Archives

1, 2, 3

I closed this debate as redirect to The Alexander Wilson Project. That way it can be deleted under CSD G8 if the other article is deleted. (it has another day) If the prod is removed then both articles should be nominated together. However, I'm curious as to why you AFDd Sheerport but prodded its parent. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:03, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think there was a lot of editing activity when I PROD'ed it. I was thinking the article creator would be adding more, I guess not though. You are right that I probably should have nominated both. Clubmarx (talk) 02:06, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just a heads up on Shvoong. Twice you've reverted the removal of a speedy request on this article. Just a couple of problems with the reversions -- first, the request was removed by someone who is not the article creator, which is allowed and shouldn't be reverted. Second, the article creator created the page with the speedy request on it. Obviously s/he wasn't asking for the page to be deleted, and it was placed in error.

Since the speedy tag has now been removed three times by two different editors, if you think it should be deleted, prod or AfD would be the way to go. While it might be eligible for speedy, this has gotten muddled by the reversions and might not be uncontroversial. HTH.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 19:29, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You could probably tag Sneaky Stockwell and Sneaky Steve for speedy-deletion as BLP attack pages. DMacks (talk) 02:15, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. Thanks. Clubmarx (talk) 02:31, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if the testpage was a problem...I was using it to experiement with making tables. Feel free to delete it. I am not new to wikipedia/or a newcomer but occasionally I might do a test---in this case making a table(which I don't tend to use which is why I wanted to test. Thanks again, SchnitzelMannGreek. 16:01, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Curious, why don't you use your user space for tests? Clubmarx (talk) 16:03, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

yep, sorry a typo. I requested deletion but you had already done it. Thanks

Tim1357 (talk) 16:23, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am an avid automotive enthusiast and created this article based on information I found on the web about this automobile wheel brand. The information provided was referenced from DUB magazine an automotive trade magazine with national distribution and MHT Luxury Alloys, an industry leading wheel company. The information regarding Zane Edition was found on the DUB Zane Edition website. I think this article is important since the founders of this wheel brand created the first automobile wheels to include cubic zirconia stones and apparently their work has been featured on MTV, VH1 and TLC and in music video's. Please advise if this article is o.k. on this basis or if I should revise it. Thanks.--Artinmotion888 (talk) 03:27, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello - The references so far all sound like they are associated with the subject of the article, so that does not make them good sources because of the inherent conflict of interest. That is why I included the tags on the article. Are there news articles or independent reviews? This established the notability of a subject. If there are none, then the article reads like an advertisement or promotion. The subject may be notable, but right now there is no way to verify that. Clubmarx (talk) 03:42, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Clubmarx, thank you for clarifying. Could I omit the mention of MHT Luxury Alloys in the article to avoid a conflict of interest and provide basic information on DUB Zane Edition? Thanks.--Artinmotion888 (talk) 04:12, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is not really so much that those are included. It is more to do with the fact that there are no other sources listed. Maybe those listed really are separate from the people who make the product, but from the name it doesn't seem like it (it looks like a newsletter/blog/source from the people who make the product). Also, some aren't web links so people can't check it. Find news articles, reviews from industry web sites, etc.

