Jump to content

User talk:Salvio giuliano/Archive 71

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 65←Archive 69Archive 70Archive 71Archive 72Archive 73→Archive 75

The Signpost: 02 April 2014

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:06, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Segnalo

Ti segnalo un utente che elimina opinioni di altri alterando il consenso in wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hanowa

quel tizio può fare tutto quello che vuole o deve rispettare le regole come tutti?--Iperlofio (talk) 10:37, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

(in Italian) La risposta alla domanda retorica, ovviamente, è che deve rispettare le regole come tutti. Per questo, gli ho lasciato un avvertimento che non deve rimuovere i commenti altrui. Se lo rifà, fammelo sapere. Un'altra cosa: sarebbe bene, per rispetto di chi non parla Italiano, che su en.wiki tu scrivessi in Inglese, cosicché gli altri possano comprendere ciò che dici.

(in English) It's a rhetoric question, but, yes, he should respect the rules just like everyone else. For that, I have just left a warning on his talk page not to remove other people's comments. If he does that again, please let me know. Another thing: it would be better if, out of respect for those who don't speak Italian, if you always used English when editing en.wiki, so that others can understand what you wrote. Salvio Let's talk about it! 10:48, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Get well soon

I was passing by and read that you have some health issues currently. Get well soon. ShriramTalk 17:45, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the kind thought, Shriram. It's appreciated! Salvio Let's talk about it! 12:54, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

WP:Articles for deletion/Bauribandhu Mohapatra & Gujarat National Law University Community Service Award

I do not see a consensus here, and I request that this be relisted.  I will go into detail if you want.  Unscintillating (talk) 13:00, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Unlike you, I do see a very clear rough consensus.

During the deletion discussion, two people argued in favour of keeping the article; the former, Uncletomwood, does not give any reasons to keep the article and actually goes as far as saying that he [a]grees with the nominator; you are the other and you say [t]here is no Wikipedia notability guideline that awards as a topic are restricted to those primarily given to wp:notable recipients, which is correct but immaterial; it may be considered a rebuttal of the nominator argument that one or two of the individuals given the prize are likely to be notable, but not most of them, but that assertion was not the primary reason he nominated the article for deletion. It was merely added ad abundantiam. You then go on to add and as to whether or not the recipients would be listed in the article, this is a matter of WP:DUE wp:prominence, not WP:N wp:notability, which is basically a strawman. All others who commented, on the other hand, made policy-based arguments, discussing the fact that the award in question had not received significant coverage in reliable sources and, therefore, was not notable in its own right. Therefore, since the only policy-based !votes were in favour of deletion and consensus is not merely vote-counting, there was a consensus to delete.

For these reasons, I'm not going to relist the AfD. Salvio Let's talk about it! 13:12, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

  • "Non-notable" is not equal to a policy-based "deletable".  The nominator is known for advocating the use of AfD for non-deletion arguments, so the fact that he does not recommend delete in the context of a potential merge target may have been significant.  Why did you not ask him why he didn't discuss the WP:ATD in the nomination?  The next delete !vote is from an experienced editor, yet by saying "per nom", gives the appearance of appealing to the good-ole-boys network.  After doing some Google searches, I find that this article appears to be a copyvio of [1].  wp:Notability is not defined by sources in an article, and whether or not this is a copyvio, doesn't change the fact that this is evidence that no participants researched the topic's wp:notability.  I withdraw my request to have the AfD reopened.  Unscintillating (talk) 17:18, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 April 2014

Austrian economics case

You skipped voting on a couple of principles. If you have reservations or are still thinking about these principles, I understand, but if you just skipped them inadvertently you might want to take another look. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 20:25, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. Actually, I am still thinking about those principles because I find them to be a little bit too academic. I'm afraid admins who rarely get involved in creating content (and I am one of them) may forget what it is like to be in a long, heated dispute, maybe with a clueless newbie or with a civil POV-pusher... These people sometimes drain an editor's patience and when a person who's trying to protect Wikipedia from their activities occasionally loses his cool, then context should be taken into consideration (and, depending on the circumstances, the other people's actions might even excuse his). Salvio Let's talk about it! 09:22, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Ahem ;) - Sitush (talk) 09:31, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Howdy Sit, fancy meeting you here... ;-) How are things? Salvio Let's talk about it! 09:36, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Frustrating! I seem to be surrounded by clueless newbies and pov-pushers, civil or otherwise. If anything, it is getting worse because many of the few who once would assist me are MIA - Qwyrxian won't be back, Boing! and RegentsPark are basically on lengthy breaks, SpacemanSpiff has gone walkabout, etc. It's getting lonely and even harder than it used to be. And for some crazy reason I still keep getting drawn to the mess that is the AE arbcom case, where civil POV-pushers abound. I've got a semi-retired up there but have been churning through stuff these last few days, mainly because I can't leave my house at the moment. - Sitush (talk) 09:52, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
And now The Times of India have contacted me about a story they want to run re: Wikipedia & the Narendra Modi article. I've responded in general terms and asked them to provide more specific questions. Should I be running my replies through any particular channel here? I rather think that I can say whatever I want to say, although that may not be pretty. - Sitush (talk) 11:00, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
I hear you, Sitush and I understand you're starting to feel more and more lonely. In general, I try not to get too involved in disputes because you never know what will end up before ArbCom, but if you need help do feel free to drop a message on my talk page: your contribution to the protection of Wikipedia is both important and appreciated and if I can help, I'll be glad to.

