User talk:Kudpung/Archive Apr 2016

Sex tech article

I tagged this article for speedy deletion under A1. The article has multiple problems. Also, I am not sure it is all that useful since the "tech" items are mentioned in their own articles. But I had second thoughts about my tag and removed it. I began writing a message to the user. Meanwhile, you tagged the article under A11. This does seem to be an invented term but it was apparently invented by an internet writer, not the user. I looked at the two previously non-working reference links to web pages and found that they were malformed. After I changed them, they worked. One of them links to a page with a few "articles" about "sex tech." The other link is to a newspaper article which can only be the basis for some subsidiary points such as the wider availability of pornography for women! It does not mention "sex tech." I left some advice FWIW on the user talk page about possible improvements to the article. I also left some more links to Wikipedia style, guideline and help pages. The user apparently did not spend much time reviewing the pages in the original welcome message or they did not make much impression. I also gave a disclaimer that others might see this differently and the article still might be subject to speedy deletion or under the articles for deletion process. I leave this message simply as information so you will know about parallel work regarding this article and about what I found when I fixed the urls. Donner60 (talk) 03:49, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tanks for the heads up. Today is a problem day and fortunately it only lasts 48 hours (when spread over all the time zones) and there is hardly anyone on patrol. Keep up the good work and ifr the creators get snarky, don't let it worry you - just tell them to develop their aricles in their userspace Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:55, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorawit Suboon

Hi, I saw a new article, Sorawit Suboon and did a prod for BLP with no sources, and then noted in my watchlist that you had apparently speedied the same article just before, it looks like it was immediately recreated. As you'd speedied it I thought I'd let you know in case you wanted to review the reposting. JamesG5 (talk) 04:48, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Luciano Marazzo

Just to let you know, that since the subject/creator removed your PROD, I have nominated this for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Luciano Marazzo. I've PROD-ed the article he's also created about his company Online Music Guild. If he removes the PROD, I'm taking it to AfD. In the meantime, I have truncated it from the blatant advert that it was. Best, [[User: |Voceditenore]] (talk) 16:19, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up Voce.. I don't stand on ceremony with jokers like this. I've blocked him and speedied his spam, so you can go ahead and NAC withdraw the AfDs. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:08, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Kudpung. See "Serenade". He's also written one about his recital program. Sigh! I've nominated it for speedy A7, G11. I've withdrawn the AfD for Luciano Marazzo. The other one was only a PROD. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 07:25, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Done, keep a weather eye open though, Voce, that he doesn't create a new account. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:57, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
If he continues in the same subject vein, any new articles will show up here and I monitor it frequently. I've also got all the multitudinous red links that he had put in Online Music Guild on watch. By the way, you missed Talk:Luciano Marazzo. I've put a G8 on it. Best Voceditenore (talk) 09:54, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

CSTA

Thank you for your review of the recent article Computer Science Teachers Association. I have added several external links that refer to CSTA, including one that references CSTA's participation with Microsoft, Google, and other notable companies and organizations. Please take a look and if you see specific parts that require additional attribution, let me know - or if you feel your concerns have been addressed, please remove the tags. Thank you --Cypherquest (talk) 15:07, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article is not in immediate danger of deletion (otherwise I would have deleted it), but the number and quality of the sources are still not of the kind that we expect to assert notability. Perhaps a read of WP:GNG, WP:ORG, WP:RS would help. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:17, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

NPP

Hey, and thanks for letting me know that I shouldn't have patrolled a couple of the pages I did. I understand Udas naslien, that was a mistake on my part, and I wasn't concentrating very well. However, I don't understand why you left me a message for List of national korfball associations. I know that Wikipedia articles should be sourced, but AFAIK, they don't absolutely have to be, unless they're a BLP article. What confuses me even more is the fact that you didn't even delete it/propose it for deletion. Could please explain to me why exactly you unreviewed it? Thanks, — Omni Flames (talk contribs) 07:43, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of page - Desh Gaurav Sekhri

Hello Sir, This is in reference to the wiki page of Desh Gaurav Sekhri. I have added a few references which prove that this person exists and is an author in India. Hope the references provided are helpful and the page stays.

Regards,

Deepali

Hazara public School & College

Hi

I have edited hazara public school page because it is in Haripur. all the information and weblinks were provided, but I am surprised to see that you have given rights to a fake school which is not even in Hazara, If you do your research you ll find out that hazara is a part of KPK and this school is there since 1980, and a number of times they have attained positions in the Abbottabad board.

