User talk:Peripitus/Archive3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

You've got a Thank you card!

Open your card!

Thank you

Thank you for watching over the Institute of Business Studies & Research. After several reversions I began to feel I was in over my head trying to reverty the page. I'm glad an admin was able to deal with it promptly. Thank you agian.--Dekkanar 17:49, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

You are promoting a bogus collge and telling me that it a vandalism, stop promotind a bogus college. Institute of Business Studies and Research is a charitable trust and some bogus people have made it a business and statred looting the poor people. Donot teach me about vandalism, if you want talk to more, write to me at sachdevajk@hotmail.com —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Institute of Business Studies and Research (talk • contribs) 09:43, 7 August 2006. response on editor's talk page - Peripitus (Talk) 21:26, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I donot know how to talk or write message to you. When I am writing all this, it means I know a lot. I am founder and settler of the charitable Trust "IBSAR" and handed it over to Monga to run the Trust in a charitable way and as per law. I did not know what Monga had in mind and he started a private coaching business under the umbrella of a charitable trust. He is ruuning from pillar to post to get recongnition from any University, but which University in India will involve itself in private business. I have moved courts to stops its business and disolve the trust or remove trustees. Police, Income Tax department, Higher Education department, UGC are after cheaters, but legal matters take time, to bring the cheaters to book. I have filed criminal cases against him and I shall be able to remove them. But if sites like you promote bogus colleges then students are misguided and cheaters earn money. I donot know who you are, but stop this and delete the site. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Institute of Business Studies and Research (talk • contribs) 23:01, 7 August 2006.

GSFE/Global Sports Financial Exchange

Dear Peripitus,

I am writing in reference to the above Wikipedia entery. You posted here that: Delete both as a company failing WP:CORP and WP:WEB. Searching through the net all of the articles I can find are clearly written by the company. The exchange appears to be simply a sports gambling site disguised as derivitives trading.


But this very untrue. There have been two live TV News pieces done on our exchnge one from Denver and one from NY,NY I will gladly provide you with a link to these. There are also several radio and newspaper stories covering our exchange. Here are two links to newspaper articles:

http://www.al.com/business/mobileregister/kturner.ssf?/base/business/114276370150830.xml&coll=3

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Columnists/Lankhof/2006/03/08/1478175-sun.html

We are not a sports book or variant of a gambling website. I believe the above mentioned falls under the WP:CORP requirements. We do not want to use Wikipedia as a form of advertising, our sports derivatives contracts exchange is a super inovative concept. It is one that represents the forward thinking and independant growth of our generation. Please give us a chance, take a moment to write me and get to know us and if I am mistaken on the requirements please help me, you can reach me at carlosd@allsportsmarket.com Thank you.

Thank you for your help on GSFE

Dear Peripitus,

Thank you for helping me get clear on what is required by Wikipedia for a listing. I would like to invite you to review these two television news stories covering our exchange. There is no interview nor does anyone from our company speak on camera, off camera, or in anyway have anything to say or have any participation in these stories. They are coverage pieces that may fit the criteria required. Here is a link to an independent media archive site where you can view the pieces WITHOUT any downloading required:

http://www.criticalmention.com/vg/allsportsmarket.com/

The Username is: allsportsmarket.com The password is: allsportsmarket.com0895

I can understand your reservation about our exchange and an association to online gaming. Since the creation of Sport Derivative Contracts as a financial instrument is fairly new this is an obstacle we have had to overcome in the past. Below is a link to a paper written by Dr. Alper Ozgit (PhD UCLA Economics). Here the differences between online gaming and ASM/GSFE are highlighted; along with its purpose and place among financial markets and its social and economic uses.

http://www.SportsTradingSecrets.com/AlperOzgit.pdf

Thank you for your time and guidance.

All the Best, Carlos Duran--ASMMarketing August 10, 2006 00:09(UTC)

Meetup on 24th August 2006

Apologies if you're already aware of this, but the Inaugural Adelaide Meetup will take place on Thursday 24th of August at Brougham Place Uniting Church, thanks to Alex Sims. Please indicate if you will attend or not.

This message left by May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| ŗ 3 $ |-| ţ |-|) on behalf of [ælfəks], 10:06, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Wide Awakes Radio

Regarding your edit of Wide Awakes Radio. "Aeris Gainsborough" is a troll from the Conservative Underground that has attacked W.A.R. from almost our first day streaming while hyping Randi Rhoades, a host on Air America. It seems silly to compare a major corporation that has had three years and millions of dollars behin it to a small, independently funded internet radio station that has been streaming for less than five weeks, and removing my edit was vastly unfair, as I did not lie and was simply pointing out the inherent stupidity of comparing apples to oranges.

"Aeris" has been banned from Conservative Underground for his behavior and this entry of his is simply sour grapes and serves no purpose other than to make him feel good. I did n't remove his entry, and I didn't complain. I simply responded to his stupidity with a true observation.

I would like my edit reinstated. When this wiki page was put up by one of my IT guys (completely without my knowledge) there was an almost instant attack to have it removed. It was allowed to stay on it's merits. Wiki has a reputation for being heavily slanted to the left, and the fact that we had to fight to stay, and now I have had to respond to try to keep a truthful edit up while an edit that has no bearing on the page is allowed to stay makes it seem that the reputation of bias is well earned.

