User talk:Realkyhick

Realkyhick is busy and is going to be on Wikipedia in off-and-on doses, and may not respond swiftly to queries.

This is Realkyhick's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4

Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end. Start a new talk topic.

I will reply to comments on your talk page, and if the conversation gets really long, I may add them to my talk page as well to make it easier to keep track of both sides of a conversation.

Please consider this as a very special case.Joseane (talk) 17:44, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

hope I did this correctly - delete away (though I hope I can restore it when it's ready - I copied to user/joseane tondino's paradox and figured out how to sandbox it. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joseane (talk • contribs) 23:11, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've nominated Preparation for flow cytometry for deletion, and since you've tagged the article and commented on its talk page, I thought you might be interested. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Preparation for flow cytometry. Deor (talk) 22:11, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Realkyhick,

Can you please express your point on your comments. I see many pages about colleges and universities that have much less information but still live in Wikipedia. Your comments are short and don't have any ground, and do not really give any suggestion on how to improve the article.

Sincerely,

Educator888 (talk) 04:18, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Realkyhick,

Could you please explain why do you think that:

> If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article TESST >College of Technology, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, >edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of >the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, >you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

> 1. editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and >products they are involved with; > 2. participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and > 3. linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).

Which link makes you thinking that "your user name is similar to that of the web site"?

>First of all you appear to have a conflict of interest regarding one of the extrernal links - your user name is >similar to that of the web site, which may constitute "link spam". The references provided are all either from the >school's own website or from a press release by its owner. These are not considered independent, reliable sources. >It appears that this article may exist primarily to promote the school, and promotion of anything at all on >Wikipedia is prohibited. Because of all of these,

The school is still notable enough to have its own face and more than 1000 students according to the governmental sources, please see the links which I provided in the article. Can you publish the list of your criteria for notability.

> I have questions as to whether or not this school is notable enough to have an article at Wikipedia. By the way, >the existence of other similar articles does not justify the existence of this one. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 05:45, >14 August 2009 (UTC)

Educator888 (talk) 11:54, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

>'You cited some site called "1888edu.com" and your username is "Educator888" - that's a little too similar for coincidence.

If '888' is the only thing for you to make a conclusion that some relation exists between my nick and cited site, I can tell you that 888, as well as 800, are all toll-free phones numbers in the US, people often use them for notability, because others number, like 111,333,666,777,999 are not really neutral for all people. I like the www.1888edu.com site because it allows me to keep searching by multiple parameters, no one other site (college navigator, ed.com/*, collegeboard.com, collegesearch.com ...) allows searching using so many parameters. On other hand, www.1888edu.com is the only site (except those in the domain ed.gov) which doesn't contain advertisements at this time and ed.gov/* sites have many references to other services. So, I don't see a good reason for stopping making references to www.1888edu.com.

>The general Wikipedia guideline for notability is found here. Various specific policies are found linked from that page. Moreover, the one and only governmental site you referenced contradicts what you just said above - it says 358 students.

Could you please give me a link in Wikipedia to the requirement, which specify the minimum number of student for notability. According to the ed.gov database, there are ~2000 students on 3 TESST campuses. ed.gov provides data in the tables and I don't see the report in the html form.

Educator888 (talk) 15:48, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the references from the US Department of Education to confirm the number of students on the institution campuses.Educator888 (talk) 19:33, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not ranting I'm giving an opinion of your actions. The article wasn't promoting the band so stop substituting words whenever you like. Who gives a shit if the article wasn't 'notable' enough? What if the standard was raised? Thousands of articles would be deleted. Then again, if the standard was lowered, more articles would be fine as they are. The Rishloo article would have been fine. Had you waited a while, the article could have been improved. Impatience is a bitch. Especially when somebody deletes your work because they're impatient.

Here's something you can do if you're bored: Delete YOUR user page. I'm sure you realize that you're not notable enough.

Here's my fucking signature if it helps. mÆniac ^Ask! 20:13, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm so sorry for the previous comment man. I had spent a lot of time on that article and seeing it deleted just set something off. I'm sorry and I hope you can forgive me. mÆniac ^Ask! 21:06, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for understanding :) mÆniac ^Ask! 19:07, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy!
Was this edit done by a bot, or done manually?
In either case, it is completely inappropriate.
"because it is a very short article" - Since when has (28,482 bytes) been "short", much less "very short"?
If a bot, suggest you fix the bot. If manual, suggest you engage brain before dumping "canned messages".

[[Image:Ambox warning_pn.svg|48px|left]] A tag has been placed on [[:NZ Rhodes Scholars]] requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under [[WP:CSD#A1|section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion]], because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see [[Wikipedia:Stub#Essential information about stubs|Wikipedia:Stub]] for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on [[Wikipedia:Notability|notable]] subjects and should provide references to [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources|reliable sources]] that [[Wikipedia:Verifiability|verify]] their content. If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding <code>{{tl|hangon}}</code> to '''the top of [[:NZ Rhodes Scholars|the page that has been nominated for deletion]]''' (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on '''[[Talk:NZ Rhodes Scholars|the talk page]]''' explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for ''speedy'' deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact [[:Category:Wikipedia administrators who will provide copies of deleted articles|one of these admins]] to request that they [[Wikipedia:Userfication#Userfication_of_deleted_content|userfy]] the page or have a copy emailed to you. <!-- Template:Db-nocontext-notice --> <!-- Template:Db-csd-notice-custom --> - [[User:Realkyhick|Realkyhick]] <small>([[User talk:Realkyhick|Talk to me]])</small> 13:11, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Next whinge: There IS no tag on the page!

