User talk:Bfigura/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

carspin

i'll try again under the draft as you suggested. FYI, not sure what you meant by the "plus" button. alanbkahn —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alanbkahn (talk • contribs) 18:41, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I just meant that next to the 'Edit this page' tab, there's another tab with a '+' tab that starts a new topic. Nothing huge. --Bfigura (talk) 19:10, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Arzuhan Doğan Yalçındağ

That's weird, it was definitely a red link when I looked there... ah well no harm done --carelesshx talk 04:20, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

AfD Word Choice

Hi there. Just a quick note: please don't use the word vanity in AfDs, regardless of how much the subject deserves it. It can be inflammatory, and there are usually other words that work just as well. See WP:AFD#How_to_discuss_an_AfD. (Or at the risk of using a argument ad jimboneum, see here). Best, --Bfigura (talk) 18:17, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi, sorry, I won't do that again. Which did I do it in? • Lawrence Cohen 18:34, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Not entirely sure to be honest. I was just skimming through the AfD's and saw it. Not a huge problem though. --Bfigura (talk) 18:50, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Woops - me too - and I'll adjust my words accordingly. I have also used rv vanity rather frequently in reverting date and year article edits in cases where some kid posts his girlfriend's birthdate or something for kicks and jollies. Another "banned" word in Wikipedia, along with crufty and fancruft? This is the sort of thing that apparently sank my RfA. *sigh*. --T-dot ( Talk/contribs ) 18:53, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Bleh. That's a shame. Based on the Jimbo memo, it would seem that it shouldn't hugely matter for cases of blatant vandalism to established articles. Still, there's always the next RfA :-). Cheers, --Bfigura (talk) 18:56, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Dave's Page

now dave cenaffra's page is notable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.139.171.188 (talk • contribs)

While the cleanup does fix some of the POV issues that were present, I don't think he passes WP:BAND. Oh, and please sign your posts with four tildes (~). Thanks. --Bfigura (talk) 14:13, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Re: Article you deleted

Original messages left at User talk:Daniel:

Hi Daniel. Recently, Xinoehpoel was deleted, per this AfD. The rational behind the AfD seemed to be a lack of WP:RS. However, I noticed that there is a New York Times article on the subject here (granted, it's in the archive, but since I have uni access, I can quote from it if need be). I was wondering if you would consider undeleting the article so that I can see if I can improve it so that it meets WP:N/WP:V/WP:RS. Thanks much, --Bfigura (talk) 16:02, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

PS, from what I can see, the mentions in the article of the subject do not appear to be trivial. Best, --Bfigura (talk) 16:03, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
I can undelete it and move it to a user sandbox of yours, so you can work on improving it to counter the issues raised at the AfD. If you want me to do this, please just note so here and I will as soon as possible. Please note that you cannot move it back into the mainspace unless you either a) consult me (as closer) to ensure that the issues which resulted in its' deletion are fixed, and I will amend my close to the discussion as required, or b) get the approval of the community at WP:DRV. Cheers, Daniel 04:12, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi Daniel. If you could userfy it to User:Bfigura/Xinoehpoel, that would be great. I'll see if I can fix it, and if not, I'll probably speedy it back to deletion land (unless there's another protocol I need to follow). Thanks. --Bfigura (talk) 04:35, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
Done. Cheers, Daniel 07:09, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

carspin

Found the "+" tab...

Did you happen to look at 'http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alanbkahn/Draft1' —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alanbkahn (talk • contribs) 18:27, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the carspin article: I just took a look, and I think it needs some independent sourcing before it would be ready to do. If you put it up now, it'll probably just get deleted under WP:A7 (failure to assert notability). I just did some google searching, but I wasn't able to turn up any references that seemed appropriate (I found this [1], but I don't think it would be good enough). The company's US website has a few news stories, but they don't mention the product or company directly. Do you know of any other references? (They don't have to be online, although that is preferred). Best, --Bfigura (talk) 19:32, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

