Misplaced Pages

User talk:Mark Arsten: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 16:45, 3 December 2012 editMark Arsten (talk | contribs)131,188 edits →A redirect?: reply← Previous edit Revision as of 16:52, 3 December 2012 edit undoNiteshift36 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers41,776 edits →A redirect?Next edit →
Line 644: Line 644:
::*So the author said "redirect", stuart says delet or redirect and Stalwart said "I think it would be a bit ''pointless''. Also concerned it might encourage recreation of an article later". Really one supporting a redirect, one saying he doesn't care and one saying he wouldn't fight a pointless effort......and that becomes the close despite the other six deletes. My concern, like Stalwart, is that it encourages recreating the article of a person that is clearly non-notable. Even the two who said re-directing was ok chose delete as their main choice. I'm not going to fight about it, but I do think the choice to re-direct was the wrong one and that it essentially ignored the clear consensus to delete. ] (]) 16:22, 3 December 2012 (UTC) ::*So the author said "redirect", stuart says delet or redirect and Stalwart said "I think it would be a bit ''pointless''. Also concerned it might encourage recreation of an article later". Really one supporting a redirect, one saying he doesn't care and one saying he wouldn't fight a pointless effort......and that becomes the close despite the other six deletes. My concern, like Stalwart, is that it encourages recreating the article of a person that is clearly non-notable. Even the two who said re-directing was ok chose delete as their main choice. I'm not going to fight about it, but I do think the choice to re-direct was the wrong one and that it essentially ignored the clear consensus to delete. ] (]) 16:22, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
:::*You were the only one to voice opposition to a redirect. Three people were amenable to that close. To go against the numerical consensus would require a strong argument. That a "redirect" would encourage the recreation of an article is not a particularly strong argument against a redirect, in my view. ] (]) 16:31, 3 December 2012 (UTC) :::*You were the only one to voice opposition to a redirect. Three people were amenable to that close. To go against the numerical consensus would require a strong argument. That a "redirect" would encourage the recreation of an article is not a particularly strong argument against a redirect, in my view. ] (]) 16:31, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
:::::*You did go against the numerical consensus. 6 said delete, 2 said delete bet they didn't oppose redirect and 1 said redirect. Note that "not opposing" re-direct isn't supporting it. 1 even said it was pointless to do it. Now, what was the argument FOR redirect? ] was the sole arguement put forth by a single person and that isn't a strong reason either. The other 2 that didn't oppose it didn't argue for it and even expressed reasons why not to do it. ] (]) 16:52, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Revision as of 16:52, 3 December 2012

Every day, we lose what the wrongly blocked would have given that day. And a little bit of our souls.

Archives

The llama of drama is all tired out,
time to give it a rest.

Lorry Girl

I have created an article named Lorry Girl and it has been deleted by you. The deletion tag said that the article lacks external references. At that time the references have not been available since the film was not projected. Now the film has been previewed woldwidely in over 40 centers and plenty of references are available. I request you to refix the page and I will put the references too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sonisoni (talk • contribs) 07:04, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I'll move the article to your userspace so you can add references and update the page, then we can think about whether it meet the WP:NFILM guideline. Mark Arsten (talk) 14:50, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
Ok, the article is at User:Sonisoni/Lorry Girl now. Let me know when you've updated and added references, thanks. Mark Arsten (talk) 14:53, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Quantum thermodynamics

While I was a dissenter, I agree there was eventual consensus to redirect this article. I do not, however, see such a consensus for deletion. Perhaps you were overzealous in this case? I would like to hear your reasoning. Thanks, Mark viking (talk) 20:08, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm a bit confused by your comment: I don't believe that I deleted anything--I think I just redirected it. Otherwise, I agree that eventually a redirect consensus emerged. You can still access the contents of the page through page history, even though it's been redirected. Could you clarify what you mean? Mark Arsten (talk) 20:12, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply. Comparing previous and current versions in the edit history for the Quantum thermodynamics page shows both the addition of a redirect tag to the Quantum statistical mechanics page and the deletion of the page's contents, a net change of -6,988 characters. Am I misinterpreting? Mark viking (talk) 20:28, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
Yes, that's correct. When a page is redirected, all of its contents are removed (but accessible in page history) and the contents are replaced with #REDIRECT ]. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:31, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the explanation and sorry for blaming you for what was an automated deletion. While it is true that contents can be accessed in page history, redirects don't seem cheap to me anymore. Mark viking (talk) 20:49, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, it can be tough. Hope you're not discouraged. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:03, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