I hope you get my drift about notability in general. Happy editing!Clubmarx (talk) 17:02, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am somewhat new to wikipedia and appreciate your help with editing. I have revised the article to include helpful third party links. I think its more concise and reads better. Can you take a look at it when you get a chance. thank you! --Artinmotion888 (talk) 20:15, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Clubmarx, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of Boil Ease - a page you tagged - because: A7 does not apply. . Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:44, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Clubmarx! I've just replied in the discussion page of Dark Project, a page that you had tagged for notability issues. Also, please note that the third party references have been added. Please let me know if my links are not meeting the criteria. If this was not the right way to contact you on that issue, I'm sorry as I don't know the right way. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amitprabhakar (talk • contribs) 12:28, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see a whole lot right now, but perhaps it can be improved in the future. Clubmarx (talk) 17:06, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Clubmarx, Thanks for writing a welcome note and alerting me to the Zoeperkoe/Hamidiyeh page. I started writing on it without finding out beforehand how exactly everything works. Too much enthousiasm, probably. I already started a new version of the page as a subpage of my userpage, and I hope I did it right this time so that I can work on it for a few days before putting it in Wikipedia for real. I blanked the page as you suggested. Is that enough, or should I also ask for it to be deleted? Zoeperkoe (talk) 16:55, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just tagged it as an author requested deleted, so you don't need to do anything else. Clubmarx (talk) 16:58, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Clubmarx I just wanted to drop you a quick note about your recent AFD nomination of Edmund Guy McMartin. I agree this is a marginal entry. However, what I did notice is that you {prod tagged} the article at 3:12, and I have no problem with that. In fact that is the correct way to handle situations like this! That gives the original author 7 days to work on the piece before the article is deleted. However, what I do take exception to is that 13 minutes later, at 3:25, you nominated for deletion at AFD. That smacks of Bad faith on your part. I am sure that was not your intention, but it looks that way. In that at first you tell the author he has 7 days to work on the piece. Then turn around and take that away with your nomination for deletion. In the mean time, I was actualy able to reference and cite the piece with a claim to notability and have expressed a week keep opinion at the Edmund Guy McMartin AFD. The more important thing I wanted you to take away from this, is that you did do the correct thing with the {prod tag} , and then went to AFD which was the wrong thing. Sometimes doing things right take a little longer, but at least you know you did them right. In the mean time, take care, and overall nice work. ShoesssS ^Talk 04:48, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Where is there a 7 day waiting period for contested Prods to go to AfDs? True, there is a 7 day waiting period for prods to be deleted. But I don't see anywhere where I have to wait 7 days to nominate for AfD. If someone deletes the prod warning, I don't see any policy where I have to wait to AfD. If you can point that out to me, that would be good as I don't see it, per WP:CONTESTED.

There are several better examples by this author of questionable notability, so I regret making this this first AfD. He has made several entries for law enforcement who have died that are not independently notable. He has made these all in a short amount of time. I don't think any of these are notable per WP:N/CA#Victims. Clubmarx (talk) 14:41, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Clubmarx, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Illinois Poets has been removed. It was removed by Promomanusa with the following edit summary '(Documentation to avoid deletion)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with Promomanusa before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 20:58, 7 September 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)[reply]

Hello Clubmarx, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD templates you added to a number of articles were removed:

• PROD removed from Damini Jain, by User:Rickz123, with summary '(no edit summary)'
• PROD removed from Joker Blast, by User:Gtfratboy, with summary '(no edit summary)'

Please consider discussing your concerns with the relevant users before pursuing deletion further. If you still think the articles should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may send them to WP:AfD for community discussion. Thank you - SDPatrolBot (talk) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Hello Clubmarx, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD templates you added to a number of articles were removed:

• PROD removed from Travis Holland, by User:Phil Bridger, with summary '(contest prod - shortlisted for major award and Google News finds plenty of reviews)'
• PROD removed from Ramayana (film), by User:AnimeIndia, with summary '(no edit summary)'

Please consider discussing your concerns with the relevant users before pursuing deletion further. If you still think the articles should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may send them to WP:AfD for community discussion. Thank you - SDPatrolBot (talk) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Hello Clubmarx, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Type (song) has been removed. It was removed by Soul Crusher with the following edit summary '(You people realize you can add this shit yourself right? It only takes about 5 seconds of your "precious" time, you know.)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with Soul Crusher before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 21:06, 10 September 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)[reply]

