User talk:Moonriddengirl/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Could you take a look at...?

Thanks for deleting Carl Farmer, created by User:Alex+levi. I've nominated the two images he uploaded for use in that attack article, Image:Carl 2.jpg and Image:Carl.jpg, for speedy deletion as in the past I've seen an admin speedily deleting images that had been uploaded and used purely for vandalism. Care to take a look and see whether you agree with my tagging? Regards, Bencherlite^Talk 01:07, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree with your tagging. Done. Thanks for pointing it out. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 01:10, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Ta. Nice work. See you next time! Bencherlite^Talk 01:15, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Ridley Road Market

Hi. As a long standing member of the Hackney community I am deeply distressed to find out this evening that the entire articles on Ridley Road Market and Chatsworth Road Markets have been deleted. I spent hours on these. Perhaps a note at the top of the page with alteration advice might have been more appropriate rather than total demolition and a smug little "please feel free to make further comtributions". I'm finding it rather difficult not to be angry with you. The market is a vital part of my community and information was taken from various sources, how can I plaigarise facts on when its open and what it sells. I would appreciate uyour comments on your destruction of my labours and i want them back so i can redraft them. Don't mess with people in this way, you're exploiting your position of power. I've good reason to be angry at you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drfinn (talk • contribs) 23 October 2007

I'm sorry for your frustration, but Wikipedia has a legal imperative to immediately remove material that is taken verbatim from other sources. Using such material is contrary to the laws of the United States and Florida, where Wikipedia exists as a legal entity. Sentences must not be copied from other sources unless they are legally in public domain. You may wish to review Wikipedia:Copyrights. If you disagree with my interpretation of policy with regards to the deletion of this article, you may request a deletion review, where other administrators can review the article and determine if they agree with the closure. If you choose to do so and have any problems with the process, please let me know and I will try to assist you. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 02:12, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Deletion review

Re: your comments at User_talk:Geo_Swan#Deletion_review.2FContent_review, thanks. You deserve a barnstar. Now, if I can find one in my bag.... :-) Bearian 17:54, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Wow! You're the one who deserves the barnstar! I had no idea there was so much going on in the background of that content review request. (I had to research to find out why this one was of interest. :D) Truly impressive peacemaking efforts. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 18:11, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Wow, thanks, I have to prevent my students from seeing me cry. Bearian 18:24, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:TheBlantonWebsterBand.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:TheBlantonWebsterBand.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 18:37, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Sherrod E. Skinner, Jr.

I messed up the template for this page and I don't know how to revert to a previous edit. *help* Pen of bushido 18:51, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Never mind--I think my web browser just interpreted the page wrong and it went haywire. Sorry to bother you. Pen of bushido 18:53, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

No bother. I'm glad it worked out. :D --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 18:58, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the userification. Geo Swan 20:17, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Simon Horn

137.73.174.107. why did you delete my artical on "simon horn" pure vandalism????, do the reserch! have a look. or is this just a Homophobic action? —Preceding comment was added at 15:21, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

If you are also user:Simonhorn, please do not continue recreating this article. The history of this article and your contributions are visible in logs—this includes not only your creation of the article, with its misleading references, but also your contribution to the deletion discussion on the article requesting that the article be deleted because the material is libelous. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:28, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

section

I am fucked in the head. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.31.118.17 (talk) 07:32, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Parser (CGI language)

Hi,

Parser (CGI language) was prodded and deleted. I wrote it, but i somehow missed the prodding and didn't get a chance to contest.

The prodder agreed to undeletion: User talk:Quuxplusone#Parser (CGI language).

I am an admin myself, but to avoid any possible conflicts of interest i ask you to undelete it.

Thanks in advance. --Amir E. Aharoni 07:44, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

No problem. It's back, sans the PROD notice. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 11:25, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the barnstar. It's nice to be recognized by other hardworking help deskers :) Leebo ^T/C 14:33, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

NYCmetroProject on Wikipedia (appeal/forum/conversation thread/etc.)

any conclusions on this moonriddengirl? i wrote an appeal.....and added a hangon attribute to the page. the project is strictly involved in a photodocumentary of nyc subways and its people. nyc subways are is pretty viable source/hefty subject....i believe it even makes reference to Bruce davidson (photographer) who explored the project back in the 80's. anyway, please help. it's notable. Quaginc 14:44, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I reported my personal conclusions at Wikipedia:Drawing_board#NYCmetroProject_on_Wikipedia_.28appeal.2Fforum.2Fconversation_thread.2Fetc..29 on October 11th. Beyond that, I'm afraid my best suggestion would be to open the conversation with people experienced in articles related to the subject—perhaps at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New York City or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Photography. Good luck. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:47, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

WP:ER

I thank you for your contributions to my editor review, I have read it, and will stop being so trigger happy with the minor edit button. :) Dreamy ^§ 19:26, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. :) I hope that it will be helpful to you. I always worry that those things come off sounding overly negative, since of course you can put a lot more time into saying "this is how you might improve" as opposed to "this is what you're doing right". :D --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 19:28, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Vinea (soft drink) page deletion

Can you explain your reason for deleting the page as you've set the chain reaction for others to delete the other pages changes and it took me a time to trace various user/admins so now there are up to 3 people involved in deletion of one simple article describing a soft drink. How about instead of deleting you actually improve article/s. If you are not familiar with the drink its still does not justify the action. Stonufka 12:15, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

(duplicating response) The article above was tagged on 18 October 2007 with a {{prod}} template suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor who tagged this article felt it might not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion because he or she believed it was a "Non-notable soft drink". Prod deletions are supposed to be non-controversial; the prod template can be removed by any editor who disagrees, including the article's creator. While editors who propose deletion are encouraged to notify article creators, you were evidently not notified. I'm sorry that I did not notice this and contact you about it at the time I processed the expired prod.

However, while the article was deleted, articles deleted through this process of Wikipedia's deletion policy may be restored at any time on request. Since obviously you protest the deletion, I have restored the article. Note that it might still be sent for review at Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. You may wish to review the notability guidelines for companies and products to see the criteria by which such articles are assessed. The article will need verification through reliable, secondary sources. Thank you for contacting me, and, again, I apologize for not realizing that you had not been notified at the time. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:09, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the speedy reply , I have included several external links to the article. I would also like to point to the list of soft drinks on Wikipedia List_of_soft_drinks_by_country where the drink is mentioned. I'm curious, what makes a soft drink brand notable? World wide sales or marketing perhaps? I did not include manufacturer as that is in my view irrelevant and considering that originally the Vinea article pointed to a fictional space object I concluded that it would only be right to correct it and include what is in my view notable product.BTW its lovely drink I miss it greatly in my part of the world. Stonufka 13:24, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Generally notability is established for products by demonstrating that other people are talking about it, by including references to reliable sources where the product is being discussed. As the guideline says, "The depth of coverage of the subject by the source must be considered. If the depth of coverage is not substantial, then multiple independent sources should be cited to establish notability". Personally, I find this to be one of the more slippery areas of Wikipedia. In order for an article to exist, you have to establish notability. If you claim notability, people will often interpret the article as overly promotional. Generally what I would do is find a good article on a similar product and use it as a kind of template. For example, Pepsi. It includes information on the history and the marketing of the product as well as its ingredients. It's also got good references. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:34, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Gangsta M.D.

Hi Moonriddengirl - Thanks for your note. You are right, I was not aware that the article was deleted. While I would have liked to know about the proposed deletion when it was posted, I think at this point it is better to leave things as they are. If the film moves further in production perhaps we can revisit the development of an article at that time. Regards, Classicfilms 17:19, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

NPWatcher

Can you please approve my NPWatcher request? Or direct me to someone who will? -Gawaxay (talk • contribs • count) 17:24, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm not actually involved with NPWatcher. Let me see what I can find out. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:27, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Okay, User_talk:Snowolf seems to be the go-to guy for that. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:28, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Aren't you an admin? Or am I making myself look stupid? -Gawaxay (talk • contribs • count) 17:32, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

I am an admin, yes, and you're not making yourself look stupid. :) But admins aren't involved with every wikiproject or bot. Each one has its own specific maintainers, who may or may not also be admins. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:34, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

It says any admin can approve... -Gawaxay (talk • contribs • count) 17:38, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Hmm. I've never used the program. Let me take a look. Oh, I see! It's over here. Since I've never used the program and really am not even sure how it's used, I think it would probably be better for you to check in with an administrator who is familiar with it. I note that it says you can bug folks "if you don't get a timely response". You might want to wait a day or so for the regular process to work. If nothing is done within that time, you should probably request it of an admin who is active in that area. I see that, as I said above, Snowolf is the go-to guy. It seems that SQL has also recently processed some requests. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:03, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Admin noticeboard request

I made a request concerning my watchlist here concerning my watchlist. I blieve you can help and am therefore appealing to you. Thanks, Laleena 18:51, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Based on the response at ANI, it seems that this may be resolved? If there are oddities still showing, I'd be happy to try to help you if I can. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:04, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Separating out messages :)

Thanks for the message! -- Ssilvers 02:56, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

No problem. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:25, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Pleezbaleevit!

Hello, regarding your decline of my speedy delete nomination, I'd like to point out that this is just an album that can't go further of a track listing and an infobox. If you go to the artist's page you would see it's a redirect to this album. That's an article with little or no content. I suggest you to reconsider your decision. Thank you.--Tasc0 02:26, 29 October 2007 (UTC) <removing unrelated message to a new section>

May I ask who are you? I'm confused.--Tasc0 03:10, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Nothing to do with this. :) It was in relation to a message I had left at his (or her) page. Anyway, on to business. "No content" has a very specific definition in relation to CSD. "Any article (other than disambiguation pages) consisting only of external links, category tags and "see also" sections, rephrasing of the title, and/or chat-like comments. However, a very short article may be a valid stub if it has context". Under non-criteria, the WP:CSD policy specifies that, "Short articles with sufficient content and context to qualify as stubs may not be speedily deleted under criteria A1 and A3; other criteria may still apply". It could be nominated under other criteria, but I just ducked over to AMG, and it seems that the album charted on several Billboard charts, which qualifies it (and its band) under WP:MUSIC. I'll add the material I've found to help you determine if you think the article should be examined at WP:AFD. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:25, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Ok, what do you think of Doggy's Angels now?

Wow! Looking good. :D --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 22:48, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh, but note that the single information on AMG seems to be off, according to the source I found from Billboard itself (#3). Happens sometime. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 22:49, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Would you post the source? I didn't find that information on http://www.billboard.com. Thanks.--Tasc0 23:55, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

It's the article at footnote #3: here. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 00:03, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I was looking in the charts history.

Well, I have to say I don't understand or either I'm confused. You're talking about the single. In the article it says it peaked the Hot R&B/Hip-hop singles. In the source number three, it says that it's at number 1 on the Hot rap singles. That doesn't mean that the information in AMG is wrong.--Tasc0 02:04, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

<reset indent>Doh! You're right! I didn't notice it was a different chart. Sorry. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 02:06, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

It's ok, don't worry. I'll add that information to the artist's article. I'm glad to help.--Tasc0 02:10, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I have to say, that's an impressive turn-around for an article that was a redirect this time yesterday. :D --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 02:12, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I agree. I always try to improve the articles where there's information avaiable. It's a same the user who created the article thinks I'm a egotistical person. I even added the fair use to the cover of the album.--Tasc0 02:16, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Wow! You two have history I see. :/ Well, you can take some satisfaction in knowing that most editors would have tagged the artist page for an A7 off the bat. A redirect is hardly an assertion of notability. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 02:21, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

It's not about that he thinks that way. I'm tired of following the policies and people who think they can act like they feel like, go to my talk page and attack me. If you want, in my talk page is the message he left. But I already reported that to the administrator who dealed in that article. I'm waiting her reply.--Tasc0 02:26, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I hope that she can help you deal with it to your satisfaction. I've looked through the history, and your decision to disengage until she responds seems like a good one. :/ --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 02:35, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I decided to follow this. I'm not scared he report me, we both know the source he used are no reliables and the information may contain WP:OR.--Tasc0 02:42, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Cute. :) I've never seen that one. Well, it's bedtime in my part of the world. I hope that the other administrator is back online and able to help out soon. Again, good work on the article. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 02:45, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

My mistake

There was a final warning on the 17th, and a 1 week block following. I didn't realize a block occurred and reported. Looks like the person stopped though thankfully. Kwsn (Ni!) 18:45, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for keeping an eye on things. :) As an RC patroller myself, I know how hectic that can get. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 18:46, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, more so around this time when the school kids are around. Kwsn (Ni!) 18:47, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Willy DeVille

Thanks for the Willy DeVille album articles. Griot 20:12, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

My pleasure. As I've been going through the list of notable albums without articles, I am sometimes surprised but what's still out there! --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:20, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Earl of Jersey

Moonriddengirl

With regards to the 10th Earl of Jersey, the request concerns the removal of his daughter's details from the site.

The reason that most of the detail was removed is that a large part of the details, although readily available elsewhere, are extremely accessible via the internet and are details that some institutions use for access thereby just a precautionary measure but I freely admit there isn't any other defence of this removal.

I don't want to be setting a "precedent" either but there needs to be a balance between the eagerness in the sharing of information and a responsibility to respect living subjects wishes, particularly with regard to potentially sensitive information (e.g. with regard to children).