JEE Toppers

why did u delete http://en.wikipedia.org/List_of_IIT_JEE_Toppers 

?   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.194.29.115 (talk) 08:39, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
You can see the reasons offered for deletion at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/List of IIT JEE Toppers (3rd nomination). I performed the deletion because I believed that the participants in the discussion had reached a consensus. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:30, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

You got mail stuff

Just what I hate about wikipeidia. If you and Floquenbeam feel the need, oh well. But count me out of anything further. Having enough trouble watching all the hypocrisy on wikipedia. Sorry to see you succumb. MathewTownsend (talk) 22:59, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Sorry if that offended you... it honestly had nothing to do with today's conflict though. Mark Arsten (talk) 23:03, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
well, why did it have to be conducted in secret then? MathewTownsend (talk) 23:29, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Replied to you via e-mail, ironically. Mark Arsten (talk) 23:44, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Black Diesel

  • This message will go any and all pages that discuss your credibility Mark, and I want an exact report from you why the page was erased. You can email me the report at mboros4@hotmail.com. As your legislation page requests of me to, per your redirect. I don’t really agree this Mark is on the up and up. He has made bold lies to remove a page that has been on the site for years. It is believed he is in collusion with special interests to promote or sabotage with out following proper guild lines. Please Google search "black diesel". It comes up with thousands of articles on a new form of alternative fuel. It was listed as a nickname for a cultural method of alternative fuel and has been growing in magnitude the world over. A company perfected the method and has a product released worldwide that produces the alternative fuel. A few other lower tech versions are also commercially available. A week later, after years, the page is attacked. Please go to the erased black diesel page and look how one user which has several alternate identities, made comments to remove and Mark followed up by saying no such alternative fuel exists, by google search. The one multiple ID fellow has primary ID as E8. He seems to be a wind energy supporter most likely ethanol as well by the name. The guy is a sell out and caution needs to be taken. Thanks.38.103.168.4 (talk) 06:29, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi, the page was erased because there was a consensus (WP:CON) that it did not meet our notability guidelines (WP:N). Please see WP:RS & WP:V for more information. If you still disagree with my closing, you can file to have it overturned at WP:DRV. Mark Arsten (talk) 13:30, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Not Evans

Now that that's over... if I find myself with free time and an urge to write about something American, I'll ping you. I was quite pleased by how that went (although you deserve most of the credit). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:01, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that was a very pleasant time. You deserve a lot of credit too... I never would have pushed past GA without you. My next articles will be forays back into the wide world of unusual religious groups--Church of the SubGenius is up next. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:39, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Good luck with that, don't think I'll be able to review. I haven't even finished writing about Theory of Literature yet (I did finish Sair Tjerita Siti Akbari, which looks pretty good for an Indonesian subject that old). And now, with mid-terms... oh well, at least Post-co is easy enough: Nationalism in Armijn Pane's Kami, Perempuan. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:44, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Recent GAN

Hey there Mark. Seeing as you just finished the GAN on Tropical Storm Kammuri (2002), I wanted to point out that someone has already started a good article review. I felt like you should know. Cheers! --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 23:13, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Wow, that was quick, less than an hour. Thanks for the note... I feel like there's some history I'm missing here. Mark Arsten (talk) 23:16, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Articles requested per fair use

Tropical storm hits Macau

Tropical storm claims 10 lives, ...

Storm hits southern China coast. Says at least 9 though.

Odd, there's a similar, but slightly different headline at Highbeam. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:06, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
There are three versions. A second version of the article. A third version of it. Probably corrections.

Meteorologists expect . . .

