User:IShadowed/Archive 4

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For the CSD declines I received upon returning from retirement (was a little rusty with CSD criteria), click here.

The Signpost: 07 May 2012[edit]

A pie for you![edit]

Thanks for your efforts to fight vandalism as you did in the Jessica Sanchez article as shown in this edit. - SyncSeth (talk) 23:27, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

My edit of The Wire episode article (Late Editions)[edit]

Hey. Contrary to what it may seem like, I am not a vandal. The article truly has a factual error in it, hence the edit. 109.226.55.14 (talk) 07:13, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

The edit initially looked quite like vandalism, but upon further review it appears you are correct. Thank you for bringing my error to my attention - I will restore your edit as well as remove the warning from your talk page. Happy editing! --  IShadowed  ✰  07:29, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Nyanpire[edit]

If you have the power, please lock the Nyanpire page as two individuals continue to change his gender to female when he is in fact a male and there is TONS of clear evidence to support this. Thanks.

Sailormoonfan92 (talk) 17:16, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately I do not have page protection rights, but I would be more than happy to request them on that page. Thanks, and sorry for the inconvenience that edit war may have caused you. --  IShadowed  ✰  17:17, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Thanks for keeping Wikipedia vandalism-free. Steven Walling (WMF) • talk 21:19, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
It's Steven Walling! The ignite talk guy! Ohhey (and thanks). --  IShadowed  ✰  00:18, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 May 2012[edit]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Reverting the flood of anon IP vandalism today Gaijin42 (talk) 15:51, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Facebook group[edit]

Hello IShadowed, I simply thought It was a page that was never viewed and just thought I'd make it easier if it was gone ? ..Anyway I do apologize for the deletion and apologize for the rudeness in the edit sum, Thanks, Kindest Regards Davey2010 Talk 15:56, 15 May 2012 (UTC)Davey2010 Talk 15:38, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

I understand your concern that certain articles may not be viewed as often as others - however this does not indicate that that article does not belong on Wikipedia. Here, we establish notability through a set of guidelines that apply to certain topics (sports, websites, people...etc). If the article in question meets those guidelines, it is generally considered suitable for inclusion on Wikipedia regardless of pageviews. I encourage you to review the notability guidelines before raising any future concerns. You may also find traffic stats useful (the example linked is for my user talk page, however you can replace that with any article to check the stats for that page). Happy editing! --  IShadowed  ✰  16:02, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
I can safely say it's the first and most definitely the last time I attempt to delete lol, Should of thought before doing but oh well, Thanks for the links, oh and thanks for replying :), Kindest Regards Davey2010 Talk 16:33, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Funny[edit]

I like your"Kitty has a penis" it is funny.--Nyanpire68 (talk) 16:00, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Note: The above message is actually not vandalism, the user is referring to a comment I made regarding an article on an... androgynous cat. Yeah.
Nyan, glad to hear that you enjoyed that :). --  IShadowed  ✰  19:08, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 May 2012[edit]

Vandalism Warning?[edit]

Please explain why I have now got a vandalism warning on my page Mdann52 (talk) 15:58, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

The edit in question appeared to be vandalism. It is, however, relevant information as it reflects a role the article's subject played. I have reverted my warning on your user talk to reflect this. Thanks. --  IShadowed  ✰  16:09, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. Everyone makes mistakes Mdann52 (talk) 16:25, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 May 2012[edit]

Sockpuppet User[edit]

Hi again. Sorry to bother you but would it be possible for you to request for the ban of user 'Irondevilkitty' who is a sock puppet of the following accounts (all of which are banned) 'Salmonmaho2/Elementaloffirearrietty/Nyanpire68/Cookietheoshawott/Mikuhatsune6/Animelover3'

This user is banned but has reappeared to maliciously vandalise genders of fictional characters again. I would report it myself however I don't know who to report it to and as you have helped previously I hoped you could help.

