Jump to content

User talk:ReaderofthePack/Archive 19

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 15←Archive 17Archive 18Archive 19Archive 20Archive 21→Archive 25

June 2015

Information icon Welcome to Wikipedia. At least one of your recent edits, such as the edit you made to Adam Bogdan, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at the welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make some test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. TeaLover1996 Talk to me ☏ 13:21, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)lol! I'm sure she will, Tea Lover, one way or another Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 15:31, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
  • No, they weren't test edits. I was asked to protect the page by another editor since people were pre-emptively adding team information to Bogdán's article. The reason why some of my edits (the addition of a protection template) were reverted was because I'd edited a version that had the wrong information on the page. That information was removed by JHamo and in the process it ended up reverting my edits as well. While this might have looked suspicious at first, they were not unconstructive edits and as such, putting this template on my page was unwarranted. I think that you meant well, but you do need to be careful about adding this template without checking to make sure that this should be added. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:38, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Block evasion

Please block the obvious sock Againt frustrated chauvinist slovak IP (talk · contribs). This account restored info added by the previous socks Invetorlist (talk · contribs) and Inventiorlist (talk · contribs). 213.229.69.40 (talk) 06:00, 13 June 2015 (UTC) 213.229.69.40 (talk) 06:01, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Apologies

Please accept my sincere apologies, when I saw that 3 of your edits were reverted I presumed you had done wrong, without checking what and why they were reverted, I jumped to conclusions, and I am sorry for that, in the future before adding warnings to talk pages, I'll check the edits and why they were reverted. Thank You. TeaLover1996 Talk to me ☏ 07:52, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

@TeaLover1996: Eh, no worries. :) Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:27, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
Thank you for your help with my students this semester! HullIntegrity\ talk / 13:13, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

ED?

My apologies about the ED page, that was the other rapper in the group. Homosexual Compound is a legitimate, non-satire group.

I'm assuming i'm not aloud to re-add the page? I do have references this time.

Thank you for the info as well, sorry for the misunderstanding. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zazier (talk • contribs) 17:35, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Is it alright if I request someone to do an english translation of this article?

Hello, I wanted to request an english translation of this article: https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/ClassDojo. However, when I checked to see if there was a translated, I found that the page had been deleted by you: wiki.riteme.site/wiki/ClassDojo because of somekind of ban of an editor. Is still alright to request at least a translation of this article into english? While ClassDojo is a very notiable in Spain, it used starting to be a few teachers in the US. How can I request a translation? 162.242.9.16 (talk) 02:19, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Sure, I don't mind. I do need to give you one slight warning, though: the page has a history of being connected with a very well known sockpuppet so some of the translators may be quite hesitant to translate as a result. I will say that if you can translate it you can always sign up with an account and translate it yourself, although odds are high that you'll likely get a perfunctory check to make sure that you're not the same person avoiding a ban. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:31, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

FSoG Franchise proposal

Hi,

It was handful receiving an email saying that my article had been declined then accepted. I got quite confused. I am aware about the theft, but I hadn't been able to add the new content. As for your proposal for the Fifty Shades of Grey series, I am in! I had initially made Draft:Fifty Shades (film series), but I was told to only submit it once the second movie had been released, and that's it in two years. Regardless, I'd be more than happy to contribute into creating the franchise article. Callmemirela (Talk) ♑ 16:17, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

  • I wonder if I should style it after the Harry Potter pages? One for the book series, one for the film series? It may be too soon slightly for the film series. Hmm... I think I'll go with the one about the franchise and just let it get figured out from there. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:41, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
  • The decline for the film series page doesn't entirely make sense since I'd say that the film series page could go live as soon as filming for the second film has officially begun. The rationale for that is that we can have pages on un-released films if principal filming has begun, so it stands to reason that a page on the film series could go live at the same time. Filming is supposed to start this month, so as soon as that starts I'd say that the film series page could be created. I'm going to shelve a page on the franchise for now since we already have a page for the trilogy in favor of working on a page for the second film. (Plus it looks like the standard here is to have separate pages on the film series and the book series and not a franchise page.) You've already got a lion's share of the work on that done with the film series page so we should be able to port a lot of the information over. Sorry if some of this sounds a bit disorganized- it's sort of the way my thought processes go when I'm working on new pages. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:56, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Damn woman. 6 replies within 4 hours lmao. Yes, it is a bit disorganized :P Let me answer reply by reply. I don't remember who told me, or how, about publishing the film series article, but I do remember them saying to only publish it once the second film had been released. I reluctantly agreed to it and I update the article whenever there are big chunks of information available instead of wasting time going one source to another. I totally understand about the franchise article. It was fun for a moment there :P "Lion's share of the work"? I suppose that's good? Hahah Callmemirela (Talk) ♑ 20:50, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank You

