User talk:Ros0709/Archive 1

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

Welcome!


Welcome!

Hello, Ros0709, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask at the help desk, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up, probably in less than 15 minutes, to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  · AndonicO Talk

Grandiosa

Hi, I've been answering you now, in the article-discussion section.

The information I'm writing is based on well known facts, like you can see in the article, I'm linking to the official company website, and to well-known newspapers etc. which are supporting all the information I'm writing.

So this is certainly established research, since it's from official sources.

Also, I'm not parial in any way, in the Nordic pizza-industy, I'm a Norwegian living in Britain.

And these are issues that have been discussed on a Norwegian message-board, and I'm simply trying to update the Wikipedia article, with the things we found on official websites, while we were discussing the contence of the Pizza in the thread on the message board.

I think that this is something that should be publicly known.

I'm simply just putting well-known, documented information, in a new context, which maybe reveals a paradox or two.

But I can't see that there should be anything wrong with doing this.

And these paradoxes has also been revealed from before, in the mentioned thread on the Norwegian message-board.

Doctor Who

Hello! While I disagree with you (and consider 'borne out of' to read nonsensically), I agree that it can be nicely reworded as you have done. 'Borne out of' makes as much sense as 'held out of'! The phrase "born out of (discussions)" is creating a metaphor of the idea being 'born' from the discussion. "Borne out of (discussions)" has no meaning at all! Maybe the idea was borne out by evidence, maybe people who don't like Dr Who can bear it, so the idea is borne by them. But it can't be borne if born is the meaning intended. But your rewording is a nice, safe, and probably better anyway, alternative. Skittle 22:12, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Beauty

Wow what a nice previous comment, Hi, I'm sorry I marked one of your revisions as vandalism, too quick on the click, the Beauty page has been the butt of quite a lot of 'school' vandalism lately. I can see that you are working quite hard to keep the nonsense out of here. :) SallyBoseman 14:06, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Actually, looking at the history now it does look like I put back some vandalism in error. I was of the belief I was removing it when I made the edit.
Ros0709 15:17, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Moon Zappa

It's probably best not to revert the removal of information from the Moon Zappa article by 206.116.209.195. Per our Biographies of Living Persons policy, "subjects of articles are welcome to remove unsourced or poorly sourced material," and "Anonymous edits that blank all or part of a biography of a living person should be evaluated carefully." The paragraph about Zappa's marriage was uncited, and it could have been Zappa herself or someone close to her removing information that wasn't true. Thanks, Mike R 14:30, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


Thanks

For the revert. :) Acalamari 19:52, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, they've just been blocked as a vandalism-only account. Funny, they mentioned a user called "NaeNae18", who was a vandal I encountered many months ago. If it's the same person, they remember me, despite the vandalism that they did was from March! Acalamari 20:03, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

There are three classes of deletion, and it is my understanding that speedy deletion tags and WP:PROD can be removed by anyone for a valid reason, it is only the WP:AFD tags that must be debated. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:13, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

To quote the tag, If this page does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, or you intend to fix it, please remove this notice. That's open to any editor, not just admins. The editor who placed the tag is no admin. So go for it. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:16, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
No problem! And I must say I really have a concern about how this editor is using this Twinkle program to slap on speedy deletion notices. Most have been reverted and that's not a good track record. I've noted several instances where s/he does not even seem to be following basic WP notability guidelines. I thought we were supposed to use speedy only when it's a fairly open and shut case. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:26, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Invitation

Hello there

I see you are interested in the Life On Mars Television Series, as I am.

At the moment I have A Life On Mars Wikiproject currently up for approval by the Wikiproject Approval Council. As you are interested in Life On Mars I was wondering if you would be interested in adding your name and joining. If you are interested you can find it on Wikipedia: WikiProject Council/Proposals its right at the very bottom you cant miss it as its titled ‘Wikipedia: Wikiproject Life on Mars (Television Series)’. And after your name is added to Wikiproject propsals please add it to the main page Wikipedia:Wikiproject Life On Mars

If you are interested by all means feel free to join

Regards

Police,Mad,Jack —Preceding comment was added at 20:15, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Regarding my user page

Hi there, Thanks for taking an interest in my user page and pointing a slight error in my wording, I will be sure to make ammends to it. --Spherea (talk) 08:08, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Regarding your removal of a speedy on Robert Abbinanti

it is not clear to me that the google hits are him until you get to this one which looks like a wiki and that the article was copied from. --Rocksanddirt (talk) 19:22, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

I did this search which gives loads of relevant results, but you are right, there does seem to be a copy there; not sure if it is authorised - perhaps it should be tagged {{copyvio}} Ros0709 (talk) 19:30, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
well...after I looked at some of the other links that just his name comes up with, he seems to be a minorly notable organized crime guy as well, so perhaps a longer article is warrented....--Rocksanddirt (talk) 00:50, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Regarding modifying own talk entires

