User talk:DGG/Archive 138 Jul. 2018

Hi DGG,

I'd like to understand why the article for Fauna, Inc was deleted. I was working on improving the article based on earlier feedback, and adding more citation links. Fauna, Inc is of category company and their primary website seems to indicate new NoSQL serverless computing technology. Also I am going to link to the pages like serverless computing to give readers some examples. (July 17, 2018‎ Yourmanmohan)

Why article five core electronics limited was deleted

Why article five core electronics limited was deleted when you less noteworthy companies listed in Wikipedia. The company is listed in national stock exchange of India. (May 23, 2018‎ Dodilp )

                                       ARCHIVES

DO NOT ENTER NEW ITEMS HERE--use User talk:DGG

Barnstars, Awards, etc.

Reminders

Topical Archives:
Deletion & AfD,      Speedy & prod,        NPP & AfC,       COI & paid editors,      BLP,                              Bilateral relations
Notability,               Universities & academic people,       Schools,                       Academic journals,       Books & other publications
Sourcing,                Fiction,                                               In Popular Culture      Educational Program
Bias, intolerance, and prejudice

General Archives:
2006: Sept-Dec
2007: Jan-Feb , Mar-Apt , M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D 
2008: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2009: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2010: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2011: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2012: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2013: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2014: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2015: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2016: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2017: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2018: J, F, M , A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2019: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2020: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2021: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2022: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2023: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O

 

            DO NOT ENTER NEW ITEMS HERE--use User talk:DGG

Needs your attention

See Talk:PSA Tour to confirm that it was deleted twice, and recently reverted from a redirect (at least 3 times previously - twice by that same editor). I don't know what else to do - it's going to require an admin action. It is pure promotion, not a notable topic as you can see by the gross revenue, and I would think there may be a COI involved with the reverts of the redirects. ^Atsme📞📧 22:42, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Atsme, I see that the band had events on the tour after the closing date of the AfD, and that one of the reasons for deletion was that the furture dates were only speculative. I think it would need another AfD. DGG ( talk ) 01:31, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Help

I am being ATTACKED - WP:STALKING and WP:HARASSMENT by this person - User:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz for many months, he apparrently hates me and the visual arts. Please get this guy off my back. Thank you...Modernist (talk) 15:25, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that a short time ago Modernist was warned by User:NeilN about using invective like this to characterize ongoing content disputes [1], a warning Modernist has repeatedly disregarded. This comes out of a longrunning content dispute regarding the use of nonfree images of visual art, where Modernist is among those who strongly reject NFCC policy (see, for example, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Visual arts#Under attack, and the related deletion discussions at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2018 June 18 (where many of the disputed uses that Modernist advocated for have already been removed). The underlying issue is whether certain articles on the visual arts are exempt from (or subject to much more relaxed application of) basic WP:NFCC, WP:V, and WP:RS policies. With his side not prevailing in the dispute, he is again personalizing the issues rather than substantively addressing serious policy concerns. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006. (talk) 16:08, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As a gneral reminder, anyone who wants my opinion on a dispute should just point me to the dispute; I will look at the arguments there, and do not need them here. If you do not think I would be able to judge for myself, why ask me?

As for the issue. Personally,within the framework of the Foundation's NFCC policy, I would prefer that we interpret it somewhat more liberally than our guidelines and decisions currently do. But the established consensus here is very consistently to use the present guidelines, and to apply them strictly, so I and everyone else are therefore obliged to do so. DGG ( talk ) 16:32, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy). Legobot (talk) 04:28, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Help

Dear DGG,

Thank you so much for your attention. I added few more links as sources, please take a look and let me know if it's okey (hope)

Wish you a great time — Preceding unsigned comment added by SamBeklik (talk • contribs) 20:34, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, the references are mere notices, entries in a track list, and a mention that you created an article of costume used once in an academic ceremony.. This is apparently an autobiography--but see WP:autobiography and WP:COI for an explanation of why people are not suitable judges about whether or not they are notable. I urge you instead to add to our articles about notable people in your fields of interest. DGG ( talk ) 21:29, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for The Live Love Laugh Foundation

An editor has asked for a deletion review of The Live Love Laugh Foundation. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. ^Thanks,L3X1 ◊distænt write◊ 14:50, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Marcus A. Ernst