WP:WQA

Hi there. I'm responding to this post Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#William_.28Bill.29_Bean. I'm not intimately familiar with the history of the incident in question. However, there isn't an excuse for making this sort of personal attack (diff). Even if the editor was in the wrong, responding to a editorial dispute with a personal attack violates policy. Please refrain from this behavior. If you wish to comment, please do so on the WQA board. Thanks. --Bfigura (talk) 02:01, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Please point out the personal attack or apologize for your error. William (Bill) Bean 03:37, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
I believe I did in the diff above. Further responses from me on this topic will be on the WQA page. --Bfigura (talk) 03:43, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Please note. This user has made numerous POV tags without any comment or stated reason. This is not a personal attack, but a statement of fact. It is also a violation of wikipedia policy. A quick review of back up my assertion. Please review Dlabtot discussion for verification. I now consider my placement here a personal attack. Fair warning. William (Bill) Bean 03:42, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Stating that someone is coming across as a troll or sock-puppet is not a personal attack. Accusing someone of the same (something I did not do) is. I will gladly accept your apology once you recognize the different. Finally, the person in question has made numerous POV entries outside wikipedia policy. He or she should stop. That's my point. William (Bill) Bean 03:47, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Please see my response on the WQA page in question. My talk page is not the right venue for this discussion. --Bfigura (talk) 03:53, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

carspin

http://www.thomasnet.com/products/automobile-turntables-89661409-1.html

http://www.mrfixit.net/new_products.htm plus an on air interview... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alanbkahn (talk • contribs) 20:53, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the references, I don't think the thomas net one will help too much, since it's more of a listing than an article discussing the company. The second one (fixit) is better, but in my honest opinion, this might be a lost cause. I hate to sound negative, but the company might not be notable enough (even with the on air interview). You can try recreating the article, but if you do, I'd strongly suggest leaving a note on the talk page of the new article saying that you're trying to address the problems that led to deletion previously. (Make sure you sign that post by typing ~~~~ at the end.) Best of luck, and let me know if I can help. --Bfigura (talk) 01:37, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

RFA Thanks!

Thanks for your participation for my RFA bid and for your support.--JForget 23:46, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Beans

Well to be perfectly honest, I've considered nominating those for deletion myself, as I feel they kind of reflect negatively on my article-writing capabilities. But when your best argument for keeping an article is "You write crappy articles," you don't have much of a case. :P Cheers, faithless (speak) 23:58, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Resolved issue?

Hi, I see that you placed a resolved tag on the WP:AN/I Wjbean issue. I'm not sure if the issue really has been resolved. You might want to review the editors subsequent replies. I'm not seeking an apology or any sanctions, but it would be nice if the user at least acknowledged his incivility and demonstrated that he has learned something from the incident. Instead he seems quite recalcitrant, and determined that he has done absolutely nothing wrong. Cheers. Dlabtot 17:27, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

You're right -- I apparently was overly optimistic of the chances of getting a short resolution (based on his admission of error over at WQA). I've removed the resolved tag and responded on ANI. Honestly, this might need to go to an RfC/U. --Bfigura (talk) 17:34, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

TRCourage (aka Cricket's Courage) and Kiwi

Tonight I was blackmailed and I spent several hours trying to sort out just what I did wrong, figuring out there is no way for me to fix it now, so I just did the best I could in the meantime with a full disclosure on both my user pages, linking to one another. This is why I didn't reply to you earlier. I thank you the courtesy you've shown. Kiwi 05:57, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

And yes, from what was said, it seems I will be banned or worse, but that's how the world goes sometimes... As long it's not a glass of hemlock. Kiwi 05:59, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
I found out later from an admintrator who knows a lot of the situation that I had done nothing wrong in this case and that many people have them and as long as they are not used to achieve consensus or to harass. As the first one had less than 50 edits and has not been used in more than a year, so there would not be any sanction. The administrator also told me that the person had retired within a day. So, good to know I won't won't have to drink that cup of hemlock. I do appreciate your alerting me to what was going on at the same time I was being soft-soaped privately. Kiwi 17:34, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Ambox and talk page template formats

You're right, they haven't switched. I wish they would, as {{Ambox}} is a lot easier to use. Has anyone come up with a talk-page version of Ambox? If so, what? (Gotta get some sleep.) - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 06:19, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Not that I know of, but I'm not really a template guru. And yes, off to bed for me too. --Bfigura (talk) 06:21, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Hold steady

So I can't put factually correct information on the pages? I'm just trying to help the site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.241.89.106 (talk) 07:36, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Characterizing a band as "selling-out" is not really constructive. --Bfigura (talk) 12:21, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Global Government of Ten Democratic States