Thank you for Putting Mouseheart are going to do the Characters of Mouseheart. and Thank for putting The Mouse with the Question Mark Tail When are you going to put the Characters and Plot onThe Mouse with the Question Mark Tail and Secrets at Sea. When? 90731fly (talk) 05:47, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

  • I'm not, although you can feel free to add these if you wish. I was more just working on the pages to show enough notability to where the pages would not be deleted since I knew that the pages were notable. I left you a long message about this on your talk page. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:48, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Sorry I just wanted to make sure everything ok. Bye? 90731fly (talk) 05:57, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Sankatmochan Mahabali Hanuman

The page is deleted by you as ‎"(G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement of {{{url}}})", I don't know who added copyright content, so please restore and check all edits, and hide the copyright content edits. Chander 17:48, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

  • I'd checked and it's in most of the past edits. It was honestly just easier to delete the history and just recreate it with the sources that had been in the article, minus the copyrighted content. The only ones that didn't have copyvio were the first 1-3 versions that only had about a sentence's worth of content. Other than bragging rights as to who created the article, there's really no reason to restore the article history. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:45, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
No, That's not a good reason to delete all good edits (edits with no copyright material). You are an admin so please do hard work like an admin Wizardman, please see this. Chander 15:10, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
  • It's ultimately up to the admin. If the copyvio goes back far enough and the only other edits are extremely small (ie, almost no content) and are fairly few in number then it's not a big thing to delete the complete article history. However I need to point out that while you're arguing for keeping an article's history you've also turned the page into a redirect that leads to a new page (with a new spelling) that you've created with the cut/paste of the other article's history. This really gives off the extremely strong impression that what you wanted wasn't to have the history intact but rather you wanted to be given credit as the creator of the page. (If the article's history was that important, why not move the article and continue to argue your point? Moving the article would move the prior article history that should include the deleted history as well.) In other words, all you were looking for were bragging rights and not really a complete edit history. I had a strong suspicion that this was ultimately all you wanted and your actions have proven this. If you'd just been open about this then I'd have been OK with that. I don't personally care terribly much about article creation bragging rights since that isn't really all that important on Wikipedia, but I know that some find this extremely important and there's not really anything wrong with that. A little tip for the future though: just be honest about what it is that you want. If you want the bragging rights of having created the article then just say that this is what you want. Most admins don't care since like I said, who created what is ultimately not all that important (although be careful that you don't fall into WP:OWN territory). What we do care about is when people try to hide what it is that they really want and argue from another standpoint when they couldn't care less about that particular standpoint. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:30, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

USA Best Book Awards

Hi Tokyogirl79, I have just come across the above awards by i310 Media Group ([1]). Although they don't appear to have a wikiarticle, would being a winner or a finalist be okay for an article's notability or should we just treat it as a bit of industry cruft? thanks Coolabahapple (talk) 11:50, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Coolabahapple, no- they're considered to be a vanity/scam award and they're even listed in the vanity award article. They've sank in the public eye because they've become fairly well known as a scam in the literary circuit, partially thanks to this Salon article and this blog article at Writer Beware by Victoria Strauss, but every once in a while I'll see them pop up on Wikipedia. Hmm... this might actually be something worth covering at the books WP and NAUTHOR/NBOOK guidelines since vanity awards will frequently come up at AfD often enough to where searching is necessary. Writer Beware is considered to be fairly definitive (and would be a RS in my opinion) since it's sponsored by multiple writing associations. I know that they have a list up of bad publishers, but I don't know if they have one for awards. I'll have to ask them since that'd be invaluable to have. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:51, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi Tokyogirl79, thanks for the heads up.Coolabahapple (talk) 05:47, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Question about 'Good Articles'

Can very short articles be GA? After one claim is referenced or removed I think the Adi Hasak article might qualify in so much as everything will be sourced and it covers all available information. I also hope that the prospect of it being a GA might temper its COI editor's desire to add un-referenced material while still giving him a certain 'feel-good' factor. There is not much on the subject but ultimately I think he is notable enough. I would also like to get a feel for getting some of the short marginal topic articles we have up to some standard. Cheers. JbhTalk 18:31, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

