User talk:Sulfurboy/Archive/2013/October

Unique Flavor

Thank you for reviewing the article created by me. I would like to ask if you have any comments regarding the article. Thanks! HYH.124 (talk) 11:22, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

I think you might have gone a little overboard with the tables on the page, but I didn't it tag this since I am running on the assumption that if someone is searching for something so specific they won't mind the overkill of info. Thanks for your work.

Yes, I am just translating directly from the corresponding Chinese article just with some modifications. HYH.124 (talk) 12:31, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

I am just worried that reviewers would tag it as unreferenced, even though there are many TV shows on Wikipedia that are not and cannot be cited with references. HYH.124 (talk) 12:34, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Hannam University Korean Language Institute

Hi! Thanks for having concern with the article I've created. I think some user mistakenly put the cost of this institute. But he reverted. :) It just purely contains information about the institute. Could you review it again and help me to keep it? :) Thanks -Nancyinthehouse (talk) 12:16, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Nancy, the page was an unambiguous advert. It has no place on wikipedia. All articles should be written neutrally from multiple viewpoints and without peacock language.

Speedy deletion nomination of Fairfax Public School (Old Fairfax Elementary School Annex)

I am planning on adding to the page, but just haven't had the chance. But if it'd be better to delete until I have more content ready, I'm fine with that. - Wiki publius (talk) 01:18, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

user: wiki publiusIt's already done now. I have a personal disliking towards the very inclusionary policy for schools here. There's hundreds of thousands of schools in the world and the criterion for inclusion is very loose. I would say at the very least, in the future have at least your stub written when you are going to create an article. An article sure looks funny when all it is an infobox.Sulfurboy (talk) 01:44, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Magnus Bromelius

Hi, Thanks for reviewing the page on Magnus Bromelius. I have now added one inline citation that covers all of the text. I would have though the citing of the other language wikipedia would have sufficed, but this was an easy fix. I agree there also was one translation issue that I have now corrected, but perhaps there are more. Perhaps if you could be specific if your issues are with grammar, style, cohesion, tone, spelling or which combination of these, I could further improve the page. Kind regards, Dwergenpaartje (talk) 08:44, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Dwergenpaartje. I will go back either in the next day or two and fix the grammatical errors in the article since it's so short. I'm assuming that English might not be your first language, as the grammatical errors are very minor and mostly syntax related. Leave me another message to remind me if I haven't fixed and removed the tag within the next 72 hours. Sulfurboy (talk) 08:47, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

John Horridge

You recently reviewed an article I created and tagged it as follows; "This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed." The article in question uses in line citations throughout from established and widely recognised reliable sources which are accuratly recorded in the reference section. Therefore, I assume you have tagged it in error, so I have deleted your tag. If you think this is wrong, please explain which part of the article you think is not adequetly cited. Graemp (talk) 08:52, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Graemp. The tag was not in error, if you note your reference section you will see that reference one and two just say "www.ukWhosWho.com" and do not link directly to the article you are sourcing your information from. I am resorting the tag, please feel free to remove it when you've corrected the issue. Thanks for you hard work on the article. Sulfurboy (talk) 09:02, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not require cited sources to have on-line links. In this case, had I provided one, it would not have provided access to that source for any non-subscriber to the site. Thanks for your interest. Graemp (talk) 09:11, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Regardless of this, you still need to provide to provide a direct link, Graemp, if for no other reason than for baseline verification. If you are unable to to do so, then quite obviously the tag should remain, as additional sources would be needed since those you provided cannot be verified.Sulfurboy (talk) 09:14, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

If you glance at my contributions page Sulfurboy you will see a large number of articles that I have either created or added to. The vast majority include this particular source, referenced in the same way. You are the first reviewer I have encountered who did not like this form of verification. Graemp (talk) 09:20, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

self created section due to commenter not correctly creating section

Tanjir H Chowdhury (talk) 10:23, 22 October 2013 (UTC)I am new user in Wikipedia. You sent a message in my talk page. What more steps should I take to improve the information of Mirpur Govt. High School. Please inform me in details.

