User talk:Kudpung/Archive Nov 2010

Note

Please do not edit archives as you did here. If you have new information, create a new entry on the correct board. I have reverted the change. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:11, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Don't you agree that some action needs to be taken beyond my innocent lapse in knowing that archives should not of course be edited? Fact is, as I was linked directly to it, and as it had never been closed, I actually failed to notice that it was an archived page until it was too late. Perhaps you could do something about it, as it was just allowed to lapse last time. --Kudpung (talk) 11:20, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

First, as per the notice when you edit my talkpage, do not use talkback templates there. Second, the reason it got archived is because none of the dozens of admins who monitor ANI felt it required actions. Third, I will not unilaterally impose something based on the results of #2. If you feel action needs to be taken because additional problems have resurfaced, make a new report at ANI - reference the original, and provide complete diff's of the newer problems. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:28, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

There have been another 19 new pages added in the last 72 hours. There are now close on 500 of these recent entries. A random stab (which nevertheless took over an hour) shows that many of them are extremely poorly sourced BLP and that further Internet searches fail to reveal sources that assert notability. I doubt that anyone who does not have recourse to bots, filters, scripts, or AWB, will spend days listing all the diffs as you suggest. I am trying to be helpful by suggesting that we try to find another solution.--Kudpung (talk) 00:32, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Update: Already blocked very late last night.--Kudpung (talk) 01:17, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

Hello. Thank you for your message relating to my article placed on Wikipedia. I am still trying to get to grips with the whole system and how to correctly use the site. I will endeavour to reference any further article I add so that the inclusions I make are considered legitimate. Thank you again for your message and I will probably be in touch when I encounter another problem. Thanks again (Rain391 (talk) 14:26, 31 October 2010 (UTC)) l

Don't worry. It hasn't been listed for deletion, but you quickly need to ais is to take a look at other articles about small places such as for example Sherrard's Green, open them in editing mode and see how they have been put together (don't change anything in there though!). --Kudpung (talk) 15:04, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Emma Groves

Hi. Could you take a look at this so you can get an idea what is going on. I have added your talkpage to my watchlist. Might I suggest you add the Groves article to yours because the propagandizing and editorializing are nowhere near done yet. I am so tired of being outnumbered and marginalized. To have a disinterested editor with at least an open mind monitoring the page's editing would be in keeping with Wikipedia's mission to be an encyclopaedia, not a site where propagandists can work unchecked by manipulating and bullying the system. You have that discretion under WP:IAR. Just compare my edits with those of the editor who immediately gutted them. Thanks. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 14:37, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi. I've just left a new comment there already. I have on my watchlist every single page I have ever visited or edited in this encyclopedia, but I think it's now over to you guys. I don't see my rôle as a teacher invigilating an exam, and I think the WP:EAR department has done what it can. If there are serious breaches in content or behaviour policy, as a very last resort the editors concerned will have to make a list of diffs and a perfectly documented rationale and take it to the appropriate dispute resolution board. I hope you'll be able to resolve your differences and collaborate together without such drastic recourse. Avoidance of heated language goes a huge way in getting things sorted out.--Kudpung (talk) 14:54, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

: Hi. I am assuming you may be asleep as according to this page it is 1:56 AM right now where you live. I won't expect a response then until your convenience. I just wanted to let you know I responded to the other editor and would like to get back to editing the Groves page, but am afraid to do so now for fear of violating WP:3RR. I know there are exceptions to 3RR (like WP:IAR, et al) but I can't and won't risk being blocked, so when do you think I can start re-editing/fixing the Groves page? Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 19:02, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

I received a response from the editor with whom I have been in this dispute who states that the Emma Groves article is subject to (see "Community restrictions").

"All articles related to The Troubles, defined as: any article that could be reasonably construed as being related to The Troubles, Irish nationalism, and British nationalism in relation to Ireland falls under WP:1RR (one revert per editor per article per day). When in doubt, assume it is related. Clear vandalism, or edits by anonymous IP editors, may be reverted without penalty Editors who violate this 1RR restriction may be blocked without warning by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offense. If you are a new editor, or an editor unfamiliar with the situation, please follow the guidelines laid out in the above link. If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it on this talk page first."

I see I was right all along to contact you. Can you tell me how to proceed under WP:1RR when you have the chance. I have never been in this situation. I mean I understand one edit per 24 hours, but now that this other editor has the article as he/she wants, the onus would be on me to make changes. Then he/she would re-edit, and so on, a kind of ridiculous two step, barring the entry of any third persons, which seems unlikely, as none came forward for three years (since 2007), as you know. So editing the Groves page will be like a Wile E. Coyote/Roadrunner cartoon, or maybe Tom and Jerry. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 20:40, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I'm aware of the 1rr for NI related issues. In clear cases of POV pushing or systematic slow vandalism, the period does not have to be 24 hours - the revert rule could be applied even if it concerns 1 rev a month. It needs, however, to be exceptionally well proven, and that could take months. Remember that Rome was not built in a day, and we have plenty of other editing tasks that need the help of skilled Wikipedians. At all costs, avoid falling foul of either the 1rr or 3rr rules, blocking is almost always the admin's reactions and is almost instantaneous. I have it on my watch list and if I have time I might even draft a suggested neutral replacement article; as I mentioned before, there are plenty of possiblilities for recycling the surplus material.--Kudpung (talk) 00:38, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for listening and for your expertise. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 13:28, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Just wanted to let you know of a funny coincidence. I was checking out the Brenda Cowling page to see if anything had been sorted out (she's still not dead apparently) and on the talk page I noticed we had responded consecutively, twice! Odd case that, some "relative" of hers insists she died, but no death notice in any reliable publication. Just wanted to share. Regards. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 22:14, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

ANI Notice regarding User:Kudpung99

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — SpikeToronto 17:51, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

UPDATE:  Blocked as a sockpuppet of User:Shyguy1991. — SpikeToronto 18:17, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Many thanks Spike, for your perspicacity and rapid action. --Kudpung (talk) 01:47, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

You’re welcome. I think the real heroes are User:EurekaLott for noticing the similarity to edits by blocked editor User:Shyguy1991 and User:MuZemike for doing the CheckUser, confirming that it was a sock, and saving me the hassle of filing at SPI. Unfortunately, there are well over 200 edits by Kudpung99 that have to be gone through! I’m glad no one will confuse the two of you anymore. — SpikeToronto 04:36, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Translation of Mindxmedia:

"Mindxmedia is a modern media company, we offer a wide range of services, traditional printed material production, to help promote accession by a variety of products and services. With us you can order what you need among professional and promotional clothing, roll-ups, promotional pens and printed materials. We sell everything you can think of putting pressure on and then some, there are no limits to how creative we can be. We are your connection to various businesses such as public relations firms, advertising agencies, printers, professional and business profile, promotional gifts and giveaways suppliers. All for the convenience of our customers, you have problems, please contact us and we will solve it with you." HalfShadow 07:33, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

You're too late - I've already done it and put on the article tp ;)--Kudpung (talk) 07:35, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Crap. I thought I got there first. HalfShadow 07:35, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

:)--Kudpung (talk) 07:37, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

What keeps mankind alive?