Regards

Gorkysfc 21:41, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you with regards to the daughter. I've removed that sentence, which should be no problem given that the sole source is a newsgroup posting. If there's other information that you believe could be used to gain undue access to the Earl, please bring that up at Talk:William Villiers, 10th Earl of Jersey so that we can build consensus in this article and make sure that we treat the article with due regards for the earl's privacy, as WP:BLP advises us to, at the same time that we provide proper coverage to an undoubtedly notable individual. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 21:48, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

Whee!!! Thanks for the barnstar! When I get the tang message bar when I'm not expecting it, it's often this rather than that;-) Always a pleasure and an honor.--Fuhghettaboutit 02:27, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I know what you mean. I've gotten in the habit of checking my watchlist before I even head over to talk. :D You deserve it. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 02:29, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the help

Hi Moonriddengirl,

Thanks for the help with my new article as well as your links to help me continue to learn the Wikipedia-way. Much obliged! Bertucciki 15:35, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

My pleasure. :) Good luck with its continued development, and please feel free to let me know if I can be of any further assistance. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:46, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Speedy decline of Exan wellness

I don't think TRIRASH was challenging the speedy, just accidentally changed the template. Please see the short conversation we had at User talk:Ioeth#Overlap for verification. --Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 20:29, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Ah. I see. Well, I'll go take care of that, then. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:34, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Er, rather, I won't, because it's already been taken care of. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:34, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Regarding edits to Peel Engineering Company

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, Moonriddengirl! However, your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, but note that the link you added, matching rule groups\.msn\.com, is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia's external links guidelines for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! AntiSpamBot 21:02, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, AntiSpamBot. :) However, that content is a necessary part of a merger following an AfD. Not that you, being a bot, will read this. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 21:06, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Careful. Talking to bots can be a sign of --Fuhghettaboutit 23:28, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

First it was SineBot, now it's AntiSpamBot: the bots are clearly talking about you on IRC and agreeing to gang up on you... Bencherlite^Talk 23:33, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Argh! You tell them I'm not afraid of them! --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 23:45, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Can't Sleep, Bot will Eat you! LOL --DP67 ^talk/_contribs 23:54, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! Nightmares for a month! :P --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:11, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thanks for your support in my recent request for adminship, which was successful. I'll do my best to justify the confidence you've placed in me! Dppowell 23:16, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

---

Same as above in general -although with the small difference that I'm bent on starting a reckless, frenzied blocking- & deleting-spree any minute now-, and thank you for that edit :-) Best regards, Ev 15:53, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Eep! No! Don't go to the dark side. :D Thanks for taking up the job. It can be stressful, but o so necessary. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:55, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Preity Zinta FA

Hi there. The Preity Zinta article has recently achieved A-class status. Due to the wealth of support I have decided to now nominate for an FA class article which I believe and judging by the comments of others is pretty much up to. In my view it is better than some existing FA actor articles. I would therefore be very grateful if you could give it a final review in your own time and leave your comments and views at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Preity Zinta. Thankyou, your comments are always valuable. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 10:57, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Hey, sorry it took so long, but thanks a bunch for my editor review! I had forgotten all about it, but I finally remembered that I had submitted one. After a bit of backtracing, I found you had reviewed me. Thanks so much! On a few of your comments: Yes, I did know that editor who vandalised The Quarry Lane School page. They had edited from home, but had discussed adding that at school the day before. The "biting" comment on the unicode page was kinda mean, too. You're right, I didn't mean it to be biting, it is hard to convey meaning in words. Yeah, you are correct, I do need to add sources to the school's site. I hoped to do that two months ago, but I got caught up in school work. I plan to do it soon. I believe that since then I have removed much of the unsourced criticism, but I haven't looked in ages. This is the first time I've really been able to have some free time here in a while. Do you really think that joining a wikiproject would be helpful? I generally find it a pain to write... simple reverts are more my thing. Any projects on that that you could recommend? Once again, thank you so much, sorry it took so long to get back to you. Hope to see you around WP! - ђαίгснгм ^таιќ 20:11, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi. :) There are a lot of projects you can join that don't require substantial article writing. Over in the Maintenance category, you can hook up with the folks at Wikipedia:WikiProject Disambiguation or Wikipedia:WikiProject External links or Wikipedia:WikiProject proposed deletion patrolling. There are a lot of possibilities. :) It's a way for you to find new areas to explore, which I suggested since you asked how you might get more out of it. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:28, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a lot!! Happy editing!! - ђαίгснгм ^таιќ 03:47, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

International Tax Solutions

Hi Moonriddengirl

I am confused, if you type 'International Tax Solutions' into the search bar of www.answers.com you will come across a page that is attributed to Wikipedia. My entry was based on this page and also took its format including the external link. I would like to edit this page, updating it with more relevent info and with no advertising content. I would be grateful if you could advise me if this is possible.

Rgards Johnribcage 12:52, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Johnribcage, and thanks for your note. First please let me point out to you that the article you've been using as a template, International Tax Solutions, was also speedily deleted from Wikipedia, and not once, but twice. It was deleted on August 17th for notability concerns and on October 31st as promotional. It's probably not a good model on which to base a new page. If you believe the company merits an article, you might do better to start at the bottom.

An article on this company would be governed by the notability guidelines on companies. The rule of thumb here is noting whether the company has received significant or widespread coverage in secondary sources that are reliable and independent of the company (excluding company PR releases and information solely available on the company website—these sources may be used for additional information after notability has been established by secondary sources). It isn't enough to establish that the service the company supplies is notable. You must establish that the company is itself of encyclopedic interest. All material must be attributable.

It also needs to be written neutrally and with an informational, dispassionate tone. The article should not read like a defense of the business or an encouragement of the use of the product, but simply set out who the company is and, again, why it is notable enough for an encyclopedia entry. You might want to look at established articles on Wikipedia on similar topics to get an idea how others have handled it, but please be careful in choosing your models. :) There are more than a few articles on Wikipedia that are inconsistent with policy but have simply not yet been tagged.

I hope that this response will prove helpful to you. Please let me know if I can clarify any of the above. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:21, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

consumerpowerlines deleted

Hi Moonridden girl,

you recently deleted an article of mine on consumerpowerlines. i have no real problem but would like your thoughts so i can improve my contributions in the future. so a question...

Was the article deleted because it seemed like an advertisement or because there was not enough info or something else?

I added it not as an advertisement but because i was researching the company and found no wikipedia article. i was hopping to go back later and add more info. the company is growing quickly and i think it deserves a wiki article.

thanks, -c —Preceding unsigned comment added by Copynomics (talk • contribs) 18:59, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Copynomics. Thanks for your note. The article was tagged for promotional concerns, but it was deleted because it failed to assert notability per the guidelines on companies. The rule of thumb here is noting whether the company has received significant or widespread coverage in secondary sources that are reliable and independent of the company (excluding company PR releases and information solely available on the company website—these sources may be used for additional information after notability has been established by secondary sources). All material must be attributable. You are certainly welcome to create a new article about the subject, and I'd be happy to supply the deleted version to you in your user space if that would make a helpful basis for you to expand. The main thing is to explain why the company warrants an encyclopedia article and to provide references that support that explanation. Please let me know if I can clarify any of that further or if you would like access to the deleted material for further development. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 19:06, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! That makes perfect sense. No need access deleted pages. If I have time I can start from scratch and include the needed info and refrences. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Copynomics (talk • contribs) 19:14, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Adoption

Hey my name's Lassie2501 and I was hoping if you could PLEASE adopt me?? I've used wikipedia before but want to learn things so i can put stuff on my user page. Lassie2501 03:06, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi, User:Lassie2501. Thank you for your interest in collaborating with me. :) I see from your talk page that you have already requested adoption from several Wikipedians who have offered to mentor you, and I believe that adding another would probably just confuse things. :) I'm not very focused on developing my user page, as you can probably see by looking at mine, so you might find one of the others a better fit. Good luck to you. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:23, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your support

Thanks for your support with respect to my request for adminship, which successfully closed today with a count of 47 support, 1 oppose. I wanted to also make sure that you knew that I very much appreciated the personal touch that you brought to your support, and I'm happy that someone knows what I went through with the editing of Philo Vance. If you ever see me doing anything that makes you less than pleased that you supported my request, I hope to hear about it from you. See you around Wikipedia! Accounting4Taste 05:06, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Truly, it was my pleasure. Congratulations. I know you will be a force for good. :D --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:13, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

consumerpowerlines deleted

Hi Moonridden girl,

you recently deleted an article of mine on consumerpowerlines. i have no real problem but would like your thoughts so i can improve my contributions in the future. so a question...

Was the article deleted because it seemed like an advertisement or because there was not enough info or something else?

I added it not as an advertisement but because i was researching the company and found no wikipedia article. i was hopping to go back later and add more info. the company is growing quickly and i think it deserves a wiki article.

thanks, -c —Preceding unsigned comment added by Copynomics (talk • contribs) 18:59, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Copynomics. Thanks for your note. The article was tagged for promotional concerns, but it was deleted because it failed to assert notability per the guidelines on companies. The rule of thumb here is noting whether the company has received significant or widespread coverage in secondary sources that are reliable and independent of the company (excluding company PR releases and information solely available on the company website—these sources may be used for additional information after notability has been established by secondary sources). All material must be attributable. You are certainly welcome to create a new article about the subject, and I'd be happy to supply the deleted version to you in your user space if that would make a helpful basis for you to expand. The main thing is to explain why the company warrants an encyclopedia article and to provide references that support that explanation. Please let me know if I can clarify any of that further or if you would like access to the deleted material for further development. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 19:06, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! That makes perfect sense. No need access deleted pages. If I have time I can start from scratch and include the needed info and refrences. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Copynomics (talk • contribs) 19:14, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Adoption

Hey my name's Lassie2501 and I was hoping if you could PLEASE adopt me?? I've used wikipedia before but want to learn things so i can put stuff on my user page. Lassie2501 03:06, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi, User:Lassie2501. Thank you for your interest in collaborating with me. :) I see from your talk page that you have already requested adoption from several Wikipedians who have offered to mentor you, and I believe that adding another would probably just confuse things. :) I'm not very focused on developing my user page, as you can probably see by looking at mine, so you might find one of the others a better fit. Good luck to you. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:23, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your support

Thanks for your support with respect to my request for adminship, which successfully closed today with a count of 47 support, 1 oppose. I wanted to also make sure that you knew that I very much appreciated the personal touch that you brought to your support, and I'm happy that someone knows what I went through with the editing of Philo Vance. If you ever see me doing anything that makes you less than pleased that you supported my request, I hope to hear about it from you. See you around Wikipedia! Accounting4Taste 05:06, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Truly, it was my pleasure. Congratulations. I know you will be a force for good. :D --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:13, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Your block of user:Cecrops

See [1] -- he's a sock of an old "friend" of mine -- user:JJonz -- who has no purpose but his own peculiar hatred of me, unfortunately. Therefore, I think an indef block would be more fitting than a mere 31 hours. But if I'm wrong, tell me. Thanks!! Gscshoyru 12:48, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing that diff to my attention. I have indefinitely blocked the account for using a sockpuppet to avoid a block. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:13, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

You did it the right way. Socks of indefblocked users (less formally, more or less banned) are to be blocked indefinitely themselves (unless they're IPs, in which I go for a fairly long block. If they keep using the IP in question, we can work with their ISP or go for a range block). The other user has a long history with this guy, and I trust him. Don't feel bad if someone reported him to AIV who wasn't aware of the sockpuppet report. Perhaps the category for suspected JJonz should be formally created so the helper bot will be aware of it and make comments. Daniel Case 16:34, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

How would making the category make a difference? I wasn't around when he was attacking me, and couldn't tag him, so the bot would have no way of knowing. Or am I wrong?

And thanks for the re-block! Gscshoyru 16:41, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

User:TRIRASH

TRIRASH ahs only been at WP for a matter or days but seems to be trying to speedy articles with no understanding of our policies. I noticed your interaction so I thought I'd see what you think. --Kevin Murray 14:05, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

I'll go take a look. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:06, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

I have suggested that the user read or reread (as the case may be) some of the policies regarding deletion, but I note that the great majority of articles that he has tagged do qualify. While his speedy tag on your sandbox article Race and intelligence/backgound did not conform to WP:CSD criteria, I can understand his confusion with regards to this article, since such sandboxes are usually created in userspace and most editors who randomly stumbled upon it would presume it is a content fork. In any event, he seems to be acting with good faith, and I have seen many far more experienced editors tag articles for speedy with far more outlandish rationale. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:29, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Race and intelligence/backgound

HI. I'm trying to resolve some issues among editors at a volatile and protected page using a "sandbox" page. This was nominated for speedy by the new user mentioned above, and then I've been nitted for removing his tag, which was now replaced. Can you evaluate the speedy at Race and intelligence/backgound. If this is the wrong address for what i'm trying to do, pleae let me know where I should put this. Thanks! --Kevin Murray 14:45, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

moved draft

Hello. Please note the creation of this user subpage User:Moonriddengirl/Race and intelligence/backgound (per suggestion of Moonriddengirl). Drafts should not be in mainspace. Cheers, Pascal.Tesson 15:00, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for moving forward with that. :) I'll ask them to let me know when they're finished so I can delete it. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:01, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you both for offering this solution. Your wise participation/moderation would be appreciated too. --Kevin Murray 15:13, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

I think that might nullify me as an uninvolved user space. :D Feel free to invite editors over from WP:3O if you like, though. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:18, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

You are right. --Kevin Murray 15:22, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

User:Dmn

On his userpage, user placed link to User:Gzornenplatz who is sockpuppet of user:Wik. Please check data. Thanks. TRIRASH 20:39, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

The user:Dmn edited Alex "El Guero" Rodriguez. Other user copied text from this page and created Ricardo Alex Rodriguez. By reading userpage of user Dmn, I thought that he is sockpuppet of user:Wik. But I think I misinterpreted things. Better to sleep. My apologies. TRIRASH 21:17, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Sleep is good. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 22:35, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

You Deleted My Page

I'm not clear on why you deleted my page "Southside Theatre Guild." The reason given is that it lacks significance, and I don't understand how you have authority over whether my subject has significance.

Jonny May —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonnymay (talk • contribs) 22:22, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Your page was tagged for deletion for failing to assert notability. According to Wikipedia's guidelines, articles about people, groups of people, bands, clubs, companies or web contents must indicate why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies.