Thanks Sailormoonfan92 (talk) 22:29, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

You can raise your concerns over at the sockpuppet investigation page. Thanks! --  IShadowed  ✰  15:57, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 June 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 11 June 2012[edit]

Header[edit]

Hi. Please do not remove perfectly valid and true edits from Wikipedia, as you did to Anne Hathaway. Thanks. Milkshake6789 (talk) 17:39, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Please back up the information you add to articles with reliable sources. Otherwise, claims may be removed. Thanks. --  IShadowed  ✰  17:40, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

why did you just revert ?[edit]

this... http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Stronger_(Kanye_West_song)&oldid=498318297

It's not a broken link. --  IShadowed  ✰  10:44, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
okay, fair point, so what should i call it?
Nothing. It's already named and located under the External Links header. There is no need to change anything there. --  IShadowed  ✰  10:50, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
er, when i use it youtube says the video is unavailble, as it has been for a while
It must be unavailable in your specific country, then, as it works for me & others. Sometimes videos are only unavailable in specific countries per copyright interests. --  IShadowed  ✰  10:57, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
ah, i see, thanks and sorry to inconvenience you. Wikipedia was once edited by 'non-experts' (i think that's the correct term, but what do i know)
You haven't inconvenienced anyone, so don't sweat it. I'm also no expert. Best of luck in your future endeavors. --  IShadowed  ✰  11:10, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 June 2012[edit]

Talk:hari singh nalwa[edit]

Hi, i was not fully aware of all the rules of editing as i am new here. will try nt to repeat again jus want to help to contribute.Marwahasaab (talk) 12:11, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Edits[edit]

I am not vandalizing chuck Martin. If anyone is you are but I will assume good faith and think that you thought I was wrong.

Please back up the information you add to articles with reliable sources. Otherwise, claims may be removed. Thanks. --IShadowed 18:32, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Please be easy on the newbies[edit]

I believe that User talk:PinkShinyRose was acting in good faith. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 19:39, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Reverting an inappropriate edit, whether in good or bad faith, then informing the user of their mistake sounds pretty reasonable to me. --IShadowed 19:44, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
Reverting the edit is fine. Remember, vandalism must be indisputable. If the edit is not obviously vandalism to any editor of good intentions (such as myself), please do not flag it as such. Assume Good Faith. Please. If I were you, I would remove the warning and apologize. Apology for one of my mistakes] Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 20:25, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
Assuming good faith is not the quintessential excuse for inappropriate edits. Perhaps the line is thin here, but I maintain the point I have made above. --IShadowed 20:30, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
I was going to ask if you would consider responding to the user's help request with a non-template message. I do believe the user is acting in good faith and this is a good opportunity to show our caring side. Cheers - My76Strat (talk) 20:46, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
Responded. --IShadowed 20:54, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Pickens High School[edit]

stop reverting my edit of pickens high school. it is productive and on purpose. read the edit!

I have read your edit, and it is not "productive and on purpose". Blanking a page is considered vandalism. I believe you are trying to create a disambiguation page, however, in which case I will go ahead and move the appropriate pages to their respective places. --IShadowed 21:27, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
yes it is productive and how would you know if i did it on purpose or not? i didn't blank a page but put a link to the correct one. next time read it instead of reverting immediately
As I stated, I've gone ahead and created the disambiguation page for you. Please also see this. Thanks --IShadowed 21:34, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
thank you for the disambiguation page.Fullsinks (talk) 21:39, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
Not a problem, my apologies for the slight misunderstanding. --IShadowed 21:41, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
:)Fullsinks (talk) 21:42, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

June 2012[edit]

Since you removed the warning template, I'll say it here: the edits were not blanking the page. They were very clearly an attempt to disambiguate two different school articles. Please do not misidentify vandalism. --Krenair (talk • contribs) 21:41, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