Mack the Knife has it's own page so why not this song? It's a Left-wing song and I am merely quoting it's lyrics. I made no statement as to whether it's ideas were good or bad so I don't see I can be expressing a POV. SmokeyTheCat 08:52, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

See WP:OTHERSTUFF. There is not much point in creating stubs when articles that can accomodate them already exist. The main problem however is the unsourced WP:POV - wherever it comes from, you are responsible for reproducing it. The lack of source alone is enough to have this sub deleted. I'm suggesting that if it is an intersting piece of information connected with the Drei Groschen Oper that is worth mentioning at all, the,n it should be in its associated article. I'll probably merge and redirect more if I find it, or spin off a standalone article about the songs from the opera. I'm happy to explain more if you like. --Kudpung (talk) 09:01, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Kudpung. You have new messages at Triwbe's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Talkback

Hello, Kudpung. You have new messages at Skarebo's talk page.
Message added 10:29, 1 November 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

re:Claudia Lindsey

Hi Kudpung. Respectfully I disagree with your philosophy towards stubs. You may want to familiarize yourself with Wikipedia:Stub for perhaps a more balanced view. Also I found your comments condescending, particularly since I've contributed to several feature articles (most recently Tosca and L'Orfeo) and good articles at wikipedia, have been editing on here for years, and have created hundreds of articles (some recent examples of more extensive articles being Mac Morgan and Lauren Flanigan). Further, I had two refs and the article clearly meets the requirement at WP:Music and WP:Creative, so I'm not really sure why you were harping on references and notability. I, and many other editors, occassionally create basic stubs knowing full well that we won't take the article beyond that level. That is a good thing. For example on October 22 I created this stub of Marie Sasse which another editor has turned into this current version which is much improved. He had never heard of the singer until I created the stub and it inspired him to make a beautiful article. Best.4meter4 (talk) 12:41, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

RE:Wisbech Grammar School

Haha, oh, ok! I think the hint might perhaps have been a bit too subtle for that early in the morning! Actually, I might just do that, then. I'm going in to meet up with one of my old school masters later this week to have a look through their archives, so hopefully might be able to expand it a bit further later. Rob (talk) 11:21, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) But will they be valid third party accessible reliable sources? (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:27, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

I was mainly going to have a look at a 1939 published history of the school[1] which is publically available (albeit mainly in the Wisbech area) and to take a few more up-to-date pictures. Rob (talk) 11:48, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I think I'd just pressed 2 instead of " Rob (talk) 10:34, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

It's raining thanks spam!

• Please pardon the intrusion. This tin of thanks spam is offered to everyone who commented or !voted (Support, Oppose or Neutral) on my recent RfA. I appreciate the fact that you care enough about the encyclopedia and its community to participate in this forum.
• There are a host of processes that further need community support, including content review (WP:GAN, WP:PR, WP:FAC, and WP:FAR). You can also consider becoming a Wikipedia Ambassador. If you have the requisite experience and knowledge, consider running for admin yourself!
• If you have any further comments, input or questions, please do feel free to drop a line to me on my talk page. I am open to all discussion. Thanks • Ling.Nut (talk) 02:25, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

• Tks for your kind words on my talk page. Cheers! • Ling.Nut (talk) 08:22, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Confuse

I'm very confuse right now. Because there a lot of rules.

Signed by Jean-Carlo Salinas —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jean-Carlo Salinas (talk • contribs) 12:20, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

You have new messages

Hello, Kudpung. You have new messages at Gonzonoir's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

andrea mohr

Hello, you have edited the article of Andrea Mohr. What is the difference to her article and the one of her co-offender Andrew Fraser? Thank you, best wishes ~~Christine 0099~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.116.212.230 (talk) 13:34, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi. Links please, and sign your posts (see page top). Cheers, --Kudpung (talk) 13:38, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

OK: The Mohr article had no referenced sources that convinced us that the article is important enough (notable) for an entry in an encyclopedia. The Fraser seems to possibly fulfill these requirements. I did not contribute to either of them. Hope this helps. You are of course welcome to improve either or both of these articles, don't hesitate to ask if you would like help with the editing tools. Regards, --Kudpung (talk) 13:48, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Hallo, I have added a link and done some changes. I hope this meets your approval. Thank you, all the best (hope the signature works, pardon me)Christine0099 (talk) 09:08, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi, you're getting there. Note that there is a difference between References and External links. References are the most important, they tell the reader that you didn't make up what you have written, and tell us that the subject is important enough to have an article in this encyclopedia. There are a lot of strict rules about what sources can be used. If you can read German, you'll find a similar set of rules in the German Wikipedia. If you prefer English, you should start at WP:RS; WP:V; and WP:CITE. External links are for linking to any supplementary. information that is relevant to the subject and might provide additional background information. Do take a moment to follow the advice in the link I posted on your talk page. Happy editing!--Kudpung (talk) 09:21, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Hallo Kupdung, once again I need your help, please. I have done a mistake. I did a few changes on the article andrea mohr but I forgot to log in so it shows now my IP adresse. I dont want that. How can I change it? Thank you so much for all your kind help [[Christine0099 (talk) 10:48, 6 November 2010 (UTC)]]

Hi Chrisine. There's nothing you can do about your IP edit now. Just remember to log in every time in the future. On the login box, if your check "Remember me for 30 days", you'll automatically be logged in. However, until you are absolutely sure, always check at the top of the page to see if you are really logged in. Do continue to develop your article - already some other editors are making minor corrections for you. However, please go to your talk page and follow all the links I gave you for the instructions how to edit pages, how to make edit summaries, and how to sign your name on talk pages. Take care, and happy editing!--Kudpung (talk) 11:10, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Christine, if you meant the only edit from today, I believe that I have taken care of it - please do be cautious in the future. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:11, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much both of you. I like it here on Wikipedia everyone is very polite, helpful and attentiv that is really great working with you all. Yes Kudpunk I found the links you have mailed me very helpful, just not been through all yet but I will. Wishing you both a lovely weekend [[ Christine0099 (talk) 13:06, 6 November 2010 (UTC) ]]

Kudpung

Hey bro thanks for the tips. Please feel free to contact me if you need any help with anything, and have a nice day! Bunkerdiver (talk) 14:39, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

You have new messages

Hello, Kudpung. You have new messages at Diannaa's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{user:diannaa/tb}} template.

I have responded to your question and have asked for your help on an unrelated matter. Thanks. --Diannaa (Talk) 16:34, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Please be more careful

Please be more careful when removing references. The cite in the Shirley Love article wasn't to another wikipedia article but to a print reference. Yes, wikipedia does have an article on that print reference, but the citation was to the actual reference source and not the wiki page. Thank you.4meter4 (talk) 08:42, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Please refrain from disruptive editing while other editors are clearing up the mess your friends have made.--Kudpung (talk) 08:45, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Please read WP:AGF and WP:Civil. Cheers.4meter4 (talk) 08:49, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Cleaning up and referencing unsourced opera BLPs