If you feel you can assert notability according to the relevant guidelines, you are certainly welcome to recreate your article, but note that in order to avoid being assessed under other processes of the deletion policies, the article needs to verify its assertions through secondary sources that are reliable and independent of the company (excluding company PR releases and information solely available on the company website—these sources may be used for additional information after notability has been established by secondary sources). --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 22:45, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

58.104.138.184

This user is back and up to his same tricks again. I have just reported him to AiV. Seems like a vandalism-only account to me, and should be treated as such. I thought you might like to know, considering his vandalism to your user page. Cheers! ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 03:04, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. :) This time it's already been taken care of. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:34, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome, of course. Actually, after seeing the message above from Moongirl enemy, I decided to do some checking, and found a pattern of behaviour from multiple IP addresses, in 4 different ranges, all of which relate to Dapto High School, University of Western Sydney, and to you (either your user page, talk page, and/or your edits). I assembled this list by going back through 3 months of edits on the U. of W. Sydney article history and looking for patterns. I will forward this to you at your request, but would not assume to take up space on your talk page with it without your approval. Cheers! ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 15:09, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

These days, he/she/they seem primarily to focus on those two articles and taking ineffective potshots at me or (occasionally) one of the other editors monitoring those articles. Given that the behavior has diminished tremendously, I suspect that eventually he/she/they will tire of this and move on. I'm not sure what to do with it other than address it as it appears. I haven't reported it ANI because it seems to involve shared or dynamic IPs. Do you have experience that suggests a different approach? :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 16:39, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Honestly, no, I have very little experience with this sort of thing, and have never made a report to ANI. Given that most of the IPs have not been active in quite awhile (late September for most of them), and only two are currently active, I doubt much would come of an ANI report. It's fairly clear by looking at the editing patterns that this is the same person, or, at most, a couple of people sharing the same demented viewpoint. But, that and $1.50 will get you a cup of coffee 'round these parts. The best option at this point, we can agree, is to watch the articles he/she/they like to edit and hope they tire of this game. All the best. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 17:51, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

All righty. I appreciate your scrutiny and your input. As you've no doubt noticed, there have really been a couple of us watching these articles, and more eyes are better. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 18:31, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

GlassCobra's RfA

		My RFA
		Hey Moonriddengirl! Thank you so much for your support in my request for adminship, which ended with 61 supports, 3 opposes, and 1 neutral. I also wanted to thank you profusely for helping me deal with the last minute troubles, and also for adding the admin tag to my user page. I hope your confidence in me proves to be justified, and please feel free to call on me if you ever need any help or opinions! GlassCobra 00:50, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

My pleasure. :D --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 00:58, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Beginner Admin

Not too bad, I think. I've blocked a few IPs, made my way through part of the CSD backlogs, and even got to indef block a sockpuppet. Not first for the first day, eh? Haha. I do always imagine that I'm going to get something really wrong and get in a lot of trouble, though. I guess that sort of comes with the territory... GlassCobra 14:46, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, I really appreciate you saying that. :D I've only closed one AfD thus far, and it was pretty uncontroversial. I think it might be a bit before I get onto anything that might lead to conflict. Anyway, thanks again for everything! GlassCobra 15:04, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Derry, County Sligo: WP:Speedy v WP:Prod

Thanks for removing the WP:Speedy tag from the above-named article, I haven't done this kind of thing (requesting deletion of articles) before, so it was done in good faith. I've now added a WP:Prod template instead. --The.Q^(t)(c) 15:19, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Not a problem. Thanks for keeping an eye on article quality. :) (Oh, and I haven't got a doubt it was done in good faith.)--Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:20, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

DRV

He Moonriddengirl. In view of your post here, I that that you might like reviewing this discussion. Best.-- Jreferee t/c 13:51, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi! I'll take a look. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:52, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Wow. It seems like I'm a little too late for that party. Everybody has been indefinitely blocked for legal threats. It's too bad that the creator didn't read the response at the Drawing Board after asking for input there. If she had followed the suggestions, the revised article might have been acceptable. I'll keep an eye on the discussion in case the users are unblocked and it does resume. :/ --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:58, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Page edits

Hi - I saw the edits you made to the Thornton Tomasetti page and wanted to know if how it's worded now meets your criteria. I don't want the page deleted and I'm not sure who has been posting the more fluffy descriptions which you edited. Regardless, I am fine with your edits and understand why you did them, I just wanted to be sure the page is ok now and not queued up to be deleted.

Thanks, Mpinzuti 14:22, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi. The article is not currently under deletion review. I removed the speedy tag because I disagreed with the assessment, but did address (as you know) a few statements I felt were problematic in that regard. I see that the editor who tagged the article has returned to the page since my edits but did not pursue deletion, so it may be that his concerns were addressed. I don't believe the article is at this point overly promotional; other editors and administrators might feel differently. However, I imagine that at this point if the article were still perceived as problematic, deletion would probably be pursued through the articles for deletion debate process, in which case the page would be tagged so that all interested contributors could weigh in. These conversations typically last five or more days, though on rare occasion consensus might be established strongly enough for early closure. If you want to strengthen the article, it could do with more inline citations from reliable sources to verify its notability. I don't think it's dangerously lacking in this as it stands, but I tend to err on the side of caution in creating my own articles. :) I hope this helps. Please let me know if you'd like to me to expand on anything. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:30, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi Moonriddengirl, I appreciate the quick reply. I'll review the text with our communications folks and try and provide the line citations you suggested. I'm new to the world of Wikipedia (been doing intranets for years, just recently been given the keys to external sites) so I am teaching myself as quickly as I can. I do have a random question though: if you check the edit logs of the page, someone named CWJE went in there a few weeks ago and wrote a ton of the text that you've since edited. I wanted to know who that person was (suspecting it was someone in our firm) but couldn't see a way to track the IP at all. So my question is, outside of the talk page to resolve conflicts or ask questions, is there a way to see the IP's of individual edits to a page? That would at least tell me if the person is internal or not. Anyway, thanks for any help you can send my way. I'll work on getting some edits up there to strengthen the text and hopefully make everyone happy in the end :) -- Thanks, Mpinzuti 15:11, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Race and intellignece protection expired

Hi.

We are starting to make progress on Race and Intellegence but the protection expired this moring and already an IP has added significant undiscussed text to an article we are trying to drastically trim. Can you revert to the prior protected version and reinstate protection. Ironically I had just sent an email to Guy, but as he is in Britian it is not likely that he will be able to respond beofre all hell breaks loose here. Thanks! --Kevin Murray 15:24, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Kevin. I've extended the protection on the article another 5 days, but since the material inserted does not appear to be a case of clear vandalism or to carry legal impact, I have to protect in its current version per policy. Whether you incorporate the new additions into the consensus version you're creating is, of course, up to you guys. I'm glad to hear that you guys are making progress. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:50, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! --Kevin Murray 16:12, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

User:Johnterrylover

you deleted my page could you please tell why this was??Johnterrylover 17:12, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

The entire contents of the article Cally timmins when I deleted it were "woohoo!! to be continued...." This is an obviously unencyclopedic article and was deleted accordingly. Creating and recreating pages that are nonsensical or obviously unencyclopedic can, like attacking other editors, lead to a block. Wikipedia welcomes all constructive contributions. If you are unsure how best to contribute, you may wish to review our introduction page. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 18:34, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Sejny again

Could you comment again at Sejny; this time a new statement ([2]) is being added and reverted and the issue again is WP:UNDUE.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 21:05, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Template:Nndb TfD

Editor User:Gustav von Humpelschmumpel did not follow proper procedure when nominating Nndb for deletion. He/She added the entry to the template but did not file an entry in the proper TfD page for discussion. This entry is now dated 29 October 2007 more than enough time to properly follow procedure per WP:TFD. Attempts have been made by other editors to remove the tag and it has been reverted, claiming it is 'inappropriate to remove a TfD while in discussion', yet there isn't an article for dicussion. In this case it appropriate to remove the tag from the template and consider it AGF or Vandalism? I ask because I noticed someone has their AWB set to delete entries from articles based on this bogus or improperly filed TfD tag.

--DP67 (^talk/_contribs) 06:27, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Nevermind; I found it.. Followed wrong link.. --DP67 (^talk/_contribs) 06:36, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Good job

Nice job on picking up on a hoax and listing it for AfD (here). That's really the biggest hoax I've ever seen.   jj137 (Talk) 02:53, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, but I'm afraid I don't get credit for spotting it. :) It was tagged by somebody else. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 18:00, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Page deletion

Hi, I just created the page Tim Dunlap bio, and you deleted it due to a copyright violation. I had the author on the IMDb that wrote the article email wikipedia stating that it can be used. I wrote the work, and I was the one who wrote it for IMDb. Therefore it is not a violation of the copyright laws. Thank you for you time and support.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Aeguy3 (talk • contribs) 7 November 2007

If permission has been emailed to permissions-en AT wikimedia DOT org, then the article can be restored with a note on the talk page indicating that permission has been sent to the OTRS system. Someone from within the system will tag it accordingly. However, I note that your new article Tim Dunlap (by contrast to Tim dunlap, which is the one that I deleted for copyright violation) has been deleted by another administrator as failing to satisfy notability guidelines. Before recreating the article, you may with to review WP:BIO, paying particular attention to the criteria for creative professionals, to ensure that the article meets Wikipedia's criteria. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:59, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

User Vandal

You'll be pleased to know that User:211.29.188.33 has been banned for a week. StephenBuxton 13:38, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. :) This is an ongoing situation, involving the same editor described in User_talk:Moonriddengirl#58.104.138.184 above. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:40, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: 58.104.138.184

Hello. I have done as you requested. The information is not formatted in the same manner as the other information you have on the page, but I guess you can do that if you wish. Let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Cheers! ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 15:03, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks so much! I'll take care of formatting. :) I appreciate your assistance. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:05, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. Any time. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 15:06, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

User:Moonriddengirl/Race and intelligence/backgound

Hi. It looks like we have completed the first pahse of our editing process. Can you substitute the text at User:Moonriddengirl/Race and intelligence/backgound into the Race and intelligence article later today? Futurebird has removed the editing notes etc. and is going to work on some flow issues. I'll be gone for the weekend, but have asked Futurebird to post the next section to User:Moonriddengirl/Race and intelligence/backgound so that our experiment can continue. Thanks so much for your patient assistance in resolving this thorny issue. --Kevin Murray 15:06, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

I'll keep an eye on it, and when the strikethroughs (or Futurebird lets me know it's ready) will put it up. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:08, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

R&I protection

HI.

We are making good progress at R&I but I would like to request that the protection be continued indefinitely while we work as we have been in consensus. I'm hoping that a culture of cooperation will develop. Thanks. --Kevin Murray 19:46, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Kevin. I'm glad to hear that you're making progress. :) I would not personally be comfortable indefinitely extending full protection to the article. As I read WP:PP, I don't think it's meant to be utilized often. Even an article as contentious, say, as "abortion" seems to receive incremental protection rather than long-term full protection (just glancing at the log). As it stands now, the protection is set to expire on November 11th. When it does, if edit warring resumes, the article may be protected again. However, it is highly preferable, I would think, to encourage the editors involved to simply make a habit of discussing major changes to the article on the talk page before implementing them. I have not been extensively involved with page protections, though, and I would certainly understand if you want to bring the matter up with an admin who is over at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:02, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

My page

Please go here. Laleena 20:34, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry to see you go. :( I hope you will return. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:51, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Energy Matters

Thank you for taking an interest in this article, and thank you also for policing its precise deletion status. As a beginner on Wikipedia I have noted the concern with the article's notability and attempted to address it - I hope successfully. If you feel it needs more work to merit its inclusion, please let me know via my talk page and I will respond accordingly. I'd like to note that my stimulus to write the article and my model in drafting it came from a refererence to the magazine in an article on Cantab, which appears very similar in content and justification and has raised no notability problems. If Cantab is ok, should not the newly redrafted Energy Matters now be too? --Andrew Bud 02:32, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Ongoing notability concerns of Moseley Iron Bridge and Roof Company

Please place the full text that was deleted again in my sandbox. I'm not sure why this is such a huge deal regarding a company that did exist and no longer does exist. The link and page are to show locations (city, state) of where the company held business to show during the 1855 and 1875 time period and where it was located. The company was located in Philly, Boston, and NY, NY. The founder traveled where there was business for bridge building of his design type. I'm no sure why this article is not notable, please explain or edit accordingly but why am I not even given 24 hr time frame to correct. I'm still gathering details but this page is all I have found in researching the company and its "note-ablity". Isn't that why the wiki pages give anyone the ability to edit pages that someone created first. To add more "note-ability" I corresponding with the great great grandson of the founder of the company and he has provided notable references, sketches, professional drawings, and documents that the company is note-able of that time period. Not sure why if your read Thomas William Moseley or Hares Hill Road Bridge this page is re-deleted for speedy deletion. Please explain what exactly needs corrected. Thanks.

page I created was deleted "Moseley Iron Bridge and Roof Company" was deleted can you provide me with the text so I may edit to wiki standards

please refere to Thomas William Moseley and Hares Hill Road Bridge pages and I'll be cleaning them up!—Preceding unsigned comment added by Saguinter (talk • contribs) 12 November 2007

I have replied at your talk page. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 02:34, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks you, I was not advertizing the Company in any way its an old company from the late 1800s that is not being promoted since it no longer exists but I was trying to incorporated it into the other links as a good way to find company related details and historical drawings & "artifacts"

Thanks for getting the page into my "sandbox" not sure what that is all about but shall get this all cleaned up soon! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Saguinter (talk • contribs) 02:43, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

RE: USS Amazon (Star Trek PbBB)

I'm trying to find my page. I saw you that you deleted while another moderator stated he didn't see any problem with the page. As for why the tag was changed, the instructions clearly stated that if I was contesting the deletion, to post a new tag. I followed instructions.

My question now is, how is is that another game of the same genre is allowed to stay in wikipedia while mine is not? I've listed on the talk page the links and wikipedia pages I'm refering to but no answer was given. Zodiac01 16:57, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I have responded at your talk page. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:10, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

RE: USS Amazon (Star Trek PbBB)

I just read the guidelines on reliable source. "1) the piece of work that is being cited, 2) the creator of the work (the author or artist), and 3) the publisher or location where it is to be found (a website, book, album or painting)."

The references listed all the sites related to the work:

I'd like to have the page accessible so that I can modify it to reflect the style of the [Star Trek Simulation Forum|Star Trek Simulation Forum] since they've somehow convince you to allow their page to stay even though they are the same thing. Zodiac01 17:10, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

RE: USS Amazon (Star Trek PbBB)

If I deleted the rules for gameplay, would that help. I'm still trying to understand why this article is not notable in comparison to the other one I noted. I don't know if you are aware but STSF is no different. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zodiac01 (talk • contribs) 17:17, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I am in the process of userfying the material and will attempt to further explain policies to you in the hopes that you can create an article that is compliant. This will take another couple of minutes. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:20, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I hope to make this an actual article and expand wikipedia viewers knowledge of PbBB gaming. USS Amazon (Star Trek PbBB) alone is the only PbBB sample here on Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zodiac01 (talk • contribs) 17:24, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

The material has been userfied and further information on policies left at your talk page. Please feel free to let me know if I can clarify any of that further. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:29, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I think i understand the "why" portion. Now I have to figure out how to get this into an actual article. But I'm lost as to what I need to add or delete. Zodiac01 17:31, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

As soon as I have addressed the situation below, I'll see if I can offer some advice. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:32, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Again, at your talk page. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 18:03, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Hard time tagging articles

Should I tag articles like Nathan Southern for sd? I found similar articles Gyorgy Kiss, Paul Donnelly (defender) created by same user. Wondering what to do with them. And this article Emily's Pub also confused me. Which one to tag for sd and which one to tag for unreferenced? How much time we should give for article like A&W Root Beer which was created on 25 sept 2004 to provide reliable references? Thanks. 19 17:19, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi. Let me take a look at the logs on that article and see what was up with it. I'll get right back to you. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:30, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

All right. I've had a look, and I'll tell you first that I am completely uninformed about sports topics and so make it a practice never to tag those for speedy or to delete them when I encounter them. Obviously, the admin who deleted Nathan Southern agreed with your tag. The general rule of thumb set out at WP:BIO on athletes is that notability is met by:

• Competitors who have played in a fully professional league, or a competition of equivalent standing in a non-league sport such as swimming or tennis
• Competitors who have played or competed at the highest level in amateur sports (who meet the general criteria of secondary sources published about them).