Please let me know if you have issues or when done. Churn and change (talk) 02:14, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Diplomacy
Thanks a lot for backing me up on Kammuri and going through all of that work. It really means a lot! ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 02:31, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the barnstar! Mark Arsten (talk) 02:34, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
Definitely. If you ever need any copyediting, lemme know! Sourcing, on the other hand, might prove controversial :P --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 02:41, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
lol, thanks for the offer. I've been working on Church of the SubGenius lately. Any copyediting help with that would be much appreciated. It's kind of a funny topic, but I've tried to treat it as encyclopedic as possible. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:47, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
Definitely I can give that a look! I don't want to GA review it, in case people accuse of quid pro quo or something, but I'll give it a read through and leave comments on the talk page. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 02:56, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
Yes, that would be perfect. Hope you like it. It will be nice to have more feedback before someone picks it up for GA. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:58, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Louis Riel (comics)

I did a checklinks which said there're are five dead ones. But they seem fixed? MathewTownsend (talk) 18:41, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, that tool's not infallible, so it's good to check the ones that it flags manually, as well. I had it show a link as dead the other day that loaded fine when I clicked on it. I've never fixed the dead ones with the wayback machine before, but I guess it's not that hard once you learn how. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:44, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Ballon d'Or (1956–2009)

Hi Mark, I recently listed this article for protection at WP:Requests for protection which you protected and stated if the vandalism persists to contact you. Since the lifting of the protection, it has persisted, so I was wondering if we could get something a bit more permanent or whether should I go back to the requestse page. Cheers. NapHit (talk) 19:44, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, I escalated to one month for protection... my same offer applies to the expiry of this one though too. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:12, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
Thank you, if it persists once this expires I'll let you know. NapHit (talk) 20:34, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Is it allowed in Misplaced Pages?

Hello, Mark

Quick question: Someone has used this sentence in a WP:FAR discussion against me:

I also note that Codename Lisa (the nominator at FAC) and Jasper Deng (another proponent at FAC) are also cited in another dispute, again for lack of balance in coverage of another Microsoft product. This is beginning to look very suspicious indeed.

Is it allowed in Misplaced Pages?

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 08:24, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

No, not really. Will look into it. Mark Arsten (talk) 14:36, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Eye color article

Mark, the same IP is back at it at the Eye color article. I don't know what to tell this IP anymore, aside from "In this case, you can't add a source asserting that that's what the image is of." And that they need to better read over WP:Reliable sources and WP:Verifiability. Flyer22 (talk) 01:12, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, I semi-protected the eye color article for a while. Let me know if you have trouble with them on any others. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:22, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
Thank you a lot, Mark. Flyer22 (talk) 02:22, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Peaks article

Hey man. One of the sources you suggested I check out for "Episode 14" seems to be behind a paywall. If you can access it, would you mind firing me a copy to have a look at? Otherwise I can't really vet it for use. :P If you can't access it, I can try WP:RX, it was great before for Eraserhead. GRAPPLE X 01:17, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

No, I don't have immediate access, checking with the RX would probably be best. That Church and Change fellow is pretty quick with them lately. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:22, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

List of unreleased Lady Gaga songs

Hey Mark, I never saved any of my info from my List of unreleased Lady Gaga songs that was deleted. Are you able to take the info and move it to my sandbox so I can update it before including it with List of songs recorded by Lady Gaga? The page wasn't available before and now it is. I'd like to merge the info like other artists have.--MrIndustry (talk) 16:42, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Ok, sure. It's at User:MrIndustry/List of unreleased Lady Gaga songs now. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:46, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
Fast! Thanks so much Mark!--MrIndustry (talk) 16:47, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, you caught me at just the right time :) Mark Arsten (talk) 16:51, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Cocks

Once I'm finished erecting Frank's Cock (see what I did there?), would you be willing to give a non-formal peer review? I may put it up for PR too later. Right now I'm trying to get to FA before I go on DYK :-D — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:22, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

lol, sure, I'll do a informal (or even formal) review--sounds kinda hard though. And if you ever have time, I have an article at PR too. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:28, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
Ok, looks pretty interesting, I'll try to post some comments tomorrow. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:37, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Freeway Jam

The Master and Steve Lukather. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 23:52, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Wow, sounds pretty good! Mark Arsten (talk) 23:57, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Finally!

Ha ha! It is done! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:41, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Wow, that is an impressive project there--I'll have to take a look at it soon. TK might be interested in it too, actually. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:21, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
  • I don't know how much she goes for the academic aspect, but yeah it may be right up her alley. I'm probably going to add a couple images if I can find relevant ones. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:36, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of Jonathan Shipley (writer)

Hi, I'm George Page (TGAPGeorge), the author of the page for Jonathan Shipley (writer). I do know the author, I have read many of his works, and I like to consider us friends. I created his page because of his extensive list of published works, and that he continues to publish stories each year.