Dear Bfigura, Please explain to me why my paper should "be deleted anyway" other than for the copyright issue. Are you an authority capable of judging matters of political science. If it is the copyright symbol that is the impediment to allowing the public to judge this for themselves, than remove it please. I say this to you respectfully and wish you only the best. Sincerely, Dennis R. Torii, Jr. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.64.38.199 (talk) 02:15, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

I based that on the fact that two different users flagged it for deletion per the speedy deletion policy. Since I'm not them, I won't speculate on why they flagged it for deletion. But even that aside, the copyright issues alone would have led to immediate deletion. (Copyrighted material may not be placed on Wikipedia for legal reasons, as Wikipedia is licensed under the GFDL). --Bfigura (talk) 02:53, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

?

I am not trying to write articles that are biased. I wrote the article because I saw the term used several times in wikipedia with no internal link. --The Emperor of Wikipedia 04:44, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

No, I should have figured that. I'm probably going to withdraw the nom, so no issue. --Bfigura (talk) 04:45, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Hey, sorry I didn't mean to sound harsh. I know raw text can seem that way, it lacks the nuances that inflection gives spoken language. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 05:16, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
No worries. This should have been tagged with a few cleanup tags rather than an AfD. I think I spent too much time new-page patrolling and got trigger happy. Bleh. --Bfigura (talk) 05:21, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
PS. Amazing cleanup job. --Bfigura (talk) 05:22, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

WQA templates

Hey! I noticed you've been using the WQA templates as {{resolved}}<small>User has been warned. ~~~~</small>, and I thought I'd just let you know it's much easier to pipe your summary into the template directly, like {{resolved|User has been warned about [[WP:NPA]]. ~~~~}}. It saves time since all the formatting is built into the template. :) --Darkwind (talk) 18:43, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Cool. Thanks for the info. --Bfigura (talk) 18:53, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Comment for Bfigura

Hello Bfigura. You guys obviously won't tolerate any dissenting opinions on the highly biased HD RADIO entry which reads like an ad for iBquity and is mostly from iBiquity's web site. I have left dissenting entries copied verbatim from websites with citations only to find them deleted the next day. Yes my first entries were dripping with sarcasm and had no citations but I have tried to be as factual and unemotional as possible in my later entries and they are still deleted, I had thought dissenting opinions would be tolerated as long as they were suported by facts before I tried it. I assume you and the other person who continues to delete the stuff I am contributing have some authority to ban me? Go right ahead, everyone who has a brain knows wikipedia is full of half truths and biased articles anyway. I have fixed other articles here but there wasn't a billion dollars riding on the success of the subject I corrected so it attracted no attention from anyone. I am a busy medical professional and don't have the time to sit for hours and write dissertions on the reasons why Hybrid Digital is going to ruin radio if it is left to dominate the airwaves. I may not be a college professor or be a broadcast professional but I am a ham and know plenty of broadcast pros who think IBOC is the worst thing to ever happen to AM radio in 90 years, but obviously that point of view is not tolerated here. A nice smooth reading ad for a big monopolistic company is always preferable than the truth. So carry on gents, the truth WILL win out anyway, it always does. Incidently I am not "the guy" who goes around writing anti-IBOC stuff on other websites, I don't have the time, but there are many many of us who hate it and can't wait until the house of cards falls. Gata4001 20:24, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

I have no stake (or interest for that matter) in HD Radio, just in Wikipedia policy. Wikipedia's primary guideline is Verifiability, not truth. And criticism is certainly acceptable (especially in the section in the article for it), but it needs to have a reliable source. (There's a whole page (or series thereof) as to what constitutes a reliable source). Wikipedia is not censored, so relevant material that's added and that meets those guidelines should be allowed to stay. (However, unsourced material that is disputed can be removed at any time, per policy). However, if you think there is POV-pushing on the article, the best way to handle it is to either follow dispute resolution or report it to the conflict of interest noticeboard.
In the future, discussing proposed changes, or provided reasons for changes in the edit summaries might be helpful, as it helps establish what's a valid edit. (And of course, you want to make sure those edit summaries reflect the changes made). Best, --Bfigura (talk) 21:35, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