If the article does not even suggest that the individual meets those criteria (and it doesn't meet the WP:BIO guidelines otherwise, such as with substantial, reliable third-party sourcing) then it can properly be tagged for WP:CSD. If it does suggest that the individual meets those criteria but otherwise fails (like if the information is unverifiable or it may be a hoax), then it's best to proceed through other steps of the [WP:DP|deletion process]], WP:PROD or WP:AfD. As far as waiting for sourcing, articles that are unsourced can be nominated for deletion, but it's generally a good idea to run a search yourself first. With 93,600 hits on Google, it's very likely that reliable sourcing can be produced for A&W, even if the article's contributors are very slow to do so. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:42, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

By this rational I got more hits than you for 'Nathan Southern'. It is horrifying to search how many results pertains to this 'Nathan Southern'. You may suggest to use different keywords. I did it today with Nelson (singer) and it wasted my one hour. Keywords like 'singer nelson bronx new york' were leading me to some insurance broker.

If burden of reliable sources is diverted to new page patrollers and admin, then... what can I say. Thanks. 19 18:20, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, checking sources is quite the game of hide and seek. :) You may wish to tag the article for reference improvement. The three tags I use most often are {{unsourced}} (if there's nothing), {{primarysources}} (if everything goes to the company's website or some such) or {{refimprove}}, if what's there is insufficient. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 18:32, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Flubber (character)

Hey whats up Moonriddengirl, its PaidInFull1987. You recently deleted my flubber page and im not here to scold you, you were right for deleting it, it was silly vandalism, I was just being silly. I was just wondering if you could send me the paragraph that I wrote because it does hold some personal value to me. Don't worry, im not going to attempt to put the Flubber page back up and vandalize again, I just got a kick out of it and I want to get that paragraph back so I can e-mail it to my friend, who would definately get a laugh out of it. Im hoping you can have a sense of humor about all this and grant my request, I would highly appreciate it. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PaidInFull1987 (talk • contribs) 17:47, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Replied at your talk page. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:50, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Jadis

Howdy, how are you? Would just like to ask quickly where the source is to say that that band is signed to InsideOut Music? Thanks in advance, friend. Scarian^Talk 19:42, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

The discography at AMG shows three (I think three) of their albums on that label, including their two most recent. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 19:43, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I just saw one their website that they're signed to it. Nevermind. Thanks anyway :-) Scarian^Talk 19:46, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

No problem. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 19:46, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

SJP has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thanks so much for deleting a few of the pages in my user space:) Cheers!--SJP 20:12, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks for the smile. :D --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:24, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

#1000

He Moonriddengirl! The words you are reading now are a bit special, because they form my 1000th edit (see here and check the <count> tags). Not much compared to your amount. But still, I've been browsing through Wikipedia for quiet a while now, and ever since, not a day has passed in which I did not thought about this project.
But anyway, ehm... I was wondering, could you give me an apprentice badge? That would be great! I ask you because, as you can see on my talk page, you are not only the last person who left me a message, but also the only person I ever had a nice conversation with.
I've seen you've done a lot of good things for WP lately, even became an admin! Keep up the good work, but don't get bonked you know... Cheers, Face 22:22, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi! Congratulations. :D I have so bestowed the tag upon you. Feel free to move it if you don't like where I put it. I have been pretty busy on Wikipedia since we first encountered each other. Comes of having No Life. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 22:27, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Big Joe Turner

Thanks for (fairly recently) adding a mini discography to Big Joe's page. He, amongst others, is a passion of mine. Is your work now done, or are you still working on this? Can I help (really not sure how)? Cheers,

Derek R Bullamore 23:29, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I am done. :) If you can find sources, his discography could use more individual article creation. Also, the article I created for The Boss of the Blues could use considerable expansion. I am slowly building a print library, but, alas, haven't much, and the internet doesn't care so much about the jazz guys. (At least, not "reliable sources" internet. :)) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 23:38, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

RE: USS Amazon (Star Trek PbBB)

Would changing the opening to the following help? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zodiac01 (talk • contribs) 20:27, 12 November 2007

I'm afraid that the central issue, which is reliable sourcing to verify that this forum is noteworthy has still not been addressed. This seems to be relying for notability on the assertion that the webhost is "a medium which is both respected and independent of the creators"—this may not be sufficient if the webhost is judged to be "hosting content on entertainment-like sites" (which is excluded by policy). Also, Horizon Fleet does not have an article, so it's not clear-cut that the host is respected. Have you tried asking assistance at the Wikiproject I recommended? They may be able to help you with specifics as regards hosting notability. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 00:34, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Dimitrios Kamperos

Thanks. Cbdorsett 08:52, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

R&I at MRG

Hi. I think that we are ready to publish the text from the MRG sandbox to the R&I article, overwriting the existing text for the section with the same name. I think that to keep up some momentum on our exercise we need to get a fresh section posted for discussion. Thanks! --Kevin Murray 16:00, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

You guys quite sure you have consensus on this version? I notice things picked up a bit on Friday. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 16:05, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

The recent discussion seems to be totally off point, regarding the validity of the article's title and whether there should be an article on a parallel topic, and whether this article should be renamed or supplanted by the other topic. It has nothing to do with this section. I am afraid that if we don't make some progress we will lose any momentum toward cooperation. We can always revisit this section later. Thanks! --Kevin Murray 01:40, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

List of Magic Tricks

.......re: my Sponge Balls edit.....I see where you're coming from, HOWEVER.........I think the item should be moved (within the same article) to Utilities/Accessories. Your thoughts? Buddpaul 18:41, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't quite understand what you're proposing. Are you talking about an existing article or suggesting a new one? --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 18:43, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

sorry......go to WP: List of Magic Tricks and look for Sponge Balls there....I know that essentially your issue was with the article itself.....nothing else.......I think I'll beef up the article a little bit (so it's more encyclopedic) AND leave what you transwikied over to Wiktionary. Buddpaul 22:08, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, my experience with magic topics is pretty limited. I came upon your article because somebody had tagged it for speedy deletion under WP:CSD#A1—essentially for lack of context. Otherwise, I doubt I'd have ever seen it. :) (I disagreed with the tag, by the way, which is I why I proposed it for transwiki instead. The article had context, but was a bit brief for an encyclopedia article.) If you can expand the article to encyclopedic details, that would be great. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 22:35, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

deleted article: Wiki- Generations_of_mesh_networks

Dear Moonriddengirl,

You had written to me (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Fdacosta) : Dear Fdacosta, regarding your contribution to History of wireless mesh networking, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites, or from printed material, without the express permission of the author or copyright holder. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from this URL: http://www.meshdynamics.com/third_generation.html. As a copyright violation, the article has been deleted under the speedy deletion criteria.

I am Francis daCosta, the founder and CTO of Meshdynamics. I am also the author of the deleted article on Wiki- Generations_of_mesh_networks. And I am also the author of what appears on [3].

And I am the author of both pictures, the one on my company website and the one I contributed to Wiki and released all ownership rights to.

I had contributed the article to Wiki because the generations of mesh networking products is a general topic and deserves a fair hearing. There is far too much hype around mesh networking and very little factual information on mesh networking architectures. The world needs to understand the evolution of mesh networks, else people have the wrong impression of mesh, perpetrated by the powers that control hype.

I will wait to hear from you before I consider re-posting the article.

Regardless of your decision, thank you for your efforts in keeping Wiki clean. I have tremendous respect for the neutral stand Wiki takes and am grateful for the contributions made by you and so many others like you to avoid it being overrun by commercial interests.

Regards,

Francis daCosta Founder and CTO www.meshdynamics.com [email protected] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fdacosta (talk • contribs) 22:48, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your note. The rest of the letter that I left on your talk page sets forth the steps to follow if you have permission to use the material or are the copyright holder and choose to repost it. The guidelines at Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission are specifically for the former case, but also demonstrate in the latter case how to leave a note on the talk page if you choose to send a permissions letter to the Wikimedia Foundation and what will happen then. (See specifically Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission#When permission is confirmed.) If you are prepared to release the information to public use under GNU Free Documentation License, which doesn't impact your copyright of the material but does permit the text to be freely redistributed, to be modified and redistributed in modified form, and to be re-used commercially (in all cases with proper attribution of the author), then there's no reason that you cannot post material that you have copyrighted yourself. If the steps I left at your talk page are not clear, please let me know. I have had limited involvement in this stage of addressing copyright concerns, but will gladly assist you in pursuing this as I can. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 23:07, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the PROD on the William Mcguinea article

Regarding the William Mcguinea article, try a search on the book titles or other things mentioned in the article, instead of the name and it will become clear most of the content of the article is accurate, but it is the name "William Mcguinea" that is the hoax. If a hoax article isn't a reason for speedy deletion there is probably some other criteria this could be speedy deleted under because the article has every indication that it was created with harassment of a Wikpedia user in mind. The person on Wikipedia who can probably best explain further is User:Will Beback. I'll let you and him take it from here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.108.132.16 (talk) 00:28, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi. If the article was created to harrass someone, it might be speediable by G3 (vandalism) or G10 (attack), but some evidence would need to be offered to support it. From the perspective of an outsider, it is not obvious what the transgression is. I'll ask User:Will Beback if he has input. Otherwise, you might want to bring the matter to WP:AN/I, though (again) some greater degree of explanation will probably be necessary. And please remember to sign your post with ~~~~. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 00:34, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

R&I Progress

Hi. I replaced the section in the sandbox with the history section. Would you be so kind as to archive the discussion at the talk page, so that we can start fresh, only leaving the last section which I jsut added. Thanks! --Kevin Murray 02:37, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

History_of_wireless_mesh_networking

I have done a first draft on History_of_wireless_mesh_networking and uploaded some new pictures that are also released under GFDL. I hope I have done everything correctly. I also noted (at the end of the content page that all the content is available for distribution. Also, there was some confusion between this content and the Generations_of_mesh_networks that should be redirected to History_of_wireless_mesh_networking, but I am not sure how to do this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fdacosta (talk • contribs) 02:44, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi. The GFDL notice, if it's to be added, needs to be added to the other website, not to the Wikipedia article. That disclaimer is already present at the bottom of every Wikipedia page. What you need to do for the Wikipedia article is send an e-mail from an address associated with that website to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or send a postal message to Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL. Then you put a note on the article's talk page, Talk:History of wireless mesh networking, asserting that you have done so. After the letter has been received and reviewed, a Wikimedia staff member will come along and confirm permission. (Please remember to sign your message on the talk page with ~~~~, which will place your registered name and the timestamp on your note.)

As to the second part, I'm not entirely sure what you mean. Are you asking how to make a redirect page? --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 02:53, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Thankspam

Thank you...

...for your participation, criticism, and support in my recent RfA, which succeeded with a final count of 90/1/1. I appreciate all of your kind words, criticism, and suggestions. I extend a special thanks to Acalamari for his nomination, and Dihydrogen Monoxide and Husond for their coaching and nominations. If you need help in any administrative matters, please contact me.

Thank you again and, best regards,
Neranei
This RfA thanks inspired by VanTucky's which was in turn inspired by LaraLove's which was inspired by The Random Editor's, which was inspired by Phaedriel's original thanks.

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by PaidInFull1987 (talk • contribs) 04:47, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Any suggestions?

As you've some experience with dealing with editors whose contributions are 95% valid, 5% flaming, have you any suggestions on what can be done with this sorry saga? (See User talk:Canterberry and this AN/I thread for the background to the whole sorry mess.) I'm looking for someone who's totally uninvolved, is used to dealing with flamewars and is willing to wade through content disputes on articles about railway lines, and am racking my brains trying to think of someone. The obvious candidate, Giano (don't laugh - this is the kind of situation he shines in) has rather a lot on his plate right now. Any ideas? Or any suggestions of anyone else who could sort it out? — iridescent 00:53, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, that's a complicated situation. Are you looking for somebody who can check in on his contributions periodically (or routinely) to ensure that he's operating on the up & up? If so, I might suggest that more than one person would be a good idea. I wouldn't mind helping in that capacity, but I would feel far more comfortable doing so if there were another editor to whom I could take concerns for a gutcheck. It's a fairly heavy responsibility. :) I wonder if User:ArielGold would be up for helping out. She seems able to remain level under attack. Alternatively, I'm also thinking that User:HelloAnnyong could be good. I worked with him or her on a 30 dispute on Ben & Jerry's flavors (oh, the drama), and s/he impressed me with the way s/he handled things. I guess I first need to know more specifically what you have in mind. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 02:24, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

It's a weird one - he was blocked for issues that ultimately stemmed from technical arguments about the formatting of railroad templates, and virtually no-one is competent to actually judge these issues. I suspect by socking to evade the ban, he's possibly made it a moot point. — iridescent 17:41, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Doesn't exactly encourage community trust, does it? --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:44, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Redirect Generation of Mesh Networks to History of Mesh networking

1. Thank you, I have added the release notices to the discussion page of of History of mesh networking.

2. I was trying to redirect the Generation of mesh networks page to History of Mesh networking but not sure how to do this. I was putting in an note under Generation of mesh networks but it was deleted. So evidently that is not the way to be doing this. I am new at this so please forgive me.

3. On a separate topic, I am the Founder and CTO of Meshdynamics, a wireless mesh networking company. I have taken pains to respect and comply with all WIKI rules and guidelines. If we dont respect these rules where would WIKI be? I am offering my free time (not a lot of it) to help with mesh networking pages that frankly need much work. I attempted to fix one (Wireless_mesh_network) but someone decided it did not need fixing. It did. The information is currently either inaccurate or blatantly commercial and makes the mesh networking industry seem sleazy. I may be reached at 408-373-7700 if someone would like to chat with me about helping clean Wireless_mesh_network and other pages.

Francis daCosta —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fdacosta (talk • contribs) 18:59, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi. Have you e-mailed or snail-mailed your release to the Wikimedia foundation? That step is crucial. The e-mail address is permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org; alternatively, the postal address can be found at Wikimedia Foundation. If you have e-mailed or mailed the foundation, your note at the article's talk page should indicate as much. When the e-mail or letter is received, the foundation will put a code providing clearance for the usage on the talk page. Without this step, other administrators may act from copyright concerns to delete or blank the article. We appreciate your contributions, and it's unfortunate that such elaborate steps are necessary, but we must protect the interests of creators to the best of our ability.

As far as the Generations of mesh networks is concerned, I'm not sure if a redirect is necessary, but if you believe that is a likely search term that Wikipedia users will enter, you can create a redirect page by following the steps described here.

I see from your edit summary at Wireless mesh network your offer to be a "subject expert" if Wikipedia would like. Please note that Wikipedia content is created by volunteers and that one of the core philosophies is that anyone may edit it. Each article is, in a sense, a mini-project, and contributors determine for themselves which articles to assist. If another editor disagreed with your changes to that article, you might want to discuss it at Talk:Wireless mesh network to see if you can reach consensus. Consensus building is a central part of Wikipedia development.

