Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

What do u see the problem is with this page, I used to go to this parish and all i was doing was trying to create a page for my former parish so you have no right in doing it unless you have some bias against roman catholics Cymruman, ^Cymruman - timed 04:15, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Can you show me how this parish meets Wikipedia's minimum notability requirements? -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 03:48, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

It is the only catholic parish from the upper hunter region of australia to have a page on Wikipedia and I don't see the problem with the page being on hereCymruman, ^Cymruman - timed 04:55, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Okay. Let me rephrase that. How did the parish meet Wikipedia's minimum notability requirements before the Wikipedia article on it was created? -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 03:58, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

I think he is notable. See also Google News. --bender235 (talk) 13:18, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

I think I should apologize. My first thought upon seeing the AfD was that it should be speedied right away. I made my first comment before I saw the revision history, and the second before I saw your reports to AIV. I fully understand your actions now. --Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 01:31, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

A very tough one indeed. I found that he does exist, and has note as a stage director [1] in Morroco and there seems to be a LOT of G-News coverage of him in French language. I also have found the films: Al Kanfoudi[2] and Brahin Yash[3]. They are pre-internet and sources are few, but they have been covered in books. If you care to withdraw, I will attempt an expansion and sourcing later today. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 23:09, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry I forgot to sign at the AfD. I just upped my own keep to strong based upon The world encyclopedia of contemporary theatre calling him one of the most influential Morrocan theatrical directors of the 1980s, and because he is written of in depth in Companion encyclopedia of Middle Eastern and North African film. The G-Book search "Al Kanfoudi", film proved useful. A web search for Nabil+Lahlou+theater is also proving fruitful, but will need help from French-reading wikipedians. I have expanded the stub a bit and added some sources. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 23:16, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the closure. It was one of my most difficult rescues but I feel good anout the result. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 02:25, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

I have updated the San Diego Thunder entry. It now includes references to multiple websites that prove the validity of the team. These sites include pages that cover the team's championship games, historical data, highlights, and also validate their league affiliations. I apologize for not posting these references immediately. This is the first wiki entry I have ever posted so I would like to thank you for your patience.

This season, the Chargers have given us permission to wear their old powder blue jerseys, which shows that well known organizations within the area are indeed well aware of our presence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sdthunder (talk • contribs) 09:45, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

--Sdthunder (talk) 09:49, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Okay. The above-mentioned references and the fact you got the Chargers' permission to use their colours prove the team's existence, which no one questioned. It is the notability of the team that still needs to be shown, and that of the league it plays in, through reliable third-party sources. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 12:40, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Check the page and you will see the references that prove that we were a member of the LCFL last season and are now members of the UFAL. You will also see that news of our team appears on websites for other teams as well (Indianapolis Tornados for example). There is also an article about us from the San Diego Tribune and several sites that display our current and past schedules.

If you visit the league website (referenced on the page) you will see that our league is being promoted by USC Head Coach Pete Carroll, who is a very well know person in the NFL and college football scene.

There is also a website in which a freelance videographer has posted game tapes of our team. I will add more later as I have to go to work now.

--Sdthunder (talk) 16:05, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

You didn't get my point, did you? Quit trying to prove the team's existence and show me its notability instead. WP:BUTITEXISTS is not, has never been, and never will be a valid argument for keeping an article, and quite frankly, the very fact that you are spending that much energy trying to prove to me the existence of your team tells me that you yourself do not believe that your team does meet Wikipedia's minimum notability requirements. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 23:45, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Ok I'm starting to gain a better understanding of what you are saying. Sites other than our own are chronicling our seasons which shows that our cause is indeed important enough for others to cover it. I understand that you are looking for more than just mere existence which is why I provided references to sites that do not belong to our team. For example, NBA teams have other sports sites such CBSSports, ESPN, etc containing information regarding their team. This shows that those teams are important enough for outside parties to cover them. That is what the E-teamz, leaguelineup, UFAL, etc are doing. These sites are providing 3rd party coverage of our team. Would someone take time out of their busy schedule to create a site if they didn't think it was important?

Allow me to introduce then some reasons as to why we are important enough to have an entry. We are a non-profit organization: non of our coaches or players are paid. In fact our players have to pay fees to cover travel, field reservations, jerseys, and equipment. We are also very active in our community as we are involved in youth intervention programs and various charity events. This is why I feel this is entry is important. Others will see the entry and notice that we have helped others in the community. If there is a cause that needs attention they will come to us to help them out.

By educating people about our team we can provide awareness to important causes. The purpose of any encyclopedia is to educate people. To expect a Semi-Pro team to have the same amount of coverage as a pro team is unrealistic. We are not millionaires. We are average Americans who just so happen to love the game of football. Just because our players aren't on national TV or make a lot of money doesn't mean we aren't important. By having only topics that are mainstream you are defeating the purpose of Wikipedia: to introduce new concepts. I can't tell you how many times I was reading a wikipedia article that contained links to a topic I had never heard of before. Upon sharing this newfound concept with others they had never heard of it before either. Something great happened here: I learned something new and so did my friend.

--Sdthunder (talk) 02:00, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Again, you missed the point. Here you asserted the nobility of your organization, while I've been asking you to establish the notability of it. Two letters that make a world of difference. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 03:54, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Although WCRX-LP is broadcasting for two hours a day, because of renegotiations with various groups, we are about to expand our hours greatly. It makes me upset that you say that this public radio station has no assertion of notability. I have updated the page and added sources and broadcasting information about the station, following the proper format and order on Wikipedia articles about radio stations. WCRS is allowed on Wikipedia, but not us? We are two stations on the same frequency, because of an FCC timeshare agreement, and I do believe that we have as much right to be on Wikipedia, as WCRS does. Please reconsider your decision, thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Onthedial93 (talk • contribs) 16:59, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Apparently that other article simply fell through the cracks. Thanks for pointing it out to me.

