User talk:Kudpung/Archive Dec 2013

Disjunctive sequel

Hello. It is me who posted the article "disjunctive sequel" on wordpress.com I tried repearedly to delete it from there but could not as i did not really like it posted there due to visibility issue.If you allow me i can post it again. I assure you it is my own written article and is safe on my computer.

Thanks,

Shakir Mumtaz — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shakirmwp (talk • contribs) 06:28, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Sorry, but that's why unfortunately you cannot use it here. You must release a copyright to be able to use it on Wikipedia. There are also other reasons why it does not comply with Wikipedia criteria: It appears to be an essay or your your own original research, and it has no Reliable sources references to support its content. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:37, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Yorktown High School

Could you look again at the article you previously reviewed? I have made some adjustments to it. Indyjrg1762 (talk) 06:40, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Look OK. It's very short though. Please carry out the same checks for all th school articles you created recently. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:49, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Can you please also put the School project banner on the talk pages. Thanks. Copy and paste this:

{{WikiProject Schools |class=stub |importance=low |needs-infobox=no}}

Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:20, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Thailand Conflict?

Hi there Kudpung. Are you currently living in Thailand? I have heard recently about the government conflict in Thailand. Can I know more about what happened in Thailand? I am going to Thailand in December. I wonder if I have to cancel my trip to Thailand if this conflict were to continue. I am going to Bangkok on the end of December. Can I also ask if you are safe in Thailand? JianhuiMobile ^talk 13:50, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

I have been living in Thailand for nearly 15 years. There have been many protests of this kind, and even a military coup. Apart from when the demonstrators squatted the airport a couple of years ago and closed it down for several days, generally the lives of tourists and normal citizens are unaffected.Read the news is the best thing to do, but remember that even the established press often blows things out of proportion - newspapers are sold on drama. I am leaving in a few moments (Its midnight here) to drive 500 miles to Bangkok for a business meeting in the morning. There will be many police road blocks that will slow my journey down, but I'm not expecting anything more than that. It will all be over in a day or two.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:16, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

So we cannot wear red shirts in Thailand because the anti-government supporters will think we are government supporters? JianhuiMobile ^talk 04:07, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Back already from a 1,000 mile round trip to angkok. part from a few police checks on the highways, nothing else noticed. Red shirt? Crap. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:50, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

That's all? I heard so much about Thailand in the news, saying about anti-government supporters breaking into the parliament and whatsoever. I actually read the link you gave me. It says about anti-government supporters bombing a bus that have people wearing red shirts and all those. So is it quite safe there? JianhuiMobile ^talk 15:55, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

No more dangerous than than the school shootings that happen in America. Would you prefer to stop going to school? Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:08, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

No? Why did you ask such questions? That shooting happened in Connecticut and not even in Thailand. JianhuiMobile ^talk 16:20, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Connecticut? I didn't mention it - my comment was in the plural - See this page to get up to speed. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:36, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Lol did not see that at first. :P if there is any latest news about Thailand, please let me know here. By the way, I finally know the feeling of being pestered and harrassed. I got harassed by someone on Wikia... Jianhui67 ^{talk★contribs} 17:13, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:BedCollLogo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:BedCollLogo.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Werieth (talk) 19:42, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Pleae check again. AFAICS, thisfile is covered by an approriate free-use declarationand is currently in usde on a Wikipedia article. let me know if this is incorrect<; Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:53, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

The file was re-added here about 4 hours after I left this message. Werieth (talk) 15:02, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Good. I have removed the deletion tag. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:14, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Please restore

Please restore Bochukov into my user space. Staszek Lem (talk) 18:22, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Request

I think User:173.11.193.217 is almost certainly evading the block you imposed on User:50.8.37.64. Could you please look into this? Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 21:14, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Pretty obvious. Identical street location. Blocked. Thanks for the heads up. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:04, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Editor retention

Regarding your comment: Dennis attempted through moral suasion to guide discussion towards improving the general editing atmosphere, rather than discussing how to deal with specific cases. However, even while he was still actively editing, there was an increasing trend of editors coming to comment on particular incidents, and with many of the regulars joining in, there wasn't much anyone could do to keep conversation focused on addressing broader issues. In the end, for better or worse, whoever shows up to discuss topics on any given page will end up talking about whatever interests them. isaacl (talk) 03:35, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

That is true and it's one of the reasons why those seriously interested in the broader issues and doing something about them finally end up taking less interest in such projects. We have the same problem at WT:RfA for years, and when we gave them a compplete set of project pages for discussing specific issues, either they couldn't be bothered to read all the stats and other info we supplied, all they did was either complain about their own personal problems, or simply heckle from the sidelines with PA at those who were working hard to keep the project pages on track. They did this so successfully that we finally gave up after hundreds of hours of hard work. That's Wikilife for you... 04:55, 3 December 2013 (UTC)04:55, 3 December 2013 (UTC)~~

Lee Foss

Hi - I have made an edit to the page you have flagged up for deletion. In response to your comments I have attempted to use more reliable sources, or, if citing an interview, make it clear that it is a quote from the artist.

As for the other sources I have used, I think it is fair to say that they are reliable. Discogs is a legitimate database which lists the discography of any artist (it is the wikipedia of vinyl records). Resident Advisor is the biggest online electronic music magazine in the UK and most of Europe. Each source cited in the article contains reliable information which verifies any point made in the article.

Please could you reconsider your proposal, or advise on any further changes that need to be made.

Thanks

Will — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wkathomson (talk • contribs) 13:42, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

There are a couple of things you can do (click these blue links): Please see WP:MUSICBIO to see the minimum requirements for notability. See WP:RS for what we consider to be reliable sources, then ask at the Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard for verification of your sources. In general, listings alone do not assert notability, just as any bit-part actor will have an entry somewhere on the IMDB. Interviews contain material supplied by the subject, so they are not reliable, pretty much in the same way as a subject's own web site - see WP:Primary. Wikipedia is the encylopedia anyone can edit or for which anyone can create an article, but unfortunately, getting past all the actual requirements is not so easy. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:56, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your response, I can give you three examples of Lee meeting the requirements for notability:

• 1. Has been a featured subject of a substantial broadcast segment across a national radio or TV network (Lee did performed an essential mix on Radio 1 for Pete Tong - http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01np997)
• 2. Has won or placed in a major music competition. (Placed no. 18 in RA DJ polls, a major / prestigious competition in dance music - http://www.residentadvisor.net/feature.aspx?1252)
• 3. Has received non-trivial coverage in independent reliable sources of an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one sovereign country. (Review of Argentinian tour - http://www.residentadvisor.net/review-view.aspx?id=12803)

As for the sources used - I have seen plenty of wikipedia pages which contain quotes and citations from interviews with the subject of the article. Surely so long as these are clearly shown to be quotations, and thus presented as non-factual, they can be used? (N.B. In this particular case the information cited is not in any way biased or self-promotion, it is simply stating that Lee met his future DJ/business partner in Ibiza in 2001, a piece of information that, while true, is limited to interviews with the subject.

In other areas of the article, where listings are referenced, this is only used to verify the information on the page - i.e Lee released on X label (with a reference to Discogs which clearly states that he has indeed released on label X) or Lee has played at X club (with a reference to Lee's past event listings on Resident Advisor to verify that he has played at X club). I assure you that these references are not to establish notability (as I have mentioned above, he meets at least three of the notability criteria anyway), but instead to provide information to anyone who turns to Wikipedia to find information on Lee.

With all this in mind, I think that you should reassess your position with respect to this page. I have read you're essay on deletion and completely understand you're qualms with any second-rate musician / actor attempting to use Wikipedia as a form of self promotion, all I can say is that this is not the case with this particular page - Lee legitimately falls into the category of musicians who are deemed notable enough to have wikipedia pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wkathomson (talk • contribs) 13:47, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

If you feel that you have adequately addressed the questions of notability - and that's what it's all about - you are perfectly at liberty to remove the PROD remplate yourself. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:54, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your understanding

Re: New Page Patrol

Hello, Kudpung. You have new messages at Br100x's talk page.
Message added 03:17, 4 December 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Please restore

Please restore Bochukov into my user space. Staszek Lem (talk) 18:22, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Please do not reformat my talk page comments

You should be aware that [this] is not done. Please refrain from doing this in the future. Thanks, Celestra (talk) 05:39, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

If you have been around since the Eisenhower administration, it's time you learned some AGF. There are better ways of pointing out innocent slips of a mouse. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:36, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

I do assume good faith. I do not think you reformatted my comments for some nefarious reason, you simply did a thing which you should not do and I pointed it out politely. I would expect a reply of "sorry, just an innocent slip of the mouse" instead of accusations and deflections. Please simply accept the reminder and be more careful in the future. Thanks, Celestra (talk) 16:29, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

I would expect a less caustic form of communication - in both your messages above. I hope you're not like this with newbies. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:04, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Caustic? In what way? I think you need to step back and read this exchange objectively or ask someone else's opinion. I have been polite and focused on the issue throughout. Your responses have been impolite, bordering on rude, deflections ignoring the issue and attacking the messenger. A more reasonable response to polite criticism is to accept the input graciously and move on. No matter. I see this is leading nowhere, so this will be my last reply. Sincerely, Celestra (talk) 19:13, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 December 2013

• Traffic report: Kennedy shot Who

• Recent research: Reciprocity and reputation motivate contributions to Wikipedia; indigenous knowledge and "cultural imperialism"; how PR people see Wikipedia

• Discussion report: Musical scores, diversity conference, Module:Convert, and more

• News and notes: One decade of Wikisource; FDC recommendations raise serious questions

• WikiProject report: Electronic Apple Pie

• Featured content: F*&!