As you have interest and experience in the field, you might want to consider becoming involved in a Wikiproject, which coordinates efforts on certain types of articles. That one seems to be governed by Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer networking. If you choose to communicate with the other editors in that project on its discussion page, please remember to sign your notes with ~~~~ (you can also use the automatic signature by pressing on the ~~~~ just below the "Save page" buttons). This will sign your registered username and add a timestamp to help other editors in their communications with you.

Happy editing. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 19:20, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

hows life

Hello there.

Recently i had a trip to Golden Temple, Amritsar. U can watch the pics at Here. Hows life these days? --Jayanta (Talk) 08:31, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Busy. I hope you had fun. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:25, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Judytwoshoes

Hello

I have read the ´reliable sources' guidelines - I will write to people who I can find that I personally was not involved with, to comment on the Bristol music scene at that time. They may or may not respond. To ask for reliable sources is not in any way unreasonable, but the period in question is ´pre-internet' and I now live in another part of the country and am unable to travel or do any ´detective´ work on the ground, as it were.

Wiljaxon —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiljaxon (talk • contribs) 19:21, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Good luck with locating reliable sources. Note that the kind usually called for in these situations would be newspaper or magazine articles or the like. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 19:25, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Hello

I have read the ´reliable sources' guidelines - I will write to people who I can find that I personally was not involved with, to comment on the Bristol music scene at that time. They may or may not respond. To ask for reliable sources is not in any way unreasonable, but the period in question is ´pre-internet' and I now live in another part of the country and am unable to travel or do any ´detective´ work on the ground, as it were.

Wiljaxon —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiljaxon (talk • contribs) 19:28, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

AfD close templates

Gah, I always forget to remove those! Thanks for cleaning up after me. :) GlassCobra 20:33, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Happens to everybody once in a while. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:42, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

~*Bonk*~

You have email! Ariel♥Gold 03:43, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Note

Many thanks for note, John Cumbers 15:01, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. I wouldn't want you to wonder where the article had gone. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:17, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks dear!

Thank you for fixing that BLP issue so dang fast. I stumbled across it as I was headed to bed, and I knew it would take time to deal with the issues, and so I figured I'd just post it on the noticeboard as I'm honestly not at all familiar with that era, so probably wouldn't have been the best person to review what was true or not. Thanks for dealing with it! ~*Hugs*~ Ariel♥Gold 23:27, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I've been looking for a BLP to help out. I've been volunteering over there for a couple of months, but lately it seems that my primary duties are administrative. (I've been closing a lot of archived conversation!) That kind of research is right up my alley. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 01:45, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Why?

Why did you delete my entry about Boberton?? HUH HUH?? EVIL —Preceding unsigned comment added by Billiamrocksforlizzife (talk • contribs) 23:35, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your attempt to lighten up Wikipedia. However, this is an encyclopedia, and the articles are intended to be serious, so please don't make joke articles. Readers looking for serious articles will not find them amusing. If you'd like to experiment with editing, try the sandbox, where you can write (almost) whatever you want. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 00:14, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Melissa Hawach

Thank you for your work on that article. I'd added the notability tag and I believe, on reading the improved version, that it is no longer necessary. Relata refero (talk) 16:52, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. :) It can be hard to tell sometimes. As I mentioned, I only removed the tag because the recommended remedy is adding 3rd party references—and we seem full up on those. :D I'm sure if there are continuing concerns, it'll wind up at AfD. I'm not entirely sure that's the best name for the article, but couldn't figure out where else to put it so left it alone. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:24, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

There certainly seem to be more than enough third-party refs, and some implication that this is more than a brief news story. If it went to AfD, I for one would vote to keep it.

Thank you again for your effort, both on this and John Anthony Walker. This is the sort of useful work that might help preserve our project's reputation. Relata refero (talk) 17:50, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Transpromotional

Good Day,

I was looking for the Transpromotional entry today, and I noticed it was removed. It's really not a neologism, because it's something that wasn't accessible to people in the past. This is a place where business strategy, new high speed printing technology and software come together to improve communications to customers.

There were citations to InfoTrends, which is an independent agency that reports about statistics in this area. There have been over 500 articles in related print magazines about the topic. Industry websites, such as outputlinks.com and xplor.org have resources on the topic. A list of leading industry providers was included, with links to their websites.

Please reconsider the deletion, because this document communication strategy uses technology to do something that wasn't feasible (it has always been possible) in the past. Draegermeister (talk) 16:54, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

I have responded at your talkpage. Thank you for your note. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 19:07, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Ummm Pardon Me...

but, this is not a very liable source for information anyway. Especially when anyone can go and edit anything. For instance, a friend of mine (yes, some people actually have them) went to a random page and typed the word "poo" everyother word. So, this isn't the most reliable website which is why we could not use it for information on a project. :)) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Billiamrocksforlizzife (talk • contribs) 00:30, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

While Wikipedia allows everyone the opportunity to contribute to the project in good faith, unfortunately we have had to implement policies for addressing vandalism. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 00:41, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Nothing florid, nothing fancy. Just thanks (especially to you, Dorothy Moonriddengirl). I'll try to wield the Mop-and-Bucket with grace and humility. --Orange Mike 03:10, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Quick question

Is this you? --Oxymoron⁸³ 14:07, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah. I'm traveling for the Thanksgiving Holidays and stuck logging in through a shared computer. I didn't want to risk my admin access being compromised. :) Dial-up, no less. It's beyond primitive. Anyway, I won't be able to confirm my identity from my own computer until Sunday. --Moonriddengirl2 (talk) 14:11, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, only wanted to know if it's an impersonator. Happy Thanksgiving. --Oxymoron⁸³ 14:13, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

You, too. I appreciate the vigilance. :D --Moonriddengirl2 (talk) 14:14, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Are you searching for {{User Alternate Acct|main account}}? --Oxymoron⁸³ 14:16, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Yep, thanks! Man, this dial-up stuff is frustrating. I primarily popped in to check the drawing board, since I seem to be the only editor who keeps an eye on it. --Moonriddengirl2 (talk) 14:19, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

<reset indent>And thanks for the page clean-up. :) --Moonriddengirl2 (talk) 14:22, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

It was a pleasure for me :) --Oxymoron⁸³ 14:24, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Medieval Prophecy - By: Darthrul

Hello.

Excuse me: I had this message that said that the page I was creating about an old Samael band album named Medieval Prophecy and I would desire to know the reasons of its deletion (although I was still editing it) because I have that album and I would like to put it in there for people to know. I will await your answer. Thank you for your attention.20:01, 21 November 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Darthrul (talk • contribs)

Hello, Darthrul, and thank you for your note. I'm sorry, but I won't be able to answer your question fully until Sunday, at which point I will be able to access the full history of the article. I can tell you from looking at your talk page that it was tagged at 20:58 UTC for deletion under general criterion #1 as being "unsalvageably incoherent", but that it was deleted rather under criterion #2, as a test page, at 21:31. Without being able currently to access the material, I'd presume that the article was irregular in terms of content and formatting.

There is nothing to prevent your recreating your article, although you will need to ensure that it asserts notability per the guidelines at WP:MUSIC and provide reliable sources to verify the assertions. There are guidelines for album articles at WP:ALBUM which may be useful to you. If you are not able to complete the article in one go or find the formatting challenging, you might want to create it in your userspace before transferring it to article mainspace or place an {{inuse}} tag at the top of the article to let other editors know that editing is incomplete. Many wikipedia editors create sandboxes in which to write new articles at their leisure. When completed, the articles can be copied & pasted into mainspace or moved (note that your account must be at least 4 days old to move articles).

If you would like more specific details about why the article was deleted or if you would like the contents of the deleted article copied into your userspace so that you can work on it further, please let me know. I would be happy to assist as I can once I am back at my home computer and have full access to Wikipedia. --Moonriddengirl2 (talk) 21:11, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Although you have not yet responded to my note, I did take a look at the history of the article now that I have complete access to my account, and I see that all the article contained was 1/3rd of the album infobox which (as it had not been closed) was not rendering correctly. At the point that the article was deleted, it had not been edited for 45 minutes and so seemed to have been abandoned in a state insufficient for a stub. As I suggested above, you might want to create the article in a sandbox if you can't complete it in a timely fashion. That will give you more time to work on it before it goes "live" and invites the scrutiny of other editors. Good luck with it. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:45, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

My rfa

Wow! and thanks for correctly interpreting the meaning of my comment in that particular AfD. , Dlohcierekim 05:03, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

My pleasure. I remember what a fun process that whole RfA thing is. :) I'll be watching and rooting for you. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:41, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Editor Review

Hello, Moonriddengirl. I thank you for the enlightening review you gave me recently. I had almost forgotten about it. I'm sorry for this outrageously late reply, I've been rather busy as of late. Just for your information, I do watch discussions that I participate in, although not for long, as I move on to another one very quickly. And to clarify matters, when I said I am fond of heated discussions, I literally meant active and...how should I put it? A discussion that is participated by many and contains logical, well-reasoned and passionate arguments. Well, I hope that answers some of your questions! (About this AFD, I'm afraid I cannot give an answer; I myself am baffled by why I said that. Perhaps I was confused at that time). I will continue to work on my article contributions, and hopefully, the next time I ask for a third review, they will show far more positive figures. Cheers, --Zacharycrimsonwolf 07:01, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

I hope that my comments will prove helpful to you. And I hope that the figures didn't seem overwhelmingly negative. That's not the impression I meant to give at all. Suggestions for improvement tend to look disproportionately large, since it takes a few sentences to explain one of those and only a couple of words to offer praise. :D Good civility and good participation behind the scenes are both, in my opinion, very important factors in an editor. That said, I do think article building should be your next goal, and it will give your next reviewer a different area of focus. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:48, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, I thank you once again on your review. By the way, just a matter of curiosity: did you go through every edit I made just to review me? It seemed to me you did exactly that. Oh and User:Polarwolf is a girl (you referred her as a "him". Just thought you should know.) Cheers! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zachary crimsonwolf (talk • contribs) 14:36, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Not every one, but quite a few. I try to put a lot of time into editor reviews when I give them. :) If I know that the editor I'm reviewing is an admin hopeful, I give it even more scrutiny. I know that the ones commenting on the RfA will! I figure the best help I can offer is to point out any and all red flags I see so they can be addressed before that joyful experience. :) As far as Polarwolf is concerned, I'll try to remember that in case I encounter her somewhere. I tend to default to he, unless sex is specific in the name. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:25, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Willy DeVille

Your initial edits to Willy Deville -- creating an album article or two last month -- got me going, and I've written articles about several of his albums. Now I need your help on a couple of things:

1. Can you change the name of "Category:Mink DeVille albums]" to "Category:Willy DeVille/Mink DeVille albums." I'd like to be able to include all his albums in a single category.
2. Can you show me directions on Wiki for inserting photos in articles? I'd like to insert photos of the different Mink DeVille/Willy DeVille albums in the articles I've written.

Thanks. Griot (talk) 01:04, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I'd be happy to help out, as much as I'm able. :) I'm not sure what the consensus is in regards to categories with slashes in them. In general, according to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (categories), categories are supposed to be short, simple names. It might be preferable to add an additional category Category:Willy DeVille albums to both his solo work and his material with his band. Alternatively, we could create a category for Willy DeVille albums and place the category Category:Mink DeVille albums into it as a subcategory, as was done (for example) for Category:George Harrison albums. If you feel strongly about the slash name, that probably should be brought up at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (categories) first to see if it will fly. Otherwise, it could wind up straight away at a deletion discussion. :)

Thanks for answering. I would prefer the slash because, realistically, Mink DeVille albums after the first two were all actually Willy DeVille albums, as no members of the original band were on the Mink DeVille albums after the first two. Would it be all right to call the category "Willy DeVille/Mink DeVille." I hate to go against Wiki conventions, but I think it's justified in this case. Griot (talk) 05:31, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Consensus is definitely for including the word album. :) It may be that there will be no objection to creating such a category. Renaming a category involves opening a discussion proposing that the category be renamed at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion. The steps for doing that are listed there, but basically it starts with editing Category:Mink DeVille albums by placing {{subst:cfr|ProposedName}} at the top of it (where ProposedName, obviously, is the wanted title. :)) There is a prominent link on the instruction page to guide you to the current day's discussions. You place your proposal there by modifying the following template: {{subst:cfr2|OldCategory|NewCategory|text=Your reason(s) for the proposed rename. ~~~~}}. To see an example of that template (and a resulting discussion) in action, you can check out yesterday's conversation on intelligence by type. These conversations can sometimes be quite quiet. :) At the end of the set period, consensus will be determined and implemented with no further action required on your part. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:00, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

As far as putting album covers in, you do that by heading over to Special:Upload. You must use a fair use explanation in the summary, or the image will be deleted. I use a template: {{Album cover article rationale|Article Title|Moonriddengirl}} and add "Image from [url AMG]". Obviously, you'd put your username in where mine is. :) The URL from which the image is taken, if you've gotten it online, goes where URL is and the source (in my case, generally all music guide) goes where it says AMG. If you scanned it yourself, you might indicate as much. Below that, in the pull-down menu for licensing, you scroll down until you get to "album or single cover".

