This is an archive of past discussions with User:DatGuy. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
@Dweller: On the courtesy blanking section in deletion policy, it says that a discussion will have its content hidden from view based on the judgment of the community, an administrator, or another functionary. This generally is not done except under rare circumstances, such as where public view of the discussion may cause harm to some person or organisation. I have no idea why a request for bureaucratship will be able to cause harm to someone. Cheers, Dat GuyTalkContribs14:22, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
I wouldn't know the answer to the question without asking Moe Epsilon, but I'm not sure he'd remember after 3+ years. Nihonjoe might remember. But wouldn't it have been easiest/most courteous just to ask them first? --Dweller (talk) 14:24, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
Cheers. As it's called "courtesy blanking", let's do our best to be courteous :-) In that spirit, would you mind reverting yourself in the meantime? (Btw Nihonjoe is one of my fellow crats and is very much active - I've already pinged him.). --Dweller (talk) 14:34, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
I have no idea why it was blanked. If I was the one who requested it, I don't recall it. It was three years ago, and I can't think of anything in the discussion I'd want hidden (at least not without looking through it). ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 19:41, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
I am getting too old to remember stuff off-hand, so I did some digging and found this. It indeed was a request by @Nihonjoe: to have it courtesy blanked by someone, which I fulfilled. If Nihonjoe wants it restored I don't see why it can't be unblanked. Regards, — MoeEpsilon07:31, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
Having taken a peek, I'm guessing that it was because of the cesspit that began on the RfB page and moved to the talk. --Dweller (talk) 14:45, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
That could very well be. I seem to remember something being taken out of context and interpolated beyond recognition. At this point, I really don't care about it. I'm fine either way. Actually, I'd prefer they be left blanked. As I mentioned in the request, people can still pull up things if they want to, but search engines won't find it. All that mess is better left less visible. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 19:21, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Toby 'TobiWan' Dawson 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 notice from the top of the article. The Drover's Wife (talk) 23:51, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
A credible source is a source that is reliable. For example, news articles such as BBC are reliable sources. A well-known book can be a reliable source. However, an editor with a conflict of interest on the subject is not a reliable source. Dat GuyTalkContribs10:23, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
Is the credible source your wage packet?
Sure you are not robot. What written is very conventional. Tell me about different types of business practices. Every heard of killing someone with a signiture Jumper47 (talk) 10:36, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the vouch at RPP - normally I can deal with it and have a little chat (as I am now - I'm calm) or just revert straight off, but it's been a little overwhelming recently -- samtarwhisper17:01, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
Source
Hi I am Sarthak Sharma, Class7-c, from India. I don't know how to provide a source. Please tell me.
It is my humble request.
Thank You
Regards- Sarthak Sharma
@Largoplazo: I did it but I think it will still be relisted or something, although I won't participate in the discussion now. Next time, you might want to add your comment below the notices and just reference your comment above. Dat GuyTalkContribs14:00, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
ArpanjainDI (talk) 14:52, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
Please help suggest how I can get better proofs or cites for my page - Design Info.
Also I earnestly request you to add and remove any information on the page to make it better and more acceptabe by Wiki.
Email - sales@designinfo.in for any suggestions.
This request for help from administrators has been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please reapply the {{admin help}} template, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page.
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.
I'm confused about why this submission was declined. It has significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. It shouldn't matter that several of the articles referenced are hosted by the same web portal. The article meets notability guidelines and would easily survive an AfD, in the unlikely even that someone made such an uninformed nomination. This draft should be moved into the mainspace; pushing a contributor away with moving goalpost criteria doesn't help anyone. GaryColemanFan (talk) 23:27, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
The four stories from Canadian Online Explorer are more than enough to meet notability and reliable source guidelines. You're making up criteria that aren't reflected in policy or guidelines. At this point, the article could be moved into mainspace with no problem. Since the IP can't do that, it looks like the best solution would be for me to move it myself to avoid non-policy based rejection. GaryColemanFan (talk) 05:53, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Primefac was:
This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.
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:Vineeth Mohan and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
I had to resubmit the article since the previous reviewer did not answer my question. Would you please help (see below)?
Dear Reviewer,
My article was about `Haider Khaleel Raad` has declined 3 times for different reasons! First it was a referencing issue, then external links, and now about notability. I believe along with many academics in this field that the person I am writing about is notable in his field. He is an author of 2 books (one of which was ranked number one best selling on Amazon last year under Aerodynamics category), and more than 50 articles of high impact factor. Could you please show me the difference in terms of notability and referencing between my article and these 2 examples?
