User talk:Skier Dude/archive/archive Jan 07

Weight Bench edit revert

Don't want to make a federal case about my edit to the Weight Bench article, but half of this two paragraph article is not about the topic but rather about using a medicine ball; and there are no sources, citations etc. Happy holidays! --66.44.125.142 12:12, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

iSkin article and notability

I'm the author of the iSkin article, and I realize that there should be some kind of "notability" to the article. I've read the notability requirements too, and I am wondering why my article has been marked for deletion, yet other similar articles have not. For example, the Griffin Technology page has less information (with the exception of the box on the right-hand side), yet has not been marked for deletion. Do I need the iSkin page to have something like that also? Dazednconfused693 22:46, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

While I'm at it, why doesn't a link to the article appear when I use the double-brackets around the work "iSkin" or "ISkin"?Dazednconfused693 22:48, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

How would I go about uploading the logo for the company? And how do I make sure it is a public-domain image? Dazednconfused693 01:58, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm still kind of unsure about the idea of fair-use images and public domain, so could you upload the image for me? Here's the link: http://www.spymac.com/gfx/partners/logos/iSkin%20Logo.jpg Thanks! Dazednconfused693 22:53, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks again for uploading the image! Now I just need to find some more information about the company...

• Do you have any suggestions about any other information I should add? Dazednconfused693 20:42, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

How do I find info about the 2nd & 3rd points of the WP:CORP? Where would I find that information? Dazednconfused693 17:14, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

E-gamers - what category is being used?

I'm not trying to PO people here, and this is a serious question from a non-sports person (the only sports I do are downhill skiing and figure skating (and a bit of college hockey years ago))... What criteria is being used for these people? My reading of the WP:BIO is along these lines...

From Wikipedia:Notability (people) Where do e-gamers fall into the standard categories? They are not:

Political figures

local political figures

entertainment or opinion makers

actors or TV Personalities

Published authors, editors and photographers

Painters, sculptors, architects, engineers, and other professionals

Persons achieving renown or notoriety for their involvement in newsworthy events, such as by being assassinated

Can they be considered under the following:?

Sportspeople/athletes/competitors who have played in a fully professional league, or a competition of equivalent standing in a non-league sport such as swimming, or at the highest level in mainly amateur sports or other competitive activities that are themselves considered notable, including college sports in the United States.

They aren't sportspeople or athletes - but they may be competitors; is this the category where their notability is being justified? I didn't think that this was the intent of this category; I read this as those that are actually physically competing. If e-athletes are to be judged under this criteria, I would urge a notation being made as such to prevent further confusion on the issue.

As I couldn't put them in any of the above categories, I fell back to the basic:

"The person made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in their specific field. - All of these criteria are in fact simply special cases of the general primary criterion of multiple non-trivial published works from independent sources. A person who is "part of the enduring historical record" will have been written about, in depth, independently in multiple history books on that field, by historians.

There may be articles written about these people, to whom I have no animosity, but can it be said that they are making a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in their specific field?

I do agree that several of the persons on the AFD list do have independent notability, and have noted so on their pages. However when looking at the field, I still say that these don't qualify as I don't see how they are part of the enduring historical record... (article - began playing):

Chris Smith (electronic sports player) - May 2005

Scott Lussier - July 2005

Eric Hewitt - April 2006

Ben Jackson (electronic sports player) - May 2005

Dave Walsh - March 2004

Brandon Jenkins - April 2006

Carlos Morales (electronic sports player) - April 2006

Michael Cavanaugh - April 2006

Victor de Leon III - "Victor has won no tournaments and has no notable placements in professional events."

Ryan Danford - May 2004

Zyos -"Leto quit gaming professionally after his former team, Xit Woundz, failed to place top 4 during the second event of the 2006 season."

TuLegit - ?

Again, I'm not trying to PO people here, would just like to see a clarification made for future disucssion on where exactly these people fit into the WP:BIO scheme!