As for the interview, you don't have to run your replies through anybody. With very few exceptions (outing and harassment, mainly), what's done off-wiki remains off-wiki. To my knowledge, mere comments are not usually sanctioned, no matter how scathing. Salvio Let's talk about it! 14:15, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

I think you are best staying out of the disputes. It seems inevitable that if I stay around then I'll be hauled in front of ArbCom at some point and that would put you in an awkward situation, as you say. As far as ToI is concerned, I've said nothing that I would consider scathing, although I guess I do have a fairly thick skin as a rule & so my definitioin might be different. I'm saving the scathing stuff for a follow-up interview that they are interested in doing for a piece about me. You have be warned ;) - Sitush (talk) 15:15, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fredy Sosa

You closed this as delete. The argument was that the Honduran National League isn't listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Fully professional leagues. But it is still listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Fully professional leagues, and there has been no discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Fully professional leagues to remove it. Nfitz (talk) 03:00, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

It's still listed because you reverted its removal. Considering that the consensus at the AfD was very clear, I'll not restore the articles until and unless you have consensus on the talk page that the Honduran National League is a fully professional league. Salvio Let's talk about it! 11:01, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Talk page guidelines

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Talk page guidelines. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:04, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 April 2014

Bethany Mota -- unlock the article

I have plenty of sources now to cite on her article. If you allow, I could do a whole rewrite. Please allow me to refine the article. The sources are here:

http://www.businessinsider.com/haul-teenage-youtube-shopping-star-bethany-mota-2014-1

http://www.today.com/style/bethany-mota-youtube-star-youve-never-heard-your-teen-has-2D11988771

http://stylenews.peoplestylewatch.com/2014/04/28/bethany-mota-youtube-quotes-best-youtube-videos/

http://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/shortcuts/2014/feb/05/bethany-mota-haul-video-motavator-aeropostale

http://www.theverge.com/culture/2014/1/20/5329356/bethany-mota-youtube-shopping-celebrity-turned-teen-fashion

https://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/driven/bullied-to-bank--bethany-mota-s-youtube-empire-133655143.html

http://www.teenvogue.com/fashion/spring-trends/2014-01/bethany-mota-aeropostale

http://abc.go.com/shows/the-view/video/PL5554876/_m_VDKA0_hil11bte

http://www.etonline.com/awards/144934_Youtube_Star_Bethany_Mota_Gets_Celebs_Orange_Carpet_Beauty_Tips/

I have unlocked the article; you will have to create a new account (if you don't have one already), but then you'll be free to recreate the article. Salvio Let's talk about it! 20:25, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:05, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Double redirect

User:Salvio Giuliano

All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 16:22, 30 April 2014 (UTC).

I had forgotten about that redirect... Thanks for reminding me! Cheers. Salvio Let's talk about it! 16:54, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 April 2014

Um...

172.56.2.179 (talk · contribs). Cheers :) Doc talk 03:36, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Kiko4564 unblock discussion

Hello Salvio, sorry to trouble you, but Kiko4564 (a user you have previously blocked, changed the block settings for, or unblocked) has requested to be unblocked. There is a discussion at ANI which so far has attracted no interest, if you wish to leave a comment, you can find the discussion at Wikipedia:ANI#Unblock_request_by_User:Kiko4564. Nick (talk) 17:29, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 07 May 2014

ANI Notice

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. (You were a participant in a talk-page discussion given as evidence in this discussion.) The thread is Personal attacks. Thank you. Lightbreather (talk) 00:00, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on User talk:CorporateM/Extant Organizations

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on User talk:CorporateM/Extant Organizations. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:06, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Madison Rising edit

Thank you so much for granting the protect status! We've had lots of problems with vandalism for whatever reason, so that will help tremendously. I'm all for the whole story, and all facts (with references) being included in the article, but there are some entries that are nothing more than simple vandalism. Is there any way you could remove the "See also" section, or grant me rights to edit? Neither Jingoism nor the Team America reference have anything to do with Madison Rising. Madison Rising wasn't even in existence when Team America came out, and I'm not sure that Paramount Pictures would approve. Thanks again!TheGr8Gonzo (talk) 16:57, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

My pleasure. Anyway, you don't need any rights to edit that page: it's semi-protected and, so, autoconfirmed editors can edit it, which is basically almost everyone except for IPs and newcomers. Also, the decision on whether to include the "see also" section should not be made by me, as it is what we call a content dispute (and admins generally deal with behavioural problems): my suggestion would be to follow the steps suggested here. Salvio Let's talk about it! 09:03, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

A Request to unlock the article and make following changes!

