User talk:Nastajus

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] radioshack

I rolled back the stuff you removed from the Talk page of RadioShack. Talk page material (unlike article material) should be left in perpetuity as a permanent record of what was done and why - otherwise we tend to go around in circles, repeating ourselves! - DavidWBrooks 12:16, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

I wasn't sure which was more appropriate, to clean up the talk page, or leave for an unspecified time, or forever. So I was bold. To me this means our topic should be integrated into article itself, if it's of value...Nastajus 23:01, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Edits by Dakese

Dakese appears to have made an edit to your userpage. I beleive that it is best that you are informed of this and may decide to revert his edit if you so wish. You may remove this message at any time. The Neokid Talk 19:11, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Sure. I like it. :) Nastajus 19:21, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] National Sleep Alert

Hi Ian! The article as it stood as I was on New Pages patrol last night was lacking in content (CSD-A3: "Any article whose contents consist only of links elsewhere (including hyperlinks, category tags and "see also" sections), a rephrasing of the title, and/or attempts to correspond with the person or group named by its title.") and also lacking in context (CSD-A1: "Very short articles providing little or no context (e.g., "He is a funny man that has created Factory and the Hacienda. And, by the way, his wife is great.").").

More than that, it was verging on the nonsensical - the first sentence read: "There was a National Sleep Alert and America in a 1993 from the National Commission on Sleep Disorders Research." And American in a 1993 from? What?

In amongst the several hundred articles created last night, this was one of 50 or so of a similar pattern that I deleted within a few seconds of it going up.

The article has since been recreated as Wake Up America: A National Sleep Alert. Whilst I still don't think this is very notable a subject for an encyclopedia, the article itself is of much higher quality. It is now has content, context and makes sense - the three things generally essential to any article.

You ask: How am I supposed to contribute information if I have to contend with that?. There are a few tips I can offer, if I may. The first thing I would suggest is to select your stub tag before you start writing. An article created with a stub tag already in place flags to the New Pages patroller that more is to be done and that the writer knows what s/he's doing. Second, I'd suggest wikilinks in the body of the article - again, it suggests to the patroller that something is going on and the article is "real" - a deadend article, or one with just a "See also" link, looks like the type of rambling the patroller will have deleted 49 times already that evening even if it isn't!

If those two options don't appeal, you can place an {{underconstruction}} tag at that top of the article. Then the patroller is likely to Watchlist the article and give the writer a few days to do something with it - it doesn't make the article immune from speedy deletion, but it does slow the process down.

I'm really sorry if I caused you wikistress. I assure you that was not my intention at all and I truly apologise for doing so. I hope you will accept the attached cup of tea (I'm British) as a peace offering. ➨ ❝REDVERS❞ 09:34, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Converstaion status

Are dolphins endangered?--Are they stable? This needs to be in the little box of summary information like other animals Nastajus 15:05, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

No. We put those remarks on species boxes, not on higher level boxes. Look at each dolphin species article for its status. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:52, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
Ah. Oh. Cool. Nastajus 22:23, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Notability of Dare Foods

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Dare Foods, by FreeKresge (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Dare Foods seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Dare Foods, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Dare Foods itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 02:44, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