• Arbitration report: Ottoman Empire–Turkey naming dispute case opens; New discretionary sanctions draft proposal available for review

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 06:46, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

New Page Patrol

"I have asked you to stop patrolling and tagging new pages until you have more experience. Please stop now. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:42, 5 December 2013 (UTC)" I don't understand you said i can't patrol till i get experience! if that is the case why patrolling option becomes available when i visit a page?? is it a bug or what? if experience is MUST then Wikipedia must disable this option till EXPERIENCE is achieved?? secondly — Preceding unsigned comment added by OWAIS NAEEM (talk • contribs) 11:41, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes, in a way it's a bug because we haven't got around to devising a way to prevent inexperienced users from using the patrolling interface. Nevertheless, we politely ask inexperienced users who make a lot of errors to wait until they have read all the instructions and have demonstrated through other forms of editing that they have sufficient knowledge of policies and use of talk pages. Please see WP:NPP for more information. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:48, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

pretty strange however i would request u to kindly show me where or which page among all that i have tagged was incorrect, and i shouldn't have tagged them? i would really appreciate!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by OWAIS NAEEM (talk • contribs) 16:44, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

I think you really need to start by doing some normal basic editing , learning how to format, and how to use talk pages, and how to sign your posts, and how to communicate in standard English. As I said, you are a very long way off being ready to carry out maintenance tasks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:51, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

thanks for advice however I still don't see any evidence of wrong tagging that i might have done according to your STANDARDS!! anyway cheers..... — Preceding unsigned comment added by OWAIS NAEEM (talk • contribs) 16:58, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

For the record, I showed OWAIS NAEEM several examples of wrong tagging here. Cavarrone 09:59, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for doing that. Although I don't doubt for a moment that OWAIS NAEEM has been patrolling with the very best of intentions, his tagging falls far below par for an acceptable error rate. May I suggest that if you have the time, you take him through a course at WP:NPRSCHOOL. I would do it myself, but unfortunately I don't have the time. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:39, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

He surely needs some guidance, but sadly I have not too much time for doing that (better to say, it would would take away some precious time from my primary interest here, ie creation of new articles/expansion of others). Furthermore, I have zero experience in helding this kind of courses, nor I have too much direct expertise in patrolling (while I am probably a quite experienced editor, I was never really interested in doing it). Cavarrone 10:23, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Kudpung. You have new messages at Talk:Rehmat Farrukhabadi.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 13:36, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Guttman Community College

Another advertising piece full of links to disambiguation pages: Guttman Community College. I guess you want to improve it before I AfD it. 24 hours enough? The Banner talk 13:56, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Why me? Do it yourself if you think it can be fixed - it's not as if you don't know how to. We're all here to build an encyclopedia, not to demolish it, though I'd love to take a sledgehammer to some restaurants. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:11, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

You are one of the lads fighting for every school... The Banner talk 14:41, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Actually, I'm not. I'm one of the people fighting to uphold policies, guidelines, and prcedents, but I would be quite happy to abide by any changes too. Trying to force changes through the back door by wasting people's time at AfD is not the way to go, but over the years you've also lost every debate you started or participated in to get them changed. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:52, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Rehmat Farrukhabadi

I have removed your PROD on Rehmat Farrukhabadi. He is not a living person, so PROD BLP does not apply. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 14:33, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I missed that. Even I'm not perfect ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:37, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

I always thought that you are a perfectionist. So I'm wrong. :/ JianhuiMobile ^talk 14:55, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

foreign language

There was a time when we posted translator results to article talk. Do we still do that? Dlohcierekim 15:03, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) People do, sometimes. An easier way is to specify the language in the {{notenglish}} template, e.g. {{notenglish|Spanish}}, when the expanded template provides a link to a Google translation. JohnCD (talk) 15:41, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict):Good heavens, no! Our effort is to keep the crap out of our encyclopedia, not put it in. Translations should always be worked on away from mainspace. True translation is an art and a talent and even we bilingual professionals have to work hard to get it right. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:47, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Righty-o. i use the translators to get a sense-- I'm good at picking out notability from the chaff-- so I've an idea of what I'm dealing with. Somewhere along the way I apply the not english template, usually after I've decided not to speedy. Dlohcierekim 15:57, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Kudpung: true, but I don't think the suggestion is to leave the foreign-language article in with a machine translation on the talk page. The point of the Google link provided by specifying the language in the notenglish template is that it provides an admin patrolling CSD, or anyone looking at PNT, with a quick way to assess whether the page is something worth translating properly, or just yet another Myspace band or student autobiography to be zapped. JohnCD (talk) 16:02, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) :::Here's a tip: I do a lot of New Page Patrolling, but what we admins generally do instead of deleting pages summarily ourselves, is to tag and let another admin do the actual deletion - it's a kind of fail safe. I do the Google translation, which is usually more than sufficient to get the general sense, and I paste it to the article's talk page so that the deleting admin can see what it's all about. I generally find that the majority of non-English pages can be tagged for deletion or PRODed for some reason or another - but always proceed with caustion ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:05, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Oh, that's what I meant to ask. put a G trans. on talk so others get a gist. I'm also reluctant to single handedly delete and tag instead. I too make too many mistakes. @John, I may not of noticed that feature on the notenglish temp. Dlohcierekim 17:39, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Undated comment

Hi there Kudpung. I noticed you added an undated comment on Voceditenore's talk page. I have dated your comment. I think you wanted to typed 4 tildes but accidentally typed 3 tildes. Thanks. JianhuiMobile ^talk 16:50, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

POssible. Thanks. I'm working rather quickly tonight. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:54, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Okay. I suggest you to slow down a bit because you are making formatting errors here and there. JianhuiMobile ^talk 17:10, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Not in places where it matters. I even get my words mixed up whan I'm talking to people in RL too. That comes from speaking 17 languages. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:18, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Hah! My German is not so good, but when I'm tired, it creeps into my writing. Dlohcierekim 17:34, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

In RL I actually speak far more German than English. been like that for 39 years. The last time I spoke much English was in August at Wikimania in Hong Kong - spoke a lot of other languages there too though. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:41, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

I wonder if you speak Chinese. By the way, I can say you are pro. While I was sleeping, you were still working! Don't tell me you don't even sleep... JianhuiMobile ^talk 01:48, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Not much. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:53, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Not much to sleeping or speaking Chinese? JianhuiMobile ^talk 02:00, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Both. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:53, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Talkback (G13 nom bot)

Hello, Kudpung. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation.
Message added 18:05, 5 December 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hasteur (talk) 18:08, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Assistance Please.

Hello Kudpung,

Ok, so I read through the commentary on the revisions for our Guttman Community College Wiki article and would like some elaboration on a couple of points. For starters, I am unsure how one can say there is "too much detail" when that is the primary goal of an encyclopedia. Secondly, the whole brochure layout, if that is what one wants to call it, is the same for the other community colleges in our area and that is how we put together the outline for this page. If you have any 'constructive criticism' I feel that maybe a little more useful than what it is you stated. When it comes to a neutral point of view, any pointers on which portions should be reevaluated would help us in revamping this article. Also there is this whole disambiguation of links, is this pertaining to the hyperlinks within the page? I was assuming this, so I have been going through my sandbox trying to see what doesn't need to be hyper-linked. Thank you for your time and I look forward to hearing back from you.

