This is an archive of past discussions with User:Cunard. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
I wasn't the author but G7 is when the author "requests deletion, if requested in good faith, and provided the page's only substantial content was added by its author". G7 can be added to articles/redirects by other users who notice that the creator wants the page to be deleted. This redirect should be speedily deleted as the creator clearly requested deletion as seen in this link. Cunard (talk) 19:25, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi There, I am sorry, I didn't know that this would be cause for speedy deletion. I am new to this so I apologize, but our competitors are listed on wikipedia (burton, k2, elan, etc). If they are allowed to have an entry, why is it inappropriate for Ride Snowboards to have an entry?
Thank you!
Chuffman123 (talk) 18:00, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
Casey
I am still refinng this article, and I am trying to verify this information to you and Wiki's satisfaction.
I can assure you that what I am composing is legit... if I am missing something or rasing questions of it's validity, please suggest what additional facts and informaion I can provide. I do have additional letter documentation in my possession tying this all together.
On 29 July, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Anne Aghion, 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.
Hi! I've seen that you removed the article, A Little Bit Longer (song)'s information and reverted it back to redirect. But I don't think you should do that since the article was originally deleted because it lacks information but now that it's been released, we should keep the information. Can I reverted it back to my edit? Thanks. ♥, calliegal_x (talk) 00:43, 7 August 2008 (UTC)Calliegal
I just noticed that Carl.bunderson has deleted 9 links from the "Hyperdispensationalism" page that I have been extensively working on lately. All of these links look fine to me - some of the links lead to main proponents of Hyperdispensationalism for 60 years. I see from his user talk that he has had warnings about this kind of deletion activity before. I am pretty new around here and don't know how to deal with this. Looks like he's a clever guy and is used to problems with other users and I don't want any unpleasantness with him. Can you help please? Mysteryofthegospel (talk) 22:28, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Hello, Mysteryofthegospel, and welcome to Wikipedia. Carl.bunderson removed those 9 links from the Hyperdispensationalism page because they weren't directly related to the article. According to Wikipedia:External links, only the "best" external links should be used in an article. The "best" links are those that directly relate to the article, in addition to containing valuable information that the Wikipedia article may not have due to copyrights or other reasons. The links Carl.bunderson removed were not directly related to the article. Some were to websites that discussed Dispensationalism. Dispensationalism is very related to Hyperdispensationalism, but that link was not directly related to Hyperdispensationalism. So basically, the external links in an article should be pared down to a minimum and should only be the best links. Hope this explains things a little. Cheers, Cunard (talk) 05:21, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
It appears that User:Ash7028 mistakenly created Ronald Presley in category space instead of article space. I've tagged the category for speedy deletion as I believe that the person Ronald Presley is non-notable. He is the cousin of Elvis and Lisa Marie Presley but that doesn't establish any notability for him. If an admin agrees with my reasoning, the category will be speedily deleted as a non-notable biography. Cunard (talk) 00:27, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
The Did you know? hook based on a fact from the article you created or substantially expanded, Wasilla High School, has been added to the Wikipedia Portal, Portal:Schools. Thank you for your contributions in this topic! If you know of another relevant fact from an article that has appeared at Did you know?, then please suggest it at the associated portal talk page.
Yen tei nennu cheppustanu menu articlu?
Sorrry buy i would like to know why you deleted my article?
Is it just because of the fact that you dont not have a knowledge of what i am trying to explain? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gowtham 6 (talk • contribs) 11:50, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your expression of confidence, but I must decline. I like writing articles, reverting vandalism, and patrolling the new pages, but I don't want the extra tools right now. I've found that I can contribute to Wikipedia in the ways that I want to without being an admin. Thanks, nonetheless. Cunard (talk) 22:34, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Miranda Uhl
On 17 September, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Miranda Uhl, 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.