Hi Kudpung, I appreciate your concern about these articles and possible deficiences in referencing. If you are going to PROD them, I'd really appreciate it if you could notify WikiProject Opera on our talk page, so they don't slip under the radar and your concerns can be addressed. We don't have every single singer on our individual watchlists and unfortunately, User:ArticleAlertbot, which we had subscribed to, is no longer functioning. If you'd like to discuss your concerns further with other editors who regularly work in this area and have access to specialised publications, please don't hesitate to visit the project's talk page the project's talk page. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 09:38, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Voc. Please start a new section with new messages. You can be sure that clean up operations like this, that have taken ten hours today, are the least inspiring of all the work I do on Wikipedia, especially when it concerns opera. I am most certainly not a deletionist and much of the time is spent copy editing, removing red-herring references, deleting passages of blatant copyvio, and providing new, accurate references. PROD is absolutely a last resort and affects probably less than 1%. Today's effort is a systematic alphabetical trip through the pages in Category:United States opera singer stubs. I personally feel it would be more productive if people from your Opera project could take time out from mass producing these stubs, to aim for some serious quality before the next bot drive to delete all the poorly referenced BLPs. If I can do it, so can they - we all have access to the same sources:) Cheers.--Kudpung (talk) 10:14, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I thought I was commenting under the same topic, but never mind.;-) I have concerns about mass-stub creation with minimal referencing by 4meter4 as well. However, I wish you wouldn't tar the the whole project with that brush. Many of the articles that you've been tagging, weren't created by members of our project at all. The vast majority of us create well-referenced articles for singers, composers etc. that are clearly notable or spend our time expanding clearly notable stubs to viable articles, as I recently did to this, which became this. I'm not asking you to reference them yourself, but as I explained before, we can't address the problems and rescue a PROD if we don't know about it. Many of us have access to the online editions of the Grove and OUP publications, specialist news archives, hardcopy reference books etc. I would appreciate if you could copy any prod warnings for those that you are prodding to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Opera (apart from those created by 4meter4, who will get the warning anyway). After all, you have to warn creators and significant contributors anyway, so why not the OP too? That's all I'm asking. But if you don't want to, that's OK. Voceditenore (talk) 10:45, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi. I'm not unaware that your particular project is comprised almost exclusively of bios. One of the projects I work closely with is that of BLP and helping to develop and implement policy across the entire board. What I'm doing today Voc, rather than inflating my ego by mass producing poorly sourced stubs , is a totally boring, very thankless gnome task. I'm certainly not tarring any one with brushes, but I would be hounded for tendentious editing if I were to concentrate only on the disruptive work of one editor. You can only address the problem stubs if someone flags them to bring them to your attention. I'm not a member of your project, and I am not really motivated into making myself more work by looking up the creator of each article I put a {{refimprove}} tag on to see if he/she is. Many user names are obviously familiar to me and if they do not ring warning bells I accord them all the greatest respect and assume their edits, however poor, to be in GF. I would hesitate before making a mountain out of a molehill out of the isolated two or three PRODS that were very special cases which I could even have CSD if I had wanted. Nobody owns articles, not even the projects that police them. I know all about projects, I founded and run one, and fortunately it's got absolutely nothing remotely to do with opera, and I'm personally most welcoming when a non member come in and lends a hand :o) --Kudpung (talk) 12:01, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Of course no project owns articles, but we can help source them if we are aware of the problem, and I personally appreciate what you are doing. I wasn't asking for notification of every maintenance/reimprove tag, and we have a bot that informs us of completely unsourced opera BLPs which I check daily. I was only asking for PROD notification, but I won't bring it up again. Voceditenore (talk) 12:38, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Martha Lipton year of birth missing?

Why did you add the Category:Year of birth missing (living people) to Martha Lipton's article? If it was a mistake, I suggest you revert your edit. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 12:05, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

See talk page header.--Kudpung (talk) 14:39, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Yeah right

You people got quite some nerve. So you want to discuss with me the reason why I keep a more Germanic tone to my English translations? As you can see, that is obviously not a lack of what you would consider "proper knowledge". Spare me, please. You're free to be "copyediting" my translations as much as you like, but if I were you I would bother showing some gratitude for the work. --Fhmann (talk) 02:31, 5 November 2010 (UTC)s

Hi Fehmann. Please stay calm. We (and I particularly) welcome all contributions on Germany related subjects. Apart from a genuine friendly offer of help, there were no suggestions whatsoever of the kind you are making. --Kudpung (talk) 02:53, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Patrick Bordeleau

Thank you for translating the page for me, I greatly appreciate it. Weatherman05071 (talk) 19:48, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Twinkle again

Could you have a look at what happened with Mohammed El-hadhiri for me, please? I used Twinkle for sending it to AfD and watched carefully while it rolled though the process. This time it seems to have missed adding the AfD template to the article page, although it has created the AfD page and listed it on today's AfD log. Any idea what's going wrong? Ooops - just realised that you are probably asleep right now, so I'll add the article template manually for now.--Plad2 (talk) 19:38, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Hmm. Nominating Halimzai (politician) for AfD also using Twinkle seems to have completed all the relevant steps without problems (or at least none that I can see). I have a couple more to do from the BLP Rescue Project current month (Dec 2008) so I think I will continue and see what happens.--Plad2 (talk) 20:07, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Philippa. yes, I fell asleep at my desk and didn't change the status message at the top of the page. I just wanted to reassure you that I've now been looking at this for nearly an hour and I 'll get back to you in a few moments. Watch this space ;) --Kudpung (talk) 23:46, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Right here we go. First let me thank you for the commitment you have shown to the problem of unsourced BLPs. This kind of work among the mouldy old files festering in the basement of BLP is a thankless task like much of the housekeeping that has to be done. :BLP backlogs are a monumental task. Many new unsourced or poorly sourced pages get added every day without being tagged, simply due fall off the 30-cliff, unpatrolled at WP:New Page Patrol, because less experienced patrollers who like to rack up their edit count, prefer the low hanging fruit at the front of the list of daily new arrivals.

I hope WP:Twinkle is working alright for you now - it should do if you are using the the most recent version of a compatible browser. It works fine for me in both Safari (5.0.2)and FireFox (3.6.12) on Mac OS 10.6.4. If you are going to AfD a lot articles, you can also consider putting the WP:DELSORT script by User:John Vandenberg/Deletion sorting tool into your User:Plad2/monobook.js (or vector.js, depending on which Wikipedia skin you use). Many people don't bother even registering their AfDs on the relevant delsort pages, but it does provide added exposure to the AfD, and vastly increases the likelihood that people will come and comment - in my opinion, AfD is as much about rescuing articles as getting them deleted. As you have seen in the past, it often needs an AfD simply to galvanise people into action.

I see you have also been given some advice at BKLP Rescue. The answer you got is of course basically correct, but perhaps it did not address the the finer points where many articles need to be considered individually. I sometimes spend as much as an hour trying to find sources, but finally still have to choose on of the methods of deletion. Assuming that one has done all the required research WP:BEFORE applying AfD template (although to go by some of the uncivil comment I get on my AfD noms, anyone would believe I'm a drive-by deletionist!), a WP:PROD might indeed be the best and most economical solution. If after doing WP:BEFORE you are reasonably sure that no other editors will be able to come up with sustainable reasons for disputing the PROD, then by all means PROD it. It saves tying up editor time on AfD, and most importantly, it prevents a really bad or non notable article from being kept by default just because there is insufficient response at AfD. If nobody comes along to contest a PROD, the article quietly gets removed without a fuss after 7 days. Thus, the general route to deletion (depending on the criteria of course) is CSD --> PROD/BLPPROD --> AfD --> WP:DRV (see special note at DRV concerning stubs).

You'll see now, that the two examples you have cited above, are in fact first class candidates for PROD rather than AfD: they've been languishing unresolved for a long time - years in some case - in the uBLP category, your research for on and offline sources has come up with nothing (and as a professional reader/editor/publisher, you understand this more than most of us), and the page hits are low (probably only search engine crawlers), and very few edits by other contributors except for the stubbers, categorisers, AWBers, and housekeeping bots, and the article creator has probably contributed very little else to the encyclopedia.