Hi again. I stumbled upon this while going down a random rabbit hole of other firms. In your opinion, does the claim that his books have been cited/quoted hold up? I don't read German so can't evaluate the veracity. Since HuffPo and NY Post are of the Page Six type, not sure he's notable if his books aren't. Thanks! StarM 02:21, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The only book I can document is the one listed in the article, but it is merely his doctoral thesis. it is in a number of major law libraries in the US as well as Germany. I do not have sources for German law articles. By WP:PROF., one has to be an authority, and one book is not enough to do it, nor is a few citations. That he omits to mention that the book is his thesis, or list the other published works, and that it documents with multiple book dealers instead of libraries -- all this is often an indication of not being really notable, but it is sometimes just an indication of naive writing. . The entire article is in my view an advertisement. (The second paragraph is also a copyvio from his web site) . DGG ( talk ) 06:12, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, as always, for your insight on all things PROF related. I noted the copyvio but as this was clearly an autobio, I didn't pursue that. I'll try PROD and hope it doesn't need an AfD. StarM 02:26, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Quick note on Adam Prtizker

Hi DGG,

Saw your note on the delete discussion for Assembled Brands. Here's what I'd say. Adam Pritzker has already co-founded two companies (also General Assembly) of note; is also written about because he is from one of the wealthiest families in the world, with 11 billionaires; and co-founded a political non-profit, which while not notable yet IMO, has attracted meaningful press coverage.

So this is not the same situation as Ale Resnik, who is known as this point for just the one company. Pritzker is known for many things already and merits an article. I could see the argument where the CEO or founder of a company should not get their own article, as you suggested, where it's essentially just a breakaway of the main company article, but not vice versa, when there is clear notability.

Merging Assembled Brands into Adam Pritzker would mean all sorts of coatracking in order to continue to update the coverage of the company from very high-quality reliable sources, which is continuing at a regular pace. It is a new and extremely well-funded approach to the fashion business, which is why it is getting so much serious press coverage. Indeed, the sub-brands of Assembled Brands are also getting their own RS coverage. I would agree that the sub-brands of Assembled Brands should remain merged into Assembled Brands article, unless one of them gets a really huge amount of press.

But I think the notability of Pritzker even without Assmebled Brands is a good reason to keep these articles separate. Also, the Assembled Brands article is certain to continue to expand, given its funding and prominence, so it flunks the merge policy that favors articles unlikely to continue to expand.

Thanks BC1278 (talk) 16:05, 12 July 2018 (UTC)BC1278[reply]

When I comment at AfD, I give advice about what I think should be done with the article. Other people do the same, and the consensus makes the decision. It's not a negotiation between you and me. The place for further discussion is where is the discussion is taking place. I think I mentioned to you somewhere that there is sometimes an unanticipated reaction when a coi editor pushes too hard. I know other people have said that they should simply present their material, and then stay out of the discussion. Myself, I don't think that's always true--often some degree of back and forth can clarify matters after the initial statement. But it's my obligation when someone asks for advice, to use my experience to say what might happen even if I think it ought to happen otherwise DGG ( talk ) 19:00, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I understand and agree the substantive discussion about Assembled Brands should take place there. Here I was trying to clarify why your general advice about doing one article for a CEO/business seems less applicable to me and thatI wasn't trying to disregard your general advice.BC1278 (talk) 19:13, 12 July 2018 (UTC)BC1278[reply]

Unbound Tech - Page was deleted

hi We don't promote Unbound - there was a page on the company with a request to add content and I wrote according to company format. Why was it deleted? Can you pls assist with edits? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Usseryroad (talk • contribs) 12:43, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Unbound formerly known as Dyadic, builds sophisticated cryptographic applications using the methodology of Multi-Party Computation (MPC), developed by Unbound’s co-founders and world-leading cryptographers, ... and ..., world-renowned cryptographers,"" that's straight puffery. DGG ( talk ) 05:42, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Two academic biography drafts

I have accepted David Stephenson (climatologist), formerly a draft. I added "climatologist" after his name rather than "academic", as there are other academics with the same name who show up in searches and who might be notable.

I postponed but did not accept Draft:Andrew Diamond (professor), which was due to be deleted after six months of inactivity. He may be notable (His book "Mean streets: Chicago youths and the everyday struggle for empowerment in the multiracial city, 1908-1969" is cited by 62, according to Google Scholar https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=Andrew+Diamond&btnG= ) , but I'm not certain that he is. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 14:50, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note -- DS is very highly notable & needs expansion to show the citations for his most impt papers -- at least the ones > 1000.

