User talk:Steel359
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Last updated 00:00, 14 December 2006 (UTC) by Tangobot |
 Archives |
|---|
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 |
[edit] Rio Grand Deleted Why
Hello Steel359, I was working so much on my entry and you deleted it on vague circumstances not fully apparent due to incompletion. I was full using templates from previous artist already located on Wikipedia and they are fully functional here. I started out with a goal full of energy to list the band here knowing how much different contacts need their info. and to be shot down for unclear and unverifiable belief is something out of the norm. What exactly was wrong with the beginning of the entry and what was to be entered? This entry would be able to provide all and any information pertaining to the band which could be used by so many, how can that be wrong? Others who know more than me could fill in the blanks or add to the Wikipedia entry. If this entry was wrong then the ones currently listed on Wikipedia should all be deemed faulty and not to policy and should be removed imediately. Please let me know what to do and how to clear this up or get it back and correct any issues you saw, I would greatly appreciate it.
Thank You for your Time. Rio Grand 16:29, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
- There's no point restoring the old version because it was completely unencyclopedic. Nobody is stopping you from recreating it as long as you keep WP:NPOV in mind, remember that this is an encyclopedia not Rio Grand's promotional website and show that the band is notable. -- Steel 17:04, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Very well, Thank you for your information and guidance. I am naturally a very descriptive writer and it may have translated as if I was their Manager or something of that nature. I will research the links you have provided and see what comes up, but I won't start again without fully understanding what happened here with my first attempt. Rio Grand 05:16, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Deletion of Trader Monthly revision
Please let me know why the revision of Trader Monthly was deleted so I can fix the problem.
Thank you Sabadu 19:03, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Why was the Dealmaker site I created deleted? In the rules it says inappropriate content must be included in the article. Is there inappropriate content?
Sabadu 19:13, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
- Dealmaker was launched very recently, so it is unlikely to be notable enough for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Also, your only contributions are to that and a related article, which suggests to me that you are only here to promote these magazines and the company. -- Steel 19:26, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Steel- I realize Wikipedia is supposed to be just that: a wiki encyclopedia. That is why I made an effort on Trader Monthly to state only facts and not anything that was a personal opinion, unlike the previous, now current, effort of Trader Monthly, which has a bitter personal characterization of an entire field of work.
As for the Dealmaker magazine, a magazine covered in the New York Times and Reuters with a circulation of 100,000 could, in my opinion, be considered notable. And again there were only facts in that article as well.
As long as the material is legitimate and appropriate, I do not think my bias should interfere with the publishing of my work. If material was published by people with absolutely no bias on the words they present, there would be nothing to read.
Please advise on how this can be rectified (more source information perhaps?).
Thank you, Sabadu 20:21, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
- I have taken this to AfD [1] to see what the community thinks. -- Steel 21:07, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks
Greetings Steel359, thanks for the assist. Ordinarily I wouldn't be reverting the User:Air of reality edits but this user has been defiantly editing despite having been permanently blocked (independently mind you) on a number of accounts. I've decided to become a bit more proactive to discourage this user's involvement. (→Netscott) 23:17, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
- Apologies for disappearing half way through the mess. I should've kept an eye on AIV for a bit but real life got in the way. -- Steel 01:34, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Hrisi Avgi
Steel359 wrote:
- Gurch, could you gain clarification from SandyDancer that these edits are uncontroversial and that deleting those "sourced sentences" was indeed an accident. Mitsos is on the opposite side to Sandy in an edit war. Cheers. -- Steel 16:57, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
I'm assuming it was since he replaced the paragraph with a reworded duplicate of the paragraph below, while leaving the paragraph below intact, hence duplicating it. in other words, it looks like he copied a paragraph and reworded it, but then when he went to paste it back into the article he pasted it over the wrong one. Both of them are trying to improve the article, at least from their point of view, so this duplication is almost certainly unintentional, so I'm willing to assume good faith and treat the removal as unintentional too – Gurch 09:50, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Admin coaching
Hi Steel359! I see on Wikipedia:Esperanza/Admin coaching/Status that you don't have a student right now. Is this correct? If so, would you like a student? I am trying to match people at Wikipedia talk:Esperanza/Admin coaching with coaches. If you'd like a student, I would place you with User:Wikizach. Please let me know. Thanks! --Fang Aili talk 17:39, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
- Sweet. Please contact Wikizach to start coaching. Thanks for participating! --Fang Aili talk 17:48, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] So
So, since you are my 'coach' what do you help me with exactly? WikieZach| talk 00:11, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] EuroRevenue
Please let me know what changes I need to make to EuroRevenue so that it is undeleted. I can't imagine that it's the copy itself. It's light years from self-promotion. Is it the subject matter? Obviously, the company is adult-oriented, but there are no external hot links to anything but the company's main site and a couple of child protection site. Please let me know as soon as you can. I tried to be wholly in compliance.