By the way, there is not a single company out there that is allowed to have an article on Wikipedia, not even the CBS network as a whole. Wikipedia is not a promotional vehicle nor a web space provider. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 17:09, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

The Bexley Public Radio Foundation is not using Wikipedia as a promotional vehicle or an advertising outlet. We are just simply trying place information about us, that is WCRX, as we are a station in Central Ohio. WBNS • WBNS-FM • WBWR • WCBE • WCDR • WCKX • WCOL-FM • Wcrs LPFM• WCVO • WDLR • WHKC • WHOK-FM • WJYD • WJZA • WLOH • WLVQ • WLW • WLZT • WMNI • WNCI • WNKK • WOBN • WODB • WOSB-FM • WOSU • WOSU-FM • WRFD • WRKZ • WRXS • WSLN • WSNY • WSYX • WTDA • WTVN • WUCO • WUFM • WVKO • WVKO-FM • WVMX • WWCD • WXMG • WYTS are all allowed on Wikipedia, for the purpose to give information that a station does exist. I don't see why WCRX or even WCRS has to be subjected both to deletion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Onthedial93 (talk • contribs) 18:48, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

• All radio stations, be them FM, AM, Low Power, Closed Current, whatever and have or have had a legal FCC license are notable. This notablity for radio stations has precedence through MANY AfD discussions. I would ask that you withdraw your AfD as such. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 01:08, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
  • While in most cases such AfD's have been closed as keeps, there have been a few deletes. Sorry, but since FCC licensing is the only notability assertion you can provide, the AfD will run its course. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 03:40, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
    • That is the standard notablity...a FCC license. There have been no deletions, with the exception of one station that was still in the constuction permit phase. If you want to waste the community's time with an AfD that will surely be a SNOW keep, be my guest. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 05:16, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
      • Without anything written that points to a "jurisprudence" anyone can consult, I promise I will not be the last one to "waste the community's time with an AfD that will surely be a SNOW keep." I suggest you start the draft of a subpage of WP:N with regard to radio stations. What about those stations that are set up by businesses to advertize something in their immediate vicinity, such as new real-estate developments? Surely they are notable by the above standard? -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 10:15, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
        • If they don't have a FCC license, they aren't notable. Radio Stations and Television Stations enjoy a standard notablity that has been tested in many different AfDs. There is a policy essay around somewhere, I would have to dig it up, but it says about the same thing. If the station has or has had a FCC license, it is notable. One can look to the just closed (as a SNOW Keep) discussion on KISN Radio in Portland, Oregon. KISN was last heard on its frequency in 1976 (the frequency is now another station) and it, since it had a FCC license, was protected under the standard notablity. Trust me, I have been here for 3 years, of the 15 AfD for radio stations I have seen only one went through and that was for the sole and absoulte reason of that station was still in the construction permit phase (and never made it out of it) and someone jumped the gun and created the article. Trust me, I know what I am talking about here. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 10:36, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
          • See the old and in need of updating policy about notablity in media. Even though it needs updating, with the precedent set by several AfDs, all closed as keep, it holds true regardless of updating needs. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 10:42, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
            • Yes, please find it. I'll make it easier to find if I have to. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 10:43, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
              • See my post about your previous for the link. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 10:45, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
• Okay, I'll make the relevant navigational changes when I get back from work tonight. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 10:53, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

The user Acroterion suggested you might be interested in looking at an entry for CSY boats [[4]] It is my first attempt at a Wikipedia article. The CSY owner's group has their own website and was looking at building a page on the website to keep all of the information about these boats in one place - I suggested Wikipedia. My first submission was removed because it was seen as an 'advertisement' (although the company was out of business since the early 1980s). I have done some work on the entry but would welcome your thoughts, edits, or inputs if you have the time or inclination. —Preceding unsigned comment added by CSYguy (talk • contribs) 15:15, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

It would need ot be updated, since some of the data is old and out of date (we do list Class A and D stations now even though that says it shouldn't). We should try to combine the notablity in media page with this one and make kind of a two-fer page (one stop for all). Let me know what you come up with and I will be glad to put it by WP:WPRS and WP:TVS for their input as well. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 02:57, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

As the initial tagger, you may be interested in Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2009_June_17#Hispanic_Commonweal. Regards, Bencherlite^Talk 20:56, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Great phrase – "nobility is not the same as notability". Look forward to reading the essay when you get a chance to write it; let me know. Regards, Bencherlite^Talk 14:11, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Actually, was bored at work so started WP:NOBLECAUSE. Join in! Bencherlite^Talk 17:28, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Ha! Great stuff. (I assumed WP:NOBILITY would have been taken by a WikiProject, but no!) Do you think it's ready for Wikipedia space, and addition to {{wcs}}? Bencherlite^Talk 21:25, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

I think the essay itself is ready to go to the Wikipedia namespace. I thought about adding WP:NOBLE as a redirect to it, but it already redirects to an essay on the notability of British peers. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 21:33, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm going to defer to your expertise on this one. There's virtually no content and no refs. Someone's tagged it for a speedy to boot. I'll clobber it now and ask questions later.  :) Thanks for the alert. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 02:45, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I was wondering why was the article deleted. It may seem insignificant/unotable to you but what gives you the authority to delete such a new page before its been given time to expand. yours biterly, hens45 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hens45 (talk • contribs) 01:28, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

The deletion log states that the administrator who performed the actual deletion agreed with me that there is no indication that the subject of the article meets our notability guidelines. In short, it means that now is not the right time for Wikipedia to have an article on this topic. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 01:36, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Added links and information to a review in the NY POST that documents the validity of the posting. Pakitrickster (talk) 02:21, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

The URL alone tells me it is no good. It begins with "http://blogs..." -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 02:23, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

It's under the banner of the NY POST which is the 13th oldest newspaper in the country. If their editors found it notable, I don't know why you wouldn't. No matter how the url starts out. It isn't a blog posting from some random site. Pakitrickster (talk) 02:28, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

It is not a random site, but it is still a blog posting. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 02:29, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Again, one that falls under the THE NEW YORK POST. The rules are guidelines not imperatives, there are exceptions for everything and in this case an exception is completely warranted. people have searched wikipedia for the REX pilot which is why a page was created. You don't have to believe me, but you can believe the numbers attributed to the Pilot. Follow the link to the NY POST and then the link to Vimeo. You will see a total of 19.7k full views, not page visits. There is obviously a place for this on wikipedia. Or do almost 20,000 people not count? Maybe I'm mistaken on what desire for knowledge, however small, counts as "notable." Pakitrickster (talk) 02:38, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

To which I answer that it is a blog posting. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 11:20, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi. I checked Google to see if the Hangar Theatre article was a copyvio and it is. You could of used CSD G12. :) --Bsadowski1 (talk) 02:58, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Bsadowski1 (talk) 03:20, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Tobias

Hello, sorry, new to this whole posting thing on Wiki. I was under the impression I was still in my sandbox, and that is was not yet published. I still have plenty of work to do on it, including listing many secondary source material.

Could you please let me know how to take it back to the sandbox?

