User talk:Star Mississippi/Archives/2009/July

StarM

I have found a user on Uncyclopedia remotely related to you. In fact, the only relationship the both of you seem to have is the username. There is also a user of my name. I was hoping on your collaboration to help find out more about this. These people are not only giving us a bad name, but also to Wikipedia and Jimmy Wales. For this purpose, I have created an account in Uncyclopedia. You can access it by clicking here. If you decide to help me, then please leave a message in my talk page. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kdpsssps (talk • contribs) 14:13, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

in this connection, please see AN/I, at [1]. DGG (talk) 01:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, commented there. StarM 01:46, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Early halloween??/

or perhaps, an onslaught of Orioles fans?. Heh. Keeper | 76 19:19, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Don't know how to play videos. But sky turning orange. Was that Friday? Freaky post-rain deluge. StarM 01:43, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Museum at Bethel Woods

Since we can't seem to come to a consensus I've nominated for deletion. But I'm not strictly speaking advocating deletion, in the sense of wiping it off the face of the earth. As you can see, I've voted to "redirect" and what I'm seeking to do here is to move the article bodily over to Bethel Woods. Bethel Woods at the moment is really far too short, and I think that's because information on the museum is not in it. Just wanted to clarify what I'm doing here, as I know you created the article and I mean no offense.--JohnnyB256 (talk) 16:11, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

thanks, I'll comment there. StarM 02:16, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the compliment!

Hi- TYVM for the compliment! I'm still planning on working on travel literature some more, but haven't had a chance yet. Hope you had a nice 4th of July weekend! --Funandtrvl (talk) 03:13, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Introduction

Hi, StarM. DGG suggested that I introduce myself. I have helped Pharos and DGG on a couple of projects, including Jewish Museum (New York) and the project to teach people about Wikipedia at the New York Public Library. Unfortunately, I am going to be too busy to help with much prior to Labor Day, but I would be please to collaborate with you in the future. I the meantime, all the best! -- Ssilvers (talk) 01:57, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Nice to "meet" you Ssilvers. I too will be pretty busy this summer, including an overseas trip from next week, but I look forward to working with you in the future. When I'm not on wikibreak, please let me know if I can help w anything. StarM 02:34, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Sarah Will

No problem, I've done a lot of work on Paralympic biographies so I know the categories by heart. Happy editing, — jwillbur 04:49, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

When "Snow" is inappropriate

I have some doubts about deleting an article after only 23 hours under any circumstances, but there's a special factor in the case of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Russell (Florida politician) (2nd nomination): It was a second nomination. A previous nomination, allowed to go the normal distance, resulted in the article being kept. In fact, more editors supported "Keep" than "Delete".

My personal opinion is that, when an article has survived AfD, anyone renominating it should be required to notify everyone who previously commented against deletion. Such a general rule would prevent the gaming the system that's involved in incessant renominations. That rule isn't policy, but, at a minimum, the editors who favor keeping the article should have a reasonable time in which to reiterate their position.

Given this unusual situation, I suggest that you reverse your deletion and allow the AfD to go the normal five days. JamesMLane t c 00:20, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

done. I don't happen to agree with you, and commenting only to those who voted against deletion is probably a violation of WP:CANVASS, you raise some valid points so I undeleted and relisted. Would suggest that those who care about the article/subject watchlist it in the event it's AfDed, which can happen at any time-never mind a 2.5 year old AfD which is in no way gaming the system. StarM 01:40, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the relisting. I do have the article watchlisted but this deletion came and went while I was offline. This particular renomination wasn't gaming the system, but other renominations have been.

These two points (people don't always notice an AfD listing, and some renoms are abusive) are why I think the notification I described should be required. The evil addressed by WP:CANVASS is that people try to stack the deck by selectively notifying editors likely to agree with them. My proposal is that people would have to notify editors likely to disagree with them -- on a renom at AfD, the renominator should notify those who didn't support deletion, and on a DRV to review a deletion, the proponent of overturning should notify those who supported the original decision. (I would that, having made the required notifications to "the enemy", the person initiating the discussion may then notify everyone else who participated in the previous discussion.) JamesMLane t c 10:19, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

• It's worth pointing out two things 1) The first AfD was a no consensus, so keep was just the default and 2) as the inclusionists love to point out, AfD's aren't a vote, so just having more keep than delete isn't a real yardstick to go by. Niteshift36 (talk) 20:37, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Neither of those statements undermines my point in the slightest. JamesMLane t c 08:58, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
• Wasn't trying to "undermine" them since there was nothing sneaky, underhanded or insidious about what I said. My comments did, however, put your characterization about the article being kept in the first AfD into proper perspective and point out that it is not relevant how many "keep" votes there were versus "delete" votes. It's also worth noting that 3 days later the AfD was closed as a SNOW (sounds familiar) and that, since you want to count votes, it was 15-2 to delete. Niteshift36 (talk) 09:20, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
  • The number of !votes is relevant to the specific point I was making. In the special circumstance that a prior AfD has revealed the existence of substantial community support for keeping an article, then a "Snow" close after less than a full day is inappropriate. The point of a "Snow" closure is that there's no reason to think that more time will change the result. When there's such a previous AfD, however, it gives reason to think that the result might indeed change from the first day's returns. If the pro-deletion point of view has become stronger since the prior AfD, then the article can be deleted after the normal five-day run, as happened here. JamesMLane t c 13:23, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
• It obviously didn't make a difference. The outcome after relisting mirrored the results of the first closure. The same snowball just got bigger. Niteshift36 (talk) 13:48, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't mind discussion. As I said initially, I had no thoughts that re-opening the AfD would change the outcome but I'm always willing to discuss legit requests, which this certainly was. I've actually been offline so didn't know it was re-closed as snow. JamesM, I trust you're satisfied with this outcome? If not, suggest WP:DRV rather than another re-opening. StarM 01:40, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm certainly not satisfied with the substance of any outcome that removes encyclopedic information and thus undermines Wikipedia's usefulness. As to the process, however, the second closure came more than five days after the listing, which was what I asked for. (Snow was still inappropriate, for the same reasons as before, but this was "snow" in name only.) I don't see any basis for a DRV, which isn't there to accommodate my disagreement with excessive deletionism. Like you, I thought that relisting would probably not preserve the article, but there was a chance, and I appreciate your respecting the process. JamesMLane t c 16:38, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Good points. I don't really think this is excessive deletionism do much as this politician not meeting the guidelines of notability. There are times I think we're too lenient, but others where we're not nearly inclusive enough. My particular bias in that respect is that I think all museums are notable, there has to be something written about these collections we just can't always find it. I'm always willing to relist except in obvious cases of trolling, spam, etc. which this clearly wasn't. Have a good day and nice weekend. StarM 02:28, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of Oz Kilim