Rah neezy (talk) 18:42, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Please see the article talk page - I have put a list of sample Community College articles on it for you to review. Secondly, please see the article's editing history to review the changes made by Voceditenore, a highly experienced user. She has spent at least the past hour on it, and when she's finished you'll see what such an article should look like. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:49, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Thank you for your quick response and I will be looking at the mentioned sections. 128.228.42.252 (talk) 19:25, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:New pages patrol

I apologize in advance for any offense, but your recent edits at this page look like vandalism to me - in fact, I was about to revert them as such when I noticed that you were not only an administrator but in fact one whom I had contacted before. Could you please explain these edits? Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 02:01, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

difs? Dlohcierekim 02:21, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

I reverted. I think someone needs to get more rest. Dlohcierekim 02:23, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

That wasn't vandalism. It was quite deliberate. I removed something about non-English language pages because it partly duplicates a dedicated section lower down. Experience has shown that patrollers thought that was all there was about non-English pages and they were not looking further down. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:51, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Ud? Toddst1 (talk) 02:55, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Thus reverted Dlohcierkim] Dlohcierekim 02:59, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

• 'Update'. Yes, I know it's not a perfect ES, but as nobody else generally takes care of that page which I mostly wrote, I didn't think it would matter. I'll be more explicit in future. It's hardly likely that I would ever do any vandalism, but I am perfectly capable of some rare errors or slips of a mouse. Thanks nevertheless everyone for proving that we do have some vigilant editors. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:02, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Ok. I was concerned that my edit summaries were sometimes cryptic, but... :) Toddst1 (talk) 03:03, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

• My edits have been restored by Staszek Lem. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:09, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Overenthusiastic people at WP:AfC/G13 backlog

Hi Kudpung, can I make a polite suggestion?

I am clear on wikipedia that we should assume good faith and judge people on their ideas and actions, not by the manner in which they epxress them. I am assuming this is because we are a worldwide community, and as a Brit living in Germany, rubbing shoulders with native English speakers from all over I am well aware that ideas of civility differ not just from country to country, region to region or class to class, but from person to person.

That said, I feel you can be at the abrasive end of civil sometimes, very close to the border with uncivil. I know from personal experience that people taking you the wrong way can rankle, and it is hard to swallow your pride and be diplomatic. My own mode of expression can cause problems- I see it as "Grown up, mature, polite and measured", but others can see it as "stuck up, pompous". But a little bit of tact can go a long way to keeping people on side, and keep discussions shorter and more productive. Blaming people for reacting badly, while simultaneously expecting them to cut you slack over your over-directness is a little hypocritical don't you think?

I've stopped short of offering an apology on belalf of the project to the user you offended, because I feel you wouldn't appreciate that. Rankersbo (talk) 09:39, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

How interesting - I spent the first 18 years of my adult life as a Brit living in Germany. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:24, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Well I tried. :( Rankersbo (talk) 14:21, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Nice try, but what you have effectively achieved is to lose AfC of one admin who was doing a huge amount of work in the background to improve it. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:38, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

That's a big shame, although given I was so polite, considerate and compassionate in my approach to you above, there is only one person to blame for this situation, and it isn't me. I actually am aware of all the effort you are putting in, but that doesn't excuse the sort of rudeness you generally dish out. We all have to live by the same standards on wikipedia, we don't get cut extra slack because we're doing great work in front of or behind the scenes.

This is all because of an incident you caused. Let's be clear on this. It wasn't the fact you raised an issue, because the issue you rasied was perfectly valid. It was the way you raised it. This is the consequense of your actions, I am just the mechanism by which the consequence is returning to you.

It does seems strange that a person who is so excessively free with doling out criticism is so thin skinned when criticism is returned in such a gentle form. I feel sad about the loss to AfC, if indeed you are genuine about what you say. But putting up with the abrasiveness with which you conduct yourself on there is too big a price to pay for the assistance we recieve. Rankersbo (talk) 21:41, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

• (talk page stalker) Rankersbo, I don't agree that your comment here was all that "polite, considerate and compassionate" as you claim. I don't know who this person is that you claim Kudpung has offended, and I don't know why you wouldn't offer an apology on behalf of the project if you truly believe the core issue was a simple language barrier or difference in culture. I have never seen Kudpung not appreciate an attempt to clarify or adjust the tone of a comment where tone or clarity weren't of a nature in which another user could understand. I would be really downtrodden to lose either of you from any part of the project because I know you both do a great deal of things albeit mostly behind the scenes. Anyways, I hope can both shake hands and shake this off. Happy editing! Technical 13 (talk) 21:58, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Essay Writing

Hey there, I am quite perplexed to see the Essay Writing page deleted. I even checked the plagiarism of it on Copyscape and it was 6%. The deletion message says the content I uploaded was similar to that of a pre-existing Essay page. What can I do in order to make sure my Essay Writing page stays? I have spent 2 sleepless nights over its content writing so kindly assist me out as it matters a lot to me.

Regards, Peyton Sawyer a.k.a Sawpey. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sawpey (talk • contribs) 14:36, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi, erring on the side of caution, I simply WP:PRODed the article. Another patroller decided that was not enough and tagged it for WP:Speedy deletion. As a consequence, based on those two opinions of experienced editors, the article was deleted. I appreciate that you possible spent a lot of time researching and writing it, but does also read like WP:Original research. This happens unfortunately to many articles that were created with the best of intentions, but our policies and guidelines have to be strict. What I can suggest is that I offer to WP:Userfy the deleted page to your sandbox where you may wish to work on it with a view to incorporating some of the content into the parent article at Essay. You will need to incorporate inline sources (see: WP:CITE) into the text and add the page numbers of the referenced works. Let me know. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:51, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Tool access

In case you are not already aware of this, Scottywong is in the process of migrating his user search tools from Toolserver over to the Wikimedia Tool Labs. This AfD search tool is the first one to be completed. Best, -- — Keithbob • Talk • 18:23, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the update. Scottywong's tools are some of the most useful on Wikipedia. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:19, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

over zealous tagging

We are all suffering from burnout Dlohcierekim 19:30, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Debasish Chatterjee

Thanks for mentioning it. You see, this person does have 20+ peer-reviewed articles and I provided a link to his publications.--Mishae (talk) 03:24, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Why did you remove the privilege of mine being an auto reviewer? Was it just because of this tiny article?--Mishae (talk) 03:56, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

I was just about to post this to your talk page when I saw you ad posted here. So here is the explanation:

Hi. I'm just letting you know that I have removed the WP:Autopatrolled right from your account. This does not reflect upon the good faith you invest in expanding the encyclopedia, but there are too many issues concerning your created articles. As a consequence I feel they should still be subject to review by New Page Patrollers. For a few examples, please see:

• October 2013 Shirley Gordon (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shirley Gordon)
• October 2013 Ling Chen (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ling Chen)
• October 2013 Jill Lindner (Expired PROD, concern was: Notability. All sources for the article are the subject himself.
• October 2013 Gary Alan Nelson (Expired PROD, concern was: Fails WP:BASIC, sourced only to subject's own website.
• October 2013 Steve Nicklas (Expired PROD, concern was: WP:BASIC, only given source is a WP:PRIMARY blog interview.
• September 2013 Debra Schaumberg (A7: Article about a real person, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject
• September 2013 Victor Zaragoza (Expired PROD, concern was: Does not meet notability guidelines.
• September 2013 Juan Ramírez (soldier) (Expired PROD, concern was: Does not meet notability guidelines.
• and the article above that I have tagged today.

If you believe I have made an error, don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:06, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Well, O.K. I remember it now. What shall I do to return it back? Either way, whenever you will feel that I am ready, fill free to return it. I wasn't using it that much (and I didn't abuse it either), but if I will feel an urge for it, I will let you know... As you have seen, I used only on user talkpages.--Mishae (talk) 04:26, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Well, technically, you didn't use it at all; autopatrolled isn't something you use. All it does is take your newly-created articles out of the new page patrollers' queue. Not having it just means that your new article will be available for patrollers to look at, that's all. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 04:33, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Don't worry about it too much - Autopatrolled is not an award of merit or anything like that, it's just a practical thing concerning New Page Patrol. In fact, not having it will enable you to receive more feedback about your arcticles with less risk of them being deleted before you can do something about it. The main thing is to provide plenty of reliable sources with your creations that clearly assert notability. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:32, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I know. And with some recent articles I did provided some sources. Problem is, (I do agree on a not notable soldier and photographers), but with the last one I gave it to @Randykitty: to find an h-index right before you removed the privilege. The problem with me is that I have too much fields that are of my interest... Like, for example physicians are my weakness. I currently started writing on some chess players and so far I am doing good. Yes, you will say that I provide only one reference as you can see here, but the problem is is that there is a lot of score board sites and might be only one bio site.--Mishae (talk) 04:40, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

KCK Blue Devils

Hello,

Thanks for the notification. I was just creating the page to get it started. I know that it doesn't have much, as I do not know much about the athletic teams there, and their website doesn't have much on it either. (What you see on the page is basically what they a have on their page.) Plus, I didn't take the time to research the team, just went off of their website. Would you want to give a couple of ideas to add to the page? I'll continue to work on it. Thanks, again! Corkythehornetfan (talk) 04:03, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Generally only major professional league teams are considered notable. College teams must (individually) have sufficiently excelled to meet the notability criteria at WP:GNG and WP:ORG and the article must be referenced to the reliable independent sources. Hope this helps. If I am wrong about the status of this team, please let me know. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:11, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Corkythehornetfan (talk) 04:13, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Please restore (Why are you ignoring my request?)