Thank you Ros0709 for the helpful comments. No offense is taken, and point is understood. Best wishes. Mwbseiso (talk) 20:58, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

On Hoffman

I am having a big problem with the hoffman article as you can see if you fo to my user page while I was adding information anotehr person changed the name because I didnt capitalize the last name and when it was reworked the article became stuck in the phase it was even after I tried over and over to add the additional information To no avail Wiki isnt allowing me to add the additional information I need to make this work. Artintegrated (talk) 23:44, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't think the name change should cause any problems; the page seems editable to me. Ros0709 (talk) 23:49, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Memphis Tennessee History

Hey, I undid your redirect. I am in the process of shortening the parent article Memphis, Tennessee. Like today, the history section goes to its own article History of Memphis, Tennessee. For that purpose I copy and paste the information to the new article first and then reduce the subsection in the parent article. Man, you need to give me more than three minutes to do that. ;-) doxTxob \ talk 00:20, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Go for it. Duplication of the article was going to cause problems but what you're suggesting sounds sensible. Ros0709 (talk) 08:37, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
And yes, I was a bit quick off the mark. Apologies. Ros0709 (talk) 08:58, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Krzysztof P. Jasiutowicz

Dear Ros0709! The article Krzysztof P. Jasiutowicz is about a person who STARTED POLISH WIKIPEDIA! It is very important and it isn't about wikipedian. It's about someone, who is a very known person. So please, don't delete it. P.S.: See w:pl:Krzysztof P. Jasiutowicz - it's the same article about the same person, and it isn't deleted! Kubek15 - Talk, Userboxes, Contributions 12:30, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm not an admin so I won't delete it. Anyone else can simply delete the tag or an admin can delete the article but either way there'll be a second opinion. I tagged it because I think someone should review it: I'm not sure article this would be considered notable if it had nothing to do with Wikipedia, and I don't think we should treat it any differently because of that. Ros0709 (talk) 12:35, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Shades(monsters)

I agree it should go ASAP, but G1 does not apply- have a quick reread. Doesn't quite fall under vandalism either, due to the fact that it does not appear to be deliberately introduced to cause disruption. WP:SNOW would have to be used to delete this, really, and I would rather not personally touch it, due to negative experiences with it in the past. I'll leave your tag up, but just thought I'd mention this. J Milburn (talk) 18:12, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Good call. "I cant decribed them perfectly, but i can descibe them" is gibberish, mind you! I'll leave the tag for now - it should at least attract an admin's attention. Ros0709 (talk) 18:18, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

article was dup of four-velocity

Frame-specific and minimally-variant "proper" values for time, length, speed and acceleration have been finding their way into textbooks for several decades, thanks to the conceptual clarity they offer to students not yet ready for four-vectors. I realize that relativity is probably a target for recreational contributors. However, is there a way for those of us who do physics for a living to make the case with wikipedia on items of pedagogical value that are common knowledge in the field, clearly referenced, and easy to check? Thermochap (talk) 21:44, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Crikey, had to read that twice over! If you feel that the Proper velocity article is distinct from Four-velocity then please revert my change; there'll be no edit war over it. Ros0709 (talk) 21:52, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
(follow-up) Getting the edit history of a redir can be awkward. It is here. Ros0709 (talk) 21:55, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
(reply) Thanks! Sorry about the need for editing of the note above. It is pretty unintelligible. Is "reverting a change" something simple, like clicking on cur versus last? Cheers. Thermochap (talk) 23:36, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Yep, follow the link above, click on Undo and you'll be back to the edit page with the previous (your) text which you can save. Might be worth adding something to the article's talk page too otherwise the same thing could happen again. Ros0709 (talk) 23:41, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Bubbleboy007

why was my aberdactyl colony paper deleted?

are you going to answer?

User:bubbleboy007 —Preceding comment was added at 23:27, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

According to the delete log: 23:24, 23 January 2008 Majorly (Talk | contribs) deleted "Aberdactyl Colony" ‎ (This article or other page provides no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. It is patent nonsense (CSD G1).) Ros0709 (talk) 23:34, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes

Yes i did. Thank you for reverting the page for :D. P.S. do you use Twinkle? Compwhiz II(Talk)(Contribs) 00:19, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

My Talk Page

Thanks for restoring the message on my talk page. I hadn't even read it before the editor deleted it. It looks like we have an election coming up in Canada so we can expect to get a lot of SPAs trying to create articles for various candidates. This particular one was deleted following an AfD and has since been recreated and speedily deleted at least twice. --JGGardiner (talk) 01:38, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Judith Moses

