This page 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.

Hi, I think i've found another sock previously used by Tony winward ( talk · contribs) aka Anthony Winward: Samuelsons Club ( talk · contribs) but it hasn't been used since just before his block. Found while inspecting file:Samuelsons club.jpg uploaded by A.W. Userpage mentions Anthony & user only edited his userpage. Haven't tagged the account at this time. Should I open up a new SPI case? Jarkeld ( talk) 07:15, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm not an expert on SPI, but it might be worthwhile, as it certainly sounds suspicious. Go to Wikipedia:SPI#Submitting an SPI case and start a new case called Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Tony winward, with a CU request - this will ensure that it will be connected with the currently archived requests. -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 07:31, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

SPI filed. Thanks for the advice! Jarkeld ( talk) 23:15, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi

You deleted the page about my old band. Why? Is there any way you can undelete it? If not can I do it again? Just because you couldn't find any reference to us on Google it doesn't mean we didn't exist. In fact you should have been able to find us on Google. There's quite a few references to us on Google (I just checked).

Thanks

Ian Harding—Preceding unsigned comment added by Iharding ( talk • contribs) 06:54, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for contacting me, Ian. Firstly, I have removed your email address - I won't contact you other than on Wikipedia, and this page is visible across the internet! If you want it permanently removed from this page's history, contact oversight-l@lists.wikimedia.org.

The reason that I deleted the page was that it had been proposed for deletion for 7 days with no objections. Although it is possible to undelete the article (or recreate it), the band do not meet the criteria for inclusion in Wikipedia.

No one is doubting the existence of the band - but the mere existence of something is not the criteria for inclusion on Wikipedia. There needs to be reliable, independent sources of information about it. I did a Google Search, and found nothing at Google News/Scholar/Books. Although there were 89 hits on Google Web Search (under "The Scene" "Ian Harding"), none of these were from sources which would meet Wikipedia's criteria of reliable/independent sources.

For your information, here are some of the guidelines and policies I have referred to:

• Wikipedia's Notability Guidelines
• Notability (music): Criteria for musicians and ensembles
• Reliable sources
• Independent sources

Regards, -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 08:57, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

The RfC on the Community de-Adminship proposal was started on the 22nd Feb, and it runs for 28 days. Please note that the existing CDA proposal was (in the end) run as something of a working compromise, so CDA is still largely being floated as an idea.

Also note that, although the RfC is in 'poll format' (Support, Oppose, and Neutral, with Comments underneath), this RfC is still essentially a 'Request for Comment'. Currently, similar comments on CDA's value are being made under all three polls.

Whatever you vote, your vote is welcome!

Regards, Matt Lewis ( talk) 10:36, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

	The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
	Thanks for these edits on VivoBarefoot – cleaning up refs, adding “who?” tag; exemplary yeoman’s work! —Nils von Barth ( nbarth) ( talk) 10:48, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

• Thank you! -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 10:53, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Steve Hi :) Thought you'd know this. How do I help people out with creating new accounts? Do leave a message on my talk if/when you reply. Warm wishes. ▒ ♪ ♫ Wifione ♫ ♪ ▒ _―Œ ^{♣Łeave Ξ мessage♣} 04:12, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

I'll get back to you on Monday when I'm back on on computer, rather than on my mobile as I am now -- PhantomSteve.alt/ talk\ ^{alternate account of Phantomsteve} 13:36, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Sure. Thanks ▒ ♪ ♫ Wifione ♫ ♪ ▒ _―Œ ^{♣Łeave Ξ мessage♣} 13:40, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

This is just a quick message to let you know that I have seen the above messages, and will be looking at it in a bit more detail later today -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 12:38, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

• Wifione, you need to look at Wikipedia:Request an account/Guide which explains how to get access to the account creation request interface. It tells you how to register for use (and the qualifications for using the interface). Read those, follow the instructions, and then wait for one of the tool admins (not the same as enwiki admins!) to contact you. -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 23:50, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

• Thanks. I tried that last year. But an enwiki administrator Prodego said that I needed more experience. I left a note on his talk requesting him to tell me in which areas. He didn't reply. So was wondering whether you had any inputs with respect to that. Thanks again the reply. ▒ ♪ ♫ Wifione ♫ ♪ ▒ _―Œ ^{♣Łeave Ξ мessage♣} 16:20, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

• As I'm not an admin on the Account Creation Tool, I can't tell you what kind of experience they are looking for - just general good use of your account, I think, but I'm not sure. My advice would be to reapply via the link above, and see what happens! -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 19:18, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Steve. ▒ ♪ ♫ Wifione ♫ ♪ ▒ _―Œ ^{♣Łeave Ξ мessage♣} 04:23, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

My mother has passed to me a letter written in pencil from a relation who was a soldier in the Coldstream guards during world war 1. It is more out of interest that i wish to trace where he fought and fell i do not have his number only his name his captain's name and the date on the guard duty slip for Tuesday the 18th and Wednesday 19th August no year although the dates did relate to 1914.The address on the letter is 4, Reserve Battalion Coldstream Guards Windsor and just Wednesday as a date. The soldier's name is Mr J. Remnant he has a reference to a Captain Massey in his letter. Which because of its very moving content set me thinking. I am in the process of being self taught on my daughters old computer so please excuse my spelling and my I.T. skills. sign g/45 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Perplex1943 ( talk • contribs) 16:46, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Your query is one which I can help you with! According to the Commonwealth War Graves Commission (see CWGC Casualty 1625828):

Name: REMNANT, JOHN 
Initials: J 
Nationality: United Kingdom 
Rank: Private 
Regiment/Service: Coldstream Guards 
Unit Text: 1st Bn. 
Age: 33 
Date of Death: 25/10/1914 
Service No: 4000 
Additional information: Son of the late Charles and Sarah Remnant;
                        husband of Elsie Remnant, of 11, St. John St., Farncombe, Surrey. 
Casualty Type: Commonwealth War Dead 
Grave/Memorial Reference: Panel 11. 
Memorial: YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL 

A quick look in various books I have here at home reveal the following information about the time period when Pvt Remnant was killed:

He was probably killed during the actions forming the First Battle of Ypres. The period between Oct 19-Nov 11 was a period of the fiercest fighting of the " Race to the Sea", where the French and British Armies held onto the salient around Ypres (which they would actually hold for the entire duration of the war), preventing the German forces breaking through. The Coldstream Guards were stationed somewhere between Dixmude and Armentières. At First Ypres, the 1st battalion lost almost all their officers and men (by 1st Nov, they were down to 150 men).

It is also possible that he was killed at one of the other actions involving the British Army at that time: the Battle of La Bassée, the Battle of Messines, the Battle of Armentières or the Battle of the Yser.

