User talk:Drm310/Archive 9

Archive 5

←

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

→

Archive 15

Mama Dear Kids

Are you thinking that it's a role account for Mama Dear's children? Just trying to understand you better. Nyttend (talk) 17:21, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

@Nyttend: Yes, that's what I was thinking. It implies that there could be several people accessing the account per WP:NOSHARE, and therefore the account's edits cannot be reliably attributed to the same individual. --Drm310 (talk) 17:27, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

You're right, and I will block the account momentarily. Thank you for raising the issue, as it hadn't even crossed my mind. Nyttend (talk) 18:03, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I have other concerns about the page itself, so I've nom'd it as MfD per your suggestion. --Drm310 (talk) 18:07, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Account unblocked; the user requested unblock with a rationale of I am respectfully requesting to have my access unblocked due to the fact that I am the sole contributor. This is not a group account despite the username I've suggested a WP:CHU request. Nyttend (talk) 20:17, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Fair enough, WP:AGF is the rule. Let's hope they can quickly get up to speed about WP:BIO, WP:V and WP:RS. --Drm310 (talk) 21:09, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Pilgrim Paths of Ireland

Hi,

I recently put up an article on the Pilgrim Paths of Ireland, a national organisation for the promotion of ancient Pilgrim Routes around the island of Ireland.

I'm not terribly IT savvy and, to be honest, have never used Wikipedia before, but I was asked to put a page about the organisation on the site. I obviously got something, or a whole lot of somethings, wrong as both the user (PilgrimPath) and the page on the Pilgrim Paths of Ireland were deleted immediately.

As suggested I've changed my username but I'm terrified to put anything up now in case it is deleted again, I'm permanently banned from Wikipedia and I prevent the Pilgrim Paths from getting any page.

I would just like to know what part of the page was in contravention of Wikipedia rules so that I could have a stab at it again and, hopefully, not have it deleted again.

Kind regards,

Diarmaid Deasy66 (talk) 17:32, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

(sorry if that's wrong, I'm not sure how the tilde signing works).

No worries, you got the tilde signature right! Before I make my usual long-winded reply, I'll give you a helpful link: Wikipedia:Everything you need to know. This summarizes just about every important principle and policy on Wikipedia.

I'm not sure why you weren't told about the reasons the admin blocked your account, but they should have stated that Wikipedia has a policy against usernames which give the impression that the account represents a group, organization or website. Wikipedia accounts can only represent a single individual, and cannot be shared or even imply that they might be shared. Your new account name looks much better, so you don't need to worry about that anymore.

It also appeared that your former account was intended to be used for the purpose of telling the world about an organization, person or cause that you consider worthwhile. Unfortunately, many good causes are not sufficiently notable for their own Wikipedia article. Wikipedia is selective about the topics it includes, and has particular notability guidelines concerning organizations and companies.

You also placed your writing on the account's userpage, which is not an encyclopedia article. Userpages are for users to introduce themselves to the Wikipedia community and include very basic biographical data.

Finally, all users are discouraged from editing in any area where they have an inherent conflict of interest. If you work for or otherwise represent the organization, you would be in this position. Wikipedia has a plain and simple conflict of interest guide to help you understand what kind of editing is and is not acceptable in this circumstance. There is also further explanation at Wikipedia's frequently asked questions for organizations.

If you would like to try again, I'd recommend you follow the links that I left in this reply, as well as those in the welcome message I placed on your user talk page. If you believe this subject could be notable enough for a future article, then create a draft article here, in your user sandbox: User:Deasy66/sandbox. This is outside of both the main article space and user space, and is an acceptable place for you to work on your article.

As a show of good faith, I would also advise you to declare any connection you have to this organization on your userpage. Being transparent about your connections will help establish trust with other editors here, and they will be more willing to help you.

Good luck to you. --Drm310 (talk) 18:39, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi DRM310,

thanks for the comments, much appreciated. No, nobody said anything to me about anything, so I was pretty much stumbling about in the dark. I've read some of the stuff about posting, editing, etc. but most of it appears to have been written by people very familiar with Wikipedia and how it's supposed to work, but not life in general, certainly not mine. I can't make head or tail of most of it. When I start clicking on links it just gets more and more complicated and I just get depressed at my dearth of knowledge. It is a nationwide organisation in Ireland, so I would presume fairly notable.

The reason for creating the page was at the suggestion of the National Heritage Council of Ireland, which has its own page - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritage_Council_(Ireland). Pilgrim Paths is run under the umbrella of the Heritage Council, which is a government run body for the promotion of Heritage and Culture in Ireland.