Declined speedy deletion

I have just declined your speedy deletion nomination of Atif Ali Khan as a repost of an article deleted as a result of a deletion discussion. The new article bears very little resemblance to the old one, and in fact it is so different that I am not even sure whether it refers to a different person of the same name. However, this is not to say that the article may bot qualify for deletion for some other reason. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:25, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, James, I simply didn't do enough due diligence on my own before requesting the speedy delete. Basically just assumed via the bot and by the fact that the article seemed to have similar issues to the one mentioned by said bot that it must be a recreation. I should have taken the time to review the old deleted article. Apologies and thanks. Sulfurboy (talk) 10:30, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure how you could have reviewed the old deleted article, since you are not an administrator, unless you have access to a copy of it saved somewhere. Under the circumstances, it seems to me the best thing you could do was exactly what you did, which is put a speedy deletion tag on the article, to alert an admin, who does have access to the deleted article, and can check it. My own impression, based on the new article, is that notability is very doubtful, but I have not done a search for more sources. (Please note the correction to my typo in my message above: I didn't intend to say anything about bots.) JamesBWatson (talk) 10:57, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Ruby Velle & The Soulphonics

I created this article about a band that appears to me to be significant but I did not have time to track down references for information about why I consider the topic significant and don't want to write any uncited and/or unverified claims. I appreciate your note of explanation in my talk page but your extremely speedy deletion is discouraging me from trying to contribute. Is it possible to recover the deleted page so that I do not have to start from scratch when I am ready to provide more information. CaptainLepton (talk) 10:40, 22 October 2013 (UTC) — Preceding comment added by CaptainLepton (talk • contribs) 10:33, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

After reading New Page Patrol I understand what you are doing and appreciate your contribution. Can it not be left with a stub tag while I work on expanding the content? CaptainLepton (talk) 10:43, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

As long as you source and establish notability the article can be a stub until you plan to expand it.Sulfurboy (talk) 10:44, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

My talk page

Hey, thanks for patrolling my newly-created articles, but you don't have to add a new section on my talk page every time! :P Thanks though. Ithinkicahn (talk) 11:21, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Lol, sorry Ithinkicahn, it's automatically done with page curation tools. I try to notice if I'm reviewing multiple articles by the same person and turn it off, but sometimes (err most of the time really) I don't notice. Just feel free to delete or archive those notices. Thanks for all your hard work. Sulfurboy (talk) 11:24, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

No problem at all, I like the appreciation. ;) I'm here flipping through 4 different textbooks and manuscripts at a time, save me. Ithinkicahn (talk) 11:36, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

3O filing

I have removed your filing at WP:3O. 3O listings should link to article Talk pages where there has been a discussion; your link was to an editor's Talk page. If you would like, you are welcome to relist your case with an appropriate link to an article Talk page. Thank you. DonIago (talk) 12:59, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, my first time filing one of those and seemed to mess up the order. Issues has been resolved by a neutral editor now though. Sulfurboy (talk) 01:55, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Glad to hear it was sorted out! DonIago (talk) 13:11, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Fort Lauderdale Strikers

Thanks for reviewing the pages and giving me a complement. I really appreciate that! It gives more motivation to continue expanding the work in greater detail. If you have anything you would like for me to add or create in relevance to the subject, just let me know. Take care. NYCWikiKid (talk) 13:43, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Glad to hear it, NYCWikiKid. Seeing well made pages is just as refreshing for me in new page patrol. I personally don't really know much about the subject of your article, so I wouldn't really have any opinion. Sulfurboy (talk) 03:03, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

All in all, thank you for the support! NYCWikiKid (talk) 03:11, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Minipiano