I've been around doing mainly minor fixes for a while, and I've edited other wikis, so I doubt if I'll have any coding problems, but the culture problems could trip me up. Carolina wren (talk) 18:02, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Hello, Carolina wren and welcome to Wikipedia. On behalf of the Wikipedia community, I apologize that even though you've been on Wikipedia for more than half a month, no one welcomed you! Anyway, thank you so much for your valuable contributions to Wikipdia. Have you heard about Wikipedia:Did you know? You can submit recently created articles to be featured in the DYK section of the main page. The article (2008 South Carolina Learjet 60 crash) you created today may be a great candidate for DYK. I'll take a look into that. Cheers, Cunard (talk) 18:47, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Thank you, SQL but I don't think I'll be needing the semi-protection. The IP who was vandalizing my page has since stopped. There were some many reverts on my talk page because the IP was so fast and wasn't blocked until 20 minutes after the initial vandalism. I was only targeted because I reverted an attack on Betacommand's talk page and then gave the attacker a level 4 warning. I doubt that my talk page will be targeted that much anymore but thanks anyway. Best, Cunard (talk) 21:48, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
The material is not copyrighted,my name is Daniel Milea and i am the owner of www.carpatini.ro,where u can see the transalted text.George Balan who wrote this History is my partner and you can reach him and georgentro@yahoo.com,i am just trying to help people find out more about the Carpathian Shepherd Dog,the transaltion of the text is made by me,i am just trying to be helpfull,for example the picture of the breed was a wrong one,i am glad u accepted atleast that change,i repeat that text is not under any copyright,i am free to use it and so i did,if u look on www.carpatini.ro at the english area u will find the same text ..whitout any copyright items in it!Please solve the problem or just let me know what i have to do to comvince u guys i havent post any copyrighted material!
Thank you for wanting to expand the Carpathian Shepherd Dog article. Since you own the copyright of the text at http://www.carpatini.ro, then the information you added is no longer a copyright violation. My humble apologies for giving you two harsh warnings about copyright violations. Anyway, much of the information you added, is not encyclopedic or about the Carpathian Shepherd Dog. Some of it contains the opinions of the author which is not encyclopedic, while some discusses other topics that are not directly related to the article. If you want to expand this article, please copy and paste the formatting in the article over to User:DannyFaQ/Sandbox and then expand it using the content from your website. Remember to remove the non-encyclopedic content in the article. Afterwards, give me a note on my talk page and I'll take a look at it. Then, you can paste the information in your sandbox back into the article. Cheers, Cunard (talk) 21:43, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
I did the editing
Hi there
Well i have worked a little at the text and only included the part regarding the carpathian shepherd Dog,check my sandbox,if that`s alright i`ll paste it to the article.
And if everything is alright i will add more information about the breed in time ;) Bye Bye 4 now
I dont see my name wriited down there so i tell u here,i am DannyFaQ regarding the romanian carpathian shepherd dog —Preceding unsigned comment added by DannyFaQ (talk • contribs) 22:06, 25 September 2008 UTC
Hi, would you please give the DYK nomination a second review? The only problem with it was that I had accidentally used the wrong link in a citation. It should be good to go now. Best, DurovaCharge!20:15, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
I looked for the link in the DYK as you had requested, but all of the information I had submitted had been removed before I had a chance to look at them. Can you please advise me what issue you had with this because the article is DYK right now. Thanks. Chris (talk) 17:07, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
The issue was located in this link. The hook was not completely sourced. I had approved it but then struck out the verification after another editor discovered that the hook contained information that was not in the article. The alternate hook was over 200 characters long (it should be 200 characters or less). After I notified you about the DYK hook issue, I went back to the alternate hook and was able to shorten it myself. The article was later approved by another reviewer. Hope this explains things. Cheers, Cunard (talk) 22:48, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
The hook was a combonation of the October 22, 1979 TIME article that included Godunov, Protopropov, and Belousova and from the 2008 edition of the The Complete Book of the Olympics which I own. That may explain the confusion with the second hook in question though I thought had sourced it properly when I put that in there on the 21st. Hope this helps. Chris (talk) 12:46, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
This is going to sound stupid, but..
