'll leave that to your judgement. — Coren (talk) 01:23, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
- Nickhh, issuing attacks at Coren is not helping your case. For the record, I am familiar with the I-P mess, and I support the ban. I was a bit surprised at the length (60 days), as I probably would have issued something a bit shorter. But 60 days isn't completely out of line either, especially considering your aggressive response, and that from even a quick look at your contribs, it was clear that you had become too focused on that one article. You're not a SPA, but over the last month, you've definitely been acting like one: Nickhh (talk · contribs). If you want the ban shortened or lifted, the best way to do it is to acknowledge the concerns that led to the ban in the first place, promise to do better in the future, and in the meantime, show that you can work in a cooperative manner with other editors, on multiple articles, not just the one that's in the middle of a controversy. --Elonka 00:47, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
- If you are not willing to delve even slightly deeper into what you correctly describe as the "I-P mess", then - to be honest - you are not qualified to hand out bans on the basis of edits in that area. And if you "incidentally" noticed my edits, and were acting as an impartial arbiter, you must surely have already noticed the edits of others around them - I should not have to point those out to you. By contrast, if someone brought the issue to your attention off-Wiki (as it is fairly obvious that they did) then you should at least have had the intellectual and moral decency to have looked at the other side of the issue before flying in. Oh, and still waiting for clarification of the "numerous warnings". Let's see those "supporting diffs" etc. --Nickhh (talk) 18:19, 4 September 2008 (UTC) [insert sig]
American Pharmacists Association - Academy of Student Pharmacists
I serve as the 2008 - 2009 Vice-chair of the National Standing Committee on Communications for the American Pharmacists Association - Academy of Student Pharmacists (APhA-ASP). I have been given permission by APhA-ASP to post this material as the beginning of an ongoing project to add the history and current events of the Association and Academy onto wikipedia. If you have any more questions regarding this, please contact me directly or let me know what I can do to keep things on the up and up on your end. Thank you.
Matthew C. Gauck Pharm D Candidate 2009
2008 - 2009 Vice-chair National Standing Committee on Communications
American Pharmacists Accociation - Academy of Student Pharmacists
Mcgauck (talk) 19:38, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
gauckmc@email.uc.edu
They copied my Wiki entry, not the other way around.
Your bot compared non-copyrighted information that was written by me about Hammes Company, this is fair and useable for Wikipedia, and written for Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sharnden (talk • contribs) 19:26, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Mathmo AfD
Hi there. Just trying to understand the process, forgive me if I'm incorrect! You said that none of the arguments are particularly strong either way in your summary. One of the comments that I put down in the original discussion included the fact that (unlike most of the other people commenting!) I'm actually a former Cambridge Mathematician, and so reasonably well qualified to bring information 'to the party' about the fact that the article is quite correct, and that the term is just a bit of Cambridge slang. If that's not a strong argument, how should I go about making it a strong argument? Mrh30 (talk) 12:22, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
- Well, for one, you are a primary source. :-) But more to the point, DRV is not the proper place to debate the article anew, but simply to determine whether the closure was within policy, which it was (even if other calls might have validly been made). Strictly speaking, a deletion because an article is a dictionary definition is only the best thing to do when the article could not be anything more, not when it simply currently isn't. — Coren (talk) 12:32, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
- http://www.quns.cam.ac.uk/Queens/Misc/jargon/CUjargon-M.html - now I'm not the primary source (Google for 'Cambridge University Slang', first link)! :-) I hear what you're saying. One further question/point then. If the process is as you say for DictDef, it basically means that we should never delete an article that is a dictionary definition, since they all could become a more full article at some point in the future. Doesn't that rather contradict the policy of WP not being a dictionary? How does one go about proving that something is never going to be more than a dictionary definition? Mrh30 (talk) 12:43, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
- Well, I'd say that if a few people have tried to bring meat to a definition article and failed after some time then chances are low enough that it could be expanded into an article that deletion is reasonable. There is also the "easy" way: consensus says that it can't be expanded. — Coren (talk) 17:40, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
- http://www.quns.cam.ac.uk/Queens/Misc/jargon/CUjargon-M.html - now I'm not the primary source (Google for 'Cambridge University Slang', first link)! :-) I hear what you're saying. One further question/point then. If the process is as you say for DictDef, it basically means that we should never delete an article that is a dictionary definition, since they all could become a more full article at some point in the future. Doesn't that rather contradict the policy of WP not being a dictionary? How does one go about proving that something is never going to be more than a dictionary definition? Mrh30 (talk) 12:43, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Admin Noticeboard Mention
Don't be alarmed: I did mention you in a summary of an issue I'm having on the Admin. Noticeboard, but I wanted to let you know, and tell you that I didn't say anything defaming or offensive. I was just giving the most accurate narrative of my current issue as I could, and you were part of the story. Best wishes! Westcoastbiker (talk) 15:42, 8 September 2008 (UTC)Westcoastbiker
User Boodlesthecat has posted his evidence/reply (?) in my evidence section. This is confusing and I certainly don't want it there, could you move it elsewhere? Thank you. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 21:24, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
- Indeed. Done. — Coren (talk) 21:28, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Another Wikipedia Mirror: www.celebritygenius.com
Well... that's it really. Came up here. – Toon(talk) 18:36, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
- Oh, and www.wiki-net.pl – Toon(talk) 18:52, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
- Another one: globat.es – Toon(talk) 00:06, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Bruce Crane
The text for the Bruce Crane article comes from the website of the Florence Griswold Museum, which has agreed (under the terms of GFDL) to allow publication of its text on another website. Copyright permission was emailed from the museum to Wikimedia on September 5, 2008. ----Art History 1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Art History 1 (talk • contribs) 15:39, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
Mass Spectrometry Instruments
Hi, i got a notice of possible copyright violation against the page I created for Mass Spectrometry Instruments. I would like to state that I am Director, Mass Spectrometry Instruments Pvt. Ltd, India, which is a fully owned subsidary of Mass Spectrometry Instruments Ltd. UK. The contents of the page i created are similar to the ones found on our companies official web site www.massint.co.uk.