Hmmm.. Decat-ing blocked users would be pretty trivial - I'll work on a script in the background as a learning exercise and maybe take it to the approval group if you/others request it -- samtarwhisper22:06, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
Proposed deletion may be used only once
Please note that WP:Proposed deletion is intended for proposed deletions that can be reasonably expected to be uncontroversial. Accordingly, a prod tag "may only be placed on an article a single time. Any editor (including the article's creator) may object to the deletion by simply removing the tag; this action permanently cancels the proposed deletion via PROD." The more formal review procedure of WP:Articles for deletion remains available. Thanks! --Arxiloxos (talk) 23:55, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
Telegram
Hello, DatGuy/Archives/2016. Please check your email; you've got mail! Message added 14:15, 7 January 2016 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Hello DatGuy. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Shankar filmography, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Several other users have edited the page. . Thank you. GedUK14:11, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
answering help me requests
Good job answering the help-me request such as at User talk:Aniyahboo1 however it would be helpful if you do a couple things while you're at it... (1) cleanup (WP:REFACTOR) their original message so it has proper formatting; (2) be sure to answer their message after their signature; and (3) remove the template by changing it to {{help me-helped}}... all the best, and good work! Tiggerjay (talk) 16:40, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.
Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by SwisterTwister was:
This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.
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:Metro TeenAIDS and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
7&6=thirteen (☎) has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it.
To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
Flatterer. I have no aspirations. I don't use tools (I am almost entirely a manual editor) and since I don't have them don't know what I would do if I were handed them. It would be a real responsibility, and I take that stuff seriously. When I got into the top 400 wikipedians of all time maybe. 22:22, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by SwisterTwister was:
This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.
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:Reginald Wong Jr. and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
Good catch. However, she is my opinion important and interesting enough that I am rewriting the article. Besides the first section which was copyvio from the source given, most of the rest is probably copied also, and I plan to cut out everything not directly about her, and rewrite the rest. DGG ( talk ) 19:21, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
Thank. I'll be glad to look at it. It can be difficult to do this properly without copyvio, but in most cases the detail is better summarized. I'm also going to check the links & content for the pages of the various Auschwitz physicians DGG ( talk ) 06:35, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
I appreciate your diligence in maintaining the integrity of the page regarding the fairy tale The Light Princess, however I disagree that the change I made was not constructive. Extensive information about an adaptation of the fairy tale belongs on its own page, as has been done with works like Kinky Boots (film), Wicked (Maguire novel), and other stories and media that have been adapted to stage productions. I'd be interested in seeing other examples of articles in the style of this one, as it doesn't make sense to have so much information not relevant to the original work, for which the page is titled. Please share your thoughts. Thanks.
Eric.yarham (talk) 16:43, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Rawest Nigga alive.jpg. 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).
Kindly refrain from alleging that something is vandalism without proper research. Such posts only discourage dedicated editors from becoming credible.
Abesam (talk) 18:36, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
Problem with the same user
Hi,
I added more sources and details to Kurdish-Turkish conflict (1978-present) and that guy prevented my changes. He says that only captured soldiers who are not released be in the infobox and not all captured.
I really don't understand his logic. Can you please help me with this?Ferakp (talk) 11:10, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
I got stuck with a relative's health issue and a couple of Wikithings including an edit-a-thon. Tomorrow we'll start for sure. --Tito Dutta (talk) 15:38, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
Alice Roberts reverted proof that she is no longer vegetarian, but prescatarian
Hi DatGuy,
what was your precise reason for reverting the change? I just watched this interview and she said herself, that since she had kids, she is no longer a vegetarian, but a pescatarian.
I'm stunned by people like you. Have you even watched the provided link? Did you see it's from the Account of "The Royal Insitution", which has editorial oversight?
You want to look in the rulebook of wikipedia for citing youtube: YouTube and similar sites do not have editorial oversight engaged in scrutinizing content so editors need to watch out for the potential unreliability of the user uploading the video. There are channels for videos uploaded by agencies and organizations generally considered reliable such as that of the Associated Press on YouTube. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Videos_as_references)
So if you want to keep the false statement of Alice being a vegetarian, be my guest. But you do work actively against truth and knowledge. Live long and prosper.
DatGuy, thanks for reaching out. I've submitted a page for review on behalf of a client and am currently waiting to hear back. A few questions on that point: 1) Is there a way to pull the article so I don't get in trouble given my COI? 2) If the article is reviewed and accepted, do I have to take any further steps if I'd like to make future edits? 3) If my article is denied, should I have you review and approve it, and then have you submit it?
Please search in English or Chinese, eg via Google News or LinkedIn. It is easy to check the complete list of the central state-owned companies: http://www.sasac.gov.cn/n86114/n86137/index.html of the PRC (sorry, no English version of the list on their official site.)