Today, I was going to add four more 2012 publications to his list when I discovered y'all had deleted all my work. I'd like to talk about why this was done, and address a few issues with this whole process.

There are two main problems I have at the moment: 1. Why wasn't I notified? At least a quick email letting me know the page was in jeopardy would have been appreciated. I might have been able to help, explain, or taken directions for changes.

2. "Non-Notable" seems to be the theme for the deletion of this page. I won't be petty and ask to see a list of published works (non-wikipedia) of those who decided Shipley wasn't worthy. Instead, I will point out a consistent, record of being published numerous times over a span of thirty years. The most notable include stories published in two volumes of Marion Zimmer Bradley's anthology, Sword & Sorceress. The S&S anthology has come out every year for the past twenty-eight years, is sold around the world, and copies of various years can still be found on the bookshelves of Barnes and Noble and the like. It is a very notable anthology, and any story published in the anthology is very notable as well. Elizabeth Waters, the current editor of the Sword & Sorceress anthology would not appreciate her work as being described as "non-notable".

Hadley Rille Books (see wikipedia page) has published two of Shipley's works. It would be interesting for them to know that their books are non-notable as well.

In general, if there are links, or cites, or anything that put nails in this page's coffin, that is my fault. Shipley's page was my first major wikipedia piece, and it's very possible I made mistakes. I read scores of articles in the help section before I wrote anything, but those aren't very clear to begin with, and do not give very good direction or advice. I have no problem with the sub-pages getting deleted; there were not complete, and I wasn't sure if I was doing them right anyway. However, the main page, Jonathan Shipley (writer), should not be deleted.

Thank you for your time,

George Page

TGAPGeorge (talk) 05:58, 29 October 2012 (UTC)TGAPGeorge

Hi, I'll answer your questions in order: 1. While it would have been polite of the nominator to notify you, they're not technically required to do so. 2. The page was deleted because there was a consensus (WP:CON) that it did not meet our notability guidelines (WP:N). Please see WP:RS & WP:V for more information. Can you provide links to newspapers, magazines, or books that discuss Mr. Shipley? If so, we might be able to have the page restored, at least temporarily. You can apply to have the deletion overturned at WP:DRV if you think I made an error. See WP:AUTHOR for specific arguments that could be helpful in restoring the page. 3. The polish of the page shouldn't play a role in deletion, so I don't think it's your fault. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:07, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Church of the SubGenius, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Telegraph (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:12, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Gilligan

Much obliged for venturing once more into the strange world of pre-war English cricket! Non-cricketers always appreciated, and I always ask someone to check the cricket side of things as well. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:07, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

No problem, my pleasure. I have a few sections left will probably get to them tomorrow. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:09, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Broadleaf Commerce Deletion

Hi there Mark - I'm the Director of Marketing for Broadleaf Commerce and noted the company's Wiki was deleted - is there anything I can do to have it restored? Thanks in advance - appreciate the Wiki crowd! ~Brad — Preceding unsigned comment added by Buhlstyle (talk • contribs) 13:35, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi Brad, the article was deleted because it was concluded that there was insufficient media coverage of the company. It is difficult to have deleted pages restored, but if you can provide multiple detailed articles from established magazines/newspapers/books about the company, you can apply to have the deletion overturned at WP:DRV. See WP:GNG and WP:RS for details on what would have to be provided. Good luck, Mark Arsten (talk) 15:54, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Mourdock article title

I've just commented on the talk page for that article. But due to urgent BLP issues, I'm bringing this to your talk page as well. The problem with the current title is that it includes "pregnancy . . . from rape . . . god intended" while leaving out "horrible situation". This makes Mourdock's quote appear worse than it acutally was. If you are going to have an article about a quote, it's not fair to cherry pick the worst parts. William Jockusch (talk) 15:57, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

I tend to agree with your criticism of the article's title, I've moved it. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:04, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Just for fun

Not sure what got me thinking about this, but I just nominated an article for TFA that sounds like the ones you normally work on. Meet Luke P. Blackburn, Kentucky's accused-bioterrorist-turned-governor! Thought you might find it an interesting read on a slow day sometime. If you find it main page worthy, you can drop a note at WP:TFA. Acdixon 17:59, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Hey, that does sound interesting, I'll have to check that out. Thanks for the tip! Mark Arsten (talk) 18:01, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

A something-or-other for you!