Thanks. I will try this out on my own. Griot (talk) 05:31, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I'll wait to hear further from you how you want to proceed with the categories. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 01:29, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

My ref revisited

Dear Moonriddengirl, Thank you for your comments supporting my recent RfA. You so well expressed what I could not regarding that AFD. Words nor pictures can express my heartfelt appreciation at the confidence you and the community has shown me. I am both heartened and humbled by this confidence. I will carry the lessons learned from the constructive criticism I have received with me as I edit Wikipedia, and heed those lessons. Special thanks to Pedro and Henrik as nominators. Special thanks to Rudget who wanted to. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 23:14, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

It was my great pleasure to support you. Good luck with the tools. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 19:30, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of John Horan (scout)

It is blatant censorship to delete the article without allowing myself to back up my arguements for keeping the article. John Horan is a very important member of our local society. Deletion of his article goes against freedom of press. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Emericanbuddha (talk • contribs) 16:26, 1 December 2007

Although I did leave a note on your talk page advising of the article's deletion and I did delete the talk page after the article was gone, I am not the administrator who deleted the article. I see that the administrator who did has left you a pointer to the guidelines on notability requirements for people on your talk page. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 21:03, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I am very sorry for taking my anger out on you, and I realize that it truly was a stupid article (but it did get some laughs from my friends). I am no longer too considered and I'm finally making real articles. --Emericanbuddha

I'm glad to hear that you're working within Wikipedia policies. I also see you having some difficulty with the signature. If you type four tildes (~~~~), Wikipedia will fill it all in automatically for you. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 23:36, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Avon Grove School District

I knew other users have made substantial edits, but I assumed that they could just re-create it. Would it be possible for you to delete it and then just restore the edits that weren't made by me?--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 02:24, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid not, not without compelling reason. As the explanation for CSD notes, "author request" "[d]oes not apply to long-standing articles or quality articles not created by mistake. Such articles were duly submitted and released by the author and have become part of the encyclopedia, obviating others who otherwise would have written an article on the subject". Once you press submit on a Wikipedia article, you've relinquished it under GNU Free Documentation License, which gives others permission to utilize it and build on it as they please. If you no longer feel the article is appropriate, you can pursue deletion through other processes, of course. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 02:33, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Can I prod it?--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 02:46, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

You can, of course, but the admin who evaluates it will consider your reasons when the PROD expires. Schools and school districts are a bit of a hot topic when it comes to deletion, so it's quite likely that its deletion will not be regarded as uncontroversial. I'd say it will come down to your rationale. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 02:48, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I've prodded it. Could you let me know if you think my rationale is uncompelling?--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 02:56, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I'm afraid that I do think your rationale is uncompelling. Every time we edit Wikipedia, by pressing "save", we "agree to license [our] contributions under the GFDL*". (The text is right below the edit window, in case you haven't noticed it. I know I don't always read the "small print".) Other editors have already chosen to expand your work. Deleting the article is unfairly deleting theirs. Do you have a reason for wanting the article deleted? --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 03:00, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

No reason, really. I removed the prod, and now understand that the deletion was not in accordince with the GFDL. Sorry for the improper speedy.--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 03:07, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

All right. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 03:09, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Here's another question. Do you think it would be alright if removed the expand template? I added it a while back, and asked on the talk page back in April if anyone agreed if the template can removed.--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 03:22, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

<reset indent>Yes, I think removing that template would be fine. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 03:24, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Working Woman's Barnstar
		For diligently and kindly responding to the ever so repetitive posts at the Drawing board after I had to take a break from the place! —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 15:59, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Wow! Thanks. :D It's amazing how often you get to write the same things there, isn't it? I'm going to move my new sparkly to my front page! --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 16:40, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Copyright guidance

Hi, thanks for responding to [4] this speedy deletion request; but now I'm rather confused! I've been doing new page patrol and have found quite a number of articles that are copies of other web pages. Some are just copies; others state that they have copyright permission but don't seem to have fulfilled the requirements of Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission e.g. emailing formal permission to Wikimedia. I need to know: once I find an apparent copyright problem, what should I do? Could you explain what is the difference between a "blatant" copyright violation and some other situation where the page is a copy of some web page? E.g. what is it about the Frees Hall case that made you not classify it as "blatant"? Also, when I put a db-copyvio tag on, am I supposed to watch the page so that if you take the speedy tag off, I can follow up with some other action? I thought the admin taking the speedy tag off was supposed to put the page into whatever other process would be appropriate -- is that not how it works? In the past few days I put {{copyvio}} (i.e. not the speedy kind) on a few pages, then saw an instruction somewhere that led me to believe I ought to have speedied most of them. Would it be OK if I just put {{copyvio}} on whenever I think there is or might be a problem, or is there some way to tell which ones should be speedied? Sorry if this is too many questions. Thanks for any instructions you can give (or for directing me to whoever knows about this stuff). --Coppertwig 19:14, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Coppertwig. Thanks for looking out for copyvios. I'm all for deleting copyright violations and have deleted many articles tagged for that. The problem with that particular article is that you did not identify a source for the copyright violation, and so I could not confirm that the article is a copyright violation. :) I did a google search on a phrase from the article (here) and did not find a source myself. (I don't find anything for this one, either.) Without a source, I cannot positively identify it as a blatant copyright violation and cannot delete it under WP:CSD#G12. Lacking compelling reasons of my own to believe it a copyright violation, I would feel it inappropriate for me to open a discussion about it at Wikipedia:Copyright problems. If you can identify the source, that would be helpful. If not, you can open a discussion to explain why you believe it may be a copyright violation. (More on how in next paragraph.)

The basic criterion in determining whether a text page is a candidate for CSD#G12 is that (a)it is copied from a website or other source that does not seem to be a copy of Wikipedia; (b) there is no non-infringing material on the page or in the history worthy saving; (c) the material was introduced all at once by one person, and (d) there is no credible assertion of public domain, fair use or free license. If it meets all of those criteria, then it's fair game for speedy. If it meets only some, it may require different handling. In those cases, it is certainly okay not to mark them for speedy, but to use {{copyvio|url=x}} (identifying the source). If you only suspect that an article is a copyright violation, it is handled differently, with the template {{cv-unsure}} being placed on the talk page of the article (not on the article itself). To do that, you place {{cv-unsure|~~~|2=http://en.wikipedia.org/fullurl}} on the talk page, replacing http://en.wikipedia.org/fullurl with the url of the page you suspect is a copyvio. (That permanently links the version you believe is a copyvio in the template, in case the article is later edited.)

As far as watching pages marked for speedy, I generally do watch pages I have so marked so that if the tag is challenged, I can determine if I need to pursue WP:AfD. Sometimes an admin who declines a speedy will take further steps, but not always if he or she does not agree with the tag or see an apparent reason to pursue deletion.

Please let me know if any of this is unclear or if I may be of further assistance. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 19:50, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh, sorry, that was my mistake. I thought I had included a URL, so I didn't get what you meant about finding the source. I must have neglected to put in the URL. Now everything makes sense. I've nominated it for speedy again, this time including the URL (and I think it's already deleted). I searched for shorter phrases than you did. The person creating the page left out a few words here and there, but it's still essentially a copy. (or was!) --Coppertwig 21:42, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Ah, that makes sense. :) I'm glad that you asked, then, since it seems it was a simple miscommunication. As I said, I'm all for eliminating copyvios, and I do appreciate your locating and handling that one. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 21:48, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Adoption

Hello Moonriddengirl. How are you? I am Masterpiece2000. Do you want to adopt me? Let me tell you few things about me. I joined Wikipedia on October 1, 2007. I have made over 3000 edits and created over 70 articles. But I am still new. There is lot to learn. Perhaps you can held me and guide me. Masterpiece2000 08:03, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Masterpiece2000. Nice to meet you. :) I've been looking through some of your contributions. Let's talk a little bit about what you're interested in learning, because it seems from some of the questions you've asked others (like User_talk:Ais523#Meta-Wiki this) and from your list of articles you've created that you're already quite beyond needing typical mentorship. :) (I do see one thing that I may be able to tell you, though. Biography articles are grouped together in wikiproject biography. To alert the project of the article's existence, place {{BIO}} on the talk page, as I did to Talk:Clark Bissell.) I suspect I'd feel a bit foolish "adopting" you, as by your work I imagine if I already had, I'd be telling you that you looked ready to graduate. :D

I see that you are interesting in pursuing adminship and becoming active in WP:AN. If you are looking for targeted assistance in this regards, you might rather look into Wikipedia:Admin coaching than adoption, since admin coaches are presumably experienced in guiding users in this direction.

If it turns out, after conversation, that I don't feel the adopter/adoptee relationship is the appropriate one here, please note that this does not mean that I will not try to answer any questions you have, if I can. But if you had come to me with the meta-wiki one, I'd be directing your elsewhere. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:00, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply. Your reply was very helpful. I think you are a great admin. Regards, Masterpiece2000 02:50, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

And, one more thing: Your name is quite cool. Regards, Masterpiece2000 02:55, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. I don't know if I'm a great admin, but I do try. :D I'm glad you like my username. As my userpage says, it's taken from a poem. What inspired yours? --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 03:16, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Subject deleted

hi,

i tried to learn about posting an article but i really tried alot to understand how to get the refrences ...etc

i have alot of websites that show the profile that i was posting so can you please guide me?

Bisho bkc 19:56, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi. References are good. :) You did a good job with the infobox on the article, which can be tricky, so I'm sure that the rest will not be too difficult. I would suggest that you look at a few similar articles, but you have to be careful with your choices. Unfortunately, there are many articles on Wikipedia that are not really consistent with policies, and using these as a model can lead you astray.

First thing to know is that biographies must assert the encyclopedic importance of the subject, in this case using the criteria set out at WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC. Articles that don't cover this basic step are likely to be speedily deleted. For example, if your musician has a charted hit or has gone on an international tour, you should mention that. This step is essential to prevent speedy deletion on notability grounds. Other common causes of speedy deletion are an overly promotional tone or using text directly from other sources.

There are two other deletion processes, and in order to secure your article from those, you will need to present reliable sources that verify the claims in the article. (Sourcing is always important but is especially so when your subject is living, as Wikipedia tries carefully to avoid libel.) Reliable sources may include magazine or newspaper articles or information from television websites--that sort of thing. Information taken from the individual's website can be used to add details to the article, but not to verify the notability.

Help:Starting a new page might give you some guidance, and you might also want to look at Wikipedia:Your first article and Wikipedia:How to write a great article. You might also consider taking a tour through the Wikipedia:Tutorial so that you know how to properly format the article before creation. If you need time to complete the article and are worried that you cannot do it in one pass, you might want to work on it in userspace, for example on your userpage at User:Bisho bkc, before moving it to article space. (You do have to be registered for at least four days to move an article.) Even there, you would probably want to place a note at the top of the page indicating that the article is in process. If it's left alone too long, it may still be speedily deleted as inappropriate for Wikipedia.

Just in case it will be helpful to you in establishing the article, I have placed your infobox on your userpage. If you decide after reading this that you do not wish to pursue the article, just drop me a note, and I'll remove it.

If any of this is unclear or if I can provide you with further assistance, please let me know. Good luck, and happy editing. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 21:14, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Removing IP Address?

I'm trying to help a new user who has a question which I can't answer (below). What do you think? --Kevin Murray (talk) 06:26, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I made a mistake and edited a page in a browser window that was not logged in. As a result, my IP address appears in the History for that page. I do not like this at all. Is there any way I can remove this? Thanks a lot! Prignillius (talk) 05:20, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I'll pass this on to an admin. --Kevin Murray (talk) 06:23, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi. :) It would be helpful if he had shared which page he meant. :/ It is possible to delete the page and restore everything but that single edit, but there are circumstances wherein I'd be loathe to attempt it, depending on the history of the page and the nature of the edit. The information would still be available to admins, but honestly it's unlikely that anybody would go looking. If he feels that the IP address violates his privacy, he could take his request to Wikipedia:Requests for oversight, but I have no idea if such a request would be granted. In any event, I'll take it up with him at his user talk page. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:42, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the Jeeny map edit

It was an error. She later reverted herself. She was upset at the time of the removal and did not look at the contents of the edit. She does not believe that linking to the map constitutes as a violation in any shape, or form. WhisperToMe (talk) 14:56, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

UClaim.com

Hello "Moonrider",

I understand the policy, but I know it can be overridden in some cases. Yes, I'm registering with Wikipedia to try and get more exposure for my new website UClaim.com.

But consider this with your management: there are thousands of people right now who have either been burned or flooded out of their homes. They have insurance, but the policies were lost in the disaster. They can't get them from their insurance companies or anywhere on the internet. What the insurance company does is say we will mail you one, but it does not come for 6 months, long after they got screwed on their claim.

Do you know I sent a couple of press releases to the San Diego Union Tribune offering the free policies for their readers and they said "we are too busy with charities". I would be glad to send you a copy of their email response and my press releases.

If you and your superisors don't want to help your fellow man in distress, then remember this when you become a disaster victim someday.

Thanks for your time, Ronald55 (talk) 00:57, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry that you are meeting frustration in promoting your website. I know how disappointing it can be when you try to help people and your efforts seem unappreciated. Though I volunteer at the drawing board, I have no authority to permit you to sidestep policy. If your site does not meet those guidelines, an article about it is likely to be marked for deletion, whether you convince me individually of its appropriateness or not. No matter how worthy a project may be, Wikipedia is not for promoting causes. It is meant to be an objective, verifiable compendium of encyclopedic information; nothing more. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 01:29, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Hello!

Hello Moonriddengirl. How are you? I like the name Masterpiece. I am think about Wikipedia:Admin coaching. It can be hard to get a right coach. However, I will be happy if you can help me. I think you are a very pleasant person. Is English your first language? English is my second language. If I make any mistake, please correct it. If I face any problem or don't understand something, can I contact you? And, please reply on my talk page. Regards, Masterpiece2000 (talk) 05:05, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Replied. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:23, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply. I am happy to know that you can speak in Latin. You are a talented person. English is my second language and I speak in three languages. Moonriddengirl, can you help me with spelling and grammar check? Regards, Masterpiece2000 (talk) 12:28, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Re:link fix

No problem! J-ſtan^Talk_Contribs 19:01, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion: Canadian Race Relations Foundation

I was about to remove the one paragraph of offending text and dispute the proposed deletion, when you very very speedily deleted the article. I didn't have a chance to ask you to "hold on". Please help educate me. What is the purpose of having Template:cite web if the text is not a quote? Should it be an edited version? The source was the Canadian government "posted with the intent that it be readily available for personal and public non-commercial use and may be reproduced, in part or in whole, and by any means, without charge or further permission":here. The Canadian Race Relations Foundation is an organization that is worthy of mention in Wikipedia and this was only small portion of the information entered. Can the article be restored to allow the direct quote to be removed or justified? - Secondarywaltz (talk) 22:32, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

There seemed to be more than one direct quote involved, and some of the material seems to have been taken from the website of the charity, which contains a clear copyright notice. I can userfy the material so that we can discuss problem areas. Then you can copy it from your userpage once the copyvio is removed and it won't be in the page history. I'll go ahead and userfy so I can more easily give you specifics, but in short the text has to be rewritten in your own words. I'll let you know when the material is userfied. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 22:36, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I have temporarily userfied this material, with the sections that seem to be taken word for word from other sources bolded, at User:Secondarywaltz/sandbox. I've included sources that also use that language after the problematic sections. These sections need to be revised completely so that they are no longer in the language of the original in order for us to use it. The cite web template is to explain where the source came from, not to justify the use of the precise language. It is only appropriate to use the precise language if you do so within quotation marks, and then fair use laws limit the amount of language that can be duplicated. Ideas are not copyrighted, but words are. As I noted at your talk page, this material cannot remain on Wikipedia long, but I wanted to be able to demonstrate to you more graphically the problematic portions. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 22:49, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

It seems fairly evident at this point that you have gone offline. :)

Please note that Wikipedia contributions are released under GFDL, which authorizes commercial or non-commercial use of material so long as author information is acknowledged. The license set out at the website you mention does not release the material under public domain; although it does allow the material to be used for non-commercial purposes, it explicitly withholds permission for commercial use. It also raises the question of ownership of the Canadian Race Relations Foundation, when it notes that "Some of the materials and graphical elements found on Government of Canada Web sites are subject to copyrights held by other organizations.... In such cases, some restrictions on the reproduction of materials or graphical elements may apply and it may be necessary to seek permission from the rights holder prior to reproducing the material". With material at this source, meanwhile, all rights are reserved. As I noted above, information here bears a clear copyright notice. Your releasing it under the GFDL without permission from the source is problematic.