Suggestions: If bot, test it BEFORE using it. If manual, get your act together BEFORE you embark on brainless semi-automatic activities.

I'm sorry about the tone of this posting, but lets face it, your action doesn't reflect positively on you. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 13:31, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, you've removed the speedy. But it DOESN'T need a prod. I needs YOU to think about what's going on, and if you don't understand, ask a question on my talk page. Pdfpdf (talk) 13:36, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The speedy was more of a slip of the mouse. However, your response was entirely out of line and uncalled for. Please reconsider such rude comments in the future. You've been around Wikipedia long enough to know better. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 13:34, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The speedy was more of a slip of the mouse. - You can hardly blame me for that!

However, your response was entirely out of line and uncalled for. - I don't think so. I'm not the editor going around doing inappropriate things.

Please reconsider such rude comments in the future. - Which comments are rude? Don't you think putting an irrelevant speedy on an article is rude? Don't you think blaming me for your stuff up is rude?

Look, I'm not interested in talking about this. You stuffed up. You still haven't apologised. Go irriate somebody else please. Bye-bye. Pdfpdf (talk) 13:48, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry that I clicked on a button that I didn't intend to. However, in light of your complaining, I have given your article a second look and found several problems: a title that does not follow the Manual of Style ("NZ" instead of "New Zealand"), lack of an explanation as to what this list is, and obvious formatting problems. Moreover, the list has no references for verification, and has some obvious template problems as well. I'll assume good faith that this is a work in progress, but you might help your cause by placing an {{underconstruction}} template at the top. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 13:56, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, I'm not interested in talking about this, but your polite and reasonable posting does deserve a polite and reasonable response.

I'll assume good faith that this is a work in progress. - I would have thought that was blindingly obvious, but apparently, it wasn't/isn't. Bad assumption on my part.

but you might help your cause by placing an {{underconstruction}} template at the top. - Good idea.

Just as a matter of academic speculation, why did you almost immediately respond with the speedy/prod rather than responding with the suggestion of addition of the "underconstruction" template? And for that matter, why didn't you put the "underconstruction" template there yourself?

No big deal - just interested to read your reply. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 14:19, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Simple answer: I was in a hurry on new-page patrol. Lousy excuse, but it's the best I've got today. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 14:22, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lol! (Isn't that called Occam's razor?) Thanks for the reply. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 14:27, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is so frustrating, I can't tell you how many times I've gone through this process. I like Wikipedia for certain things, but I've been really frustrated when it comes to the article that was created for Thia Megia.

I cannot tell you how many millions of fans (yes millions) this 14 yr old girl has. Her article was published on Wiki the ending of 2008. There were speed bumps and I had to submit a lot of references to prove she was worthy of a wiki article. The beginning of 2009 her article was finally up and running.

Then it started again, first people erasing the articles (young jealous teenage girls), then recently it was completely wiped out again. Why???

Thia Megia was just voted off "America's Got Talent' but she almost made it to the semi-finals. She received millions of votes from American fans, unfortunately it wasn't the fans who voted her off it was the judges when it came down to a tie.

Anyways, the point is, she had her own article on Wiki before her debut on America's Got Talent, she has a laundry list of accomplishments that I've referenced several times in the article. And since then she's gained even more popularity and has accomplished even more!

The site isn't to promote any product, any website any blogs, it's just an article about her. Plain and simple. What could be easier?

Please, Please put the article that was already approved by several Wikipedia agents like yourself last year. What can we do to stop this deleting Thia's article fiasco? It's non stop. Please assist us in putting the article back up. I would truly appreciate it...

Thank you --Surfer808 (talk) 23:44, 26 August 2009 (UTC) Kenji[reply]

Rick Rick Rick...Let me ask you, why did two admins approve her article in Nov of 2008? Since her article was approved in Nov 2008 (check your records) Not only has she made several television views (major sporting events, television shows) but she was on America's Got Talent and got through to the quarter finals into the semis!!!!! What could me more worthy for a 14 year old?

Have you Googled her name? Check this out Rick, go to Youtube and search "Thia Megia" see how many hits and videos she has (not by her, but by fans and video clips etc) there's millions of views! Seriously, check yourself.

Please reconsider, she's 14 years old. She was eliminated from the Semi Finals in one of the biggest and most popular shows in American television. She was so excited back in Nov of 2008 when she had her Wiki article up. Now she's been eliminated and now her Wiki page is gone. What a double blow

I'm not asking much, and I'm not asking you to make an exception. All I'm asking is put here back up. She was already approved before and since then she's done more. She deserves her article back. This girl has accomplished more in her 14 years of life than most adults have ever.

Don't deter this girl, don't steal that fire from under her. This article means a lot and she should have it back, I know you can help.

Please put it back.

--Surfer808 (talk) 09:59, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You've got some nerve RICK. --Surfer808 (talk) 00:12, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Thanks for contacting me about the page I created for the film Suicide Kids. I was wondering what specifically you thought sounded as promotional text rather than objective description? The film was the first shot in my hometown of Yorktown Heights, NY, and uses music from several rising, locally known bands in New York and Boston. To me, this made the film notable. Any thoughts you have to format or phrase descriptions better for Wikipedia's standards would be appreciated! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smitty2185 (talk • contribs) 17:01, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there, Just was wondering why the page Rishloo was deleted? I understand that a scant Google search may be one reason, but the band has done notable things including:
- Holding a higher playcount on Last.fm than any other un-signed alternative rock band on the west coast.
- Beginning viral marketing "I Am Rishloo" which involved over 138 individual participants from over 19 different countries. This resulted in those individuals submissions being posted across three states with no self promotion of events, contact info or otherwise.
- Playing at national festivals such as Lollapalooza and Hempfest.
- accompanying act Judas Priest at the White River Amphitheater.
- Having a third album produced by Scott Olsen, who has worked with Alice In Chains, Heart, Deftones, Limp Bizkit, Buck Cherry, Dredg, Unearth and was involved with movies Singles, Almost Famous. He has preformed with Alice in Chains (Unplugged 1997) and Heart (1998-2002) He also currently has his own record label named Jibe Records.

Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe just being a part of a large national label without ever doing any other notable action earns a band its own Wikipedia page. Let me know.

Drewguy12345 (talk) 16:28, 4 September 2009 (UTC) Drewguy12345[reply]

Update: Realkyhick, if you could respond to my inquiry I would appreciate it. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.112.225.13 (talk) 15:26, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I did, several days ago. Sign in under your user name and check your talk page. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 01:59, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the source must make the connection between Beck and Jones otherwise it is a violation of No Original Research - subsection SYN - making analysis not present in the original source -- The Red Pen of Doom 00:52, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just reworked the entry and removed any language that may sound like a "press release." Almost all of the cited references are secondary, verifiable sources. I see other entries on Wikipedia (National Wildlife Federation, for example) that use its own website and other publications as sources, so I'm unclear on why using CEL's website and books are an issue. Can you please review revised text again? Thank you.

```` —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rikaiah (talk • contribs) 19:35, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just replaced two of the cited references with independent, secondary sources. There is only ONE sentence in the whole entry that uses CEL's own website as a source. I'm not at all connected with the organization, but I am a longtime admirer. I've also attended some of their seminars/events in the past.

````

I did also want to note that the vast majority of the National Wildlife Federation's sources come from their own website. I took care not to do the same and included a variety of external, verifiable sources. Thank you very much for your careful consideration and review.

```` —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rikaiah (talk • contribs) 23:29, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

are an a**hole. I barely ever swear but this was just over the top. What did I do wrong to have my page nominated for speedy deletion? I made it and ten seconds later, I refresh the page and it tells me its about to be deleted?!? Why don't you get off of Wikipedia and get a life. Christa Black is an artist trying to make it in the music industry. She deserves recognition and you can't give her that? I may not have links for notability yet since I JUST created it, but i expect to have more time than 10 seconds before it's deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Carliandteresa (talk • contribs) 16:41, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

the page i just created:( Commit charge/Page ) is my original userpage that i intend to kind of duplicate to avoid being vandalized.. I think you understand what i mean. Thanks! ≈ Commit charge —Preceding undated comment added 23:22, 13 September 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Hi

You've proposed that the article I've put forward on Regulatory Risk Diffentiation be deleted because "Appears to be an essay, and also appears to have been copied and pasted from another source, possibly violating copyright."

While I would appreciate suggestions on how to better present the information contained in the article, it in no way violates copyright as it is my own work.

Kind regards Stuart Hamilton —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stuart G Hamilton (talk • contribs) 06:58, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Would appreciate your insights into how to better frame the article so that it meets Wiki standards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stuart G Hamilton (talk • contribs) 07:36, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I declined your speedy deletion request for Woman beater, which patently fails WP:G3. (See talk:Woman beater for details.) Please be more cautious with speedy deletion requests in the future, and think about how you can help new users, instead of templating them into submission. — Sebastian 16:46, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I resent your accusation of "templating someone into submission." The article "Woman beater" was written in a tone similar to those who post frequent nonsense and vandal articles. I still feel a G3 speedy was justified, though there's nothing wrong with the redirect. I have spent many, many, many hours on new-page patrol, and I'm pretty sure I know what speedy-deletion criteria are. Feel free to disagree, but please be more civil in your comments and discourse, and less snarky. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 02:34, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, I have to apologize. The way wrote this didn’t make sense: Here I am telling you to be more welcoming and respectful, and I’m neither welcoming nor respectful to you. I can do better than this, as I did here. Would you have taken my message more to heart if I had written to you in a similarly respectful way?

I’d like to think that the reason I treated the other editor more respectful was not the fact that he was an administrator, but because I imagined the situation differently: In the case of woman beater, I saw the following scenario: A woman has been beaten by a man. She goes to Wikipedia, enters “woman beater”, and gets the message:

You may create the page "Woman beater", but consider checking the search results below to see whether it is already covered.

There were no results matching the query.

Frustrated, she creates the page. The same minute, someone threatens to delete it immediately, and so on. When I imagined that scenario, I felt sorry for the woman, and I reacted with anger towards you. That wasn’t right, but I hope you can understand me. — Sebastian 06:35, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Understood, and apology accepted. Having looked at your previous work, your response did seem to be out of character. But we all have off days. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 08:55, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciated your comments on the talk page for "Nathan Johnson (author)". I am Nathan Johnson (speculation can cease) and have authored/written that page (perhaps not well enough) by the request of some individuals unaware of how to create a Wikipedia page. My content has been valuable over the years on this site and I appreciate not being blocked. I would welcome suggestions as to how to improve the page, not for self promotion but because I would like to offer insight into my life for those looking for it. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by John2690 (talk • contribs) 04:04, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I received your response. The gameshow appearances, theater and the fact that I am a sports writer weren't the reasons that people consider me notable. It was due to the fact that I'm a published author. That's what I tried to focus on. However, I get the impression that you feel that doesn't warrant notability either. Am I correct? —Preceding unsigned comment added by John2690 (talk • contribs) 12:38, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This page that I created was nominated for deletion, while the exact same page for another peer institution exists: Student Life in IIT Kharagpur. Now this is not the only one. The IITs are elite institutions in India, and each IIT has pages and pages of articles. I do not understand why this particular one was nominated for deletion? SDas (talk) 04:06, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Further, it is a stub and I intend to expand it!SDas (talk) 04:07, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You recommend a redirect. Yet I observe that almost every major educational institution has several pages. For example, every US university has a separate page on its sports team. The peer institutions of the one that I am writing have so many pages each, or even smaller aspects - like their annual cultural festivals (for example Spring Fest). These have existed since 2006. It is highly unlikely that those articles have been overlooked and thus not nominated for deletion. Clearly they have content. In due course, this one will too. SDas (talk) 04:19, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Even if it is "true," the redirect seemed to be a bit of an attack on Beck and speediable under WP:BLP. I looked for a target relating to someone converting to the LDS, but I couldn't find a good fit, so I just zapped it. youngamerican (wtf?) 15:27, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!