..Do you have to be an admin to verify crap on DYK? I see no reason why that would be so, but I'd like to be sure before I jump into shit creek and find i've forgotten my paddle. I nominate so many of my own articles I'd like to give something back, as it were, and spend time on verification. Ironholds15:34, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
Nope, you don't have to be an admin to verify DYK articles. I'm not an admin but I've verified a fair amount of articles on DYK. Just be sure to read through the DYK criteria and instructions so that you'll be set on which articles meet the criteria and which don't. Thanks for joining the team! Cheers, Cunard (talk) 19:17, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
Main page protection
Whoa, nice catch! You're right, if they had caught wind of that we would have some serious trouble on our hands. Thanks for bringing it up! :) I think this warrants a barnstar!
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
For noticing that the main page featured article transclusion wasn't protected and swiftly notifying administrators, I give you this Defender of the Wiki barnstar! Great job! :)Master of PuppetsCall me MoP! :)05:54, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
Sir, these articles are true and are not hoaxes. If you read the talk pages I have explained this many times. I am a chairperson at this event. Myself and the other chairpersons are attempting right now to create a webpage for the competition to raise awareness about it. This event takes place every March, and if you care to come to Sammamish, Washington, you can see for yourself. Please do not tag the pages that I have explained the citings are being currently worked on, thank you Mr. Zabriskie (talk) 06:30, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
On 3 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Roman Kopin, 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.
On 14 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Jock Wilson, 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, searching the history is good advice I should have thought of. At least it's no longer an embarrassment if you've gone back to a pre-vandal version. Tony(talk)06:39, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
Websites and musical recordings can be speedied because they have received consensus at Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion to be included in the speedy deletion criteria. Films can't be speedied because consensus has not been established as to whether or not they should be included in the A7 criteria. For example, in this recent discussion, the community decided to create A9 as a new deletion criteria for albums with red linked bands. Prior to this, the albums had to be prodded or sent to AfD in order to be deleted. This is the same with non-notable films. Some of them assert no notability and should have a speedy deletion criterion, but A) this might not have been proposed yet, or B) someone proposed it but there was not enough consensus to add it into the A7 criteria. The lack of consensus could have been due to ambiguity over how film articles would classify under that speedy deletion criteria. Some films might have an IMdB entry but still do not pass WP:FILM, while others like Wulf (2008 Film) don't have an IMdb entry and should be speedied because they are non-notable films made by non-notable individuals. There could also be a film article that doesn't have an IMdb entry but is notable. The difficulty for admins and other users patrolling CAT:CSD in discerning the differences between these possibilities may be a reason why films can't be speedied. Hope this explains things a bit! Cheers, Cunard (talk) 05:11, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
It's a close call, nad I can see why one admin might delete but another might keep.I actually saw these two listed in CAT:CSD and when I got to them the speedy tags had been removed. theedgedaily.com appears to be the website of a newspaper, so coverage there asserts notability, although the two hospitals were not named explicitly. "Columbia Asia Hospital" also appears to be notable, as it gets many hits, although "Columbia Asia Hospital - Taiping" doesn't. On first glance I would have agreed with not deleting, but looking closer I think I would either WP:PROD them or redirect to Columbia Asia, as the size of that article isn't big enough yet to warrant spin-offs, and the information that is given in the spin-off articles isn't too big that it would harm Columbia Asia either. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 05:39, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