I'd also like to add that I just noticed the "very very speedily deleted" in your note above. The article was tagged 17 minutes before my deletion, and since the tag included notice of only one source, I spent several minutes locating the others before determining that deletion was necessary to protect Wikipedia from copyright concerns. I'm not sure it was so "very very speedily deleted" as all that. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 00:03, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. I am new around here and everything was gone before I could understand what was happening. To me 17 minutes felt instantanious. I plead guilty to sloppiness! If I cut back this entry to something more basic (top section, Purpose, References, See other, External links) would that probably be acceptable? That would then allow the CRRF, and others, to add their own input. Unofficial feedback I got was that they liked what was briefly there.
Again thank you for putting me straight. How much time do I have for this? It's friday night here!!! - Secondarywaltz (talk) 00:54, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Everybody is new around here at one point or another. :) You can keep all of the information as long as you change the wording. (I've revised the first problem sentence as an example). I am a little uneasy about the continued presence of the article even though it's not in article space. How about if while you are not working on it, you replace the page with a note that says "under construction"? When you come back, you can revert back to the last version. Just remember that when you restore it to article space, you need to copy the last version, without copyright violations, and paste it. Copy & paste moves are usually a bad thing, but in this case that will be necessary to make sure that copyright problems are not present in the article's history. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 01:06, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Deleted Page???

Why did you delete my page!!! It was titled AndrewSmith. That was for my project!!! Come on... I'm going to make a new one, but don't delete it!!! Please answer back why you deleted it!!! I'm trying to talk civil. But come on! You deleted it! Please answer back.

Andrew Smith —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alphasquadron (talk • contribs) 18:35, 7 December 2007

I have replied at your talk page. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 22:54, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the review

Many thanks for the review. I'll work towards utilizing your suggestions for interactions with other editors. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 00:42, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

My pleasure. :D Those are the kinds of reviews I enjoy giving. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 00:46, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you!

Hello Moonriddengirl! Thank you for the reply! Regards, Masterpiece2000 (talk) 04:55, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Gary Lee Price

Thanks. :) I wondered when someone was going to get round to closing the debate! Tyrenius (talk) 13:24, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

I just saw at a noticeboard what a backlog there is. Oi. I'm usually in the CSD department. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:25, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Article Deleted

Dear Moonriddengirl, Yesterday I was very happy to post my first wikipedia article and today I found it deleted :D. My article was about a tower in Dubai called "Wind Tower I". I found a thousand of towers in Dubai on wikipedia and I thought there won't be a problem. It didn't have any price or advertisement or reference to an advertisement site. and in case of copyright, the whole content of article was my own work. so Honestly I don't find the reason of my article been deleted. would you please tell me why it has been deleted and how I can undelete it or create it again. thank you --Atlasiali (talk) 06:23, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

thank you so much!

thank you thank you thank you! :))))))))))))))))) it looks so much better.

if you ever need anything let me know!:> ANOMALY-117 (talk) 04:19, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

		The Special Barnstar
		thank you for helping me put togeather my page again if you EVER need anything let me know. ANOMALY-117 (talk) 04:25, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm glad I could help. If you're lucky, you may attract a wikifairy who will make it something truly spectacular. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:38, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

u are seeking to adopt? try my little brother ANOMALY-116. ON mschel's page (my adopter so check my page for a link)--ANOMALY-117 (talk) 14:15, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

We'd need to make sure we're a good fit first. :) I'm working through a pretty backlog of AfDs right now, but I'll look at his contributions later and see if our interests mesh. Meanwhile, he can read my adopting section if he'd like to see what he thinks. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:19, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

he uh is like new as of like yesterday. but he likes halo and stuff like that.--ANOMALY-117 (talk) 04:45, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Judging by his user page, it seems like he's found an adopter. :) I hope it works out well for him. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:19, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

First Wiki entry, questions about how to correct deleted material

Hi MRG, thanks for being civil in your explanation. Another sysop was not, and I appreciate the effort. I have some questions about your message that I hope will help me learn Wikipedia better.

I added a statement under "Aftermath" in the Megan Meier suicide controversy. I discovered the case and found that a blog had been created called Megan Had It Coming, detailing information about the case and eventually stating that it had been authored by Lori Drew, a party to the controversy, to present an alternative to the current media narrative.

I see in the link to sources that you provided that self-published material has many criteria to be included, and I wonder where this blog falls short. I see a clear case of the self-published material as relevant, not unduly self-serving, not unrelated to the subject, and not based on other uncited sources.

If the problem with the blog is due to being contentious OR involving third parties (although the piece is mostly about the author's relation to other parties), OR continued reasonable doubt as to authorship, what constitutes satisfaction of those claims under the Wikipedia guidline of "verifiability, not truth?" If the blog is genuine in all other respects and still contentious would it be removed on those grounds? Would that standard similarly apply to any self-published material that references a third party?

I ask because truth is a defense to libel, and if Drew's authorship of the blog is genuine then using it to quote her (as seems to have been her intention due to heavy suspicion of broadcast media) is defensible.

So, if I were to contribute to Wikipedia in the future (considering we can agree that proper participation is the goal of an open source encyclopedia), what do I need to know about verifiability in Wikipedia's standards? Must information be more likely verifiable (or true) than not, as in tortious cases (such as libel), or must it be proven at or near 100% certainty (which is nearly impossible about any account of history or current events not reported through multiple, independent, first-person sources without the means or motive to corroborate)? I ask especially because more-likely-true-than-not is a standard often used in the newspaper business (with qualifiers), and printing a story (especially reporting someone's words) does not verify information in any sustained way other than the negative proof of a lack of a libel lawsuit. Jay.Hazen (talk) 20:00, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Jay. The primary problem with the blog is reasonable doubt of authenticity. While blogs are seldom acceptable sources, they can be used to document the activities and philosophies of the individuals who write them as long as they meet certain criteria. The guidelines on biographical material about living persons indicates that a blog may only be used about the subject him or herself if "there is no reasonable doubt as to who wrote it". Given the ease with which people can commit internet fraud (this case evidence in point), we can't be sure that an impostor didn't make those claims.

Those concerns would be satisfied if reputable sources with editorial oversight such as newspapers reported that Drew had acknowledged authorship or if they reported that police had investigated and verified authorship. At that point, the blog could reasonably be used to quote Drew...although even then care would have to be taken to maintain a neutral tone and avoid undue weight. The blog might still be removed if it was perceived as being used to attack Megan Meier, for instance. Articles this contentious are fraught with difficulties and generally constructed with a lot of heated debate. :)

And, yes, we agree that proper participation is the goal. :) I hope you will continue to contribute and, in this case, if you find documentation verifying that the blog belongs to Drew, please let us know. There is an active conversation about the article and its development at its talk page. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 21:04, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for, among other things, showing me where the talk page is. I'm so new I didn't even know what one was until I saw I had messages. Have a great week! Jay.Hazen (talk) 04:32, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Adoption?

Your user page mentions you're looking to adopt someone...? I was wondering if you could adopt me - I've been asking around but no one seems to want to adopt me *Cry*. All I'm looking for is a bit of a run through with various vandalism issues and CSD issues, which you mention you teach. Think about it, but it'd be great if you could. Cheers, Spawn Man ^{Review Me!} 04:43, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Spawn Man. I'd be happy to help you out with various vandalism issues and CSD issues, but given that you've been a Wikipedian longer than I have, I think we'd best not call it adoption. :D Do you have specific questions? We do seem likely to have time zone challenges which could make conversation slow, but I'm game to offer my input if you feel like I have experience that can help you. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:18, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Kewl then. I've already started a page here for when Durova was coaching me, but she was more into the technical side of admin duties etc. Specific questions? Not that I know of, just a little training in the art of vandal fighting, Speedies and blocking etc etc. You know, the general stuff. :) Is there anything you need to know about me or anything? Just tell me if you need anything else from me. Cheers, Spawn Man ^{Review Me!} 03:52, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Richard Syron

I was about to create an article on Freddie Mac CEO Richard Syron when I saw that such an article was recently deleted as a copyright violation. Just checking whether it is OK if I build up a stub on Syron, who is a former Boston Fed executive and Amex exchange chairman and definitely notable. I never even read the former article, and will of course avoid whatever copyright violations troubled the former article.--Samiharris (talk) 15:09, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

It's absolutely fine to create an article on him. :) Only in exceptional cases is the ground salted to prevent recreation of a speedied article, and copyright violations are not usually among them. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:12, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

copyright

hi i dont have time to read through 6 pages of copyright policy, but if would point me to the correct section relevant to me, i would read it.--Zorgness (talk) 17:28, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

It's in the first full paragraph after the italics section. It shouldn't be too hard. However, if you're really pressed for time, look at the third sentence. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:37, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Angel of the Retributionings

I revised the list-y section into a more prose-y thing. Hopefully, it's good. Howa0082 (talk) 01:19, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Danke! Howa0082 (talk) 03:27, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Photographs EP

I've done some work on the article. Looking for suggestions and an updated assessment. --Blitzvergnugen (talk) 06:39, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I've reassessed it as a start. To achieve "B" status, which is the highest that WP:ALBUM can give, you need at least one more section of informative prose. You can read more about it at Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Assessment. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:47, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

PokerTH

Hey, see you declined the {{db-spam}} on this. I've previously blown it away a couple of times, can't see the notability. Anyway, there seems to be something afoot with this and similar pages like Portableapps.com. A lot of speedy tags are being added... I'm beginning to suspect there's more to it than meets the eye. Care to join me in investigating? The Rambling Man (talk) 21:05, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Sure. I'll take a look at it. Are you thinking harassment? --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 21:07, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Dunno yet. Just seems there are some odd editing patterns... The Rambling Man (talk) 21:56, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Say, this, for a new user? The Rambling Man (talk) 21:57, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

At the very least, it seems to be somebody with a vendetta. Given the username and the focus on portable apps, I think we can safely presume a WP:COI. This contribution is telling. But I don't see any sign that this is sockery, do you? --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 22:06, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

No, not convinced about socking but Portableapps.com does have a considerable number of external links across the English wikipedia, so that's spamming in my opinion... not sure all round. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:12, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Exactly my thought. :) I think the speedy spam tags are excessive, and the reapplication of it in one instance is clearly vendettaish, but I would not be comfortable restoring the Portableapps links removed myself because I also think them overly promotional. :) I guess it's something to note and keep an eye on. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 22:14, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Wolfen (Star Fox series)

I saw that you re-deleted Wolfen (Star Fox series). I thought it was an appropriate article, as we have one about the Arwing, used by the "good guys". I know the Wolfen are not nearly as prominent as their good counterparts, but should they have their own article, or at least mention on either the Arwing page or the Star Fox series page? I personally think that a separate article would be the best fit for this fictional type of air/space craft. RingtailedFox • Talk • Stalk 21:17, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry if the article's deletion was a disappointment to you, but the consensus of the community at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wolfen (Star Fox series) was evidently to delete. If you disagree with the procedural handling of that WP:AfD discussion, you can bring that up at deletion review (please read the rules and policies carefully), but simply recreating the article contravenes policy. Please do not recreate the article unless you are certain that you can address the concerns raised at that AfD. Thank you --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 21:23, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

• I see that now, and i was not trying to disrupt wikipedia to make a point. I was just trying to create an encyclopedic article on a fictional aircraft in the Star Fox series of video games. Would it still disrupt wikipedia if i tried to discuss it on the deleted article's talk page? I won't if that is against the rules. RingtailedFox • Talk • Stalk 21:26, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

I wasn't presuming that you were being pointy, but I did need to explain why the article was deleted. It's not up to me to give you permission to recreate the article. I'm just mopping up. :) A deleted article shouldn't have a talk page, so you'd do better to discuss it at the page of a related wikiproject or article, presumably something else in the Star Fox series. I'm not familiar with it, so I'm not sure what article would be the best host for such a conversation. You guys do need to be careful about creating an article on this topic, though. I would definitely limit it to a mention in a related article unless you have ample evidence of real world notability. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 21:31, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the info, I had already dived in to create an entry for Mayor Cohen.

Don't know him personally (although I once met him years ago) but did live in St Paul during his administration. Did not provide a developed bio just enough to identify him as one of the St Paul mayors and distinguish him from the screenwriter.

As to "idiots", Mad Magazine always prided itself as being published by the "usual gang of idiots" so it may well be understood to be an accolade for creative minds.

LAWinans

My pleasure. I hope it proved helpful to you even if you had already moved forward. :) As far as idiots in concern, I suspect the accuracy of the term in my case at least is reflected by how much time I spend here working for free. :D --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 02:18, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Trying to include more secondary references for Hygiene Standard Institute

Dear Moonriddengirl,

Thank you very much for the comments you have made on this article on Hygiene Standard Institute. I am trying to find some secondary references to this article. Regards, Sreejiagriman —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sreejiagriman (talk • contribs) 09:47, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Deletion rationales

Whoops, sorry about that! Still a bit new to this whole admin lark :-) ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:15, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Everybody's new at some point. :D Just yesterday I dove into the backlog at Wikipedia:Requested_moves for the first time. I couldn't figure out why there was a backlog...until I hit the move that took me almost an hour. Oi. Fixing redirect links is pretty boring. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:57, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Wind Tower I

Moonriddengirl, I recently asked for the Wind Tower I article to be deleted due to blatant advertising and copyright violations. I am not sure what is the policy for the deletion of articles, but you did not delete the talk page. I just thought I should let you know. Thank you. --Leitmanp (talk | contributions) 18:20, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. I missed that one. :) I'll go take care of it now. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 18:21, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

As the contributer of the deleted article, I respect your decision and also may somehow agree with you. It was a test only. But as someone who is new at contributing to wikipedia I want to know that Do you alert, send message, verify, correct the articles? or is it like the administrators delete whatever comes at their hand? I just like to findout whether I contribute again or not --Atlasiali (talk) 19:50, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Hello, Atlasiali. Thanks for your note. Articles tagged with problems are handled differently according to the nature of the problems. Some are tagged for repairs and are eventually addressed by other editors. Some, with more substantial issues, are nominated for deletion through one of the three deletion processes. These three processes are:

• the articles for deletion discussion, which is for cases where the need to delete may be uncertain or controversial,
• proposed deletion, for clearly uncontroversial cases without immediate need for action, and
• the speedy deletion process, for articles that are blatantly unencyclopedic (overly promotional, for instance) or violate inviolable policies like those concerning copyright or libel.

