User:TenPoundHammer/Archive 5

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Jandek

Why did you remove the Jandek photo? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.149.203.252 (talk) 08:47, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] E. Upton and Sons

E. Upton and Sons is clearly asserting importance. The speedy criteria are hard and don't stretch - please take more care

with these. (This is becoming a matter of public concern and PR problems, so a few people are looking at all CSDs and particularly A7s lately.) Thanks! - David Gerard 17:31, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Amen, brother. I admire your energy--but an eagerness to make possibly controversial taggings (and closings) is not the way to induce people to trust you as an admin. DGG (talk) 21:31, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Chart positions

Hi, I see you've done some work digging up chart data on country musicians. I was wondering, if you have the time, if you could take a look for a musician named Nikki Hornsby, who doesn't have any chart data at Allmusic but who might nevertheless have hit the country charts at some point around 1988-89. Would appreciate it. Thanks. Chubbles 06:50, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] participation in AfD discussions

I will participate in these as I see fit thank you very much. Brookie :) - he's in the building somewhere! (Whisper...) 15:22, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Human chemistry AfD

I apologize if I seem suspicious, but I'm really not sure how to improve the group of articles I mentioned in the AfD nomination. Usually I just edit without logging in, but to nominate an article for deletion one must have an account, so I created one. Anyway, the articles don't make much sense, and seem to be some sort of combination of original research and synthesis. Do you have any suggestions as to what I can do to help fix this? Although I've made edits before I'm pretty much new to the community here and I don't want to start off on the wrong foot. Ggreer 03:35, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Shaun van Eeden

I don't believe this article is notable is their any chance you could delete it. --88.110.208.5 16:52, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Hate to bother you again but this page needs to be deleted, the years on it are all in the future. --88.111.94.52 15:38, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Porthill park cricket club - Another possibly deletion. --88.109.190.36 20:34, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Human chemistry

Your SNOW closure was somewhat over-hasty, and it has attracted criticism[1]. I suggest you revert it. It will not help you in future Rfas--you will recall this was the principal objection in the past. DGG (talk) 00:42, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Much as I tend to disagree with DGG on deletion issues, just thought I would come by and support him for once. The article in question is a ball of fraud and pseudo-science, and it took a while to get people to look at it instead of just say "oooh ... look at all the pretty references." It may have looked like a snowball keep yesterday, but now it is going down in flames.Kww 12:34, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wing-Benn Deng

Hi. You deleted Wing-Benn Deng back in August for failure to provide notability. Do you think the current version satisfies that requirement? It seems borderline, to me. Corvus cornix 21:53, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

I take it back, you didn't delete it, you commented on its deletion at the AfD. Corvus cornix 21:53, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
User:Android79 put the speedy on it, he/she was the admin who deleted it originally. Corvus cornix 22:15, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
I'll go along either way. I'm not convinced he's notable, but the claims sound like he might be. Corvus cornix 22:19, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Twinkle AfD nomination overwrote AfD#1

Your Twinkle nomination of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sierra Vista Mall over wrote the AfD#1. See this diff. Within the past week, someone else using Twinkle to nominate an AfD overwrote that AfD#1. Is there anyway you can contact the Twinkle crew and see if they can modify their software to prevent this from happening? Thanks. -- Jreferee t/c 21:19, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RE: User:12.74.157.98

I have since learned that this user is not a novice, but rather a serial vandal whose calling card is that he signs his IP address to articles he vandalizes. Unfortunately, he has never vandalized with a registered account, so we cannot tag him as a sockpuppeteer. dhett (talk • contribs) 18:49, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD mistake

Sorry, all fixed! Kevin 23:51, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Afd closing

Hi, how do you close Afd's as a non-admin? Giving me the how-to page is ok too. --Lenticel (talk) 09:22, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. If I ever become admin first I'll Approve your RfA. Cheers!--Lenticel (talk) 00:23, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD's

Hi. Just so you know, you forgot to add the AfD template to Paradise Pavilion and East Town Mall. I've added them both. - Rjd0060 05:25, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Emilio

Hi--great job on the Emilio article. I'm a classical musician, and most pop/rock/country artists are barely on my radar; but I'm also a San Antonian who remembers that Emilio was a huge phenomenon a few years back. I was totally surprised that there was no wikiarticle on him, so thanks for addressing that oversight. Emoll 13:58, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Forest Mall

I find myself agreeing with you more frequently. Scary. Bearian 16:55, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Paying the Price: Killing the Children of Iraq

Just so you are aware, I db-copyvio'd it earlier, but Coren removed it and suggested AfD instead. Pishogue (talk) 02:15, 19 November 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Mappila Malayalam

I would like to know the reason for your premature closure of AFD related to Mappila Malayalam. While I agree that the reason given by the user for AFD was quite long and difficult to fathom, more users are questioning the authenticity of the article as seen here Talk:Mappila Malayalam. You could have allowed the discussion to continue for some more days to hear the other side of the story as well. Just my two cents.. Thanks -- ¿Amar៛Talk to me/My edits 02:27, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Additional Comment on Mappila Malayalam