deleteing bryce dressel

I received a speedy delete flag, I agree with the flag. How do I delete the page? Please answer back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xznatedogzx (talk • contribs) 03:38, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry, you don't need to do anything. (Only administrators can delete pages). Best, --Bfigura (talk) 03:41, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Bigura, if authora want to delete their own pages, & nobody else has done significant work on them, they should place a tag {{db-author}} on the top, even if it will be in addition to a tag already there. Then the admins like me can do it without all the otherwise necessary checking. Just so you know. DGG (talk) 06:53, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

adding a question to the HD talk page

Hi Bfigura,

I have tried to add a critisism at the end of the page as others have done and it appears I did not do this correctly. I am sure Theaveng will probably have a nervous breakdown as I am again questioning his baby (the article which still is very biased no matter what anyone says) and incorrectly it appears . Can you please advise me on the proper ways to add to that discussion so people will focus on my contributions rather than the style or lack thereof? Thank you,

Gata4001 15:20, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi Gata. Do you have a link to the changes you made (or were you referring to the issues raised on the talk page)? (Ie, was it this?) It would make it easier for me to comment. But in general, if you're going to put in something that could somehow possibly be construed as opinion, make sure it's backed up by a reliable source. Let me know if there's something more specific you were asking, I'd be happy to help. Cheers, --Bfigura (talk) 15:31, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you Bfigura, Yes I was asking about the talk page, I hadn't noticed the little plus sign and inadvertaintly posted something in the previous person's post about HD and DRM as you noticed, I have fixed it now, thank you,

Gata4001 23:09, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Royal Enfield.

Hi,

I noticed you left a message on the talk page of he anonymous vandal of Royal Enfield. Being a bit of a wikepedia newbie, I don't feel confident enough to revert the article to how how it was before 2nd Sep. If ell this is necessary because this vandal has removed all the detail of royal Enfield prior to WWII (which incidentally is the period which interests me. It seems that there have been a couple of perfectly valid minor edits (also anon.) in the mean time. Que faire - is it valid to revert the article anyway?

Why are anonymous edits allowed anyways?

All the best,

Brendan —Preceding unsigned comment added by Myredroom (talk • contribs)

Done, I think. I couldn't do a straight undo since there were intervening edits, but I put the missing content back in. Let me know if it needs more work. PS, in the future, please sign your posts by typing '~~~~', so I can respond easier. Best, --Bfigura (talk) 17:50, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

hello

Hi. I am creating an article for the History of Dutch Nationality as a research paper. I am a student at a university and it is my assignment to do so. please do not propose to delete my page. I am doing research right now so i can add a substantial amount of information to the article soon. If you will look more carefully, there is no information on Wikipedia about the History of Dutch Nationality. i respect your policy of deleting useless pages but please leave my page alone. thanks. -Aleksandrovna —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aleksandrovna (talk • contribs) 02:14, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi Aleksandrovna. It's not that I have a problem with your assignment, but you should know that wikipedia has a strict policy prohibiting original research, as described here. (However, we do allow and encourage neutral, verifiable, articles that reference independent, reliable sources). And also, as a side note, strictly speaking, it isn't your page / article (see WP:OWN). If Wikipedia's policies conflict with your assignment, you should probably mention this to your instructor as you probably won't be the only person to have issues. Best, --Bfigura (talk) 05:38, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

hello, I am not doing any original research. i am stating facts that are published in many books. there will be no historical interpretation or any analysis of the history of Dutch nationality. this will be an article from a neutral point of view (not now because the info i put up there will not stay up there in the same format - there will be significant changes) once again, the article does not conflict with any Wikipedia policy. thanks. Aleksandrovna —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aleksandrovna (talk • contribs) 14:37, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Hemet Academy of Applied Academics and Technology

Thanks for keeping an eye on this. It does not appear to be a copyvio any more. Probably ripe for AfD though as it has only just opened. -- But|seriously|folks  06:11, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

True, but given that high schools tend to survive AfD, I don't really think it's worth nom-ing. (Plus, it'll probably eventually open, in which case it should have an article). If it stays that way forever, then maybe I'll revisit it. Cheers, --Bfigura (talk) 06:14, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
And thanks for cleaning it up too. --Bfigura (talk) 06:16, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Additional source for "Vibrational Medicine"