Getting the hang of contributing to Wikipedia can be a bit daunting, I know. I believe that creating articles about commercial interests is particularly challenging, especially for new contributors. The notability guidelines on those are a bit vague as compared to some others (say, the one on musicians). Also, Wikipedians in general are very wary of promotion and conflict of interest and may sometimes be hypervigilant in that regard. Today alone I have declined a number of speedy deletion requests for "promotion" where I disagreed with the extent of the issue. It is, unfortunately, a bit subjective. Sometimes it can be beneficial to take your ideas to the talk page of a related article or to join up with a "wikiproject" where you can get feedback from people with similar interests.

Oh, and additionally, with regards to sending notices, editors who tag articles for deletion are encouraged to send notices to contributors. In the case of copyright policy, this is essential. Before deleting the article, I did note that you had been notified of copyright policy on your page by CorenBot.

If I have not answered your question or if any of this is unclear, please let me know. I've tried wikilinking to all of the policies & guidelines that might give more information, but I know this is quite a lot of material to digest. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:09, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to the Graveyard

I note that you have declined my request to delete Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Business and Economics/graveyard1. This sub-page was set up with the intention of it becoming an archive for old AfD discussions relating to business. However it has since been superceded by Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Business, where business AfD's are logged and archived. Could I ask again for you to carry out my page deletion request? --Gavin Collins (talk) 08:42, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid that I'm not comfortable deleting outside of the criteria at WP:CSD. Given that the only substantial edits to the page have been made by User:Egfrank, s/he could request it as {{db-author}}. I'd be happy to approach him or her about this if you'd like; just let me know. Alternatively, you might consider MfD. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:07, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Disruption

The user TTN is using sockpuppets and bots to nominate a great deal of video game articles for deletion. The sockpuppets in question are Shiva Evolved and Krator. I'm not the only one that assumes this, either. User:Nubula and User:FangzofBlood and several others are getting tired of User:TTN et al. disrupting wikipedia to make a point. TTN has been following me on any articles i edit or link to and nominates them for deletion or merger. Something needs to be done. He has been removing others' posts on his talk page (mine included) if he doesn't like them asking him to stop. The sad reasons are "notability", "fan/gamecruft" or "not real world information". RingtailedFox • Talk • Stalk 23:08, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

well he does have the right to clean his talk page but i can under stand how that is frustrating. so he stalks you. have you treid asking him what his problem is? ANOMALY-117 (talk) 23:10, 10 December 2007 (UTC) and your signuture does say "stalk" maybe he's taking it literlyANOMALY-117 (talk) 23:11, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

That means he's being immature and incivil. As well, he refuses to answer others that asking him why he's doing this. RingtailedFox • Talk • Stalk 23:16, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

hmm....yea block him. ANOMALY-117 (talk) 23:18, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

I have very little experience personally in addressing sock puppetry. If you believe you are dealing with an individual who is utilizing sock puppets, you should read the the policy and, after gathering evidence, present your concerns to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets. Please read the guidelines at Suspected sock puppets carefully. You might wish to read through some of the existing reports to see the types of evidence generally offered. Lodging accusations of sock puppetry is serious, and you should have reasonable evidence before doing so.

What TTN seems to be trying to express to you based on your notes above is that Wikipedia's policies on WP:Notability (fiction) requires "real world" coverage of a concept. That means that the article needs to do more than talk about it from a fictional standpoint, but also must (with sources) discuss real world aspects. Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#PLOT explains that a bit. As an example, if I wanted to write an article about the whale in the novel Moby Dick, I might talk about what author Melville had said about the whale, what critics of the novel have said about the symbolism of the whale, how the current whaling industry at the time of the novel's composition impacted Melville's choice of symbolism & development. I could also include a section talking about the whale as it appears within the book, but that lacks "real world context" and thus does not meet policies.

TTN's nominating of articles for deletion might be regarded as disruptive if they were obviously made in bad faith. However, if these deletion discussions are proceeding anything like the one at Wolfen (Star Fox series), I'm afraid that community consensus might be with him. The best way to proceed in those is to marshal your arguments and, if you can, address the concerns being expressed.

Finally, the editor may remove any content that he pleases from his userpage. See WP:USER#Removal of comments, warnings. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 00:44, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Hmm. Poking around a bit, I see that TTN was actually encouraged in the use of AfDs at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Episodes and characters. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 00:56, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I suggest you ignore the ridiculous sockpuppet allegations — in fact you might consider the status of the vociferous detractors. Cheers, Jack Merridew 15:30, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

No worries. I'm not pursuing an out of process investigation. :) Since I'm not investigating, I didn't judge the merits of either accuser or accused, aside from looking to note that the AfDs are likely not done in bad faith if the editor has been encouraged to use them precisely as a show of good faith. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:41, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Missing encyclopedic articles

Hello Moonriddengirl. How are you? I have completed the missing biographies of all the governors of Maine. I have also created the missing biographies of the governors of Connecticut. Can you make necessary changes on Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/American politicians/Governors? The missing articles has been reduced. Regards, Masterpiece2000 (talk) 05:37, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

That's something that you can do yourself. :) If the page is not protected, it can be edited by anyone. And a most impressive accomplishment it is! --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 11:57, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply. Regards, Masterpiece2000 (talk) 03:17, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

D'oh!

I'm so sorry I did not reply sooner, see my talk page for the reason, and for advice! I'll drop Ryan a note as well. Ariel♥Gold 13:35, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

IRC cloak request

I am moonriddengirl on freenode and I would like the cloak wikipedia/moonriddengirl. Thanks. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:53, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Adoption

Hey Moonriddengirl,

I was checking out the adoption thing, and was wondering if you would be interested in "Adopting" me.

Im pretty new at wikipedia, and need someone experienced to help me out.

Signed, ~Ryan A. (Kodiak Ice) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kodiak Ice (talk • contribs) 15:22, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Ryan. Welcome to Wikipedia. :) Have you read my adopting section? It might give you some idea of whether or not our interests mesh. If you're looking to grasp a lot of the technical side of Wikipedia, I probably am not your top choice. If you're looking for somebody to help guide you through the process of learning to contribute text to article space, then I may well be able to help you out. :D I see you have truly just arrived. What kinds of articles interest you? --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 18:02, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for leaving the article about Carolyn Jessup.

It is truly a momumental book and an essential reference to Utah History. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wyorunner (talk • contribs) 22:50, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Wyorunner. I agree that she's notable and am glad if I was able to help. As I mentioned at that article's talk page, you might be able to further strength her claim of notability (see WP:BIO for guidelines) with more sourcing. There's very likely information in the external links I added that could be used to expand the article. :) Please keep in mind that as a biography of a living person, the article does require special care with sourcing and tone. :) Good luck, and happy editing. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 22:53, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Would you please help me with the book article as well.

The book is Escape (Book by Carolyn Jessop).

Thanks again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wyorunner (talk • contribs) 22:59, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I have added some external links to the article. I've also expanded Carolyn Jessop a bit. There's a lot more room for expansion there, but I'm out of time. :) Anyway, the deletion nomination on the book has been withdrawn. I hope that you will continue to build on these articles, as I do agree with you that they have a place on Wikipedia.

Just as a general note, when you leave comments on Wikipedia talk pages, please sign them by typing four tildes (~~~~). This will leave your username and the time you left the message, which can be helpful for people encountering your notes later. :) There is a function below the edit summary window to do this automatically. Just click on the tildes following the bolded Sign your username. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 23:26, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

WMMW

You have deleted my start up page for the WMMW project.

I work for Staffordshire University and we own the domain and copyright for the wmmw.org domain and are fully entitled to use any and all information about the project as we see fit

We thought it would be useful to have the project on Wikipedia

Please advise as to how we can get the wiki pages re-instated

Steve Silk —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stevesilk (talk • contribs) 09:08, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Hello, Stevesilk. Actually, while I left you a note about removing speedy notices, I am not the administrator who deleted the page. The deletion log indicates that it was deleted by User:Royalbroil under criterion A7, which means that it did not assert the notability of its subject. You have two options for getting the page re-instated. First, you can speak to the deleting administrator to ask him or her to reconsider. Second, you can bring the matter up (after having tried the first) for deletion review. There, editors will consider the question of whether the article was improperly deleted or will consider new evidence you bring. Alternatively, you can rewrite the article so that it addresses the concern. While the article was deleted, there is nothing to prevent your creating it again as long as you do so in good faith. Given the brevity of the information deleted, I will be happy to put it on your talkpage for your use in case you choose to go that route.

As far as addressing those concerns, this particular article would be governed by the notability guidelines on companies, which addresses commercial and non-commercial enterprises. The rule of thumb here is noting whether the project has received significant or widespread coverage in secondary sources that are reliable and independent of the projects (excluding project PR releases and information solely available on the company project—these sources may be used for additional information after notability has been established by secondary sources). All material must be attributable.

If you are able to assemble necessary sources to assert notability, you may certainly create such an article, although as you are closely associated with the subject, you may wish to review our conflict of interest guideline. If you do choose to write the article in such a case, you'll want to be particularly careful to approach it neutrally and without undue promotion.

You might also look at Wikipedia:Your first article and Wikipedia:How to write a great article and please consider taking a tour through the Wikipedia:Tutorial so that you know how to properly format the article before creation.

Please let me know if you'd like to discuss this further. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:57, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Another copyright question

I hope you don't mind another question. I can't figure out what to do with this page. Relief From Joint and Several Liability on Joint Returns. I'm wondering if it's a copyright violation, but maybe everything from the U.S. government is in the public domain so maybe not. Not quite sure if it's from U.S. govt, either. Here's the page it seems to be copied from. Thanks. [5] --Coppertwig (talk) 02:49, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, I'm not a federal copyright attorney, but that one should be fair game. You can see a FAQ on copyright & gov documents over here. :) I'd think that article suffers from other problems. It's not extremely encyclopedic, but more like a tax guide. I've put an {{unencyclopedic}} tag on it and noted as much on the talk page. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 03:07, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Uh, fair game for Wikipedia to copy, or fair game for Wikipedians to put speedy-delete tags on? Anyway, it's been deleted by Dragonfly67 as "not an article". --Coppertwig (talk) 18:21, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair game to copy. :) No copyright protection exists. Deletion seems good in this case. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 18:24, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Hayden Panettiere discography

Sorry, I was just gone for a few hours. Let me know if I haven't done what you wanted. Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 21:00, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

It's always timing, isn't it? :D That's great. I just added it to the Category:Redirects from merges and made a null edit at the main article to specify the source. Thanks. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 22:07, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

DYK nomination of The Cannonball Adderley Quintet in San Francisco

Hi. I've nominated The Cannonball Adderley Quintet in San Francisco, an article you worked on, for consideration to appear on the Main Page as part of Wikipedia:Did you know. You can see the hook for the article at Template talk:Did you know#Articles created.2Fexpanded on December 13, where you can improve it if you see fit. – Black Falcon ^(Talk) 21:49, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Wow. :O Where's the icon for stunned and honored? This is a first for me, so I'll go take a peak at it. Thank you. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 22:27, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Zanzoona

I believe that "speedy deletion" is appropriate for things that are clearly vandalism or advertisements. I think it would have been more appropriate to tag the article with standard notability template, and give the author more than a few hours to complete the article. For the record, Zanzoona's channeler has a book out, is a frequent contributor to the local paper, and runs a multi-million dollar "church." I believe she has also appeared on local radio shows. She also appears to be a remarkable scam artist and my understanding is that she has been investigated by the local police in connection with this.

None of this may rise to the standard of notability, but speedy deletion is simply a knee-jerk reaction. Imagine my surprise when I logged on just 10 hours later to flesh out the stub I'd created and found the article gone. Kind of disheartening.

And yes, this is a single use username created to keep my commentary of this controversial person separated from my usual contributions. Zanzoonoid (talk) 08:27, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry if you found the deletion disheartening. As an evidently experienced Wikipedian, I'm sure you know that biographies, band articles and articles on groups must assert notability. Consensus that articles that do not meet this threshold were appropriately speedily deleted arose in response to the great number of such articles created that do not meet the relevant notability guidelines. If the article had indicated the above, it probably wouldn't have been tagged for speedy deletion even if it did not meet the verifiability policy. (Although, of course, it could have been tagged for deletion under other means of the deletion process and it might have been deleted under WP:BLP if you referred to the woman as a scam artist without sourcing. As an article on a living person, sourcing and neutrality standards are even more important here.)

It's my practice to userfy material if the creator expresses an interest in further work on the article, and I have done so at your userpage, but please bring it in line with policy before returning it to article space. Notability needs at least to be asserted to avoid it being retagged for speedy and redeleted. To minimize the chance that it will be deleted through WP:AfD, of course, you need to substantiate notability with reliable sources. The primary source you used may add details, but can't substantiate anything as it is produced by the group in question.

To prevent this kind of disappointment in the future, you might want to consider creating articles that you don't have time to bring to minimal standards in user subspace in a sandbox. That way, you can build it at your leisure with much less concern that it will be tagged. Personally, even when I am actively working on creating an article in article space, I use {{inuse}} to notify other editors that I am not finished. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:15, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Editor review

Thank you for your comments on my editor review. Just to let you know, I usually archive my talk page by removing any comment from my page at my leisure (I was inspired by Glen's explanation on Figaro's talk page at User talk:Figaro#Answer). If every single comment was left on my talk page, it would be too lengthly to go and search the topics. As for the part about the uncivil and rude statements, I apologize for my actions. Once again, thank you for reviewing me and please accept my apologies. I appreciate your review very much. All the best, Greg Jones II 00:18, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Greg. You don't have to apologize to me. :) You asked for feedback, and I'm happy to give it. As I said, for the most part you are scrupulously polite and civil. It's just a heads up on those rare occasions. :) The reason most editors choose to archive talk is so that they can be easily perused. I do a lot of editor reviews (yours makes #20) and occasionally contribute to RfAs, and it is a lot easier to do them when talk is archived. With the help of User:MiszaBot, I don't even have to think about it. :) Anyway, good luck, and I hope that my input proves useful. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 00:40, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On December 18, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The Cannonball Adderley Quintet in San Francisco, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! Royalbroil 03:53, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Yay! Thanks for the nomination. Unexpected and very exciting. :D --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 03:54, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Race and intelligence

Could you please remove the protection lock on the article "Race and intelligence". A significant amount of time has passed without significant progress being made on the article with the protection lock in place. --Jagz (talk) 17:36, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I'll ask the admin who extended the protection, whose name is so sufficiently similar to yours that I did a double-take. :) He seems to be semi-retired, so it may take a bit for him to respond. If he doesn't have any objection, then I'll be happy to lift the protection. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:41, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

• Sadly progess stopped on our attempt at a consensus sandbox effort, during the protection period. Thanks for your help and cooperation with this. --Kevin Murray (talk) 18:37, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

My user subpage remains open. I hope that you guys are able to work peaceably. Good luck! --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 18:44, 18 December 2007 (UTC)