Without having access to other sources of information, that's all I can give you - I hope it is helpful!

As you may have gathered, the First World War in an interest of mine - I am aware of 4 great-great Uncles who died in the Great War (and at least one who survived), and so I have various reference books!

Regards, -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 17:43, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Incidently, The National Archives have the War Diaries here which can be downloaded (it costs £3.50) - the description for those documents are:

1 DIVISION, 1 INFANTRY BRIGADE:
  1 Battalion Coldstream Guards 1914 Aug - 1915 July/
  1 Battalion Scots Guards 1914 Aug - 1915 July/
  1 Battalion Black Watch (Royal Highlanders) 1914 Aug- 1919 Mar
(220 pages)

Be warned though - they will not mention Remnant by name - only officers would be mentioned; however it will say where they were on which date, number of casualties, etc. -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 17:52, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Further to the above, I should point out that I couldn't find Mr Remnant's Service Records - but about 60% of them were destroyed during The Blitz. You can, however, get a copy of the medal card for him from the National Archives here (cost is £2). This would show you what medals he was awarded posthumously. Unfortunately, if they are not in the family, it is not possible to get duplicates from the MoD, as almost all medals were sent to the registered next of kin after the war.

Another useful place where you might be able to get more information is The Coldstream Guards Association -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 22:39, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

How impressive, it's nice to see someone go out of their way to help where they can. Weakopedia ( talk) 07:40, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Hello,

I'm trying to understand why the DefenseWeb Technologies page was rejected.

I have followed the guidelines put forth by Wikipedia, and find that what I submitted is very similar in scope to other company pages (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RightNow as an example).

Can you help me understand this so that I can get this article accepted?

Thanks

Meg —Preceding unsigned comment added by Megdavis00 ( talk • contribs) 21:49, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

The DefenseWeb Technologies article was deleted as explained in the deletion log:

21:37, 4 March 2010 NawlinWiki ( talk · contribs) deleted " DefenseWeb Technologies" ‎ ( A7: Article about a company, corporation, organization, or group, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject)

There was no indication of how this company meets either the general notability guidelines or the notability guidelines for companies and organisations.

I am not going to discuss other articles, as the presence or otherwise of other articles has no bearing on this article - it could mean that the other article is better referenced, or it could be that the other article should be deleted as well!

Wikipedia is not a promotional tool, or a directory of companies. For a company to meet the inclusion criteria, there needs to be significant coverage in independent, reliable sources.

As NawlinWiki deleted this, you would need to contact them about this. I would not even think about restoring an article that another admin has deleted.

You might also want to mention that you (Meg Davis) have twittered about this company, presumably in your role as a Technology Product Marketer (and according to the LinkIn info, specifically in Computer Software). This means that you have a conflict of interest in the subject. -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 22:17, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

I noticed that you nominated WPRZ-FM for deletion. You should be aware that all radio stations, be them new, defunct or currently broadcasting are notable. This has precedence of several AfD discussions. Please also read the essay WP:NME. While it is only an essay, it is backed up by the precedence I spoke of earlier. Please note that another user is saying the station may, in fact, be on the air. With that, the notablity factor, the precedence and the essay, I recommend you recend your nomination for deletion. Thank you. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 23:39, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

NME says Notability [of a radio station] can be established by either a large audience, established broadcast history, or unique programming - which of these 3 criteria does WPRZ meet? -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 23:51, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

The station will (or already is) serve Culpeper, Virginia, Washington, Virginia, Madison, Virginia and Warrenton, Virginia, along with other localities in North-Central Virginia. If the station is on the air, it already has an established broadcast history. If the station is on the air, the programming is coming from studios in Warrenton, Virginia, inside of the broadcast range.

But you are also forgetting the clear precedence that all radio stations (new, current or defunct) be them on FM, AM, LP, CC, or LW are notable. That overrules the essay. Precedence overrules everything. So again, I ask you withdraw your nomination for deletion as this will save us ALOT of time. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 23:57, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Just a note, some references has been added to the page and more will be added by another user who is great at digging up all kinds of information about stations. Please stand by for that. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 00:24, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

"Precedence overrules everything?" - even policy? Or is WP:N to be ignored, because it has been in the past? You see, going by that reasoning, we don't need to bother finding sources for any article which has been unsourced for years (including BLPs), because there's obviosuly a precedent there - they have been unsourced for years, let's keep them that way.

I looked at the applications:

Application Search Results 
File Number Form Paper/
Elect Call Sign Facility Id Service Status Status Date Details 
BMPED 20100301ABZ 340 E WPRZ-FM 121978 FM ACCEPTED FOR FILING 03/02/2010 Info  |  Application  
BNPED 20071019DGB 340 E WPRZ-FM 121978 FM GRANTED 12/16/2009 Info  |  Application 

The 12/16/2009 is the original construction permit; the 03/02/2010 is a minor modification to a construction permit. This is indeed a new station (they filled in sections 15-17 of FCC340). As those are the only 2 applications on file with the FCC, this is a new station - so it doesn't meet the "history" criteria of the essay which you referred me to.

They are applying for a permit as a nonprofit educational organization, specifically to the "providing of an educational program concerning the Bible, biblical teaching and family living in accordance with biblical principles, and the operating of broadcasting stations in furtheration of the Corporation's educational purpose" (see here): this would probably not be "unique programming", as there are lots of stations which broadcast this kind of thing.

The area they are covering is approx. 150 by 150 kilometres (93 by 93 mi), so a relatively low audience (see page 3 of attachment 16).

You referred me to the NME essay - and using the criteria there, this station should not be included in Wikipedia - oh, but I'm meant to ignore that, aren't I?. OK, according to the policy WP:N, it should not be included either.

I will remove the SD tag, but I will consider nominating this for AfD next week unless I see specific improvement to demonstrate notability - as nowhere in WP:N, WP:ORG or WP:NME does it say that this radio station should have an article, precedent or not. -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 00:30, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

I am not appreciating the attitude I am getting from you. I am attempting to work with you on this in a civil manner and comments like "oh, but I'm meant to ignore that, aren't I?" aren't civil.

Now, if you wish to clog up AfD with another pointless AfD, that is fine by me, have at it, but it will get struck down on precedence and already exsisting notablity of ALL radio stations.

I do have one question, how is 93 by 93 miles (a good section of land here in Virginia) a low audience? Have you taken population figures in those areas? It isn't, by any stretch of the imagination, a low audience. In fact, it is part of Northern Virginia and is a quite large population. I should know, I live in this area of Virginia.