I would highly appreciate it if you could explain my last post on the Broadway's talk page? Thank you. Krazycev13 (talk) 19:12, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

hi, you recently proposed my page for deletion under "Doesn't pass WP:COMPOSER." what can i do to avoid this? how can i improve it? i did the necessary sourcing that was previously required... do i need more? i appreciate your help!--Mouser Hyde (talk) 00:26, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see you already removed the PROD tag. I put it there since I didn't think video games are 'notable compositions' per WP:COMPOSER. I have never come across a similar article. But, I guess it is because of this Category:Video game composers. Clubmarx (talk) 02:15, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Clubmarx Pls don't delete my article called Boy Mondragon ok.Paco19882 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.202.237.198 (talk) 15:59, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It just has a notability tag and an unreferenced tag. You should find references in reliable sources because right now, the article does not seem to meet WP:MUSIC. You shouldn't delete these tags without making any attempt to address the article issues. Clubmarx (talk) 16:03, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Clubmarx, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD templates you added to a number of articles were removed:

• PROD removed from Inner-X-Musick, by User:Theebradmiller, with summary '(no edit summary)'
• PROD removed from Neveah Gallegos, by User:Crimeexpert, with summary '(no edit summary)'

Please consider discussing your concerns with the relevant users before pursuing deletion further. If you still think the articles should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may send them to WP:AfD for community discussion. Thank you - SDPatrolBot (talk) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Hello Clubmarx, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Leslie Urdang has been removed. It was removed by Nihiltres with the following edit summary '(rm old prod tag after undeletion)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with Nihiltres before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 20:31, 23 September 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)[reply]

Really? Three studio albums isn't enough? Several EPs? All three members went onto form other (popular within the scene and have both toured internationally, see A Place To Bury Strangers) bands and they aren't notable enough? I mean, I've saw the notability guidelines for bands/musicians, but I mean, gold in at least one country? They're guidelines, not strict rules, if we only wrote about bands that have achieved gold records, there'd be very few bands on here.

What's the use in Wikipedia being a tool for learning if we can only write about bands everybody already knows about?—Preceding unsigned comment added by Garethom (talk • contribs)

All bands need to be notable before having an article, meaning at least one of the criteria of WP:MUSIC needs to be met. And yes, it is a rule. Here's why I added the tag: There is no mention of a gold record in the article and there are no independent references. Also, it is not clear if the record labels are notable as they do not have their own articles. The band members also do not seem to meet this criteria: "ensemble which contains two or more independently notable musicians, or is a musician who has been a member of two or more independently notable ensembles" as the article states that only one of the members went on to the other group. Clubmarx (talk) 21:08, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I don't mean to butt in here, but I think you misinterpreted what Garethom said... "but I mean, gold in at least one country?" -- I _think_ what they are doing here is saying "come on, really? this is a requirement??"... Though as you explained, it is not a requirement, just one of many 'ways in'. Luminifer (talk) 02:44, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for finding that link! Luminifer (talk) 16:56, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

and again! :) Luminifer (talk) 01:41, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I patrol new pages and I see a LOT of non-notable music pages being created. Metalchicks is definitely not one of those. Clubmarx (talk) 01:52, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate it - how did you find those references? I'm good at finding new music to listen to, but terrible at finding references apparently... Luminifer (talk) 03:13, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Always use quotes around everything. I also add "review" to the name plus get rid of the junk by adding: -site:en.wikipedia.org -site:youtube.com -site:twitter.com -site:facebook.com -site:myspace.com -site:last.fm. Clubmarx (talk) 03:47, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, thanks! Seems to work ok in some cases, not so well in others. Since you seem to know the WP:MUSIC policies pretty well, I'm curious - did Metalchicks even need those extra ones? I think to satisfy the requirements needed (I think easiest was 2 albums on a major record label), reviews in magazines seems superfluous (don't get me wrong - it's NICE to have in the article, but I don't see how it helps notability, unless if a band is close to fulfilling multiple notability requirements, it helps?) Luminifer (talk) 05:20, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be very on top of interpreting wikipedia notability polices. Could you comment on the deletion for Pain Hertz? I thought I was interpreting point 6 correctly, but people seem to disagree with me there. If I did misinterpret it, feel free to comment on THAT on the discussion page... Thanks! Luminifer (talk) 04:10, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Clubmarx, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to The Letter Black has been removed. It was removed by 143.232.105.198 with the following edit summary '(This band has only just released their first album on a major label and is working on a second. Having a Wikipedia page is important for credibility and it'd be nice to let them keep their page.)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with 143.232.105.198 before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to take part in the article's current AfD. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 20:32, 28 September 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages) 20:32, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I started by noticing on the List of Law & Order episodes page that even shorter articles had already been created with only the six main cast members and the short summaries. Since these shorter articles had been created and not challenged, I added guest cast to them and then created other articles by following the same pattern. Now that at least some of my additions have been reversed, these articles remain in their originally shorter form. I will add more detail to my future submissions. But I'm not clear as to why these originally skeleton articles were created or remain unchanged. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdlankin (talk • contribs) 05:27, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what articles you are talking about. Links? Clubmarx (talk) 06:05, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I recently posted the following text on Wikipedia regarding the creation of a new Visual arts/Technology-related project in Wikipedia:

