User talk:Tomasohara

Your AN/I report re 64.65.220.26

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

That's not a user - it's an IP address (aka an anonymous editor). In general IP addresses aren't blocked indefinitely (though some IPs which make repeated high volumes of disruptive edits may be blocked for long periods, such as a year). Trouble is with blocking an IP address is that you may throw the baby out with the bathwater - there's no guarantee that blocking Mr Stupid Vandal on IP address 192.168.2.1 today won't stop Ms Wonderful Editor (who may be at a location hundreds of miles from Mr Stupid, and have nothing to do with him at all) tomorrow when she's allocated 192.168.2.1. In the specific case you mention the IP address appears to be in a block of 8 addresses assigned to a company so the chances are that a rangeblock wouldn't cause too much collateral damage, but this is very low-level vandalism. The latest block expired on 21 Feb, since when they've made a grand total of 8 edits (one of which appears to be in good faith, though misguided). In short, they're not worth bothering with. By the way, to report current vandalism by an IP (or a registered account) you want WP:AIV. Cheers, Tonywalton ^Talk 12:07, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Speedy deletion nomination of East by South by Southwest

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on East by South by Southwest requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organized event (tour, function, meeting, party, etc.), but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, 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 from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Bgwhite (talk) 06:17, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Reverted edit to intro for Philadelphia Eagles

via User_talk:Sabbatino:

Hi, please explain what you mean by "better formation" in the intro to Philadelphia Eagles:

   09:08, 6 September 2018‎ Sabbatino ... (Restore better formation)

Note that your reverted my fix for a grammatical error involving the semicolon. See https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-the-usage-of-semicolon-and-colon (mentioned in my comment). In addition, it makes sense to include the year for the benefit of people not familiar with the current number of Superbowls (i.e., 52).

Tomasohara (talk) 14:18, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

   Super Bowls have their own naming (Super Bowl XIII, Super Bowl 50, etc) and year is not needed since people can click on the link and find out when it happened. 

@Sabbatino:

Yes, but having to click is inconvenient, disrupting the users train of thought. It would be different if a hover-over link showed the year. Furthermore, there are years mentioned at the end of the sentence (e.g., 1948), so this is better in terms of parallelism.

  As for the ; and : situation – we use what WP:MOS says and not what some other website states. – Sabbatino (talk) 07:28, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

This is common knowledge of English grammar: I just used that web site for illustration. Again, you introduced a grammatical error: this is not a question of style.

via MOS:COLON:
  A colon (:) introduces something which demonstrates, explains, or modifies what has come before, or is a list of items that has just been introduced. 

via MOS:SEMICOLON:
    If the semicolon separates clauses, normally each clause must be independent (meaning that it could stand on its own as a sentence)[....]

Tomasohara (talk) 06:02, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

The reason why the NFL Championship Games have years is because they did not have a fixed name as Super Bowls have. You can always ask about this at WT:NFL, because this is not a discussion for two persons. If the community at WP:NFL agrees with you then the year could be added. Regarding the MOS:COLON versus MOS:SEMICOLON case, this is on a case-by-case basis. – Sabbatino (talk) 07:57, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Scrappy Web Search

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Scrappy Web Search, 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, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. – robertsky (talk) 07:49, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Scrappy Web Search (April 14)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Robertsky were: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Scrappy Web Search and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Scrappy Web Search, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

– robertsky (talk) 07:50, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Tomasohara! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! – robertsky (talk) 07:50, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for declaring your conflict of interest. That doesn't mean you can write what you like, you must follow the guidance below:

• you must provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the organisation or company, press releases, YouTube, IMDB, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, logs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the company or organisation claims or interviewing its management. Note that references should be in-line so we can tell what fact each is supporting, and should not be bare urls
• The notability guidelines for organisations and companies have been updated. The primary criteria has five components that must be evaluated separately and independently to determine if it is met:

1. significant coverage in
2. independent,
3. multiple,
4. reliable,
5. secondary sources.

Note that an individual source must meet all four criteria to be counted towards notability.

• You must write in a non-promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic, with verifiable facts, not opinions or reviews.
• There shouldn't be any url links in the article, only in the "References" or "External links" sections.
• You must not copy text from elsewhere. Copyrighted text is not allowed in Wikipedia, as outlined in this policy. That applies even to pages created by you or your organisation, unless they state clearly and explicitly that the text is public domain. We require that text posted here can be used, modified and distributed for any purpose, including commercial; text is considered to be copyright unless explicitly stated otherwise. There are ways to donate copyrighted text to Wikipedia, as described here; please note that simply asserting on the talk page that you are the owner of the copyright, or you have permission to use the text, isn't sufficient.

Before attempting to write an article again, please make sure that the topic meets the notability criteria linked above, and check that you can find independent third party sources. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:35, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia needs clearer guidelines on the new page form: specifically mentioning those notability certification requirements. This process is very frustrating. I was waiting for a reply for my appeal to the initial speedy-deletion notification and thought your message was guidelines for rewriting the page, not an ultimatum. (Note that good indication of notability is the approved patent.) Tomasohara (talk) 11:06, 16 April 2022 (UTC)