Air America is a major and well funded broadcast radio station that has been broadcasting for about three years while Wide Awakes Radio is an independent funded internet radio station that has been streaming full time for less than five weeks. To leave an edit by a bitter troll with a grudge that is in effect comparing apples to oranges while removing an edit by the CEO of the company in blatently unfair.67.126.142.90 13:07, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: Wide Awakes Radio

In the entry regarding the imminent failure of W.A.R., "Aeris Gainsborough" wrote "On Monday, August 11, 2006," and since it is Monday, August 14th, 2006 at the moment of this writing I ask that no weight be given to someone that doesn't even know the date. 67.126.142.90 13:15, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Your adition to the article [[1]] and your above comment make no sense to me. Can you please tell me what you are on about ? Whom are you criticising ? Peripitus (Talk) 21:34, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

LG15 and Notable YouTube users

This may be something to bring up, but I am actually looking into creating a subcatagory (Users) or (Notable users) under the YouTube parent catagory. The reasoning is this: 1)Obviously the users are notable or they wouldn't pass WP's standards. 2)They are all famous or notable for their videos on YouTube 3)The page is only there to link users that have pages here at WP so what is the difference between this and a Catagory? A catagory would make it easier for people to traverse between each userpage as well and make things neater. It would also end these kind of arguements that "'XXXX' deserves mention because they are notable on YouTube."... Now, 'XXXX' needs to have an article before being included in the catagory and if they have an article, it can be debated in a consenus of editors if the article truely stands up to WP's standards. Thoughts? --Brian (How am I doing?) 18:31, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, it seems the catagory was made and the page will be removed. Sorry for the babble above :) --Brian (How am I doing?) 19:06, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

RFA thanks

Thanks so much for your support on my RFA, which closed successfully this morning with a result of (64/3/3). I will be stepping lightly at first trying to make sure I don't mess up too badly using the tools. Any further advice/guidance will be gratefully accepted. I hope I will live up to your trust! NawlinWiki 11:45, 26 August 2006 (UTC) talk contribs PS I will try to be more diligent about using edit summaries.

Ideological Nomadism

Slowtrain - forgive me if I've picked you as the wrong user but you seem to have edited logged out. I answer to your questions regarding your below comments/questions

Peripitus - I disagree with your assessment of the article ideological nomadism and its subsequent deletion despite its reasonable comprehensiveness and supporting references. First, its is not a "walled garden" and it is definitely not an essay. Just because you cannot "find any reference to ideological nomadism as a topic" does not mean it is not a valid concept. As you admitted, you have only done a very limited investigation of the concept and by your admission, your only source is "not up-to-date and often misses things". To reduce the concept to "words in a sentence", in my opinion, would be disingenous. Especially, in view of the well accepted concepts with comparative contexts, for example "group think", identity crisis, etc. I was waiting to hear more comments on the article besides yours, which started out as "low number of google searches" as reason for initially flagging the article for deletion. Obviously, the author of the article and those who edited it spent time and energy on it. To quash all that just because a single person don't agree with the concept seems to me a little egocentric. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.152.86.214 (talk • contribs) 03:19, 1 September 2006.

The comment about a Walled Garden refers to the fact that there are a sequence of artices, apparently created and edited by one person, that only refer and link to themselves. Myself and others cannot find any reference that the concept of Ideological Nomadism has any significance in the wider world. The closed nature of the articles ( where no articles out side the loop refer to them ) and the lack of information we could find supporting the article inexorably leads to the conclusion that it represented original research for the purposes of wikipedia. It appeared that the article was based entirely on the material in the book Tribalizing America which represents the opinion of the author rather being a peer reviewed scholarly work.
If you wish you can list the article for deletion review to have it relooked at ? Peripitus (Talk) 06:37, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

JPD's RfA

Thanks, Peripitus, for your support at my RfA, which finished with a tally of 94/1/0. I hope I live up to the confidence you have shown in me in my activities as an administrator. JPD (talk) 16:34, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William Rollo

Your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William Rollo were altered. I have tried to reintroduce their original sense, but could you please check them and make sure I haven't mangled them in some way? Thanks Mr Stephen 17:44, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Two months

Editing articles is too fun... that's what you said on my talk page. I'm trying to be nicer to people whom I talk with because I'm in the Kindness Campaign... •Sean•gorter•(Talk) 02:06, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Coopernook

I wrote the entry for Coopernook. I'm sorry you're not interested in history. Please delete the entire entry. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Andrewcalvin (talk • contribs) 22:18, 17 October 2006.

Please delete the entry for Coopernook. I submitted it in good faith with some history that interests certain types of people. Trainspotters are not the only people in the world with an unusual eye for detail.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Andrewcalvin (talk • contribs) .

Please note, this article is about a real place that deserves to remain on Wikipedia. The author is objecting to my removal of information about the telephone exchange. After I tried to engage him is dialogue about this, he simply replied "I think you're a knob" [2]. It seems that User:Andrewcalvin has now decided that if the article can't go ahead exactly as he wants it, he'd rather have no article at all. This is not how Wikipedia is supposed to function. I think the article should remain, and be open to edits from all users - just like every other Wikipedia article. Cnwb 13:10, 17 October 2006 (UTC)


Transversal

Thanks for your incredibly prompt comments. I reckon Transversal is part of the Cambridge Phenomenon - a highly successful .com, still going strong. I can point you to newspaper articles if you want. I added the article not because I was trying to do advertising, but because I like wikipedia and would like it to be as complete possible. I have de-ad-ified the article. Djcmackay 08:21, 20 October 2006 (UTC) David MacKay