WikiProject Industrial design is a Wikipedian community that aims to better organize information in articles related to Industrial design (also called Product design).

• If I'm cor-rec-to, there are about 900 articles on Industrial design in Wikipedia...
• At least, it's more than for Typography, and there IS a Typography WikiProject...
• And it's more than the Fashion WikiProject with 482 articles...
• There is also an Urban studies and planning project and a Video games portal so...
• Now you can also see a proposal for the Design Portal. (that portal would be for Industrial design AND Graphic design/Interior design)

Please support this initiative,
--  Alain  R 3 4 5 
^{Techno-Wiki-Geek} 22:31, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Clubmarx! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 8 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

1. Vuokko Nurmesniemi - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 19:55, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Talk:Moobcomer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Glee105 (talk • contribs) 23:55, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Read WP:MUSIC. Clubmarx (talk) 23:57, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please just go to the talk page and explain yourself why you want this page deleted. Please. Glee105 (talk) 00:01, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please go to the link above, it explains the required notability for musicians. Clubmarx (talk) 00:07, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I read it, and you must not have read the talk page because I stated that it applies to #11. Can we remove the deletion tag. Glee105 (talk) 00:08, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I highly doubt that they meet #11, given the number of google hits. You'll need to have several verifiable sources of facts in articles. Clubmarx (talk) 00:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I live in Edison, on JX98, I have heard them play Explosion at least twice, they have talked about the Siren Remix and there album. Also, you can't just guess that its not true. They often play explosion over another song so there both playing at the same time. Glee105 (talk) 00:18, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do you agree to keep it. :D Glee105 (talk) 01:11, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Based on the fact that you just undid my edit, I'm guessing your still against keeping this page. Could you please tell me why. Glee105 (talk) 05:05, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Authors cannot remove speedy delete templates of the articles they create. It is not my decision to keep the article or not, it is an admin decision. Why don't you try to address music notability and improve the article? You have not made any edits that address the problem. That would be better than trying to convince me. Please read up on speed deletes and music notability. Clubmarx (talk) 05:36, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was in the middle of reading up on what you told me to to determine whether or not we should delete it, but another user (SchuminWeb) deleted it without informing me. I put the Holdon template on it, shouldn't that have stopped him. I have heard Explosion on the radio twice but I'm not sure if that makes it valid for Wikipedia. Glee105 (talk) 06:30, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Clubmarx. You have new messages at SchuminWeb's talk page.
Message added 22:10, 7 February 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