Thanks for your patience with a non-gamer. SkierRMH 05:53, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

My honest belief is this: many people compete in games and attain mass amounts of wealth doing so, but fail to achieve notoriety. A lot of what these gaming leagues are putting out as "leading edge" is really just marketing fluff, and even if their content appears in magazines, they're not necessarily notable. We see developers of a variety of video games being interviewed in magazines like Computer Gaming World, Electronic Gaming Monthly, and numerous blogs, and honestly, they don't all get included in Wikipedia.

I have no problem if they're mentioned in Wikipedia, but they don't need an article of their own.

I do appreciate your input. :: Colin Keigher (Talk) 07:22, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

I appreciate your willingness to discuss this. While I am in no way, shape, or form a gamer, but I'd reckon I may be more inclusionist. As you guessed, I based my argument on the athletes/competitor provision, because I believe it should be more adaptable to new forms of competition and no necessarily limited to only physical sports. It is clear that the teams are paid competitior in the highest form of professional competition for pro e-gaming. However, we need not limit our analysis merely to notability. I noticed alot of these articles rely heavily on cites to the websites of MLG and the USA Network, which broadcast MLG competition. I do not think it too unreasonable to expect verification from more independent and reputable sources to show that they are noteworthy, especially when were are dealing with biographies of living people.-- danntm ^T _C 15:26, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Now that you've done a little more expansion on your stance, I see where you're coming from. In addition, I apologize if I came off as belligerent last night, as that was not my intention. Anyway, I look at these people, as some other editors above do, as competitors, not necessarily athletes; however, I would consider playing Halo- taking into account the high stakes, the hand-eye coordination and dexterity required, and the increasing media attention- a sport. Thus, I look at what we'll call "e-athletes" as needing to meet the sportspeople criteria of WP:BIO. As danntm states, a big problem is verifiability of one's achievements/notoriety, as just links to the MLG will not do. With that said, I think there is a line to be drawn for which e-athletes meet notability requirements and which do not: In the MLG, at least, only the top 16 teams are actually qualify for a tournament. For every stop on the tournament circuit, there's a 32-team bracket- the top 16 teams (or, for individual competitions, which are actually less popular than four-on-four competitions, the top 16 players) automatically make the bracket, and all of the other hundreds of teams that show up must play into the other 16 spots. Thus, in my opinion, anyone who is on one of the top 16 teams (or is one of the top 16 players, though I'd imagine that all of those players are on the top 16 teams) would meet notability requirements- assuming membership on said teams can be verified. Assuming every player and team had its own article, this would only add 80 articles to Wikipedia, which I do not think would be too overbearing or gamer-intensive for this wonderful site. Still, as with anyone else, if multiple reliable media sources have discussed your work- no matter what your work is- you probably qualify for a Wikipedia article. For the players/teams for whom this criterion applies, notability is a non-question. For the others- which play on a top 16 team but don't have multiple citations- I think notability is slightly more in doubt, but I also think that a distinct line could be drawn. -- Kicking222 16:04, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Also, as you asked on some of the AfDs, I'm doing a little clean-up of the articles on the more noteworthy individuals/teams to remove POV and make the text clearer for non-gamers. -- Kicking222 16:14, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Chris Smith (electronic sports player) - May 2005

Scott Lussier - July 2005

Eric Hewitt - April 2006

Ben Jackson (electronic sports player) - May 2005

Dave Walsh - March 2004 Definitely Keep Has been featured in many publications - probably the top 3 most out of all the pros.

Brandon Jenkins - April 2006

Carlos Morales (electronic sports player) - April 2006

Michael Cavanaugh - April 2006

Victor de Leon III - Definitely Keep LiL Poison is not only the famous gamer but is infamous world-wide. He is the youngest professional gamer who signed with MLG at the age of 5.

Ryan Danford - May 2004

Zyos - I don't care This is the only article I had nothing to do with "Leto quit gaming professionally after his former team, Xit Woundz, failed to place top 4 during the second event of the 2006 season."

TuLegit - Delete I brought it into wiki and I just took it out because he is not significant at all.

About the other gamers - I didn't search for all the publications they have been in, but don't come at me with this AfD stuff unless you watch the first 5 minutes of MLG shows showed on USA or read the entire pages of the gamers. Here is a link to the finale http://www.mlgpro.com/video/play.php?p=content/episode_content/full_episodes/107-full-500.wmv

Personally, I'm treating gamers as part of the 'competitors' category (which is what has been done with other non-athletic competitors, such as chess players, card players, etc..), and since they compete at the top of their event, they meet notability guidelines. All the articles I have voted to keep have more than enough sources to make them notable and to verify content for an entire article. About the "enduring historical record" concept, none of the other competitors are being held to this, or most college and many pro athletes wouldn't have an article if this were so. I believe that is just if you can't assert notability under any of the categories and are just going for general bio notability. This is how I interpret this. I will improve the articles as much as I can, and I'm trying to create a WikiProject to reach this goal. J0lt C0la 01:59, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Ben Jackson (electronic sports player) up for deletion review

I was wondering if I could get your opinion on that Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2006 December 30. He is Karma in the gaming world and currently ranked as both best FFA/1v1 Halo 2 player and is apart of the best team, Team Carbon Valoem ^talk 06:00, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

• Comment if you will look at my talk page User talk:SkierRMH you will see that there are concerns about the inclusion of electronic sports players. It isn't even clear what category they're be included in... and depending on what category they're in, there doesn't seem to be any consistency on inclusion/exclusion. I think that this should be clarified before another rash of these hits the AfD. Therefore, I'm remaining neutral until there is some clarification. SkierRMH 06:12, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Oanda Corporation

I've gone ahead and expanded the article, with citations from some reliable sources (with pretty good potential for more, from a LexisNexis search). Would you please have another look, and see whether you'd be inclined to change your opinion on the AFD? -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 18:10, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

• Thanks for looking again. From what I can tell, I think they're privately held, but I didn't put anything in the article about that because I wasn't 100% sure. -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 19:19, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Bayramiye

Bayramiye is getting better .I haven't finished. be patient,please.--3210 09:37, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

note - was afd'd at c.10 words, is now marked as stub but still needs work.

NPWatcher approval

You've been approved to use NPWatcher. Please give me any feature requests or bugs. I'm also happy to help if you have any problems running the program, or any questions :). Before you run the program, please check the changelog on the application page to see if I've made a new release (or just add the main page (here) to your watchlist). Finally, enjoy! Martinp23 22:00, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Sornalingam

I removed the speedy tag from this page, added sources, and cleaned it up. If you disagree, I'll see you on AfD =). Cheers, cab 03:38, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Note - this was tagged as afd as a 1 line article; massive additions since then.

Maryland Gridiron Network

The Maryland Gridiron Network (MGN) is not run by the University of Maryland so I would disagree with merging it with that page. The MGN does however support Maryland Terrapins football if you think it should be merged there. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Johneweb (talk • contribs) 01:22, 4 January 2007 (UTC).

Thank you for the correction on that one, I have changed the redirection to the name that was in the article itself. SkierRMH 01:30, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to be a pain but as I'm sure you can tell, I'm new here.......since I proposed this article can I go ahead and perform the merge now?

Note - Merge completed 1/4/07

Looking for input

Hey there. Not too long ago, you were involved in the AfDs centering around Major League Gaming. I would appreciate some input as I believe there needs to be some sort of consensus on whether or not the notability of these players meets requirements for Wikipedia. Thanks. :: Colin Keigher (Talk) 04:49, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

First off, I have a real problem using the term sport and sportsmen here. I think we need to remember that these are people playing e-games. They are, therefore, competitors. I think the language needs to be very clear about that. This is nothing against people playing e-games; but to call someone playing a video game an “athlete” is really stretching the use of the term (and yes, I am aware of the usage regarding ‘mental’ competitions).

Therefore, the same criteria for anyone playing an e-game should apply here. Given that, the basic WP:BIO multiple non-trivial reports criteria should be applied (as User:Fan-1967 points out). This would apply to both the individuals and the teams (although I fear that we might be facing a “garage band” problem with every team that gets blog-coverage and has a my-space account will think that they are therefore notable ;) ).

My other concern is about notoriety. Much of the notoriety being cited on many of the gamers’ pages (not just these specific ones) appears to be very good marketing from the game manufacturers. Getting these people in the limelight is their business, but doesn’t necessarily make for notoriety. If I could draw the parallel to the multitude of developers of various video games that are being interviewed in magazines like Computer Gaming World, Electronic Gaming monthly, and the like. Those types of citations aren’t normally applicable for notoriety; at what point do we take aggressive marketing campaigns use of gamers to promote their games as legitimate coverage for notoriety? For these specific pages, there is a lot of reliance on cites to the websites of MLG and the USA Network, which broadcast MLG competition. Possibly the ‘criteria’ mentioned by User:Djith would be a starting point, the breakout into the mainstream media (opposed to the specialized), would be a starting point. I don’t know the answer to this, but I think it does need to be included in the discussion.

I agree with User:J0lt C0la that the basic inclusion criteria should be WP:BIO. I think that the delete/keep for the groups mentioned above is an indication that this just wasn’t the case here. Some of them did meet BIO and were deleted, like Dave Walsh, and others who don’t, like Zyos, were kept.

Rafed.net

Following a deletion review Rafed.net has been relisted: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rafed.net (2nd nomination). - brenneman 01:57, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Note - this is going to end like the last one - no concensus.

Urban

User talk:82.44.242.16 keeps mucking with that page from the same IP. Should they be blocked or something? It's happened 3 times...

--futurebird 12:40, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Note - made 3 edits, all reversed, and then, thankfully, disappeared.

AFD categories

Thanks so much for categorising my AFD proposal. It seems you do this for many articles. That is super. It is kind and hardworking people like you that make Wikipedia work. Obina 21:10, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

I'd just like to second this for my own AfD proposal. It's the first time I've done one and I was a little uncertain about stuff. Thanks! Wibbble 06:49, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Cocktails

Hello. As a person interested in cocktails and/or the WikiProject Cocktails, you may be interested to know that a name change is being considered for the WikiProject from Cocktails to Mixed Drinks. Please add your opinions to the discussion and vote. Also, check out the recent changes to the WikiProject area. Consider becoming an active Participant. Thanks! --Willscrlt 08:59, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

• AGREE - and don't see any complications with some overlap between projects on items that could be considered under various headings/categories/projects. SkierRMH 20:57, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

You da man!

Thanks, I must be getting tired. Think I should delete that picture off my talkpage? I've seen enough of it on the [[Nadir] hijacks! I have both on my watchlist. I bet the two users build a Nadironline article next. Ronbo76 06:52, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Picture gone. BTW, most users who answer the helpme will take off the brackets as per its request once the helpme is solved by the intervening user. Ronbo76 06:58, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Project Megiddo

Itchy Trigger Finger? I was in the process of rewriting the text I posted! Jeez! Wait 5 minutes next time, will ya? Thanks. - Fairness And Accuracy For All 07:17, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I would highly suggest that you use a "user sandbox" or subpage to work on articles, especially "cut & Paste" from other websites that does construe a copyright violation. If you work on it in a sandbox before publishing, there won't be an issue of copyright violation. So, work on it in private, and then when ready, create the page! To make user subpages/sandbox follow the instructions here:

Wikipedia:User page#How do I create a user subpage? SkierRMH 07:22, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Good suggestion! I was looking for an article on the subject, saw a red link with two sources and thought I'd get to work. I figured I'd have at least an hour to work on it before it got noticed. I should be grateful for vigilent editors watching out for the good of Wiki. You didn't know I was re-writing. Sorry for jumping down your throat. - Fairness And Accuracy For All 07:30, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

And Chaos Died AfD

Metamagician3000 and I have reworked the article on Joanna Russ's book And Chaos Died. It's not a great article, but I think it's much better than what had gone before (on the AfD, 23skidoo has changed his vote to keep). While it could certainly be expanded, it maintains an encyclopedic tone, establishes an amount of notability and includes external hyperlinks. Thoughts?