Diamond is in my opinion notable & I accepted it--the books are important. GS is usually not relevant for citations to a book, without considering factors like nature of the book and date of publication. . DGG ( talk ) 05:39, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you David for reviewing Nick De Morgoli, much appreciated, Jamesmcardle^(talk) 02:20, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How to re-open an Arbcom request which did not result in a sanction

Hi,

I would like to re-open an Arbcom request, which was closed with no action as the editor concerned promised to follow consensus, but could not find how this should be done. As "no action" is not actually an enforcement (or am I mistaken?) it does not seem to fall under any enforcement criteria that I could find. Apologies if it is not appropriate to come here with this question, I couldn't find anywhere that seemed to cover this situation. Cheers, DerbyCountyinNZ ^(Talk Contribs) 06:59, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Bblueberry

I've pinged you there, and I've been going through the contributions deleting as prod-removed A7, G11 or G12 via translation. However, I'm running out of time, and I'm going to be away for a few days, so would you mind checking the rest please ?. I'd also suggest that if he/she attempts to recreate without replying to my COI query (the second request), that a block is appropriate, cheers Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:16, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Jim, I'll follow up for all the books. I think the bio article will hold up if it is fixed a little , which I will do. DGG ( talk ) 16:48, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kim Timby

Dear David, I don't understand your insertion of the template reading "This article reads like a press release or a news article or is largely based on routine coverage or sensationalism" on this article. I am doing what I can to improve coverage of women art and photography historians. It is properly and thoroughly referenced. Timby is notable with numbers of articles relating to the field in which she works on WP citing her work. If you can point to something specific to improve/alter/remove I'd be most grateful and will attend to it. I don't work for Kim Timby or any of the institutions associated with her, nor do I know here personally, but have read and respect her work, which is an original contribution to the field of the social history of photographic technologies; stereoscopy, colour printing technologies etc. Jamesmcardle^(talk) 09:08, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dear David, thank you for taking the time to review Kim Timby and for reverting the template. Much appreciated! Jamesmcardle^(talk) 22:25, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I work mainly these days on dealing with promotional articles, and I must admit that concentrating on this can lead to a tendency to see it everywhere. I try to avoid this by not doing too much of this work at a time, but I do make errors. This seems to have been what happened here. The characteristics I saw were not sufficient to say it was promotional.(I saw such things as isolated words of importance quoted from a source, which is often cherry-picking, the inclusion of what I consider unnecessary general context, and an overpositive tone--but all of this was minor and occasional and didn't justify the label) DGG ( talk ) 00:23, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:George Galloway

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:George Galloway. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bringing Royal Thai Marine Corps march to Attention

DGG, I found this article, Royal Thai Marine Corps march on the Wikipedia and I feel that it doesn't meet Wikipedia's WP:N and it doesn't cite any sources. Yanjipy (talk) 19:50, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

merging is a good solution here; another editor marked it for merging before I had a chance to do so myself DGG ( talk ) 20:43, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Stephen Maitland-Lewis Edit

I do not understand your comment about the “other reviews” – If Kirkus Book Review, Historical Novel Society, NY Journal of Books and Midwest Book Review are all published, reliable sources and have their own Wikipedia Pages, why do you feel their below reviews are “useless”? https://www.kirkusreviews.com/book-reviews/stephen-maitland-lewis/ambition-oYdrRzag/ https://historicalnovelsociety.org/reviews/botticellis-bastard/ http://www.nyjournalofbooks.com/book-review/botticelli%E2%80%99s-bastard http://www.midwestbookreview.com/sbw/feb_12.htm

Booklover213 (talk)Booklover213 —Preceding undated comment added 16:05, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The books are all or almost all self published or published by extremely obscure publishers. . WorldCat shows them in essentially no libraries. Kirkus reviews self published books if you pay them, and is therefore totally unreliable. MW book reviews are entirely unselective. The other two I have no prior knowledge of, but examination of the reviews there gives me no confidence in their reliability. Experience at AfDs is that it takes very unusual circumstances for a writer of self-published books to be considered a notable author.