SchuminWeb (Talk) 22:10, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

IMDB[[1] mitigates against speedy. Whether it meets WP:N or not, I don't know. Ty 04:33, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Creator removed your CSD tag. Then I added a PROD. Still not convinced of notability, though there is a tenuous claim to significance, a lower standard than notability. I deleted this once before, but am content to see if notability develops as there is now 3rd party sourcing-- see my prod comment. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 18:50, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Clubmarx, tell me what is the solution for our film article. i am new to this wikipedia article creation. i am working as asst.dir for the film. you can check our official site. still its under construction. if you improve and cleanup our article million thanks to you. i removed our image also. because i just like that uploaded without mentioning proper copyright details. mr.vallabhan@gmail.com waiting for your guidance asap.. Karuppampatti (talk) 05:42, 28 February 2010 (UTC)Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).[reply]

See WP:MOVIE. Clubmarx (talk) 05:44, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can delete those subpages of the article I made. I don't know how to make templates, so have gone back to just having multiple references. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 20:34, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

hi clubmarx, got it.. soon new articles are coming out about this movie. and i will check film guidelines also. i will fix it as soon as possible. give me some time. i understand and respect the wikipedia guidelines. thanks. Vdotto (talk) 05:23, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Clubmarx. I am just letting you know that I have converted the speedy deletion tag that you placed on Christophe Jenkins to a proposed deletion tag, because I do not believe CSD applies to the page in question. Thank you. Olaf Davis (talk) 11:47, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK but I disagree that being president of a student government association for six months of a student body of 1,000 is notable. Clubmarx (talk)

I replied at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Boil Ease. Sometimes non-prescription medicines are notable because some authority says that they should not be recommended. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 01:29, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Clubmarx. I am just letting you know that I deleted Egguwit, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. The Wordsmith^Communicate 04:04, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Has no chance to continue these articles? Environment, My, Your and Theirs and Blessed Are You Among Women

Could you explain the non-formally the reason for elimination? For the wikipedia has many rules and are too complex. Thank you for your time too. --Itatira (talk) 22:17, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Topics need to be notable and backed up by reliable sources to verify facts. I do not see how this is notable given there are no google hits. You can provide sources on the article page or comment here Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Environment,_My,_Your_and_Theirs. Clubmarx (talk) 22:20, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I call hoax. No hits in Portuguese. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 22:58, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome, thanks for getting the category and template too. Clubmarx (talk) 23:03, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brudos333 and Leandro666 ?
they both have similar patterns in their name and both are new, and also both have been editing the same topic. im guessing its the same person, what about you? -- ..::Abb 615::.. 04:19, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it does appear suspicious. Clubmarx (talk) 04:22, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So, what now? -- ..::Abb 615::.. 04:28, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can comment here Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Leandro666. Not sure I did is correctly as this is my first time using that reporting. Clubmarx (talk) 04:35, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

also put that account creation times are about 1 hour apart -- ..::Abb 615::.. 04:48, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Clubmarx. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Nivelu' 4, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Editor has recreated repeatedly after deletion (3 times) - will tag for AfD so that deletion discussion will stand. Thank you. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:40, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Clubmarx. I am just letting you know that I deleted Flamoritorium, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:06, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Rate Your Music, 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! -ClockworkLunch (talk) 18:15, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to have a problem between my accounts, I use my User (Itatira) and my computer to make edits. This is not good?--Itatira (talk) 20:37, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not exactly sure what you are saying, but I'm not sure why you are going between an IP and your user account to edit. It makes it appear that two people are editing. Clubmarx (talk) 20:42, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Manning Control

Is this just the links page. If so these are soon to be scaled down once I have sorted the references out. New to all this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Manning-Control (talk • contribs) 06:05, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for adding that category! Decora (talk) 01:01, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

