en User talk:KDS4444 Archive 4

Welcome to Archive 4

This is an archive of past discussions with User:KDS4444. 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.

Archive 1

Logix City Center

is a genuine article related to an existing mall developed by Logix Group. The complete information is mentioned with reference to external links to prove the correctness of information. Moreover,

tag has also been put on the above of the page, which shows that page. is still being updated.

Kindly take your request back for the nomination of speedy deletion.

Univz

Hi there, You marked this page as in your opinion it serves only to promote person. But there are only dry facts, and all links that I could found in internet about her. Also there is neutral point of view. I deleted all external links for any video and releases, pls let me know if there are still something not he page that looks like spam or promotion

Sangam Kumara Swamy

Sangam Kumara Swamy article is genuine one and i am a new commer in wikipedia. i know i have limits. i am learning things now. i will try to improve my article soon. please dont delete this article. Thanks

I have no power to delete this article. I have only nominated it for deletion. The power to delete it lies with an administrator. If you can address the issues I raised on the deletion nomination, the article's deletion can be prevented. KDS4444^Talk 14:48, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Mehmed Selim Orhan

Why you want to delete this Page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nalanidil (talk • contribs) 14:42, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

I stated my reasoning in the deletion nomination. Please review that for a full explanation. Also, please sign your posts on my talk page (on any talk page) with four tildes like this: ~~~~. Thank you. KDS4444^Talk 14:48, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

But more specifically: the article contains no references to support a claim of notability, which is a major problem. All articles on Wikipedia require citations to reliable independent verifiable sources in order to be retained, and this article currently has none. If you can add citations to such sources, the deletion nomination can be immediately derailed. Please find and add such material as soon as you are able to prevent the article from being deleted. KDS4444^Talk 14:51, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Cubezip

Citations have been added for the — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cubezip (talk • contribs) 08:08, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

For the what? Added for the what?? KDS4444^Talk 13:14, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

This Thursday: Women in Architecture edit-a-thon @ Getty Center

You are invited to join the Women in Architecture edit-a-thon @ Getty Center in LA on October 15! (drop-in any time, 10am-4pm)--Pharos (talk) 18:25, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Read House Hotel, Chattanooga, TN

Greetings, this speedy deletion nomination and current AFD, it turns out it is actually an entry on the National Register of Historic Places, so can you withdraw the nom? Cheers.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 04:14, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

It appears someone has beaten me to the punch! And more power to them. Cheers to you! KDS4444^Talk 10:40, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Ibraime Cassamá

well, you said that this article dont't have any sources. yes! that all the source that i can found about him. It's really difficult to find a source for least-known African player.

btw, i wonder why these articles are pass? when they have few source and they also use Soccerway like Ibraime Cassamá article

Malado Reld Anido
Hendrik Somaeb
Muzi Dlamini
Mxolisi Lukhele
and a lot more

Dear AKeZZZ: first, if you wish to leave a note in a talk page, it is very useful for the person receiving your message if you sign it by placing four tildes at the end of your message like this: ~~~~. Please try to do this in the future. Second, the fact that it is so difficult to find sources to support a claim of notability for a person perhaps means s/he is not actually notable and should not have a place in the Wikipedia mainspace. Third, the fact that other articles are as poorly sourced as this one is not relevant here, per WP:OSE. KDS4444^Talk 14:17, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

October 2015

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Mildew may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

that minimal moisture is available in the air and temperatures are low enough to inhibit growth (at or below {{convert|70|F|C}} without causing condensation to occur, or by in such a way that

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:02, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Your contributed article, Ross Lewis (disambiguation)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Ross Lewis (disambiguation). First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Ross Lewis. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Ross Lewis – you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. The Banner talk 10:52, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Deprod

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from [[{{{1}}}]], which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! 2602:30A:2EFE:F050:F462:E14B:BD77:9AA8 (talk) 07:32, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

In case you're interested

Sorry, couldn't resist. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:38, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

And I couldn't be happier! You know where this belongs? In the (still as yet non-existent) "references" section of the article! We'd all be happier if you placed your link there rather than on my talk page, yes? Thanks, Shawn! KDS4444^Talk 14:09, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Yes! I shall. best, Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:04, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

At last! At last! Don't ever think I don't check these things. References! Heavens! Now, if only I could get 10,000 other editors to do as you have done there! Nice work. KDS4444^Talk 18:21, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks

Hey. No worries. I like to give thanks when someone has taken the most sensible and appropriate action, as you did in this case. There actually is a discussion about Upcoming albums and how to include them here. Enjoy editing! Karst (talk) 23:48, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

some "sage" advice...