Richard Gerber, M.D. author of Vibrational Medicine has been listed with site of publisher, name of publisher and date. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pleasanthill (talk • contribs) 06:37, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Yup, I saw. I left a brief message on your talk page. PS, in the future, please sign your messages by typing four tildes (~~~~). Cheers, --Bfigura (talk) 06:39, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Edward sheasgreen

Hi. You tagged this article for speedy deletion under criterion G4, a repost of content deleted via AfD. I can't find any AfD discussion for this article, nor does it appear to have been previously speedied. Natalie 01:53, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi Natalie. Hmm, sorry about that. I was lead astray by the AfD tag on the author's talk page. I assumed that since he had been notified about an AfD on that page, and that it had been deleted in the past, it was due to an AfD. My mistake there, although I still think it's a speedy candidate under pure vandalism. (Although that's just my opinion since I can't find any sources to back up the material). Cheers, --Bfigura (talk) 01:57, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
To clarify, I think the author's just been introducing the same content under a number of different names. (Although since I can't see deleted contribs, I can't say for certain, but I seem to remember seeing that content before). Best, --Bfigura (talk) 01:58, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Ah, gotcha. I'll look into it. Natalie 01:58, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
That's good information. I'll check their deleted contribs. Otherwise, the library I work at has the Journal of North American History, so I can check if the provided citation is anything. Natalie 01:59, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
You were right - the article was recreated four times under three different names. There also has been an AfD discussion - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sheasgreen, which is all I need. I am sort of curious about the citation, though, so I still might check it out. Natalie 02:02, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi Natalie. Ok, drop me a line if the citation turns up anything. In the meantime I left a more personalized warning on the user's talk page that should inform anybody else who has to deal with this in the future. Cheers, --Bfigura (talk) 02:14, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

GLAI

Maybe we could redirect to LOL instead of deleting? —Ignatzmicetalkcontribs 04:36, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. I figured I'd prod in case someone wanted to add references, but if you think a redirect is better, I'll go along with that. Cheers, --Bfigura (talk) 04:38, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of MWV

An article that you have been involved in editing, MWV, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MWV. Thank you. Carlossuarez46 05:29, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I've !voted at the AfD. --Bfigura (talk) 05:33, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

You are very kind to say so. I know I should try to keep these things on a higher plane, but every so often the urge to be amusing just bursts free. Thanks for the barnstar and your hard work in AfD too. Accounting4Taste 06:21, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Hans Steiner page

Can I just write something fresh? I am happy to do so. He was one of my mentors, I think he deserves a place in the Wiki-universe. This is my first foray into writing for Wikipedia so sorry if the questions are dumb. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gasforth (talk • contribs) 06:52, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi there. If by fresh, you mean 'from scratch', then yes. (Follow the links on the banner to see where to create the new article). However, before you do start writing, please read our policy on conflict of interest. If you think you can write a neutral, COI-free article, then make sure that what you write is verifiable via reliable sources. (At the risk of making this sound more complicated, you also might want to scan WP:PROF, which is sort of a minimum standard for articles about professors. From what I saw, I think this guy meets the standard, but just double check to be sure). Best, --Bfigura (talk) 07:03, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
Oh, and PS: please sign your posts on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). It lets people see who you are, and when you were writing. --Bfigura (talk) 07:03, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Re WQA

Yeah, I know about sourcing rules due to my efforts in other areas. I would also ask you to look at the other edits the guy has been making with regards to that Russian missile's capability to detect stealth-- in particular editing in weasel words further down the page, adding in unsourced claims, and linking to an incident that has nothing to do with the missile in question. Please look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-400_Triumf -- I am clearly correct and he is clearly wrong. Jtrainor 00:28, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Do you have some diff's to support that? I'm not really invested enough to mount my own investigation here. --Bfigura (talk) 00:30, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=S-400_Triumf&action=history If you will check the edit history, Necator, and an IP that is Necator's, have been making extensive attempts to add this POV to the article, and I'm hardly the only one that has been removing unsourced claims and irrelevant crap, such as the F-117 incident (which has nothing at all to do with the subject of the article, as it happened years before the missile was even developed). Jtrainor 00:35, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
Look, I'm not really interested in digging into histories. If you give me some diff's, I'll give you my opinion, but otherwise, I don't care enough to do a POV-investigation. (I'll give some suggestions on how to resolve that in WQA though). As far as the IP being Necator's: have you done a checkuser? If not, please don't make sock-accusations with proof. It's not terribly civil. Best, --Bfigura (talk) 00:40, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
You don't even need to click some of the different versions to view the edit history and see he has a history of mucking about with this particular article. Jtrainor 00:43, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
Please see my comments on WQA. I'm personally done here. (Nothing personal, I'm just not getting into this). --Bfigura (talk) 00:45, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
Well, that what i told you about. When this user asked to provide sources, he just keep talking... And by the way he continues revert my changes to his POV [2] Necator 19:55, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
You will be reverted (3RR permitting) as long as you continue to add content that violates NPOV and is irrelevant to the S-400 Triumf article. Claiming I'm violating policies does not make it so, and you're the one in the wrong here. Jtrainor 00:53, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