I hope all this helps and that you didn't think it was TLDR. You probably kow most of it anyway, but it will be reassurin for you to know from another editor that you are on the right track, and you can even use some of it for giving advice to others. If you need any more ideas or suggestions, don't hesitate to shout - VFR only I'm afraid ;) Regards, --Kudpung (talk) 01:10, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. Very helpful. You're correct in thinking that I was a bit puzzled by the advice I got re PROD vs. AFD. I had previously thought that PROD should be the first step but following J04N's advice (and the edit summary I had from the editor removing the PROD), it seemed that I had got that wrong. I will go back to PROD first and not mind if they get removed. It's a bit galling when one has spent a serious amount of time fruitlessly searching for anything which might count as an RS, to have that research dismissed in a matter of seconds. But hey, I know that's how it works here. And thanks also for the reminder about the Delsort script.--Plad2 (talk) 06:54, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

The discussion on PROD vs AfD has continued here with some different viewpoints being expressed. I mention just in case you want to take a look. I don't personally see any need to prolong the discussion. I think I've got enough from what's been said so far to arrive at a balance on the decision whether to PROD or send to AfD (which kinda boils down to "it depends..."), so I'm OK with that. Interestingly enough the article with which I started this section Mohammed El-hadhiri now appears to be moving to a "Keep" as another editor spotted an alternate spelling of the subject's name on the list of Pan-African delegates (which I feel I possibly should have seen as the transliteration of Arabic names can vary enormously).--Plad2 (talk) 07:26, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Phil Bridger is perfectly correct in his literal interpretation of the guideline. That is why a correctly PRODed article will slip away uncontested after seven days. I think it's always best not to hint at any 'possibles' in the wording of a PROD rationale. After all, the PROD idea is for the deletion to be taken for granted. Doing AfD, especially for a ten-word stub that nobody has taken any interest in for two years, is, IMHO, counterproductive considering the effort required, and even more so if its unsourced presence is innocuous. The project really needs to consider focusing its priorities on the articles that have greater quantities of unsourced content, and where keeping them could clearly be a net benefit to the encyclopedia. Problem is, with clean up campaigns like these, people earn their barnstars on quantity (of articles) rather than on quality, as opposed to the WP:GOCE campaigns that award for word count. As you say, it kinda boils down to "it depends...", so don't hesitate to ask me again any time you want another opinion. Naturally I can't promise to always be right, but I do have a way at looking at the grey between the black and white aspects of many of our policies - nothing is written in stone. See for example the Charles Warnken discussion lower down on this page, where an editor questions why I declined his WP:CSD. --Kudpung (talk) 23:12, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

As ever, very helpful, thank you. I really do appreciate your views on this. My personal criteria for AfD now includes people whose name are a transliteration from a non-Roman language (assuming that there is some assertion of notability) as I've now seen three found sources by someone with better knowledge of the language searching for a different version of the name. I agree with your point about the rather skewed focus of the drive to source all UBLPs. There is no doubt that there are much larger issues lurking below the surface of this whole initiative but I still think it is worth doing this basic pass through the whole list as we are weeding out a number of hoaxes, copyvios, spam, very occasional attack pages (which is what got the debate started in the first place), controversial text and some non-notables along the way. Every single one of those articles will have had a pair of eyes on it by the time we finish, which is no bad thing. The fact that what's left will be a much larger body with "refimprove" tags will have to be addressed, of course. I have worries about determining value by word count. Me, I've got to the point where I seriously doubt the point of having literally hundreds of two line stubs on Thai premier league (2004 season) footballers who technically meet WP:ATH but are difficult to source (that's a topic for the folks over at the Football Project) but I've also found more worthwhile (IMO) stubs which I have enjoyed expanding and referencing.--Plad2 (talk) 07:23, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Of course the work is absolutely necessary - as you say, it serves to weed out the really bad stuff, while the innocuous 10-word stubs are not taking up any serious server space. I come across enough pages at random to keep me busy while I'm on other stuff, so I know what you guys are up against. I'm still trying to drum up support for some experienced New Page Patrollers who are prepared to work in that difficult area at the bottom of the NP list. Probably 70-80% of new articles are now BLP and 200 - 300 new pages a day just pass untagged, unreferenced and unstubbed after 30 days until a project like yours stumbles on them after a bot run. The sports ones are the hardest because no one outside the fans of the various ball games even knows if the leagues are notable, let alone the player! And, there are also nearly 2,000 poorly referenced BLP stubs out there that were mass produced earlier this year by a sock-master that also need to be processed, so it's also imperative to check the article histories and the creators' contribs. So if you have any ideas, please keep them coming. First on the agenda is to revamp the BLPPROD in a couple of months to ban/blacklist directories, job agencies, blogs, and social nw sites from being used to circumvent it. This loophole was left largely undiscussed in the pressure to get the BLPPROD finally up and running. It would certainly reduce the load for the uBLP clearing houses in the future.--Kudpung (talk) 09:51, 15 November 2010 (UTC) BTW: I've addressed the children's book issue below.

Thanks for this (and for the note below). It does seem to me that the WP:ATH guidelines could do with tightening up to provide more clarity on the notability (or otherwise) of the one/two season player stubs (even when they are playing at the highest national level). The other problem, as you say, is that there are just not enough people with the time, enthusiasm and experience to do the gnomish work. And there's a lot to learn. I seem to have over 4K edits in my contribs list (mostly in the children's literature and BLP areas) and I am still learning new stuff every time I log on. I can't help feeling that if newbie editors could be firmly encouraged to go through a training program (gaining barnstars for mastering new techniques) we might see a drop in the number of basic mistakes and time involved in putting those right. I get the impression that very few people respond to the Welcome messages (certainly no-one has ever asked me for help - but then, I don't think I've been back to see how they were getting on) and I wonder whether there is something could be done there. Anyway, stuff to ponder on.--Plad2 (talk) 07:48, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Kudpung. You have new messages at Plad2's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Response to your query

Here's the response to your query. I'll do a bit of tweaking during the week and I think that should lay the concern to rest.--Plad2 (talk) 06:26, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Ho hum. I see that a CCI has been opened re this user. Perhaps I was wrong. (I also haven't had the time to do the fixing I had in mind). I have informed MRG, who opened the CCI, of the possible issue re Ruth K. MacDonald.--Plad2 (talk) 22:59, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

I think you've done absolutely the right thing. Seems it was only the tip of the iceberg. I originally asked for your help because you are a publisher of children' books, and I thought it wise also to have a more discrete way of addressing the problem in view of the editor's large number of articles, GA, FA, and DTK. The saddset thing is her apparent lack of concern for all the mopping up that now has to be done. Anyway, it goes to show we just can't be too careful, especially in the light of the very recent huge issue that forced one of our top bureaucrats to excercise a WP:RTV. Thanks for all you have done. BTW, there's another answer to the Twinkle thread above. --Kudpung (talk) 04:20, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

And it seems it's got a whole lot bigger. I'll be a bit more suspicious next time. It seems your antennae for something dodgy were spot on.--Plad2 (talk) 21:44, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Pqcell for deletion

A discussion has begun about whether the article Pqcell, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pqcell until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:27, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

I originally PRODed this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pqcell&action=historysubmit&diff=394166515&oldid=394165475 --Kudpung (talk) 20:07, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Incomplete Articles