Hi Graham - thanks for taking a look at the minipiano article; before posting it I worked on solving some of the issues you brought up with another writer/editor (Jim Bleak). It's not easy to adapt your writing style so specifically to a particular style and avoid making anything that sounds like an opinion when you're addressing a subject that is problematic, but we finally thought we'd ironed these issues out and I was advised to post the article. I'll try to further address some of the things you mentioned on the talkpage of the minipiano article and will welcome any changes people make. The problem remains, however, that everytime I try to make the article more exact and less essay-like, the longer it gets as I try to more specifically reference anything I refer to of a technical nature (i.e. range of the instrument, necessity of comparing the instrument with piano). I wish you the best of luck with your work. Kind regards Zachar Alexander Laskewicz 15:10, 22 October 2013 (UTC)ZaxanderUser:Zaxander

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Sir my page New R. S. J. public School Senior Secondary had been tagged with speedy deletion. kindly remove this tag because there was no purpose of advertisement. you can tell me what is promotional so that i can remove it. please kindly remove the tag fast. Pratham 15:55, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Rapper Chunk

Thanks for reviewing the article on rap artist Chunk. Ben0kto (talk) 20:19, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Eva Klotz

Hi Sulfurboy, could you please help me fix the apparent problems with the page about Eva Klotz that I wrote? Maybe I am your typical dumb American, but I am not understanding the issues commpletely... Your help on this one could give me a leg up for my next page. Kind regards, --Mondschein English (talk) 06:15, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

U-19 Volleyball

You're welcome :) --Fayçal.09 (talk) 11:53, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Typo in your FAQ

In the section "Will you help me fix issues you tagged on my page?", The last sentence should read, "The tea house is..." not "...if..." HYH.124 (talk) 12:29, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing it out.Sulfurboy (talk) 12:31, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Talkback (from Schneile)

Hello, Graham. Thank you for having a look at the Parker Liautaud article. I have left a reply to your comment on the article's talk page. Many thanks. Schneile (talk) 13:14, 23 October 2013 (UTC)schneile

Gulf Drilling International article

Dear Sulfurboy,

We have submitted our article twice, after having re-writing it. Could you give us an example of how to avoid it sounding promotional as it is very unclear to us?

Awaiting your response.

Thank you, Tek hai — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tek hai (talk • contribs) 13:44, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Spam covers it.Sulfurboy (talk) 13:48, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Jerry Carroll

Thanks for reviewing the article Jerry Carroll (comedian). I didn't know it was mandatory for pages to have links. Thanks for informing me. I have created links to that page and removed the tag.

Take care Just A Common Guy (talk) 15:16, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Np Just A Common Guy, it's a very minor and common issue. Thanks for taking care of it. Sulfurboy (talk) 15:17, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Pushpak Express

Hi, thanks for your positive comment on the Pune Ahmedabad Duronto Express. I need some help from you on another matter. Another editor is repeatedly editing Pushpak Express & instead of explaining his reasons on the talk page, he is quoting pages to read. I have read them & i still cant understand what he wants. A little help would be appreciated. Superfast1111 (talk) 06:47, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Looks as if other neutral editors are already helping so I'm going to stay out of it. Sulfurboy (talk) 09:10, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Well thanks anyway. The issue seems to have been sorted out. Superfast1111 (talk) 05:04, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Could you point out a page to me where all of the issues you have raised have been addressed thus enabling me to have a template for future use. And what do you have against the flag of India?? Superfast1111 (talk) 04:43, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Seems the issue on most of your pages is there not being any sourced references. If you've gone back and added references, then feel free to remove the tag. And I don't know what you're talking about with India? Sulfurboy (talk) 04:51, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Mick Zais

I responded on the talk page. Please review. ProudGamecock (talk) 17:30, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Tag removed. Sulfurboy (talk) 04:42, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Hollywood Dun It

Hi Sulfurboy, just a quick howdy to let you know that WikiProject Equine is now aware that the Hollywood Dun It article has been created and we are "on it" to look at improving content. I am specifically going to flag User:Ealdgyth to look at it, as she has multiple GAs and FAs on various famous Quarter Horses and should be able to do some fast cleanup and sourcing. This particular horse is most definitely notable and the article is needed, so we will be glad to work with or without the creating editor to whip it into shape! Thanks for your efforts there! Montanabw^(talk) 03:00, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Renato Abella