As i am one of the shareholders of the company, please do not remove the contents for copyright violation as i take the full responsibility for any legal issues that may in case arise.
AlokDamle (talk) 07:14, 10 September 2008 (UTC)Alok Damle
Haines
Hi, just to point out that you put "failed" when you, presumably, meant "passed". Abtract (talk) 21:28, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- I don't see it. I said all pass except one that fails (which it no longer does). Where, exactly? — Coren (talk) 22:37, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- When you said it failed 5:1 it didn't since the voting was 5:1 in favour (now 6:1). I was just trying to prevent him getting off on a technicality that's all. Abtract (talk) 06:11, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
- Ah, I can see why you were confused. At 5-1, the proposed remedy would have failed; the majority is counted against all active arbitrators, not just those who voted: this means that (at that time) a measure needed six supports to pass. — Coren (talk) 12:08, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
- When you said it failed 5:1 it didn't since the voting was 5:1 in favour (now 6:1). I was just trying to prevent him getting off on a technicality that's all. Abtract (talk) 06:11, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Will the Circle Be Unbroken?
The song (Will the Circle Be Unbroken?) is in the public domain (1908) so cannot be under copyright. CoverTones (talk) 00:35, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Centre for Human Rights
I am the webmaster of the Centre for Human Rights website (http://www.chr.up.ac.za) and I am currently creating our Wikipedia page. I am using the same text that is on our website and this is not a copyright infringement - we own the information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Centre for Human Rights (talk • contribs) 08:03, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
SoMedia Networks
The bot picked up a submission for a craigslist ad we wrote and published. I am giving wikipedia permission to use and duplicate the information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iam-network (talk • contribs) 19:05, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
Good Governance Programme
I am the webmaster of the Good Governance Programme website (University of Pretoria) and I am using content directly from our site to be placed on Wikipedia. Yolanda Booyzen (talk) 10:45, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
- Yolanda, please see the note about copyright I left on your Talkpage. Thanks,
SIS15:04, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
- Yolanda, please see the note about copyright I left on your Talkpage. Thanks,
United Socialist Movement of the Americas - New Page - Copyright issue
Hello:
I am the owner of the copyright on the United Socialist Movement of the Americas website and give permission to use its content for the purpose of creating a page in Wikipedia. I provided a link to the web site in the article. Please advise if anything else is required.
Thanks,
Joseph Dubonnet Jdubonnet (talk) 13:30, 12 September 2008 (UTC) Administrator The United Socialist Movement of The Americas.
Copyright violation from Vampilore.co.uk
I have just started some new pages on Wikipedia about models who have been featured in the Harris Publication Vampirella. The pages I started are for Cathy Christian, Maria DiAngelis and Sascha Knopf. The CorenSearchBot has quite correctly noted that a substantial section of the content I (rather quickly) added to the above pages is an almost word perfect copy of content from the www.vampilore.co.uk web site. May I state here that I am the owner of the Vampilore.co.uk domain, the Vampilore site is my own creation and that I have no objection to content from the Vampilore site about Vampirella and related persons being used on Wikipedia (and it's related sites). The content I used relates directly to their roles as published models within the Vampirella comic books and trading cards. I sincerely hope that someone else will add further content to their Wkikpedia pages relating to their careers/lives outside of the narrow confines of my area of expertise/knowledge. Robin Whale Sept 12 2008 Robinwhale (talk) 14:23, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
Reporting, Alastair Haines Arbcom restrictions
Coren -- just so I can understand this -- how do the restrictions work? Ilkali has already made two reverts on one page today [2]&[3], and another revert on another page. [4] When another user tried to communicate with him about the reverts, he replied in this way [5].Tim (talk) 18:19, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- I'm curious as well. Alastair has already violated the terms of the ArbCom decision by accusing you, and by extension the entire panel of arbitrators of a "slanderous lie" ([6]), which is a violation of WP:CIVIL and comes close to a violation of WP:NLT, in exactly the way that he was instructed not to in the ArbCom. And yet there don't seem to be any repercussions at all. -LisaLiel (talk) 19:04, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- I have warned Ilkali and reminded him of the edit restriction. As for the edit summary when he removed (and thus acknowledged) the summary from the decision... well, we're clerks and so we're often bearing bad news. I have thick enough skin. — Coren (talk) 19:53, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
i copied and pasted from this page - http://kappatalk.com/sisters . which we run and have the permission of the sisters to use that info on our own site and on this page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dirtycrow (talk • contribs) 19:50, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
ArbCom Clerk template
I've created a template shortening the work for you, it is the same thing as used on your userpage, converted to template form. Cheers. —Sunday Scribe 00:42, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- That's a very nice thought, but I'm not entirely certain that it's appropriate: clerks do not have and official status, and the whole fez thing is mostly a lark. :-) I don't suppose it does any harm, though, so thanks. — Coren (talk) 00:52, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- Very welcome. Feel weak in your presence. THe ArbCom might lighten up one day... nah. —§unday His Grandiloquence 02:10, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
Don't encourage me!