The history quite clearly shows a 'page blanked' tag which prompted my huggle revert, as explained above. Also, you edit conflicted my removal of the warnings from this users page. --IShadowed 21:52, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
That's an AbuseFilter tag. If you so much as glance at the diff you can see that there is content on the page after the edit. --Krenair (talk • contribs) 22:27, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
Which I did, and still appeared to be the blanking of 99% of the page content. Attempts at disambiguation creation were not apparent until after multiple reverts and conversation with the user in question. --IShadowed 22:28, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
Page blanking is when there is no more content left on the page at all. The edits left a couple of links there, so it was not blanking. Fullsink's first edit to the page was this, which is still clearly an attempt to disambiguate. Multiple invalid reverts and conversation was not necessary to establish this. --Krenair (talk • contribs) 22:33, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
Disagree, it was quite necessary to establish his intent. The fact that you are willing to argue over nuances such as the exact definition of blanking when you clearly demonstrate understanding of the spirit of my statements indicate to me that this conversation is over. --IShadowed 22:38, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Teamwork Barnstar
Dear IShadowed,

Thank you for your polite message. As I was about to check and list up references and souces this morning, Frankly speaking, I'm regretable and a little sad that my article has been deleted.... However your indication is right. I also think that Article should be objective and shouldn't be used for the wrong purpose. It's a first time for me to write an article, hence my preparation wasn't enough and feel sorry to make you bother. If I create an article next time, pls.advise me if you aren't inconvenient.

Regards K.Hightown (talk) 02:37, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Original Barnstar
Hello IShadowed ! I can't thank you enough for the intelligent changes you made when reverting my article. You see,being a foreigner (I am Portuguese) I sometimes find it difficult to write an article the way I should. Siegfriedplus (talk) 20:08, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Loyola University Chicago School of Business Administration[edit]

WP:CSD#G7 only applys where the author is the significant contributor to the article, which is plainly not the case. See User:Skier Dude's comments (an admin). Callanecc (talk) 18:15, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

See my comment on the talk page. I don't disagree that the CSD tag is potentially inappropriate, nor did I place it on the article. I undid your edit per edit summary -- but I digress. --IShadowed 18:17, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
There was nothing wrong with the edit summary, replacing a CSD nomination immediately after it is declined is vandalism, my use of rollback was appropriate, including when taking into account my message to User:Claire.degrazia. Callanecc (talk) 18:24, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
I see what she was trying to do- I've created a redirect rather than deleting, as it maintains the history of the old article. Skier Dude (talk) 18:26, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
<echoes SkierDude>. --IShadowed 18:28, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
<and echo SkierDude & IShadowed> Callanecc (talk) 18:31, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

John "Buddy" Boudreaux[edit]

Hello iShadowed - I added the page as a placeholder for other content that is being added shortly. I have updated the page with some references and external links that I believe verify the 'notable' status of Mr. Boudreaux and importance for inclusion in Wikipedia. Please keep me posted if, after the additions, you still believe this is not appropriate for inclusion. Thanks for your help in my first Wikipedia article! Emwdx (talk) 20:44, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

The subject of your first article may well be notable, but my concern is more with the references that you cite. Please review the reference guide and make appropriate changes. Sentences such as "He and the band "performed with such greats as George Burns, Gladys Knight, Buddy Rich, Andy Williams, Doc Severinsen, and Bob Crosby."" must be verified via a source -- I see that you have listed a print source, but it is also recommended that you find multiple online references as well. I would also recommend condensing the article by merging some of the headers. For example, 'high school' and 'college years' can be merged into a header called 'education'. This ensures that each section is of appropriate length, rather than just a simple sentence located under a very specific header. --IShadowed 21:08, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
I am working on the references - the main issue I am encountering is that nearly all of the references are from print publications and newspapers. Given that the bulk of these publications are from 1940 - 1997, it may be difficult to establish these references online. I am working to add these references in as detailed a fashion as possible, but it is difficult. I will adjust the headers to make the sections of appropriate length - as you mentioned, the reference issue is the big one I am trying to tackle first, as suggested in the 'Getting Started' page for Wikipedia. Emwdx (talk) 21:15, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
Glad to hear, don't hesitate to let me know if I can be of further assistance. Cheers! --IShadowed 21:51, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 June 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 02 July 2012[edit]

Endless Entertainment[edit]