Please restore Bochukov into my user space. Staszek Lem (talk) 19:26, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi. I apologise for missing your request. Unfortunately it's a dab page with only one entry that has no links to anywhere and therefore has no use on Wikipedia. I see no compelling reason to restore it. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:32, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

To exercise a courtesy by addressing request into my user space should be a reason compelling enough among colleagues. At least you could ask why I would want it, and I would answer that the inline comments of the page you deleted indicate how this page may be expanded. Staszek Lem (talk) 02:33, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

So? Staszek Lem (talk) 19:10, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Quite to the contrary, I feel it can certainly be expected, whether here on Wikipedia or in real life, for someone asking for something to offer an explanation why they want it. At least it's usual and polite in the English speaking world. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:03, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Well, on Wikipedia it is quite obvious, isn't it? We are working on encyclopedia, right? Good bye. Staszek Lem (talk) 16:42, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Geez Lem, you're acting like this over the phrase "Bochukov feminine: Bochukova (Бочуков, Бочукова) is a Bulgarian-language surname."? As Kudpung noted, that was not worth undeleting whatsoever, and you're smart enough to havenever requested the undeletion/userfication of something that pathetically minor and easily re-creatable by yourself. Wow, we're a commununity working on an encyclopedia - remember that ES&L 11:51, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Wow, It is extremely sad the admin community has such a demeaning attitude to a colleague. I explained my reason. Can you read carefully please what other person wrote before throwing shit onto him? Staszek Lem (talk) 17:46, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Fortunately it took me less than two weeks to find an admin who is not on a power trip. This is why I am "acting over", if some curiosity left in you. Staszek Lem (talk) 17:54, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

"Power trip"? In understand now why nobody responds to your requests - you just insult them. Nobody was demeaning to you ... and even if they were, the wise person doesn't respond in kind ES&L 17:57, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

I am not insulting you: I am accusing you of abuse of power. I am not a random vandal that you made me post six requests in three different places until someone bothered to assume that I am not a complete idiot. I don't think you can create a friendful "commununity working on an encyclopedia" if you make a person kiss your ass six times before addressing an extremely simple request. Anyway, good thing to know who is who; I will not bother you two with requests any more. Staszek Lem (talk) 18:12, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Again, you're misreading, AND insulting. Nobody has attacked you. Nobody is abusing power, but accusing people of abusing it when they clearly are not is an insult. Nobody was asking you to kiss anyone's ass anywhere. All that anyone has ever said is (and it's been said in a clear and friendly manner) is that what was in the deleted article was not worth undeleting due to its limited content. It was that simple, and no assult or insult to you. ES&L 12:02, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

• Is there any chance that you two could just... you know... stop? Staszek Lem has the page undeleted. Neither of you are likely to change the other's opinion. If you carry on, you're both likely to end up having things backfire on yourselves, so just - walk away. Worm^TT(talk) 12:11, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

My apologies

I apologize for editing your post on Beeblebrox's talk page, as I did not mean to cause offense to you. I have thus reverted my edit as well as written a note to myself there. Epicgenius (talk) 03:35, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Because you love horrible school-articles...

... so here is one for you to work on: PLK Vicwood KT Chong Sixth Form College. Have fun. ow, I have already halved the article. The Banner talk 20:23, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

I don't actually 'love' working on horrible school articles - that last thing I like doing on Wikipedia is cleaning up after lazy editors., and I don't even do it systematically; However, I fully agree that any content that is not approved by our guideliens, especially those at WP:WPSCH/AG should be removed. Thank you for your work. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:11, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

List of Old Xaverians

Hi Kudpung. I saw you putting the linkrot tag to that article. I have fixed some of the bare URLs. Unfortunately, I cannot fix pdf links bare URLs using Reflinks. Jianhui67 ^{talk★contribs} 11:12, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:33, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

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

AfC discussion.

You wanted to get in contact with me, and a good friend of both of us(DGG) reminded me that I needed to get back in contact. Give a hollar when you might be interested in having a sit down about AfC. Hasteur (talk) 02:18, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I've been meaning to have a chat about an idea I have. Any time you're ready really. Note however that my enthusiasm for AfC has waned considerably since a couple of editors chose to attack me over my work there for no reason at all. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:36, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 December 2013

• Traffic report: Deaths of Mandela, Walker top the list

• In the media: Edward Snowden a "hero"; German Wikipedia court ruling

• News and notes: Wiki Loves Monuments—winners announced

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Wine

• Interview: Wikipedia's first Featured Article centurion

• Featured content: Viewer discretion advised

• Technology report: MediaWiki 1.22 released

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 04:22, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Regarding Deletion of Indian Army Fans page

Hello, Dear Kudpung,I was working on a wikipedia page named "Indian Army Fans" yesterday,even before I complete editing,formatting & adding content to the page,I got a notice that page is promotional and not an encyclopadic article and will be removed.Before I could do anything it got removed.

Excessive deteil

What is Indian Army Fans? Indian Army Fans is a community located in India spreaded in different cities.It started as a facebook page to show patriotism towards nation,but afterwards as numbers of members started increasing it came into existence in real life.Not only in virtual but Indian Army Fans also started working in Real world. We make people aware about Indian Armed forces,sacrifice of soldiers who laid down their lives for them,motivate youth to join Indian Defence.Keep them aware about latest news and current affairs of Indian Armed Force to increase their interest in Indian defence. How : ? As I mentioned Indian Army Fans is a patriotic community,all of our work is related patriotism or similar.The name itself contains "Indian Army".We work for rights of soldiers of Indian Armed Forces,We support them through several charity events,stage events,public events & fight for their rights through street protests. Every year Kargil Vijay Divas,(26th July) is celebrated in different cities by our volunteers to pay a tribute to Martyrs & Soldiers of Kargil war. In 2012 a small run was organized by Indian Army Fans on occasion of Kargil Vijay Diwas in Delhi,named "Run Delhi Run" & a tree plantation ceremony was also held. After the Mumbai Attacks in 2008,Indian Army Fans also started organizing events across the country to pay tribute to the martyrs and victims of 26/11 attacks through candle light marches & vigils. From Last two years Indian Army Fans has also started doing charity events such as warm cloth distribution in winters,giving food to the needy ones & also providing school kits to kids lives in orphanage. This year Indian Army Fans has also started organizing bike rides in honor of Soldiers. First bike expedition took place this year on occasion of Kargil Vijay Diwas,the riders of Indian Army Fans ridden from Delhi to Kargil(#Where the Indo-Pak Kargil War took place in 1999) to pay a tribute to warriors. Second tour was organized from Delhi To Wagah border. Currently Third tour is being organized and will take place at the end of the month where our riders will ride from Delhi on 25th december to Kutch,Gujarat.covering many places of Rajasthan including Longewala(#Battle of Longewala,1971 Indo-Pak War). All of our events mostly dedicated to Indian Armed Forces,and on regular bases across the country in different cities. The core team of our community is based in Delhi,India other teams based in Jaipur,Banglore,Hyderabad,Pune,Chandigarh,Ahmedabad & Also volunteers across in almost each major city of India. We operate India's largest Defence fan Page "Indian Army Fans".Our posts are mostly related Defence,Current affairs,Political & non political issues to keep citizen of India aware about everything,make them taking interest in such things. We keep them updated about Wars of India,Soldiers & their sacrifices & Indian Defence through regular posting. Why "Indian Army Fans" wants to be on wikipedia : We want to take "Indian Army Fans" initiative to each citizen of India,day by day people's interest in Nation's defence is decreasing.They lack of proper knowledge and information regarding Indian Armed Forces.Through our community we want to spread that knowledge. Indian Army Fans is unique community of its kind,there is no community in India which operates at this large scale.but considering population of India its too small.We want to reach as many as people we can,make them aware about Indian Army Fans,what it is,why it is. How they can also be a part of community and show their dedication towards India & Armed forces. As Indian Army Fans is fastest growing & largest defence page on facebook many other people have created pages/groups of same name & some also got fooled by imposters.It's needed to be stopped.We want to create an authenticated source,where people can differentiate Original from fake. I'm attaching some of our event photo albums which are posted on facebook,kindly refer to that. 26/11 Tribute : Chandigarh  : Agra  : Ahmedabad  : Surat  : Delhi 26/7 Kargil Vijay Diwas Celebration : Mumbai  : Chandigarh  : Banglore  : Hyderabad  : Jaipur Bike Expedition : Delhi to Kargil  : Ride to Wagah border  : Third Bike Ride Teaser Charity Events  : Diwali Celebration  : Donate a smile  : Vriddhashram (Old age home)  : Blood Donation Camp Honring Sacrifice : Visit to Village of Warrior  : Saluting Sacrifice  : Inquilaab Zindabaad : Saluting Freedom Fighters  : Honor the Fallen  : Salute a Martyr Street Protest  : Team protesting at India Gate  : Hunger strike

"various news agencies have covered our events and published." Dhruvil Dave. User_talk:Dhruveel 08:44, 12 December 2013‎ (UTC).