(undent) Hi there. This is the last time I'm going to say this: please take this to dispute resolution. I'm not getting any more involved here. Thank you. --Bfigura (talk) 01:02, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Howard Krongard

Good edit, my wording was rather poor there. • Lawrence Cohen 21:15, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Hardly your fault, the article itself wasn't entire clear either. --Bfigura (talk) 21:17, 3 October 2007 (UTC)


James Fenimore Cooper

How was my edit not constructive? I have studyied cooper and read some biographys of him in the past.

and some of the info before my edit was just plain wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kasparwilson (talk • contribs)

Because you replaced this: "was a judge and member of Congress." with "His father started a trading post, trading guns with the local tribes". While that might be true, you need to have source to prove it. Plus, you need a good reason for deleting relevant information. Best, --Bfigura (talk) 01:49, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Do you have a source to prove that? (Ie, History Book XVY, page # 10?). Unverified information is subject to removal (see the verifiability policy). I'm not sure about the original version, but I'll look into it. --Bfigura (talk) 01:50, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
According to this page, his father was a Judge and congressman. I'm not a historian, so I could be wrong though. Let me know if you have a source that shows I am. Best, --Bfigura (talk) 01:55, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Your contributions to the article New English School (Jordan) are highly appreciated. The ablity to detect, clean, and remove ad material is exactly what Wikipedia needs! Please contribute to that article as to save it from deletion. Thanks!--GermanCorrecter 13:26, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Hodgepodge

I just wanted to know how the tool was working for you. Any suggestions or complaints? Thanks. Wikidudeman (talk) 16:25, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Cooper

I have found a book source to back up my edits of Cooper's life

Adventures in American Literature Pegasus Edtion 

    Copyright 1989 Harcourt Brace Jovahovich Incorperated

ISBN 0-15-33-4872-0 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kasparwilson (talk • contribs) 00:10, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

New Topic Break

thanks for changing the heading. It should have been the name you gave it.

They are asking me to improve the artcile. what do they want?? also asking for verifying information. what kinds of verification do they want???

all statements are true and accurate. not sure how to foot note this????

thanks for help.

LynetteBW —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lynettebw (talk • contribs) 13:58, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I think most of your questions are answered in this guideline. Oh, and in the future, please sign your posts on talk pages (by typing four tildes (~~~~)), it makes it easier to see who's talking. Best, --Bfigura (talk) 16:13, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Kindly delete

Wrom: BGJSNBOHMKHJYFMYXOEAIJJPH Sent: 5. oktober 2007 18:09
To: Michael Holmboe
Subject: Re: Harassment

Dear Michel Holmboe:

Please inform Wikipedia that they are completely wrong.

The certificate at the WorldUnionFederation.org site is used to enable visitors to the site to become an "Advocate for World Peace" and the website has no relation to your original and first Humanitarian Award.

Horace E. HendersonStrike-through text Chairman
Coalition for the World Union Federation
1925 Burnt Bridge Road Suite 822
Lynchburg, Virginia 24503 USA


Dear Bfigura

I feel ill treated in the discussion, so I kindly ask you to remove the article about me.

