User talk:Celtechm
|
Nomination of Easy projects for deletion
[edit]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Easy projects is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Easy projects until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Keystoneridin (speak) 21:48, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
Easy Projects
[edit]Hello, it appears that some of the literature in the article you wrote does not match up to the correlating citations. You have given small mentions of parts of articles. I'd be willing to help you fix this article and make it better, but some better background with full sources contributing to the page would be nice. Just trying to help.Keystoneridin (speak) 01:28, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
Your recent edits
[edit]
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button 
or 
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 06:26, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Earlyshares
[edit]
A tag has been placed on Earlyshares, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.
If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. The Bushranger One ping only 23:14, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
Good catch
[edit]Don't know how I missed the spelling issue, but I very much appreciate the correction. I withdrew, there's enough for GNG based on English sources alone, and I know there are very likely to be sources in Hebrew as well. Anyway, much appreciated! --j⚛e deckertalk 20:20, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
This is an automated message from VWBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Dr. Philip Oxhorn, and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://www.mcgill.ca/isid/staff/founding-director-philip-oxhorn.
It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.
If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) VWBot (talk) 18:34, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
A page you started has been reviewed!
[edit]Thanks for creating Earlyshares, Celtechm!
Wikipedia editor Jrcrin001 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
Reviewed as a stub article.
To reply, leave a comment on Jrcrin001's talk page.
Learn more about page curation.
Thanks for your contributions to LightManufacturing LLC. When you removed the WP:PROD tag, you stated "Notability and depth seem proven by inline citations to multiple RS." Could you say some more about this? How does this article meet WP:CORPDEPTH? This is how I see the sources:
- 1: blog (you added this one)
- 2,6,9: press releases
- 3: patent application
- 4,7,8: youtube
- 5: yellow pages directory
- 10: interview
Logical Cowboy (talk) 22:41, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
- Hi, Logical Cowboy (talk), and thanks for your note. I based my interpretation of RS primarily on three Refs:
- #1 Looks like a significant article in an online magazine. Unique coverage with depth in a venue that looks professional and covers that industry.
- #2 Significant, unique write-up by a professional editor in an online magazine that covers manufacturing industry.
- #10 Plastic News, Again, unique write-up by a professional editor in an online magazine that covers plastics industry.
The other refs were largely lacking, but I thought these three made the issue of depth unclear at the least and made PROD the wrong way to go. Celtechm (talk) 15:30, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
- Hi, thanks for your reply. Number 2 looks like a press release to me. There's no "author" for this "article," which ends with contact details, e.g., "Please call 415-796-6475...." With regard to number 10, it's an interview, which does not do much for WP:CORPDEPTH. Arguably it's not an independent source. I agree that number 1 is the strongest of the lot, but I don't think it's enough for WP:CORPDEPTH when you read the whole guideline. Logical Cowboy (talk) 15:53, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
John Kennedy Toole
[edit]Hi Celtechm, I responded to you on my talk page. Dickdock (talk) 17:56, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
Conflict of interest
[edit]Your name has been mentioned at the conflict of interest noticeboard in relation to paid editing on the Earlyshares article. Gigs (talk) 01:11, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
The article Joseph R. Carvalko has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- Fails WP:BASIC, WP:PROF, and WP:CREATIVE. General lack of independent reliable sources with in-depth coverage to establish notability.
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Logical Cowboy (talk) 05:21, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
The article Institute for the Study of International Development has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- Promotional article that fails WP:ORGPDEPTH.
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Logical Cowboy (talk) 05:29, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
An appeal
[edit]I see you have continued editing even after being "busted". Have you considered being more open about your paid editing activities? If you are socking, stop doing that, start disclosing your conflicts of interest, and stop directly editing articles in main article space, instead proposing edits and working with the COI noticeboard. The community will, in general, be willing to work with you, if you are willing to work with us. It's clear that you are pretty familiar with the policies and guidelines. Lets stop this cat and mouse game. You won't be able to write overly promotional pieces, but you can probably still write something that will satisfy your clients. It's a longer term value for them as well because it's less likely to get picked apart if you were up front about your paid editing. Please consider it for the sake of the long term viability of your endeavor. Gigs (talk) 20:16, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
- Hi Gigs, Thanks for engaging me on my talkpage in a more-or-less civilized fashion. Wikipedia would be much better served if everyone would engage in civil discourse rather than flaming, flagging, and generally behaving like petulent children when they disagree about content, policy, or behavior. That said, you’ve also advocated a checkuser on my account and have made various accusatory statements here and elsewhere, so I doubt we’ll be new bffs.
Thank you for your input. In response let me say that I am a single-account user, that I stand by every edit I have made (Small errors or mistakes excepted), and that my editing is driven by a desire to enhance the English Wikipedia. If you have taken issue with my edits or !votes, as indicated by your comments here and elsewhere, I would suggest that we may simply have a difference of opinion about thresholds for notability, RS, or other content factors and that my positions on these and other areas are all well within the normal variation of the Wikipedia editor population. My account records bear this out as you already know, or we would not be having this interaction. I have some input for you as well, and, in the interest of further civilized discourse, will post it on your talkpage.
Disambiguation link notification for October 28
[edit]Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited NetSuite, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ERP (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 01:17, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
You may want to give your side of the story at your sock puppet investigation. Gigs (talk) 16:06, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
Nomination of Institute for the Study of International Development for deletion
[edit]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Institute for the Study of International Development is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Institute for the Study of International Development until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Logical Cowboy (talk) 01:11, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for November 16
[edit]Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited RDM Server, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Solaris (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:57, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:54, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Appstar Financial
[edit]The article Appstar Financial has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- non notable and promotional refs are trivial notes and press releases
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DGG ( talk ) 20:00, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Obaidul Karim
[edit]The article Obaidul Karim has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- not a single reference here is about him
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DGG ( talk ) 20:03, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Green School Bali Logo.png
[edit]
Thanks for uploading File:Green School Bali Logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:34, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
The article Earlyshares has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Lacks notability per WP:ORGCRIT, some sources provided don't even mention it
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. AusLondonder (talk) 17:50, 7 March 2024 (UTC)