The speedy deletion on it has been declined, which means the article, though far from perfect, can remain in the main article space. No action is needed. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 01:45, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi Blanchardb,

I wonder if you could help. I am new to wikipedia and have just placed a new article about Scottish Running Guide. I work for the publish the Guide but my reason for posting this was because I came across an article that mentioned Scottish Running Guide and this prompted me to include some details. I don't want this article to be about promoting the Guide merely to provide information about it as it is relevant to the running community in Scotland. Could you advise as to amend to make this more acceptable? Kfb7662 (talk) 16:48, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

First of all, I think deleting the last two paragraphs of the article would do a lot in the way of getting rid of promotional language. Then, after the spam issue is dealt with, there is the notability issue: is there a third-party reliable source anywhere that you can use as a reference to establish the periodical's notability? If not, then the article may be nominated for a deletion discussion over that issue alone. That is to say, you must show that the periodical is already well-known at least in some circles. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 16:54, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi Blanchardb,

Could you tell me if this is now acceptable?

Kfb7662 (talk) 17:16, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Not yet. Internal Wikipedia references are not acceptable to establish notability. Please see what we mean by reliable sources. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 17:28, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi Blanchardb,

Thanks for your help but there simply is no third party sources of information for The Scottish Running Guide so I'm afraid I can't do any better than that. Seems a shame now since it is now solely based on fact and the only reason that I placed the information was because of the article on magazines published in Scotland which I came across on wikipedia!

Kfb7662 (talk) 17:37, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

I would agree to redirect Mary Guibert to Jeff Buckley#early life so long as we give enough information at that location that somebody searching for Mary Guibert would find satisfactory info there. I think that would be awkward if we inserted details of MAry's later business life, and therefore recommend against your idea. Linguistixuck (talk) 23:09, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

And to think I was just about to log off.  :)) Thanks much for the nice gesture. I really needed it! Regards, --PMDrive1061 (talk) 14:54, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I've given references. What more is needed? Can you suggest an article where I should merge this? Proxima Centauri (talk) 15:29, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I think you should just give it time at this point. You gave one book review, a second one would be welcome. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 15:31, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I'll develop the article slowly but I have other commitments online and should limit time spent in front of a computer. Proxima Centauri (talk) 18:01, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

This is a distinctive publication that started in 1996 and continues to be ahead of its time in bringing timely articles in easy to read and distinctive format. For over a decade, long before it was fashionable, Legal Bytes focused on the legal implications of the convergence of technology and its application to every facet of business and personal life. The description on Wikipedia explains just how notable, distinctive and unique the publication is and having evolved from paper to a blog format increasing its readership from about 100 paper-based readers in 1996 to thousands around the world by 2008 and growing, is notable and worthy of mention. JIRLaw (talk) 02:02, 26 June 2009 (UTC) JIRLaw

Please read our notability guidelines and tell me how the site meets the criteria laid out there. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 02:06, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

OK. I will gather the information over the next day or so and get it to you. Thanks. JIRLaw JIRLaw (talk) 04:50, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi,

I just created a description of Lensography, which you have flagged for deletion. I agree it is only used on Squidoo, but with more than 1 million pages it is widespread use and can been seen by searching Google, where there are more than 25,000 refs.

Please would you re-consider or vcan it be modified for approval.

Regards

Drachsi

Can't it just be mentioned on the main article? For us to keep the article, you have to show us third-party reliable sources that are about the term, and preferably without a mention of Squidoo. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 14:20, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Zack Grumet which is a new page that you patrolled, is actually a copyvio. Regards, WWGB (talk) 14:21, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

I usually don't check for copyvios, since we've got a bot that does it for us. But thanks. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 14:22, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi I figured I would do an entry for Canadian model Train manufacture Rapido Trains. This is the first article that I did for wikipedia. If you notice anything wrong with the way its written feel free to correct the article. I only did it as I notced that in the list of model Train companys on Wikipedia no one had written an article about Rapido yet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shnorth (talk • contribs) 21:20, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

It is not so much the article that warrants deletion as it is its subject. The article asserts no notability for the firm, that is, it gives no indication that there is reliable third-party coverage of this company anywhere. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 21:31, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Louis Tomlin: Louis appeared in 'The Last of England' as a baby. I do not think that this needs to be deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Njd405 (talk • contribs) 21:46, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi, you requested speedy deletion of the Andrew Hsu page. He is a real person (go to website www.andrewhsu.com for info about him) and is philanthropist and scientist. Att159 (talk)

Please read WP:BUTITEXISTS.-- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 21:19, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

He meets all the criteria - there are reliable sources who have documented him. Seattle Times http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003752165_andrewhsu18m.html

Today Show http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_OntiXRsuOY

NBC 11 San Jose News http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iwh-_87a6_A You requested three reliable sources, and I have given them. Thank you. Att159 (talk) 18:27, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

How do you manage to get to the editor's Talk page before I do, when I was the one putting the db tag on his article? Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 21:34, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

I have no idea. Neither of us is using a script, and there was no indication to me of an edit conflict, since your edit was exactly identical to the one I was attempting to make. So I copied and pasted, and that was that, I guess. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 21:41, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

How odd.  :) Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 21:47, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi

I see that you are a native speaker of French, so if you could translate some parts of the French article on Bolak (there are a lot of information there - my French is not nearly good enough to translate) and incorporate them into the English article? Or just tag them for translation. --ArkinAardvark (talk) 04:47, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm not making any promises, but I might consider it. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 05:27, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. When was there a Speedy Delete suggested? Who suggested it? And what were the grounds? I didn't hear about any of this as I was working on the page. Sincerely, your friend, GeorgeLouis (talk) 23:37, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

---

I left the above reply from you on my talk page but have not heard back. Sincerely, your friend, GeorgeLouis (talk) 15:56, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Couldn't we just make a Danny Panoz similar to the Don Panoz page? Redlinks drive me completely ballistic which is why I made the page with my knowledge and maybe other people would expand it and if I'd pick up anything else on him and add it. But yeah, could we make a Danny Panoz page similar to the Don Panoz page? Marauder09 (talk) 16:47, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Since you tagged Automobile Dealer Economic Rights Restoration Act, would you take a gander at ADERRA as well? 98.248.32.178 (talk) 00:02, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Sure thing. This topic looks like something on which a legitimate article could be written, but these two identical articles contain nothing but external links, with no apparent intention to expand. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 00:05, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

This is not a single-household snack. It is offered at one of the largest waterparks in a huge market, Southern California. Furthermore, the management team of the park is planning to open new venues throughout CA and NV. The product only launched within the past month, and the park is vehemently advertising it. In no time at all this will be a widespread amusement-park food. I do not believe that due diligence has been given to determining the notability of this item. Falexanders (talk) 00:19, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Just wondering about the speedy decline on BIBS Quality Measurement. Creator and "system" get no ghits, and the creator's institution, the "Drools Institute", doesn't exist. Even stretching WP:AGF to the limit, I can't see how this is anything but vandalism. Care to enlighten me? Thanks!--Fabrictramp | talk to me 00:21, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