Premature is a bit of an understatement. It appears you are interjecting some level of authority which is not founded. I am not attempting to be mean here but closing that AFD after a few hours when there was obviously more than one native speaker that was disputing it and numerous voices on the article's discussion page as to its validity was not in keeping with the balance of a consensus here on wiki. If you will notice there are several more deletes and a few more people from the Malayalam Wikipedia that have voiced there thoughts. This article was deleted from Wikipedia Malayalam for these same issues. Just because an article may look well formated doesn't make it valid. Just use a little more discretion and patience and don't be so quick to want to impress and you will do better at this in the long run. Make it a FIVEPoundHammer, instead. Good Luck. ---Iconoclast.Horizon (talk) 01:14, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] El Con Mall

Hi. Nice work on El Con Mall! It actually has significant info now, which it really didn't before. Just wanted you to know your effort is appreciated. --Karen | Talk | contribs 02:40, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mappila Malayalam

Some user has placed the delrev tag. I will ask the user to create a discussion page for it. Thanks -- ¿Amar៛Talk to me/My edits 02:49, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/An_Exceptionally_Simple_Theory_of_Everything

I wonder if you noticed when closing that AFD that:

  • 11 of the 24 keep comments were duplicates. In other words, only 13 comments had been made to keep.
  • The total elapsed time was 4 hours.

This hardly seems to me to be keeping to the spirit of WP:SNOW. After all, much can change during one day (after people from several time zones have seen the AFD). Often one will see a flurry of 12 keeps, then a flurry of 12 deletes, etc. Also, your closing without noticing or fixing the dupes indicates to me undue haste. A discussion has started on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Mathematics#An_Exceptionally_Simple_Theory_of_Everything. You may wish to comment there. --C S (talk) 06:52, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your Snowing AFD discussions

Your most recent snowed AFD close was overturned at DRV yesterday. Your talk page evidences concerns about your other closes of AFDs. Your contribution history at AFD shows an unacceptable failure rate for snow closes for an admin but as a non-admin this points to serious cause for concern.

  • You closed Human Chemistry extremely early as a keep and then reversed yourself 2 days later after concerns were raised on your talk page. The article was later deleted.
  • Dallas Cowboys Seasons [2] was speedy closed and redirected less then an hour after the AFD opened allowing only two editors to comment - one to keep, one to delete. It's possible that the AFD may have agreed a redirect but unless you allow the disscussion to happen we will never know.
  • Your redirect of Random Haiku [3]less then 20 minutes after the article was nominated was in accordance with the nomination but did not allow any discussion to take place. The subject was likely notable because there was a section in the main article but who knows whether this little stub might have been substantially improved by a random editor as a result of the AFD and been able to stand as a separate article in its own right.
  • Your speedy close of Susan Orr was correct but you went and accused the nominator of bad faith in the close. Naughty!

What worries me most is that this is a collaborative project and that means that we have to listen to other views and allow discussions to take place. You frequently close discussions under SNOW before any discussion has taken place. You are effectively substituting your opinion over the consensus that would have emerged over a full 5 day AFD. You are not an admin and should not be closing anything other then uncontroversial AFDs. No user has the right to stifle discussion and prevent the development of consensus. I am raising this now because I would like you to stop closing AFDs under snow unless

    • there has been substantial discussion; &
    • at least two or three days of discussion has taken place; &
    • the outcome is clearly evident.

I'm happy to discuss. Spartaz Humbug! 08:04, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

  • Ouch... I am forced to agree. I was shocked when I saw your improper close of the AfD for Reisch, and the reason you provided: "The result was Keep, perfectly valid redirect." That's an editor's opinion, and should have been a !vote for Keep, not a close for Keep after a day and two votes. I've personally expressed grave concerns about your overzealous non-admin closes of deletion discussions, and I had hoped you would take my advice (and that offered by a number of other concerned editors) seriously, but the remedial course you have taken has been temporary, if anything at all. You've been up for adminship a couple times now, and the community has not indicated that it has enough trust in your course of action to provide you with tools - that is not an insignificant turn of events. I guarantee you will never be accepted as an administrator by the community with this record unless there is a decided and immediate change; and you know how things go in those discussions... maybe not even then. If you want to help Wikipedia, you must come to a better understanding of how the deletion discussions work. As I said in my last comment on your talk page, wishing to help the workload of the undoubtedly busy mop-bearers is a noble idea, but your attempts have thus far proven to be less than helpful, and perhaps even borderline disruptive. I fully agree with everything Spartaz said above, and these closes are becoming something of a hindrance... I hope it won't come to someone opening up a request for further steps against you, and I strongly urge you to leave the closing of AfDs alone. You've been very gracious in your answer to me the last time I raised this concern, and I hope to see not only a repeat of that calm acceptance, but an actual amending of your actions as a result of these often-expressed sentiments by myself and other editors. Thank you for your attention. ◄Zahakiel► 07:34, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Further comment - I looked back over your contributions and talk page, and I notice that I actually supported you during your first RfA. I'd love to have been able to do that with the subsequent ones, but you keep saying, "I guess I am too quick with SNOW; I'll be more careful from now on," but nothing changes, and a few days later you're back at it again. This is just to reinforce what I have already said above, but if you notice that self-control and getting too excited to prevent SNOWing things is a problem for you when making closes, abstinence is still the best method of protection. ◄Zahakiel► 07:50, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Antiquroum Auctioneers - thanks!