Please Kindly try to unlock the following article and remove the links of catfights on sets and all articles which are fake ! and Miss Ansha sayed is an indian television actress and not a model. her birthday is 16th july https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Ansha_Sayed

Hello sir, I am Swagatam, from India. Now sir, there is a wikipedia page on Ms Ansha Sayed, where there is a lot of incorrect information on the actress Ms Ansha Sayed. So, sir, I and a couple of my friends, who are big fans of the actress and are blessed with the privilege of being able to speak personally with the actress, have been trying to edit her Wikipedia page and add the correct information. However, sir, immediately after our edits, the page gets edited back to what it was before we edited it. And now, the page has been set as semi-protected, so we can't edit the wrong information. Please understand our situation and help us resolve the difficulties sir.
Quoting from WP:V, one of Wikipedia's core policies, [r]eaders must be able to check that Wikipedia articles are not just made up. This means that all quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation. Unfortunately, this means that we cannot accept "Ms. Sayed told me this" as a source... I am sorry. Salvio Let's talk about it! 09:53, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Dr James Walsh

Why please did you take it on yourself to delete by biographical details? This is just editorial vandalism, and high handed arrogance! Please restore it forthwith. Dr James Walsh British, West Sussex Medical doctor, serving Liberal Democrat politician, Knight of the Most Venerable Order of St John of Jerusalem

Actually, I did not take it upon myself to delete your biography; there was a weeklong discussion, where members of the community debated whether you were notable(*) enough to qualify for inclusion and it was determined that, unfortunately, you are not. I am sorry, but please understand that this was neither vandalism nor arrogance.

(*)In Wikipedia's parlance, being notable means having received significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. Salvio Let's talk about it! 09:59, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 May 2014

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ahmed_Kaboudan

FYI we are discussing your closure of this AFD at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion. If you axe me, it was a little hasty with only two users participating. You always could have relisted it. ~EDDY (talk/contribs)~ 20:17, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

I generally only relist AfDs when consensus is unclear or there are too many non-policy based votes; in the case you refer to, the consensus was clear. Yes, there were only two people commenting, but when it comes to AfDs there is no quorum: if someone thinks an article should not be deleted, then all he has to do is post a comment; if he can't be bothered to do that, then he can't complain afterwards. In this case, you removed the PROD without providing an explanation and chose not to comment during the AFD. Well, you have to accept that others have come to a decision and accept the result. Salvio Let's talk about it! 10:08, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Deletion of article about Sabella (company)

Hi, I saw that the page about the company Sabella has been deleted. I must say that I do not undestand exactly why. Sabella is a well-known company in the (small) field of tidal energy and the only 100% French tidal turbine developer. Moreover, it has constructed and tested in real conditions a 3 meter diameter turbine which has proved to be working well. Another turbine is almost completely constructed (only the foundation is missing, according to articles in French independant newspapers) and will be installed this year, which could make it the first grid-connected tidal turbine in France. So I think this page was useful and provided interesting information. I agree that there are nos so many independant sources about Sabella in English, but there are a lot in French. I would like to ask this article to be undeleted. I do not not know exactly where this request should be, so please do not hesitate to transfer it to the correct place or to tell me what to do. If you wish to discuss more about this article and its deletion I will be happy to do it. Thank you in advance. Best regards.

The article was deleted after a weeklong discussion, where it was determined that Sabella is not notable enough to qualify for inclusion. If Sabella has received significant coverage in independent, reliable sources, then the company is deemed notable and can have an article. I can speak French, so, if you wish, you may post here the links to the articles you've mentioned. I'll take a look and if the company meets our notability criteria, I'll undelete the article. Salvio Let's talk about it! 10:15, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

my article micky byggs was deleted

It claims it was deleted for obvious advertising...it was an article like any others..modeled after my trainer ox baker article...it looked exactly like it but with my info...how was that advertising..looked like any othet article about a person....this is the second time you have done this...thx...Micky Byggs 98.67.178.252 (talk) 05:37, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