- There once was an admin named Coren,
- Whose user page isn't that boring,
- Speaks clearly in French,
- But Germans a wrench,
- That WikiElf we all know as Coren.
CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 06:23, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
- Do we need to get NYB over here? —Sunday Note 14:10, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Thank you ...
... and all others for the confidence. Tājik (talk) 16:46, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
CorenSearchBot tagged this page as a copyright violation. While the text is similar it was not taken from http://scifipedia.scifi.com/index.php/Isaac_Asimov_Presents_The_Great_SF_Stories_14_(1952). I have removed the tag and added a note on the article's talk page. There're only so many ways to say the same thing... Danielklein (talk) 05:27, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
The bot tagged this page, but nearly all the text presently in the article is just the tracklisting of the album, and I believe this is why the bot tagged the article. Hellbus (talk) 05:29, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
Boy, this is going to get tedious. Same problem as before and also just mentioned by Hellbus (list of contents). Danielklein (talk) 05:49, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
bot message Herrenhauser Brewery
Hi, your (?) bot encouraged me to drop you a line on this page. Here I am. What I was doing: I found Herrenhauser Brewery which is not spelled correctly , so I created Herrenhäuser Brewery and performed a copy and paste from 1 to 2. Then, I redirected article 1 to 2. Meanwhile, the bot became active (so fast...). Hope you understand what I mean. Anyway, I removed the automatic bot message and I think there's nothing to do anymore - just this message. regards Andreas -- Hundehalter (talk) 20:49, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
Reply to: Notability of Lira Luis
I can give you numerous references to the notability of architect Lira Luis. I created this article as a fan of architecture. I used this username as the name of the article because it is the most logical and easiest name to remember. If you do a search on "Lira Luis" from the Yahoo! search engine, you will see a lot of articles written about Ms Luis. I think the original article I wrote about her was unfairly reported and deleted. It appears as a blatant sabotage against a person by a group who appears to be very jealous of the success of Ms Luis. The persons in question are: Blakegripling ph, who conspired to taint the reputation of Ms Luis. Please read these articles that will justify the notability of the achievements of Ms Luis:
http://www.metropolismag.com/cda/story.php?artid=1150 http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P3-1023770461.html http://damnedinblue.blogspot.com/2006/04/architect-lira-luis-and-immortal.html http://www.aiany.org/firms/firm.php?id=1001563 http://archrecord.construction.com/archrecord2/live/OnTheSide/bowwowhaus.asp http://www.target.com/gp/detail.html/602-2332920-3398253?asin=1424300479&afid=yahoosspplp_bmvd&lnm=1424300479%7CFRANKly_Speaking:_It%27s_the_WRIGHT_Way_:_Books&ref=tgt_adv_XSNG1060 http://archrecord.construction.com/archrecord2/work/0502/pod.asp http://www.metropolismag.com/cda/story.php?artid=1051 http://www.planetizen.com/node/14990 http://globalnation.inquirer.net/ofwspotlight/ofwspotlight/view_article.php?article_id=26967 http://goodnewspilipinas.com/wp/?p=865 http://aec.cadalyst.com/aec/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=429618 http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/questex/cadalyst0607/index.php?startid=14 http://aec.cadalyst.com/aec/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=437990&ref=25 www.midglen.com/newsletter/volume9.pdf http://www.jurgita.com/models-id218134.html Liraluis (talk) 12:36, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
SoMedia
The bot picked up a submission for a wikisac that I had wrote and published. I am giving wikipedia permission to use and if possible duplicate the information. In the meantime i have revised the article --Gpisces (talk) 18:40, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
CorenSearchBot issue
Hello,
CorenSearchBot seems to have been a little confused by the spam site http://88kwklm.cn/kummer.html, which led it to place a copyvio notice on a disambig page Wolfgang Kummer. Something you might want to look into. Cheers, David Schaich Talk/Cont 18:49, 15 September 2008 (UTC).