I'm not actually a member of the Pilgrim Paths, but I do put info on their Facebook page and posts on their website, which is why they asked if I would take on the Wikipedia page. I did so thinking it was fairly straightforward, but was apparently completely wrong about this.

Anyway. I've tried another stab at it in the Sandbox. Would you mind taking a peek to see if it's any better.

Again, many thanks for your assistance.

Kind regards,

Diarmaid.

Deasy66 (talk) 22:50, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

@Deasy66: Certainly, Diarmaid. I'd be happy to look at it and offer some suggestions. I might not be able to reply right away, due to various real-world commitments (work, etc.) and the obvious time difference between Ireland and western Canada, where I am. But I'll do my best to help you out without overwhelming you. Just so you know, new editors often have a rough start because of their unfamiliarity with Wikipedia policies and culture. But if you can persevere, I think you'll find this quite an enjoyable and rewarding experience!

I'll make my comments on the talk page of your sandbox, which is here: User talk:Deasy66/sandbox. I look forward to working with you. --Drm310 (talk) 23:50, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

@Drm310:

Thanks for the very useful hints, much appreciated. I've had a stab at the references, I'm not sure if they're as they should be. They look fine to me, but I don't know if that works for Wikipedia. Any comments greatly appreciated.

I understand where you're coming from with work commitments, same here. I hadn't budgeted for becoming an editor in my spare time.

All the best,

Diarmaid. Deasy66 (talk) 09:41, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi again,

I've had another shot at this, would appreciate your feedback if possible.

I'm presuming that 'ping' thing tells you that I've posted here, if not and I'm using it incorrectly, apologies.

@Drm310:

Deasy66 (talk) 19:10, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

@Deasy666: - You're correct, it does notify me of your post. I just got back from a vacation, so I will review your changes soon. --Drm310 (talk) 18:46, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

@Drm310:

Hi DRM310,

Do you reckon this might be worth re-submitting? I presume you put the official website link at the end, I don't remember doing it.

Again, many thanks for your assistance.

Deasy66 (talk) 11:47, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

@Deasy66: Hi again,

Yes, I added that external link when I had a few spare minutes - sorry for not letting you know! I was trying to make it a little more like the standard article layout.

I think it might be ready for a resubmit now. The only thing I'm still a little uncertain about is the paragraph that mentions all the media coverage. That in itself might not be notable... but I'll let the reviewer make the call about it.

Overall, it looks pretty solid to me. I recommend that you resubmit it, and let's see what happens. Good luck!! --Drm310 (talk) 22:00, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

@Drm310:

Hi DRM310,

Have been away for a while and just checked back on Wikipedia. To my surprise the Pilgrim Paths article has been published. Many thanks for all your help with this, there is no way I'd ever have gotten anything published without you.

Again, many thanks for all your help, it is much appreciated.

Deasy66 (talk) 10:46, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Duke of Weselton

Hey I think I see what happened on that Duke of Weselton AfD discussion you started. I made it a redirect right before you tagged it for AfD and that made it collide with Frozen, heh. RegistryKey^(RegEdit) 22:31, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

@RegistryKey: Yeah, LOL. I just left a note on your talk page about it. :) --Drm310 (talk) 22:33, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Mendel Art Gallery

Hello Drm310, Thanks for the welcome. I'm finding it really interesting learning how Wikipedia works. I've added several suggested updates (with sources) to the Mendel Art Gallery page. If you have any suggestions about the information or sources I've added, please let me know. Is there anything I should do to notify editors of my suggestions?
Many thanks, Jmc881 (talk) 16:48, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Jmc881. I'm currently on vacation and my Internet access is limited. I'll review your changes on the weekend, when I should be back home. Thanks! --Drm310 (talk) 22:07, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi, and thanks. I've gathered sources and started two new articles - one for Remai Modern and one for Gregory Burke (museum director, writer and curator). Can you let me know where to add these to get feedback? Jmc881 (talk) 17:05, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

@Jmc881: I would make a userspace draft - these are subpages of your main userpage. I've created two for you:

• User:Jmc881/Remai Modern Art Gallery of Saskatchewan
• User:Jmc881/Gregory Burke (curator)

These don't necessarily need to be the titles of the eventual articles. However you will need some kind additional identifier for Gregory, as there is an existing article for a Gregory Burke, a playwright. I just chose "curator" to keep the title short. --Drm310 (talk) 20:55, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