Hi. Thank you for tagging an article for a maintenance issue. Did you by any chance check out the references? (I did). Please consider also applying any CSD or PROD that might be appropriate. Thanks. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:55, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

I've decided that the article in question does not meet the criteria for A7 as it does make claims of notability, but lacks verifiable references. It also does not appear to be G11 as it is not unambiguous advertising. Therefore, I've decided to nominate it to Articles for Deletion. Cheers! --IShadowed 04:04, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
Good idea - a safe solution when you're not sure. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:09, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

FC Rohožník and other[edit]

Hi. Why do you wanna delete article about Slovak club FC Rohožník and TJ Kovo Beluša? I said there is also the source article. --IQual (talk) 10:07, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello IQual, thanks for your inquiry! For inclusion on Wikipedia, articles must meet our general notability guidelines. It appears that some of the articles you have contributed, such as the ones listed above, fall short of these guidelines. --IShadowed 02:17, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi IShadowed. OK, I would appreciate your help to help me improve the quality of these articles that meet the required criteria. --IQual (talk) 06:57, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

It's not so much that the quality of your articles isn't alright -- they appear to generally follow the manual of style etc. However if the subjects of those articles simply do not meet notability guidelines, there isn't really much I can do to help you improve those articles. The only thing you really can do is include all the reliable, independent references that you can to demonstrate notability. Best of luck, --IShadowed 20:40, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Laura Devon[edit]

Hello. I received your notice about the stub article on Laura Devon, which I posted this afternoon. Your notice of deletion stated: "The article Laura Devon has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article."

Laura Devon is not a living person -- she died in 2007, as indicated in the stub article.

I do plan to enhance the article, but may not be able to within the deadline of July 17.

Does this policy also apply to deceased people?

Thanks for your message. Jburlinson (talk) 01:02, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

The policy does not apply to deceased individuals. I do not recall reading that the subject had died in 2007, but it is very probable that I simply missed it -- my apologies. I'll go back and remove the PROD notice, however I still have notability concerns. Please review our notability guidelines and revise the article as needed. Cheers! --IShadowed 01:12, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Article mentioned[edit]

Note that an article you prodded is being used as an example here: Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#.22WP:DICTIONARY.22_should_be_banned. Not that you need to comment or anything, just a heads up. IRWolfie- (talk) 16:40, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I don't feel I have anything further to contribute to that discussion, as my argument has already been expressed (when I added the PROD tag to the article, it appeared to simply be a silly definition with no further elaboration. It has since been improved, and the PROD tag removed. I can respect that). --IShadowed 20:31, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Captain Thomas Graves[edit]

Hello IShadowed Fixed the inline refs for Thomas Graves thanks to your prompt. I have a little more to add and fix. Best regards RobertNotafly (talk) 17:12, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Sure, thanks for improving the article! There are still a few minor issues, like how the links to the sources are included in the references (the names of those little 'arrow' looking links like this one right here are numbers instead of the title of the source -- but those aren't a massive issue or anything, just something you might like to read up on from Wikipedia's manual of style. Nice job, thanks for your contributions! --IShadowed 20:37, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Grand Masters of Calatrava[edit]

Hey IShadowed,

Sorry for any lack of clarity on my part. Glad you were super diligent.

Best, --ClarkSui (talk)

Not a problem at all! You did a great job at creating that article. --IShadowed 02:15, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Huronia[edit]

Thank you ... I think. I was trying to settle what I perceived to be a ripe place for a disambiguation page for Huronia when magically it all seemed settled by a pro. I assume that's you. Thanks. The Huronia region should now survive as a page and I leave it to true experts to flesh it out. It is likely to outweigh the other obscure topical reference about 1,000,000 to 1 but I felt the disambiguation ought to keep all 1,000,001 readers happy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dabiddo2 (talk • contribs) 04:45, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 July 2012[edit]

Deletion of Arnie Kuenn Bio Page[edit]