My RfA
|
Thank you for supporting me in my RfA, which passed with a count of (166/43/7). I appreciate your comments and in my actions as an administrator I will endeavor to maintain the trust you have placed in me. I am honored by your trust and your support. Thank you, Cirt (talk) 01:55, 16 September 2008 (UTC) |
Page is a one-liner (plus a stub template transclusion). The text was not copied from anywhere. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AlastairIrvine (talk • contribs) 14:36, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Mentioned you
I mentioned something you said at AN. See here. Thought I should let you know, as basic courtesy and in case I misunderstood you, and to let you respond if you want to. Carcharoth (talk) 05:17, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Convenience Valet
I am writing in regards to an automatic bot message I received. There was text placed into my article that had not yet been referenced and it was similar to the actual website. I have since changed the text to avoid any exact similarities and added numerous references to back up my research. Thank you. Bmedick (talk) 06:16, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Canton of Fécamp
I too am writing in regards to an automatic bot message I received.
I had just completed my translation from fr:Canton de Fécamp, and your message said it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.speedylook.com/Canton_of_F%C3%A9camp.html.
This was similar to my article, but I take each French wiki version of cantons, communes etc ((About 2000 edits so far - how come it's not happened before) and turn it into English.
I wonder if Speedylook has a bot to do the same? Which came first ? Speedylook's page or Fr:wiki's page ?
I've left your tag there for the moment. Thank you. Dickie (talk) 10:11, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
James ben Ali Haggin
The text of this article which appears elsewhere online was published in 1928 and is now public domain. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RichardBond (talk • contribs) 17:40, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Several References added to Legends In Concert
I have added several reliable references to Press Comments contained in this article for review.
Thanks, Jaiesi (talk) 02:34, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Tennessee Technology Center at Shelbyville
Coren has picked up our old domain's catalog site. This page on our website is being deleted. Catalog Site We authorize wikipedia to use the information under the wikipedia page Tennessee Technology Center at Shelbyville
Stevemallard (talk) 04:53, 18 September 2008 (UTC)Stevemallard
www.ttcshelbyville.edu steve.mallard@ttcshelbyville.edu
Just an FYI... I saw you closed this AFD as delete but the article showed up on my watch list today. :) GtstrickyTalk or C 18:08, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
- Never mind. It has been resurrected and sent to WP:DRV. GtstrickyTalk or C 19:57, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
- noteI'd like matt lee(musician kept and want to appeal this.See what I said below. This tricky and his fiend nard a too hurried to delete this, like they have a vendetta. That makes me feel they are creeping with prejudice. They are in a huge hurry to delete this. WHY ? D. Schneider(69.231.39.97 (talk) 18:17, 18 September 2008 (UTC))
matt lee(musician)
Hi ,I just wanted to know why this is a proposed delete. I was forwarded an actual credits sheet from a divine horsemen record w/ Mr. Lee's songwriting credits on a divine horsemen record(a band already in wiki) and he has a song in a major movie. These are verifiable and he also has a major record release through interscope records on interscope's subsidy HepCat records. The same label that has led zepplin, britney spears, the stray cats and many more coming out in 2mos. There will be a tour as well, along with radio play. One the songs on the record is a re-release of Mr. Lee's song Shot Down in a movie called Bikini Island. It's at IMDB.He is notable and has a track record. He co-wrote the devil's river album and has that listed on his credit sheet from the lp liner notes.Not all is on-line, but the hard copy of the lyric sheet should suffice. If we can do anything to help you reverse this decision please let us know. Straight from the go, this one guy nard has been trigger happy over deleting this site. Is he a frustrated person or what? Instead of helping with the critique here, he hammered away with an apparent vendetta. He never offered,kindly to help, he just kept tearing away at the article like a prison guard, only trying as hard as possible to delete this article which i've worked hard on to make an acceptable piece of journalism. The Divine Horsemen have records for sale worldwide and the original pressings of these records are highly priced and prized collector's items online and in store. You can locate the sale sites for these on google at records collector sites. Just type in divine horsemen original pressings for sale in google and you'll see that. The Divine Horsemen have multiple record deals with capitol/enigma, sst, new rose records,atavistic, and have a web site at rollingstone.com under a combined site for the flesheaters/divine horsemen. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.231.39.97 (talk) 18:09, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Lua error: no page name specified; please use |pg=pagename.
UNDELETE_REASON 69.231.39.97 (talk) 17:48, 18 September 2008 (UTC)(69.231.39.97 (talk) 18:20, 18 September 2008 (UTC))
Just letting you know the article is still up and hasn't been redirected. RMHED (talk) 18:38, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
- Well, things are now sorted out despite my having made no less that three successive errors, including deleting the destination. :-) — Coren (talk) 22:31, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
- I would have redirected myself but I wasn't sure if you intended to delete the article and then create the redirect. I think a delete then redirect would be best as otherwise the redirect is likely to be reverted. RMHED (talk) 01:33, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
Thank you
Hi Coren. I would like to thank you for your support in my RfA and the confidence expressed thereby. It is very much appreciated. :) The RfA was closed as successful with 73 supports, 3 opposes and 4 neutral. I would especially like to thank WBOSITG for nominating me. Best wishes and thanks again, —αἰτίας •discussion• 22:34, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Jive Aces deletion
Hi,
You recently closed the discussion on the deletion of The Jive Aces, for which the result was delete. When does it actually get deleted? (Sorry - I'm still fairly new to WP.)