You said that, I have created some incomplete articles. Actually, those are some important articles. So, I wanted to start those. But, people can contribute there. And, I hope, soon those will be complete articles. thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mailmurshed (talk • contribs) 20:03, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry Mailmurshed, but almost every one of the articles you write gets deleted. Now please stop or you will be blocked again from editing the encyclopedia.--Kudpung (talk) 20:10, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Darren Ross protection

Hi, Kudpung! Thanks for the nice note. I already salted the title, but if you'd like me to salt more, please let me know. Thanks again.  :) --PMDrive1061 (talk) 03:08, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Caroline Cave

Y'know, sometimes there's a difference between sites where you can get information while you're starting an article (like IMDb) and sites that you can actually use in the article as references (like newspaper articles)...so sometimes you gotta give a guy more than five minutes to actually hunt down better sources, eh? (*grin*) Bearcat (talk) 05:57, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Like I said, I didn't realise it was you. Workin' overtime on NPP, there's so much rubbish coming in today. Think I'll take a break and go get a cuppa tea ;)--Kudpung (talk) 06:15, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Charles Warnken

You said, "Generally, academics and PhD members of faculty are considered notable," concerning my speedy-delete tag of Charles Warnken. Could you please cite Wikipedia policy or precedence that supports your claim? Frankly, I think you are wrong. There are plenty of academics and/or Ph. D.'s that are not necessarily notable. Checking over WP:ACADEMIC, I do not see how Dr. Warnken meets any of the nine criteria. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 20:39, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

I assumed that as the CSD tag had been applied with in 13 minutes of the new article being posted, that the CSD was based on the rather unusual wording of the lead, and the paucity of references - both which I improved, and thereby creating sufficient doubt as to the article being a case for immediate deletion. Before doing a CSD, I feel that WP:BEFORE is essential. (On Labor Day 2007 I founded the Wikipedia Intensive Care Unit. It's a place to "heal" articles about subjects that are probably notable, but the article themselves face imminent deletion for other reasons.)

WP:ACADEMIC goes on to clearly explain how exceptions to the nine points might be interpreted.Professors (in the American sense of the word) tend to be kept and deleted in about equal numbers. Generally, tenured professors at major research institutions and top liberal-arts colleges tend to be kept, while assistant professors without major awards are deleted.(AfD/Co#Ed). With academics especially, many editors tend to err on the side of caution at CSD (although less perhaps with possible non notable actors, rock musicians, and sports people, for example), and prefer to place either an appropriate maintenance tag on the article, or if deletion is really required, a PROD. It may have happened in the past that a Nobel Prize winner has been deleted simply because it was not mentioned in the stub. That means if a new article is not blatant advertising, a personal attack, a copyright violation, or an obvious hoax, the systems of PROD, BLPPROD, provide the creator with time to improve the article or justify its cause for existence, while AfD at least provide the article with a chance to defend itself and be judged by a consensus of the community.

I have absolutely no concerns whatsoever with the decision to take it to AfD, where after further investigation, I might even !vote in favour of its deletion.--Kudpung (talk) 21:51, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Your sources helped, but only perhaps to get it out of speedy territory. I also tend to give articles about academics a little more leeway, but this one appeared to be non-notable on its face, and I still don't think he's notable, hence the AfD. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 03:00, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi RK. I'm glad if my opinion helped in some way - but it was of course only an opinion. All our decisions are a fine balancing act between what we feel, what we know, the policies & guidelines, and the enigmatic Wikipedia 'consensus'. In the face of the less expert but necessary work by some of our enthusiastic but less experienced/younger patrollers, you can understand why I initially queried your CSD. Keep up the good work. Cheers.--Kudpung (talk) 05:39, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

And thank you for the barnstar! - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 06:02, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Question

Shockingly, I still don't know this, but what do I do in case I'm in an edit war? I'm not sure, but I may be at or over WP:3RR without realising it on Malaysia. Thanks, Chipmunkdavis (talk) 09:47, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for the late response, somehow I missed your post and my talk page seems to be getting quite busy thee days. I've checked out the Malaysia page history and I don't think there is any current danger of you getting into trouble. If there was, there have been no warnings AFAICS on your tp so the filters didn't pick it up. Anyway, you know what the 3RR rule is, and the best way to avoid an edit war is to take a back seat however hard it may seem. If you a re absolutely sure that you a re in the right, let things blow over first, then if other editors are really being disruptive, let them cast the first stones, leave a standard template warning on their tp, and if they still persist , take the matter to the appropriate notice board complete with rationale and a list of diffs. On the present issue, there seems to be a reasonably calm discussion on the article tp, and you appear to have the support of User:Bejinhan. Cheers, --Kudpung (talk) 05:34, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

It definitely looks busy. I think I've involved myself quite deeply in the Malaysia article, luckily lately I've been done with most edits there so I've been able to regain some perspective. There's a whole long-term edit war going on right now throughout a lot of Malaysian articles, will be interesting to see how that pans out. Thanks, I appreciate the guidance and clarification, Chipmunkdavis (talk) 17:32, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Peter Jarrette Artist/Author/Multi Media

Hi Kudpung, thanks for looking at my efforts. The reams of interviews on the subject Peter Jarrette exist in American papers from the 70's and 80's which I too cannot access print on however I have read these tears sheets. Along with NYC features in Art Direction magazine (listed) and scores of interviews in Trinidad Press form the 70's 80's and 90's...the last blitz being again mid 90's. How can I cite these beyond perhaps the names of the published mag/news titles if these all appeared before the times of google and wikipedia...obviously both new formats that have yet to trawl backwards in time to include some really outstanding types from art and media worlds etc? May I just say that I detect a negative note in the responses of some of your editors as regards my efforts and those of others that seem to be slated for their subject choices that for whatever reason are not of interest to the Sci-Fi pundits and middle aged niche interest individuals who seem to be prevalent here? No offence intended....simply my own opinion as per face value and profile reading thus far. Also to suggest that I am my subjects alter ego? How does one arrive at this? The Google entries, if you care to spend time researching this chap, perhaps by archives of the magazines that you can access, are articles written and published by others on him in legit and heavily circulated, established and respected magazines. I am simply trying to write an article on a person and like you I am trying to find my way into his past works and examples but if they have not been filed online say like his illustrations for Mademoiselle Magazine in the early 80's then what would you suggest I or someone else do? Like wise citing the existence of his grandparent who I have never met and I believe even the subject has never met? So, what is Wikipedia then? Is it a special interest source for a closed society of individuals who share harsh and dismissive views of things they do not know or care to consider? I understood there was an etiquette policy in place but with the feedback I have recieved from one or two more pointed editors it seems that this may not be the case in fact. I will continue to experience this site to my aim as long as permitted and thanks again for your words. They have been very discouraging and ungenerous however. --Eggs Aldo (talk) 18:49, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Eggs Aldo. Please read carefully the message in my talk page header and follow any links, then go to the talk page of your draft article where any discussion belongs, and where I will shortly be leaving a comment. Thanks.--Kudpung (talk) 19:05, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

RfA Time?