Can you please give a rationale for deletion in this AfD? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 20:27, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Now fixed. Don't quite know what went wrong when I made the proposal; I suspect the link to WP:BIO (which I may have entered incorrectly) messed it up. Ros0709 (talk) 20:30, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Amit Sahai suicide

I nominated an article, Amit Sahai suicide, that is related to the List of deaths caused by ragging that you've edited and so maybe you would interested in that AfD debate. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amit Sahai suicide. Thank you. --JJLatWiki (talk) 15:50, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

thanks for helping me with the spam tag on GILA

:) ViperSnake151 18:42, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Shelly burns

My apologies: it was a speedy. I misread the article. 12:03, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

I should have tagged it db-web rather than db-bio; db-bio was correctly declined! Ros0709 (talk) 12:17, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Ashwini Gupta

Oh, okay then. I'm sorry, I didn't know that I could remove it. Wow, that makes everything a whole lot easier! Thank you! — Cuyler91093 - Соитяівцтіоиѕ 09:15, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Wills n(N)eck

Thanks! I was just trying to sort that out when it magically happened!

You're welcome. Ros0709 (talk) 10:17, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
BTW - Google has a lot of references to "Will's Neck". I added a redir for that. Ros0709 (talk) 10:20, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

HelenaMaria

I noticed that you removed the speedy deletion tag from this article. Just wanted to let you know that this is an almost exact re-creation of the article that was speedy deleted earlier today. I am still not convinced that it assets notability with appropriate references so, if you don't object, I am going to re-nominate it for speedy deletion. Thanks. --ukexpat (talk) 21:09, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

I think this one is a close call and therefore not a speedy candidate. Perhaps PROD it instead? Ros0709 (talk) 21:10, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

TrimWater

What makes TrimWater spam as opposed to Ramune or Red Rain Energy drink? The tone isn't advertising. Red Rain energy drink isn't notable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sugarisbad (talk • contribs) 21:55, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

See WP:SPAM and WP:WAX Ros0709 (talk) 21:58, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Abongo (Roy) Obama

Thanks for tagging this article. I hope the original poster now figures that its not me against him and that this is simply not ok with the guidelines. In case your interested, there is an open Deletion Review for this article. Excirial (Talk,Contribs) 20:19, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Hey, thanks for standing up for me RE: the personal attacks on the Michael Minns afd. Much appreciated. Note that I created a Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User names for the User:Michael Minns username requesting that it be blocked, reason: duplicates the name of a living, notable person whom the user is not (by his/her own admission). Best, --Pgagnon999 (talk) 16:00, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

PCD album

A schedule of future events may be appropriate if it can be verified. :Well it's been verified by a group member on the OFFICIAL web site--KingMorpheus (talk) 04:45, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

My response here

Re: Phoenix Film

What do you mean, recreate? I didn't recreate anything. Two One Six Five Five τ ʃ 16:38, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

oh, wait. #@!. Hold on a sec.... Two One Six Five Five τ ʃ 16:38, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Got it. Thanks! Two One Six Five Five τ ʃ 17:00, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Dovetail Ranch

The article I posted about Dovetail ranch is almost the same as the one for some of the other Brothels in the "list of brothels" page. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_brothels_in_Nevada SnitchyCat 2 March 2007

WP:WAX Ros0709 (talk) 17:02, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

SICA

Please read User talk:Xenon54#SICA and try to understand how I view tearing down SICA as tantamount to tearing down The Commonwealth. Next time, please consider running a quick Google check for notability or following the links listed therein before posting a speedy. Ta. :)--Thecurran (talk) 00:38, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

An article which consists of nothing but external links (as it was at the time it was tagged) satisfies the criteria for deletion at Wikipedia:CSD#A3. I did not actually delete the article, applying the tag merely brought it to the attention of an administrator for further consideration. Notability was not an issue in this case, the lack of content was.
In the circumstances you correctly applied a {{hangon}} tag and continued development of the article (an explanation on the talk page would have been advisable). Note that the Wikipedia process (which I was following) worked: your article was not deleted, but if you had left the article as it was when tagged (and this happens a lot) then it would have been.
As a suggestion for the future, if you wish to create the article in small incremental steps I recommend you do it first in your own user space, where it will be left alone by new page patrollers. You would initially create the article as eg User:Thecurran/Newpage and then copy/paste to create the actual, completed, article. Thereafter you could blank the original and reuse it for a future new article, or tag it {{db-author}} and an administrator will delete it for you.
Ros0709 (talk) 09:26, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Desktop video