Just an FYI that I made the above article into a redirect to The Errand of Angels. I created The Errand of Angels when I had no idea that Errand of Angels (film) existed. In creating the redirect, I've effectively removed the PROD notice you placed on the article. I wanted to give you an explanation of what I did and why I did it.

Peace! Big Bird (talk • contribs) 18:33, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Wycombe Railway Company , has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Redrose64 (talk) 21:52, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But this is my research!

Αλλά αυτό είναι μου ! -- Ebola90 (talk) 22:04, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK sorry! Del the Sliven demon :( -- Ebola90 (talk) 22:07, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have been investigating and testing Wikipedia today with the EcoPawz listing. I obviously do not know what i am doing. I tried to take the page down and it will not let me; it keeps showing up. Can you help me to understand how to take the page down...please!

Got it, thanks! I was not completely aware of the full guidelines. However when I search the page still exists. If there is anything that i can do to ensure the page is removed please let me know.

Proof of chemenish,

Youtube user: burb3rryb3ats-Listen to the voice he uses in songs such as bbburberry (weaker version of chemenish) Youtube user: Doki66-Listen to mc devvo-donny soldier on his channel(strong use of chemenish in a slightly different manner)

I hope that helps :)

Hello Realkyhick, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Learning store has been removed. It was removed by Colonel Warden with the following edit summary '(Cleanup)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with Colonel Warden before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 20:14, 21 September 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)[reply]

I agree with your statement on neutrality. That having been said, if the goal of wikipedia is to record only FACTS, then I have done so. My sources are listed, but I would gleefully add more to back up these insertions. The things Beck has said are a matter of PUBLIC RECORD...his shows are broadcast all over the country...I'm only adding this history to his wikipedia page.

Thank you Jeffrey Owens

Now that I've read your "profile"...who do you think you are? Are you a paid employee of wikipedia? HELL NO! No wonder you were watching the Beck page you Bible thumping hilljack! Wikipedia is for EVERYONE.......as long as insertions have VERIFIABLE REFERENCES they should be left alone. I'm putting my insertions back in....these facts, again, are a matter of public record, as are my references. Delete me again and I'll report your sorry ass to wikipedia for misconduct. That's a promise.

Jeffrey Owens

Beck's mortal enemy? Now YOU sound like Beck and McCarthy. Beck FREQUENTLY gets the facts wrong. Hell, he misinterpreted the Constituion on his OWN SHOW! As for my citations, don't you worry, I've already broken out my other sources.

As for my personal opinion of Beck...his inability to check his facts leads him to report his ignorance, and his ignorance is dangerous to every American citizen.

Thus endeth the lesson

Wow..that sounded an awful lot like a threat as well. Pretty ironic from someone who purports to be a champion of neutrality. I assure you, I'm not trying to put in something that did not occur. Rather than just "delete me", why didn't you just say that my wording gave the appearance of bias? I would have attempted to be more unbiased.

Beck DID say these things on his show. All his viewers heard them. I'm just trying to add them to the record, is all.

I'll concede that blog entries are not good sources. I do not, however, just take Olbermann's words as facts. I WATCH BECK's SHOW. His own words ARE his errors.

When he tries to explain that in the constituion (Article 1 Section 9) the founding father's added an "immigrant tax", he is INCORRECT in his interpretation. Any credible U.S. History course teaches that this concerned the slave trade.

When he misquoted Edward R. Murrow (not only in text but in that the quote was actually stated by Attorney Joseph Nye Welch) he is INCORRECT. Since I noticed you also went to town on his statements on his radio show, I see that your bias is also showing. If you don't think that his hatred of 9/11 victim's families or calling survivors of Katrina scumbags counts as controversial, then so be it.

Whatever, dude...be the king of your little mountain, then.

"Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it." - Sir Winston Churchill <sup>[1]</sup>

Jeffrey Owens

i dont understand why my pages are being deleted? they are not inappropriate in the least!

Uorallstars (talk) 16:22, 27 September 2009 (UTC) tony[reply]

Seeing as I'm the one who did the CSD Nom, I thought I'd leave some feedback here. I nominated them (and they were deleted) because you provided no Reliable Sources for your articles, and a search of three major search engines as well as IMDB showed absolutely no references whatsoever to anything that resembled your articles. If you can provide reliable sources and prove that it wasn't a hoax, then you are welcome to re-create the articles, but until such time as you can do so, the articles have been deleted. Please note that you were give an opportunity to fix this here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Uorallstars&diff=prev&oldid=316505782 but chose not to do so. Frmatt (talk) 16:26, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for conducting a conversation with a third user on your talk page, I don't like it when it happens on mine, but was watching this user's contributions and saw the question appear on your page and figured it was the easiest way to get them an answer. Frmatt (talk) 16:28, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. No apology necessary. Thanks for helping. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 16:29, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is redlinked. Twinkle failure no doubt. Kevin (talk) 01:03, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Due to a lock, I could not add the following to the Mark Levin Talk page:

Well, Realkyhick, I have to say you made a good call. However, other than this blip in time when a sudden wave of v hit the page, the page should be unprotected as the serious problem is established editors not following wiki policy.