The reason given is "Pages which exclusively promote a company, product, group or service and which would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Note that simply having a company, product, group or service as its subject does not qualify an article for this criterion: an article that is blatant advertising should have inappropriate content as well. If a page has previously gone through deletion process and was not deleted, it should not be speedily deleted under this criterion."
My entry is certainly about a company, but it is wholly encyclopedic. Please explain what qualifies as the "inappropriate content as well" that warrants the deletion. Thanks in advance. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hmoss (talk • contribs).
Can you please tell me why my EuroRevenue entry did not qualify. I left a message here once, and I'm not finding a follow up to it (I'm not seeing it at all, actually) Please give me a clue. I don't get the logic behind your decision. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hmoss (talk • contribs).
- The bot removed [1] the original message before I could respond to it. Anyway, to answer your question, EuroRevenue was deleted under the criterion you quoted above. Wikipedia would rather you didn't create articles about your company. -- Steel 12:27, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
I'm still not reading you. "Note that simply having a company, product, group or service as its subject does not qualify an article for this criterion..." You tell me what I need to do--pull the names of websites? Add a company history? Pull the link to EuroRevenue? I don't accept "Wikipedia would rather you didn't create articles about your company." Doesn't seem fair. What kind of changes do I need to make to be in compliance? Thanks for your time.
I went ahead and re-posted the article--under "eurorevenue" and per your question, "Has EuroRevenue been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works? Are there sources for the content in the article other than the company's own website/publications? -- Steel 14:00, 11 December 2006 (UTC)"...I added multiple links to live news sources. These kind be found throughout the article now, and there are additional stories in the News section at the bottom of the article. I also killed the direct link to the www.eurorevenue site. Please let me know if this works and if not, why not. thanks for all the help!
[edit] Evolve Partners
Hi, I'm fairly new to Wikipedia but I'm not sure why you deleted this article under the "blatant advertising" rubric. I don't work for that firm or have any financial connection to them or anything like that in any way. I wrote the article because I thought it was noteworthy that there's a firm with high-level government clearance started in the aftermath of the 911 attacks that's hiring U.S. military combat veterans to handle foreign policy and homeland security issues. You may not realize this living in the UK, but in the US during the past five years the need for transparency in its national security issues is greater than ever before, and when there's a private company run by ex-military types doing contracts with the Defense Department and Microsoft, among others, the public ought to have that information available to them.
Also, your comments on deleting the photos/logos seem arbitrary. One is a company logo, and yet you put "no source" (?). What do you mean by "replaceable" or "orphaned" fair use?
Thanks in advance...! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kidradical (talk • contribs).
- This was a borderline case. CSD A7 actually fits it better than G11. A Google search [2] brings up relatively few results, the top ones being to the company's website itself. Google News brings up nothing [3]. Has the company been the subject of multiple, non-trivial works? Images were deleted as "No source" where there was no link to the place you got the image (here for the logo, for example). Wikipedia doesn't accept fair use pictures of living people where a free equivalent could be created (replaceable fair use), and "orphaned" basically means that the image wasn't being used in any articles. Incidentally I've just deleted Image:Masters of Success cover.gif as orphaned fair use, apparently I missed it the first time round. -- Steel 13:58, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for the quick response. But if, as you say, it was a "borderline case," then why are you using Speedy Deletion? That's supposed to be used only for obvious cases, such as "patent nonsense" or "pure vandalism". The policy itself even says that "simply having a company, product, group or service as its subject does not qualify an article for this criterion." (Emphasis in original.)
As for whether it is "notable," having a company handling multimillion-dollar DOD contracts with a company president who's on the WSJ best-seller list would seem to be the definition of "notable", and the lack of information on Google or elsewhere is exactly why a Wikipedia entry would seem necessary. I had planned to write a number of articles on these new companies doing national security work under the Patriot Act, but if they're simply going to be arbitrarily deleted by admins, then I'm not going to bother.
I'm also confused about the image policy that you're discussing--if the images are the publicity photos distributed by the company for the media, then this would seem to be exactly the "free equivalent" that you're talking about.