Also, MANY radio stations focus on "biblical teachings" and have beyond met WP:N, among other policies. There again is that pesky notablity of radio stations. There are about 11,000 radio station articles, about 300 users (that I have run into) that work on radio station articles, with about 15 on a daily basis covering the entire country. We keep those articles up-to-date, well-sourced, and free of problems that BLPs see. Haven't seen an RfC on Radio Stations or WP:WPRS lately have you? That's cause we are a pretty well oiled, up-to-date, well read machine and we know what we are talking about.

So, when I say that an AfD would be a waste of time, it will be. Precedence and notability will keep this article on Wikipedia for years to come...or I will eat my hat. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 00:43, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Put down the hat. Yes, I declined the speedy and, yes, I've added quite a bit to the article but this particular article may be vulnerable to a challenge at AFD as while countless precedents have found all licensed broadcast radio stations to be notable (which the in-need-of-rewrting NME essay reflects only awkwardly) this new station has only a construction permit, not a license, and thus does not enjoy the general notability a licensed station enjoys. (For the record, since "notability is not temporary", a formerly-licensed station now defunct is still generally notable.) As an not-yet-licensed station, unless WPRZ-FM has garnered some mention in a reliable third-party source, it's quite likely to fall at AFD, also per dozens of precedents. I'd suggest moving the article to NH's user space where it can be worked on in preparation for its probable licensing in the future. - Dravecky ( talk) 01:00, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

I have no problem with the article moving to userspace until the station is fully licensed and on-the-air. That works for me, if it works for Steve, then we can move it to userspace. Just would need to remove it from List of radio stations in Virginia, 88.1 FM and Template:Fredericksburg Radio. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 01:09, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

( edit conflict) It's late, and I'm about to go to bed - but I just wanted to apologise for being a bit sharp - I'm tired! I just didn't like being told "look at WP:NME" and then when I explain why I think it fails to meet that, you say "oh ignore that, precedence says to keep it". If the station had ever broadcast, I would not have nominated it for speedy deletion. If there had been significant coverage in the local media about it, even if it hadn't started broadcasting, I would not have nominated it (although to be honest, I spent about 20 seconds looking it up: GNews=0 hits, GScholar=0 hits; GBooks=1 hit about a NC station, not this VA one - see here (2008 publication). This was not an indepth search, but a quick check of the main sources of reliable info - I didn't check GWeb).

Oh, and userfying is OK with me until it receives its license and starts broadcasting!

Anyway, I just wanted to apologise for snapping at you, and now I'm going to say Goodnight, America, wherever you are! -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 01:12, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Apology accepted. No worries, we all get sleepy :) I will have Dravecky userify it and I will move it back once it starts broadcasting. Take Care... Good Night and Good Luck. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 01:21, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm glad this all worked out calmly. Article moved to user space, by request. - Dravecky ( talk) 01:29, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi there! I am the one who created the Shane Dawson page. I am still a beginner and don't know how to deal with the speed deletion thingy, but I think the page deserves to be left as Shane's channel is the 4th most subscribed channel of all time (you can check this out here). Please, could you leave the page for a few weeks till it catches up momentum (it has been on for a few hours). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dyaa ( talk • contribs) 01:34, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi Dyaa! I had a look at the "most subscribed" page you linked to, and Shane wasn't number 4:

1. panacea81 339,489
2. charlieissocoollike 302,458
3. TopGear 264,222
4. miaarose 237,444
5. bubzbeauty 234,836
6. simonscat 190,263
7. BBCWorldwide 183,698
8. eddsworld 128,913
9. patcondell 113,301
10. sosolid2kk 110,573
11. leonalewis 106,518
12. mememolly 104,948

I didn't go past that! However, the number of subscribers and views is not the only criteria for inclusion on Wikipedia - Shane would need to have received significant coverage from reliable, independent sources such as national newspapers and the like, which would show that he meets the notability criteria, and specifically the notability criteria for people.

As for leaving the page "for a few weeks till it catches up momentum" - this seems to indicate that you realise that he doesn't meet the criteria! If he was notable enough for inclusion, we wouldn't need to wait for the momentum. Sorry, but I still feel that Shane is not notable enough for inclusion at this time. -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 07:27, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

On second thought, I do agree with you now! Deleting the page is the best thing that can happen in the meantime. -- Dyaa ( talk) 09:12, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for reviewing my contributions. I will take on board the suggestions. Cheers. - Reconsider ! 02:59, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm glad it was useful! -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 07:28, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Hello Phantomsteve. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Team san jose, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you. ( talk→  BWilkins  ←track) 12:20, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi Steve, I saw that you had deleted my page on Ksport. Would you care to elaborate on why? I wasn't sure what was meant by "Autoline might be notable, but Ksport is not." Autoline is the parent company and US distributor of Ksport suspension products. I suppose that could have been made more clear, however, I didn't feel that it would result in a deletion.

If you'll let me know, I'll fix it and try again. Thank you.

Pendizzle ( talk) 20:42, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

UPDATE: I've done a little more research and I think this may have something to do with a lack of media coverage? Ksports race cars as well as teams using their parts are regularly featured in industry publications, as well as everyday folks with Ksport parts on their street cars.

I think you are mistaken about this - I neither proposed it for deletion (that was A Stop at Willoughby ( talk · contribs) and seconded by TenPoundHammer ( talk · contribs)) nor deleted it (it was deleted 7 days later by JIP ( talk · contribs)). I had no involvement with this article or its deletion. -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 09:41, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Hello Phantomsteve. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Autumn Moon Entertainment, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Releasing a game that's notable enough to have its own article, is a credible assertion of notability for A7. PROD or take to AfD if required. Thank you. Ged UK  20:51, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

My sincere thanks for your answer re:- 1st world war soldier of the Coldstream Guards Private Remnant. The letter I have addressed to his wife has a poem written in ink on the back, any clues on its author

                The Truth
              God and soldiers folks adore
              in times of war and not before
              When peace returns and all is righted
              God is forgotten and soldiers slighted.

I feel moved from the contents of the letter and the sentiment of the poem from my late father's aunty and will visit the war grave to show my respect. yours G45 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Perplex1943 ( talk • contribs) 16:19, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

I find references to the poem attributing it to both Rudyard Kipling, Thomas Jordan (1612-1686) (we don't have an article about him), Francis Quarles (see The Weekly Telegraph) This blog gives:

Our God and soldiers we alike adore,
Ev’n at the brink of danger; not before;
After deliverance, both alike requited,
Our God’s forgotten, and our soldiers slighted. – Frances Quarles, 1632

The book The final betrayal: the Armistice 1918-- and afterwards By Richard Garrett also says that it is Frances Quarles ("which put the matter even more succintly than had Kipling") - and Speed on the ship!: a centennial history of the Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers, 1893-1993 by William duBarry Thomas which says "Admiral Wallin's paraphrase was not originally from Kipling, but from "Of Common Devotion" by an English religious poet, Francis Quarles (1572-1644)"

This forum quotes this:

God and Soldiers we adore
In times of trouble,
not before
When Trouble's gone and all things righted
God's forgotten and the soldier slighted. 