When it comes to hoaxes, my view is that speedy G3 is for cases where one sees no reason to even bother with a Google search, which wasn't exactly the case here. This looked more like bad writing than an actual hoax, and I was unaware of the article hijacking at BIBS. Also, one could easily assume that "drools" has a different meaning in Dutch. (I've seen too many German and Italian last names that are not exactly flattering, one of which belonged to a former president of the Ordre des Ingénieurs du Québec) But if you want to speedy it, be my guest. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 00:29, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Now it's been AfD'd here. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 03:46, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

I've added my bit at the AfD. Unfortunately, the vandals have figured out that if they write something exactly like this they can have it up for a week or two and get a lot of comments on it at AfD, giving them the attention they crave. :( --Fabrictramp | talk to me 13:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

After you put the tags on the article The Write Place At the Write Time (literary magazine) concerning notability and references, I put in several inline citations. Have you looked at the article in the last day or two? Can the tags you put in be removed? ThanksRayjameson (talk) 09:01, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Yup, the concerns have been addressed. I removed the tags. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 10:32, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks.Rayjameson (talk) 13:55, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Hello,

The article 'fat_imgen' that I just created got tagged. Now, there is a reason for this of course, so I am curious what exactly made you tag it. How should the article be edited for these tags to be removed?

Thanks in advance,

-- BugHunter2 (talk) 00:17, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

The notability tag means I am not sure that the topic meets our notability guidelines. Although there is no reason to initiate a deletion process right away, the fact remains that if the software's notability is not demonstrated in a reasonable time, a deletion process might be initiated at any moment by any editor.

And the next tag, primary sources is related to the first one. It is by showing that the software has already been reviewed by a third-party reliable source, that is, not affiliated in any way with the subject, that you can show that it does indeed meet our notability guidelines. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 00:24, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

So, what exactly should I do about it? Should I try to get people who run a sort of software indexing website to review the tool? Can you be a bit more concrete about what to do?

BTW, just the fact that there may not be any "reliable sources" (judging by the standards of Wikipedia) doesn't mean necessarily that an article is unreliable, right? I think that, before deleting such an article, editors should be careful.

-- BugHunter2 (talk) 00:45, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

You write, Should I try to get people who run a sort of software indexing website to review the tool? You mean that hasn't been done yet? No, you should wait for "people who run a sort of software indexing website to review the tool" without you even trying to get them to do it.

If an article is not based on reliable sources, then that means its reliability cannot be assessed or evaluated. If none are available, then that simply means the topic does not meet our notability guidelines for the time being, and the time is not right for Wikipedia to have an article on it. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 00:52, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, I for one thought this tool could be extremely helpful to various people, e.g. kernel hackers that want to test their kernel on a virtualizer or emulator (edit: What I meant to say is that, that fact on itself makes the article "notable". And by having an article on Wikipedia, it probably increases the likeliness of the tool being used and thus would also probably speed up the process of having it reviewed. But I digress, if you think the article should be deleted then by all means do so.

-- bughunter2 (talk) 01:13, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

That article made no assertion that it applied to a particular living person, hence A7 was inappropriate. I'm not sure any speedy deletion criteria would have been appropriate. If none apply, please feel free to use {{prod}} rather than speedy with a marginal reason. Cheers, Jclemens (talk) 01:32, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I figured, but I've seen articles like that speedied as A7's in the past, even after I prodded them. Thanks anyway. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 01:34, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

I declined speedy as he is a member of the Nigerian House of Representatives. However, given the primary author's username, there could be a COI problem. Thanks! Plastikspork (talk) 02:19, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Given that there are zero G News hits for Finnair 341, or for the person, perhaps you should reconsider your decision not to speedy delete this--I would consider the article clear vandalism DGG (talk) 03:28, 4 July 2009 (UTC).

I see DGG was thinking the same thing. I was just coming here to inform you that I deleted the page. Let me know if you disagree. Thanks! Plastikspork (talk) 03:38, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

In my edit summary I stated that the article was plausible enough to avoid a G3 speedy deletion. The G3 criterion, by its very nature, assumes bad faith on the part of the article creator, and that's why I go with Item 2 of WP:NOTCSD, and I reserve the criterion for cases where I see no reason to bother with a G News search. Which does not mean I will disagree with deletion: if indeed you find no sources backing it up, then it must be deleted, just not as speedily as an article about Saddam Hussein being a Martian. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 03:56, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree. We should be cautious with speedy deletions. You did the right thing to be cautious. I was stopping by to let you know that I did a bit more research. FYI, in this particular case, the editor in question has only made two contributions and both have been deleted. Thanks again. Plastikspork (talk) 04:04, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

I have probably said sometimes that one should always check, but in practice there is clearly a certain level below which it isn't needed . This is such a major event that I cannot imagine i would not remember it, but I would not have deleted on my lack of memory alone. Had I seen it before you I would have double-checked in gnews archive, and then speedy deleted, because the absence of finding anything there makes it unquestionably false. DGG (talk) 04:56, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi, care to remove the notability tag? See the discussion page. Hedgehog83 (talk) 10:38, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. I have put this aside for the time being. Amitiés. GeorgeLouis (talk) 20:59, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi BlanchardB,
You just put a speedy deletion tag of the CALICO - The Computer Assisted Language Instruction Consortium, article. It appears also that you have already deleted the article in spite of my adding an HangOn tag. A quick follow up of the link to its website , in particular :

• CALICO home page
• CALICO members directory

and then:

• associated organisation

will determine that this is a serious organisation concerned with education, managed by Texas University. It is a consortium of high level academics from many important US universities and colleges, and its mission is to promote and control the quality of computer assisted language learning programmes. The article may be short, but I feel that within the scope of any WikiProject concerning education, it has sufficient notability. I am a professor of linguistics, but I am personally in now way a member or otherwise connected with the organisation. if after reviewing the links and the organisation, you really feel it does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for an article, I have no objection to it being removed. I do however consider 'Speedy Deletion' to be a harsh tagging, and that at least PROD would have been more appropriate. There are numerous less worthy articles in our encyclopedia that I would personally hesite before hanging an AfD on them.
Best regards, --Kudpung (talk) 16:48, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

The reason I tagged your article for deletion (it hasn't been deleted yet) is that no notability is asserted. Please note that none of what you stated above is relevant in establishing the organization's notability: what you need is third-party reliable coverage. You only provided sites that are affiliated with the organization.