I have adjustment in the article itself claiming it's larger relevance, discussed it's relevance in it's talk page, and left a message alerting you of these changes this user's talk page. Nastajus 03:08, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi Nastajus, I went ahead and deleted the article because it is only one sentence and a link. If you want to recreate the article, feel free, but please do include references to reliable sources that show it's notable. You can see WP:CORP for more info on what an article about a company needs to be included. As someone mentioned, it needs to not only be notable, but have info stating that notability. You may want to work on the article in your userspace (i.e. any page beginning with User:Nastajus/) if you want to put it together bit by bit (that way no one will delete it before it's finished). Don't hesitate to leave me a message on my talk page if you have any questions or need anything, I'm always glad to help. Peace, delldot talk 17:38, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm not good at finding references. I get exhausted looking for them because I don't know where to look. I thought I would give it a head start by making the article exist, and then OTHER people would find the actual references. I'm getting wikistressed from this. That template said five days... You're early. I've left a response on user Delldot's talk page and suggested we continue this conversation there. I have left the article untouched in it's currently deleted format while I am waiting for a response from Delldot on this matter, because I disagree with his actions. Nastajus 05:54, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Ok, sorry about that. I've undeleted it so you can fix it up. But you should probably do it soon, or it's likely to be deleted again by someone else, since in its current state it doesn't assert notability, a requirement for all articles. Note that making lots is not enough, it has to show that the company's received media attention. I'd definitely do this yourself rather than hoping that someone else will do it. You may want to copy it into your userspace so you can continue to work on it in case someone else does delete it again. I'm all for putting imperfect articles out there for others to improve on, but you should ensure that don't meet any of the speedy deletion criteria before putting them out there. Anyway, sorry for the wikistress, I hope the undeletion resolves it! Let me know on my talk page if you need any help or anything. Peace, delldot talk 15:30, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Looks like both your opinions represent the majority. A third user came along and deleted it only hours after you restored it, delldot. I have no idea how to find the number of cookies they make. Looks like my stubby-stubs aren't enough for the standard here. Thanks for both taking the time to discuss with me, as per the Wikipedia policy I am familiar with. This third person, Bjelleklang, he just deleted without any discussion. I wonder if speedy deletions evolved since a year or so ago. I'm out of touch with them. Anyways, thanks. Nastajus 04:26, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Sorry to hear it. If you want, you can try the userspace thing until it's up to the standard at WP:STUB and then move it to the mainspace (you can consult with me first if you're not sure it's deletion-proof yet). The way i'd go about finding references is to do a google or a google news search. If articles have been written about the company, it's probably notable (see WP:NOTE). If you can't find any mentions that way, you should probably wait to create the article until the company gets more famous. I'm not surprised that the other admin deleted it without discussion, that's quite common with speedies. If you're interested in learning more about the speeedy deletion policy, it's at WP:CSD. It may have evolved, I'm not sure. Anyway, thanks for being good about it. See you around, let me know if you need anything. Peace, delldot talk 13:42, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
The initial enthusiasm is lost. In the future when I get that urge again I'll pass something else by you, delldot. The main problem here is me, I never reference anything. I barely ever read any of the references at the bottom for existing articles. I'm happy enough if what I'm reading seems correct, and just focus on other things, like English legibility. I probably need to partner with somebody in these situations, I am not resourceful at researching at all, not if exceeds the top 10 hits in Google. It's feels self-defeating to realize only typing this response out my own standards are lower than a stubs. It's like I'm lesser than a stub. Oh well I'm not worried. Later I'll be eager write something again. Nastajus 05:01, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Linking to IP addresses

What you can do is instead of linking to [[192.168.1.1]], you can link to [[Special:Contributions/192.168.1.1]] (which displays Special:Contributions/192.168.1.1). To have it display without the "Special:Contributions" part, type [[Special:Contributions/192.168.1.1|192.168.1.1]], which displays 192.168.1.1. This is called a pipe trick, and works for all links. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 02:41, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] NaturallySpeaking

Hi, thanks for the most recent note. The article looks good, I really don't think someone would want to delete it. You're right that it needs referencing though. My first suggestion would be to find references for it, but if you really don't want to, I like your idea of partnering with someone who's willng to. More references will address any notability concerns and more firmly protect against deletion. Also, since anyone could put untrue statements in, it's important that statements be referenced so the encyclopedia is more reliable. But it doesn't have to be you who does that if it's really not your thing. I think you're right about not splitting into two pages, that would be a mistake. But I also think we shouldn't shy away from including any negative info about the product. If it's sourced and relevant, I think it belongs in the article, and I think if it's balanced with other info it will help make the article more neutral, which is very important. It won't hurt the article at all. I think if a person feels so strongly about a product that they don't want any negative info in its article, they probably shouldn't be editing the article because it will be hard for them to remain neutral. Anyway, thanks for the note, on the whole I think the article is fine. Maybe I'll try to dig up some references myself. Let me know what happens. Peace, delldot talk 12:33, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of List of Dragon NaturallySpeaking commands

List of Dragon NaturallySpeaking commands, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that List of Dragon NaturallySpeaking commands satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Dragon NaturallySpeaking commands and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of List of Dragon NaturallySpeaking commands during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Toohool 18:44, 22 September 2007 (UTC)