Now Mark has singled out Will Beback. Let me be clear that in my opinion Will Beback is acting appropriately within Wikipedia guidelines. Mark, it is bad to just blank out sections. Will Beback is right to restore them. However, selective editing is needed to properly remove the material about you that does not fall within Wikipedia guidelines. --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling (talk) 01:10, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I agree with you about MMfA, and I added a comment to say so, but Bob Mifune, always on the attack, removed it with the comment "rvv". The comment is clearly not v. --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling (talk) 03:02, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You may not have known this, but re-adding comments to a users' talk page that they have removed (as you did here ) is considered harrassing behavior on Wikipedia.

Any user may remove comments other than block notices from their talk page. Removal of a comment is considered a form of acknowledgement of having read it. You do not have a right to insist on it sitting on their page. If they want to take it down, they can.

Please do not do this with anyone else, particularly further with BobMifune, given the current incident. Everyone needs to calm down and be on their best behavior for a while around that topic.

Thank you. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 06:18, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your uw-npov was arrogant and inappropriate. You disagree with me about covering a notable controversy related to Byron York, fine. But keep the templates to yourself, that was just childish. 64.231.164.148 (talk) 05:05, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since you love slinging around policies to win content disputes, why don't you quote me the policy that says "people who understand wikipedia are required to have accounts, and if they edit from an IP, other wikipedians should make derogatory insinuations about them and demand they log in." Jackass. 64.231.164.148 (talk) 05:18, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While doing recent changes patrol with Huggle (HG), I came across the edit reversions in this article. My understanding of WP:NPOV is that deleting material that is accompanied by verifiable reference(s)/citation(s) can be also be construed as a violation of WP:NPOV. Moreover, the person deleting material that is accompanied by verifiable reference(s)/citation(s), is most likely going to receive a warning of between {{Uw-delete1}} to {{Uw-delete4im}}, depending on the Level of recent, previous warnings. Had the reversion of the material accompanied by verifiable reference(s)/citation(s) not been returned to the article just before I was about to Huggle it back, HG would have issued you one of those delete templates. Realkyhick, if you seek to remove material that is accompanied by verifiable reference(s)/citation(s), you need to first check that the references can be verified to contain the information that they are purported to contain. If they do not, then you can delete and say in your edit summary that the refs/cites are improperly used, and that they failed verification. If the refs/cites are indeed verifiable, and you still have a problem with them, you are required to open a new discussion thread in the article’s talk page. I am saying all this to keep you two from ending up in a possible edit war and receiving inevitable 3RR blocks. Thanks! — SpikeToronto (talk) 05:24, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Realkyhick - I know tempers are running hot at Mark Levin, but ALL non-article related discussion is to END. To enforce conduct I'm running on a single warning, then a 24 hour block system. Hence you are getting a warning for this diff. You're a respected, long-standing editor and I'd really prefer not to block you. Regards Manning (talk) 05:22, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea. Go and sleep. Regards, Manning (talk) 05:35, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you identified BobMifune as a potential sockpuppet of another user. However, I cannot find any identification of Jimintheatl, and it appears to me in the exchange on the talk page that this was the account BobM was using at the time. Did I read it wrong? Or is Jimintheatl another account version of BobMifune? Thx. Flyer190 (talk) 06:02, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me there were several accounts that, in retrospect, all may have been sock puppetry. They all had the same POV, violated the rules (BLP) in the same way, and all seem to have gone silent about the same time.Flyer190 (talk) 06:12, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are several external links to WiFi Rail and someone should start a wiki about it. WiFi Rail has filed 4 patents and provides high-speed wireless network connections to trains (see similar WAAV). The network has been proven at BART and facilitates safety and security aspects never before available which are supported by many government agencies. Cooperglee (talk) 03:30, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Milestones...

Feb 20, 2007 began demo of free wifi service in 4 downtown stations
Jan 20, 2008 Proved testing in the above ground network
Jun 20, 2008 Tested redundancy of network
Dec 20, 2008 signed contract for all of BART
Mar 20, 2009 Tested and demonstrated 4.9 Ghz network
Jun 20, 2009 trans-bay tube deployment under testing

Some websites...

www.bart.gov[1] www.cisco.com[2] www.reuters.com[3] KRON 4[4] Cooperglee (talk) 06:52, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article 21 Astor Place has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

not clear how this might meet notability guidelines. No claim of notability is made.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. RadioFan (talk) 16:37, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Realkyhick, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I have deleted a page you tagged (0408136145) under a criterion different from the one your provided, which was inappropriate or incorrect. CSD criteria are narrow and specific to protect the encyclopedia, and the process is more effective if the correct deletion rationale is supplied. Consider reviewing the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. Thanks again! NW (Talk) 00:02, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the redirect info. So much to learn! I saved it before previewing it. I just edited again - could you please check all ok?

Thanks

Sarah —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarahb1982 (talk • contribs) 03:05, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mmmm, actually my citation edits didn't save. Will redo now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarahb1982 (talk • contribs) 03:08, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I have declined your speedy delete nomination of Horrornewsnet because you tagged ti too fast in only one minute. Fro the brand new article you should give it a bit of a chance. However I would delete vandalisms, attacks, banned output, and copyvios in under a minute. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 07:29, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I have re-edited the page for Horrornewsnet and tried to remove anything that sounded too promotional. Please look over and reconsider. Also we appreciate any suggestions. The site itself can be verified thru numerous Google links. thankyou! Mikehorrorfan (talk) 18:10, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Realkyhick, Our company want to own a private wiki server, please tell me is this possible in any way. We want to put some important documents on wikipedia so that everybody else can get information about them. We dont want them to be edited at all by anybody else. Also please tell me how can I become an autoconfirmed user because i have to upload some pictures on wikipedia. Fozia izhar (talk) 12:28, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It means non-admin cannot put pictures on wikipedia. can I became an admin? What all are requirements to be an admin? please tell. Fozia izhar (talk) 07:45, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Realkyhick, i'm sorry but i just don't think it was very polite of you to delete an article i barely started working on. i'm new in here and don't know how to use it, so it might take me more than a few seconds to grasp all of the editing concepts, so it really did bother me the way in which you just removed my article without giving more than 30 seconds notice? hope you are well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cfreibur (talk • contribs) 23:50, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