Hello Sulfurboy. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Renato Abella, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Article claims coverage in reliable sources. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 03:18, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Female education and human development page

Hi Sulfurboy, thanks for attending to my page. I was wondering if you thought the page I created should be kept. The issue had been raised of whether it was appropriate for Wikipedia, and given that it is for a school assignment it is somewhat important for me to know whether or not this is a valid article topic to pursue and/or if serious changes need to be made. Thanks! Bwl5 (talk) 04:52, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Hyperlink to the page please? Sulfurboy (talk) 04:54, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Sorry about that, I misspelled it in the title. Female education and economic development -Bwl5 (talk) 14:24, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

I don't see any nominations for deletion? I'm assuming it was removed? Sulfurboy (talk) 18:16, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Takaharu Tezuka

Hi Sulfurboy. I can fully understand why you put this article forward for speedy deletion but I'm glad I caught it before it disappeared. It may look as if it's self promotional but in fact it's based largely on Wikipedia's Japanese article which has a history going back to 2008 with contributions from numerous editors (see here). I certainly do not think user "Bule archi" is a sock although he may well be associated with Tezuka's firm. I think he simply came in to put the article up in English. As you will now see from the additions and references I have included in the article, Tezuka is widely recognized and has received some of Japan's major awards for architecture. He certainly deserves a page on the English Wikipedia.--Ipigott (talk) 10:39, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Assorted "Seal Island" pages

Thanks! Pdfpdf (talk) 14:11, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

HKA test

I'm cleaning this up. I assume you just forgot to do so. If I did this in error, please revert me. Bearian (talk) 22:31, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Canadian Equestrian Team

Thanks for looking over the new article I started on the Canadian Equestrian Team CanFan57 (talk) 22:53, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Mount Sungay

Thanks for the supportive review on the article (Mount Sungay) I just started. Briarfallen (talk) 23:51, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

SEED Infotech Ltd.

Hi Sulfurboy. Thank you for your help with the SEED Infotech page. I've tried fix the issues that you pointed out. My article is still unreviewed though - could you let me know how to fix that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by FhDigi (talk • contribs) 06:23, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Looks as if someone else beat me to it.Sulfurboy (talk) 14:00, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

thanks for the review

I can't find my stuff, mensatop2 Mensatop2 (talk) 07:07, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Chunk

Hi Sulfurboy. It has been a couple of days since you last looked at the Chunk article, however it seems to lack a significant number (or level) of noteworthy (or text) sources. I know there has to be some more out there though, since he is a notable bay area artist who has been around for quite some time. I have moved his name to the Chunk disambiguation page and will continue to keep digging. Thanks again Ben0kto (talk) 16:20, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Nasim Sdn Bhd

Hi there. . I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Nasim Sdn Bhd, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The copyvio has been rectified. I can't see a previous deletion discussion, so can't judge on that. Note that CSD and PROD do not count, only AfD. It is still quite spammy, and I'll tag it as such. Not sure it's spam deletable, but I won't object if you want to tag it as such. . Thank you. GedUK  13:52, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

GedUK , the issue also was the article creator blatantly and repeatedly removing csd and tags added on the page. Was hoping that would be noticed on review as it seems there still has been no page protection placed, we need this guy put on timeout or something so we can get tags placed and try to clean up the page.Sulfurboy (talk) 16:30, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi there. Removing tags and CSD tags isn't a reason to delete the page though. I'll have a look over their contributions again and give them a warning/block as necessary. Thanks for the clarification. GedUK  12:07, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Adding an item on Wikidata directly

Hi.