Cheers, Darimoma (talk) 02:25, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
- It should already have been; something apparently went wrong yesterday when I closed debates and some slipped through the cracks. Fixed. — Coren (talk) 02:37, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
- Cheers. Darimoma (talk) 03:11, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
Public housing in the United States copyvio tag
Your bot caught flagged copied content; this occurred during the split of Public housing in the United States from Public housing in the United States and Canada. Removing tags and leaving a note as requested by your bot. Thanks! TheMolecularMan (talk) 02:56, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
What happened to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2008 September 14? Corvus cornixtalk 03:02, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
- Apparently, the AfD closer tool went *boom* and ate it. I just performed an Heimlich on it. — Coren (talk) 03:05, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
- Heh. Cheers. Corvus cornixtalk 03:06, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
The discussion for the RfCUn on User:Message From Xenu assumed that the account would not be used for trolling. It now appears clear that assumption of good faith was misplaced: [1], [2]. user:j (aka justen) 04:32, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
- My point was that the username isn't inappropriate per se, that doesn't mean that the edits aren't blockworthy for disruption. I'm about to leave for work so I don't have the time to look into it right away, but if no other admin intervenes and there is disruption or vandalism I'll handle it sometime later today. — Coren (talk) 12:26, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
Legends In Concert
Wait
Before deleting the Legends In Concert article please view Carolina Opry in Wikipedia. The article about Carolina Opry is very similar to the article I have submitted about Legends In Concert. Legends In Concert can also be cross-referenced in Wikipedia to establish credibility and notability at Imperial Palace Hotel and Casinoarticle under attractions.
Thank you.
Jaiesi (talk) 22:34, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
- No, actually, Wikipedia is not a reliable source sufficient to establish notability. The article isn't going to be deleted for several days while discussion takes place (and improvement to the article is possible; in particular finding good sources to verify the article information would be a requirement). — Coren (talk) 22:37, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
I have added several references to the press comments.
Jaiesi (talk) 02:33, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
- COMMENT RE:"Well, in the first place the fact that an article exists, flaws and all, does not give a free pass to other articles. They all must stand on their own merit. A second detail is that the Governor's price is considerably more notable than one given yearly to dozens of entities by a local newspaper"
What is the "Governor's Price?". I have reviewed The Carolina Opry entry and found nothing relating to a "price", so I don't quite understand your response. Additionally, in the Legends In Concert article I have referenced almost all of the Legends In Concert press comments with verifiable sources directly from the web to establish notoriety and credibility. Many of the press comments I have entered are from credible authors from the likes of The Seattle Times, The Boston Globe, etc. As I review The Carolina Opry, I do not find any directly verifiable references for their press comments or awards.
Thank you for your time and prompt responses as I work to improve the article.
Jaiesi (talk) 13:54, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
River Parishes Community College
The reason this page should not be deleted is because I work for River Parishes Community College and was asked to place our presence on Wikipedia. We are a small community college and we are trying to have our presence expand on the Internet as many other community colleges in the state have done. Many of our students do Internet research on potential schools before actually contacting us, this was another way to have more information on the Internet that we know is accurate and that we can control. I was given permission by administrators at River Parishes Community College to use passages from our general catalog when creating this site.
Thank you,
Julie Sullivan
Itsjep (talk) 23:56, 18 September 2008 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by Itsjep (talk • contribs) 23:50, 18 September 2008 (UTC) 09-18-2008
I have created a different version of the page. Will you please review the new content before deleting this page. Again, if you have any questions please contact me (see the talk page).