  • JBH: Nah, the expectation is that GA will be more substantial than what's currently in the article. One of the criteria is that it also has to be stable, which isn't really the case here with the COI editor edit warring with you in the past few days. He isn't so bad that I'd outright block him, but unless he shapes up I think that he's cruising for a 24/48 hour warning block. I'll leave a stern warning on his talk page about all of this. I don't know if he realizes that he can get blocked for this or not. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:21, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Looking at his edits, I wouldn't give it GA quality just to pacify someone who is clearly here to promote someone/himself. I've left him a stern warning and if he does this again, I'm blocking him. If he keeps it up and doesn't use the talk page, it'll become permanent. I'll drop a note at WP:FILM asking for people to come and take a look at the page to judge notability. I'd also probably recommend getting User:DGG to take a look as well. He's strict, but if DGG thinks he passes notability guidelines then that's as good of a seal of approval as any. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:41, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
    Thank you for the advice and help. I was near the point where I should check myself to make sure I ]am editing for the article rather than against the editor - kind of a mental reset plus an attempt to find a way to co-opt the COI editor into cooperation. Thanks for bringing the subject up with WP:FILM, I hadn't thought of that. I will drop a note to DGG if no one pops over from WP:FILM. Have a good weekend. Cheers. JbhTalk 11:28, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
I have, just like Tokyogirl79, increasingly been encountering COI editors complaining that I have rated their article Start, or C. It seems that some paid editors are paid higher if their work becomes a GA. I don't think any paid editor, declared or undeclared, should ever be offering this, not even a fully declared paid editor, as they're offering what they alone are not able to fulfill and what will depend on the work of others, whom they have no right to enlist for their pecuniary benefit. Any COI editor with any form of COI should not be insisting on it: they should be pointed to the criteria, and told to edit the article as best they can, in accordance with them, and let it be judged by the community. One thing that can be fairly said to any editor, is that additional good pertinent 3rd party sources will help any article.
And I really think that in any case, including voluntary good faith editing, an author of an article should leave quality rating up to other people, and limit themselves to taking account of the suggested improvements. It's a little futile in our environment to be overly attached to any particular article.
As for notability, being screenwriter on two notable films is I think enough. The article should have rbe re-focused on what he has done already, because that is notable, not on what he has done for a film that won;t be released until 2016. Any non promotional editor would have done that; organizing an article to highlight the latest work, especially forthcoming work, is in my experience an almost certain sign of promotional intent. DGG ( talk ) 20:10, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
@DGG: Thank you for the input. The only reason I thought about GA was I thought that might be a way to get the creator of the article to focus on solid sourcing and good writing and to give me some experience in the process. It has been a battle to get un-sourced biographical material out of the article and to get RS references in. Mostly I thought, if such short articles could qualify, getting the other editor (who says he is the subject's son) on board with GA might de-escalate the situation over there.

A couple of other editors have shown up to work on the article and I think my removal of the prospective Eyewitness script has stuck. Again, thank you for your help. It looks like the next thing for me to learn here is how the article assessment system works. PS I really wish the requirements for articles went sourcing --> notability rather than the other way around. No sources == No article. And for my next wish.... world peace! :) JbhTalk 20:44, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

deleted eby page

dear tokyogirl79 hello! :-) you have deleted my page Eby G. Friedman due to G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion: G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement of http://www.ece.rochester.edu/~friedman/

so i wanted to clear a few thing so that my page could be up again and also ask a few question

this page is a biography of Eby G. Friedman and it has been given to me by the dean of the department of computer science in my university. it is a gift to Eby G. Friedman ,for his long and important help for the departments of electronics and computer science in our university. the site http://www.ece.rochester.edu/~friedman/ is his! and he accepted to receive this gift

so why is there problem with copywrite ?and why is it advertising?

thank you ! :-) Gal lilos (talk) 13:15, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

@Gal lilos: Just to clear up any misunderstanding: Tokyogirl didn't delete the page(s). I just recommended her in case you need some further advice as she knows a lot more about copyright than I do. Tokyogirl, hope you don't mind :) --TMCk (talk) 14:13, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

@The Magnificent Clean-keeper:@Tokyogirl79: guys. this page is important (not only for Eby G. Friedman and my university.but also for me to finish my degree!! :-) ) so please tell me what i need to do to restore this page corectly. thank you very much! Gal lilos (talk) 19:16, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