I would like to create an item to link my User pages in various languages. Do you know how to create an item on Wikidata directly? If so, do guide me on it. Thanks! HYH.124 (talk) 15:39, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I'm not familiar with this. Were you able to find help from someone else? Sulfurboy (talk) 09:26, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

created section for author who formatted comment wrong

Hello I have improved Half_Bad now. Can you review it maybe? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by JanHalfBad (talk • contribs) 23:24, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

JanHalfBad, I have removed the orphan tag. Primary tag stands as article relies nearly entirely on primary sources. Please also make sure you format comments you leave on my talk page correctly and sign all your posts. Thanks, Sulfurboy (talk) 23:27, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

UMG Recordings, Inc. v. Shelter Capital Partners LLC

Hi, thanks for looking over my article. Is the page really an orphan? I added links from Veoh and Viacom International Inc. v. YouTube, Inc. prior to your comment, and it's showing up in the what links here tool. (I plan to add more incoming links as I find them.) Or am I not understanding what an orphan is? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tnishi237 (talk • contribs) 01:01, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Tag removed. I'm unsure why in my page curation tools it's show up as an orphan (as like you said it shows pages linking to it in the what links here page). Sorry for the inconvenience, Tnishi237. Sulfurboy (talk) 01:03, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Page protection requests

If it's only one editor causing problems, consider WP:AIV. If there is anything you ever need, just ask. Best wishes, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:24, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Ways to improve List of LSU Tigers football poll history

Thanks for letting me know. I plan to add more to the page and knew it after I created it. Finished it after being up for approx 20 hours, so knew it wasn't my best work ever. Take care. User:spatms (talk) 06:44, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Jay Steensma

Hi Sulfurboy, what would you suggest for reference cleanup? Thanks for your inputTomseattle (talk) 03:29, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Tomseattle, please hyperlink to the article. Thanks. Sulfurboy (talk) 03:30, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, thought you meant you'd already placed a hyperlink to a reference cleanup article.Tomseattle (talk) 03:55, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

No problem, the issues seems to be that you have repeat references listed, which should be condensed. If you had the references repeat because you were gathering the information from different pages or editions then you should format the reference to state the page number, etc. Does that make sense? (kind of tired, here). Sulfurboy (talk) 09:25, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Sulfurboy.

Please put tag elimination in The Good Die Young (Scorpions). Create this article was a mistake. Please delete it. Thanks you.

Done. Sulfurboy (talk) 03:54, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Sijo Kuruvilla George

Hello Sulfurboy,

Thanks for letting me know that new articles on Living persons need references, I have mistakenly placed two links from reputed news papers in India The Hindu http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/byte-by-byte-in-gods-own-country/article3886025.ece and Deccan Chronicle http://www.deccanchronicle.com/131009/lifestyle-offbeat/article/cool-calm-and-oh-so-young in External links section. Now I have made them references.

Startup Village has created an emerging startup ecosystem in Kerala which is recognized by Government of India as the next big thing in Indian entrepreneurship ecosystem.

BBC and Reuters have written about it:

BBC on Startup Village: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22205601 Reuters on Startup Village: http://in.reuters.com/article/2012/12/04/india-technology-startupvillage-entrepre-idINDEE8B20GO20121204

As the co-founder and CEO or Startup Village I believe Sijo Kuruvilla George's wikipedia page is justified.

Thanks, DhananSekhar (talk) 05:15, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Sijo Kuruvilla George, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, please to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion if you feel it should be deleted. DhananSekhar (talk) 05:15, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Leonard Saxe review

Hello,

Thanks for reviewing the pages I've recently created. I noticed you placed a notibility tag on Leonard Saxe. Since your review, I've added some more relevant/notible information on the page. Obviously it is just a start, but do you think there's enough material to warrant the tag removal?

Thanks, I.am.a.qwerty (talk) 05:17, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

I.am.a.qwerty, my issue is the lack of an assertion as to why this person is notable, preferably to be cured via secondary or news source coverage. There are thousands of researchers who have worked in various cultural and ethnic fields that are not necessarily notable. What makes the subject of this article different? I'm copying this convo over to the talk page. If you want to further comment on this, do it on the article's talk page so other's who may raise the same question will see this. Thanks. Sulfurboy (talk) 05:21, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Saint-Mathieu