Seen it from several times now, and I need to point out that a personal opinion of "Unremarkable film" is not found under WP:DEL#REASONS. To some it makes you as a newb editor.

More important to my "advice", is to strongly encourage you not send brand new articles from new contributors to AFD unless a diligent search shows the topic as unsourcable. AND for Indian films, please know that Google News does not search Indian media properly... so the tools at WP:INDAFD are priceless in expanded searches.

Under WP:WIP and WP:IMPERFECT it is prudent to allow contributors to address issues.

But if you find a brand new and imperfect article offensive if it sits unimproved for a short while, under WP:ATD you can always suggest the author work out of mainspace. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 01:38, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

And in your new page patrol work

...It might be better all around and less bitey to newcomers if you'd to look to the oldest articles on that list, and not so much the newest. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 05:55, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Archie Manners

Can you please remove the speedy nomination notice, and give me guidelines as to ensure that it can remain on the page. Happy to re-write to ensure it fits within Wikipedia's guidelines. Currently it reads very similarly to many other wikipedia articles that are biographical of living people. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Magician10085 (talk • contribs) 17:52, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

As you have already contested the deletion, the "speedy" part is now officially up for admins to consider. I am not yet convinced that the article isn't worth being deleted, but I will be glad to remove the tag once I have seen evidence that the subject is genuinely notable and that this is supported by appropriate references. The article as it still stands is, in my mind, unambiguously promotional, and so my deletion nomination will stand until it has been substantively changed to address this concern (but please do not worry: the article can always be restored later even if it does get deleted, so you are safe no matter what so long as you address my concerns as raised on the article's talk page, yes?) KDS4444^Talk 18:15, 5 November 2015 (UTC) ALSO: PLEASE SIGN YOUR POSTS WITH FOUR TILDES AT THE END! THANK YOU!

Thanks and explanation

Hello KDS4444, you asked on my talk page why i thanked you for marking an article i created, Samuel Orcutt, for speedy deletion. I don't actually recall thanking you, but i guess i must have. However, you mentioned that you often get a reaction of ire when a page is marked for deletion. I don't have that at all. I do thank you for doing the work of checking newly created articles, and i do realize that Wikipedia can't contain an article on everything, only significant and notable things. I need to learn more about the guidelines for notability and significance. I noticed that another user did postpone the speedy deletion, and i'll work more on that article if it's still here in a week, when i get time to do more research. This is an author whose books i've used quite a bit in my research for other articles of historic nature relating to Connecticut, and having so many well cited books, i just assumed there would be enough bio information to flesh out the article and situate his significance. Anyway, he's significant to me in that his works give a lot of clues about native life in New England before and during colonial times that would be otherwise hard to find. I suppose back in the 1800s there was a lot less chatter about authors because of (1) less people, (2) less general literacy, and (3) no Internet, and maybe (4) less navel gazing. Anyway, thanks for your work, and if the article's still around in a week, i'll work hard to flesh it out more and improve its formatting. I am still learning about how to make great articles on Wikipedia. SageRad (talk) 21:12, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

New message

Hi! Just in case you don't get some kind of notification: I left you a short and non-urgent message here. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 14:52, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Suns Dancers

Hi KDS! I want to retrieve the information on Suns Dancers, to improve it and maybe make it relevant enough so it can be put back on Wikipedia.