Please do change it otherwise it looks like wikipedia buys anything it gets from random people.

Here are some links for you to consider.

http://www.dawn.com/news/1121475

http://www.schoolinglog.com/school/HAZARA-PUBLIC-SCHOOL-And-COLLEGE-Haripur_183584.html

http://www.hazarians.pkonline.biz/

https://www.facebook.com/hpsandcollege

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.230.91.56 (talk) 07:26, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

RfA nom

Hi! I was reading through a few discussions on WT:RFA and thought I should look into doing another RfA. Would you consider (co-)nominating me? Like last time, I'd be focused on technical work, but also some AfD or uncontroversial CSD work. Thanks! (I've also asked HJ Mitchell, FWIW.) APerson (talk!) 12:04, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi APerson, I'm travelling at the moment so apart from some sporadic edits I make from my laptop in departure lounges, I haven't got time to take a closer look right now. If HJ Mitchell is quicker, and I know him exceptionally well and trust his judgement, I would almos certainly co-nom any nomination he makes unless I uncover something at he last minute that he has missed. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:40, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your response! I'll continue waiting for a response from HJ Mitchell, then. APerson (talk!) 01:44, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 14 April 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:46, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Joe and Shaun Mysteries

Looks like a hoax article, two boys working together at their elementary school? If that's their real names that's another worry. Doug Weller talk 20:41, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Doug. I can't find anything - can you give me a link to thr article or the user? --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:31, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Here's your prod.[1] Doug Weller talk 06:18, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I don't see any issues with deletion. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:25, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Anish Sundash

Well I put Anish Sundash as a hoax given the fact the guy claims to be born in the year 2053! Also it is a autobio looking over at the name but that's another story. Wgolf (talk) 02:22, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please be more careful when patrolling pages and do the proper required checks before tagging foor deletion. Anish Sundash is absolutely not a hoax and FYI 2053 is the year in the Buddhist calendar that is used all over Asia. Autobiographies are discouraged but they are not a reason for deletion. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:27, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well another thing was I misread part of it and thought it said "He became a superstar singer at age 7". Also I don't tend to speedy autobios unless if they have to be (some people are too quick and just put db-person on everything) Might need to put a few templates on the page. Wgolf (talk) 02:35, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
He might well have become a superstar at the age of 7 - nearly every country has an X-Factor or a Got Talent show and his is a small country. You can template with any templates including PROD or BLPPROD if tey are appropriate, but please be careful with CSD because some admins may not check. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:41, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I know I tend to check, anyway everything is looking good now. Good luck with editing. Wgolf (talk) 02:48, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Heartmath Institute

You deleted it a year ago; should it link to Lew Childre instead? I tried to do it myself, but it didn't stick. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chamberlian (talk • contribs) 05:44, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for bringing this up. Looks as if we forgot to get the Lew Childre article deleted too.--Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:48, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rebecca Redfern

Hi, you sent me a message regarding biography sources on the article for Rebecca Redfern. As this is my first article please can you talk me through what I need to get sources about because this is all new to me.

Cheers — Preceding unsigned comment added by XxNevvoxX (talk • contribs) 16:01, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. If you look at this you'll see that I had already addressed the issues for you. Please remember to sign your talk page messages. Happy editing!Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:43, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Giannis Bezos

I put a reference. OK now? Gmentis (talk) 17:21, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This reference is not an in-depth source. An article requires many sources in order to assert notability. Please see WP:RS. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:25, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
there are not other references even in greek wp Gmentis (talk) 17:28, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
In that case, Wikipedia should not have an article about the subject. See WP:RS. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:32, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Policy Sciences

It is not "copied from another source." It is an accurate reproduction of the the aims and scope of the Journal. This is NOT copyright material. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mi9cal (talk • contribs) 17:59, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This article is in fact a synthesis of several copyrighted sources. See WP:COPYVIO. Wikipedia is very strict about the verbatim use of material ripped from the Internet or printed sources used without attributon. Please sign your posts (see the big blue banner at the bottom of this page). --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:05, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