can you email me a copy of the wiki page i created? stevolivin@yahoo.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stevolivin (talk • contribs) 02:09, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Katja Avdeeva requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or 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 indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

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. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this.

Hello,

I am new on wikipedia.

I see that you lock my page... a cultural page about a great artist. I try to read the wikipedia best way of writing article... but everything i do seems to be wrong Could you explain me what i did wrong ?

Nicolas

RESPONSE 2 :

Thank you for your help. Katja has been produced by SONY. Her CD is being selling here : http://www.sonymusicclassical.de/artists2.php?iA=1&artist=790388&product=82876876272

A tag has been placed on Katja Avdeeva requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or 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 indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

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. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this.

Katja Avdeeva is being under contract with Sony and has made the following CD http://www.sonymusicclassical.de/artists2.php?iA=1&artist=790388&product=82876876272

She is a swiss pianist and plays in many orchesters in Switzerland and Germany.

Is it enought to be on Wikipedia ?

best, Nicolas —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nicemb (talk • contribs) 02:06, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• 15:08, 26 May 2009 Accounting4Taste (talk | contribs) deleted "Focus group video streaming" ‎ (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion: Unambiguous advertising or promotion (CSD G11))

Carol McNerney Carolmc68 (talk) 21:21, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

At her request, apparently nearly simultaneously with this one, I've provided a copy of the deleted material for this user at User:Carolmc68/Sandbox. Accounting4Taste:talk 22:02, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

why do you speedy delete my article kate punch? all the facts are true and it discusses new books coming out in 2010. if you don't like the context please revise it, or contact me, do not delete my work that i have spend time researching. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scottpunch (talk • contribs) 16:43, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

what does this article need to meet wikipedia guidelines? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scottpunch (talk • contribs) 17:01, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Realkyhick,

this is all new to me. I've been trying to read all the guidelines Wikipedia has documented and get my head around them all. Not easy. It seems to me to be a lot of shades of gray in the guidelines and I can't quite figure out where my article falls into. But the reason for the multiple article creations was by accident –– the on screen directions weren't clear to me. Once again, so much reading and processing. If my article has to be deleted well I won't argue with it; I'm going to just have to take some time and read and process all the guidelines. But if there is any specific reason(s) for the deletion, I would be grateful to know what they are. Thanks. Progressive3000 (talk) 01:30, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I am not sure why have you marked the SpringPeople Technologies page for deletion. I have been searching Spring framework providers in India on wikipedia, and today for the first time I found something relevant. And I see you have marked it for deletion. I am not sure if it is a good idea. I am not sure who created it and why. But it will be good to have this page where I and our development community can edit the article to bring out the unbiased version of the training and other services provided by this company. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ravikaklasaria (talk • contribs) 04:59, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Realkyhick

I understand your reasons for proposing the article for deletion; I, however, consider the article to be of encyclopedic value for the following reasons:

• It presents unbiased facts ("Information about SpringSource partner") about one of the most important companies in the Java world (SpringSource Inc.).
• Valuable to numerous Spring Framework technology users looking for factual information on "official" source of training ("official" because the training has been created by Rod Johnson, the creator of Spring Framework itself).
• I have carefully kept all the content of the article to pure facts - no promotional material, no claims of superiority etc
• As for independent references, I am not sure why you would not consider the fact one of the important Java Conference in India considers SpringPeople Consultants to be an authority on the subject due to their association with SpringPeople/SpringSource.
• It is easy to get the web littered with "independent" references from the students who have been on training courses - I don't go for it as that's what in my mind a pure self-promotion.

I hope we do not get "non-notability" criteria weigh in more than the importance of the article and the value it provides to the readers. As one of our students recently pointed out - Spring Framework courses are costly and it really hurts them spending money on getting the hundreds of other training providers, most of whom don't themselves understand the finer details of the technology. He was glad to have been referred to us by other users on the Spring Framework forums- after nearly 5 years of Spring Framework being in existence, it's only now that there is an "official" SpringSource training provider partner in India.

Hope this helps clarify the reasons for my posting the article in the first place.

Peeushb (talk) 10:19, 23 November 2009 (UTC) Peeush[reply]

Hi Realkyhick

I think we are debating cross-purposes over here. My argument for inclusion of this article is based on the "encyclopedic" value of it. I (and I am sure millions of others like me) expect my encyclopedia (in this case, wikipedia) to be able to give me "factual" information about an important topic like Rod Johnson created Spring Framework training courses in India - irrespective of how non-notable the result is/how small or trivial the actual information is! At the moment, this is the only article that gives this information to thousands of Java developers in India, who although good with their knowledge of technology, still do not know much about SpringSource or it's official partners or sometimes even where to look for this information without getting confused - if not for the trusted wikipedia!