I've started the userspace drafts. I'll keep working on them in the next couple weeks. Feedback is appreciated!Jmc881 (talk) 19:48, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

@Jmc881: I noticed! I left a note about something on your talk page, too. --Drm310 (talk) 20:42, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

British Imperial Party article

I have one question why was the page deleted when the policy is to welcome newcomers to the site and not scare them away and besides there is articles that are more irrelevant than this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dai pritchardss (talk • contribs) 17:26, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

It appears the the British Imperial party page was deleted by User:Yunshui under the WP:A7 speedy deletion criteria. That means the subject of the article did not sufficiently demonstrate its notability. Wikipedia is selective about the topics it includes... they must be notable to the world at large, as evidenced by significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. This administrator must have felt that this topic did not pass this criteria, and therefore deleted it.

I was not involved in whatever dispute arose from the deletion of that page. My message to you was only meant to point out your unacceptable conduct [1] [2] towards another editor. Wikipedia users are expected to behave in a civil manner and not harass each other when disputes arise. There is a prescribed dispute resolution policy that you must follow if you disagree with decisions that are made. Getting angry and lashing out is not going to get you the results you want.

On another note, you've made a total of three edits so far. Another editor, Sladbob, was upset about the same thing on Dai Pritchard's talk page. Are you the same person? --Drm310 (talk) 17:43, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

PIXO, Inc. Content Gaming

Hi DRM310,

I saw you're tag on our page for SD - PIXO,Inc Content Gaming. Can you please tell me what it is specifically we need to change or add to make our page acceptable? We are a content gaming network like trivia crack, quiz up etc. I will make the required changes right away so that it does not violate any Wiki rules.

Thank you very much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CF62:5DC0:9413:1394:C2C9:A43F (talk) 15:42, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

There are a number of problems, the first of which is that your account name is that of a business. As per Wikipedia's username policy, accounts cannot be named after businesses or organizations (WP:CORPNAME). You will need to request a change of username as it is quite likely that your account will be blocked on those grounds.

You should not be writing about your own company as it is a conflict of interest. Wikipedia's plain and simple conflict of interest guide and FAQ for organizations explain why this type of editing is highly discouraged.

Wikipedia is also not a business directory, and not every company in existence gets to have an article. Only companies that are notable as evidenced by significant coverage in reliable, independent sources are considered worthy of inclusion. --Drm310 (talk) 16:19, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks in anticipation for your help to understand the guidlines! And are you a photographer too? May i add you on FB? --Humarafm90 (talk) 03:00, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

@Humarafm90: You're welcome. If you need any help with interpreting policies and/or guidelines, let me know.

I am an amateur photographer, yes... I have a Flickr page that you can view if you like at https://www.flickr.com/photos/daryl_mitchell/. As for Facebook... sorry, but I choose restrict my contacts to a select few people that I have first met in person. --Drm310 (talk) 06:34, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

March 10 Response

Hello Drm310, thanks for reaching out to me while I am attempting to create a wikipedia page for the Zachary Taylor Parkway. I was completely unaware that I had deleted any maintenance templates from the page (honestly, I had to look up what a maintenance template was). Additionally, I will go back through the text and verify that everything is cited properly. I am having a difficult time inserting the infobox as I have no idea how to upload images. Do I need to load my image first before referencing it? Also, this is my first time using the "Talk" feature so I have no idea if I am doing this correctly...

TMGConsulting (talk) 17:23, 10 March 2015 (UTC) TMGConsulting

@TMGConsulting: Hello. Images on Wikipedia must be first uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, a separate but affiliated image repository site for Wikipedia. Please note that all images uploaded must be uploaded with a Creative Commons license, which permits others to re-use and/or adapt the image, even for commercial use.

There are more serious matters to discuss, however. Your username violates Wikipedia's username policy, which states that accounts cannot be named after a business. Accounts can only represent a single individual and cannot be shared or even imply shared use.

Also, your business is doing work for the subject of this article, which means you are in a conflict of interest position. As you are receiving money for this work, I will share with you Wikipedia's policy on paid advocacy, public relations, and marketing:

If the following applies to you:

you are receiving, or expect to receive, monetary or other benefits or considerations from editing Wikipedia as a representative of an organization (as an employee or contractor; as an employee or contractor of a firm hired by that organization for public-relations purposes; as owner, officer or other stakeholder; or by having some other form of close financial relationship with a topic you wish to write about),

then you are very strongly discouraged from directly editing Wikipedia in areas where those external relationships could reasonably be said to undermine your ability to remain neutral. If you have a financial connection to a topic – including, but not limited to, as an owner, employee, contractor or other stakeholder – you are advised to refrain from editing affected articles directly.