I was basing my opinion on Wikipedia:Notability. There seems to be no evidence of any significant coverage of him, and there don't seem to be any sources that give an encyclopedic overview of his life. Actors are not inherently notable, and he appears to have only acted in that one movie as a child. BuddingJournalist09:03, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
I have declined a speedy on the article because it has some independent sources. I feel it's a marginal topic for an article. You might want to do a full AFD to determine if it should be kept. I have no comment. Royalbroil13:43, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
I originally removed a G11 tag from the article and added an A7 tag because I believed that the article was not spam but might not be notable. A search for sources confirms that this company is notable, so I will not pursue deletion. Thanks for notifying me! Cunard (talk) 04:20, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
You're welcome! I'd hate to see an article that has had so much effort put into it get rejected for DYK because it's missing an easily found reference. Cheers, Cunard (talk) 18:10, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Also, I could not help but notice you removed the CSD tag with the edit summary "declined speedy." This is misleading as you are not an admin. You can neither "delete" nor "decline to delete." I very nearly AFD'd this based on the speedy having been "declined," but in preparing my AFD found it to be an unquestionable hoax, and thus vandalism. It would be better to use the edit summary "detagged" or "removed speedy tag" to avoid such confusion. Also, it would be better to verify content and sourcing before removing a speedy deletion tag. Dlohcierekim 16:30, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
My apologies, Albert, for removing the speedy. Operation Barcelona was originally tagged as {{db-nonsense}}, but the article was not incoherent nonsense so I did a quick Google search on it. I found a source from The New York Times but neglected to see if the source was related to the article, so I mistakenly declined the speedy. Sorry about that.
Dlo, your point about my misleading edit summary of "declined speedy" is taken. I'll use "removed speedy" instead. Thanks you for the feedback and my apologies for my egregious mistake. I'll be careful to validate the information and sources in articles before I remove speedies. Regards, Cunard (talk) 21:44, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
My pleasure! You've also done a great job sourcing and expanding the article. I've watchlisted the article and will provide you with assistance in reverting POV statements made by editors who are unaware that articles on Wikipedia must be neutral. Cheers, Cunard (talk) 08:25, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
I've re-added the speedy tag for a more experienced editor to evaluate whether this individual passes WP:ATHLETE. If he's never played for the professional team and only for the minor league teams, then he's probably non-notable. Cunard (talk) 22:31, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Just came back to The Best of Kenny Rogers today and noticed your temporary redirect back to Kenny Rogers' individual page. You may recall I reverted the page to a blank slate without a redirect because at first I didn't find any link between it and The Kenny Rogers Singles Album, leaving behind on the Singles Album page a vow to place a redirect to it when I someday create the album page.
Forgetting the link to the Singles Album temporarily, I'm now turning the page into a disambiguation page, unbelievably, and for one main reason: there is another album in 1992 with the same title. And another in 1995. And yet another in 2001. And apparently, almost every year since then. This doesn't count titles with The First Edition, either, which I'll possibly give their own disambiguation page since I'm doing The First Edition's history separately. Needless to say, I have a lot of work to do here as I seem to be the only one interested in this project (though I've been followed by a couple of other editors in my work to make enhancements or other changes - Share Your Love actually had a valid comment removed which I readded and sourced *LOL*).