Kipling,
Someplace in Barracks-Room Ballads (1899) 

However, the Project Gutenberg transcript ( here) doesn't have it in that book (the 1892/1896 versions anyway),

Bartleby's quotations says Quarles as well, and it's the one which seems to be most reliable.

Hope this helps, let me know if you want to know anything else! -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 17:18, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

I was wondering if you'd give your opinion on this post, as that would be helpful. Thanks Paul 2387 11:51, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi Steve.

A new user Doson left a message on my talk page to help him with unifying his accounts. He's having problems with one account especially (the zh wikipedia account). Would you be able to chip in and help him? I left a message on admin Orangemike's talk page but guess he's not around. Thanks in advance. Best regards. ▒ ♪ ♫ Wifione ♫ ♪ ▒ _―Œ ^{♣Łeave Ξ мessage♣} 16:53, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Hey Steve, I don't know if you came across Oswald Gracias and Pete Wilson (bass guitarist) by chance. If you look at the history you'll quickly see I'm having a disagreement with another editor about the removal of unrefBLP tags; that other user has mode dozens and dozens of edits similar to this, and I can't track them all down. I've asked them for an explanation (see their response on my talk page) but I am not satisfied. What do I do? Thanks, Drmies ( talk) 14:44, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

I came across them as I have been working on the backlog of unref'd BLPs! With regard to Gracias, I added a couple of references, but I think there are more that could be added. With regard to Wilson, I couldn't find any reliable sources, hence the PROD. I am going to leave a message on your talk page addressed to both of you! -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 14:50, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Steve. Drmies ( talk) 14:56, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Steve, I removed the {{db-person}} on Wilson, as he seems to satisfy WP:BAND #6. I think this should be brought to AfD, though, as I'm not convinced of the claims in the article. Still, if there is a credible claim, it's not eligible for CSD A7, from my understanding. Joshua Scott ( talk) 23:52, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Quite right, Joshua - I hadn't really noticed the claim about other bands - I only noticed the Icebreaker one, which seemed to clearly be false (I have just changed it so that the claim is not there, although mention of playing with them is). I will look again for sources, and if necessary PROD or AfD this later today or tomorrow. -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 07:20, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Hello, I am the editor of the article of Ghazni khel (clan), which was deleted. I have a request to relist it because in discussion process only two neutral members participated and the editor Marwat is not a neutral person. Thanks.-- Mahabat 11:31, 11 March 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mahabat ( talk • contribs)

As I said in the closing summary No evidence for the notability of the clan (as opposed to individual members of the clan) has been presented, and no RS produced by the opposers. Census is to delete. I see that this was declined for undeletion at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/Current requests#Ghazni Khel (Clan). I believe that my original assessment of the close was correct, but you are welcome to take it to Wikipedia:Deletion review - if others disagree with my close, it can either be re-opened or undeleted. Regards, -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 15:25, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Is it possible to for wikipedia? One of my pictures contains some of my personal information that I wasn't aware of at the time of uploading. I want to get rid of that. In case it cannot be done, please delete the image I just tagged so I can try and reupload it without worry of the metadata.— Dæ dαlus ^Contribs 09:51, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

To be honest, I don't know! You might want to ask at the Help Desk or perhaps Wikipedia_talk:Images? I think you'd probably have to edit the metadata on your computer before upload. I'd look at Major Geeks or [Tucows], they're the two sources I'd usually use for this kind of thing. -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 10:10, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

I went to delete it, and found it's been done! -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 10:12, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

i want to upload my information , but it gets deleted as i have given the same information on other sites pls help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gulukar ( talk • contribs) 10:47, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

The version of Rafique Shaikh which you created yesterday was a copyright violation. If you want to use material on a website which you own, see WP:IOWN which explains how to do this. The version which you created an hour ago just contained an external link. For Rafique Shaikh to have an article on Wikipedia, it needs to be shown that he is notable (see Wikipedia:Notability, Wikipedia:Notability (people) and Wikipedia:Notability (music), using reliable, independent sources. The only references I can find about a Rafique Shaikh is to a criminal, not a musician. -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 10:55, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

As per the discussion on Wifione [talk] page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Wifione#Merging_All_Accounts

I tried to log into it but couldn't get through cos I don't have my account in zh Wikipedia. It's not my account. I use only en Wikipedia :).

And as you said :) it may be possible to Usurp it, as it's never been used since it was created in October 2007 it'll be great if it's really possible.

Thanks

Doson ( talk) 11:14, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

To usurp it on zhwiki, their equivalent to our WP:USURP is zh:维基百科:更改用戶名/帳戶易手. Go there, follow the instructions to usurp the account. When it's yours, you might need to go to Special:MergeAccount to merge it with the other unified accounts, or it might be done automatically - I'm not sure! Good luck! -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 11:19, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

You stated when closing the deletion discussion on the page in question that there was "consensus to keep" the page. I dispute this, as at least 3 other users (not counting myself) were in favor of deleting the page. That is not what I call consensus. Although I understand that the majority of users were in favor of keeping the page, I feel you closed it prematurely. When you respond, please leave a talkback template on my talk page to remind me of your message. Best wishes. Immunize ( talk) 14:08, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

I realised that I had closed it 12 hours "early" after I had done so! As you know, it's not a vote, but when I closed it there were 12 editors who had suggested keeping this, and 4 (including yourself) who had suggested deletion.

I read carefully all the arguments presented (bear in mind that I had misread the time/date, and didn't realise that there were still 12 hours left before the MfD would normally have been closed). I noted that the last activity on the MfD was Tarc's response (at 14:16, 9 March 2010, 12 hours before I closed) to your comment (at 14:11, 9 March 2010). The last !vote was at 20:11, 8 March 2010 (30 hours before I closed the discussion), and just over half of all the !votes cast were 'keep's all in a row (7, from 00:27, 5 March 2010 until 20:11, 8 March 2010)

Please note that in closing the discussion, I said that there was consensus to keep - I did not say that it was unanimous or near-unanimous. Consensus is the general view - and the general view here was to keep the article.

Neither side used policies or guidelines (or even essays) in support of their positions (although in the nomination, you said that it was totally against policy, you did not explain which policy you felt was being violated) and two of the delete !votes appeared to basically say WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Without clear policy guidelines (and bearing in mind that this page has been clearly labelled as being humour from the very first edit), I felt that there was no reason to delete it.