Therefore, I advise you to stop editing this article altogether and do the following:

1. Request a change of username for your account, or abandon it and create a new one for only yourself. Accounts named for business are blocked outright.
2. Openly declare your connection to the subject on your userpage and the article's talk page.
3. Review Wikipedia's plain and simple conflict of interest guide.
4. Restrict your activities to suggestions the article talk page, using reliable, third-party sources to verify your statements.

--Drm310 (talk) 17:37, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

A bowl of strawberries for you!

Thanks for fixing Arthur's page. I'll know to find an admin, rather than userfy, next time I find that kind of thing. FourViolas (talk) 18:48, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

@FourViolas: Thanks for the strawberries! Wikipedia:Oversight is where you can alert an admin about a minor posting too much personally identifiable information. --Drm310 (talk) 19:06, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Well, here's another case. I don't know if WP considers this user a major, but I emailed Oversight to let them decide. FourViolas (talk) 23:01, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, sometimes it can be ambiguous. If there's any doubt, I always err on the side of caution and contact Oversight. --Drm310 (talk) 05:23, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks

Hello, Drm310. You have new messages at 69.195.52.97's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Mindport

Requesting retrieval of deleted page Mindport in order to continue working in sandbox to conform to Wikipedia policies. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newvisionpublisher (talk • contribs) 20:57, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

@Newvisionpublisher: I did not delete the page, as I am not an administrator; User:RHaworth was the admin who deleted it. You can leave a request at his talk page. Just please remember to sign your posts by typing four tilde characters (~~~~) at the end of your message. --Drm310 (talk) 02:25, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Failla

Thanks, please see this and my warning Jimfbleak - talk to me?

Now blocked for one week with talk page access denied too. I view this as a shot across his bow to show we mean business. If he still doesn't learn, next time will be much longer Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:37, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

@Jimfbleak: Thanks for taking care of that. It's too bad when it must come to a block. But, he was given many opportunities to behave properly and at each one, he chose not to. Now he learns that there are consequences. --Drm310 (talk) 07:49, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Help

Can you help me correct some of my punctuation in my user pag, Have a Nice Day. BTW am planing to make an article about Marawi City what do you thinkHamem — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akosimem (talk • contribs) 06:17, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

@Akosimem: Well, I don't normally edit other peoples' userpages, but I will do it once for you as a favour. I do have some other advice to pass along.

On your userpage you should talk in the first person. Speak about yourself directly and use words like "I" and "me". Right now, you're talking about yourself in the third person, which makes your userpage look like a fake article.

I see that you're trying to link to another Wikipedia article, but you didn't do it correctly. To link to another Wikipedia article, use the article's title and surround it with two square brackets on each side. For example, for Manila you would write out [[Manila]] in your userpage code.

I think you should look through Wikipedia:Tutorial, which will help you learn the basics of coding on Wikipedia.

Am I correct in thinking that English is not your first language? If you speak Tagalog, there are a few editors here who also speak it and can answer questions in that language.

Finally, whenever you post on a talk page (but never in an article), always sign your posts by typing four tilde characters (~~~~~) at the end of your message. That will insert your username as well as the date and time of the message. It's important on a talk page to see who said what, and when. --Drm310 (talk) 03:45, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Bulverton

Thank you for your input, I moved to Bulverton in 2004 (I was born in Sidmouth in 1966, so its my local area) and live in a principle location in the hamlet - I have personally been involved in a range of issues in the immediate area for some years and have extensive local knowledge.

If there is any thing else you feel I can do to reassure you do let me know.

Bulverton (talk) 19:53, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

@Bulverton: I see. Can you provide published sources for your writings? Your own personal knowledge is not considered a reliable source, as it is considered unverifiable original research. Wikipedia articles must only summarize information that has been previously published in reliable, independent sources. --Drm310 (talk) 21:41, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Thought

Pretty sure most if not all of the editors on Brice Stratford are socks of each other. (If not, meat is obvious.) I haven't felt like filing an SPI because they (that particular group) tend to be vindictive on a couple of articles I wrote. Let me know if you file. Justlettersandnumbers may be interested as well. Thanks. Softlavender (talk) 05:37, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