As this is the only article you've worked on, it is reasonable to ask you whether you have some conflict of interest with the subject of the article. Please see WP:COI for our rules about that. If this is a direct COI involving employment of money, the details of it must be declared. if you are by any chance the subject himself, see WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY . DGG ( talk ) 17:18, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Family names

Are we allowing WP to be a "family name" directory? See Pant_Pratinidhi_family. ^Atsme📞📧 17:00, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

incomplete article, but from the information given it was a family of princely rulers. See, for example House of Habsburg . DGG ( talk ) 17:20, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Stalker here, and I know I'm not the person you asked, but FWIW I mean Engelhardt family is one of my articles and I don't see what's wrong with that, provided the family is prominent or otherwise notable, as the Pant Pratinidhi seems to be, presuming that the article is accurate. Herostratus (talk) 17:43, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thank you - looks like an editor is working on completing the article. ^Atsme📞📧 19:34, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

BigGantt

Hi DGG, thanks for having a look at BigGantt entry. I noticed the message "redirect to parent software" you left. Unfortunately the "parent" is not quite accurate as BigGantt is neither parent, nor child of BigPicture. Worked to get the article to a more encyclopedic shape, added an .org source, removed language that might have sounded biased. Does this sound right? What to change for the article to be acceptable? Martin DE (talk) 11:49, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of B. Jeffrey Madoff

Hi DGG, please let me know what I can do to remove the advertising and/or promotional aspects of this page that you recently deleted: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B._Jeffrey_Madoff

I'd be happy to make any changes to bring this back online. Thank you. --Jakemadoff210 (talk) 14:48, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You can start by reading WP:COI. Assuming you are connected with the person or his firm, it would be best to wait until someone not conencted thinks the subject important enough to write an article. DGG ( talk ) 06:28, 29 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DGG, understood. Where can I access the deleted page? I worked hard to collate that information. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jakemadoff210 (talk • contribs) 13:52, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nigerian Films of ...

	Nigerian Films of ...
	Thank you... appreciate Aficaedictor (talk) 21:13, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tag on Charles R Conn's page

Hi, you added a sensationalism/news release tag to Charles R Conn's page. That's fine but would you mind leaving a note on the talk page detailing specifically what it is you object to and how you would like the piece changed or expanded. Best Wishes Pug of the day (talk) 18:29, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

for example , "During Conn’s tenure, the Trust deepened the Scholarship experience with a character, service and leadership program, and re-vitalized its intellectual mission and sense of lifelong fellowship with a convening program of current and alumni fellows including an annual forums on healthcare, new ventures, ethical leadership, education, climate change, LGBTQ rights and other topics." That's pure PR-talk. DGG ( talk ) 21:30, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Draft in Wikipedia talk space

Hi, DGG! You seem to have moved a draft into Wikipedia talk space. Is that what you intended to do? (and if so, why?). Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:23, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, DGG. I don't work in the Draft space much, so I'm confused by this move. Could you clarify for me? Thanks. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 21:02, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

clicked the wrong box.I think I corrected it ,. DGG ( talk ) 21:28, 31 July 2018 (UTC) I'll check again tonight to see if it is clear DGG ( talk ) 21:28, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for Nick Lovegrove page

Hello DDG, it seems JzG deleted the page for Nick Lovegrove, author of a book on personal and career development called The Mosaic Principle: The Six Dimensions of a Remarkable Life and Career, on 22 December 2016 because the user who created that page was blocked. [1]. Would it be possible for a) to restore the page so I can make some edits to it or b) get a text export of the page so I can create it again please? I've found an archive of the page here if that helps [2]. Sincerely, Audemars_arthur (talk) 20:42, 31 July 2018 (UTC) [3][reply]

References

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log/delete?type=delete&user=&page=Nick_Lovegrove&wpdate=&tagfilter=&subtype=
2. http://deletedwiki.com/index.php?title=Nick_Lovegrove
3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Audemars_arthur/sandbox/Audemars_arthur

1. First, about about WP:COI: What if any is your relationship to the prior author? What if any is your relationship to the subject of the article or any of his companies?
2. Second, as you point out, there is apparently a copy of the text at eletion wiki, so it isnt necessary to undelete for you to see it .
3. Third, I rather doubt the person is notable--at least, he wasn;t notable at the time of the AfD, so unless there is further material there's no real point in trying again. If you must, do it in draft space after a full declaration of any COI. DGG ( talk ) 21:24, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]