It is through the existence of such sources that Wikipedia determines whether an organization really is as important as it claims.-- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 16:52, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

As I said, I don't really mind either way. Apart from having met some of its members at international conferences, I have nothing whatsoever to do with the organisation.--Kudpung (talk) 17:09, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Umm hello? Im still working on the page as we speak, so don't be quick to erase things. :) (LonerXL (talk) 23:06, 6 July 2009 (UTC))

The crossings of the Lachine Canal and the Canal de l'Aqueduc could be listed as (a) section(s) of List of bridges in Montreal. Those crossings that have a significant history might even merit an articcle of their own. The listing would perhaps be from east to west. BTW, I don't get very often get to the Carrefour Laval. Peter Horn 01:29, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

I found Lachine Canal#Crossings & Canal de l'Aqueduc#Crossings. Peter Horn 02:28, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

So in List of bridges in Montreal#See also I added Crossings of the Canal de l'Aqueduc & Crossings of the Lachine Canal. A temporary fix? Peter Horn 02:41, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

I think until I decide on the layout of that section, that will do. The color scheme of the main section needs work too, I believe. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 03:13, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi BlanchardB, You just put a speedy deletion tag on the Society of Hospital Medicine article. While you have yet to delete this page I wanted express that the was not any bad faith placed in the creation of this article other than to educate about the Society, its history and how it supports and assists a growing population of medical professionals (hospitalists). Within this article, there are citations and references to to other medical group present in wikipedia such as the american hospital association and major publications such as the new england journal of medicine. The information presented was created by a group of medical professionals that include some of the pioneers within this division of medicine (hospital medicine). I feel that post has not violated any commercialism and was presented as an educational tool. If there are areas fo concern, please feel free to respond to my talk page (additionally, i have placed a talk thread on society of hospital medicine where i challenge how other organizations and corporations can present their history, profile, etc. without being called self promoting (for example, Anheuser Busch, Girl Scouts of American, Beggin' Strips, and the american board of hospital medicine to name a couple that i cited). I look forward and respect your input, but do feel the speedy deletion tag is a bit harsh.

Kind Regards, Docbb1 (talk) 03:58, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi BlanchardB, Thanks for the input. We have cleaned up the entry and noted so its talk page. I appreciate your input and we will continue to build upon the entry with additional citations and references in order to ensure an educational article entry...

Regards, Docbb1 (talk) 02:14, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Looking at the title, that sounds fair to include all the bridges - though it might duplicate existent content in the section of the Lachine Canal article.

They have a page mentioning about New York City bridges including creeks or in different boroughs. Though it might be tough to mention the bridges in a counter-clock wise fashion so probably the lead paragraph would have to change. JForget 01:08, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

For (in cleanuup section) Sambuca (musical instrument) - perhaps needs same treatment as for Symphonia. SimonTrew (talk) 14:19, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

I've pretty much done all this, as I got the go-ahead from original author. You may wish to take a look and remove from the translation page. SimonTrew (talk) 23:18, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Could you please now follow up on the AfD dicussions and take the necessary administrative action. Thanks.--Kudpung (talk) 10:14, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

That's not up to me :-) -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 12:08, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi there, i'm writing about the article that i have just created about my self, and I was wondering why it has been marked for a speedy deletion, I understand that it's a conflict of interest but the guidelines state that it's strongly discouraged, not that you cannot do it, i'm not trying to cause any trouble or be a smart ass but i would just like to know what's going on, all the information on there is true, i know it's easy for me to say that since i'm the person writing it, but you can confirm all of that information with my other pages on Myspace, Facebook, Triple J Unearthed, Youtube and Last.FM. I really am sorry if i have said or done something inappropriate but please do let me know what the reason for this deletion is because i'd like to know, thank you. NoureddineAzhar (talk) 02:05, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

And that's the problem right there. Note that I did not check for conflict of interest before marking your page for deletion, nor does the deletion rationale have anything to do with that. The real problem is that you currently do not appear to meet our notability guidelines for musicians, so we cannot have an article on you for the time being. Now I do not like the tone of this essay, but its message is certainly something worth considering. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 02:11, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

That's very understandable, sorry for any inconvenience and i'll make sure to read the guidelines more carefully next time. Thank you for the reply. NoureddineAzhar (talk) 15:13, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

When I was doing the AfD I wasn't aware that you had already place a prod tag on the article. My apologizes. MS (Talk|Contributions) 02:06, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

No offense taken. Actually, I was certain that you got an edit conflict while setting up the nomination. :-) -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 02:12, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

--Kudpung (talk) 03:30, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

The Christianity WikiProject Newsletter

Archives  |  Tip Line  |  Editors The Christianity WikiProject Newsletter Issue X - July 2009 Project news The Christianity project and its related projects currently have 76 FAs, 8 FLs, and 148 GAs. We gained new recognized content in each field, with 4 FAs promoted, 2 FLs, and 3 GAs. Congratulations and a big thank you to all those who worked on these articles! Member news It was a big month for new members, with User:RandomNumberSee, User:Per Ardua, User:Muzhogg, User:Arlen22, User:Scotchorama, and User:Jaybird vt joining, bringing us up to 292 listed members. Thanks to you all, and a special welcome to our new members! Other news I am still working on the categorization matter. With any luck, we should have some results by the end of the month. There are also some discussions regarding project related activities at Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity/General Forum. One issue in particular that might be addressed is possible elections of new coordinators. Anyone interested in serving in such a capacity is more than welcome to indicate as much. Related projects news The WikiProject Films has recently created a new task force for Christian films. All interested parties are welcome to join and contribute. Member contest of the month The previous contests are still ongoing, because of the extreme amount of time the categorization is taking me. Anyone who can bring any of the few Stub class articles among the project's 1000 most often accessed articles by the end of July will get an award. Please see the details Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Christianity#Project challenge of the month. Christianity related news Pennsylvania Amish farmer jailed for outhouse violations Obama expands Bush's faith-based initiatives Relics of 39 saints found by British Museum From the Members Welcome to the Tenth issue of the WikiProject Christianity newsletter! Use this newsletter as a mechanism to inform yourselves about progress at the project and please be inspired to take more active roles in what we do. It has been a long time since the last coordinators election. There is a lot for people to do, and I certainly would welcome seeing any individuals with an interest in such a position put themselves forward as candidates. I in particular would very much like to see some degree of "specialization" in the coordinators, so that, for instance, we might have someone knowledgable about some of the specific Christian faith traditions or other main subjects, like Orthodoxy, Lutheranism, Mormonism, the Jehovah's Witnesses, art, theology, and so on. If any parties who have experience with some of our faith- or- subject-based content would be interested in being candidates, I would love to see them do so. Please feel free to take part in the discussion regading what the minimum number of category items is, and how to deal with the non-qualifying categories, on the General Forum page. John Carter (talk) 23:26, 1 July 2009 (UTC) To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. This newsletter is automatically delivered by ~~~~

John Carter (talk) 22:10, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi. It seems this article has been deleted once per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cape Wind: The Fight for the Future of Power in America, but has been re-created, and it still looks non-notable to me... Johnfos (talk) 02:27, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Though I often squawk when something slvagable is sent to AfD, I understand your good faith concerns in sending it, AND appreciate the opportunity you afforded me to improve that article. Happy editing, MichaelQSchmidt (talk) 02:53, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