@Softlavender: It appears that ship has already sailed: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BriceStratford/Archive. There might be meat puppetry and off-wiki WP:CANVASSing too, but without evidence there's not much to be done. There's an open thread at WP:COIN right now, so at the very least they're aware that they are being watched. --Drm310 (talk) 06:11, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Drm310 and Justlettersandnumbers, I think the instantaneous closure/archiving of that SPI was a mistake, and I have several other accounts I could add to the list and several other articles affected and indeed disrupted. I don't know why the clerk is taking the breezy and obsequious word of the main articles' subject over the observations/request of a longterm editor in good standing. I do not believe this is a case of various people living together and using the same computer(s). Due to the nearly identical nature of the edits and editing style (with the occasional diversionary tactic), I think at least several if not most or even all of them are the exact same person. Softlavender (talk) 06:25, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Drm310, Softlavender, I was a little surprised at the prompt closure of the SPI, certainly. I received a very courteous apology on my talk page from Brice Stratford, but I remain convinced that the explanation given is not the whole story and that we are looking at persistent long-term disruptive sockpuppetry. When compiling the report, I was not entirely convinced that every single account was the same, but some of them are, for sure. Since there are at least three fresh socks (RoodEnd,‎ Feast is Feast, "Theatre Royal, Windsor", all strangely opposed to the deletion of Windsor rep acting dynasty), and since you say you have more to add, may I suggest that one of you re-opens the SPI? It seems to me quite reasonable to ask for checkuser to clear this up one way or the other. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 07:44, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Is there any way for you to re-open it, instead of me? I will gladly chime in, but I have found these to be a vicious and persistent group of sockpuppets and they have already targeted several of my articles in the past and I do not want to be the initiator. Perhaps Bbb23 could help in terms of the overly rapid (nearly instantaneous) closure. Hey I never even got a ping from the mention of my name, it was closed so fast. Also, Binksternet may be interested in this case, it is so interesting and unusual (and problematic). Softlavender (talk) 07:51, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

• Note on the new AfD -- of all the four respondents so far, all of whom have voted Keep, two are new SPAs, and two are sleeper accounts created in June–August 2014 with a handful of diversionary edits at that time, and which are now SPAs on this subject. This tracks with the same sort of behavior that was occurring with the other accounts in June–August 2014. Softlavender (talk) 08:11, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

OK. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BriceStratford. If you have anything or anybody to add, please do. I'm disturbed to hear that the previous ping didn't work. I think that must be a software error, not because it was closed quickly. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:42, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for filing the re-open. I hope people take notice and take some action. This enormous game of sock/meat/warring/COI has been a source of enormous frustration. I added thoughts, articles, and accounts to the discussion. There's more I could probably say or find out but it's 10,000 o'clock here and I've probably said enough anyway for people to go on. I wish Bbb23 and Binksternet would get involved. Anyway, thanks again. Softlavender (talk) 12:43, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

I was pinged so I'm here to say that the SPI case will be stronger if you are able to identify stylistic similarities between accounts, which will cast doubt on the assertion that a bunch of people are using the same computers.

The accusation of meatpuppetry was not cleared by the note from Brice. A group of people directed by one of them, all working on the same articles, is a meatpuppet troupe. Binksternet (talk) 14:50, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

It's an exhausting ritual -- there are 25 of them. (@Justlettersandnumbers: There's another now: Gabby Road, and I wouldn't be surprised if most all of the contributors to Secret Cinema (company) are members of the farm). Bink, you are someone who loves to identify and detail stylistic similarities. I find it tedious and exhausting, especially when there are so many accounts. Some of the similarities are: Began editing in June–August of 2014 (sometimes as late as December 2014); made a number of either obvious preliminary diversionary edits to establish a "neutral" history, or edited preliminarily on articles in common with another sock, such as Secret Cinema (edited by known member TheFrontDeskMust). Propensity for odd/silly-sounding SNs and no userpage so the SN is red (not true on all of them -- the worst ringleaders MarlovianPlough and TheFrontDeskMust have userpages). An easy familiarity with Wikipedia style, mark-up, reference format, edit summaries. Edit-warring, often with detailed (faux) wiki-lawyering edit summaries. Tandem and/or tag-team edit-warring and POV-pushing on the target articles (Owle Schreame, Brice Stratford, Windsor rep dynasty, Ian Charleson Awards, etc.). A tendency to drown out the opposition with lengthy and seemingly wiki-ingratiating soliloquies on AfDs of the target articles. And so on. I've actually tried to distance myself from their antics but even from my self-imposed distancing I can relate that much. There are numerous other similarities; in fact, the farm never even breaks stride, it is so much in tandem, even though "differences" are occasionally attempted as another diversion. The worst example of their vandalism is July 22 - August 31 on Ian Charleson Awards -- the two main ringleaders, plus 2 IPs and 2 redlinks (note: Ddhume is not one of them).