[edit] Where?

Which Geneva is this place located in? Geneva, Switzerland? Geneva, Michigan? Right before Helvetica in my fonts menu? Ten Pound Hammer • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 20:22, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Excellent - thank you! Some placeholders in my draft were left in place! Umptious (talk) 14:27, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

However, the [citation needed] tag against the "ten million dollars" auction was probably incorrect - the source for this was the same as the source for rest of the paragraph, which was given at the end of the para.

Thanks again - you've been very helpful and courteous indeed; wiki needs more editors like you. Umptious (talk) 14:33, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Camel discography

I did wonder where it went ! I think its because I posted it around midnight. Thanks. Hammer1980·talk 00:30, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reggie Sears

Just to let you know that I'm not disagreeing at AfD regarding article content - just that G7 wasn't applicable. Could be weakly claimed that discography is a "nod" to notability... Doubt that this will pass AfD, which is best, as it will then be g7 applicable & will prevent recreation of the same thing ad nauseam. :) SkierRMH (talk) 23:14, 25 November 2007 (UTC)



[edit] Taylor Swift

No, she's not on the AC charts. She's on the HOT AC chart, which has 40 positions, and according to Hit Predictor, she's currently at #27. I am going to try to disambiguate the two AC charts at some point, as we're using "Hot AC" chart for many country songs that have not charted on THAT chart (such as Lost in This Moment, Lost, etc.). See http://www.hitpredictor.com/hotac.php for more information; she's listed there (as well as R&R's Hot AC chart). Spell4yr (talk) 00:47, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I'm slightly mistaken. Hot AC on Radio & Records has no corresponding chart on Billboard; Billboard's "Hot" AC chart is the equivalent of Radio & Records' "Mainstream" chart. So she's charted on R&R Hot, but not Billboard. Quite confusing on their part. Spell4yr (talk) 01:02, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
For the record, it seems that R&R Hot Adult Contemporary = Billboard Adult Top 40; R&R Adult Contemporary = Billboard Hot Adult Contemporary; R&R CHR/Top 40 seems to have no match on Billboard. Taylor's charting on the first and third sets of charts, and since I based the Top 40 Mainstream position on the last chart, I wonder if the chart position listed on her page should be the first chart and not the third. This is far too confusing -- to make it easier, country artists should be forbidden from pop radio so no one has to deal with this categorization. :-) Spell4yr (talk) 05:56, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Carpenter tags

Hey, I have tried to improve the neutrality and quality of Mary Chapin Carpenter. Would you be willing to give the article a look to see if I've fixed these problems, and let me know if there are any changes or additions you'd suggest? Thanks! Hobbesy3 (talk) 21:06, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Worked on the article a bit. Thanks, Hobbesy3 (talk) 15:22, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Also, since you look like an experienced editor of music-related articles: is there any consensus on Wikipedia as to whether non-charting singles should be listed in an artist's discography? Several singles lists I've seen are titled "charting singles," which makes sense to me, as these would probably be the only notable singles an artist has. It seems unnecessary to list all the Carpenter singles which have failed to chart. Won't removing the non-charting singles and retitling the section "Charting singles" get across the same information? Let me know, Hobbesy3 (talk) 00:45, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Avenue at white marsh

There are four sources in the article and only one of them is a dead link. I can't find anything about what happened to nottingham properties but their website went offline at the end of the summer. What is wrong with the other three?MDSL2005 (talk) 03:24, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

  • I cited the Avenue's website only for a current list of stores. A third party isn't going to publish a notable article everytime a new business opens. MDSL2005 (talk) 03:34, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reason

I put the reason in there. Not sure why it;s missing Alatari (talk) 04:44, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Alan Butler

Alan Butler was closed deleted G4, not A7, according to the blocklog deletion log. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 21:48, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD

Thanks. I didn't catch that. Metal Head (talk) 13:46, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thank You

I don't know what was going on. I thought I was inputting the code properly, but I couldn't get it to work. Thanks!--Folk smith (talk) 04:18, 30 November 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Founding Fathers

What are you talking about? I put the nonsense tag because, that article is absolute drivel. I have freshmen in developmental English who at least understand that paragraphs are important. It's indecipherable.--Folk smith (talk) 04:36, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

No, this tag subst:Nonsensepage|Template:Db-nonsense is placed on the talk page. --Folk smith (talk) 04:44, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

You are mistaken.--Folk smith 02:33, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you!

Hi TPH,

Thanks for striking out your deletion !vote. I've tried to improve the article a bit, and will work on it later as well, as I find good sources. Thanks for keeping an open mind during the process. Not every nominator will take a second look, let alone change his statement. I appreciate that. Firsfron of Ronchester 03:13, 2 December 2007 (UTC)