Thank you,
Julie Sullivan
Itsjep (talk) 15:26, 19 September 2008 (UTC)(09-19-2008)
Your close of this seems to be based upon your own opinion of the article rather than whether a consensus to delete was established. This seems improper - please reconsider. Colonel Warden (talk) 06:47, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
- As it stood, the article could not meet the notability requirements and the concerns were not addressed despite two relistings (over two weeks). You might want to work up a draft in your userspace, source it properly, and bring the result to deletion review when you're done; the article was deleted because it was not up to par, not because no article could possibly be written that could be. — Coren (talk) 12:30, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
- My understanding of the process, per WP:DGFA, is that the closing admin should evaluate whether there is a consensus to delete and, in cases of doubt, should not do so. So, it's not a matter of the article reaching a given standard but a case of the discussion reaching a sufficient consensus that it should be deleted. It does not seem that we achieved such a consensus due to lack of participation and agreement. Colonel Warden (talk) 12:55, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
- Your understanding is only partially correct. Policy trumps consensus; and while the AfD usually either provides for a quick agreement or the opportunity to address the concerns with the article, the ultimate deciding factor is whether the article is appropriate for the encyclopedia or not. The closing admin's job is to evaluate policy-based arguments, not count raised hands. So yes, it is the matter of the article reaching a given standard and the purpose of the discussion is to determine whether it does and not a vote. — Coren (talk) 14:21, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
- My understanding of the process, per WP:DGFA, is that the closing admin should evaluate whether there is a consensus to delete and, in cases of doubt, should not do so. So, it's not a matter of the article reaching a given standard but a case of the discussion reaching a sufficient consensus that it should be deleted. It does not seem that we achieved such a consensus due to lack of participation and agreement. Colonel Warden (talk) 12:55, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm writing to ask that you please reconsider--at least for the time being--the closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A.C. Ransom. My reason is a simple one: There are a few editors that have been spamming deletions against college football coaches so rapidly that we have not had time to accurately respond. Please review the project listing articles for deletion. We're willing to go with the final consensus, we're just asking for more time to adequately respond.--Paul McDonald (talk) 14:16, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
- I've closed according to the specific AfD, not in the context of a larger discussion. It may well turn out that the consensus goes towards changing the notability guidelines to let those coach articles stand, but whether it does or how long it will take is anyone's guess. I'd be more than happy to undelete en masse if warranted later after discussion but, as it now stands, there is clear agreement that the article doesn't meet the current policy. — Coren (talk) 14:24, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
- Additionally, it has been proposed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alured Ransom to merge the contents of the two articles, and that AfD is still open. Our editors are busy with the current season of college football and have not had the time to address the historical AfDs that have recently popped up... as you say... en masse. Thank you just the same.--Paul McDonald (talk) 18:22, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
- Would you then please move the deleted page to User:Paulmcdonald/A.C. Ransom so that efforts to improve the article can be resumed?--Paul McDonald (talk) 01:06, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
- It's there now; I've disabled the categorizing since it's in userspace. — Coren (talk) 03:34, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you very much!--Paul McDonald (talk) 03:42, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
- It's there now; I've disabled the categorizing since it's in userspace. — Coren (talk) 03:34, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
- Would you then please move the deleted page to User:Paulmcdonald/A.C. Ransom so that efforts to improve the article can be resumed?--Paul McDonald (talk) 01:06, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
- Additionally, it has been proposed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alured Ransom to merge the contents of the two articles, and that AfD is still open. Our editors are busy with the current season of college football and have not had the time to address the historical AfDs that have recently popped up... as you say... en masse. Thank you just the same.--Paul McDonald (talk) 18:22, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia Mirror
FYI it looks like CorenSearchBot has reported a copyright violation based on a site which is a Wikipedia mirror. The article in question is John DiFronzo and the website is http://danpritchard.com/wiki/John_DiFronzo --Megaboz (talk) 15:23, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Ben E. King's "I've Got Songs In My Pocket" page
Sorry, I forgot to edit a line on the I Have Songs In My Pocket page. I copied it from another article I wrote without fixing it for the new album, and I've just changed it. Template removed from the page. =) CycloneGU (talk) 00:04, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
The Fuller Brush Man
This is about the third time your bot has goofed on one of my stubs. Clarityfiend (talk) 06:43, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
The Indian Hunter
"The Indian Hunter" was published before 1842 and is in the public domain. It can't be copyrighted. TradeDayWriter (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 22:02, 20 September 2008 (UTC).
- As a note http://www.pdmusic.org/ is public domain music and should be removed from your bot. TradeDayWriter (talk) 22:08, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Done Added to the list CSBot knows about. — Coren (talk) 17:30, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Re Marie Breen Smyth page
Hi guys, you sent me a message saying that there is great similarity between the Wiki page on Marie Breen-Smyth and that on the Aberystwyth University website. That is because Breen-Smyth has written a lot, and the titles of her books and articles are listed on the Aberystwyth site and are also listed on the Wiki page. I can't do much about the similarity for that reason, and in any case, the titles are all in the public domain. I hope this explains matters to your satisfaction and you can remove the tag on the page. Many thanks martinpking 21st sept 2008 Martinpking (talk) 21:02, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Re: Country Today
Although Country Today and AC Active look similar, the "AC Active" branding was left on the Country Today article by mistake. I have also made modifications and removed the tag. Mbrstooge (talk) 00:53, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
Sorry
I apologize for not contacting you beforehand. I assumed we were waiting until the debate was finished before either leaving things as they were, or switching things around. Bobo. 01:05, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
Green Mountain Inn Article
Understandably and appreciated that web contents are copyrighted by default, but I am posting this article at the behest of the Green Mountain Inn so their history may be more widely shared. Can I put a 'used with permission' disclaimer or shall I simply re-write to exclude the exact quotes from their page?
Tmfradkin (talk) 18:07, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
- Please read the guide to requesting and formalizing permission to use copyrighted works on Wikipedia. Note that, in addition to copyright requirements, the article must still comply with notability guidelines, advertising prohibition and avoid conflicts of interest. — Coren (talk) 22:26, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Petitions
Would you mind pointing me to the conversations where the clerks have made such decisions? thanks. --Joopercoopers (talk) 18:41, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
Tatiana DeMaria deletion... why?