Hi Kudpung, A7 was prolly a goof, if these non-facebook sources pass scrutiny. As for the G11, suggest pushing to AfC for improvement, rather than deletion before the editor has a chance to explain.

p.s. Special:Contributions/Dhruveel is empty now that you deleted the page... where can I see the full edit-history, do you know? Danke. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 14:51, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) The cached version is available for a while here. But really, apart from a list of its 20 non-notable "team members", the entire text consisted of

Indian Army Fans is a community organization founded in 2009.Its purpose is to show gratitude towards Indian Armed Forces.From the early beginning Indian Army Fans team has organized various events like Candle Marches,Kargil Vijay Diwas celebration,Charity Events across the country in different cities.Today Indian Army Fans is India's biggest page on facebook dedicated to proud Indian Armed Forces

In my view, that is not a credible claim to notability and a likely candidate for A7. There has been press coverage of a bike ride they organized [1] (listed in the deleted article) + coverage of a race they organized [2]. However, neither of the sources supports the claim that it "is India's biggest page on facebook dedicated to proud Indian Armed Forces". The "sources" listed at User_talk:Vanjagenije#History are all to Facebook pages and the creator specifically states that the reason they want to be on Wikipedia is to publicize their group. Voceditenore (talk) 15:27, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Botak Philippines

Hi Kudpung,

I would like to have the page Botak Philippines put back, I have found a reference http://www.philstar.com/business-life/281478/power-second-wind for the said page for Botak Philippines. I hope this will be enough to reinstate the deleted page else can you help me what else do I need to research so that the page would be reinstated?

Sincerely, Tim — Preceding unsigned comment added by TimC19 (talk • contribs) 11:21, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi Tim. The article consisted of exactly one short sentence. I have userfied it it User:TimC19/Botak Philippines but adding one more reference will certainly not assert sufficient notability for this article to be moved to mainspace. Please see criteria at WP:GNG and WP:ORG, and then perhaps WP:RS. 5sorry about the acronyms but it will all become apparent when you click on them). Please remember to sign your posts. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:00, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Nottingham High School

I've done a bit of sorting- but intend to leave it now- give me a shout if you need further culling help. -- Clem Rutter (talk) 14:35, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

The right stuff?

I am cautiously beginning to consider whether I want to apply for, or ask nomination for, the role of admin. Could you review my editing history and advise me please? At this point I am not asking for a nomination from you, because I want to read up on the expectations, level of activity, etc of the role. Regards --Greenmaven (talk) 23:39, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi. In my opinion you are the right kind of person the community needs as an admin. However, there are some gaps that need to filled in your work to be able to demonstrate your knowledge of policies, admin, and maintenance areas. The community also likes to see regular editing patterns, so having only worked for the last two months this year will probably atract some criticism. I would suggest spacing your edits out such as for example around 500 a month over the next 6 months. Please take a look at WP:Advice for RfA candidates and check out my criteria at User:Kudpung/RfA criteria (don't be put off, they are among the most strict but I do apply swings and roundabout) then let me know how you feel. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:57, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I will do more reading. I will see whether I can edit on a more regular pattern. Somewhere it has been suggested that one should take 6 months to prepare oneself. Regards. --Greenmaven (talk) 12:48, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Deauxma

I would like to recover the work I did on Deauxma's article. Could you userfy it for me please? Rebecca1990 (talk) 00:46, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi. This is a controversial article that has been deleted several times by community consensus and locked so that it can only be recreated in mainspace by an admin. If you work on it in your userspace you will need to ask an admin to review it and move it to mainbspace when it's ready for inclusion. It will shortly be available at User:Rebecca1990/Deauxma. Remember that there will be a lot of eyes on this so it won't be permitted to stay there for very long. It will also be immediately deleted if it is recreated in mainspace under another name. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:18, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

List of social networking websites

Why did you fully-protected for 1 year again? Because Mark change to semi-protection then you change back to 1 year full-protection? 12:16, 14 December 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blaster0425 (talk • contribs)

Hi. A look at the article history, it's protection log, an its talk page and archives will answer your questions quicker and better than I can here. I'm also fully convinced that Mark mae a totally unintentional error, and if he thought I had made an error he would almost certainly have mentioned it to me himself. He hasn't. PLease sign you posts. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:47, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

You've Got Mail

Hello, Kudpung. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

-- — Keithbob • Talk • 18:33, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Rollback

That was a fair decision and almost exactly what I had anticipated. Seems like a good editor; they just need a little longer track record first, as I said to them there. Thank you. :) Acalamari 11:16, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Nomination Help

Could you please tell me the criteria when my request will not be too early for nomination to become a reviewer.It will help me to stay focused and complete my goal as soon as possible.Thanks.--Param Mudgal (talk) 18:46, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

The fundamental criterion is that we are here first and foremost to build an encyclopedia; it is generally expected that people who want to police it should also have demonstrated that they know how to produce it. These things come from experience, 100 mainspace edits in 5 months doesn't give us anything to judge. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:23, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

You can give a chance so that i can help wikipedia. If i don't work properly you can take this permission back from me and i will not regret that.You only told me before that 48 mainspace edits don't help in any way and so i worked hard and completed 100 edits in a very short span of time.But you know better of wikipedia and you take right decision. I totally accept your decision. I will keep on working hard for Wikipedia.Thanks for the help.--Param Mudgal (talk) 15:29, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Yo Ho Ho

ϢereSpielChequers is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec13}} to your friends' talk pages.

Messages

You need to close your message boxes with "|}" ;-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:40, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Goofed again ! I'll be down in Krabi working through the hols :( Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:03, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

We used to dream of being down in down in Krabi working through the hols... etc ;-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:39, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Hot

Not so much cold as hot down here, 40°C today. But thank you for the holiday wishes. I hope you enjoy the festive season as well. :) Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:45, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!! Yep it's fairly cold here but it would be boring if it was sticky and hot all year around right?♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:58, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

I want to see snow but haven't got that chance to.. :( It's forever 23-33 degrees here... JianhuiMobile ^talk 15:32, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

NPP deletions.

You left some messages on my talk page saying that you deleted some articles that I tagged for CSD, but tagged them wrong. I was under the impression that with an article with multiple issues, choosing one of the options is acceptable. I can't look the the history of these articles anymore because that's an administrator only function, but I'm sure my tags were acceptable.

As with the BLPPROD article (Alexis Spight), I'm very hesitant to tag for CSD when the article at least tries to assert notability. It didn't even cross my mind to search for a blatant copyvio from last.fm. I'm not very bold, so I appreciate you finding the correct tags and deleting for the right criteria.

In my mind if I can bring the article to administrator attention, with a tag that is at least somewhat applicable (and hopefully not completely wrong), I have done it correctly. Bluefist ^talk 16:55, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi Bluefist. You're actually doing quite a good job with your vandalism patrolling, but your NPP work is a bit below par and your accuracy rate needs improving. There were some others but I only picked out the most serious errors because these are ones you can learn from. Tagging articles does not bring them to admin attention - only the CSD tags do that because admins have to decide whether to delete them or not. However, many admins trust our patrollers and don't do further checks so it's important to get it right. Choosing the correct CSD criterion is important so that the creator gets the right message, we also need it for the gathering of stats - we often need to know how many of each kind of article has been deleted, so we need to get it right. Patrolling new pages is awfully complex and it's surprising that the task doesn't need a special user right such as Reviewer and Rollbacker, but maybe one day that will come. It's fair to assume that most articles about companies and software are spam or copyvios, so they do need some in-depth investigation before tagging or simply reviewing as OK. Biographies are also very delicate and must make credible claims of importance and be adequately supported by reliable sources. I know it's complicated, but please read WP:NPP again, WP:DELETION, and WP:BLPPROD and WP:PROD. The bottom line is the golden rule: if you are not sure, leave it for another patroller and move on to the next new article. Happy holidays! Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:21, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice, I try to leave articles alone that I have no idea how to deal with. Even after 2 1/2 years of NPP/Recent Changes I still hesitate to do anything wrong. I also regularly leave for months at a time, then come back and help for a while, then leave again. I'm going to review the pages to linked and try to implement them asap. Bluefist ^talk 02:45, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

From a very cold, windy, and wet London

St. Paul's Cathedral at Christmas...

Merry Christmas Kudpung, and a very happy 2014!