Hi Kudpung. I'm not really familiar with you personally, only with your contributions and the fact that you're around a lot. Have you considered an RfA recently? You seem rather sensible, have great content contributions, and seem like the kind of editor that's passing RfA with flying colors nowadays. I don't know if you have a nom in mind, but you should definitely consider it! ceranthor 01:35, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Ceranthor. Thanks for the kind words. However, there seems to be a stigma attached to self-noms, and they all seem to want people who will work on copyright issues and AfD closures, and those are not the areas I'm most familiar with. Besides which, because I use Mac, I can't use several of the useful scripts. i'm thinking it over though :) --Kudpung (talk) 02:38, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Alright, send me an email when you feel comfortable. I'm sure I can recommend a nom, or even be one. ceranthor 23:34, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Kennedy mmbando

Hi Exciral. I'm surprised you put a G11 on this. I would have thought a A7 if it needs a speedy, but it's really a classic example for a BLPPROD unless I have missed something. Anyway, it's entirely up to you :) --Kudpung (talk) 12:01, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

You are entirely right that this should have been an A7 - i actually intended to tag it as such, but in the process i got distracted and placed a G11 instead of a A7 (So much for the benefits of multiple tabs in a browser :) ). The reason to tag it as an A7 over a BLP prod was due to two facts - It was deleted two times under that criteria already, and nothing in the text or in a search gave any indication that this person would be notable.

A BLP prod is a tad different. Instead of being not notable a BLP prod indicated that a text is not, or not correctly sourced. There may actually be a claim to notability in a BLP (A claim is sufficient to pass A7 after all), but unlike other article's an unsourced BLP is a no-go. Thus i generally place an A7 on non-notable pages, and a BLP prod on pages that may be notable, but are unsourced (Provided that a quick search doesn't turn up any good sources) Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 18:24, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Excirial. Thanks. I must admit I had forgotten to check the page log :) --Kudpung (talk) 02:40, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Edna Wilma Simons

Hello, I'm new to wikipedia and i'm making this page about edna wilma for a class. I plan on adding a lot more about this person, but we needed to submit a stub about them before the deadline. I was wondering if you could help me make this page work. I'm not trying to give any false information or make a joke of wikipedia. I really want this page to work out, mainly because my grade is dependent on it. I also think that is an icon for our town of missoula and i really feel she deserves her own page, but i understand i need more info. Thank you for your time Cody Jensen —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cody.Jensen5 (talk • contribs) 20:04, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Cody. I never thought for a moment that you were making a joke page - the Wilma Theatre is quite famous even outside Missoula, Montana, and that's why there is already a Wikipedia about it. However, while we encourage the creation of new pages as a class project, I'm very surprised that your teacher is forcing students to make articles for the Wikipedia for their grades, and setting them to a deadline. Although Wikipedia is the encyclopedia anyone can edit, there are lots of rules, policies, and guidelines that have to be followed, and every editor should know about these before even starting to put the stub on an article page that can be viewed by everybody. If you are going to start an article as a school or class project, you should look up these rules first, or ask your teacher to look them up for you.

There are a couple of snags already which need looking into:

• It needs to be established whether or not the person is notable enough for a page in the encyclopedia. Truly notable people will probably already have had books written about them or there will be, or have been,extensive newspaper articles about them, or they have been featured in a TV documentary. Just a fleeting mention in another article or on a web site is not enough. Check out the rules on this at WP:NOTABILITY and WP:ENT.
• Once the notability is established, reliable references must be provided on the Wikipedia page. These sources must prove that what is said is true. You can read about the kind of sources that are acceptable in the guidelines at WP:RS and WP:V. You might need to go to your city or county library or to the newspaper office archives to find this stuff - lots of Wikipedia editors do it if the right kind of sources can't be found on the Internet.
• Once those sources have been found and checked for accuracy, the footnotes on the page must be formatted correctly - WP:CITE will help editors understand how to do this.
• If a subject is not really important enough for a stand-alone article in the encyclopedia, all is not lost, because as I have suggested, it can be included in another, very similar article about much the same thing.

I'm not going to get the page deleted just yet, but bear in mind that at some stage it is likely to be merged to the Wilma Theatre article. So Cody, don't hesitate to ask me here for more advice, or even ask your teacher to contact me here for more information. Best regards, --Kudpung (talk) 01:25, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Zachary J. Collins

I started to add sources to Zachary J. Collins' Wikipedia page. I accidentally hit "save" before citing any sources. The article isn't even half way finished yet, and I apologize. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Politics360 (talk • contribs) 07:47, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi. Please start a new section for a new discussion and remember to sign your posts. I have reviewed the article again and I find that it unfortunately fails our criteria for inclusion on multiple issues. If references were to be found according to our criteria for (click this link)reliable sources, it is not clear from the article which category Mr Collins falls into, but he/she certainly does not appear to have accumulated any notability sufficient to pass any Wikipedia inclusion criteria for people. Please click this link for more information: WP:BIO. Please also click the links in the welcome message on your talk page. Thanks.--Kudpung (talk) 08:04, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Kudpung, so you know: user has now twice removed the BLP PROD, and I am losing patience. It is a user's job to know how the place works, and they have been told a few times already now. Drmies (talk) 04:06, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Absolutely. However, I'm not an admin so I can't do anymore about it than you. What you could do, if you are as sure as I am that this subject is not notable, is to put a WP:CSD A7 on it using the {{db-person}} template, or doing it semi-automatically if you use Twinkle. If you do it manually , remember to copy and paste the warning template (shown on the CSD template) to the creator's talk page. If that CSD gets removed, come back here and I'll walk you through the next step in the process.--Kudpung (talk) 04:31, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Hmm... after saying all that, I see you've already done the A7. well done :)--Kudpung (talk) 04:33, 18 November 2010 (UTC) BTW: What yu could also have done would have been to restore the stubbed version I made. I've done it now :)--Kudpung (talk) 04:40, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I thought about it, and twice almost did it. What stopped me, I don't really know. I hope this is a red link soon, and then you and I can go back to talking about Bach and the upcoming season in Chamonix. Drmies (talk) 05:18, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, whaddayaknow. Anyway, you'll never guess who's staying at the Grand Hotel des Alpes this winter! Yes, with her American aunt! Drmies (talk) 05:22, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

talkback

Hello, Kudpung. You have new messages at PamD's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Question

Hello Kudpung. I was wondering why the article regarding Grasbeck does not have sufficient source, considering "who named it" has been cited. Feel free to change or delete the page. I however think it has sufficient source since all it indicates is his name, date of birth, and his contribution. Cheers! Dr. Persi (talk) 08:47, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi. One source that just mentions a person's name does not meet our criteria for notability. We need several sources, generally ones that are articles in mainstraem press, journals, TV, etc., dedicated to the subject. When notability is first asserted, then we can start looking at the reliabilty of the sources that confirm it. Who named it is not a reliable source because there is no indication where that website got its info from and if it is indeed true. It might well be true, but we need the proof. Please read up on our policies at WP:GNG, WP:BIO, WP:NOTABILITY, WP:RS, and WP:V. It's a lot of reading, but that's the way it goes I'm afraid. If you need help understanding any of it, don't hesitate to ask.--Kudpung (talk) 08:55, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Melanie Joy

Hello Kudpung. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Melanie Joy, 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. ϢereSpielChequers 12:07, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi WSC. I'm surprised, because as a part-time lecturer at a university (non tenured, non assistant- nor associate prof), author of two minor, non award winning books, and the only WP:RS is the brief bio page on the uni she works for (her own self-published web site doesn't copunt), and after doing some of my own research, and the fact that it's been deleted twice before already, I would have though that this is a clear fail. --Kudpung (talk) 12:26, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Kudpung, I doubt that this would survive AFD, though I've heard of the EllenDeGeneris show. But speedy is for more blatant cases than this. Lots of articles will be clear deletes at AFD but don't qualify for speedy deletion. ϢereSpielChequers 17:51, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Leandro Leviste

Hello Triwbe. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Leandro Leviste, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: the author has challenged it, and there is maybe just enough here to escape A7; I will take to AfD. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 12:19, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Matthew Wood (conductor)

Hi,

Thank you for your help and comments with the above article. There are more references to come, including international merits and awards - and hopefully a list of recordings. The page is certainly worthwhile, given the number of international positions held and invitations received.