Furhtermore, I am scratching my head after reading articles on other NBA cheer-leading squads, such as the Laker Girls and the Warrior Girls. Thanks and God bless you!--Antonio Puerto Rican Condorito Martin (aqui) 1:46, November 9, 2015 (UTC)

Hey, I have asked the deleting admin if the article could be "userfied" for you— hopefully something can be worked out for you that way. With regard to the other articles you mentioned, the standard response is to say that WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, but more than that, these other articles may also warrant deletion (which would be something like, "WP:OTHERSTUFFSHOULDNTEXISTEITHER", I guess). An article consisting primarily of a list the first names of the members of a cheerleading squad feels... It doesn't feel "encyclopedic" to me. KDS4444^Talk 20:15, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Thomas T. Veblen

I think "one of the foremost experts in nothofagus forest dynamics" is a clear claim of significance, so this article does not qualify for WP:CSD#A7 speedy deletion. If you think he does not meet WP:PROF, please use WP:AFD. —Kusma (t·c) 10:48, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Fair enough, though someone beat me to it. KDS4444^Talk 20:09, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Stadium attendances of Asian Football Leagues

"Proposed deletion of Stadium attendances of Asian Football Leagues"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stadium_attendances_of_Asian_Football_Leagues

Hi,

I have updated reference links in the page.
And kindly note the 'See Also' section, which i have added.
and also added categories.
I hope you will not delete the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arun4biju (talk • contribs) 12:42, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Arun4biju: I can see the new list of references you have added— this seems like a good start, and I am glad you provided more information, but my continuing concern is that these are references to statistics, not references that somehow show that "Stadium_attendances_of_Asian_Football_Leagues" is itself a notable subject. I could create an article titled "Attendance at State Fairs" or "Attendance at Ventura County Middle Schools" and provide citations to demonstrate that the figures I mentioned were true, but that isn't the point— Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, so unless you can demonstrate and provide sources to support the idea that stadium attendance in Asian football leagues is somehow a notable event (or maybe custom?) then my proposal to delete the article will have to stand. Can you maybe tell me something about why you composed this article in the first place? Perhaps I can help you figure out what to do with it other than deletion. Oh, and please sign your comments here with four tildes at the end so I can see who you are. Thanks! KDS4444^Talk 05:18, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

November 2015

I'm just letting you know that I declined your deletion request for Mitch Hughes, a page that you tagged for speedy deletion, because the article involves a youtube personality with greater than five million subscribers, which is in itself a credible claim of significance because it indicates the strong possibility of evidence to demonstrate notability. Thanks! Appable (talk) 18:04, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

No worries, I take no offense— I do my best to pick out my CSD candidates with care, but was not aware of the YouTube notability clause. Thank you for pointing it out to me. KDS4444^Talk 05:06, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to New Providence may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

fluctuations (often as little as {{convert|5|F|C}} in any given 12-hour period) and warm winters (a typical winter morning in the range of {{convert|70|F|C}} to {{convert|74|F|C}}, excellent

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 06:14, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cabomba, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Whorl. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:03, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

No Doubt

Hello @KDS4444:! I've recently started the article, List of songs recorded by No Doubt. I just noticed that you turned the article into a redirect, but I was going to put in a significant amount of work to it today. Would it be alright with you if I put in the Under construction tag and continued to work from there? I'm very passionate about this article and will do my best to make the article perfect. Thanks! Carbrera (talk) 15:45, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Another new message

… for you here. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:35, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

… and another. Isn't there a better way of doing this? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 08:39, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

There must. In the mean time, that ticket is now all yours— I have reassigned it to you. Enjoy! KDS4444^Talk 17:22, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Eric Boyko

Hi @KDS4444:, I revised the Eric Boyko page I created yesterday that you nominated for a speedy deletion, please take a look and let me know if you still think it should be speedy deleted. I tried to make it more neutral and concise while still demonstrating why he is notable. Thanks.--Bernie44 (talk) 02:23, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Well, it looks like he may be notable after all. Nice job. KDS4444^Talk 05:16, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

on BLPROD

I see that you put a BLPROD tag on Eleanor Beardsley. I've removed it, with the addition of a reference. But you may want to review WP:BLPROD, which says "To place a BLPPROD tag, the process requires that the article contain no sources in any form (as references, external links, etc.), which support any statements made about the person in the biography." The external links on the article when you placed the tag would've covered that. But thanks for your efforts! --Nat Gertler (talk) 05:09, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, had not noticed the external link, have now gone ahead and nominated it for regular deletion. Appreciate the heads-up, though, always. KDS4444^Talk 05:19, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Vanjagenije. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Kang Jin-a, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. Vanjagenije (talk) 09:24, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Deletions