How do you know? Kardak Island does not belong to Greece. 'Kardak Crisis' Do you never heard about? Turkish Flag is hanging in there! --78.180.217.154 (talk) 13:30, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

The information you removed has nothing to do with that. Since you are telling me that there is a dispute, you are therefore telling me that the Greek name must remain in the article. Removing the mention of a Greek name amounts to telling me that the 'Kardak Crisis' never happened, okay? -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 13:34, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Your edit was actually saying that the name Imia is from the Turkish language. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 13:36, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

How you can say you have not? you never know in that. because you live in Canada. Event has occurred in the Aegean Sea. We have sent troops to the island. And we sewed our flag. Greece 4 hours after this incident and do nothing could not be noticed. Because the island belonged to Turkey. Even an international agreement on any of the island was not there. --78.180.217.154 (talk) 13:42, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

And how does that address any of what I am telling you? -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 13:45, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

You look at pictures in Google Earth. There is the Turkish flag. (You can see the Turkish flag in pictures) Regards --78.180.217.154 (talk) 13:50, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

That does not answer my question, EVEN IF WHAT YOU ARE TELLING ME IS TRUE. That is not what I asked. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 13:51, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

You are not right to tell. You with Greeks. Maybe you're hate Turks. --78.180.217.154 (talk) 13:56, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Please READ my argument, okay? Do you know the meaning of the word read, or do I have to spell it out? -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 14:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi, are you watching this peer review? Some feedback has been left here, but nothing seems to have been done to act on that advice. Cheers, Dabomb87 (talk) 18:02, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

It looks like referencing is the main issue here. I can reference several of the construction dates from http://www.exitlists.com, but not all of them. For those, I will need to consult a library that is not exactly accessible to me. But you're right, I can take care of the aesthetics right away. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 20:29, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Replied on my talkpage. --jjron (talk) 07:24, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Please would you mage a WP-Link in carbon which directly points to File:Carbon_basic_phase_diagram.png. I don't know how to achive this. Then you may delete the article-page phase_diagram_of carbon. Thanks Regards, Achim1999 (talk) 11:53, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

I want to correct the falsity of melting point and boiling point of carbon. I wonder why noone has did this since years, dispite it is on the articles discussion page. Achim1999 (talk) 11:55, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

You didn't say in which article you want the link? -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 11:56, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. In the article carbon I original want add a sentence like "... see the phase diagram of carbon" and wanted that the reader sees this text as a (blue) link, but if he clicked it he is redirected to this File:Carbon_basic_....png . (Now it should be ok.) I am meanwhile ready with this sublimation point syntax. Regards, Achim1999 (talk) 12:54, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Then it should be coded [[:File:whatever.png|whatever]]. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 01:06, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Hello,

I am a new Wikipedia user and I just created an article for "Rockbridge Associates, Inc." which you tagged for speedy deletion. I spent a long time researching and referencing many different sources including the University of MD, Fox News, NBN News, etc. and thought I was objective compared to several other company's wikipedia pages. Anyways, If you could let me know what I need to fix to get this article approved it would be greatly appreciated. As a marketing student, I have studied much of the methodology created by this company and I know I would have been able to dive deeper into their research had their been a Wikipedia page available in my earlier college years.

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rdevall (talk • contribs) 01:58, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

"Note that simply having a company or product as its subject does not qualify an article for this criterion" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rdevall (talk • contribs) 02:12, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Note also that describing a company as "innovative" in the very first sentence smacks of promotion. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 03:08, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Touché. I can see how that would come across as an advertisement. Thanks for the tip and for taking the time to edit my article! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rdevall (talk • contribs) 03:44, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Hello Blanchardb, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I contested the speedy deletion of Carl Hoppe - a page you tagged - because: The article makes a credible assertion of notability, sufficient to pass A7. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. NW (Talk) 03:55, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Would it be possible for me to re submit a piece for the above entry, I believe I may have more info to perhaps make him a notable entry.

If you feel that the new content is still short of the mark then so be it.

--Caerws (talk) 15:29, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

The article was about an author who has published only one book, and and you failed to assert that the book in question meets our notability guidelines for books. Furthermore, the only place in all of Wikipedia where the publisher is mentioned is in connection with this author, and the only reference provided doesn't even show that connection. That mention doesn't even belong in the article where it was inserted.

What you need to provide is a reliable third-party source attesting that the author is indeed notable, such as a book review from a major reviewer, etc. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 15:50, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

The Christianity WikiProject Newsletter

Archives  |  Tip Line  |  Editors The Christianity WikiProject Newsletter Issue XI - August 2009 Project news The Christianity project and its related projects currently have 75 FAs, 8 FLs, and 147 GAs, with a net loss of one FA and one GA. Our thanks to those who helped keep some other articles listed, and to those who have worked so diligently in improving all of our articles. Member news Three new members joined this past month, including new members User:116Calvinist, User:Lrnngrbc, and User:Frazz, bringing us up to 295 listed members. Thanks to you all, and a special welcome to our new members! Other news Two new pages for the benefit of members of the project have been created. Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity/Mutual aid society is designed to be a place where editors seeking specific assistance from other members can with luck find others who have the abilities or materials they need, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity/Special collections is, at this point, the beginnings of a list of publicly accessible special collections libraries which our members might find useful. Anyone who lives near one of the collections listed is encouraged to visit them and see if they can find anything they would like to read or use to improve some of our articles. There are always some discussions regarding project related activities at Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity/General Forum. I think the timing of the call for elections might have been bad (summer vacation, what was I thinking?), and have thus changed the period for individuals to run to be one of the project's coordinators. Individuals who have a particular interest or knowledge of specific fields within Christianity are encouraged to run, to serve as a kind of "unit coordinator" for that topic. Related projects news The WikiProject Films has recently created a new task force for Christian films. All interested parties are welcome to join and contribute. Christianity related news Pennsylvania Amish farmer jailed for outhouse violations Obama expands Bush's faith-based initiatives Relics of 39 saints found by British Museum From the Members Welcome to the Eleventh issue of the WikiProject Christianity newsletter! Use this newsletter as a mechanism to inform yourselves about progress at the project and please be inspired to take more active roles in what we do. One area in particular need of attention right now is the content related to the Oriental Orthodox churches. Several of the topics within this field are of great importance, including the churches themselves, their histories, thinking, and some of the individuals associated with it. Unfortunately, the number of people who belong to the churches, and, correspondingly, the number of editors working on that content, is smaller than it could be. Anyone interested in helping to develop this content is more than welcome to look at the Wikipedia:WikiProject Oriental Orthodoxy page and seeing where they can help out. John Carter (talk) 23:26, 1 July 2009 (UTC) To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. This newsletter is automatically delivered by -- Tinu Cherian BOT - 18:37, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello Blanchardb, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Kukkuṭāsana has been removed. It was removed by Arolga with the following edit summary '(no edit summary)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with Arolga 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) 20:31, 5 August 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Blanchardb - Thanks for the administrator work you're doing. I have a question about the deleted article "Critical exploration". I got some feedback from another administrator [5] about what could be done to make this article into an acceptable format. Do you have any additional suggestions? Thanks in advance - (S12B3 (talk) 14:23, 6 August 2009 (UTC))