More to follow!

NathanLawrence —Preceding unsigned comment added by NathanLawrence (talk • contribs) 14:27, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Help sourcing Thai footballers for WP:URBLPR

Hi Kudpung,

Greetings from Malvern. I wondered if there was any chance that you could help us out at WP:URBLPR sourcing a number of articles on Thai footballers that we have found in the latest month? I know you live in Thailand, and I assume you speak Thai, so I thought this might be a much easier job for you than it is for the rest of us. We think there are about 18 this month (Oct 2008) that will need to be done. Very many thanks Hallucegenia (talk) 15:37, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Hallucegenia,
There were indeed exactly 18 - I picked them out by simply recognising the Thai names, but apart from that the work, which took just over 5 hours, was not a net benefit to the encyclopedia in terms of ROI for the time spent. IMHO, the project really needs to consider focusing its priorities on the articles that have greater quantities of unsourced content, and where keeping them could clearly be an enrichment to the encyclopedia. I'm inclined to let those that are already PRODED just slip awy into oblivion and not spend time duplicating the effort of searching to save what in my opinion was the single greatest mistake Wikipedia ever made: according de facto notabiity to every Tom, Dick, and Harry who has kicked a leather ball along a 100 m field ;) Results below. Cheers, --Kudpung (talk) 22:17, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

1. Kittipong Loon-jak OK PROD removed
2. Rapeepan Pulsawat OK PROD removed
3. Jiraniti Thalangjit OK PROD removed
4. Nithichai Chamchoi OK PROD removed
5. Narasak Kiengkrodklang OK (aka Sak King Nara) PROD removed
6. Wissanusak Kaewreang not currently listed at Buriram FC no translate - ask creator of article & team article, or ask WP:FOOTY
7. Nitipong Limsuwan not currently listed at Muangthong United F.C. no translate - ask creator of article & team article, or ask WP:FOOTY
8. Narong Prom-on not currently listed at Samut Songkhram F.C. mentioned in various Thai footy blogs - ask creator of article & team article, or ask WP:FOOTY
9. Niphon Phanporm no Thai translit. Not listed in given FC in en.Wiki
10. Patipat Rorbru not currently listed at Samut Songkhram F.C. - ask creator of article & team article, or ask WP:FOOTY
11. Prasert Choei-Taisong no Thai translit. not currently listed at Samut Songkhram F.C. - ask creator of article & team article, or ask WP:FOOTY
12. Jarupong Sangpong no Thai translit. not currently listed at Buriram F.C. - ask creator of article & team article, or ask WP:FOOTY
13. Sarawut Treephan see: http://th.wikipedia.org/wiki/สโมสรฟุตบอลกรุงเทพคริสเตียน Bangkok Sports Club.
14. Anusorn Srichaluang see: th.wikipedia.org/wiki/อนุสรณ์_ศรีชาหลวง (Thai article unreferenced)
15. Supakit Jinajai listed as captain at Buriram F.C. check http://www.buriramfc.com/_home.php but we have no Thai translit.
16. [Jakkrit Thammasan] listed at F.C. Phuket but official website is down - ask creator of article & team article, or ask WP:FOOTY
17. Thana Punprakon no Thai translit. not currently listed at Muangthong United F.C. - ask creator of article & team article, or ask WP:FOOTY
18. Jakapong Yaito no Thai translit. not currently listed at Buriram PEA F.C. - ask creator of article & team article, or ask WP:FOOTY

Thank you. That was indeed above and beyond the call of duty. Hallucegenia (talk) 08:41, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank You

		The Rosetta Barnstar
		For translating and advising on the Thai Footballers URBLPS from October 2008.Plad2 (talk) 08:04, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

And just to chime in, I'd like to add a "thank you" cluster to this barnstar. Your efforts were and are very appreciated! --j⚛e decker^talk 17:31, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Re my edit on '*Mao's Great Famine: The History of China's Most Devastating Catastrophe, 1958-62'

If you look at what I did, you will see that what I added was not 'a comment', but a template noting that the article appeared to contain a clear copyright violation. This was done entirely in accord with Wikipedia policy, as I understand it. AndyTheGrump (talk) 13:07, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Template:Infobox UK school

Hi. Thought you might be interested in this: Template_talk:Infobox_UK_school#Unnecessary_parameters.3F. Thanks! Mhiji (talk) 00:08, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Schools

Hi Storye book. Please bear with me if you are already aware of this. In early September changes were made to an infobox template that affected the display of hundreds of school crests/logos in the UK schools infobox. This is now being taken care of and you may find the discussions on this page interesting: Template talk:Infobox UK school, do however leave a message here or here if you come across any that are still not displaying correctly.
If you are still actively interested in schools and and are not already a member, and would like to help out on school pages and school templates, you may wish to consider joining the WP:WPSCHOOLS project where you can also stay abreast of developments by adding its talk page to your watchlist. Happy editing!--Kudpung (talk) 03:34, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Kudpung. Thanks for remembering my interest. Yes I'm a retired teacher, among other things, but schools as such are not my primary interest. I am involved in researching certain school buildings and buildings on school sites, though. If Wiki needs me to help in that area, I'll do my best, but I don't think I'll be useful in an educational project group. Cheers and thanks again.--Storye book (talk) 11:09, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Kudpung. You have new messages at Mhiji's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Re: Schools

Presumably you are referring to the changes I made to the template. Yup, I was aware of those :) Sorry, I have only a passing interest in schools, but I do quite a lot of template and bot work; feel free to leave specific actionable call-to-arms on my talk page and I'll be sure to give them a look. Otherwise, my interests are a bit too vague and my time just a tad too limited to be of much use, I'm afraid. - Jarry1250 ^{[Who? Discuss.]} 19:23, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Re: Schools

Presumably you are referring to the changes I made to the template. Yup, I was aware of those :) Sorry, I have only a passing interest in schools, but I do quite a lot of template and bot work; feel free to leave specific actionable call-to-arms on my talk page and I'll be sure to give them a look. Otherwise, my interests are a bit too vague and my time just a tad too limited to be of much use, I'm afraid. - Jarry1250 ^{[Who? Discuss.]} 19:26, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Michael Wainer (MIKE 13) - Major Label, Platinum music producer signed to LL Cool J and his Boomdizzle/CBS music.

With reference to Michael Wainer's (MIKE 13)'s possible deletion. MIKE 13 has produced 3 platinum singles, has composed/produced music for the #1 scripted show in the United States, NCIS as well as True Blood and NCIS:LA all while signed to and performing with entertainment icon LL Cool J. (as referenced by a televised performance at PetCo Pk (39, 000 ppl) in San Diego on major television network CBS. The link can be found between the article music mogul and possibly the most revered and respected man in modern music, Russell Simmons, ran on his personal website, globalgrind.com where he cites MIKE 13 as one of the most brilliant young producers in the business...Mr. Wainer is also featured on LL Cool J's personal website, boomdizzle.com as an "ALL Star" and is posted alongside the national television/in store and internet commercial campaign which MIKE 13 composed, produced and appeared in bearing both the LL Cool J trademarked logo and the SEARS trademarked logo.