Your nomination [1] of Carta (publisher) for deletion despite the under construction template in place on the article and despite the creator's response to your speedy deletion nomination with the valid assertion that he was still working on this new page was inappropriate. Please avoid repeating this sort of move in future.E.M.Gregory (talk) 17:04, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi. At the risk of becoming a pest, I just took a look at Eleanor Beardsley, and I want to make certain that you know about WP:BEFORE. Some well-intentioned, experienced editors appear not to. I know that lots of WP:ADVERT exists, but we still need to look before just throwing new articles up at AFD. All the best; I do know that combing though the muck that gets created daily is one of the Labours of Hercules, and I thank you for undertaking it. Only, please slow down.E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:27, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

信用研究行動計畫 (Credit Research Initiative: CRI)-deletion under A7

Hi there, may I know why the page I created was deleted under rule A7? I believe the institution has its significance therefore was supported by Singaporean government. And I also sited the source from valid source in Taiwan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vulejijo (talk • contribs) 07:14, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, is anyone there who can address my question? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vulejijo (talk • contribs) 04:24, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Let me see if I can help you. As the article has now been deleted, I am not able to look at the text and recall exactly what moved me to nominate it for deletion, but from what I recall, the article lacked a claim of notability— that CRI merely exists does not mean that it warrants a standalone article. You need to tell us (the reader) WHY it is important, what IMPACT it has had, what its SIGNIFICANCE is, and then you need to support those claims with references to reliable independent sources. My guess (without looking at the article) is that it lacked these things (either separately or together). KDS4444^Talk 07:13, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Bahwey ali mata

Hi KDS4444, nice pictures on your userpage.
Having 'buttered you up', do you have any idea what the Bahwey ali mata page you patrolled is actually about? I can't make it out.

On second reading it's about a temple . Maybe it needs to be moved to Bahwey ali mata temple? Google suggests it should be Bawey Wali Mata temple. The page also spells it Bahwey Aali Mata (two As in Aali). I give up! 220 of ^Borg 11:09, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Don't give up! The page needs moving... And renaming. Or deleting. I am not sure why I didn't any of this myself at the time. Oh, and thanks for the butter! KDS4444^Talk 14:17, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:55, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Gagauzia in the Bala Türkvizyon Song Contest

Hello I am User:KingDriverFC and I want to ask you why is Gagauzia in the Bala Türkvizyon Song Contest worse then the other ninteen country articles? Thank you in advance KingDriverFC (talk) 22:20, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

The standard response, and the one I am giving you now, is WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. It's not a matter of better or worse, and it's not a matter of comparison. I am sorry. KDS4444^Talk 14:14, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello again. I want to ask you if I should re-create Gagauzia in the Bala Türkvizyon Song Contest? Thank you in advance KingDriverFC KingDriverFC (talk) 17:13, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

I can't encourage you to re-create this article. Did you read the link I gave you above on other stuff existing? that other similar song contests exist does not by itself mean that an article on this one should. Perhaps those other song contests also should be deleted— but even that is not the point. Any article on Wikipedia needs to be supported by multiple independent reliable sources that cover the subject in a non-trivial way. If you believe that you can re-create this article and can provide such sources, then you are, of course, welcome to do so. If you do not, however, you may expect it to be deleted again and your time will likely have been wasted. I am advising you to consider not re-creating it, but I have no power to prevent you from doing so. You may do as you see fit. Best of luck to you! KDS4444^Talk 17:34, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Advice

Hello, I see you nominated Criminal Spin for AfD, what do you think about Positive Criminology by the same contributor? Thanks, JMHamo (talk) 21:06, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