Hey Sulfurboy, thanks for your comments.
I translated the Saint-Mathieu lighthouse page from the French Wikipedia, and actually noticed that there weren't very many inline citations while I was translating. As such, I doubt that this issue will ever be fixed, not sure what should be done here.
I created the page (and a few others) in an effort to minimize red links on List of lighthouses in France.
NB, French Wikipedia has a lot of interesting maritime and nautical pages that we do not have on the English Wiki, e.g., maritime sémpahore towers (not the flag semaphore system), goémonier (type of boat for seaweed-collecting), jahazi (East African fishing boat), etc. What can you expect from a linguistic culture that produced Captain Haddock, eh?
--(Moshe) מֹשֶׁה‎ 06:10, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
PS: Thanks for the Teahouse suggestion, but I've been on Wikipedia for 8 years already ;)

Hi (Moshe) מֹשֶׁה‎, although the issues 'may never be fixed', this unfortunately does not mean the tag should be removed. Don't sweat the tag too much, but please also don't remove it unless the issue is resolved. The teahouse suggestion (along with that entire comment on your talk page) is auto-generated via page curation tools. I wasn't trying to call you a noob ;). Sulfurboy (talk) 06:13, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Philip Sahagun article

Hi Sulfurboy, thanks for your edit, I added links to the article and changed some wording how can I go about removing these offenses from my article?

Thank you! =]

This article is an orphan, as no other articles link to it. (October 2013) This article contains wording that promotes the subject in a subjective manner without imparting real information. (October 2013) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scmagym (talk • contribs) 07:12, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Smokin Jo Article

What gives you the right to propose this article for deletion? 'Those sources are self submitted" that implies this artist posted them themselves I want you to (PROVE) that fact before you go around with nothing else better to do with your time. The Guardian newspaper based in London is a respectable (NOTABLE) source, the journalist is cited in the interview she conducted with, they would not allow her to submit her own words. And as she was anone of the four original dj's at Trade (nightclub) her page is completely relevant. Get off your high horse and find something more constructive to do.--Navops47 (talk) 07:13, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Sorry you feel that way. Feel free to discuss concerns you have on the afd page. Sulfurboy (talk) 07:17, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

N.E.P.

Thank you for your attention to the subject page. Of course, you're right, the article as it is now lacks citations, and I'm going to add some, there is a wide variety of options. Because of the said drawback the significance of the subject may not be obvious, though the band is credited by mass media as a legend of Russian rock music, an example is http://www.rocketsmusic.ru/ (full link is available in the article). Thank you for your vigilance again. Greetings from Russia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phyloneer (talk • contribs) 13:02, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

why u deleted Tirana Logistic Park?

It is very rude to delete someone else work just because you think it is promotion. It is informative information about the latest project on logical services and is not promoting anything because is the only one of this kind in Albania. Does it look to you Vodafone is promotion or advertising on wikipedia? https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Vodafone

Please rethink on this topic! --Albania communicates 10:23, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Albcomm (talk • contribs) 13:58, 29 October 2013 (UTC) 

Kent Carroll

Kent Carroll being the first page I'd created, I'm not sure how to address the issues you tagged. Could you give me some guidance? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yellowbird73 (talk • contribs) 14:52, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi Yellowbird73, please review this help page: Wikipedia:Inline_citation. Sulfurboy (talk) 18:14, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Elimination already held

The Good Young Die (Scorpions) was eliminated, but if I want to recreate in the future there, I can do this? Rules and standards which I have to follow? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frank Rocker (talk • contribs) 15:01, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Hey Frank Rocker, yes you can recreate the article in the future. However, I would recommend reading Wikipedia:NALBUMS#Recordings to better understand why the article was deleted in the first page. I also would recommend submitting via the Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation process. Forgoing the AfC process opens up your page to much higher scrutiny. Sulfurboy (talk) 18:13, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Oct 29, 2013

Please review my contest of the deletion of the page Coatsworth and Sons. I don't see any reason why it was deleted, and neither did Bbb23, one of your fellow editors. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MW6288 (talk • contribs) 15:42, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Please hyperlink to the article. Sulfurboy (talk) 18:10, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