Currently Mr. Wainer is composing the theme song for a newly developed CBS series and collaborating with fellow producer, Timbaland and recording artist Justin Timberlake on three new singles to be released in early 2011 in a collaborative effort btwn LL Cool J's label and Timerlake's Jive Records.

A simple email to Wainer's management Violator Mgmt, google search or comtact with Wainers Performing Licensing Society, BMI, will bear the burden of notability.

A 25 year old man, under the wing of LL Cool J with the support of Russell Simmons produces music which has sold over 3 million units worldwide, writes and produces for the # 1 show on television as well as many others and has written, produced and actually appeared in a national commercial marketing campaign side by side with retail giant SEARS and grammy award winning, emmy nominated LL Cool J....

We here at CBS records Public Relations feel that there are many less qualified who walk the halls of wiki...short of a grammy, there is virtually nothing MIKE 13 - Michael Wainer has yet to accomplish.

We appreciate your time and understanding and thank you for leaving the page intact. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Boomdizzle13 (talk • contribs) 06:13, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi, please read my talk page header and follow the links. As regards an article someone wrote about Michael Wainer, I'm afraid I cannot comment here as other Wikipedia editors have opened an enquiry at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Wainer (MIKE 13) where a community decision will be taken to decline or accept the article for inclusion in the encyclopedia. In the meantime, according to our rules, unsourced claims have been removed from the article; this does not mean however, that the remaining items in the article have met with approval of Wikipedia. Thank you.Kudpung (talk) 06:36, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Roger Stevens

Hi - I've added another reference from The Poetry Society. As you can hopefully see his work includes over 200 items with broadcast on a UK national radio station. Does that help?Poetfellow (talk) 11:00, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Poetfellow, we have absolutely nothing against the subject of your article, and it's quite possible that he's notable enough for an entry in the Wikipedia. However, the problem is, that it must be proven because verifiability , not truth, is the motto, philosophy, and policy of Wikipedia. That means we need referenrces to articles in the mainstream press, or TV documentaries, dedicated to him; just a list of links to things he has done is not enough. The page hasn't been tagged for deletion yet, but you'll have to find some references soon. To find out if the references are the kind of thing Wikipedia needs, do please take the time to read up on the polices, they can explain thing better than I can. Here are some links to things you need to know: WP:RS, WP:V WP:BIO, WP:NOTABILITY, and of course, WP:COI. --Kudpung (talk) 11:16, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Kupung. Thankyou for those links, and I'm sure I can find some reliable references (although I would think the poetry society reference should be good - it's third party and a reliable source). I'm confused about you rlink to confilcts of interest - as you can see I've been listed poets in the past and (amazingly) remembered my account password when perusinf wikipedia this morning. I'm not related to any of these people and have nothing to do with poetry, so there's no conflict that I am aware of. Thanks again for the handy tips and support.Poetfellow (talk) 13:15, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

HAPPY HOLIDAYS

HAPPY HOLIDAYS ! Wishing you and yours a very peaceful and joyous holiday season Mlpearc

Schools list

Hello, Kudpung. You have new messages at Keith D's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Just in case you have not spotted the list you wanted. Keith D (talk) 00:17, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the support to merge the Acomb Primary School article into Acomb. However, i have to hold my hands up and say i had forgotten to amend my comment on the discussion page. After looking up the Local Council information, the old school is no longer in Acomb, but has moved to new buildings in nearby Holgate. So not only is the information in the wrong article, it is also no longer accurate information. I will amend the Acomb article in due course. Sorry.Rimmer1993 (talk) 22:39, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

No problems. Leave it to me - I know what to do, otherwise we have to go through an RfA process :)--Kudpung (talk) 23:02, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Wikibin

You tagged The Warrior Heir for deletion as a copyvio of http://www.wikibin.org/articles/the-heir-chronicles-2.html. While it was a copyvio, that website wasn't the one whose copyright was infringed upon: everything on Wikibin comes from deleted Wikipedia articles (in this case, The Heir Chronicles), which in this case was CC-by-sa licensed by dint of being created here on Wikipedia, so those whose copyright was infringed are the original authors of the Wikipedia article. Whenever you find something copied from Wikibin, you can tag the article for deletion with {{db-repost}} (with the title of the Wikibin page as the WP article that's been reposted), for that will likely make the deleting admin's job easier and quicker. As well, that way, the deleting admin won't be likely to say "Not a copyvio, just taken from a Wikipedia mirror". Thanks for your help! Nyttend (talk) 12:10, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Re: Worcestershire

Bromsgrove

Malvern

Pershore

Redditch

Stourport-on-Severn

Worcester

class=notpageimage|

Worcestershire

One way to add multiple red dots to the map is to use {{location map+}} amd {{location map~}}. For example, the wiki-markup below produces the map to the right (showing Bromsgrove, Malvern, Pershore, Redditch, Stourport-on-Severn and Worcester).

As for "correcting the ones already on it", I'm not sure what you mean: Do you mean incorrect red dots on a use somewhere, or something wrong on the background map itself? If the first, where is the problem? In that case, it may be the coordinates are incorrect?. If the second, what's wrong? I'd need to fix the SVG file in that instance.--Nilfanion (talk) 11:23, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

{{location map+|United Kingdom Worcestershire|float=right|width=350
|caption=Worcestershire
|places=
{{location map~|United Kingdom Worcestershire|label=[[Bromsgrove]]|background=white|lat=52.3353|long=-2.0579}}
{{location map~|United Kingdom Worcestershire|label=[[Malvern]]|background=white|lat=52.1077|long=-2.3250}}
{{location map~|United Kingdom Worcestershire|label=[[Pershore]]|background=white|lat=52.10780|long=-2.08172}}
{{location map~|United Kingdom Worcestershire|label=[[Redditch]]|background=white|lat=52.305|long=-1.943}}
{{location map~|United Kingdom Worcestershire|label=[[Stourport-on-Severn]]|background=white|lat=52.34182|long=-2.27624}}
{{location map~|United Kingdom Worcestershire|label=[[Worcester]]|background=white|lat=52.19123|long=-2.22231}}
}}

Thanks for your extraordinarily quick and well detailed explanation. You'll be relieved to know that there's nothing wrong with the svg map itself. I just wanted to change Great Malvern to Malvern, which you have already done, and add some more of the largest towns, which I see you have also done except for Droitwich, Stourport-on-Severn, Tenbury Wells, and Bewdley. Also, is it possible to reduce the font size to avoid overlapping of the labels? Thanks for all your help.Kudpung (talk) 11:39, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Good to know - on first bit. I just picked the district HQs for the map as I'm not sure what you'd need exactly, but I'm sure you get the idea to change to the ones you need.

To tweak with the labels, see the documentation at {{location map+}}. The most relevant ones are label_size can be used to alter the label text, marksize the size of the dots and position to put the label to top, bottom, left or right of the marker.

I've adapted the map above to show tweaked parameters for Redditch, making the label larger in this case. Note wiki-markup works as normal in the labels too (such as bold). Hopefully that gives all the info for you to produce what you need.--Nilfanion (talk) 11:53, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much indeed again - it's also taught me pra&ctically all I need to know now about thse kind of maps. Cheers.Kudpung (talk) 11:55, 29 November 2010 (UTC)