The thing, is, I don't know how or where to put all this information, or where and how to list the new socks. It would be much easier of the whole thing could be re-started with all of the socks listed together and all of the targeted articles (which include Sam Wanamaker Award) listed. Also, we may not have the correct sock master -- it may be, for instance, Xanadu Reacher. I'm just not as familiar with SPI as you guys -- I think I've only filed once. (I've also already posted several novellas on that SPI and no one has responded.) Softlavender (talk) 23:29, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Regarding my page

Hey, i am new to Wikipedia and i have created a page of Palash Muchhal , i got a message that it's proposed for deletion because i didn't add any references in the end. so i added one but still that message appears on the top of the page which reads that if you don't insert a reliable source the page will be deleted. Please see to it that it should not be deleted.

BuggedBrat (talk) Thank You.

Just so you know, I am an experienced Wikipedia editor, but I am not an administrator. I have no power to cause or prevent the deletion of an article. I see that you have removed the proposed deletion template yourself, which has stopped the deletion process. That is considered acceptable, since you have addressed the immediate concern that caused the proposed deletion to be made.

However, the one reference you added does not guarantee the article's survival. There are still issues, and other editors may put it up for deletion using the articles for deletion or speedy deletion processes. In either of those cases, you cannot remove the tag on the article without consequences.

You should read up on a few things before continuing to work on the article:

1. Notability: Article subjects must be notable to be considered worthy of inclusion. Particular guidelines apply to people, particularly if they are living persons. See Wikipedia:Notability (people) and Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons.
2. Sources: The article subject must received significant coverage from multiple reliable sources that are independent. See Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources and Wikipedia:Independent sources.
3. Footnotes: The article text must be properly footnoted so that readers can verify the statements made in it. See Help:Referencing for beginners and Help:Footnotes.

Hopefully this has explained a few things and given you some guidance about what to do next. Good luck. --Drm310 (talk) 14:31, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Tri-State Allstars

I am trying to understand the reasoning for being potentially deleted. I am obviously a new user of Wikipedia so I accept all advice you may give. My page wasn't intended to advertise our team but rather to give information about this team in the same way that any other professional team has a page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tri-State Allstars (talk • contribs) 07:43, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

First of all, your account name is problematic. Per Wikipedia's username policy, account names cannot be named after an organization (WP:ORGNAME). Accounts must represent a single individual and cannot be shared or even imply shared use. You must request a change of username or your account will be blocked from editing.

Your userpage is not an encyclopedia article. It is intended for you, the individual user, to provide a small amount of biographical information and your Wikimedia-related activities. It is not intended for any sort of promotional writing or to host a fake article.

If you have a personal or professional connection to the team, it is improper for you to write about it as this is a conflict of interest. Please consult Wikipedia's plain and simple conflict of interest guide to learn why this type of editing is discouraged.

Sports teams must meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines for organizations to be considered worthy of inclusion. An organization is generally considered notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources.

Finally, you are not permitted to remove the speedy deletion tag that was placed on your userpage. I will be restoring it shortly. If you wish to contest the deletion, click the button in the deletion message and plead your case on your talk page. An administrator will evaluate the deletion nomination and make a decision according to Wikipedia's policies. --Drm310 (talk) 08:03, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Reasoning

Hi Drm310,

I am responding to your note about giving explanations for changes on the jordannah elizabeth page. I have been working to explain the pages I make on the page. I noticed it needed some work and there are many references out there. I will do my best to update and hopefully the page can become citation free.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Son2435 (talk • contribs) 19:18, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

@Son2435: Very well, just please make sure that they are reliable sources, as per Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. Also, please use citation templates as I had done previously. This formats citations in a consistent manner and assists the automated scripts (bots) in finding archived pages if citation links become broken.