You say that this is not a notable subject to be on Wikipedia, but that to me is kinda silly. Tatiana is the frontwoman of the band TAT who have a page on wikipedia. Why can she not have her own page linking to the TAT one? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Helloyou32 (talk • contribs) 00:54, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
- You may want to read the notability guidelines which give a fairly good overview. In general, notability is not transitive; that is, a member of a notable group is not necessarily notable on their own. — Coren (talk) 22:23, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Re: SikhiWiki
Hi Coren, I notice that you have been petioned by HariSingh to reprogramme your bot not to pick up stuff posted by Sikhiwiki. I strongly recommend you do not reprogramme your bot as Sikhiwiki is a highly controversial site with some questionable material, that is clearly written from a POV. The site have been the the debate of several controversy's and the site editor HariSingh involved in edit wars here. Stick to our NPOV policy and treat Sikhiwiki like any other site. Thanks --Sikh-history (talk) 09:10, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
- The only thing CSBot checks is whether a new page is an obvious copy of a side with an incompatible copyright license. It makes no assessment as to the suitability of the text, and nor should it. In this particular case, the license is compatible and copyright (properly attributed) contents is permissible— that is where the bot's involvement ends. — Coren (talk) 22:22, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
I do not believe album credits can be considered a copyright violation. The opening text is mine, and I didn't write much because I don't have the album, now OOP, in question.--Scottandrewhutchins (talk) 21:59, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
- They generally aren't; but CSBot is much too dumb to analyze contents beyond "does it look the same?" and couldn't make that call. You can simply remove the tag in that case— pages tagged by the bot are examined by human editors in all cases before any further actions are made. — Coren (talk) 22:25, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Sorry to dump this on you, but right now I am on an ancient computer that will explode if I open another window, and you're the first admin whose name was on my watchlist. Could you please take a look at this article, an anon/"segregated account" has tried to AfD it and the AfD is malformed. I don't much care whether you fix the AfD or delete it, but it needs to be cleaned up one way or the other. Thanks. Risker (talk) 23:01, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks again for handling that. Risker (talk) 00:39, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
- Wasn't particularly hard; whatever the point of the nomination was, the probability of the article being deleted stood somewhere between epsilon and zero. :-) — Coren (talk) 00:42, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Deletion review for Essjay controversy
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Essjay controversy. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Segragate account (talk) 00:48, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Deletion for Cogito,ego sum
The article about "Cogito, ergo sum". In fact, the real sentence for this Latin shall be "Cogito, ego sum". So, that's why I created "Cogito , Ego sum" article from pasting from "Cogito, Ergo sum". So, if i couldn't do it, then please re-edit the title "cogito, ergo sum" to the correct sentence "cogito,ego sum" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johan11131982 (talk • contribs) 02:35, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
For help
Hello! The administor VS asked me to note to other Admins. It happened that I found you and I invite you help to solve the dispute/problem about the article Gaogouli County if you are interested and have time. Reference: http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism&oldid=240660700. Thanks! -Dicting (talk) 11:57, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Do you think it'd be a problem...
I know you're not the one who unblocked last, but you are the one who made the suggestion for conditions surrounding an unblock, so I'm asking you:
Do you think it'd be a problem if I posted on WT:ASSESS with a question regarding the assessment process? I could ask someone to post it there for me, but then if I have further questions that the reply raises, it can get rather cumbersome. I realize that this is rather soon after the block was lifted and I agreed to the conditions, but it's a question that arises from something I've been planning on doing with Lyles Station, Indiana for a couple of weeks now. That particular page isn't exactly one of the more contentious project-space areas anyway, I figure. Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 19:02, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
- It's not; but frankly I think you'd be asking for trouble. Even if your actual post is the least controversial possible, there will be hordes with the pitchforks and the torches waiting for you. How about I post your initial question but make it explicit that follow up should be directed at your user talk?