JMHamo So I am notified by Wikipedia that I have a new message on my talk page. And I know that I have been doing some new-article patrolling, so I figure someone is mad I nominated their article for some kind of deletion. Or else someone is telling me that my technique in doing so is flawed somehow, and that I should back off. And when I see the word "Advice", my bells ring... "I have some advice for you— try nominating something ELSE for deletion!" or something. I figure I am in trouble. Never before has the message been a request for thoughts on the existence of an article which I have NOT nominated for deletion! I am disarmed. But the question is still fraught with possibilities: if I say I think the article in question should remain, am I making myself a fool for having nominated its related article for deletion? How certain am I of that proposal, anyhow? Was I thinking clearly? Was I hasty? Was I careless? What did I do? What did I mean to do? It's a wonder sometimes that I ever get anything done at all. And then your question on positive criminology... It needs an answer.

So I have now had a look, and I have some thoughts... Will it seem evasive of me to ask you what you think of it? Probably. So let me dissemble: my reasoning behind the deletion nomination of the article on Criminal Spin was the heavy reliance on unverifiable, unpublished theses. I made that clear in the deletion nomination. It wouldn't take much to derail that nomination, but it will take more than multiple unpublished theses to make it fly on Wikipedia. The article on positive criminology, aside from the formatting errors in several of its references, might seem to have some more behind it. The fact that it is attributed conceptually to a single person makes me wary, and that it has no inline cites at all until its third full paragraph makes that feeling worse. The article looks like it is much longer than it needs to be for the topic it is covering. It is overlinked (there are links to the word "life" and "family" which are indicative of an editor who doesn't know how to use hyperlinks properly). Its section headings are malformed. The article includes no critique of the subject matter. The only immediate evidence of the use of concept of "positive criminology" is in a paper published by the aforementioned single person and a coauthor. For these reasons, it comes across as the work of a student of the proponent of the concept, someone with a probable conflict of interest (perhaps one of those unpublished thesis writers has been at work!). I will even say I think it very well doesn't warrant a standalone article either. But an article with, what is it... forty seven references? My gawd, the thought of just beginning the process of evaluating each one and assessing its contribution to the subject's notability makes my eyes glaze over and I go faint. It's hard enough nominating those articles for deletion that I am certain warrant it. Other battles need sterner hearts than mine.

There. I have dissembled. My turn, now, sir: what do YOU think of it?? KDS4444^Talk 03:15, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Wikiclaus' cheer !

		Wikiclaus greetings
		Michael Q. Schmidt ^talkback *is wishing you the happiest of Wikiclaus' Wikipedian good cheer.* This message is intended to celebrate the holiday season, promote WikiCheer, and to hopefully make your day just a little bit better, for Wikiclaus encourages us all to spread smiles, fellowship, and seasonal good cheer by wishing others a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. *Share the good feelings and the happiest of holiday spirits from Wikiclaus* !**

Lovifm music

Persistent, isn't he (or them)? I see why you've stopped reverting. I've reported the article creator at AIV, and I hope whoever takes care of it will deal with the rest of it too. Meters (talk) 07:33, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

I am pretty convinced it's just a "he". Thanks for filing the report. Hope this blows over soon. Is there a Wikipedia term for users who insist on the existence of a single article and will go to any lengths to try to preserve it in a spiral that ends in deletion and account blocking? 'Cause it seems like there autta be— I've seen this kind of thing before and it never ends well. Messy. KDS4444^Talk 07:50, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

WP:SPA is probably the closest, but not all SPAs are a problem; they may have a single focus but still make good edits. Meters (talk) 19:41, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Just to mention I've now raised Lovifm for blacklisting at MediaWiki talk:Titleblacklist and MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist. --McGeddon (talk) 12:25, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Janice Celeste

There is lot of indication of importance about the person.

A7. No indication of importance (individuals, animals, organizations, web content, events)[edit source]

This applies to any article about a real person, individual animal(s), organization, web content or organized event that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant, with the exception of educational institutions.[7] This is distinct from verifiability and reliability of sources, and is a lower standard than notability. This criterion applies only to articles about web content and to articles about people, organizations, and individual animals themselves, not to articles about their books, albums, software, or other creative works. This criterion does not apply to species of animals, only to individual animal(s). The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source or does not qualify on Wikipedia's notability guidelines. The criterion does apply if the claim of significance or importance given is not credible. If the claim's credibility is unclear, you can improve the article yourself, propose deletion, or list the article at articles for deletion.

She is a notable person , news links from mainstream news websites are given to prove her notability , Also she is Mrs. New Jersey United States 2015 and many award winner .

Always :) (talk) 09:55, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Christmas Wishes

Christmas wishes Always :) (talk) 15:33, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Criminal spin

I saw your message regarding criminal spin - I made all the changes so now it's need to be o.k. I didn't understand how can I close the deletion of it?. Please explain to me. Thanks! :-)

Please sign your messages with four tildes like this: ~~~~. Thank you! Also, you are not a good candidate to close the discussion, as you are a major contributor to the article. Either an uninvolved editor with a significant history of contributions or an admin may close the discussion, which may not happen for some time yet. In other words, please sit tight and wait: the debate will hopefully be closed soon, one way or the other; there is really nothing you can do to affect the outcome anyway other than make as much effort as you can to show in the article that its subject is indeed notable by Wikipedia's standards. If the article has now met the requirements mentioned in the deletion discussion, then it is likely to be retained (unpublished theses will not go far in this regard, but any formally published works certainly will, especially those which discuss the subject secondarily, not those which introduce it or which are the works of its inventor). KDS4444^Talk 05:29, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your explanation. Pro Natti Ronel made all the changes and added more Resources so now you can see that it's not only unpublished theses it's includes many articles that were published. we want to publish this value and it doesn't look good with this remark. Additionally On January we have a conference and we will talk about criminal spin. I guess that you are an admin because you have a lot of experience and knowledge - so Can I ask you to check it by yourself and to close this deletion? This value was published because many of students asked Pro. Ronel to add this value to wikipedia, by the way we have it in Hebrew please see: https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%A1%D7%97%D7%A8%D7%95%D7%A8_%D7%A2%D7%91%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%99%D7%A0%D7%99 also I'm adding you a link which explain the work of Natti Ronel:https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Natti_Ronel You can see that he published many articles. Thank you very much for your help. I really appreciate it. Moran. — Preceding unsigned comment added by מורן חסיד (talk • contribs) 15:09, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

I have now had a chance to review the Hebrew version of the article. Thank you for pointing this out to me. While the fact that a Hebrew version exists is certainly encouraging, the problem is that the Hebrew article lacks inline citations, and its "Further reading" section lists the same unpublished theses on the top of its list. Having said that, I am fairly well convinced that the English version of the article now makes sufficiently good argument for notability to probably pass. BUT: the only person who may close a deletion discussion if there is even one significant "Delete" vote anywhere in the entry is an admin, and though I am flattered that you think I am one, the truth is I am not. Even if I were, however, to close my own deletion nomination either to keep or to delete would likely be inappropriate, as I am not an uninvolved party anymore (even if I switched from "Delete" to "Keep"!). At this point the only thing you can really do is wait. I understand that the deletion nomination tag is unsightly— sorry for that. But it will be removed soon (I cannot promise you when) either when the article is finally kept or is finally deleted. I do not know of any means by which an individual may speed up this process. It just takes some time, and an involved admin has to make the final call on it, perhaps after one or two more "delete" or "keep" voted have come it. KDS4444^Talk 01:58, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. In Hebrew we also need to add more references we will do it soon. How can I know who is admin? so I can talk to him. Is it possible? Thank you very much.

There is no way to know which of the thousands of admins will finally make a decision about this article until after that decision has taken place. Any admin may make that call after one week has passed since the initial nomination, but it is the admins themselves who decide which nominations to close and how to close them. KDS4444^Talk 21:28, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Per WP:LEAD

The lead should generally be three to four paragraphs and an overview of the article in question. Thus restored. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:33, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Creeper (UK band)

Hello KDS4444. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Creeper (UK band), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The Kerrang articles are enough for A7. Take to AfD if necessary. . Thank you. Ged UK 13:04, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Appeal of speedy deletion of Bumpbows

Regarding your speedy deletion of the Bumpbows article I have started, I wish to appeal this decision.