If you feel strongly that my decision was incorrect, you are welcome to take this to Deletion Review (which "includes appeals to ... delete pages kept after a prior discussion" and "Deletion Review is to be used if the closer interpreted the debate incorrectly"). -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 15:00, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

I felt it violated WP:BITE, and, at the time of the nomination, it suggested vandalizing other users talk pages, which is unacceptable, even if intended as humor. Immunize ( talk) 15:17, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

I understand your motivation for nominating it, but what I felt about the page (whether in favour or not) wasn't relevant - if I had felt strongly one way or another I would have !voted myself and left the closure to someone else - my role as the closing admin is to judge the consensus, and I feel that in this case it was indeed to keep. -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 15:24, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Was this advertising? I've found this page is the uncontroversial moves area and whoever placed it there had stated that it was in the user namespace by mistake. Note this was not me. Simply south ( talk) 14:13, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

User:SebastianFresh was tagged as deletion as a promotional page. Looking at it, I agreed with this assessment, as the article was written by the user SebastianFresh about the rapper SebastianFresh, with links to his websites (YouTube, Twitter, Facebook), and no indication that this was a notable individual - it appeared to me that the intention of the page was to advertise themself. -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 15:09, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

on your user page you have some useful templates. One of which is

{{Collapse top|1=Optional text|bg="palegreen"}}

I note it is paleblue. If you remove the quotes around the color it will be palegreen.

You also have a hidden begin.. hidden end template. I use the collapse template a lot, but had never seen this one. I'm not seeing the difference—why would you use one over the other?-- SPhilbrick T 20:01, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Well spotted! As for the difference between {{ collapse}} and {{ hidden begin}}: collapse puts it all in a box, hidden... does not -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 20:08, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

i own the website.. i want to use the same content on wikipedia —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hiphoptamizha ( talk • contribs) 11:30, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Please see WP:IOWN which explains how you can grant permission for the website content to be used on Wikipedia. As I am sure you can appreciate, we need some proof of ownership - anyonecould say they own it, but that is not proof! The link I've provided explains how to go about doing this. -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 11:35, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Could you explain how an article that opens with "The Kerry Film Festival was established in 2000 and brings films & filmmakers from around the globe to one of the world’s most beautiful locations. With a rich and varied film history the delightfully scenic County Kerry is located on the scenic South West Coast of Ireland and has starred in Oscar Winning classic films from David Lean’s Ryan’s Daughter while its been the inspiration for many more including Jim Sheridan’s The Field." is somehow ambiguous? Ironholds ( talk) 12:49, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

The article may need re-writing and trimming down, but I feel that the purpose is to inform about the Festival. A quick look at Google News returned 77 hits (in fact it appears to have been founded at least in 1996). In the article itself, there are two Irish Times references. The wording needs improving, but I did not feel that it was unambiguously promotional in nature. However, please feel free to PROD or take it to AfD. -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 12:54, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Hello. Without getting too WP:BEANSy here, the editing patterns of Honda Enoch are the same as those in Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of HeadMouse and Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of HeadMouse. I have been dealing with HeadMouse and his socks since before I became an admin in 2007, and once you get used to his style, he is easy to spot a mile away. Please let me know if you need anything else. Thanks, — Kralizec! ( talk) 13:28, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for getting back to me - I had assumed that it was something like that, and as I have not had dealings with HeadMouse and his socks, then I am happy to defer to your opinion. Would it be an idea to get a CU to confirm it, just for completeness? Your call, of course, and I wouldn't dream of interfering here! -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 13:32, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Just wanted to let you know that I restored Daniel Spivak whom you deleted as a Prod that lasted 7 days. I restored it for two reasons, first off it had been kept at Afd in January so was not elligable for prod, and secondly the prod had only been added about 5 hours before you deleted it. Not a big deal but thought you might want to know why someone restored something you deleted. - DJSasso ( talk) 13:41, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

No worries, my bad - I saw this version as an expired PROD, and it was listed as an expired PROD at DumbBOT/ProdSummary. I failed to look at it more closely, and didn't see that it had been fraudulently PRODed with an expired date. Thanks for letting me know, you did the right thing - I'll have to remember to look more closely in future! -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 15:19, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

I noticed a discussion in Chzz talk page about penises and agree with you about censureship. When I looked up Skene's last year I found it refreshing this wasn't censured out. But you have to admit that this is a bit in the readers' face. Wouldn't it be better if the image was lower down in the article and the reader could scroll down to it. Informative and classy doesn't have to be mutually exclusive. Slightsmile ( talk) 16:39, 14 March 2010 (UTC)Slightsmile

While I understand what you are saying, I think that in that case the image needs to be in the infobox, and hence at the top of the article. Also, bear in mind that as a rule, most people who get to that article will have looked it up specifically, knowing what it is about. However, the place to discuss this would really be on the article's talk page -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 22:15, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

They'll probably prefer it on top too then. I still think it's an eyesore but that's okay, I finally found a project to keep me busy and out of trouble. Just curious, I see This user has 2.5 centijimbos, so admins can see users' watchlists? Slightsmile ( talk) 18:40, 15 March 2010 (UTC)Slightsmile

No, I can only see my own watchlist, admin or no! I know how many have my page on their watchlist by looking here (incidently, that'll only show if there are more than 30, unless you are an admin) - I actually have 86 now, so need to update the centijimbos figure!. The template User:Jake Wartenberg/centijimbo calculates it from the figure you give it! -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 19:09, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs 1982 Radio City Rules of evidence Joseph Stalin Cape Canaveral Air Force Station Launch Complex 11 Cape Canaveral Air Force Station Launch Complex 26 United States Soundtracker Karl Marx Tikkabilla Leithiinae Soprano clarinet Davis Tracker North Whip (instrument) Africa Cape Canaveral Air Force Station Launch Complex 18 Uptempo

Cleanup Bangladesh Air Force 1981 Organization of American Historians Merge Manila Humour List of Intel microprocessors Add Sources 1856 Georgi Beregovoi 1870 Wikify Foggy Nelson Object Windows Library Bhonsle Expand Fantomex UEFA Champions League Cool (aesthetic)

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot ( talk) 23:51, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi Steve, May I kindly propose the addition of three articles to the Wiki entry on the Singapore international Energy Week? The articles are all carried by the Japanese publication , Sankei Shimbun and written by their Singapore Bureau Chief, Mr Miyano Hiroyuki. 1. 【スマート・シンガポール】科学技術立国への戦略（１）自前のエネルギー確保へ - http://www.sankei.jp.msn.com/world/asia/100111/asi1001110807001-n1.htm 2. 【スマート・シンガポール】科学技術立国への戦略（２）ＥＶビジネス創出　 - http://sankei.jp.msn.com/world/asia/100118/asi1001180732001-n1.htm 3. 【スマート・シンガポール】科学技術立国への戦略（３）太陽光発電、欧州と提携 (1/3ページ) - http://www.sankeibiz.jp/macro/news/100125/mcb1001251003013-n1.htm

I have also edited the Wiki entry to include this year's edition of the event.