@The Magnificent Clean-keeper:@Tokyogirl79: --TMCkUser:tokyogirl79 dear mr TMCk i see that tokyogirl179 is the one who deleted my page!! if not please tell me to whom should i talk Gal lilos (talk) 10:54, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Gal lilos, I did delete the page but I was not the one who tagged it. What you will need to do is re-write the article in your own words without any promotional tones. Regardless of whether or not this is needed for graduation Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted or promotional materials. It may actually be even more important that you write this in your own words since cut and pasting or closely paraphrasing the source material can be seen as plagiarism- something that will earn you a zero (and possible disciplinary action) at almost all educational facilities. You can re-create the page, but you should not post copyrighted material. I also have to note that I'm also more than a little leery of the fact that you were asked to create this by the college and that they made it a requirement for your graduation. That seems a little bit like your school is extorting you since it sounds like they will not pass you if the article is not on Wikipedia. In other words they weren't looking for an attempt (ie, showing that you got experience) but an article itself and unfairly punishing you if the article is not kept for whatever reason. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 11:05, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Now as far as copyright goes you can always get the school to file a ticket through WP:ORTS that would give Wikipedia permission to use the material but even so it would still be promotional, which would also keep it from being used. It reads too much like a CV (ie, trying to show how great he is) than a neutral article- the entire research summary section is pretty unambiguously promotional. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 11:06, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Basically, Wikipedia articles should not be given as a gift nor should the absence of a page be grounds for not passing someone. A class that uses Wikipedia as a tool should take into consideration that they can be removed for various different reasons- notability, promotion, copyright violations, and so on. Like I said above, I have no problem with you re-creating the page in your own words, although offhand you will need to provide better sourcing since everything was WP:PRIMARY. In order to show notability per WP:PROF you will need to show how he's notable outside of his own college. Publishing things is not enough by itself to show notability, nor would holding patents. Also something to take in mind is that not all awards are considered to be noteworthy on Wikipedia because there are so many awards out there. A common saying is that if you took all of the awards that were ever given for any accomplishment (from Nobel Prizes to Newberry Medals) only about 5% of them would be considered the type that would give even partial notability. Of that 5%, less than 1% would give notability. That doesn't mean that the awards aren't difficult to receive or impressive, just that Wikipedia is pretty strict about this sort of thing. I'm not saying that he is non-notable (him being a fellow with IEEE alone makes him pass WP:PROF), just that you will need to find better sourcing for any future incarnations of the article or it will run the risk of getting deleted due to a lack of notability even if you fix the copyvio and tone issues. Any claims that are not sourced are typically removed in articles, so if the IEEE fellowship isn't sourced and that gets removed and there's nothing else in the article that would pass notability guidelines, then the article is at risk for deletion. Again, not saying that there aren't things that would make him notable, mostly I'm just trying to show how important it is to properly source things and to write things properly- this is something you will absolutely need to know how to do in a professional setting if you choose to say, write a paper for an academic journal. (You'll likely have some leeway with promotional prose to a degree since some non-NPOV tone is allowable, but most journals really want to make sure that you properly source material and do not take material from other places without proper attribution!) Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 11:26, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Tokyogirl79 ok. thank you for the elaborated answer .but i have a problem i need the page i wrote. since it has alot of changes i did can i have it in beck in my sandbox? i had alot of work on it.this is more then "copy paste" from other website! tnx Gal lilos (talk) 12:14, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Since some of it was closely paraphrased it's still considered to be a copyright violation and as such I cannot restore it. I can, however, e-mail you a copy if you enable this in your user account. I would recommend that you not re-add the information that was taken from other sources, though. I would also recommend that you get your college to file a ticket through WP:ORTS that gives the site permission to use material from the official page, since that would give you some wiggle room on material that you can't really rephrase without it coming across like possible copyvio. I still have to stress that it's important to re-write the material in your own words since pages that heavily take material from other sources are frequently targeted as promotional and WP:COI pages. I've had experiences with fairly neutrally written pages where it was actually more work to deal with incoming editors accusing the page of bias due to the use of copyrighted text than it was if I'd just re-written everything. (And it ended up that everything was re-written anyway, at which point the page was left to its own devices.) Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 13:22, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Tokyogirl79 i will do as you say.and get the permission as you say.because i want this page to stay forever :-) i will be happy to recieve it by mail. what do you mean enable the user acount is it not enabled? TNX Gal lilos (talk) 17:29, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

  • I checked and you have e-mail enabled.
    BTW, my comment above is confusing, just as I was early that morning. I had referred them to Moonriddengirl and didn't realize they posted here.--TMCk (talk) 22:13, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Tokyogirl79 tnx! got it. ill fix every thing. if i want to post it can i give it to you for review? Gal lilos (talk) 19:39, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Diary of a Chav

Day-um! You beat me to the punch =D!

Any ways; Hi Tokyogirl79, It's Kandiwell I hope you don't mind but I'm going to help out on that article; I've started and have been out in the sun all day and feel exhausted and just wanna crawl in a nice cold area of my house and sleep; I've upload the photo of all six of the books to the article and I am starting to write a synopsis for all the books (so far started writing 'bout Trainers V. Tiaras but I will do some more tomorrow and possibly Saturday - all depends on the weather as I hate being out in the sun using my iPhone or iPad and the sun reflecting on it.)