The Human Rights Barnstar
For contributing one of the twelve featured articles of WikiProject Human Rights. -- Khazar2 (talk) 18:27, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
I was just admiring it again this afternoon--congratulations on a great article. -- Khazar2 (talk) 18:27, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
Thank you, it was a tough article to write, but I'm glad that I did. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:29, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
free popcorn

'tis the season

Thank you for doing it, are you ready for special treats? All the way to the bottom for United Nations Convention Against Torture, 8 years ago ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:01, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for the popcorn :) Mark Arsten (talk) 23:47, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for playing a good part in the story ;)
ps: do you have an idea who wrote it? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:57, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
Oh, I see now, very interesting. Mark Arsten (talk) 23:06, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

I suggested Alexis Bachelot for TFA, there's a debate you may want to take part in. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 01:15, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the note! Mark Arsten (talk) 02:48, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Query

Hello sir,Auto wiki browser using rights are just approved to me but found little difficulty in understanding user manual .I have seen alerts but didnt get how to find and fix them from whole article within the the edit box of software.Thanx---zeeyanketu 20:42, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi, to be honest, I use AWB regularly but generally just for typo fixing. I'm not sure if I've done much with the alerts at all. I think the best place to ask for help would be Misplaced Pages talk:AutoWikiBrowser. Good luck, Mark Arsten (talk) 21:02, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
Ok I will ask there then please tell me how to do typofixing exactly because i dont want to commit any mistake.---zeeyanketu
To fix typos, you go to the "options" tab and click "Enable RegexTypoFix" on the bottom of the screen. Then you just have to make a list of pages to check (use the source drop-down box on the center of the left side of the screen, go to random pages if you can't think of anything specific to check) and then go to the "start" tab and click start. That should do it. Misplaced Pages:AutoWikiBrowser/User manual might be of help, I'm a bit of a novice about some of its functions. Good luck, Mark Arsten (talk) 22:41, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

A bowl of strawberries for you!

Thanx a lot ! I got it. Have a great day ahead.Take care :) ---zeeyanketu 07:21, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
You're welcome, glad to hear it! Mark Arsten (talk) 14:13, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Boris Malagurski

Hi Mark!

I terribly sorry to bother you, but I noticed that you previously protected the Boris Malagurski article so that only established editors can edit it - I think there might be a need for that protection once again. Several anons have appeared, all inserting a sentence that has as a reference - a YouTube video, in violation of WP:COPYLINK. I reverted a couple of times, now realizing that I might have broken the 3RR - if I did, I apologize and I'll stop reverting anyways (I already gave tons of input on the matter on the talk page), but could you advise me on how I should respond? And is there anything you can do to help?

Thanks a bunch,

--UrbanVillager (talk) 01:14, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I protected--that was pretty clear cut. BTW, reverting copyvios is an exception to 3RR. You might want to try to explain to the IP on his talk page though. Let me know if there are any other issues. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:21, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks Mark! Cheers, --UrbanVillager (talk) 01:30, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi Mark! I've noticed that you've protected the Boris Malagurski page and that's cool, but can you please instruct a content editor (or something similar) to have a look-see at the issue in question, and several issues raised prior. Several editors appear to have an issue with UrbanVillager, citing he is editing the page without giving due process to neutrality and including all angles of the matter at hand. I only raise this issue because one-leaning articles irk me so. Thanks for your consideration. --114.172.134.168 (talk) 01:28, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello, sorry if you've been confused about the reverting and protection. The issue was that you were linking to a mirror of a newscast, which is technically not allowed here (you would have to link to the news stations website or official YouTube channel for it to be allowed). The best way to get input from uninvolved editors about neutrality would be posting a new section at the Misplaced Pages:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard or maybe the Misplaced Pages:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard. You'll usually be able to get comments from fresh editors at one of those. Let me know if you have any more questions. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:40, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

---I understand. Thank you for the clarification, but I assumed that my YouTube post was credible because it is broadcast on Boris Malagurski's official YouTube Channel. Is that also not considered official enough, since Boris Malagurski is the one in question、and he is the one broadcasting a CTV news report?　 --114.172.134.168 (talk) 02:37, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, copyright is the issue here. CTV owns the rights to the broadcast, so we only link to it if the site is run by the network or on the network's official channel. The WP:COPYLINK guideline explains things in more detail. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:59, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello again Mark!