I would like you put back the page because as mentioned several times his food is at a very high level and he will have a book. If you would like to see why his food is worth having a page look at Oz_Kilim images in wikimedia. Please, oh please put it back, I would be very grateful.

Thank you in advance (assuming you do put it back) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spareaccount123 (talk • contribs) 23:54, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Nope, not a chance. Also using one account to get around a block is block-evading and sock puppetry. You may return to editing when your main account is unblocked, but there's no evidence you're noable and Oz Kilim will not be able to be created. This is not a fan site. StarM 00:07, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

I am sorry for any angering you, this is still spareaccount123 and lewishnl, it is just that I believe that this person deserves a wikipedia page and due to your own rules it says that if the page has any possibility of having importance it should not be deleted. As you can see in the images the dishes make the person noteworthy. If you believe otherwise please justify why and please stop blocking my account because it is very annoying. I am sorry, but I believe that it is noteworthy and wikipedia's policy says anything that has any possibility of being noteworthy the page should not be deleted.

Sorry

Please put back the page, if you do, I will be very grateful if you do.

Thank you in advance, (and if you don't, you know I'll just come back, [no threats, just please,please])

Please, oh please put back the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Useraccount123456789 (talk • contribs) 12:44, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Nope, please read WP:NOTABILITY. There is no evidence that he/you are notable. Pictures of food is not evidence of notability. You admit yourself it's an "upcoming chef" who's working on a first book. When you're successful and have a book, there will be reliable sources that confirm notability. Until then, te article will not be created. You're in violation of sockpuppetry rules and any accounts will be indefinitely blocked. Please wait until your original account is unblocked. StarM 15:51, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Demon kiss (upcoming novel)

I sympathized with your comment in the prod tag you placed on the above-captioned page. I decided that material about a novel without any mention of the author or publisher was "not enough context to identify the subject"; this might be useful to you in the future. Accounting4Taste:talk 01:49, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

wholly agree, and will likely use it for "X is debut album with 5 tracks" with no evidence on who the artist(s) are, let alone notability. Thanks for the heads up. I was just glad the creator didn't contest because I didn't want to have to take it to AfD. Thanks for the tip StarM 02:15, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of Insite Security

I apologize for making too many changes at once. I see you commented a few times on the page. I am new to creating Wikipedia pages and am still having a hard time figuring out why this page was deleted. Can you explain it a little more? This is a client of mine who has been in the business press quite a bit lately. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nmilman (talk • contribs) 20:11, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

I deleted it once, it has been deleted seven times, including a deletion discussion, which can be found at: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Insite Security. You working on an article of a client may fall afoul of the conflict of interest guidelines, which you should read. If you want to have it restored, I suggest you prepare a draft in your userspace and present it for deletion review. I'll be unable to assist you further as I'll be offline. You may also ask at the Help Desk if you need additional assistance. Thanks StarM 02:19, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Tsk

This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you create an inappropriate page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.

:P J.delanoy^gabs_adds 00:15, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

goes to stand in my corner :( StarM 00:17, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

hehehe :-) J.delanoy^gabs_adds 00:19, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

of course I only remembered about the test pages in new admin school after I started playing, but warning myself is fun. Love the CSD Helper script so much. StarM 00:21, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

If the script does something like query the API to find the page's creator, that would have been even better :D J.delanoy^gabs_adds 00:22, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Don't know if it queried exactly, but it recognized that Star Mississippi was the creator, just not that the admin was warning the creator. I like it for converting CSDs to prod and notifying author of declined speedy, conversion, etc.

[unindent] I came here while reading the Ace (volleyball) AFD; how did this happen? Did you warn yourself? Makes me think of someone I saw recently on Commons who nominated some self-created images for deletion: the scripts involved in COmmons nominations led him to warn himself of deletion several times :-) Nyttend (talk) 03:48, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Yep, see here. I was trying out a new script that converts speedies, explains why if you decline, converts to PROD, etc. I'd forgotten about new admin school and the dummy accounts there I could have warned, so I warned myself a few times and tried out the messages figuring I could at least be my own victim. Funny that the script doesn't catch and prevent that, since I think at least one I declined was a "G7" and it let that go through StarM 03:58, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Project update for WP:WPTOUR

Hi again, I see that you're a member of the Tourism project. A few of us are trying to re-organize and consolidate several of the Travel WPs. If you're interested in helping out, see: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tourism for more details. Thanks and enjoy your trip!! --Funandtrvl (talk) 22:14, 22 July 2009 (UTC)