Hope you don't mind just thought I'd let you know what's what really and just to be friendly and would like to suggest if you want to get the books get them you'd enjoy them (if you're like me 22 and still enjoys reading them) but in all honesty they are a good laugh and funny some of the lines in the book will have you crying with laughter (especially in Too Cool for School) Kandiwell 21:07, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Yes please! I haven't read the books so I was kind of going by the summaries. I'd added one or two bits to them that tend to be the standard of any YA novel/series (ie, overcoming obstacles), so I'd really appreciate help from someone who has read them. I have to admit, they sound like a lot of fun - I got some "teenage Bridget Jones" type of vibes as far as the humor goes, so the books sound right up my alley. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:15, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
  • You'd love it; if I was you and this is my honest opinion I'd buy them off of the Amazon.co.uk website (it might cost a tiny bit more in postage if you don't live in the UK/Channel Islands) and if I was to be honest if it's out of sync don't read until you've read Trainers V. Tiaras it is a good read and I think you will enjoy it Kandiwell 16:24, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
  • I'll probably do that- I know that once I get started on series I want to finish them. I've got an account with Amazon UK - I ended up getting a book from an English author from there since I didn't want to wait for the US release. (Argh... the wait for books while they edit the text to replace the UK references with US equivalents is just frustrating!) If I can recommend an author, I'd recommend D. Rus, if you like sci-fi/fantasy books. He's got this series called Play to Live that's surprisingly good. I'm actually mildly surprised at how little coverage it's getting in English. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:21, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Let me know once you've got them and I didn't realise that they changed some of the UK references when a book goes to America (would love to have seen what they would've done for Keeping it Real as she name checks both Mariah Carey and her song I Stay in Love) and I've got a book I'd like to recommend to you; Jan Lowe Shinebourne's The Last Ship one of my best mates is a post man and he delivers to her and she signed a copy of the book for him Kandiwell 21:30, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Dariusz Zawislak

I would like to create new article about this person please unlock this topic. Best OKD — Preceding unsigned comment added by Okejdokej (talk • contribs) 09:40, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

  • I don't have any true opposition to this, mostly I'd just like for you to give better evidence for notability. Your sources were pretty much entirely WP:PRIMARY or were linked to places that cannot be used as a source to show notability, such as a random YouTube video. (YT is not a good thing to link to in articles since many are not uploaded by the person who owns the rights to the content, making it a potential copyright violation.) Also, please do not put the film posters on his article. The thing about film posters is that copyright laws only allow us to use them in the infobox for the article about the films - they cannot be used anywhere else unless the person who owns the rights gives them up as fair use. It also doesn't entirely help that using them all can sometimes come across a little promotional or at the very least, makes the page look and feel pretty cluttered. I'd also like to ask that if you speak/read Polish, that you help look for sources on his other films since so far the coverage for them as a whole is actually pretty light. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:40, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Appeals without talk page access

Hi Tokyogirl79. You recently left a message message for a blocked use who had talk page access revoked. info-en is OTRS, and is not a suitable appeals venue. Instead, it would be better to direct such users to UTRS, and failing that, BASC. LFaraone 17:24, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Jason Adelman - Undelete

Hi again, I wanted to make sure you received my message I just sent to your inbox. Please let me know if that will suffice and look at the last edited page of me as there are sources for everything which was the main concern. Before Karina I was on here for a decade...please let me know what else, besides today I can add so you can restore I'll do whatever it takes..if I need to post the last article somewhere else let me know. Thanks again I really appreciate you and your hard work! Robot19332 (talk) 13:01, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Robot19332, ultimately this will have to go through deletion review at WP:DRV. The only person who could have restored this was the administrator who closed the request and he has declined to do this. I didn't see anything in my e-mail inbox as far as sources go, so you may have to send it again. However I will say that if you can, try to see if these sources are ones that you can post to DRV since that'll make it easier for everyone to verify. If they're sources that aren't currently on the Internet that can't entirely be helped, but you can still send the sources to someone. I'll take them if you want to try to send them to me again, although I'll openly say that I'm not sure if you can send attachments via e-mail. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:38, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Jason Adelman

Hi it's Jason again. I sent the sources on your talk to you page. However , if it's easier if you can look at the page before it was removed there are active sources for everything. Or please tell me where to send them exactly . Can I email them to you? My email is jadelman1977@gmail.com or whatever is easier... Robot19332 (talk) 03:54, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Great Ipadcover777 (talk) 09:58, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Co-op Pilot Results & Mentoring

Hey there! The Co-op has been on a hiatus for a bit, but we are planning on opening up shop again soon. When you're able, please read over and respond to this update on our talk page. We have favorable results from our final report regarding the pilot, and we are interested in seeing who is available to mentor when we reopen our space and begin to send out invites again. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:16, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