		A song of praise
		For this long overdue cleanup. Cheers, Racconish Tk 22:49, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Whether you did so as a result of my request here [2], or for other reasons, thank you for helping to clean up the article. Cheers, JNW (talk) 00:42, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are references on the talk page talk:Joe Cali (inventor). They were in the original article when it was split but they are very badly formatted. RJFJR (talk) 18:06, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is more than formatting. I didn't investigate each one, but most seem to be unreliable or just links to sites, not references. The BLP tag seems valid until some proper references are added to the article. Clubmarx (talk) 18:18, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I deprodded. If there are enough refs for WP:V, its sufficient. They do not have to show WP:N. DGG ( talk ) 21:23, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Clubmarx, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Save Our Souls, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The claim of playing with Iron Maiden is sufficient to escape A7 (I've no idea if it's true, but it's plausible). Try PROD or AFD if you don't believe the band is notable. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Olaf Davis (talk) 22:06, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually that particular section of information appears to have been posted by Cathy Hernandez, executive director of Fort Worth's 'Artes de La Rosa'. She had herself worked at the theater and later worked toward preserving its cultural heritage. However, I am not disputing the "dubious" tag, as the source is not exactly independent of the subject. I suppose have continued work on the article more for the practice than anything else, as the individual in question simply does not have enough notability for his short carrer... local Telly Award or no. I just hate opinining at an AFD unless I have made efforts to address a nominator's very real concerns. It is my sense that had there been an article about the film, we'd have had a better chance of showing notability. But for this drector, his autobio is simply too litle and too soon. He should satisfy himself with the bio he wrote for himself over at Documentary.org Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 03:43, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And in my related searches, I continue to find the film written of and in relationship the theater that inspired it: KERA, National Association of Latino Arts and Culture, Stamford Advocate, World News, etc... showing that the place and the film have more going on for them than does the filmmaker. It was a decent nomination. I support deletion. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 04:07, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your response. I had taken time to search out sources and came up empty. I didn't know about the Telly Awards WP page. Now that I've read that, the award in itself doesn't seem notable enough to keep the Gilpin article IMO, even if there was reliable coverage. Clubmarx (talk) 15:23, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please drop in at User:MichaelQSchmidt/Too Soon. I am thinkng of using a "too soon" link in my AFD discussions that will take editors to the essay. I'll provide a link to the too soon section for actors, and one to the too soon section for films. Or is the essay itself "too soon"? (chuckle) -- Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 04:24, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is good, but it doesn't (directly) address a lot of the situations I have encountered lately:

• IMDB page as a reference
• references as links to a movie but the person is not mentioned in the article

Clubmarx (talk) 01:55, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dear friend Pls see this Article and suggest to don't delete best Chandana —Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.135.175.28 (talk) 13:42, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please just give me a little time and I can create the artist page for An Endless Sporadic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Clevelandcavsfan11 (talk • contribs) 22:31, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It has been repeatedly recreated. It hasn't met WP:MUSIC any of the times. Clubmarx (talk) 22:33, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wondering why you felt the need to request speedy deletion of this work in progress? Did I piss in your cornflakes or something? (lol) Seems you jumped on the page before I hardly had time to save it, let alone get back with more references I KNEW were needed. Check my track record, I'm one of the "good guys" if albeit a sorta newbie (been at this about a year). I've created some pretty decent wiki entries (or so others have said) and am a member of the Wiki Missouri project. I knew the article wasn't finished (and I still have more to do), but I was having internet issues tonigt and wanted to at least save what I had til I could get back. No offense, but next time consider not being quite so "trigger-happy". Seems like from the other discussions you've done it a lot. Much thanks! Sector001 (talk) 04:30, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what you are talking about as I didn't tag it for speedy deletion. I moved it to fit the proper style for titles and added maintenance tags. It was never up for deletion. Clubmarx (talk) 00:46, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Clubmarx,

you wanted deleting the article Save Our Souls because of missing relevance. Well I found something on their artist label page that the band toured around the US and played concerts with Kitte, Cartel, Glassjaw and Powerman 5000. Hope this is enough for showing the relevance of Save Our Souls.