I appreciate your comment about the non-notability of the organisation; as for the citing reliable sources, I am not sure what can be a more reliable source about a SpringSource partner than the listing on SpringSource website as a partner?

Most importantly, let's not forget in all this debate about non-notability that an encyclopedia is to serve the information needs of it's users - Java developers in India is a big community who benefit from knowing the indisputable fact about SpringSource partner in India - I strongly feel that it's not for anyone to deny useful information to others on account of a technical guideline (which, btw, notes that there can be exceptions). If this is to really be questioned at all, we should have a poll where the India Java developer community can have their say on if they find it beneficial to have the facts known from wikipedia or would they rather trawl pages after pages on google to find the information about SpringSource partner in India.

I hope we agree that it's more important to fulfill the fundamental premise of wikipedia than to get bogged down with a general guideline created by wikipedia, which is applicable to most articles, but certainly not all.

Peeushb (talk) 23:00, 23 November 2009 (UTC) Peeush[reply]

Final Note...

Hi Realkyhick

I think there's not much left to debate further; I still don't agree with the "one yardstick to measure all" concept of yours, but will accept the decision in the right sprit - I hope that the decision process is democratic and not just one person deciding if this page should be deleted or not (or is it? some of the language in your replies seem to suggest that you already have taken a decision to delete this page?).

There's one comment in your reply though which I would like to elaborate on - Java developers not being "proficient" if they cannot find the information from a cursory Google search; Java developers can be proficient with the technology but may not necessarily be able to filter out useful/factual information from among hundreds of pages returned by Google on their query (irrespective of if the correct page has good SEO and appears at the top of the results) - that's where people expect information sources like wikipedia to be helpful.

Thanks for your patience with my queries and taking out time to explain the process/reasons for deletion.

Peeushb (talk) 15:02, 24 November 2009 (UTC) Peeush[reply]

I would appreciate it if you'd take some time to review the talk on the Mark Levin article and comment on the RFC I started on Sunday. Many thanks! Malvenue (talk) 04:50, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, is it possible to get back my article of Hinterland aviation so i can improve it to meet the standards of wikipedia. thanks jarden sJarden s (talk) 18:17, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why is my topic "Overdrive band" marked to be deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by ScionOfBalance (talk • contribs) 21:38, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can i put facebook link for group that is for the same band that is wikipedia topic about on External links section? —Preceding unsigned comment added by ScionOfBalance (talk • contribs) 22:35, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I dont understand why is "Overdrive (band)" topic about to be deleted? It is Serbian band with 3 studio albums. What is the problem? There are a tons of another bands on wikipedia, even ones from Serbia like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Gogh_(band) i dont see that is the problem? They are recognised band that recorded last album for biggest rock and alternative house, national house. I am personal friend with all band members and they agreed to make wikipedia topics about them. ScionOfBalance (talk) 22:55, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A musician or ensemble (note that this includes a band, singer, rapper, orchestra, DJ, musical theatre group, etc.) may be notable if it meets at least one of the following criteria. And they meet more than one. 1) Has had a charted single or album on any national music chart. -but that was in 2003 and i cannot find it on the internet 2)Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels 3)Has been the subject of a half hour or longer broadcast across a national radio or TV network. ... So what is problem? I just stated the fact and info about the band, nothing more. What must be done to keep this topics? ScionOfBalance (talk) 23:16, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

evidence they performed at EXIT Festival: http://eng.exitfest.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1233&Itemid=419 I will try to find out more evidence... ScionOfBalance (talk) 23:23, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://eng.exitfest.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1635&Itemid=712 ScionOfBalance (talk) 23:25, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PGP RTS doenst have online records for Overdrive(because that was in 2003), but Overdrive did publish 3rd album. I can scan cover of the album, there is a PGP RTS logo on it. Will that be enough? I found TV interview http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_ib_QJze1U&feature=player_embedded ScionOfBalance (talk) 23:52, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually PGP RTS published they 3rd album in 2005. I found link where you can order CD, and it says "Product date: May 23, 2005 Author: Overdrive Publisher: Pgp-Rts" http://www.yu4you.com/items/en/cd/item_2466.html#opis ScionOfBalance (talk) 23:58, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

and what about http://www.yu4you.com/items/en/cd/item_2466.html#opis you can order that CD from there, and it says that PGP RTS is publisher! If that isnt enough only other way is to contact PGP RTS, but i imagine they are busy. If this isnt enough how much time is left untill topic is deleted? ScionOfBalance (talk) 00:07, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your initial instincts were right - though it may not be a hoax it's been deleted before here. Keep up the good work.  7  01:14, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Please stop. If you continue to add promotional material to Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 21:25, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm confused - I am doing my best to work within the confines of Wikipedia - I am doing everything I can to avoid the Peacock - I certainly didn't write the book.

The book is legitimately published-with the ISBN's previously given.

I looked at other "books" listed in Wiki and don't see much of a difference- See this one as just one example: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Race:_The_Reality_of_Human_Difference

I simply want to add a page with information about the book- if you read the book you'd see it isn't going to be easy to describe.

I'm sure you've been doing this a l o n g time now- and I understand your efforts to hastily dismiss something you believe is not noteworthy I'm not faulting you for that.

if you are convinced that I cannot put this information - even as simply as the above example - which is what I was going to try next when I saw your comments- then I will hold off for a while until I can figgure out what it is that I'm missing in my efforts and your requirements.

Please understand - it is not my intention to "advertise" the book - simply to begin a place where it can be further looked into.

Thank you-

John (I believe you have access to my email address - please feel free to email me if you'd like, otherwise, I'll just watch for my info on my discussion page- thanks again, J.) Amwaawwiki (talk) 23:32, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Realkyhick,