This message was sent by I JethroBT (talk · contribs) via Mass Message. (Opt-out instructions)

Methods for the timely replacement of cartridges in respirators deletion

Dear Tokyogirl79, You supported the proposal to delete Methods for the timely replacement of cartridges in respirators. This article has been significantly changed. If You think that this change is not enough to save the article, please indicate the specific reason for the removal, or to indicate that still requires improvement. Please help - I am not a Wikipedian, and could not find a place to discuss articles that are put up for deletion. Thank You very much. AlexChirkin (talk) 10:30, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

  • AlexChirkin, the problem with this is that it ultimately looks like it's a personal essay/academic article that was posted on to Wikipedia and as such, has several sections that look like original research. This is fine in some outlets and if it was an academic journal it wouldn't be so bad, but it's not really an encyclopedia article. You draw a lot of your own conclusions in the article. You use sources, but ultimately this is sort of your own personal research on the topic. There's also the problem that there's already an article on respirators and this sort of just goes into more detail on things that are already sort of covered in that article. This brings up another concern: did you post any of this content anywhere else or is any of the material closely paraphrased from somewhere else? I got a strong feeling that this was the case, which would make it a potential copyright violation. To be honest, I'm not really sure what can really be done to this article at this point in time to make it fit the standards for an encyclopedia article since this was ultimately written in the style of a student/academic paper. You'd pretty much have to start from scratch with this. I can move it to your userbox (if you're interested) and you can work on culling material from there for a new article. The things to remember are as follows:
  1. It must be written in an encyclopedic format, which is dramatically different from a personal paper. The biggest difference is that you can make your own opinions/original research (WP:OR) with papers whereas you cannot with an encyclopedia - everything must have already been said in a reliable source and it must not be written in a fashion that gives off the impression that this is your own personal take on things. This doesn't mean that your OR is wrong, but it's still considered OR.
  2. You need to show how the topic of respirator cartridge replacement would merit its own article separate from the main article. This is a pretty big issue since the article for respirators is already pretty expansive. Is it already covered in the article? If not, can it be added? Remember: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that gives a general overview of things and as such, does not go into extremely specific detail. If this is already generally covered at the main article for respirators then odds are that it likely doesn't need to go into any more detail. I say "likely" since you may still be able to justify some more information.
I'll be pretty honest in that I don't really think that all of this information needs to be in the main article for respirators (although you could probably merge a little) and I don't entirely think that it would merit its own independent article. Many of the sources in the article have to do with general respirators and there isn't a lot there that specifically goes into cartridge replacement methods outside of the regular coverage you'd get in manuals, mentions in articles about overall respirators, and the like. What you need to show is how replacing cartridges is independently notable outside of cartridges (much like how someone would have to show that a specific respirator is notable outside of the general discussion) and you'd have to have an article written in encyclopedic detail. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 12:58, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

I'm beginning to understand You. But there is a problem.

1. You write that I did my own research and You suspect that I have violated copyrights. This was a surprise to me, since almost all the material taken from open Western sources, and mainly from textbooks NIOSH (1987 and 2004), which are public domain, and that are written in the same (English) language. More detailed information about ESLI is in the (English) documents: G. Favas, End of Service Life Indicator (ESLI) for Respirator Cartridges. & Integration of Sensor Technologies into Respirator Vapor Cartridges as End-of-Service-Life Indicators: Literature and Manufacturer's Review and Research Roadmap. Of course, You may not be familiar with NIOSH books in detail, but if You look them up, You can see that "my findings" are a repetition of the opinions of specialists NIOSH. It's hard for me to look at it from the side, because the experts NIOSH has allowed to use these books, and I translated them (and other documents) into Russian. Maybe need to make more references - for example, in each phrase, and to specify the page numbers in the source?

2. The placement of this information in the main article. I believe that this should not be done, because the main article becomes very large, and as will be "not convenient" to make links from the article Gas mask, for example. And those experts who developed the methods of replacement cartridges, usually studied the cartridges separately from the respirator.

3. Information from open Western sources was used earlier in the article in Russian. Because of the similarity of the themes, it was similar with an article in the RuWikipedia. But we received permission to "use" this article: {{permission OTRS|source=http://ohranatruda.ru/ot_biblio/articles/147204/|2013042410005972}}. AlexChirkin (talk) 15:20, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