P.S. I think you have confused some terminology. "Citations" refer to the inline references used in the article. I believe your goal of the page becoming "citation free" refers to the {{more footnotes}} maintenance tag at the top. --Drm310 (talk) 19:27, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

@Drm310 Thank you for clarifying. I hope my edits are sufficient. Son2435 (talk) 21:08, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

@Son2435: I'd be willing to review your edits whenever you like. You might find this link helpful as well - WP:REFPUNC. It is from Wikipedia's Manual of Style and describes the proper placement of citations around punctuation marks. --Drm310 (talk) 21:40, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

@Drm310 I would appreciate a look over as soon as you are available. I am able to make changes upon your advisement if that turns out to be the case. I have looked over the citation and punctuation guide and believe I have done well. We will see. Son2435 (talk) 21:52, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

@Drm310: I have updated inline citations. It would be great to know if the changes are acceptable. I appreciate your responsiveness and your time. Thanks. Son2435 (talk) 04:26, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

@Son2435: I will have a look when I have a bit of time this weekend. I'll leave any further comments on the article talk page, Talk:Jordannah Elizabeth. --Drm310 (talk) 05:34, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

@Drm310: Thank you.

A beer for you!

alright thanks alot Ceechrison (talk) 22:26, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

about barwali

Hi, thamx for taking any action.But why you removed the link of this article. The link was helpful to other. Tell me cause Brijmohan Swami Barwali (talk) 07:39, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

The link did not help to verify the text it was placed beside, which is the purpose of an inline citation. Regardless, linking to unreliable sources is not helpful because it could give the reader potentially misleading information.

I suggest you have a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Indian_cities, which has details about how articles about cities/towns in India should be written. There are conventions to follow for layout and content. It includes the use of the settlement infobox that has multiple options for displaying geographic coordinates.

It also appears that English is not your first language. Did you know that there are other versions of Wikipedia in different languages (for example, Hindi Wikipedia)? Perhaps you might want to try editing in one of them if you're having difficulty in English Wikipedia. --Drm310 (talk) 13:16, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Their lordships

This is a tricky one. My thoughts

• I don't like the articles,which are obviously COI and self-serving, but I can't see how to get rid of them, since they are about places and therefore can't easily be whacked as non-notable. The current versions aren't particularly spammy, and the c/v version was replaced with the shorter current form after I deleted it
• Since the user names are of places rather than companies or products,I don't think I can block as spam user names, just as we don't block people using the name of an individual
• It's the misuse of multiple accounts that is the problem, such as to evade a block, or post false votes at Articles for deletion. I can't see that this is the case here. The charitable view might be that a newbie is just changing the user name each time to match the article they are creating, and creating a category isn't misbehaviour, although I don't know if this one is worthwhile. Unless I've missed something, I don't think a sock claim would succeed.

The removal of maintenance tags we can address, but I think our hands are tied on anything more drastic at present, although I'd welcome you convincing me that isn't the case! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:57, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

following more maintenance tag edit warring, I've given a final warning, and I'll block both accounts if there is another episode Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:05, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

@Jimfbleak: Thanks. I'll explain WP:COI, WP:OWN and also WP:ENN to both of them. If the articles are about places, then they do a poor job of separating the topics of the place from the feudal lordship title, already covered an existing article called Lord of the manor. At the very least, I'll stub them because they are so short. --Drm310 (talk) 12:58, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Good. The trouble is that COI is not actually forbidden as long as the article itself is neutral, and, as I indicated above, I'm not sure whether we can speedy (or AFD) for places, especially as they are reffed and have historic links. I'd welcome your view since on my talk pagethere is a lengthy discussion where they are asking for the COI and notability tags to be removed. I've said to wait until you have had an input, but we either have to remove the tags or take/suggest some action on them. Your suggestions of explaining the policies and stubbing the articles makes a lot of sense, regardless. Thanks Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:04, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

I will quickly reply now and give a more thorough reply later in the day. Real life concerns prevent me from giving it much attention at the moment. --Drm310 (talk) 18:16, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Kashmir window

Hi Drm310, just to let you know that I removed the speedy tag from this, as the author has found a source, and he and I are discussing on talk whether the article should be undeleted. I don't have time to look closely at it right now, but I'll look again tomorrow. Sarah (SV) ^(talk) 05:22, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Copyright images

Hi Drm310,

I noticed that you left a message about copyright and image use in some of my edits. You also deleted the images that I have added and I don't understand why. The images posted are my own creation and pertinent to the topic. If you could help me understand what's up I will be able to better contribute. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Atlasjupi (talk • contribs) 18:13, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

hi Drm310,

I noticed that you deleted images that I added citing copyright issues. The images that I contributed to the right place are my own creation and I own the rights to publish and distribute. Could you please clarify what was the issue and reasoning behind your deleting them so that I can avoid any mistakes in the future?