I am not sure why you voted to delete the Fire Department Photography link. I thought it met the criteria for inclusion in the Fire Photography Wikipedia page. The site is not set up for profit and has numerous pictures related to the Fire Service and various aspects relating to such. i guess my next question is how does one get a site added to the wikipedia page when it relates to the material being presented? Can you please advise so that I may follow that appropriate path in the future.

Tctrenr (talk) 04:32, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am very curious to know what was advertisement or self serving about the article that was posted to Wikipedia just a few moments ago which you targeted for deletion.

The article very clearly states that the mentioned company isn't even scheduled to open its doors until July of 2011.

The fact of the existence of such an elemental change in a significant industry as elder care in America is most certainly worthy of Encyclopedic mention so I fail to see why or how this article violates any of the conditions set forth in Wikipedia guidelines.

Please advise me how i could better rewrite this article to meet with whatever criteria you feel it violates.

thank you --Kurtd71 (talk) 05:02, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And for your information, I made no attempt to delete warning messages, I attempted to delete the messages themselves, which were apparently targeted for deletion for whatever ludicrous reason you set forth. I dont know how long you've had this job, but I can assure you that most people do not, and will not take kindly to your threats and warnings of being blocked, or of "skating on very thin ice". I can assure you, that your ice, can be just as precariously thin so I suggest you control your tendency to become a keyboard gangster just a bit better when making comments in any type of public forum. The results could be....well.... detrimental to you, to say the very least. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kurtd71 (talk • contribs) 05:11, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, but If I were "obviously....directly, and indirectly promoting the company" as you suggest, I would ask people to go to a site, or to email someone, or to buy something, or call for more information. Nothing of that sort occurs here. The sole purpose of that article was to inform people that changes are coming to a vital industry and the nature of those changes. It would serve absolutely no purpose to promote a company that isn't opening for at least another 18 months in this, or any other forum for that matter. The article is an awareness piece...nothing more, and nothing less. If I remove the name of the company, would that still be considered by you to be an advertisement? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kurtd71 (talk • contribs) 05:17, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I received a notification for from Realkyhick advocating the really speedy deletion of MeshDynamics.

I am the founder at MeshDynamics. MeshDynamics has made significant contributions to Wiki in terms of content regarding multi-radio backhauls and animations explaining different mesh architectures.

The page I created (MeshDynamics) does not in any way advertise MeshDynamics. It focuses on MeshDynamics core technology that is resulting in new emerging markets for wireless mesh. There are articles and press releases on this - simply google MeshDynamics. I have not included them.

Please do take a look at other mesh companies on Wiki. There are quite a few. And there is absolutely nothing notable in terms of their technology contribution to Wireless Mesh Networking.

In the event that this article is deleted, in fairness, all companies listed under wireless mesh networking in Wiki, should also be deleted.

If there are questions I may be reached at fdacosta@MeshDynamics.com. I am willing to take this to the highest levels at Wiki. I simply wish us to be treated fairly, especially when, unlike others, we have kept content to core facts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fdacosta (talk • contribs) 22:45, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Realkyhick, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of TV Torso - a page you tagged - because: Two thirds of the band were in a band with an article. PROD or take to AfD if required. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. GedUK  09:51, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't looked too much into their notability, assuming the Capitol Records signing was enough, but after doing some digging, I see they are the subject of a few reliable sources: Boston herald[5], NPR[6], a mention in Rolling Stone[7], Pitchfork[8], an Orlando Sentinel article that is behind a pay barrier, and tons of info from Austin-based sources. Looks like they were all hype with no finish, but still notable. Angryapathy (talk) 17:33, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I'm new to Wikipedia, at least the contribution side. I've just finished writing a page on R.J. Huggins, the pioneer of new technology for creating web-searchable newspaper archives in their original image form. I've sited real references as asked, spent a lot of time making sure that the spelling and grammar are correct, yet I'm getting a message from you saying that there is no references to external, independent reliable sources? Which references are you referring to? Many of the references cited are Wikipedia's own articles (that presumably have themselves been verified)??.

You also state that it appears to have been copied and pasted from another source. I'm sorry but I've spent days researching and compiling this information and writing it up on my computer. If you are insinuating that its a slapup copy/paste job from somebody else's work, then you are very wrong and I am feeling more than a little put out that you appear to be accusing me of that.

Thirdly, what is notability not credibly shown mean? The man is a entrepreneurial genius who saw the educational and historic value of being able to search/view/read/copy original newspaper test/images through using Boolean search capabilities. RJ Huggins and his company Cold North Wind Inc were the first in the world to invent an entirely new process for web-searchable content that has now been bought by Google for inclusion in their current stable of products. I've sited references for this and for many other factual statements throughout the article. In 2002 they digitized the entire 110 year history of the Toronto Star Newspaper using their patented process. This is not noteworthy? Not of historical interest??

This article has been written by me, is truthful, factual and referenced. What am I missing? Webmastercol (talk) 16:33, 8 December 2009 (UTC) webmastercol —Preceding unsigned comment added by Webmastercol (talk • contribs) 16:28, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The author removed your PROD. Another editor then tagged it db-spam, which I have declined as it is not strongly promotional; but a quick search suggests no notability - do you want to take it to AfD? Regards, JohnCD (talk) 17:16, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• No need, someone else already has. Cheers, JohnCD (talk) 17:20, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've taken your SD off now that references have appeared (and a No 20 on Billboard). I'm keeping a watch and pushing gently. (I nearly said 'prodding'......) Not my scene musically, but there was a request for help. Peridon (talk) 19:33, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've done quite a bit of editing to this article, still a long way to go, but was wanting your opinion if it now qualifies to have it's SD warning removed? Bwave (talk) 00:51, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello R