Jump to content

User talk:South Bay/Archive

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


Scottsdale, AZ

Hi, I changed your edit to Scottsdale, AZ to more accurately reflect which cities border it. Also, the comment about $5 million homes is probably not germane to the introduction, and would need a reference.JackWilliams (talk) 21:45, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Clarity in encyclopedia articles

In your edit [1] you suggested that a city votes. In the United States, a city does not vote - people vote. A city is a division of government, not a voting block or group. Please be careful with your edits. Thank you. --64.181.90.91 (talk) 01:03, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Hello

My edits are biased in favor of truth, accuracy, and citing sources. I corrected your mistake. In the Trickle-down economics article, you said the Bush tax cut was "just for the wealthiest percentile." I corrected it, and I even quoted your source, which said "The tax rate declined across all income levels." In other words, I am biased in favor of truth, accuracy, and citing sources. Grundle2600 (talk) 22:50, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

We apparantley have a disagreement, both of us claim to be right but unfortunately only Buddha knows the truth!! Nissanaltima (talk) 22:52, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Swing states

The map shows states with margins of victories within 5% in 2004; Kerry got around 52% of the vote in Oregon compared to Bush's 48%, so Kerry's margin of victory there was 4%. We use 2004's swing states on that page since using 2008's tends to involve too much original research. SteveSims (talk) 09:35, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Las Vegas, Nevada image

You do realize that nothing in the image you added to the Las Vegas, Nevada article is from Las Vegas? That are all from places not in the city. Vegaswikian (talk) 01:32, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Lawyer pictures

In my opinion the pictures you chose for the lawyer article could be seen as in conflict with the wiki ideal of neutrality. It had been proposed by other editors that one of these pictures be used, but since they are all European, perhaps they are not objective either. In my opinion, the primary function of content is to inform, therefore perhaps a picture is not necessary at all. Zoticogrillo (talk) 07:50, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello. Concerning your contribution, JMP Securities, please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). This article or image appears to be a direct copy from {{{url}}}. As a copyright violation, JMP Securities appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. JMP Securities has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message.

If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:

  • If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at Talk:JMP Securities and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
  • If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:JMP Securities with a link to where we can find that note.
  • If you hold the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:JMP Securities.

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you. Wsmitchell3 (talk) 05:29, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Matthews Asian Funds

A tag has been placed on Matthews Asian Funds, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add {{hangon}} on the top of Matthews Asian Funds and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Wsmitchell3 (talk) 14:06, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

L.A Insurance

A tag has been placed on L.A Insurance, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add {{hangon}} on the top of L.A Insurance and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Wsmitchell3 (talk) 14:09, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Geico

GEICO is irrefutably notable given that it meets the general notability guideline. I noticed that you had some articles about insurance companies that were deleted, and could imagine that maybe you nominated GEICO as a retalitory move. Please do not disrupt Wikipedia to make a point. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 22:57, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

I stand by my decision to delete it, Blantant advertising. thank you South Bay (talk) 22:59, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
It's not. Just because one of your articles got deleted doesn't mean you can get revenge by noming other articles. CWii(Talk|Contribs) 23:05, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
WP:POINT applies here. CWii(Talk|Contribs) 23:10, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
(EC) If nothing else, can you at least specify how you think it's "blatant advertising"? We do have the template {{advertisement}} for articles on notable topics that are written in an ad-like tone. There's no reason to delete anything that irrefutably meets notability. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 23:11, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

{{un-retired}}

No one cares. Really CWii(Talk|Contribs) 23:17, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't mean to be rude, but State Farm Insurance is notable, and your nomination for the article's deletion was in bad faith. Bearian (talk) 01:39, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Your use of the administrators' noticeboard

  1. Please stop asking questions which can only be answered properly boy getting personal information about the admins (like you did here and here).
  2. Please use descriptive headers for your sections - headers which will help users decide if they want to read the sections.
  3. When starting a new thread on the noticeboard, please use the link which says "Click here to start a new discussion thread", or this link which links to the same place, or the new section tab which exists on every discussion page).

עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:45, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Template:User Crap

I see that you recently created this userbox, but that no one is using it, not even you. I have to admit I am having a hard time understanding what the point of this userbox is and who would be likely to post it on their page, or perhaps it is a metaphorical comment of some kind? - Ahunt (talk) 13:17, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

The very same reason people use this and this and this. Thanks South Bay (talk) 20:46, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Okay thanks - at least those boxes are used on people's pages. - Ahunt (talk) 21:43, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
I guess an admin found it; "13:34, 12 February 2009 Orangemike (Talk | contribs) deleted "Template:User Crap" ‎ (G3: Vandalism)" - Ahunt (talk) 14:12, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Cost-U-Less Insurance

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Cost-U-Less Insurance, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Claims of notability not supported by tertiary sources; article is essentially an advertisement.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. §FreeRangeFrog 08:39, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Cost-U-Less Insurance

A tag has been placed on Cost-U-Less Insurance, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the article or have a copy emailed to you. ukexpat (talk) 15:47, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Admin

I'll tell you right away where my candidacy is likely to fall apart. I work on a ton of stuff at the same time to get them to WP:GA. I try to keep one thing in the WP:FAC pipeline at all times to help raise their quality above GA quality. The army of folks over there will probably contest my nomination as a person lacking the understanding of allocation of resources. If you were to say the purpose of an FAC is in part to take things already well polished to the next level and in part to get attention of a broad spectrum of people to clean up an article they would like to see the types of articles appearing at FAC as about 5-10% the latter and 90-95% the former. Since I work on a lot of stuff at one time my nominees tend to be more like 60-40%. They get annoyed that I am wasting their resources. Yes I do a lot of good work, but they will say I waste a lot of their time with premature candidates. My nomination will get crushed from the army of people who feel this way. You should talk with those folks before wasting your time on my nomination.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 14:40, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

Thanks! - Ahunt (talk) 02:05, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Adobe lightroom.png

An image that you uploaded or altered, File:Adobe lightroom.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. — neuro(talk)(review) 09:01, 21 March 2009 (UTC) --— neuro(talk)(review) 09:01, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

Thanks, although I would certainly love it if you could mention which articles/edits have attracted your interest. In any event, thank you! Cheers, ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 20:16, 23 March 2009 (UTC)


Thanks for the advice

I probably should have majored in english instead of chemical engineering so I could make highly useful grammatical edits here on wikipedia and make a more valuable contribution to society. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.65.229.151 (talk) 14:38, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

For future reference, lambasting users on their grammar is pretty rude, and not necessary, there are plenty of people to correct it. Thanks. ╟─TreasuryTag►contribs─╢ 07:38, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Notice

Hello, South Bay. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at WP:AN regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. ╟─TreasuryTag►contribs─╢ 06:43, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of File:Neil Diamond - Caroline.ogg

A tag has been placed on File:Neil Diamond - Caroline.ogg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I10 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a file that is not an image, sound file or video clip [i.e. a Word document or PDF file] that has no encyclopedic use.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. South Bay (talk) 02:47, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

RFA thanks

My RFA passed today at 61/5/4. Thanks for participating in my RFA. I appreciate all the comments I received and will endeavor to justify the trust the WP community has placed in me. Have a nice day. :-) AdjustShift (talk) 21:36, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Your Welcome:) South Bay (talk) 02:07, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Re: Wow

Why thank you. :) –Juliancolton | Talk 13:24, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:South_Bay/Archive&oldid=1149997543"