I am working on rescuing this and proving its notablity. Contrary to my initial reaction, I have been finding lots of good sources to prove notability, and it has been a "footnote" in the health care reform debate. Bearian (talk) 21:55, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Surely the process of giving aid, managing procurement and promoting better health and stronger health systems is an important subject? IHP+ is not the only way to do this but it is one. Am happy to add more links/references if this helps. Thanks LauraHSD (talk) 14:13, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Certainly, it's an important subject, but the article is not about that, as far as I can tell. It's about a company that aims to these goals. Please read WP:NOBLECAUSE. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 14:19, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that feedback. Here was our thinking when we decided to put up a Wiki page: This programme is a WHO (World Health Organisation) sponsored programme which monitors and evaluates the IHP+ (the IHP+ is designed to change the way aid is given and spent to make is more reliable and effective). Human|Scale Development is a profit-making company but profits are not sourced directly from the success of the project and therefore this is NOT intended as publicity. We would like to raise the profile of the programme among people who are not professionals in this area particularly since one of the aims of the programme is to do advocacy for change. If you think some changes could be made to improve the focus on the activities rather then the company please let me know (or make them!). As this is only my second post I am aware that I may not have things quite right.

many thanks

LauraHSD (talk) 14:11, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

You say, We would like to raise the profile of the programme... Sorry, but Wikipedia may not be used for that purpose, and that was precisely the point of the essay which I asked you to read. A Wikipedia article should reflect the fact the program's profile has already been raised.

In other words, to improve the article, you should be stating the program's objectives in terms of past achievements (and failures!) and you should back up those statements using third-party reliable sources. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 14:40, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Ok, thank you for your feedback. I see your point and I agree. We really don't want to mis-use Wikipedia! Please give me some time to make the relevant changes (and to check these with my boss). In the meantime I will make some adjustments in tone and content. Thanks again for your patience and goodwill.LauraHSD (talk) 14:47, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

I wrote this page on http://www.kasys.ca/en-kaprobe2.html and I sent a mail to the French version of Wikipedia (permission-fr@wikimedia.org) to prove that I am the real author of these pages. What more can I do ? Thank you KaSYS (talk) 14:17, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

The deletion tag and the notification I gave you mentioned nothing about copyright issues. Please read them. The article will be deleted summarily for as long as it reads like an ad, regardless of copyright status.

Also, you do not mention that you have received a confirmation of permission from the French Wikipedia (which, incidentally, would be valid only for the French Wikipedia.) -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 14:25, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Where should I mention this? KaSYS (talk) 14:34, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

The confirmation will tell you. But as I see that if you copy and paste the text from your website verbatim it will be deleted as spam, I don't see any point in seeking such permission. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 14:42, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

It was deleted on French Wikipedia as well, by the way. Under something called "Critères d'admissibilité des articles". :) – B.hotep •talk• 15:56, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Which corresponds to our WP:N but also summarily covers our WP:SPAM, WP:COPYVIO, WP:OR, and WP:V, all in a single page. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 16:04, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

How efficient is that?! Groovy. :) – B.hotep •talk• 16:06, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

I was just about to say the same thing! Vicenarian ^{(Said · Done)} 16:07, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

You can delete it:) —Preceding unsigned comment added by PatrioticSergeant (talk • contribs) 14:23, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

You recently marked one of my articles as being patrolled. could you explain what I might be able to do to change that status and have it unmarked? Would you like more detailed information on it posted? All advice welcome. Many thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marinelf (talk • contribs) 16:26, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I did mark your article as patrolled, but this cannot be undone. Such a tag only reflects the fact a newpage patroller took a look at the page and either was satisfied that the article meets our inclusion guidelines or tagged it appropriately as not meeting them. Now I'm not the one who marked it for deletion, in fact I will unmark it immediately. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 16:36, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Blanchardb,

Thanks for untagging. Most appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marinelf (talk • contribs) 17:03, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Thanks fopr the message. I have reworked the article so that it does not violaute corpyright.

The article has also been extensively reworded in my own words as it consisted entirely of textual material.

I have removed the {{db-copyvio}} tag it had.

Please review and comment back to me when finished.

Thanks. Rob99324 (talk) 03:10, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi again, check me out when you have a chance. All c/r violations removed now. Should pass bot at this point. Thanks.Rob99324 (talk) 03:44, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Since I've listed the page at WP:CP, an administrator will make the final decision, not me. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 03:59, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Got'ya! Rob99324 (talk) 18:59, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi. I'm wondering if you'll reconsider your prod of the Carrotmob article I just created. I appreciate that Wikipedia frowns on neologisms, but this article is not simply a definition. Instead it explains a form of activism (akin to a boycott). Moreover, you'll see that I cited several reliable secondary sources: Time, NYT, and The Economist. I believe these address the concerns at Wikipedia:Avoid_neologisms#Articles_on_neologisms. Also, a NYT article (that I didn't cite in the article) that is specifically concerned with the definition of the term includes other "words of the year" such as Hypermiling and Staycation which have articles of their own. I admit the article could be expanded or even completely rewritten, but a prod? --Fisherjs (talk) 03:49, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the change.--Fisherjs (talk) 14:49, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

At the RfD page you mentioned, "Portuguese do = Spanish del, sometimes (not often) abbreviated as de". Did you mean del or do being very occasionally abbreviated as de? I have no knowledge of Portuguese and only a passing familiarity with Spanish, but del -> de sounds vaguely familiar, perhaps in the interest of euphony in rare cases of particularly cacophonous pairings, but no examples come to mind. -- Thinking of England (talk) 14:37, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

No, it's not that frequent, but it is still a plausible misspelling. In any case, anything Spanish that contains "de" where there should be "del" and which is not a redirect should be corrected. Redirects, however, should be left alone. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 20:27, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I forgot to add my reference: Congressional Health Care Caucus FAQ: "all GOP Members and their staff are invited to participate in Caucus events" -- 173.57.76.98 (talk) 13:17, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