  • If the copyright isn't a problem then that does solve that particular issue, although I do need to specify that each Wikipedia is different with their rules. You can't say that something was OK in the Russian Wikipedia so it should be OK here. I'd highly recommend that you refile this ticket through the English language Wikipedia's ORTS, since I'm not sure if a ticket filed in Russia would necessarily be valid on the English Wikipedia. As I said above, each language Wikipedia is different in their rules- partially because there are different laws in each country when it comes to copyright issues. In the same tone, each Wikipedia is also different in what they consider to be acceptable as far as tone, notability, and such goes. Just because something was put on the Russian Wikipedia does not automatically mean that it will be approved for the English Wikipedia. This article still reads like original research and if I picked up on it then others are likely to pick up on this as well- especially if they were to think that this was copyvio from somewhere. The unsaid thing about copyvio is that even when Wikipedia has permission or the material is open source, re-writing the article becomes inevitable. I've worked with multiple articles where people contributed text that was wholly neutral and encyclopedic in tone, only for the material to constantly be bombarded with various tags (OR, promotional, copyvio, etc). It actually ended up that myself and a few others had to re-write the material from scratch because it was the only way to keep the article from being targeted.
In any case, I still think that this article needs to be re-written to remove the student/academic paper tone. I'm not going to change my opinion on that. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:42, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello

I think you deleted a template page that I created citing G7 as the reason. I don't remember requesting that the template be deleted and I am the author. It was called WikiProject Women's health invite. It was deleted on 6/13. I just got to the message informing me of its deletion. I probably can do without the template because I have kept a copy of the wikicode that produces the image and can just cut and paste that, but I was wondering why it was deleted? Best Regards,

  Bfpage |leave a message  18:30, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Acid rap

Gotta say he's persistent. [2] And inventive. Don't think I've ever seen an RFC added to ANI. --NeilN talk to me 18:21, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

LA EigaFest and Japan Film Society

Hello Tokyogirl,

This is Generic345, please separate LA EigaFest and Japan Film Society into two separate wikis. I believe you made it harder for people to understand between one being a film festival and the organization behind it. I do have more links for LA EigaFest and Japan Film Society http://www.scifijapan.com/articles/2009/12/02/mothra-night-at-sony-studios/

http://www.scifijapan.com/articles/2009/10/01/blood-the-last-vampire-%E2%80%93-free-screening-in-monterey-park-ca/

http://cinema.usc.edu/events/event.cfm?id=12385

http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/press-release/2009-11-30/japan-film-society-presents-the-winter-shorts-at-the-royalt-cafe

to prove they are both notable and need seperate pages that should be link

thank you for getting rid of the Japanese Film Society page, that was an accident as the real name is Japan Film Society — Preceding unsigned comment added by Genericusername345 (talk • contribs) 02:18, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Genericusername345, I'm sorry but I am not going to do that. The problem here is that the group and the film festival both have issues with notability, enough to where I'd argue that neither really has enough notability on their own to merit individual pages. That left a choice: either let both articles be deleted for a lack of notability (since it's likely that the film festival page would have been next) or merge them into one article that contains information about both that could possibly squeak by notability guidelines. You can separate them, but I wouldn't recommend it. That'd almost certainly be a death sentence for the article about the organization since the film festival is the only thing that's asserting some notability. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:49, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

I would like to argue that the LA EigaFest is just a West coast version of the New York Asian Film Festival if you look at what's cited on that page there's really no difference except years they've been happening. If you feel that LA EigaFest isn't that notable than I would say neither is the New York Asian Film Festival on notability. So let's seperate them and put LA EigaFest as one as JFS I'll try again with more sources and notable events. Genericusername345 (talk) 05:34, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Per WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, the existence of other pages does not automatically mean that both the organization and the festival merit pages and even at the AfD there's an argument that neither particularly warrant pages to begin with since most of the coverage is routine and that the only in-depth coverage is in non-reliable sources. In any case, the article for NYAFF has some serious issues with coverage and unless there's more coverage out there, NYAFF doesn't look like it'd pass notability guidelines either. The thing about pointing out other pages is that it's possible that the other page passes notability guidelines in a way that the other does not or (more likely) it's that the other page just hasn't been discovered and nominated for deletion at this point in time. The drawback of pointing out other pages is that it can exponentially raise the chances of the other page getting deleted. Sometimes people point the other pages out in the hopes that the other page will be deleted as well, but I don't think that this was your intent. However, this is kind of an example of how pointing out another page can backfire pretty badly. The bottom line here is that the other page is not the topic of this AfD so right now the only thing to do is find coverage that could show that the organization and festival are notable and would merit their own pages. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:11, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Genericusername345, I was able to find where the NYAFF has received mention in several academic sources so if you or someone else were to put it up for AfD I'd argue for a weak keep. You can feel free to nominate it if you desire. As I said on the AfD page, I think that the only real chance that the society or film festival has of remaining on Wikipedia is for them to be merged into one article. Neither of them has a particularly strong chance of surviving AfD otherwise and I think that separating the two pages is pretty much a death sentence for the articles. I know that you want two separate pages, but you've got to think about what will be more likely to survive. I merged the two pages because I felt that this was going to be the only true option here. I could have easily just left it as is and let both get deleted. But then, that's my personal take on things - it could be that they would survive, but I think that the chances of that are fairly slim, given that there were already two "delete" arguments against the JFS page. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:47, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
Thank you so very much for your help with my courses this semester! You da bomb! HullIntegrity\ talk / 19:22, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Minor clarification