Greetings from Germany

Goroth 20:45, 11. Jun. 2010 (CEST) —Preceding undated comment added 19:47, 11 June 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Hello Clubmarx, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes, you are providing one of the most essential services to the Wikipedia project. I am just informing you that I changed the speedy deletion to CSD G10 because: attack page needing to be blanked immediately. Do check out the criteria for speedy deletion and if you are not sure about accurately identifying the right CSD criterion for a new article, don't hesitate to ask on my talk page. Happy patrolling! --Kudpung (talk) 05:39, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Ray-johnson-bunny.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 04:04, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mcdonald Elementary School 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/Mcdonald Elementary School 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 good 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. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 06:31, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Archives of American Art Wikimedia Partnership - We need you!

Hi! I'm the Wikipedian In Residence at the Smithsonian Archives of American Art and I'm recruiting Wikipedians who are passionate about art to participate in furthering art coverage on Wikipedia. I am planning contests and projects that will allow you access, no matter where you live, to the world's largest collection of archives related to American art. Please sign up to participate here, and I look forward to working with you! SarahStierch (talk) 00:14, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings Clubmarx-

My name is Randall Livingstone, and I am a doctoral student at the University of Oregon, studying digital media and online community. I am posting to invite you to participate in my research study exploring the work of Wikipedia editors who are members of WikiProject: Countering Systemic Bias. The online survey should take 20 to 25 minutes to complete and can be found here:

https://oregon.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_cSHzuwaQovaZ6ss

Your responses will help online communication researchers like me to better understand the collaborations, challenges, and purposeful work of Wikipedia editors like you. In addition, at the end of the survey you will have the opportunity to express your interest in a follow-up online interview with the researcher.

This research project has been reviewed and approved by the Wikimedia Research Committee as well as the Office for Protection of Human Subjects at the University of Oregon. For a detailed description of the project, please visit its Meta page. This survey is voluntary, and your confidentiality will be protected. You will have the choice of using your Wikipedia User Name during the research or creating a unique pseudonym. You may skip any question you choose, and you may withdraw at any time. By completing the survey, you are providing consent to participate in the research.

If you have any questions about the study, please contact me via my Talk Page (UOJComm) or via email. My faculty advisor is Dr. Ryan Light. If you have any questions regarding your rights as a research participant, please contact the Office for Protection of Human Subjects at the University of Oregon.

Thank you very much.

Sincerely,

Randall Livingstone School of Journalism & Communication University of Oregon UOJComm (talk) 03:48, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's looking like the overarching cat I was looking for. I had no idea it even existed, :( or I'd have used it in the first place. Thx. Changed. TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 20:14, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the proposed deletion tag you placed on Art for charity because it has previously been kept after a deletion discussion and per policy is permanently ineligible for prod. If you wish to pursue deletion, please open another AfD. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 14:14, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I've seen that are you are a member of the Wikiproject: Visual Arts and I would like to ask you for some help. The Wikipedia in Catalan have reached an agreement with the Joan Miró Foundation: They will include QRpedia codes next to the highlights of his upcoming exhibition about Joan Miró. It's the most important exhibit in the last 20 years, and has passed summer at Tate in London, this autumn will be in Barcelona, and then will go to NGA in Washington. The articles have been made in Catalan and are being translated into English, and I would like you to help us whether monitoring the translation, translating articles or expanding or translating them to other languages. The more languages ​​we have, the better the experience for the user. You can find more information about the Wikiproject here. Thank you in advance!.--Kippelboy (talk) 11:38, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Clubmarx! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only. If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

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) 12:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Clubmarx,

In order to better control the quality of new pages, keep out the spam, and welcome the genuine newbies, the current system we introduced in 2011 is being updated and improved. The documentation and tutorials have also been revised and given a facelift. Most importantly a new user group New Page Reviewer has been created.

Under the new rule, you may find that you are temporarily unable to mark new pages as reviewed. However, this is nothing to worry about - most current experienced patrollers are being accorded the the new right without the need to apply, and if you have significant previous experience of patrolling new pages, we strongly encourage you to apply for the new right as soon as possible - we need all the help we can get, and we are now providing a dynamic, supportive environment for your work.

Find out more about this exiting new user right now at New Page Reviewers and be sure to read the new tutorial before applying. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:29, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]