What you wrote is totally different than what your reference is saying. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 13:25, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Balnchardb. Soory, I was about to add more to the Leslie William "Billy" Sunday talk page, when I suffered a few technical problems. Anyhoo, it seems that it is a composite charcter in the movie, so I am going to redirect to the movie article. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 15:41, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

I would recommend to first create & save the deletion subpage, and only then add it to the list: an empty one creates confusion in the AfD list. - Altenmann >t 15:54, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Actually, that is not possible: as soon as I create the deletion subpage, the text to be copied and pasted onto the list disappears from the tag in the article. Until that problem is solved, I will have to keep doing it the way I'm doing it now. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 15:57, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

I see. I had some other issues with this "smart template" as well. (However I don't have your problem, since I am creating afd pages in a somewhat different way.) I will start the discussion in the template talk page. - Altenmann >t 16:03, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello Blanchardb, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Jay Clayton, critic has been removed. It was removed by Cheeryble Nickleby with the following edit summary '(no edit summary)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with Cheeryble Nickleby 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) 21:31, 18 August 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Thanks for the note. Some very interesting articles on that page. A lot to investigate. It's copyrighted so I can't add it, but [6] it's no joke! :) Live free or die? ChildofMidnight (talk) 03:04, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

I want to redirect this page to Lille University Northern France. How can this be easily done? Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 18:54, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Quite simple. Replace the entire content of Université Lille Nord de France with #REDIRECT [[Lille University Northern France]]. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 23:42, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

According to a few sources, although Taschereau was indeed the name at the time of its construction, it was already no longer in uses by the 60s (see on p. 198). A few anecdotal references ([7], [8]) state that the official name was change, a fact that the Commission de Toponymie's website confirms, with the current name officially listed in 1977. There is no risk of confusion, hence my removal of the hatnote as it IMHO creates MORE confusion by being there (I would be extremely surprised if somebody entered "Taschereau Bridge/Pont Taschereau" looking for the Pont de l'Île). Now, if you want to argue about the others 5 or so actual Taschereau Bridges known to the Commission, feel free :p One is actually located a mere few kilometers eastward from the Pont de l'Île! Circeus (talk) 02:28, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello! Your submission of Taschereau Bridge at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! —S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 09:48, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi again,

I've had a few back-and-forths with you regarding my music site. In case you don't remember, I was curious as to why I was not permitted to link to our reviews on album pages and the notability issue was raised. I fully understand it and have respected it. With that said, why do sites that rank lower than mine (according to alexa.com) in traffic have reviews on wikipedia? I'm well aware that "Wikipedia is not a mirror or a repository of links", what I don't understand is why my site has been dismissed to the side while others of equal or lesser prominence are allowed to link their work. Iamnotacamera (talk) 21:28, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

No one said that Wikipedia rules are applied consistently. In fact, the nature of Wikipedia is such that a lot of stuff falls through the cracks without anyone noticing in a timely fashion. But this is no reason to break the rules any more than stealing can be justified because others do it. When you see other sites that do not meet our guidelines on external links, it is just a matter of time before someone finds them and corrects the situation. It's called cleanup, and we are pretty much shortstaffed in this department. You are welcome to help. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 01:05, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough, I was in no way suggesting that I would start posting reviews simply because others have. I was simply curious because just about every album page I visit contains links to sites that are hardly notable by Wiki's definition. I appreciate the quick reply. Iamnotacamera (talk) 05:08, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

You might want to take a look at Critical Software too. These pages are linked, and the former failed an AfD 3 years ago. It's been recreated along with the set of articles you've recently seen. Shadowjams (talk) 07:19, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

You proposed Ajax (band) for deletion. The creator removed it an added a chart reference. Is that sufficient or not; I'm not too sure. -WarthogDemon 20:41, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm going through and cleaning up the mess I made of Jetsunma's article. I wasn't straight with you guys, though my spin-doctoring against Jetsunma was pretty obvious to the Wiki community I'm sure. I did not have scholarly integrity in how I wrote the article about Jetsunma, cherry-picking negative information to put together as negative a picture as possible -- even more negative than the most critical materials out there. I knew what to use because I was one of the main sources on the book, The Buddha From Brooklyn, which is major conflict of interest as well (especially since I didn't admit my involvement and presented myself as an outside party and then used that book extensively for the article). In fact, my real name is Michelle Grissom, formerly known as Ani Dechen, and am actually a student who broke with Jetsunma in 1996. I was one of the main reasons the book was so slanted against Jetsunma. I was not honest in that book either, slanting information exactly the same way I did here on Wikipedia: I used things that weren't really a problem for me because I knew they would upset non-Buddhists. Describing a confrontation where -- after 8 years of my rebelling against the monastic community and my breaking my monastic vows -- she yelled at me and swatted me once, I called it a "beating," simply because the police term for any kind physical contact is battery. I swept my own behavior that led to this under the rug. Jetsunma has been divorced several times, to men who either were or later became her students, and I used that in the article to make her look like she was sleeping her way through her students. I also used the generosity of her students as a way to paint her as being very greedy, even though she's never even asked for a salary, and blamed her for the ongoing struggle to build a monastery, even though the main reason the monastery hasn't been built is that the land bought for it doesn't perk. I've taken all the spin-doctoring out of the article and I am very, very sorry I abused Wiki for my own personal vendetta. Longchenpa (talk) 23:03, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello Blanchardb, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Blaçi has been removed. It was removed by Jac16888 with the following edit summary '(create village stub)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with Jac16888 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) 23:59, 24 August 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Blanchardb, you were a little quick there on your posting. I was in the middle of writing the rationale. You might want to remove your note. Bye.Tobit2 (talk) 15:37, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Cheers, I don't have a lot of time to add a lot of verifiable content about Belfast Food. It's kind of hard to find any content about Croatian stuff, including bands, that I could say is "third party" and "trusted". (Blogs don't fall in this category, and most of content should be online.)

I have added minimal amount of content about Belfast Food to prove some notability. Can you check if this is enough to avoid speedy deletion (or any deletion whatsoever) since this band is hardly non-notable in Croatia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ivucica (talk • contribs) 16:07, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Novice user, can't find sending email or message to you. Thanks for your pics of Hwy 25 bridge construction. Where can I view a lot more. Thanks. Mike. . —Preceding unsigned comment added by Moochowping (talk • contribs) 18:22, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm afraid that where these come from, that's all there is available. These are all pictures I took myself. My workplace is a 10-minute drive from the construction site, but I don't always bring my camera with me - especially when I see no new major development.

With a digital camera, the name of the game is, take as many pictures as you can, then throw away the bad ones. And that's exactly what I do: a full 50% of the pictures I take never make it to my hard drive. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 04:37, 30 August 2009 (UTC)