You mentioned that I could let you know if there were any issues with the article. Well, I think I might need some guidance. I've been very active on the Boris Malagurski and The Weight of Chains (Malagurski's film) articles, and I feel like the discussion on the talk pages with some editors is going nowhere. To be precise, the IP address above, together with 221.92.163.122 and Opbeith, who apparently have personal or ideological issues with Malagurski and his film, and openly state that on the talk pages, are attempting to alter the articles using, as references, self-published blogs and websites which all fail WP:RELIABLE - I read it through.

The thing is that all the reliable references on the articles have a neutral or positive view of Malagurski, while the only criticism of his work that can be found is by individual unreliable bloggers. I suggested the creation of a "Criticism" section when criticism published by reliable sources appears, but have received personal attacks as replies - some have accused me of being biased, even being Boris Malagurski himself! I feel like the moment I suggest something short of attacking Malagurski and his films, I'm labelled as "biased" by these editors.

Now, I'm a nice guy and I really don't like arguing, I'm the kind of person who likes compromises and have always been able to reach compromises with people who also seek them. I tried turning the other cheek and attempting to discuss on how to make the Boris Malagurski article better (instead of engaging in a discussion about what Misplaced Pages editors personally think about Malagurski and his work), but got met with more personal attacks, specifically by Opbeith. I have no interest in there not being a critical note in the articles, but only if its published by a reliable source, am I right to hold that position? I'd like to discuss these articles with Misplaced Pages editors who want to make the articles better, but the editors I mentioned are clogging up talk page space by discussing personal opinions on the topic, copy/pasting sentences from blogs,... pretty much acting like Misplaced Pages is an Internet forum.

Sorry if I'm bothering you with all this information, but I don't know what else to do. I tried informing them that Misplaced Pages is not the place for those kinds of discussions, but this had no effect. Mark, what should I do? Regards, --UrbanVillager (talk) 02:15, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Oh hey, sorry that I forgot to respond to this. It totally slipped my mind last week. I only have a minute, but I think you might want to go to WP:DR or WP:ANI depending on how clear the disruption is (ANI will only work for clear disruption). Sorry that I can't be more help, Mark Arsten (talk) 18:00, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

DFW Parking

RE: Armin Cruz Sr DFW VP of Parking I was an employee of the DFW Airport for a number of years......It is common knowledge he was the father of Armin Cruz, the person convicted of the war crimes...awkward, yes, but fact.....not sure how else to phrase it......99.109.96.151 (talk) 00:54, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately, we need sources to state that. See WP:RS & WP:V for details. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:55, 4 November 2012 (UTC)


User:Arulraja/Kagapujandar

Hi Mark worked on the above article and added reliable sources to the article . Help me to add the article under the title Kagapujandar. Arulraja (talk) 15:23, 4 November 2012 (UTC) Arulraja

Hi Arulraja, glad to see that you've been working on the article. I'm unfamiliar with the subject area, so I'm hesitant to make a decision one way or another here. I think it would be best if you filed to have the deletion overturned at WP:DRV, noting that you wish to have the draft reinstated. That way you can get feedback from multiple editors. Regards, Mark Arsten (talk) 15:39, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

FYI

--Rschen7754 19:45, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the note, I'll take it up with him. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:56, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Saw your comment..

..on AN/I, re Wikipediocracy and interaction bans. Maybe an interaction ban between Wikipediocracy members and Misplaced Pages editors? Rich Farmbrough, 06:49, 5 November 2012 (UTC).

lol, that just might work! :) Mark Arsten (talk) 13:07, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

List of songs recorded by Lady Gaga

Hi Mark, will you please add your opinion to this talk page? I would like an admin's opinion over this condescending child thinking he's an admin. Talk:List of songs recorded by Lady Gaga --TV | talk 23:53, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

stale user draft

the user hasnt edited this page (nor any page) since you userfied this User:Yfever/Thirty Years of Research on Race Differences in Cognitive Ability after the afd. does it go through an MFD or does the Afd apply for a speedy? -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 06:15, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