Have a cheerful 2007! Anville 20:34, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Keep - re-written version, with note to move to And Chaos Died SkierRMH 21:29, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Redirects with no target

You can just tag these for speedy deletion with {{delete|Redirect has no target}}. —Centrx→talk • 23:40, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Delete sorting

Please do not put delete sorting tags on AFDs unless you actually transclude the AFD discussions on the respective delete sorting pages. I had to correct a bunch of anime and manga AFDs that you tagged as being included on the list of Anime and manga-related deletions when they were not. The tags are meaningless if you don't put them on the lists. --Farix (Talk) 21:49, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

AFD tag is not vandalism

My edit to add the AFD tag to 2Advanced wasn't vandalism - it's a wikivertisment. --87.80.43.97 10:57, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

• note; this was an incomplete AfD done by an ISP, article was frequently vandalized, ergo assumption this was another attempt.

re Gay icon

That was weird. When an article is tagged for AfD but no corresponding deletion-argument page is made, someone usually puts it forward by placing it on the list as a procedural nomination. But that means that no argument is actually made for deletion. So I can see the point of just removing the AfD tag from the article. Anyway it was speedily kept so no harm. Herostratus 18:35, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Planet Family Guy screenshots

Hey -- just wanted to say, thanks for your good work in replacing those watermarked images. Mangojuice^talk 20:13, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Ayinde Bakare

Please don't be too hurried to speedy tag articles like this one (as you did only a few minutes after it was created). This article did clearly assert the notability of the subject, and dead Nigerian musicians aren't exactly over-represented in Wikipedia. If you still think it should be deleted, you can obviously take it to AFD. up◦land 10:13, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Nominated for AfD 1/18/07

Contesting prod of Alhaji Abass Akande Obesere

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Alhaji Abass Akande Obesere, which you proposed for deletion, because I feel that this article should not be deleted from Wikipedia. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still feel the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 18:14, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Note; nominated for AfD 1/18/07

Thanks for the Heads

Thanks for the Welcome and for the heads up on the page. Sorry about the edit I keep on forgetting this is a talk page and not an article. SherwinA 07:27, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Needs album infobox

I've just been trying to work out who has been whittling down the Category:Needs album infobox. I left it at 50 last night and come in to start up again and it was at 11. Thank you very much for the assistance! :D Bubba hotep 08:50, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

deletion of Garnish (accessories)

I agree that it should probably be deleted. I just did not know what to do with it. It was on the original Garnish (food) article (at the end of the article), where I did not think it belonged. Didn't want to delete cuz I though it was important info that should be conveyed somehow. Where do you suggest that info should be conveyed; or should it just be ignored? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by LAZY 1L (talk • contribs) 04:45, 21 January 2007 (UTC).

Thanks!

Thanks for removing the vandalism from Core Democratic Values, I set up the page so it was nice to know someone took the time.--Plattler01 04:59, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Copyrights

Oh, the {{helpme}} tag was used on the user page, so I didn't notice. I think you're right, in any case. Xiner (talk, email) 01:08, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanx for response and advice

Thank you for your prompt and useful response to my plea for help on copyright issues for translations of lyrics. Appreciate the comments. Oh, and hope your vacation in real life was good. (Heli-skiing in Canada?) --Technopat 23:00, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Cran

I noticed that you placed a DB tag on Cran. While I agree with you that the (apparent) subject didn't meet WP:N, the original article was actually a disambig page that had nothing to do with the artist. I've restored the page to original form and left a note on the talk pages of the three editors in question letting them know. Just wanted to keep you up to date. janejellyroll 07:41, 24 January 2007 (UTC)