Hope to hear from you soon and feel free to share with me any feedback you might have.

Matthew.lim ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:13, 11 March 2010 (UTC).

Thanks for that Matthew. I will look at them later today (although it may not actually be until Monday, due to family commitments!) and add any relevant info to the Singapore International Energy Week article. -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 07:21, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi Matthew, sorry for the delay! I've looked at the three articles. In all three of them, although they mention projects and initiatives which were announced at the SIEW, they don't appear to mention SIEW itself. All the projects in these are already in the article, with references - so as such, these are not required as such. However, thank you for providing them - but although they would be useful for articles about the different projects themselves (although at the moment, none of them are notable enough for inclusion), to be included in an article about SIEW, they need to clearly mention SIEW!

I have expanded the section on the 2010 event, with references from the SIEW website. What we really need are references from the media, so when these are available, we can use them - obviously, the SIEW website is useful for now, but isn't independent!

Please do contact me again if I can be of any further assistance! -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 10:13, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Hey, after commenting I was thinking, should we pre-empatively move the discussion to the RfA talk page to allow for replies and discussion there? It isn't directly relevant to the Request for Adminship, and I don't want to risk derailing it with one of those "meta" discussions that isn't about the candidate on the main page. If you agree, we can move it to the talk page and leave one of those "Discussion regarding this !vote moved to talk page" things? -- Taelus ( talk) 11:24, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Sounds fair enough to me - I'd probably have done it if there had been a couple more comments, but now is as good a time as any! -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 11:27, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done, perhaps some would wait for more comments before moving, but remembering how RfAs can be to a candidate they may be happier with the discussions on the talk page rather than cluttering up the neutral section. Anyway, happy editing to you, -- Taelus ( talk) 11:35, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

I've declined your prod of Ray Cappo, since (as far as I can see) he passes WP:BAND #6. Nyttend ( talk) 13:45, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

		The Account Creation Barnstar
		You're dominating every other account creator on Wikipedia. 141 accounts created in the past 28 days. Wow! I award you the Account Creation Barnstar. Well done! Swarm( Talk) 03:21, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

• Thank you... I just happen to be on at good times, so sometimes I've been able to create several accounts because no one else is active! That figure also includes a time when several accounts were created in a very short time span because they were accounts from different students at a college (all for a project), so once I had done the checks for the first one, the IP checks were done already for the others! Mind you, in a few weeks I won't be online very much, so my creation rate will go down significantly! (Also bear in mind that I have created just under 280 in total - the top five creators have created 1294, 1186, 1101, 765 and 746 respectively - I've got a long way to "dominating every other account creator on Wikipedia"! However, thank you for the barnstar - it was a surprise, and very welcome -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 08:24, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
  • Eh, I think topping the list for most accounts created today, yesterday, the past 7 days and the past 28 days (by more than double the number of accounts the runner-up has created) entitles the use of the word "dominating" :P. Anyway, you're welcome. Swarm^{( Talk)} 21:35, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
    • Your humble rejection of the award only means that you're more deserving of it. :) Let me thank you, too, for the time you put into it, as well as your IRC input (especially when it's humorous) - both are greatly appreciated. Take good care, and my best wishes to you and your family, Arbitrarily0 ^{( talk)} 03:06, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

I moved my name to active but for some reason it isn't showing. I could not quickly identify the problem. Would you take a look at the active section and fix whatever I fouled up? Thanks JodyB _talk 21:46, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

You can take my name off the active list, but I might still take on one later on. Bearian ( talk) 02:39, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for contacting me! JodyB, I'll look at that now; Bearian if you do take someone on, will you update your entry? Thanks, both of you! -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 07:07, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi Steve. I noticed a few of your subpages have been placed in this category:

• User:Phantomsteve/welcome
• User:Phantomsteve/offensive-name
• User:Phantomsteve/multi-name
• User:Phantomsteve/company-name
• User:Phantomsteve/company-name/doc
• User:Phantomsteve/multi-name/doc
• User:Phantomsteve/offensive-name/doc
• User:Phantomsteve/welcome/doc

If you could remove/nowiki/link/includeonly these categories (whatever suits you), that would be helpful in clearing page out from CAT:UAA. Cheers, - Kingpin ¹³ ( talk) 11:25, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for that - the /doc pages had examples of the usage (which put it into the category), and the others trandscluded the doc pages - I have now changed all the [[Category to [[:Category. Thanks for letting me know! -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 11:48, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi, Steve, I don't want to chivvy you, but will you be returning to GTC? There's not much that needs to be done for it to pass GA so it shouldn't be a big job (I know you're busy elsewhere!). Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:33, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

I'll be looking at that next week, thanks for the reminder! -- PhantomSteve.alt/ talk\ ^{alternate account of Phantomsteve} 21:03, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

No worries! I've got it watchlisted, but feel free to drop me a line if you want me. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:37, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi Phantomsteve. Per your note I've removed myself from the process. Regretfully I no longer have the time to do much more than the odd tinker on Wikipedia. Thanks for letting me know. Pedro :  Chat  07:50, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know! -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 07:57, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the note, please feel free to remove my name. Kind regards, NCurse _work 14:30, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

I have moved you to the "retired" section, thanks! -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 09:23, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Hello Phantomsteve,

Thanks for helping to maintain the Admin Coaching page. Unfortunately, real life is forcing me to be less active on Wikipedia, so I would like to be placed on the Retired list at this time. It is possible that I may be able to return to admin coaching in the summer, and I will let you know if this will be possible in a few months. Academic Challenger ( talk) 01:22, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

I have moved you to the "retired" section! -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 09:48, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Hello Phantomsteve, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Joshua Hutchinson has been removed. It was removed by Sarcasto with the following edit summary '(Removed the unreferenced BLP crap)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with Sarcasto before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot ( talk) 08:04, 23 March 2010 (UTC) ( Learn how to opt out of these messages) 08:04, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Please undelete the Dre Knight page. Why would you delete it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.115.108.194 ( talk) 02:56, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

I deleted the page as a proposed deletion which had not been challenged in 7 days. I see that it has now been undeleted. However, as there are no references, and I could find no reliable independent sources of information, I am going to take this to Articles for deletion. Once I have done that, I will leave a message on your talk page about it, so that you have the opportunity to make a comment explaining why the article should be kept. -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 06:49, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

PhantomSteve:

I was on the team of health bloggers and professionals who originally launched the wikipedia page for Dr. Shikhman. I see that, on March 8, 2010, you deleted the page. I am more than happy to understand the full reasons why and make sure that none of us carry out any practices that would do anything to hamper the page's continued revision and evolution.