Thank you! Atlasjupi (talk) 18:20, 4 June 2015 (UTC) Atlasjupi

@Atlasjupi: The attribution you supplied for the images linked to websites that had copyright notices, which conflicts with the CC BY-SA 3.0 license that images must be released under. Review the terms listed under Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials and try the method described under Granting us permission to copy material already online. --Drm310 (talk) 21:28, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Removing "Multiple Issues" Warnings

Hi: I've been editing the Page for Shawn Amos for several years, and to the best of my understanding we've since addressed the issues that editors noted back in May 2012. Can you let me know how we can remove those warnings at the top of the Page? Presumably I can edit them out myself, but I'm not clear on whether or not that is permissible. Or if there are any remaining issues, can you please let me know what they are so I can take care of them? Thank you! edit: just posted this on the Talk Page for the entry itself, responding to another editor Christinelusey (talk) 02:06, 7 July 2015 (UTC)ChristineLusey

Just posted about this on the Talk Page for the entry itself after noticing a more recent entry from another editor --Christinelusey (talk) 02:06, 7 July 2015 (UTC)ChristineLusey

I've replied to this at Talk:Shawn Amos. --Drm310 (talk) 20:45, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

St. Catherine's Monastery

Hi Drm310, can you please leave the Friends of Mount Sinai Monastery link up. This is an organization directly working with St. Catherine's Monastery to spread news about the Monastery and also support them. Please contact them through the website if you have any questions, and they can put you in touch with someone from the Monastery if you need verification. Thanks. PeterPonder (talk) 04:58, 15 July 2015 (UTC)User:PeterPonder

@PeterPonder: Replied at Talk:Saint Catherine's Monastery. --Drm310 (talk) 05:14, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Replied to Drm310 with question at Talk:Saint Catherine's Monastery.PeterPonder (talk) 05:21, 15 July 2015 (UTC)User:PeterPonder

Added another comment at Talk:Saint Catherine's Monastery. If I add questions/comments there, will you automatically receive them? I was just adding things here as it is not clear to me if you will get messages posted to you on that page. Thanks. PeterPonder (talk) 05:33, 15 July 2015 (UTC)User:PeterPonder

@PeterPonder: Yes, if you use the {{reply to}} template (as you've done already), it will alert me to any new comments you leave. Just FYI, it's also standard practice to indent new messages with colons (:). Indent one additional level than the previous message - for example, I used three to indent this line. If you were to reply, you would begin your message with four colons. This keeps the conversation thread neatly sorted and easier to read. --Drm310 (talk) 17:22, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

@Drm310: Got it, thanks for your help!

BOY WHATS UR DAMAGE

ok i created the julianyewest wikipedia page to educate others about an influential woman and ur trying to take it down??? i dont see why??? if u think its an autobiography its not lol!!! keep my page up man

Replied at your talk page. Please also sign your posts when placing comments on talk pages or pages with active discussions. Thanks. --Drm310 (talk) 05:30, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

uh shes real??? have u seen her blog its fantastic

I'm confining my replies on your talk page, so that the discussion is not split across two places. Any further discussion here will not affect the outcome or the actions that result from it. --Drm310 (talk) 05:44, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Chris Hyndman

Yeah, I was actually just about to propose the very same thing — not just because of that alone, but because there's also been at least one unsourced attempt, also by an unregistered new user, to portray it as a confirmed suicide (as well as a few edits that have actually had to be revision-deleted for being extremely inappropriate.) Thanks for the support, I think I'll go ahead with it now that I know there's some backup support. Bearcat (talk) 21:13, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

question

i just want to find out how to get a wikipedia page written on me so it'll come up when im googled — Preceding unsigned comment added by TRAXXSANDERS (talk • contribs) 20:35, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

@TRAXXSANDERS: Wikipedia is not a place like Facebook or LinkedIn for people to write about themselves. It is a different sort of site, a project to build an encyclopedia, so it is selective about subjects for articles. Writing about oneself is looked down upon, for reasons explained at Wikipedia is not about YOU and Wikipedia:Autobiography. Wikipedia doesn't exist to help someone gain notability - it is to present subjects about people (and other things) that are already notable.

Only if and when you meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines for people will you get to have an article, and it can't be written by you or someone who knows you. Using Wikipedia for self-promotion and publicity is one of the many things that Wikipedia is not. If you want to write about yourself and improve your search engine rankings, there are many alternative outlets instead of Wikipedia that you can use. Good luck. --Drm310 (talk) 20:50, 11 August 2015 (UTC)