A Quick Question

Good Morning! I received an alert that you "checked" a page I edited. I looked at the history but didn't see any changes you might have made. I am new to editing pages and want to make sure I am doing everything right. I felt like I should start contributing since I look up so much information here. If you could let me know what you caught so I know better in the future, I would very much appreciate it! :-) Thanks, User:alvb

Hi, User:alvb. As you may have noticed I've moved your question from my user page to my talk page, which is where you should leave your comment for most editors. That notice was to let you know that I had reviewed your page, if you do not see any tags, that means I didn't find any errors. Good job :). I review pages as part of New Page Patrol, which is basically just a quick way for wikipedia to make sure your newly created page didn't have any glaring issues. Sulfurboy (talk) 18:08, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

First, sorry I put this in the wrong spot! Still trying to learn my away around. ;-) Glad to hear you didn't find any issues with my page. Doing my best to make sure I follow all the rules and guidelines. Thanks again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alvb (talk • contribs) 23:01, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Tagging of Gil Brendan D´Angels

You tagged this for speedy deletion under WP:CSD#G1 and WP:CSD#A7. This is clearly not a G1, it consists of readable English prose, and G1 is for "Pages consisting entirely of incoherent text or gibberish with no meaningful content or history." Please note that G1 goes on to say that "This excludes poor writing, partisan screeds, obscene remarks, implausible theories, vandalism and hoaxes, fictional material, coherent non-English material, and poorly translated material." (emphasis added). A7 is more arguable. The page in question clearly makes claims of significance, but they might be argued not to be credible. However what this really is (in my view) is a hoax (it was speedyied as one before). I have re-tagged it under G3. I urge care with the CSDs, particularly with A1, which is often misapplied, in my experience. Thank you for doing NPP. DES ^(talk)

To clarify, DES, "Content that, while apparently intended to mean something, is so confused that no reasonable person can be expected to make any sense of it. If the meaning cannot be identified, it is impossible to accurately copy-edit the text.", doesn't apply because the article could be considered a hoax? That reasoning just seems very subjective, which is why I tagged it with multiple criteria. The idea of it clearly not meeting G1 seems unsubstantiated since it does take some subjective reasoning (not to mention it seems as if G1 was used to some extent in the speedy delete comments by the reviewing admin). Not trying to seem as if I am challenging your knowledge, just felt obligated to challenge the notion that I do not take care with CSDs. It seems it's almost a daily routine of admin telling me one thing and another saying something different in terms of CSDs. Thanks. Sulfurboy (talk) 19:35, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

I think you are misunderstanding G1. It is not because it is a hoax that it didn't meet G1 it is because it is "readable English prose". Nothing that is readable prose meets G1. G1 is for stuff like "AFHUHVIUYUDCJHVYFYV" or "The gantoosh jumped lively by but harkened with clear eyes killing me". If a reasonable reader can figure out what it is supposed to mean, whether it is truth or lies, factual or advertising, encyclopedic or not, it isn't G1. G1 is often mis-used, but it is actually pretty narrow. A7 might be debated, but if you can tell it is about a person so that A7 might apply, G1 won't. DES ^(talk) 21:08, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying, DES. Sulfurboy (talk) 21:11, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Sijo Kuruvilla George Conflict of Interest

Could you pls have a look at Sijo Kuruvilla George, There are 8 citations from reputed news outlets. Also tried to change the language, if it's Ok, could you please remove the coi tag. I do not wish to remove coi myself.

By the way Thanks, the article is in much better shape now :) DhananSekhar (talk) 19:25, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

DhananSekhar, I am tentatively removing this tag. Thanks for your work to improve the article and please in the future avoid creating articles about people you have such a close connection with. Thanks. Sulfurboy (talk) 20:59, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Orphan tag

Hi! I've had a few pages tagged lately, including one just now, with the "orphan tag." The tag reads "This article is an orphan, as no other articles link to it." In each case, the article has, by that definition, *not* been an orphan. I write articles about notable legislation and always link them to the appropriate list - bills in the 113th Congress. Is that insufficient to avoid the orphan tag??? I'm sure additional linkages would be desirable, but those grow with time. I thought as long as there was one, things were acceptable. Can you explain that any further? Thanks. HistoricMN44 (talk) 20:48, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