In this article, should the following be omitted? (re. G11. Unambiguous advertising or promotion):

Links to social media including Facebook and Instagram
The section "Styles and colours"
The line "and can also give style and even a cute look on a pregnant belly"
The word "beautiful" in the section "The birth of an idea".

What else should I omit as well?

RoundupResistance (talk) 03:52, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

The article has now been deleted. Although I nominated it, I was not the person who conducted the actual deletion and I am not personally able to retrieve its content. In order for me to help you, I will need to see a version of the entire article. If you have such a version somewhere, please provide a link. Alternatively, I can ask the deleting admin to undelete the article and move it to your user sandbox where we can both take a look at it. Please let me know which you think will work best. KDS4444^Talk 09:39, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

(tps) I'd be happy to move it to userspace, if that would help.--S Philbrick (Talk) 22:59, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

File:TaosMountain12.tif listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:TaosMountain12.tif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 23:51, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

OTRS unblock request

I think I know who you mean (I haven't reviewed the ticket yet). He had sent some emails to me that I was finally able to answer last night. Daniel Case (talk) 19:05, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Well, I finally did try to review the ticket, but I got the message "Insufficient rights". Is there some way you could email me or otherwise discuss its contents in confidence if need be? Daniel Case (talk) 06:32, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hip, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hip pain. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:15, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Google Books citation tool

I saw your edit and though I would share something I've been doing recently, on the chance that you either have thoughts on how to improve it.

I do a search for "/books?id=" which identifies articles where the raw url to Google books is used.

I then fix one or two, and then leave a note on the talk page, suggesting that editors might want to fix the others.

Example--S Philbrick (Talk) 22:57, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

This certainly seems like a good idea, S Philbrick. Those raw URLs do bug me, especially when they would have been so easy to fix when originally created. Back in the day and because I didn't know better I used to actually manually enter every parameter of every book I wanted to cite by typing in each letter of the citation template: "< r e f > { { c i t e b o o k | t i t l e = ...", and it was incredibly tedious; then I started copying and pasting in all of the parameters and filling in those I needed to use on a case by case basis-- still incredibly tedious, but better than typing out everything. I felt like I'd found God when I discovered the Google Books app on someone else's userpage one day. If there were a course that new editors were required to take before becoming full-fledged editors (I know, I know: there never will be for lots of reasons) learning how to use this app should have been on the first page (and oh, the grief it would have saved me!). KDS4444^Talk 05:20, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

PMMA use

PMMA is commonly used not only by bodybuilders but also in plastic surgery butt implants, especially in Mexico. Please see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artefill http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/ProductsandMedicalProcedures/DeviceApprovalsandClearances/Recently-ApprovedDevices/ucm077416.htm Good peer check and thank you Boilingorangejuice (talk) 04:16, 9 February 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boilingorangejuice (talk • contribs)

Oh, I am not doubting that the procedure is done, Boilingorangejuice, I am asking you to provide a citation to a reliable, independent source that proves it (if you have one?). KDS4444^Talk 05:09, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes. My source is from the United States Food and Drug Administration. Here. http://www.fda.gov/medicaldevices/productsandmedicalprocedures/cosmeticdevices/wrinklefillers/default.htmT "Unapproved Uses

The FDA has NOT approved soft tissue fillers to: Increase breast size (breast augmentation) Increase size of the buttocks Increase fullness of the feet Implant into bone, tendon, ligament, or muscle The FDA has NOT approved liquid silicone or silicone gel for injection to fill wrinkles or augment tissues anywhere in the body." Boilingorangejuice (talk) 05:16, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

I wasn't clear: it is not to me that you need to show the link, but rather within the article on PMMA in the section where this is discussed. Have you placed it there? If not, could you? Thanks! KDS4444^Talk 13:32, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Earthworm, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Metamerism. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:50, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

User talk:KDS4444/Archive 4