FYI: The original author has removed the dated prod tag without discussion. I am of the same opinion as you, even with the added sources, that this is original research. At best, the information should be included in another larger article. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 16:24, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the pointer (especially as I had omitted to watch that page). I'll recheck it later and consider taking it to AfD if necessary. Ros0709 (talk) 18:58, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Holiday (Haylie Duff song)

Hi Ros, I've removed your speedy deletion tag, as criteria A7 does not apply to songs. Marasmusine (talk) 11:22, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Just noticed; no prob. Actually, I had marked it as such because there was no assertion of notability of the performer and that was probably an error - she has her own page but the link was missing to it. Ros0709 (talk) 11:24, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Viral injection

I see we were both taking Viral injection to AFD at the same time, and I created a discussion page at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Viral injection while you were adding a notice to Viral injection. Apologies for any confusion. EALacey (talk) 15:32, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Likewise! No confusion; I have added my !vote to your nomination. Ros0709 (talk) 15:35, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Stefano Gualeni

Fair enough. Please note that to avoid conflicts or disputes I reported just stark facts that can be quickly verified. If it doesn't suit Wikipedia's notability criteria, please delete the whole article. I was tired of meeting people that say that they "googled" me and decided to give a reliable, minimal base myself. Thanks and bye. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiipsi (talk • contribs) 20:26, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Eastern Creek V8 round

Referring 2008 Eastern Creek round of the V8 Supercar Championship, ummm... how exactly does a page with no text other than a partially filled in template read like a news release? --Falcadore (talk) 02:38, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

"Routine news coverage of such things as [...] sports [...] are not sufficient basis for an article". All the article consists of is the result of a race that completed the same day it was posted; that seems to be exactly what WP:NOT#NEWS addresses. Ros0709 (talk) 08:18, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Missing the point. The annotation says reads like a news release when very plainly it does not. Either it is the incorrect annotation to use, or it needs to be re-written. Additionally, the piece is incomplete, pending more information being posted, the bulk of the piece is written behind a <-- needing further editting. Maybe it needs to be removed pending a more complete version of the article being written, but as initially mentioned, the annotation was fundamentally incorrect and no additional explanation was provided as to why it might be appropriate. --Falcadore (talk) 23:15, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Speedy tags

Thanks for the advice. I obviously still have a lot to learn!--Habashia (talk) 13:57, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Kieran Murphy (businessman/Nicasol

Hi Ros0709, thanks for message. Please see my talk page for my response. --Agrofe (talk) 17:03, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

RfD nomination of FordFord School

I have nominated FordFord School (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Snowman (talk) 23:35, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

RfD nomination of FoxFord School

I have nominated FoxFord School (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Snowman (talk) 23:36, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Edit war?

On User talk:Neovik82 you tagged the user as being involved in an edit war, which they doesn't seem to have happened. Perhaps you want to remove that warning so that, as a new user, they're not confused. Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 13:50, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

It appears that this was the third time the article was created, having been speedily deleted twice before in the same day. However, a 3RR warning was probably a bit harsh so I have removed it for now. Ros0709 (talk) 14:01, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
I didn't think WP:3RR applied to new page creation, but having just re-read the guideline, it seems to. It did seem a little "bitey", though, since we had both already warned them about related issues. Thanks for reconsidering (even though I was wrong about 3RR). Delicious carbuncle (talk) 14:16, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Albert Junior problems

Thank you for your advice in that matter. However, I don't feel that removing his hang-on notices constituted vandalism on my part; I was pretty open about what I was doing and why. This user is (or in this case was since he's been blocked) apparently quite familiar with the workings of editing a wiki based on his knowledge of formatting, layout and the use of templates. Won't happen again, though. I do too much "whack-a-vandal" patrolling around here to get clobbered for vandalism myself.  :) Take care. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 07:32, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Quotezone.co.uk Article

Hi Ros - Just wondering if you could give me some guidelines to list the Quotezone.co.uk article? The site is one of the UK's leading insurance aggregators and the first to market with van insurance comparison in the UK. Ive put in some references including one from thesun.co.uk online newspaper - is there anything else required?

Greg w ni (talk) 17:50, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Disclaimer: I am a regular user like you; administrators have the power to delete pages and it is they who will decide whether the page should go or not. My concerns are:
  • Yes, there is mention in The Sun, but it is such a passing reference it may not be considered sufficiently relevant. See Wikipedia:Notability_(organizations_and_companies)#Primary criterion: "The depth of coverage of the subject by the source must be considered. If the depth of coverage is not substantial, then multiple independent sources should be cited to establish notability. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not sufficient to establish notability".
  • As you are clearly referencing your own site (and the title is the website address, not the company name) then you have a conflict of interest. This is a problem because it makes it difficult to objectively write from a neutral point of view.

Ros0709 (talk) 18:00, 15 April 2008 (UTC)