ArizonaTravel (talk) 15:46, 11 July 2012 (UTC) I noticed that the page I created yesterday has been deleted. I thought I had followed the guidelines closely. In fact, I modeled the page after this one Jay Baer. Is it worth my time to re-do the page for inclusion? Can you please userfy the page for me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ArizonaTravel (talk • contribs) 23:03, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Notability, airlines and a fed up article author[edit]

Firstly, thank you for correcting formatting in my articles - and in others - with the volume of articles I wanted to do (every significant airline in Russia!) I kept telling myself I planned to go back to the articles and format them afterwards (bolding etc.) but I have a feeling I would have forgotten. So than you. Now - notability. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shar_Ink for example. My articles keep getting flagged for this - often by you I believe (?) - these airlines are all notable in their (very large) regions (some as large as small countries). The reason my articles on those can be short is that there is so little information on these airlines, and hardly any is up-to-date. Unlike in the UK which is full of plane geeks (I'm not one, looking up obscure but popular airlines is more of a constructive way to pass time than anything else, and I am very interested in Russia (I'm English but strong Belarus/Russia background)) in the parts of Russia these airlines operate in people just use them to travel, or use their services - they don't sit down at a computer and start typing out any background information or fleet lists. Some of the flagged airlines have much larger fleets than some large commercial airlines! Trust me - if there was more information I can find on them, I will add it as soon as I find it. Short of contacting the airlines for a blow-by-blow account of every last detail (even then the officious powers-that-be will tell me the owners are an unreliable source!) there is nothing much I can do to make the articles much bigger or more detailed. Flicking through hundreds of sites and directories online via Google Translate (I can't speak Russian that well) is very very time-consuming and yet that's what I've done to get what little information is there.

If you've decided what I've just written is too long and dull and you've skipped through it all, basically the airlines are more than notable and the reason the articles don't give that impression is that online information on them is very sparse. Alexzarach (talk) 00:12, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

A cookie for you![edit]

It was cool to see you IRL. I hope you enjoy this cookie. Guerillero | My Talk 02:39, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Wikimania Barnstar[edit]

Wikimania Barnstar
It was great to see you at Wikimania 2012! 18:39, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Meredith Shaw Speedy Deletion[edit]

Please do not delete the Page titled "Meredith Shaw". I was in the process of finding content and references. The reason for the speedy deletion was not enough content - I will, given the chance -- rectify that situation with heavily referenced content.

Luludemaine (talk) 23:06, 16 July 2012 (UTC)Luludemaine

Hi, and thanks for your contributions! Unfortunately, the issue with the article in question is not a lack of content, but rather an issue with notability. Please review the notability guidelines and revise the article as needed to demonstrate importance. Thanks! --IShadowed 23:08, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Jose Villarreal (soccer) deletion[edit]

This article is about a professional player, that already have played in a fully professional league (WP:FPL). I have added three reliable sources (MLS, Transfermarkt and USSOCCER). Therefore, this page can not be nominated for deletion. SirEdimon (talk) 23:33, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi there, thanks for your message. Unfortunately, I still don't see any references on the page -- did you intend for the external links section to serve as the reference section? If so, please use in-line citations to support various claims in your article. Articles may be deleted for any number of reasons, and I have concerns regarding the notability of this one. The league in which the subject played is not listed as a pro-league but rather a local club, if I understand correctly. Could you clarify this? --IShadowed 16:12, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Poljot Strela nomination for speedy deletion question[edit]

What basis do you have for nominating the poljot strela page for speedy deletion? There are several valid secondary sources, and all production of the movement has ceased. It is a popular watch that played an important role in the russian space program, as well as being used by the russian military, and being popular with watch collectors as a reasonably cheap mechanical chronograph.