"several copyrighted sources" - Where do you get that from! This is completely inaccurate. It contains original material I compiled and reproduces (FAIR USE) important primary information from the Journal's frontpage materials. Should I have mis-spelled names - would that make it more accurate. This is a legitimate article and you should stop deleting it for capricious reasons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mi9cal (talk • contribs) 18:11, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Mi9cal:: you need to pay attention to your talk page, as important messages regarding your conduct are being left there. If you would read it and follow the instructions there, you could a) avoid having your account blocked (the likely next step based on your conduct) and b) actually get a wiki article on the journal published. But you need to do these things without name calling and without copyright infringement. Calling someone a Naz* is not goign to get you sympathy, nor will cutting and pasting from other sites get your article published. Civility and reasoned discussion will get you results. HappyValleyEditor (talk) 18:34, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Synap

Hi Kudpung - many thanks for reviewing this page and making some suggestions to improve. As you can tell, I'm still learning my way around wikipedia but will respond to your suggestions today and let you know once some changes have been made. 18:39, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Kudpung - could you give me an example of either a reference that is inadmissable, or part of the Synap page content that is too promotional for wikipedia's standards? I'll have a clearer understanding of the changes you're looking for with such an example! Thanks again for your time.

Edu apps (talk) 18:46, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Blogs, primary sources, listings, newsletters, press releases, etc., do nothing o asset notability while occasionally they might confirm some content if they are WP:Reliable sources, but anything the subject says about themselves is certainly not reliable. It's sometimes very hard to pinpoint exactly how the tone of an article is promotional, but this certainly reads like an advertorial. As you have a COI, you need to be very careful because whether we admit it or not, this article in its present cast is designed to give the company a boost through its presence on Wikipedia. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 19:00, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarification. Yes, of course having a wikipedia page will be a boost to our presence and I can't deny that! I do understand the importance of keeping wikipedia neutral and objective hence declaring a COI. As stated, Im happy to change the article or accept edits from other editors in order to maintain a neutral perspective.

In terms of reading like an advertorial, I've had another look through and think I've identified several aspects of what you have picked up on. I've submitted an edit with several changes to the phrasing and some significant deletions that may have fallen into the 'promotional' bracket, as well as many of the references from smaller blogs etc. Looking forward to your thoughts.

Edu apps (talk) 19:18, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kudpung, I noticed you prodding Ashley Stones and related articles. I looked deeper and I can't find any evidence this person or her albums actually exist. The only results for her name and albums point back to Wikipedia. In fact, the only source on any of these articles (on Punkalicious) doesn't have anything on her. She appears to be completely fictitious, so I've tagged all the articles with {{db-hoax}}. The articles also seem to have been tag-team created and edited by two accounts: CqlebEllis (talk · contribs) and Sammie126 (talk · contribs). Considering the edit patterns, I'm wondering if they're socks. clpo13(talk) 18:39, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Good catch! Keep your eye on them and if you think I should use my mop, let me know. I don't waste time starting an ANI with jokers like these. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:49, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Athletics in Epic Poetry

I am trying to start the wikipedia article "Athletics in Epic Poetry", but I am not sure how to properly format it. I have the content for the article currently saved in my sandbox.

Deletion - Sari Feldman

Hi Kudpung, You deleted/drafted my Sari Feldman page. I'm in the process of adding all my information to the page but I wanted to post the headings as a guideline reminder for myself. This page will be complete sometime today. This is for Library and Information Science class project so lots of peers including my professor will be able to give me critic feedback on it. I understand why you deleted it but just wanted to inform you that you will be seeing it again but with a lot more information shortly.

Sincerely,

DBiblio — Preceding unsigned comment added by DBiblio (talk • contribs) 20:24, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You must read the messages on your talkpage. The article is at Draft:Sari Feldman where you can develop it without it being deleted again. When it is ready, please submit it to WP:AfC for review. Please sign your talk page messages (see the BIG blue banner at the bottom of this page). Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 20:32, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 24 April 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:42, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"... if a new rule gets accepted ..."

You mentioned on a talkpage earlier a discussion of a proposed new rule for RfA voters. I must have overlooked the discussion you are referring to ... could you kindly point me to it? Thanks, Newyorkbrad (talk) 16:04, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Newyorkbrad. It's an issue that the community has been deliberately avoiding for years, at least since I launched WP:RFA2011, but which is now being revisited at WT:RfA#Different approach. It hasn't reached RfC stage yet. The en.Wiki, AFAIK, is now the only major Wikipedia to not have such a rule. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 19:40, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reply. I'll take a look at that. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 20:30, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]