In any case, thanks for putting in the redirect; I didn't think of that in the interim and didn't check it myself. I've now dedicated the page's use and will continue to update it. =)
You're welcome! I added the redirect because pages in the mainspace (including redirects) shouldn't be blanked. By the way, great work on articles related to country music. Best, Cunard (talk) 04:41, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
I live in So Cal and mixed is the rapidly becoming the norm. My Dad hid his background. I can only assume your assumption that "American Mongrel" is a slam on Obama is a reflection of a hidden prejudice. THINK ABOUT IT. Shame on you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joniwells (talk • contribs) 05:53, 2 December 2008
You might not have meant that article to be an attack, but in the opening sentence, you calling Mr. Obama a "mutt" seems to be an attack on him. I'm sorry if that's not what you meant it to be but this article does not belong on Wikipedia. I've searched for reliable sources about this topic and this phrase doesn't appear to be used in the mainstream media. Sorry, Cunard (talk) 06:01, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
Obama referred to himself as a "mutt" in his first press conference. But it's a long walk from that to claiming that "American mongrel" is a "newly recognized ethnic group" or that Obama is an "American mongrel." An unsourced article like that does have the initial appearance of an attack page. --Pixelface (talk) 06:09, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
I didn't realize that Obama referred to himself as a "mutt". I agree with your comment here that the article has very little encylopedic value. An article as specific as this one is unnecessary since most of it belongs in the article Mongrel. Thank you for your insight! Cunard (talk) 09:01, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
My take as well, Joni. Sorry, but that's a slam in my book. You may also want to consider that the article itself was original content, and unsourced. Thank you.--Yachtsman1 (talk) 06:05, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
It's fascinating that I cannot respond to the Irishman (Yachtboy?) directly. So, I will respond as follows: I am multi-ethnic and multi-racial & unlike several of the people that objected to my article, I was born in the US. Y'all have zero sense of humor and zero understanding of the feelings of those of us that are multi-ethnic/racial as WE considered the mutt comment a recognition of our background. Have you ever considered that those of us that do not have a definite identification to a primary ethnic/racial group or consider ourselves "just an American" get feeling a little left out when people bray about ethnic identification? Obama is us...we are mutts - or more formally, American Mongrels.
Furthermore, I think you are obviously completely unfamilair with diverse communities other than (possibly) at a noblesse oblige distance.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Joniwells (talk • contribs) 07:51, 2 December 2008
Please stop making inappropriate comments such as this. Further disruption of this sort will lead to you getting blocked. Please also read the civility page - comments about the nationalities or ethnicities of other contributors is irrelevant to the deletion of this article. The article that you wrote (which has been deleted twice) is not suitable for Wikipedia. It is unsourced and is made up of mostly original research. Such an article cannot survive on Wikipedia. You must find a number of reliable sources about this topic to back up what you write in the article. Please follow Pixelface's advice.
An alternative to creating a new article would be expanding Mongrel, an existing article. Much of the information you want to write about would be better placed on that page. If you do expand that article, remember to cite the page with reliable sources. Failing to do so may result in your edits being reverted. Good luck with your research, Cunard (talk) 09:01, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
indian biased
I'm sorry i'm pretty new to this. it's just that I read about the neutral point of view on wikipedia, so when I saw this article, i tried deleting it. Sorry, it wont happen again.Shawn1020 (talk) 14:33, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
Hi Cunard,
I'm sorry I believe I replied in the wrong place at first. I'm writing you because I believe the Cyberhomes entry should not be merged to the Fidelity National Financial entry. Cyberhomes is a very small division of FNF, who is the leading provider of title insurance, specialty insurance and claims management services.
It's also important to note that Cyberhomes is not only funded/owned by Fidelity National Financial, but Lender Processing Services, Inc. (LPS) as well. I will make note of this in the entry.
If you can find enough references specifically about Cyberhomes, then the article shouldn't be merged. However, if there aren't enough, then the article should definitely be merged. Also, the best place to discuss a merge or not merging the article is Talk:Cyberhomes so that it will be visible to all interested editors. Cunard (talk) 22:53, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
Restored per request. Can't guaranteee it won't be deleted again under A3, so it might be worth moving what content you intend to use to a userpage. Good luck with it. Euryalus (talk) 05:00, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for restoring the article! I've added content to the article and have placed a {{hangon}} tag. I don't think the article needs to be moved to my userspace since it has enough content to pass as a valid stub. Regards, Cunard (talk) 05:11, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
DYK for Julia's House
On 20 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Julia's House, 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.
Ecoleetage (talk) 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, Go on smile! Cheers, and Happy editing!=) Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
DougsTech (talk) has given you a fresh piece of fried chicken! Chickens promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a piping hot chicken, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Bon appetit!
Spread the tastiness of chickens by adding {{subst:GiveChicken}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
This is an archive of past discussions with User:Cunard. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