HistoricMN44, please link to the page you are talking about. Sulfurboy (talk) 20:50, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

This page Veterans' Advisory Committee on Education Improvement Act of 2013 (H.R. 2011; 113th Congress). There may have been a few others last week. HistoricMN44 (talk) 20:51, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

HistoricMN44, orphan tags are noted automatically in my page curation tools. It seems the only page that links to the above article is a list and not actually an article, which is why it probably still shows as an orphan (I'm going to double check this is not a bug, though). You should attempt to find links via actual articles, not just lists. Thanks. Sulfurboy (talk) 20:57, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. I didn't realize that a "list" didn't count as an "article." That would explain the orphan tag being added. Thanks for clarifying that. HistoricMN44 (talk) 21:01, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm not a 100% certain of that and am asking someone for clarification, but pretty sure it's the case. I'll let you know if I find out differently. Sulfurboy (talk) 21:02, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Marcel van den Broecke

Dear Sulfurboy, I am rather astonished that you propose this article for deletion, with as cause a lack of references. I do not see immediately what I could add to the given informations which are references in their own right: so many books and articles, so many bookreviews, all to be found on google, if one wishes to find if they are genuine.

I had the most information directly from the person in question, but I cannot tell so, I suppose. The article was first placed on the Dutch wikipedia, where the article in itself has been considered a sufficient reference in itself.

The reference question is something particular to the English wikipedia. You can indeed find numerous articles where there are many references, but mostly newspaper references, which after some time are no longer available. What is the point of that?

Best regards, Andries Van den Abeele, Belgium. Andries Van den Abeele (talk) 21:14, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

I would recommend reading BLPPROD to understand why this was nominated. All that needs to be done to avoid deletion is to add sources, like you mentioned. You can remove the tag yourself when this is done. Please understand there is a very high level of scrutiny involved not only in pages of living people, but also pages that skipped the AfC process. Please let me know when you have added sources and I'll happily review the article. Also, if you personally associate with this person, you should disclose so on the talk page to avoid COI. Sulfurboy (talk) 21:17, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

I added references, to comply with the rules. I hope I will find others to place supplementary. But you will also be aware that very often the real references come only after someone died! I am not associated with the person (I'm a Belgian, he is Dutch), I only know him through his writings, by which he has become a leading authority in his field, wellknown in Europe. I only asked him to correct the factual things I have assembled about him. I hope my references can do. Best regards, Andries Van den Abeele (talk) 23:46, 29 October 2013 (UTC).

Re: Vítor Aleixo

Thanks for notifying me. I agree his notability is doubtful (though the notability for local politicians doesn't seem that clear cut to me; there are certainly city mayors who are notable for holding that office) and proposed deletion seems an avenue to go. By the way, you shouldn't use CSD A7 where there is any credible claim to notability at all, even if you don't think the subject in fact meets the notability requirements. It's aimed at those multitudes of articles created by schoolkids about their friends/enemies, and the like. Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 21:30, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Yes, as I'm sure you've seen I changed it to proposed deletion for that reason. Sulfurboy (talk) 21:40, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Ways to improve Dennis Edwards (American football)

Hi, thank you for your assistance with reviewing this article. I needed clarification on something. I believe the only thing that needs to be fixed right now is that the article is a stub. Is that correct? (I want to make sure I am reading the page tags correctly). If so, I included all verifiable information I found, so I should just leave the article with that stubtag,. Correct? Thanks so much & also thank you for referring me to the Teahouse. I am learning a lot by reviewing other editors questions. --BuzyBody (talk) 21:58, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

BuzyBody, sorry to just now respond. Yes, you should just leave the stub tag in place. A stub tag is not necessarily a bad thing, but is put there (and often may stay in place for years) to encourage other editors to add to the page. And yes, the Teahous is great :). Let me know if you need anything else. Sulfurboy (talk) 06:10, 30 October 2013 (UTC)