I think it would go to Mfd--I'm not sure that there's a speedy for stale drafts. Mark Arsten (talk) 13:57, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Australian Christian Lobby

Thank you for trying to resolve the dispute re the Australian Christian Lobby. Editor Dominus Vobisdu does not seem to want to resolve the issues. He does not appear to even read the resolution-discussions. He makes little or no contribution to discussion. ("Not at all interested. Never was". http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Dominus_Vobisdu#Notice_of_Dispute_resolution_discussion - but yet again, can delete within 6 minutes). In his latest ACL TP contribution he provided a single (was-easily-refuted) sentence. He even ignores Misplaced Pages's Core content policy - No original research Appreciate you advice here. Sam56mas (talk) 22:50, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, I suggest you open a thread to discuss the latest revert on the talk page, then hopefully a few users will chime in. Then if he reverts again you can demonstrate that he's against consensus. Also, you might ask Hahc21 for his opinion, too. Mark Arsten (talk) 23:59, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

That edit i did

Indeed that comment was not exactly the most intellectually valid edit. I personally just find that whole article to be stereo typed and inadequate. I do however feel that the addition of a section perhaps briefly covering the varied "sub" subcultures within goth would greatly enhance the article, groups such as; Industrial goths, cyber goth(they're not the same thing)vaudeville goth and many others are not fairly represented in this article. An opinion that i'm sure would be shared by many goths themselves is that; as a subculture it is hugely diverse and impossible to make great sweeping inclusive statements such as seem to be displayed here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.145.154 (talk) 01:11, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I suppose that's a reasonable point you make. I suggest you post that on the article's talk page, you might be able to draw some more interested editors to fix up the page a bit. Good luck, Mark Arsten (talk) 01:12, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Vandalism?

Fair enough the edits on the Jade Goody page are generally unpleasant, and i shall no longer do that, i was just "experimenting" as you say, to see what would happen. However the edits and concerns i have regarding the Gothic subculture page, i feel are valid and will endeavor to improve that page in a manner that is acceptable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.145.154 (talk) 01:24, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Ok, please do concentrate on the goth page instead of the Goody page. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 01:26, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
You should be aware that there are several of us who revert vandalism such as yours, and in each case Mark has beaten me to the revert button. had he not reverted your vandalism, I would have. The best thing you can do for yourself right now is STOP before your account gets blocked. --Sue Rangell 01:29, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

HTML article vandalism seems to be sock

User talk:Jnelmark101 and User talk:Recon62 seem to be the same person, judging from what was added. LittleBen (talk) 03:01, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I'll keep an eye on him. Mark Arsten (talk) 13:35, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Bhutto semi-protect?

I noticed you had edited the Bhutto article. Its constantly under siege from editors wishing to change the sourced Rajput to Arain. This is probably a political "statement" of some kind. I've added a good RS and wondered if you would now consider a semi protect since most of the changes are made by IPs. Hopefully that will stabilize that article somewhat. I'll look for more academic-type sources soon to add to the source I just added. Thanks for your consideration.(olive (talk) 16:43, 7 November 2012 (UTC))

Oh... unless you consider yourself to be involved. (olive (talk) 16:45, 7 November 2012 (UTC))
Huh, I had forgotten all about that article. In fact, were my edits not in the history I wouldn't believe you. But anyway, I think there's a decent case for semiprotection here. I've semi-d for a week, if you have problems when that runs out I can do it for longer etc. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:00, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, that was fast. Yes, I dug through the history to see if an admin had been around and came up with your name. This reversion to Arain has been going on for a long time so I may be back soon for more help. Many thanks.(olive (talk) 17:04, 7 November 2012 (UTC))
Ok, sure, just let me know. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:08, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
Looks like IPs have now taken user names and are vandalizing the Bhutto article. Changing a few words is a bother but vandalizing the source is a bit of a pain to fix. I'm not sure blocking the users will help. Might they just come back with new user names. I've warned this user and it looks like he's causing problems on other articles as well.. Any help is appreciated. Thanks :O)(olive (talk) 14:34, 13 November 2012 (UTC))
Hmm, you might want to take them to the edit warring noticeboard if they keep reverting (WP:AN3). Mark Arsten (talk) 17:59, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Ok thanks. I'll probably do that, although I don't see this as an edit war situation, or I wouldn't be reverting myself. I hold myself to one revert. This is an ongoing effort to make a political statement, and to vandalize the article it seems and its been going on for at least a couple of years in this article. I didn't think much about it just reverted in the past but this has been more persistent and includes messing around with the refs harder to notice and catch which concerns me. I may just take it to AN. And thanks again. (olive (talk) 18:14, 13 November 2012 (UTC))