Do you think the article's a disguised advertisement for a watch that was introduced in 1959, and production of which ceased in 1979?TeeTylerToe (talk) 03:08, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

I nominated the article for deletion under the A7 criteria, notability, rather than G11, advertisement. Please keep this in mind. That being said, the article in question does not adequately assert notability with respect to our guidelines. Please review the general notability guidelines as well as any specific notability guidelines that may apply to the subject of the article (the company/movement/person/product mentioned). Thanks! --IShadowed 03:12, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
What makes the subject of an article "important or significant"? Also, as I said, it's a watch that was used in the space program, it's a licensed copy of a swiss valjoux movement, perhaps the most famous swiss chronograph maker.
What is your idea of a watch that is important or significant? What makes 90% of the articles about commercial products on wikipedia important or significant? There are 9 articles about the same helicopter. There are probably articles about a cell phone, a second article about that cell phone's european version, and probably a third article about that cell phone in pink. The company's own PR department probably didn't even bother issuing a press release about the pink version.TeeTylerToe (talk) 03:30, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
You can read exactly what qualifies an article as important or significant through the links I've provided above. I'm sorry to hear that you're discouraged. --IShadowed 03:31, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
I see notable defined, but I don't see important or significant defined. Where is important or significant defined, and what is the definition?TeeTylerToe (talk) 04:23, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
Important or significant as they pertain to Wikipedia are nearly exactly the same as their definitions in any other context, but they must be supported by the notability guidelines to demonstrate that the subjects are not only important and significant but also encyclopedic. --IShadowed 04:25, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 July 2012[edit]

Unreliable sources[edit]

Hi! I saw that you have tagged the article Io canto (song) as containing unreliable sources. Can you please tell me which sources are unreliable, so that I can try to improve the article providing better sources? Thank you for your help! --Stee888 (talk) 22:29, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Sure. I was a bit concerned with the reliance upon links to amazon and iTunes to support claims in your article. While these references may be able to support some claims, links to places where one can buy a certain product are usually considered questionable/unreliable of sorts. Perhaps a better tag would have been {{refimprove}}, as you may need to replace some of these references or add additional ones to support claims. I'll change the tag, and thanks! --IShadowed 22:34, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Some stroopwafels for you![edit]

Nice meeting you too, enjoy these stroopwafels Lansey (talk) 00:45, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

George L. San Jose Wiki[edit]

I wanted to contact you about this Wiki that you nominated for speedy deletion. I was wondering what I could add to make the page more verifiable. Please get back to me as soon as you can. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jessiesmithh (talk • contribs) 16:17, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Sure, not a problem. I have concerns with the notability and coverage of the subject of your article. The subject of the article appears to be about a community activist, but does not demonstrate why his activism/qualifications in business are exceptional/notable. The references you cite appear to be from local sources--I would recommend adding independent, third-party sources from national or international publications if at all possible. --IShadowed 16:21, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the speedy response. I believe the links prove that he is more than a community activist. I inserted a link to his company, The San Jose Group's Wiki page. As referenced in that Wiki, this company has multiple international ties. Please let me know what other steps to take to refute this speedy deletion. Jessiesmithh (talk) 16:40, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Whether or not the company is notable or not does not necessarily speak to whether the individual in question, George, is notable. Please review the general notability guidelines and make any appropriate changes. Thanks! --IShadowed 16:42, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Again, I appreciate your feedback. I am going to delete some of the content on the page now and in the mean time, I am going to continue to search for source that prove George, not his companies, notability. Thanks. Jessiesmithh (talk) 16:52, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

I have continued my research on George L. San Jose. I do believe that George as an individual is notable. References in the article reinforce that he is considered a pioneer in the Hispanic Advertising Industry. Further, his work has translated into $5billion in incremental sales for his clients. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jessiesmithh (talk • contribs) 18:34, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

ANI[edit]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Robby The Penguin (talk) (contribs) 19:25, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

CellCognition[edit]

Thanks for your correction for the article about CellCognition. I just realized that I had mistakenly edited your correction. I will undo my change. Thanks again. --Qingzhong (talk) 11:04, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Anthony Santorelli for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Anthony Santorelli is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anthony Santorelli until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. --Vic49 (talk) 21:21, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi, unfortunately you've placed these notices on the incorrect talk page. I am the creator of neither of these articles. Thanks anyway! --IShadowed 21:22, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of John Castellucci for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John Castellucci is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Castellucci until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. --Vic49 (talk) 21:21, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:IShadowed/Archive_4&oldid=1144525858"