The page was deleted after a weeklong discussion, where the members of the community who chose to participate determined that the article subject does not meet our notability requirements (for biographies in general, these are located here and for MMA fighters, here) and, for that, he does not qualify for inclusion. Another issue with the article was its promotional tone; this, however, could have been fixed by editing – had this been the only problem with the page, deletion would have been superfluous. As I've said, though, that was not the only issue: the more serious one, and one which cannot be fixed by editing, was that Mr. Byggs is unfortunately not deemed notable, as far as Wikipedia is concerned. Salvio Let's talk about it! 09:21, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Sockpupperts

How much we must to wait? Please see: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rtuftrbsee. This person has many sockpuppets only to controversial changes and edit-wars, nothing more. Still create new sockpuppets (for example User:Slimmilky51) and create new conflicts, see Talk:List_of_tallest_buildings_in_Europe#Socks. Some sockpuppers by this person has been blocked by administrator Darkwind, administrator CambridgeBayWeather semi-protect article but Slimmilky51 today (how?) again restored own controversial changes [2]. How much we must to wait? How many must be edit-wars and nerve of users before the case is resolved? Please, react. Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 17:03, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:10, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

RE: JAYP & JAY-P

Hi,I have been doing some upgrading and fixing some of the errors with the references for the page Jay-P. Out of the 38 references that show about 7 0r 8 need to be removed. Initially they were 35 references and i removed three after double checking them and added others. kindly advise me. Can you be kind enough to avail me a copy of the deleted page so i can continue to edit it offline if you won't let me fix it onlineAlexanderGee (talk) 22:51, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi Alexander. Quite frankly, I don't believe Jay-P is notable enough to have an article on Wikipedia (see WP:MUSICBIO), anyway I'm willing to give you time to improve your draft. For that, I have moved it here. Please note that if the article is moved back without being significantly improved, it will probably be speedily deleted.

On top of that, the article also has a promotional tone (for example: Through dress, Jay-P has contributed to inspiring, promoting and influencing the hip-hop culture. Being street is the epitome of hip-hop characterized by jeans, sneakers, t-shirts ,boots, chains and baseball caps among others. Despite the pressure to keep to the street couture culture, Jay P makes a statement through dress, making it clear that it is important to dress appropriately for the ocassion or there could be consequences. If you must be formal, be formal), which is inappropriate for Wikipedia articles. That's something else which you should fix before moving the article back.

Finally, I don't know if you have any connections to Jay-P, but if you have, I suggest you read WP:COI, which is our policy on conflicts of interest. Salvio Salvio Let's talk about it! 09:20, 17 May 2014 (UTC) Thanks for being kind and straight forward Salvio. I made some changes. Please check it out and advise me accordingly

The Signpost: 21 May 2014

Pippa Bartolotti

The commenting editors were divided and none expressed the reason given: There are some terrible sourced stats here. Some are references to random blogspot blogs. This whole page really needs to be taken down.

I didn't write the entry, but did add sentences into the Career section. Because of her recent activities as lead Green Party candidate in the European parliament https://www.facebook.com/PippaBartolottiWales, Bartolotti has far greater public prominence in the http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/wales-green-party-leader-pippa-7093559 than when the article was created and expanded.

The above reason shows very cursory inspection of the Wiki-entry. The stats check against Company House records and official election results. The main source blog was Bartolotti's own (the other contained refs to Company House and her other blogs), with some fanciful description of her career that ignored the fact of a former husband who set up and ran the family electronics companies she falsely says she'd founded. On what basis does she assert "malicious" entries - any neutral disclosure of her past would be portrayed by her as "malicious"; what factual material does she claim is faulty?

The article should be restored (frozen) unless and until she can point out factual corrections or substantive contravention of Wikipedia rules on biographies. If not, you give support to her depicting historical disclosures as "malicious". Maxwallis (talk) 11:12, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

My actions were not meant to give support to her "depicting historical disclosures as "malicious""; I deleted the article not because I agreed with her assessment, but because Ms Bartolotti is a relatively unknown person who asked for the deletion of the article about her; in these cases, under our policy (cf. WP:BIODEL), we tend to comply with the deletion request, unless there is a consensus to keep the article. So, per policy the article should not be restored and frozen. Salvio Let's talk about it! 16:26, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 May 2014

Notification of COIN discussion

Hello, Salvio. Recently I reported the Serama article, which as you might remember is an unlikely target for disruption, to COIN at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#Serama. The response there has been to, as usual, accuse me of an agenda, again claim the photoshopped images aren't photoshopped (despite previous discussions on this where I've pointed out the chicken is not the issue), and to ask for my real-life identity, all the while while of course not responding to any of the actual points raised. If you have anything to add, based on what you saw when you were applying the various blocks/protections, that'd be helpful. Regards, CMD (talk) 15:28, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Novels

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Novels. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:07, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Salvio_giuliano/Archive_71&oldid=1257963175"