Kind regards,

Michael Holmboe
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.88.205.219 (talk) 03:00, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi there. The article is currently being considered for deletion, at this AfD. AfD's usually last 5 days, so this should be resolved in two days or so. Best, --Bfigura (talk) 03:32, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

rather new to this

Was trying to write a page up for a model that I admire yet I keep getting deleted while editing it (adding content etc)

Am I under some sort of 5 minute time limit? I don't even seem to get time to edit the grammar and layouts much less the time to formulate supporting evidence to show it isn't an advertisement. It would appear you are a little overzealous in your work - how am I supposed to put together an eloquent submission when I'm not even allowed to finish it.

I've tried to concoct my submission offline to submit via copy - paste but I am left with the same issue of editing/comprehending the tags. So, what is the time limit in regards to the completion of submissions? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rachelravage (talk • contribs) 06:58, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

There's no time limit. As noted in the speedy deletion policy, articles that fail to meet certain basic standards may be deleted at any time. (Although I should point out that I didn't do the deletion here, that was handled by 2 different administrators it would seem). Also, as I mentioned earlier, creating pages about yourself is strongly frowned upon. However, if you think you can write a neutral page that meets our biography standard, you're free to try again. I'd suggest using the preview button to ensure you've got the article how you want it before submitting it. Best, --Bfigura (talk) 19:19, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Reverting my talk page - thx

Thanks for reverting the trolling on my talk page. :-) ... discospinster talk 16:09, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of tallest buildings in Hartford

It was a good catch, the copyvio. I hadn't realized it. I've notified the admin who deleted to close the discussion. - Mtmelendez (Talk|UB|Home) 21:23, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I actually glanced at the source once before and somehow missed it. I guess second time's the charm. Cheers, --Bfigura (talk) 03:11, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

carspin

okay, so I entered the listing again, the way you suggested, and WHAM it was gone almost immediately. However, today (10/4) in the WSJ, look at this - it also appears on D6 of the paper version:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119144885203848167.html?mod=AutosChannelMain_RelatedStories

Hmmm, looks like car turntables are becoming a big thing. This article references an above ground manufacturer in CA (it's one of those editorial placements in exchange for an advertising contracts, thus why they really only talk about this single residential manufacturer), but in the need of some subjectivity, they reference Thomas' Register, and yup, there I am...again. Am I still going to get deleted?

alanbkahn —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alanbkahn (talk • contribs) 17:58, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Not sure. A WSJ mention should help, but the fact that it's pseudo-advertising isn't great. If you add in the new reference, you could try, but I think it's about 50/50. You could try marking it as a stub (see WP:STUB), and leaving a note on the talk page that you're trying to improve the page, and that you'd welcome suggestions. Also, since you're genuinely trying to contribute here, it probably wouldn't hurt if you had a user page (see WP:USER). It'll help position you as a genuine contributor rather than some spammer person. Best, --Bfigura (talk) 23:08, 4 October 2007 (UTC)


Re the WSJ, and what article doesn't, ultimately, smack of alternative objectives? ;-) I set up a user page as suggested. Wouldn't the best location for a stub be within "car turntable"? alanbkahn —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alanbkahn (talk • contribs) 17:06, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

My recent RfA

Thank you for supporting my RfA, which unfortunately didn't succeed. The majority of the opposes stated that I needed more experience in the main namespace and Wikipedia namespace, so that is what I will do. I will go for another RfA in two month's time and I hope you will be able to support me then as well. If you have any other comments for me or wish to be notified when I go for another RfA, please leave them on my talk page. If you wish to nominate me for my next RfA, please wait until it has been two months. Thanks again for participating in my RfA! -- Cobi(t|c|b|cn) 01:40, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Smile

Domthedude001 has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

--Domthedude001 22:24, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Baxi

A few seconds after I start this article you attempt to have it speedily deleted? Why? Nick mallory 06:24, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

I didn't see a claim to notability immediately. After about 2 seconds, I went and changed it to a prod, since I don't think notability is automatically inherited from a football team (but I could see how someone might). Best, --Bfigura (talk) 06:26, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Griffith Review

You're probably correct. Since there seems to be some national funding involved, there probably are some RS out there (although I couldn't turn up any), so I'm not going to AfD it. I've done by best to fix the article, and hopefully someone will turn up the refs at some point. Cheers, --Bfigura (talk) 05:26, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Great - thanks for letting me know, and for your work on this article and so many others. - Philippe | Talk 14:37, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bfigura/Archive_2&oldid=1136205444"