At this point, his many patients and those who recently saw his presentation at a health conference are confused when they see "deleted." Can we just have the page entirely removed as though it didn't exist? That might be less confusing and a little more comforting to Shikhman's patients and colleagues.

The article was well referenced and Dr. Shikhman's credentials unimpeachable.

I hope to hear back from you. The inner workings of Wikipedia are largely unknown to me and, at the same time, fascinating.

If it is entirely removed -- are there other implications we need to know about? I'm sure, with the doctor's reputation and presence in the research community, there will be energy and pressure to reinstate it.

Gopher49 ( talk) 01:48, 25 March 2010 (UTC) Gopher49

The article Alexander Shikhman was deleted following a discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alexander Shikhman, where the consensus was to delete. The reasons given were twofold:

1. Concerns that the page may be a copyright violation. However, as the comments there noted, there was uncertaincy about whether the article was copied from the website, or whether the website was copied from the article!
2. Concerns that the doctor did not meet the criteria for inclusion at WP:PROF.

With Articles for Deletion (AfD), a week is given for discussion, and after a week, an admin will judge the consensus based on the arguments given. In this case, as the consensus was to delete, the page was deleted.

Unfortunately, there is no way to suppress the "this page was previously deleted" message that shows if someone tries to recreate it. However, I should point out that if someone tries to go to the article (rather than tries to recreate it), they will just get a message saying "There were no results matching the query".

Although his credentials may well be unimpeachable, this does not in and of itself make the doctor notable enough for inclusion in Wikipedia - no one in the discussion disputed his credentials.

As an admin, I can see the text of the article that was deleted, and although there were indeed references, the consensus was that these were not enough to merit inclusion in Wikipedia at this moment in time. The references are 3 "is on the board of [organisation]" (not enough to show notability, thousands of doctors are on boards like this); a couple of "received a grant for research" (again, thousands of grants are awarded every year - not everyone who received them are automatically notable as Wikipedia defines notability); an article about the opening of a health centre (but no further coverage), which seems to be mainly based on a press release; a book publshed by the doctor himself (so not an independent source); and an article (written by the doctor) in a book (again, not an independent source).

If you feel that my decision to delete the article was incorrect, it can be taken to Deletion Review, which allows an appeal to be made against the deletion of an article - however, this is not an opportunity to give arguments in favour of keeping the article (there was a week for that when the AfD was open). It is used for if the closing admin (i.e. me!) inaccurately closed the discussion (which, as there were no "keep" arguments, only "delete", I did not) or if "significant new information has come to light since a deletion and the information in the deleted article would be useful to write a new article".

I looked for reliable sources of information, and couldn't find much at all! Google News returned two hits - one from 2002, one from 2008 - the 2008 one is the one which was used in the article, and the 2002 hit appears to be a link to the 2008 article anyway (in the "see also" section of the page). Google Books returned a few hits, but the "San Diego Magazine" references are in their "Special Advertising Section", and the other hit is a mention about his article in a book ("Niel Greenspan, Clemencia Pinilla, and Alexander Shikhman (chapter 7) describe striking mimicry between peptides and the group A streptococcal carbohydrate..."; Google Scholar's results are all of his own publications.

I am afraid that unless Dr Shikhman receives significant coverage in independent sources, he does not currently meet the requirements of the Wikipedia General Notability Guidelines, Notability Guidelines for people or Notability Guidelines for Academics.

Regards, -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 07:53, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

What can I do to get this undeleted?

If I am able to provide more citations from other sites would that help? It sounds from the discussion as though I need to provide some further information on what makes this company unique, such as their work with 4i2i, another Scottish company. Or pehaps doing the hardware and DSP design for the heart of CERN's Hadron Collider?

Any advice on the best way forward would be appreciated.

Thank you.

-- Ariadnenv ( talk) 23:32, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi Ariadnenv. As I said in the closing summary for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alpha Data Parallel Systems, no evidence was provided about this company's notability (using Wikipedia's criteria). Although a couple of editors made comments about the possible notability, all the references found about the company were a passing mention - no significant coverage, as required by the guidelines (see Wikipedia's General Notability Guidelines and the Notability Guidelines for Companies). When I am looking for reliable sources, I look at Google News (and News Archive), Google Books and Google Scholar - all 8 of the News hits were very minor ones (1 is the experion company report; 3 were press releases from the company on PRWire/marketwire; the others were basically "xyz is available from Alpha Data..."); Google Books were all minor mentions, generally just mentioning the company's address; Google Scholar likewise basically says "xyz was developed by Alpha Data...".

Using "Alpha Data", Google News has one hit ("sponsored by Microsoft and Alpha Data"); News Archive shows a few hits, but again, mainly very minor mentions and/or press releases; again both Books and Scholar return very minor mentions.

Overall, I would say that I can't find sufficient coverage to justify their inclusion on Wikipedia - unless there has been an indepth article in a reliable source about the company which I can't find online! -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 07:18, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Hello Phantomsteve. In this AfD you closed, it looks as if you deleted one article, but not the other two. Thanks... Paul Erik ^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:06, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

I'll look at this later today, thanks for letting me know! -- PhantomSteve.alt/ talk\ ^{alternate account of Phantomsteve} 06:20, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

One was deleted earlier today, and I've deleted the other one just now. Thanks again for letting me know! -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 11:04, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Hello PhantomSteve,

Thanks for your message.

I guess a problems is, as one of the discussion comments noted, that there are a high number of search hits for “Alpha Data” which makes it difficult to hone in on relevant information.

Given their involvement with projects such as the CERN LHC, Mars Rover and Hydra Chess computer I would say Alpha Data Parallel Systems is a notable company.

I've rewritten the article on the talk page Alpha Data Parallel Systems Talk Page so as not to leave a long message on your talk page. I've added some additional external links and changed some references. Although the reference I'm using for CERN is a "Compute Scotland" article, please note that the reference info for this article came from THE SCOTSMAN and THE HERALD, as noted in the article.

-- Ariadnenv ( talk) 20:46, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi Ariadnenv, thanks for contacting me.