Such huge Chinese "National Group" in is too famous to exist. Only Big 3 "National" oil/gas groups there (plus SinoChem if for refining).
The only source is too ridiculous to look like a "national"-level official website. It just lists some oil refining companies (the first being a local branch of SINOPEC, one of the Big 3) and fake a title of "National Group" even with a semantically wrong Chinese image title ("China National Refinery-Factory Group Corporation" instead of its claimed text "China National Refinery Corporation").
The "National Group"'s attempted website provides no telephone number but a contact address whose format is wrong
(corrected: Suite 3801, K. Wah Centre, No. 1010, Middle Huaihai Road, Shanghai, 200031, China)
The address has been used by other companies.
Hi there! I stumbled on the article while patrolling speedys and my search came up with a website, which made me question the A11 criteria and made me think that no one had looked into this (my mistake). I finally came over to your talk page. This is a puzzling case! A few things about this article are weird. The creator of the article, Luckylehana only made a few edits ever, and none of them are screaming out at me as hoaxes or vandalism. Also, the way that the unnamed user above can't explain anything is strange. The fact that the English version of a Chinese site looks "weird" isn't a reason to think it's not real. A lot of Chinese web sites look that way (I do a few Chinese bios). If you want to have more eyes look at this, send it up to AfD. A Speedy isn't the best way to get this done, since they fly below the radar. I tagged the article with a WikiProject China, and it might be a good idea to ask for help, there, too. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 23:29, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
I am a Chinese speaking Standard Chinese from Shanghai. I read news about China's politics and economy every day. It is very apparent to any reasonable Chinese that such huge corp. does not really exist. That website itself is not a reliable source. I found a list of the top-level state-owned companies in English, however old: http://www.gov.cn/misc/2005-10/21/content_80894.htm. But a recent Chinese version can be machine-translated: http://www.sasac.gov.cn/n86114/n86137/index.html. See also: List of government-owned companies of China. Can you believe that "National Group" has only that isolated website-building practice (No any other source or any external link to it) only in English (no Chinese version)? Thank you. -- 121.44.225.51 (talk) 03:13, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.
Hello, DatGuy, and welcome to STiki! Thank you for your recent contributions using our tool. We at STiki hope you like using the tool and decide to continue using it in the future. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
Userboxes - Do not hesitate to wear the STiki label with pride by choosing from a selection of userboxes!
We hope you enjoy maintaining Wikipedia with STiki! If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions don't hesitate to drop a note over at the STiki talk page and we'll be more than happy to help. Again, welcome, and thanks! West.andrew.g (developer) and Ugog Nizdast (talk) 12:25, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Note: Having a username change after you start using STiki will reset your classification count. Please let us know about such changes on the talk page page to avoid confusion in issuing milestone awards. You can also request for your previous STiki contributions to be reassigned to your new account name.
The Yoddhas, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
Did you read the manual of style yet? The issues I saw were the use of abbreviations, such as 1st, not spelling numbers as words in text eg 4 should read "four". Also there was wrong capitalisation of headings, and wrong placement of reference tags. The idea is for you to read the manual of style and identify what you have been doing differently from it. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:46, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
For AWB we actually want the operator to be able to tell if it is making the right suggestions, so that they can take responsibility for it. AWB is not a substitute for knowing what to do. AWB is to make doing the right thing faster. Let me know when your comprehension of manual of style is good enough. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:46, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello - I had received a message that I had had a sockpuppetry investigation opened on my Talk page. I followed up with a message on the investigation page; as I noted, it is my intent to abide by Wikipedia's policies, but there are specific issues with this situation which I would like to have addressed. Thank you very much for your attention.Veritas20132014 (talk) 03:24, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Sorry
Hi DatGuy.
My apologies, I was trying to tag the page for speedy deletion as its a duplicate of "Fina Biosolutions LLC". I'm working on expanding that page today so it isn't a stub.
Thank you for the mind-numbing array of tools and reference material. I'm sure my technique was crude and perhaps out of the bounds necessary for consideration.
But my question is simple. I suggested two additions in good faith. Have they been rejected? Are they being considered? They are both legitimate additions to the page "People from Park Ridge, Illinois," and I was hoping they'd be added.
I really don't have the man-days necessary to master all the resources you've provided. I just wanted to add three names. Is there a simple way I can do that? Or are my additions undergoing some scrutiny?
.jpg)
.jpg)
Dat GuyTalkContribs 21:23, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
Note: Discussion at IRC. Dat GuyTalkContribs 16:17, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
Dat GuyTalkContribs 06:21, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