Voceditenore (talk) 19:02, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

since hong kong and august

havent seemed to really catchup

from hot australia - have a good christmas anyways and a busy new year... satusuro 03:42, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

haha - remembering the heat of Darwin, Northern Territory and of Yogyakarta, Indonesia - here is wishing you either (a) a good high powered genset if you have irregular power source (b) good ac with clean filters (c) good deep swimming pool (d) all three... best wishes to you and your family satusuro 04:21, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

We have a 5.5 kW diesel gen set but now the rainy season is over it won't be used much until it starts again in May. AC has clean filters, but being a fresh air freak I usually have all the windows in my office open and use a fan. The pool is 1.4m at the deep end and full of kids from the neighbourhood ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:28, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

I just spent the last year in Hong Kong, wonderful city, I reccomend it to anyone...Hell In A Bucket (talk) 04:35, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Nice. JianhuiMobile ^talk 06:17, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Happy holidays!

JianhuiMobile ^talk is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

JianhuiMobile ^talk 07:09, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Soham (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas5}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Soham (talk) 10:05, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Param Mudgal (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas5}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Happy Merry Christmas and New Year.

Non-admin endorsements

Hello Kudpung, I was just looking through WP:PERM/C and seen your endorsement edit, and wanted to point out, shouldn't Armbrust's Non-Admin decisions also be endorsed ? Mlpearc (open channel) 03:15, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

There's a big difference between editors like you and Armbrust who are highly experienced, been doing it for years and know what they are doing, and over-zealous newbies who think it's cool to tinker with adminy stuff. But I didn't wish to go into too much detail there. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:21, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanx for the reply, I was just checking, the request I linked to seemed a little out of the normal non-admin "WP:FFU or request reason needed" statement. Mlpearc (open channel) 03:28, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Kudpung. You have new messages at OSborn's talk page.
Message added 05:05, 23 December 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

OSborn ^arf_contribs. 05:05, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

New RFC on Article Incubator

Hi,

I have drafted a new RFC on the article incubator at User:TheOriginalSoni/sandbox3. I plan to be removing the nowikis and starting the RFC at the VPP soon (ideally in a couple of days). Could you please look through it, and make any changes as you see fit? I do not want this RFC to go through any hiccups like the last one did.

Thanks and cheers, TheOriginalSoni (talk) 05:59, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Will do :) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:42, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

I already have a draft for this lurking on my computer, but there's no reason why you shouldn't go ahead. I would be inclined to keep this very simple (see below). There are currently only 10 articles in the Incubator, so it's almost certain to be a deprecated place. It's never been used much anyway. You should locate the RfC at Wikipedia:Article Incubator/RfC to close down Incubator.

Proposal: Close down the Incubator, move the existing 10 articles to the Draft mainspace, and mark theIncubator as historical.

Rationale: The roll-out of the new Draft mainspace, an area where pages are not indexed, where AfC submissions will be processed, rescued articles can be parked, and for users' use for their drafts, makes the Incubator essentially redundant.

Note: This RfA is not for discussing any other alternatives. For other suggestions, please start a separate RfC.

Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:00, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

• I see. I didnt know there were only a handful of articles there. There are about 15 or so articles there. I've changed the RFC abd located it as you advised. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 07:24, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Kudpung. You have new messages at Loriendrew's talk page.
Message added 12:16, 23 December 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(talk) 12:16, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

G13 postponed submissions

Dear Kudpung: I noticed your post about the Article Incubator. There is another group of pages that may make a good test of the Draft namespace: the postponed G13s. There are about 2,200 of them listed at the link above, all abandoned by their original submitters, all in Afc at least one year, yet all selected as improvable by sn Afc reviewer. It's unlikely that the five or six people who have done the postponing will have time to fix them all up in the six months allotted, so maybe moving them into the draft space would get others interested. It may be a vain hope though, considering what has happened to the Article Incubator. What do you think? Notice that I managed to refrain from commenting about Afc for almost a full 24 hours, while my electricity was out because of an ice storm. —Anne Delong (talk) 13:23, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

The template actually applies a hidden category of Category:AfC postponed G13, so this is a easier way to identify the list than the "What Links here" as what links here also includes mentions of the template. Hasteur (talk) 13:29, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Anne Delong Since it's been suggested to rehab the deferred submissions in Draft space, I've modified the template's remit to be more widely cast (WP/WT/Draft/Draft Talk) so that the drafts won't loose the category when they get moved out of Wikipedia talk space. Hasteur (talk) 13:34, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

It occurred to me that since these are abandoned, there is no particular reason to have them going through the Afc process, since there are no new editors to be helping. It was just a thought, and also it seems that there are editors who are in a hurry to have some drafts in the Draft space. I don't know if others will like this idea or not.—Anne Delong (talk) 14:39, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Just my thought, but the Draft space does not mandate that a AfC submission header be attached to a page (especially since Article Incubator is going to be folded in). Obviously we'd need to get a wider consensus (and get several points clarified) but I would be fine with striping the AfC banners. We would need to get clarification if CSD:G13 is applicable to all pages in the draft space, or only those that have at least one AfC template attached to it. I'm leaning to the first interpertation as that will make the "Notification" process much easier to sort through (as I can reach into the replication database for that data instead of having to crawl the AfC submissions). Hasteur (talk) 15:23, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Will moving the articles to a new space count as a edit, effecting the G13 eligibility? If the draft pages are going to be from several sources, I think that some kind of recognition of their source needs to be visible. The Afc decline templates and comments let everyone know what's been going on with the article. To be tidier, though, they could be moved to the talk page, and replaced with a small explanatory banner such as "This draft was submitted to "Articles for creation", but has not been edited by the last submitter for more than six months. (See the talk page for the review history.) It has been selected for its potential by the AfC reviewers, and is awaiting a willing editor." —Anne Delong (talk) 21:01, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Moving counts as an edit, so it would reset the clock on these pages eligibility (which might not be a bad thing), though from all the reluctance (and outright FUD flinging) I'm getting at Wikipedia talk:Drafts, I'm now very disinclined to let any of the suggested postponements out to their ill trained hands. Perhaps you'd like to explain why G13 is useful in light of WP:NOTWEBHOST? Hasteur (talk) 21:14, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Well, if the use of G13 in the new Draft space is being questioned, that makes it all the more important that the G13 backlog is gone before any serious changes happen at Afc. As for the rescued ones, I don't think it matters so much, because they are the best 5%, and many will be improved and moved to mainspace, especially if Wikiproject banners are placed on the talk pages. If there are some languishing after 6 months, and the bot finds them again, they will be comparatively few in numbers. If consensus goes against automated deletion, they can either be "rescued" again or - how about this - automatically moved to mainspace to sink or swim. That might encourage some last minute improving. Sorry this was written earlier and I didn't notice the edit conflict. —Anne Delong (talk) 04:28, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Anne, I would welcome your comments on my sub section below. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:52, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

My thoughts

Before you read what I have to say below, please don't get me wrong, I am neither an inclusionist, exclusionist, deletionist, or any other kind of -ist.

I've spent an hour or so going randomly through the 2,000 or so 'rescued' G13s and what I deduce is:

• Partly AfC declined by inexperienced reviewers and/or deletionists.
• Articles, particularly BLPs, that are in no worse condition than tens of 1,000s that are already in mainspace but probably tagged with BLP refimprove - another cat that will slumber forever.
• The creators are mainly SPA and have no intention of returning.
• Partly rescued from G13 through over-zealous inclusionism or anticipation that someone is actually going to work on these.
• Partly made worse by the G13 re-reviwevers who could already have taken 3 minutes to add refs, do it properly (no naked URLs, add stub templates, etc), and move them to mainspace (E.g. see [3].
• Creating a new backlog from an old one is counter productive - who do we imagine is actually going to work on these? Note that we have backlogs at AfC, there are serious backlogs and poor patrolling at NPP where newly moved drafts will appear, backlogs at PROD & BLPPROD which again, like G13 are more likely to be procedurally deleted by admins whose job it is not to spend time improving them themselves for lazy editors, and it's questionable whether all the maintenance tagged articles do in fact have editors who slog through all those cats.
• We have 20 million registered accounts, apparently something like 50,000 'active' editors (dubious), and it's my guess that dedicated 'maintenance' editors are not more than a few dozen, and, for example, of the 1,600 admins, only about 30 or so are truly active.

Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:54, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello Kudpung. Yes, there are many sloppily rescued articles added to the list by me, with bare URLs, that need more work. You must be a fast worker, because getting one of these articles in shape take me more like an hour. I add the reference URLs because finding at least four solid refs is my threshold for postponing, and once I've found them I may as well add them. The bot is deleting so fast, that for every one I stop to spend an hour on, up to 50 more are deleted before I (and Rankersbo, who's been helping, DGG, who has been working on certain categories, and occasionally others) can look at them. The pressure of this makes it impossible for me to do a good job of of editing the articles. My plan (not knowing that the new draft space would be disrupting the process) was to wait until the backlog was gone, and then go back and start processing them properly before the six months was up. A few of mine have already been picked up by DGG. My reason for suggesting moving these over is that it's the only group of submissions that really have no submitters wanting to edit them, and the people in favour of the new space seem to want some articles to get started on. I can still follow my plan of fixing them up, no matter where they are. If any other editors pitch in, that will be a bonus. If the whole of Afc ends up being moved into the draft space, the two batches will end up back together again. However, it was just a suggestion, and I don't really care if they are moved or not. —Anne Delong (talk) 05:09, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Anne, bots cannot delete articles. You are probably confusing this with Hasteur's bot that lists submissions older than 6 months for G13. It's my guess however, that like at BLPPROD and PROD, many admins procedurally delete them without doing any further research and indeed, they are not obliged to. Not everyone reviews them again as thoroughly as you, DGG, and I might, but any loss of potential worthwhile articles through this is, IMO, a minor collateral damage. What I generally assume us to be aiming at is a clean Wikipedia, and and knowledgeable (if not regular) content contributors. If SPA can't be bothered to come back and see what's happened to their submissions, that's their problem. However, I think there should be a clear note on the Wizard that submitters should check back and not automaticlly assume that thier submissions will be accepted without any further ado. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:30, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I am aware that the bot only nominates the submissions, and should have used more accurate language. The result is the same. The submissions disappear. Some of these submissions took many hours to create, and it's a lot easier to fix their deficiencies than to find and research 5,000 or so new topics from scratch. I promise that I will start fixing the articles as soon as the G13 backlog date is down to six months (we're at twelve months now), whether they are still in Afc or have been moved somewhere else. —Anne Delong (talk) 05:46, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Anne was not really incorrect when she said that the bot deletes AfCs . Most of the admins doing the deleting do so without looking--let alone checking . Some of them perhaps really wanted to delete everything in the backlog and it seems like they might be trying trying to do just that. Hasteur designed his bot on the assumption admins would be careful, which was rather naïve considering comments during the prior discussion. I think we should never have departed from the rule that for deletions, two humans are needed. At present I have checked submission almost to the end of December, going date by date ; Anne is using a different but overlapping sequence going letter by letter. Few others seem to be involved in any substantial way besides the two of us. Considering the extremely important nature of some of the AfCs being up for deletion, and the total irrelevance of some of the reasons for declining them, the best that can be hoped for is a rough screening. (see below) By the end of January she and I should be at the 6 month point, and what will happen then depends on any delay built into the bo: for safety, i intend to try to reach a five-month old submission. I tried almost singlehanded to force some consideration on the BLPProds, and for most subjects, I succeeded. One or two people can do a lot here if they are determined enough. Like Anne, I don't really care where they end up--wherever they are, I will work on what needs work the most. DGG ( talk ) 08:51, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

• I have a considerably different take on this from Kudpung. When I first started going through the old AfCs , I tried to immediately improve every one I thought improvable. I soon realized that this impossible if i was one of the 2 or 3 peoplemnaking this screening, as I can not personally rewrite more than a few articles a day, and the process of deletion was going much too fast for this. I therefore adopted in November a different method: A When I encounter an article that is essentially ready for mainspace even though it has some defects, I simply accept it; I have since early November done 56 that I think satisfactory & do not think necessary to revisit, BIf it is important enough and in my fields of competence and I can see how to make changes and have the resources available, I do so & then accept it; I have now done 88 since early November. For another 46 since then I have accepted them though I think they definitely need further improvement--they are good enough to have the standard 50% chance of passing AfD, but not the 98% chance I expect from my own work. C If I cannot make the changes now, but realistically hope that I or someone will in the future, & that if made they will have over a 505% chance of passing AfD, I postpone them with a comment that I think it certainly or probably notable, and usually giving some indication of what is needed; since November are now 287 in that group. D for those I think need further consideration, but where I am not prepared now to say that they should be able to make it, I just postpone. I dod not keep track of these--there probably are several hundred. E While screening, if I encounter one that absolutely must be deleted as soon as possible, i list it for CSD; or if it is >6 months and enough in my field that my opinion that it won;t make it might be helpful, I also list it for CsD -- that makes about 150.

At the beginning of the screen we had about 30,000 old AfCs--I think the rule of thumb in a screen is to get the top 10% pulled out for further work. We can therefore expect to select about 3,000 to be looked at again. That matches Kudpung's figure, and is I think the desirable number. He seems to interpret it as so high a number that he despairs of dealing with them. I compare it with the 30,000 we started with and see it as a very good first step, doing just what it ought to. I personally could probably rewrite at least 1,000 articles a year if I did nothing else here, but this would include new submissions. I expect going forward I will be able to work on my own marked backlog of about 400 that I have marked at the rate of maybe 5 or 6 a week-- it will take about a year or two to finish if nobody else helps. I think it reasonable to spend a year or two dealing with such an immense long standing set of problems. As we keep saying but do not seem to believe, there is no deadline.

there are several sets of particular problems I have noticed. First, the AfCs that need merges. I've postponed deletion on these without really looking if they have been done. In spot-checking, only about 1/10 have been in fact merged, and in half of the others, it certainly should be. Second, the ones that have been entered despite declines. About half of these are OK, and the corresponding AfCs should have been redirected to the talk pages or removed long ago. The other half are definitely not OK & I've been using various deletion processes as appropriate. Third, the ones accepted that should not have been, and many of which are every bit as bad as our worst ordinary articles. I've been using AfD,--I am reluctant to use prod, because some other editor has apparently thought otherwise.

Going forward, how can we cut down the number of do-overs? The way is to work from both ends: At the low end, decline the ones that will absolutely never make articles, while telling the contributors in no uncertain terms not to try to resubmit them; at the high end, accepting the ones that are basically OK, leaving improvement to the ordinary WP processes. Articles do get improved over time--for every one of us prepared to do comprehensive rewriting, there are 10 or 20 people prepared to do small fixes. And in the middle, guiding and watching over the improvements. DGG ( talk ) 05:38, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Aside from the perennial problem of needing more participants so that every article is checked, I think the process is going well. I think DGG is underestimating the size of the original backlog; on September 16 I took the time to write down the number in the G13 category and it was 52,896. It was larger before that, because that wasn't the first day I worked on it. So over 30,000 have been deleted, postponed, edited or resubmitted so far. —Anne Delong (talk) 06:00, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

• About active admins: THIS statistics page shows about 65 admins with over 1,000 edits in September, the last time the data was collected. —Anne Delong (talk) 23:29, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Anyone whose edit count is much above 500 per month is probably making a lot of one-click or semi-automated edits; that also includes 'gnome' admins who work through the deletion cats, editors who revert vandalism, and editors who clean up typos and punctuation using AWB. An edit count however, is often a poor criterion for activity - compare with this editor who spends about 8 hours a day online, offline, and in RL, on Wikipedia and Wikipedia related projects. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:23, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Pratyya ^(Hello!) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Pratyya ^(Hello!) 04:48, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Mediran (t • c) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Mediran (t • c) 08:27, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Maukerja

Hi Kudpung,

First, I'm new to wikepedia and obviously alot of rules are new to me (still in the learning curve)

I would like to know why http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Maukerja was deleted. The reason I created this website is to tell about Maukerja bio, such as who own the website, what is this website, where is this website from and when the website established. It's not my intention to promote this website commercially in wikepedia.

Hope to get your reply soon.

Thank you Bobby — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobbycsl (talk • contribs) 08:52, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi. The article was written in a totally advertoral tone 'offering services'. Wikipedia articles must be completely neutral, and may not be created by people who have a close connection with the subject. It is also unlikkely that Maukerja will meet our criteria for inclusion any time soon. Please see WP:GNG and WP:ORG, and WP:NOTYELLOW to find out why. Regards, Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:03, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

International School of Engineering

You gave Insofe advice on how to fix this article, but from their wording in contesting speedy deletion it occurs to me that the user name probably represents the institution. Since they are working on the article, I didn't block them, but instead instructed them to change their user name (and informed them that group accounts are not permitted, in case that is the situation). It's not an obviously organizational user name and I'm thinking that they should have an opportunity to demonstrate their intent isn't purely promotional before being prevented by the username block. I'm headed to bed myself and the red light here indicates you have already retired for the night, but when you return you should of course feel free to block them anyway. Yngvadottir (talk) 09:10, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

I would leave it at that and let it go. It's not a if they are likely to contribute anything else to Wikipedia.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:20, 24 December 2013 (UTC)s

I had the same thought but was thinking of it as a WP:ROPE situation of the nice kind - after all we all start out as single-issue editors, and we could always use more contributors to engineering articles. However I see he did get blocked by someone else, so now I'm seeing what I can do with the article. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:30, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Yo Ho Ho

Dougweller (talk) is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec13}} to your friends' talk pages.

Dougweller (talk) 10:14, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Happy Yuletides!
Merry Yuletides to you! (And a happy new year!)