I am going to delete the AfD talk page - its purpose isn't to put up a proposed article! I had a look at the references, and although they do verify Alpha Data's contributions to CERN, mars Rova, Hydra Chess, etc, the mentions of Alpha Data are pretty minor, rather than being the significant coverage required by the General Notability Guidelines or the Notability of Organisations and Companies Guidelines. I would suggest that they may be suitable for mentioning the company (in a single sentence) on the articles about LHC, Mars Exploration Rover or Hydra (chess). Regards -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 20:04, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi, My name is Rebecca, and I worked with a group of service learning students to create the Whatcom Volunteer Center page (I work at WVC). I fully understand the reasons why our page was deleted, but I was wondering if there was anything we could do to re-post our page and make it more appropriate for wikipedia. We have gathered links to outside sources where Whatcom Volunteer Center was mentioned, such as newspaper articles, etc, but I wasn't sure if this was enough to make our page notable. Since our students took the lead on creating the page, I don't have specific knowledge about creating a page, so please try to keep things in "laymans terms" so I can wrap my head around it. Whatcomvolunteer ( talk) 16:34, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, Rebecca Rayner

Hi Rebecca. I have a couple of points that I would like to make:

1. Your user name is against Wikipedia's user name policy, as it is intended to represent an organisation rather than an individual. As such, I will be placing a temporary block on it until you have requested a new user name (see the instructions on the block message to explain how to do this).
2. Looking through the comments at the arguments presented at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Whatcom Volunteer Center (the AfD), and the references provided in the article itself, I have to agree with the argumetns in the AfD that Whatcom is too local an organisation to warrant an article itself, and that the references were not sufficient to show that the organisation met the General Notability Guidelines or the Notability Guidelines for Organisations.

As such, I do not think that the article can be re-created. Please feel free to ask any other questions

Why did you feel it necessary to move my questioning of the oppose to the talk? CTJF83 chat 17:48, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

I felt that the discussion about it would be distracting to the process. If someone other than yourself feels that it should be on the main page, then they can move it - but I would suggest that you not do so yourself.

The oppose is clearly marked as being discussed on the talk page, so anyone wanting to read the discussion can do so - and to be honest, if there had been your question and one more response, I'd have kept it there - but it was a discussion that was continuing, and is not about the candidate, but about the opposer and/or the oppose.

It wasn't intended to be a sleight on your querying of the oppose - for what it's worth, I think the oppose should be ignore by the closing bureaucrat - but to allow the "propose" section to be a list of opposes, rather than a discussion about one particular oppose.

I hope that I am explaining this properly - if you have any other questions about this, please feel free to ask! -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 19:25, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Nope, that explains it, I was going to ask some of the more active bureaucrats if they ignore "bad" opposes like that. CTJF83 chat 22:14, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Hey Steve I have logged in to be a member to update and change some of the material that you have on me. keep up the good work mate.

Great Golfing Brett Ogle —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brett james ogle ( talk • contribs) 23:18, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

As both you and UserStwalkerster raised concerns over my speed at ACC, I've given the reason in a reply to Stwalkerster. ManishEarth ^{Talk • Stalk} 02:19, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

I just saw that! As I said before, I was just surprised at how quickly you were going through the requests, Chrome or no! It really is not a race, but I haven't looked at your requests, and trust stwalkerster's assessment. I did notice that you created a second account for a request from the same email address as one I'd created an account for a few days before. As a rule, there is no reason to create another account for a user - it's probably best to reset their password for them, and "custom close". I have actually reset the password on their first account, and blocked the second account with a message referring to the first account. A third request from the same email address was declined, with a custom close message explaining the sitation. -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 02:24, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Can you please restore the Shane Dawson page? He is the 4th most subscribed YouTube celebrity ever. Many other top Youtubers have pages. 146.115.115.160 ( talk) 18:25, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

I am afraid that I cannot do that. It was deleted following a discussion, and I see no evidence of the significant coverage of Shane in reliable sources that would be required to justify re-creating the article. For your convenience, here is the deletion log for the article:

• 13:02, 14 March 2010 Phantomsteve deleted "Shane Dawson" ‎ (G4: Recreation of a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion (CSDH))
• 21:55, 13 March 2010 NuclearWarfare deleted "Shane Dawson" ‎ ( Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shane Dawson (2nd nomination))
• 12:38, 5 March 2010 JohnCD deleted "Shane Dawson" ‎ (A7: Article about a real person, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject)
• 04:42, 10 February 2009 PMDrive1061 deleted "Shane Dawson" ‎ (G4: Recreation of a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion)
• 10:18, 25 July 2008 Tikiwont deleted "Shane Dawson" ‎ (AfD discussion: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shane Dawson)

Unless there has been significant coverage of Shane which I was unable to find, then he still does not meet the criteria for inclusion - I can find mentions in "most-watched videos of the week", blogs and Tubefilter News - none of which are significant and/or reliable sources. -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 01:44, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks anyway. If I do find some reliable sources, will you then restore the page? I am a big fan of his and I'll try to get some better sources than Youtube itself. 146.115.115.160 ( talk) 18:25, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

God, you can't do anything around here without someone else taking notice ... Thanks! Daniel Case ( talk) 17:44, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

I have removed the ability to edit the talk page for the IP, as they were being abusive there too. -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 17:46, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Someone has been using multiple accounts in a deletion debate and not doing a very good job of hiding it (check out the IP address in the first report). Just thought that you might be interested. 96.52.5.187 ( talk) 23:57, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

It certainly looks suspicious, so I have reported it at SPI. -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 08:30, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! I was thinking of nominating these three pages for deletion as well, since they are criterialess lists on trivial topics with huge overlaps to the WWI vet deaths, but I suspect that there'd be sockpuppet havoc if I did that, so I'll wait until the results of this case. Thanks again! 96.52.5.187 ( talk) 15:13, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Just a note. User Manishearth created a user [1]. Both you and I had first reserved the request and then dropped it (presumably as the requesting ip had a range block active). I'd sent an email to functionaries for permission. However, Manishearth mistakenly created the user (making my previous day's issue again pertinent - of him perhaps not clicking on all check links before creating the account). I wouldn't want to complain about him. He seems to be a good guy, trying to contribute. But perhaps he needs to be diligent... Regards. ♪ ♫ Wifione ♫ ♪ _―Œ ^{♣Łeave Ξ мessage♣} 10:39, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

You might want to leave a message on stwalkerster's talk page, as he has been looking into this, and as you can see from my signature, I'm not at home at the moment, so it's harder for me to deal with it. -- PhantomSteve.alt/ talk\ ^{alternate account of Phantomsteve} 10:46, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I left a note with Prodego who replied who'll take this up. Warm regards. ♪ ♫ Wifione ♫ ♪ _―Œ ^{♣Łeave Ξ мessage♣} 12:37, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm briefly at home - but as you've contacted Prodego, I'll leave this to him! -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 13:01, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Why did you remove my last commtn of the talk page? Slatersteven ( talk) 13:00, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

That would be the result of the edit conflict - I'll look at it and re-add. Sorry! -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 13:01, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Thats OK it happens, I have re-inserted it myslef. Slatersteven ( talk) 13:04, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

The High Fin Sperm Whale 18:13, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

- preceding message left at 22:44, 17 March 2010 (UTC)