Lives in isn't correct, "hails from" is. There's only one userbox/category for both, so prone to confusion. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 12:51, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

  • I was wondering if it was "from" rather than "in". In any case I was kind of going "huh?" with that, since you're very clearly someone who would be India savvy. A quick question though - have you heard of the actor Dhruv Bhandari? Someone created a fairly malformed article and I'm trying to sweep for sources, although I know that some will likely be in Tamil or one of the other languages spoken in India. Want to do a quick sweep? I can probably handle the English language end thanks to WP:INDIA's search engine. I mostly want to make sure that I find everything that's out there. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 13:00, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
    • See User_talk:Psychonaut#Dhruv_Bhandari, this article's been a part of a set created by a sockfarm. I'm not sure of the entire history behind the farm, I just deleted a few articles after the last SPI. But to your original point, the Hindi TV articles have quite a few sock farms operating to get bit part actors in as major achievers with source fudging etc; I haven't been around much over the past year, but some of my editing history on the SPIs prior to that will give you an idea of that problem. As far as Hindi TV series go, most of the coverage is available in the English media, especially in Times of India or Hindustan Times -- typically the coverage in Hindi media is about the same as in these two; you'd have to look at other language newspapers only for non-Hindi TV and movie stuff. —SpacemanSpiff 13:12, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Eww... I may have found a new sock then. I'll go drag the new account to SPI and see if anything matches up. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 13:15, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Actually, I think I'll wait for Psychonaut's response since it may not be one. I'll bow to his rationale. I admit that since I've cleaned it up a little I'm a little hesitant to delete it outright as a sock evasion if it is a sock account. It's not a perfect copy of the prior versions so it might not be? Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 13:20, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Yes, I'm not familiar with this set of socks, that's why I had alerted Psychonaut instead of acting (but it was twice created by the particular set of socks). Right now it won't qualify as a G5 anyway, with the effort you've put in. —SpacemanSpiff 13:23, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
  • That's good to hear- I think that it'd pass notability guidelines if it came to AfD, but if it came down to it I wouldn't mind deleting the article history and then reposting the content if anyone really objected to an article that started off as a sockpuppet creation. I know that it would likely keep it from being as much of a target for speedy deletion, at least. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 13:26, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Since you happen to be a bibliophile and are looking to edit India articles, a couple of them that could easily be expanded are here for you Coolie and Two Leaves and a Bud (both stubs that I created as a newbie and was hoping to make GAs out of, but as usual got sidetracked!). Indo-Anglian literature is something I've been hoping to focus on, but hasn't happened. —SpacemanSpiff 13:30, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Sounds like fun! I'm definitely trying to help out India related articles whenever I can. I know that a lot of them tend to languish because there are so many of them and it's so difficult for some India sources to show up in an English Google search. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 13:46, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
  • I think I've actually heard of Coolie - I can't remember which article it was, but I seem to remember someone comparing something to that book. Wasn't a movie based on that book? Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 13:47, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
  • I'll have to see if I can locate both books. I'm trying to cobble together a plot for Two Leaves and a Bud and it sounds like it's an amazing and heartbreaking read. I'll have to steel my nerves for these reads, that's for certain. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 14:21, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Rodelyn18

Since you blocked Rodelyn18 and socks earlier, I'm notifying you of the SPI I opened for a new sock. — JJMC89 (T·E·C) 14:43, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Thank you so much!! I kind of figured they'd be back. (sighs) I'd posted to another person's page about this, but you may be interested in reading it as well. It's kind of a history of the whole thing: User_talk:C.Fred#Rodelyn_onggo. Long story short, it's a pretty clear and obvious hoax article. I think she was trying to copy the article for Gretchen Ho, which she'd vandalized at one point. In any case, she's got a Twitter account full of very poorly photoshopped pictures, some of which she tried to add to Wikipedia. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:27, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Unilateral addition of dubiouis text

Hello! I'd like to ask you to revert the unilateral additions of dubious text made by User:Rob.HUN at the semi-protected article called Austria-Hungary. His edits were once reverted after my talk page request at Talk:Austria-Hungary#Semi-protected_edit_request_on_28_June_2015, but now he restored them. 213.229.101.59 (talk) 08:23, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:ReaderofthePack/Archive_19&oldid=1142550743"