Soham (talk) 13:31, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Season's greetings

Bast wishes to you and yours, and thanks for your greeting. Not as cold here as you might have feared, a relatively balmy 8°C or so, though gales causing some disruption. What a cosmopolitan world this is becoming, this morning you in Thailand and me in England advising Japanese/Brazilian teenagers, tonight we are invited to supper by a Swedish/Greek couple, later we take home for a visit two grand-daughters, one born in Canada and one half-Chinese... Regards, JohnCD (talk) 14:43, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks&Merry Christmas

		Holiday Cheer
		Angelia2041 talkback is wishing you Season's Greetings and thanking you for supplying this message!!! This message celebrates (Im told!) the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, some Perfect Strangers or just some random person. Share the good feelings & Cheer up and we are grateful for everything here and now. - @Angelia2041 Happy Holiday! Cheer up! Inspired by MichaelQSchmidt - Yes. We can share alike. Thank you. Angelia2041 (talk) 15:00, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Merry Christmas from Cyberpower678

—cyberpower _Online^{Merry Christmas} is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

—cyberpower _Online^{Merry Christmas} 22:49, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

MoneyLIFE

I was still editing and you deleted the page, already! Would request for recreation. This is a Indian business magazine. It would have been really good if you could have helped me build the article rather than deleting it. Nimitsaxsena (talk) 12:14, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Deleted primarily as a copyright violation, the subject is also most unlikely to comply with our criteria for inclusion per our general notability guidelines. There is a limit to how much help we can offer other than informing nerw editors of what can and cannot be included in the encyclopedia. Above all, this is the English language Wikipedia, and it is probably fair to say that most of the regular editors here who take care of the quality of content have very little knowledge of Indian topics. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:25, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Brazil Bennett

this person is a person of relevance and notoriety. With all respect, I am appalled that she was not already on here. My choice of doing an article on this person is because we personally witnessed her foundation help fourteen families this year, who had lost everything and had nothing. Her charity bought furniture, clothes, appliances, and help to grant the wish of one sick child. I do not know this person personally and read your rules to be a neutral source. I offered factual information but this person is already all over the internet and radio, which is why I am SHOCKED that the page would be up for deletion. Navigating through your site is a little difficult, so maybe I did not do something correctly. I uploaded photos of this person's company on the red carpet. I have three. One was with singer Neyo, one was with rapper French Montana, and the other was on the red carpet at the 2013 B.E.T. awards. I can delete the page myself, if you would like. But I'm still not sure I understand how someone as relevant as this person would not be honored on your site.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Celebritynews101 (talk • contribs) 14:10, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi. The article was deleted following a review by a new page patroller and a further check by the deleting administrator. Unfortunately, the subject, Brazil Bennett, did not meet with Wikipedia criteria for notability. Notability is not shared or inherited from the people she shares a birthday with, and being an organ donor or CEO of several companies does not assert notability without being supported by several, in-depth, third part sources that should be found in articles about her in established media. The article was also written in a familiar, not encyclopedic tone which included much unsourced speculation. Finally, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a role of honour - it is not a proiilege to have an article here, it's just a normal, verifiable, feature of encyclopedic importance.

Please note also that you may not edit the Wikipedia as a group of people, or as representing a company or organisation. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 21:37, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

About Neenah Paper Article

Hi there. Firstly, thank you for reviewing my page. I want to argue that the company is a listed company and a FSC certified company with numerous recent news on the Internet, which make it a significant influencer in the stock market. Many of the articles in Wikipedia have mentioned this company such as Invitations to the first inauguration of Barack Obama. Also, major financial reporting websites such as Yahoo Finance, Google Finance, etc.all have independent webpages for this company. So I think it should not be deleted and I will go on working on the article by adding more recent news that will help Wiki include in a useful company in its files. Thanks and Merry Christmas!MoistureG (talk) 14:23, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Guy Allen

Please help me better understand your reverting the edit on Guy Allen you recently made. I am trying hard to add notariety to my school articles to prevent them from being redirected. How can someone not be notable (as a professional) after achieving tremendous success in their field. What better sources do I need? Merry Christmas, by that way. Indyjrg1762 (talk) 16:29, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Having notable alumni does not add to the notability of school - notability is not inherited. Most articles about High Schools are generally kept anyway, while most primary (elementary) and middle schools are redirected to the article about their school district. I can't find a Wikipedia article about a Guy Allenso that's why he can't be included per the guideline at WP:LISTPEOPLE - notability has to satisfy Wikipedia criteria. If you have sufficient sources that clearly establish notability for this person, you might like to write the Wikipedia article about him. Season's greetings, Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 21:16, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings

Diannaa (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

--Diannaa (talk) 16:55, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Merry Christmas! :-)

Happy Yuletides!

Merry Yuletides to you! (And a happy new year!)

~TheGeneralUser (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Hi Kudpung, Wishing you a very Happy and Wonderful Merry Christmas! Hope you are having a great time with family and friends :-) Best wishes. ~TheGeneralUser (talk) 19:02, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

User re-added content

User:DJ Buddy Holly (DJ Devious) has immediately re-uploaded the content. I think that you're just going to have to block and salt the userspace, unfortunately. I've left a warning, but considering that he (or someone) has tried to re-add the information in about five (and probably more) different versions, I doubt that they'll pay attention to that. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 00:12, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

• He's changed it, but I honestly think he should be blocked. I know we should assume good faith, but this guy has been doing this since about 2009. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 00:18, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

I think I've deleted and salted all the creations, including one that was under a current AfD (which you may wish to close for us). The new content on their user page is fairly innocuous, but it's on my wl. Thanks for keeping an eye on his edits too. You can block him yourself if you like - I'll support the block if it comes to blows. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:23, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

I want to, but on one of the SPI pages User:Amatulic is endorsing blocking all and leaving the main account open for editing on Wikipedia. I have to admit that I'm lobbying pretty hard for a complete block, as I don't think he has any true intention of editing in a beneficial manner. His history seems to consist of a flurry of articles, a year break, then another flurry of articles under a whole new slew of usernames. I'm not even sure that this guy will stop if we block this account. I think he'll just be back in a year to post another round. In any case, I think that if I were to do this now, it would be immediately undone because I launched the SPI. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 00:29, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

I wasn't "endorsing" I was suggesting. FWIW. ~Amatulić (talk) 04:40, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Ah, I didn't realise there is an SPI. Which one is it? can you give me a link? Perhaps i can chime in there. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:35, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Update: The AfD has been closed by someone, and I've left a comment at the SPI. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:06, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

The Way I Look At Wikipedia Now.

In one sense, I am slightly NOW turned off from Wikipedia. Not because my NON-BIAS article was deleted, but because of the explanation and "allegation that the article was familiar". I do not know my subject. On the other had, these patrollers must have a pretty tough job. Either way, the purpose of the site is to share valuable, validate info. I remember a long time ago reading an article on here that said a well known talk show host was born a man and is now a woman. (I wonder how that one slipped through the cracks). I wonder do the patrollers verify the approved articles, as well as verify the deleted one's. Just my thoughts.  :)

Either way, like Kudpung said, being rude on here, or in life for that matter, gets you nowhere. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Celebritynews101 (talk • contribs) 03:34, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Celebritynews101 03:32, 26 December 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Celebritynews101 (talk • contribs)

Flamel Technologies

I removed the A7 CSD tag from Flamel Technologies but tagged it for notability and refimprove. The two editors are new and I don't want to scare them off so I held off sending it to AFD. See Talk:Flamel Technologies for details. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 23:37, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

These articles all have the hallmarks of paid advocacy. I have summarily deleted one that was a blatant recreation of an article deleted at AfD, AfD'd another, PRODed a couple more, and if the PRODs get removed, I'll either summarily delete them per A7 or send them to AfD depending on the mood I'm in ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:34, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

That's what I thought at first. In fact, I was all set to open an WP:SPI when I found the first 4-5 cooperating editors (it's over 20 now), but it looks like this may be a university-related project by editors who misunderstand what Wikipedia is all about. Please see User:Davidwr/Tsinghua and its talk page for more information.

Several other editors are involved in trying to figure out what to do with this group.

It is possible that this is deliberate abuse of Wikipedia, but I'm prepared to assume good faith for another week or two.

I would welcome your input on this matter. Please post your comments on User talk:Davidwr/Tsinghua.

davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 00:42, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ultralife Corporation

If "are under investigation" you mean someplace other than User:Davidwr/Tsinghua, please let me know so that efforts can be combined. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 03:03, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

That's exactly where I mean. I've just gone through all the oages and the creators - tool me two precious hours this morning, and I now have to go to work. I've left some ideas on your project page talk. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:13, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the input. I replied with a counterproposal in the spirit of WP:AGF. It took me far longer than 2 hours to gather all of this together. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 03:27, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

I know how time consuming things can be - I used to spend probably two whole days on one single SPI. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:31, 27 December 2013 (UTC)