Best regards, KRad
- I'm using speedy deletion because I think in practice the CSD criteria can be stretched a little for the good of the encyclopedia. This is an issue reasonable people can disagree on, and we could be here for days discussing it. The images were tagged as fair use, so they're copyrighted. No image is preferable to a copyrighted image. As for eVolve, the article needs sources. WP:CORP is the relevant page here. All I found after an, albeit brief, Google was listings in company directories. As long as the company has been the subject of multiple non-trivial works I'll restore it. -- Steel 00:19, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks, as always
Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my user page. A particularly odd case since I've never interacted with that user before... Best, Gwernol 18:37, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Skype is free
Skype is free for Linux, Mac and Windows. Calling is free too. Maybe you can try it out and see if it works? -- Fuzheado | Talk 11:58, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
- I'll look into it at some point. -- Steel 22:00, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Looking for deleted article
Hiya, I was looking for an article about the Cowley Club, a social centre in Brighton. Now I saw at the deletion log that you deleted in on the 19th of November. I was looking through the AfD pages to find some discussion on this but can't find anything. Just wondering if you could point me to some more info on why it was deleted. Cheers, WietsE 21:57, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
- The article didn't explain how the club was notable or important. It appears to be a regular community centre of some sort, and not a very big one judging from the photo. -- Steel 22:00, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Out of curiosity
I have a minor interest in Royal Canadian Sea Cadets, though approve heartily of the protection, having watched the rather challenging editing stance one of the protagonists took and tried to talk him out of it. I suspect each was close to a 3RR breach though the anonymous editor kept changing IP addresses every few minutes. The other was patient, but we had an edit war nonetheless. My curiosity is over the normal duration of such a protection. Or does it truly wait until the issue is settled on the talk page and someone asks for unprotection? Fiddle Faddle 00:11, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
- Protections generally last until the dispute is resolved (which can take a few weeks for larger disputes) or until one (or both) parties lose interest. I go back through my protection log every now and again to see if there's still active discussion, and unprotect if there isn't. Other admins go through WP:PP and unprotect old articles if they appear to be abandoned. -- Steel 00:30, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Why Was Meltdown Deleted?
Hello, Steel59. I've tried creating entries for the comic book series "MELTDOWN" several times now, but you seem to keep deleting them. I'm not sure why, and would like your input as to how I can make this entry acceptable to you. The comic is one of the best-reviewed series of 2006, has covers by two very notable comic artists, and comes from a major publisher. In fact, the vast majority of the publisher's titles do have Wiki entries, despite some of those books being a bit more obscure than MELTDOWN. Again, I'd appreciate your input as to how we can make this entry acceptable so that it no longer gets deleted. Thanks - I appreciate your time and attention. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.231.154.58 (talk) 14:09, 13 December 2006 (UTC).
- The article didn't explain how it is notable. -- Steel 14:16, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Reverting warnings to YorAmy
Why in the world are you reverting warnings on a spammer's talk page? Is it a sock-puppet account? -- Zanimum 14:30, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Block Evasion
Hi Steel,
Please note that this particularly vicious vandal you blocked (24.94.125.158 (talk • contribs • WHOIS • RDNS • RBLs • block user • block log)) is evading his block and editing as 24.94.122.64 (talk • contribs • WHOIS • RDNS • RBLs • block user • block log). --Strothra 17:18, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
- I've issued a range block. I'd be grateful if you could revert the blocked user's edits. -- Steel 17:23, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Correct Protected
Please revert protected to correct version as Dionyseus and Skinny McGee have been adding false and unverifiable information regarding a non-member of this band to the article, and that is what the arbitration is all about now. The correct version is not disputed by either party. The dispute only contends with the added info about Angus and publisher credits about Linfaldia. As it stands, you have protected the disputed version, which was what Dionyseus intended, as he is part of the dispute. GuardianZ 20:00, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] International Conference to Review the Global Vision of the Holocaust
I didn't realize it was on the main page. Thank you for watchlisting it (and of course there are good edits--I'm working on it!) :-) Jeffpw 20:06, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] user:downwards
Hi there,
I noticed you blocked an anon IP today which I requested on Qatar, so thank you. I request your help with another editor, named downwards. I recently stumbled upon Cat:African American basketball players and saw it was heavily undersorted. I began to delete its lower cat, namely Cat:American basketball players. I requested help from another editor named user:Darwinek and he advised the user to stop recat my edits to better sort these people, but he has not responded to my or Darwinek's requests to stop doing it and has continued with it for several days. Frustrated, I am seeking help. Could you ban this user, though I understand it is harsh? I repeatedly showed him that the rules for cats are not to include an article in the 2 categories in question. Thank you--Thomas.macmillan 22:35, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
- You're probably best off bringing this up at the incidents noticeboard. I'm not entirely sure what's going on and I'm a bit worn out at the moment to go wading through tonnes of edits. -- Steel 22:43, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you, I have reported it on the board.--Thomas.macmillan 22:59, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Kaczism
The protection violates the wiki-rules - have you read the rationale? 83.29.153.85 22:23, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
- Yes I have. -- Steel 22:39, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