- I know the prohibition away from project space is an inconvenience, but I really think it's best you stick closely to it for the time being. — Coren (talk) 22:17, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
- Just my opinion, but I see no reason why Kurt should be prohibited from editing a project page when it's purely in regards to an article (the same way Kurt would be able to participate in an afd of an article he's involved with). Seraphim♥Whipp 22:47, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
- Perhaps, but you have to remember that this is, ultimately, a compromise meant to quiet down a fairly acrimonious dispute. Adding exceptions post facto or tweaking around it so early will be perceived as a sign of bad faith regardless of the motives behind it. — Coren (talk) 22:53, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
- I guess. It does seem to stand in the way of allowing Kurt to build an encyclopedia though, since he's unblocked, accepted your terms and asked politely about a quiet corner of the wiki. I suppose you're right though. Seraphim♥Whipp 23:51, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
- Perhaps, but you have to remember that this is, ultimately, a compromise meant to quiet down a fairly acrimonious dispute. Adding exceptions post facto or tweaking around it so early will be perceived as a sign of bad faith regardless of the motives behind it. — Coren (talk) 22:53, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
- Just my opinion, but I see no reason why Kurt should be prohibited from editing a project page when it's purely in regards to an article (the same way Kurt would be able to participate in an afd of an article he's involved with). Seraphim♥Whipp 22:47, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
That would work...here it is:
What is the process for requesting an article be re-evaluated after significant changes have been made? I was thinking of just removing the assessment grade from the talk page template so that it'd show up in the relevant "unassessed" category, but I wanted to make sure there wasn't a better way first. Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 14:49, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks! Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 14:49, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Bad call
Bad copy-vio alert in [7]. Note string "wikipedia" in URL of supposed "source" site, which you could check for. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 21:45, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Petition
Yes please, I'd like an on-wiki summary for the thinking, or if you would publish the contents of that part of the mailing list, I'd be very grateful (I can't imagine there's anything confidential in those discussion). The point of course, is transparency of decision making. Cheers. --Joopercoopers (talk) 09:21, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Sky Angel
I added new Sky Angel and one of them are Adult Movie. But I'm just create disambiguation. --Landavia (talk) 13:00, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Justin Bindley
You deleted my entry on the presumption that I had copied wholesale from justinbindley.tripod. This is MY own official website and I own the copyright for all content. PLease remember I am not able to supply a different profile and career information for each seperate site, and therefore I copied it from MY website. Therefore please re-enstate my entry, as I have clearly shown you that I own and was the originator of all material added to my page which you so swiftly deleted.
regards
Justin Bindley Baritone Profesor de canto —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jusboy7 (talk • contribs) 19:06, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
RfA
There are replies at my RfA to your oppose. iMatthew (talk) 16:22, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
- Re: Matt Lee - this is a new article with some parts from an old one. It has new refs and has many omissions from the original form.(Joeyboyee (talk) 18:09, 27 September 2008 (UTC))
Cars Toons
I found the article on Disney Channel Media Net | http://www.disneychannelmedianet.com/ and it shows that Cars Toons is an official short series.
I'm going to make an article page for it. Is that OK? Thanks :D. - Alec2011 (talk) 20:02, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
Speech to the Electors of Bristol
This is a speech of a British Parliamentarian from 1774 and is therefore not under any copyrights as stated by British Law that all Parliament documents are Public Domain 50 years after being published.
Dotsonbk (talk) 23:58, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
San Diego Russian School article block
Hi. I recently added an article called San Diego Russian School. After that, I was told by CorenSearchBot that I had violated copyright law. Part of the text is indeed copied from the website stated, which is the San Diego Russian School website. I manage that website, and have permission from the authors of the text to put it on Wikipedia. I'd appreciate it if you could authorize the page.
Thanks so much! --Maximz2005 (Talk) 00:38, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
Hello again. Thanks for your quick response. I've removed the _NOEDITSECTION!
OK, would you like me to follow the guide that you linked to or can you just authorize the page as I have permission to release this text to the public domain. Thanks! --Maximz2005 (Talk) 00:45, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
The image I used is from my scanner and not amazon.Sposato (talk) 11:26, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
The Wreck of the Nancy Lee
I've had an automated message from Coren saying that my entry on this song may violate copyright. I don't think this can be the case since only the chorus of the song is actually given, and the song is an old traditional shanty to which, as far as I'm aware, no one holds copyright. Please consider leaving the page active. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sgouveia (talk • contribs) 13:59, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
Brink (surname)
Well, yes, duplication. Brink (surname) has material i am moving from Brink, and the external site you are concerned about appears to have copied content from WP. Details at talk:Brink (surname)#Corenbot template, and further facts per German source.
Perhaps you're already building a list of sites that copy our content, and won't keep complaining when we move it around inside WP? Thanks for what you're doing!
--Jerzy•t 03:54, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Deletion review for Matt Lee (musician)
An editor has asked for another deletion review of Matt Lee (musician). Since you closed the 13 September 2008 AfD#2 discussion, you might want to participate in the deletion review. -- Suntag ☼ 21:15, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Carla Hilderbrand
My article on Carla Hilderbrand appears to be deleted. I believe there were two potential problems: 1. use of information from Carla's site, and 2. impartiality. I wish say: the information I used from her site are facts about her performances, not a copy of the text on her site.
I do not know how to address the issue of impartiality----of course, I am not impartial, if I didn't care about her career, I would not even write the piece. I do know her, but so do many people in the Pacific Northwest. I have included quotes from reviews, which show her professional status. Please let me know if there are other questions you may have. I would like the article to be posted, and I am glad to live within the Wiki Rules....I am not sure where I went wrong, or how to fix it.
Best regards, Charles Berry, Seattle. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Berrycomposer (talk • contribs) 23:05, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Center for Court Innovation
I moved the content of "Center for court innovation" to "Center for Court Innovation" because the article should have initial capitals. Center for Court Innovation is a proper name. Center520 (talk) 21:16, 30 September 2008 (UTC)