Thank you

Thanks for commenting at Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Deep vein thrombosis/archive3. I think I've addressed everything you mentioned, and I left a comment. Best. Biosthmors (talk) 18:52, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Alright, I'll check it out. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:00, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
This is to be my first FAC. I was thinking of asking a couple others to take a look before FAC and then potentially going ahead with it soon. Does that sound wise? Biosthmors (talk) 19:07, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
Yes, that might still be a good idea--better to get too much preparation in than too little! Mark Arsten (talk) 19:10, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Ivy Sports Symposium

Ivy Sports Symposium, which you deleted as a result of the discussion here, has now been recreated twice by User:Adamespino, who I assume is the original author. I speedied it once as WP:CSD#G4, but I think that a more permanent solution might be in order. He appears to be recreating it from a saved copy, as the recreated page includes the full Afd tag and reference. I'm not sure where else to bring this to, so I brought it to you as the closing admin.Vulcan's Forge (talk) 00:39, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, I've deleted and salted. Hopefully this will put a rest to it! Mark Arsten (talk) 00:45, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Paul Summerville

Paul Summerville has recreated his wiki page again despite a decisive vote. Any ideas as the closing admin? Moss rocks (talk) 03:05, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Well, since it's at WP:DRV at the moment, I think it is Ok to have it up for now. The DRV will decide what to do with it, I guess. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:10, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
Ok, sounds good. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:30, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Constructive Contributions

What exactly do you believe was unconstructive about my update to the Star Wars page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluehatguy (talk • contribs) 03:28, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Well, for one thing, you changed its name to "Star Trek". Mark Arsten (talk) 03:30, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
Are they not the same? I was informed that the names could be used interchangabley
No, they're not actually the same... Mark Arsten (talk) 03:42, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure they are — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluehatguy (talk • contribs) 03:44, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

GA Notice

GA Notice
The article Church of the SubGenius that you nominated as a good article has passed ; see the GA review for comments about the article. Well done!

— ΛΧΣ21™ 01:27, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
· · ·
Thanks for the note, and for the review. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:58, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Congrats!! :) --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:42, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
Well deserved, my big friend. — ΛΧΣ21™ 04:27, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
That barnstar came with a high price, Mark. Your dismissive comment about Till's previous disatisfaction with you was gratuitous and unbecoming an administrator, and has dropped you down a peg or two or three in my eyes. I have no idea about your previous history with him (I don't know him from Adam, and just know you by name), and really couldn't care any less, but bringing it up on ANI was ungentlemanly and below the belt, and tantamount to poisoning the well. It was inappropriate precisely because you were supposed to be acting in your role as impartial admistrator. Striking the comment and apologizing to Till both in the ANI and on his talk page would be the grown-up thing to do. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 08:36, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
@DV I don't think there was anything wrong with what I said, so no apology will be forthcoming. @AXE Sorry to see how that turned out, but we shouldn't be surprised--ANI is a pretty unreasonable place these days. Mark Arsten (talk) 14:50, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Oh, I think I see the issue now! When I said "This should be taken with a grain of salt", "this" referred to my comment--not Till's complaint. I meant that I may not be 100% impartial, not that Till's views should be suspect because he complained about me. Is that how you took it? Mark Arsten (talk) 15:59, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Yes, that's how I took it, and you can understand why I would be a little shocked. I'm satisfied with your explanation, though, and relieved. Thanks. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 18:04, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Alright, thanks for the note--I'll see you around. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:16, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Should a user sub-page of a banned/blocked user be deleted?

Hi Mark. I came across this user sub-page of a banned user and I was wondering if it should be deleted? It appears that the user created it around the time they were banned and it does not seem to relate to Misplaced Pages or its mission in any way but I am unclear if I can slap a deletion template on it or there is another procedure. Since you took the last action against the users account would you mind giving me you opinion? Should the page be deleted (as {{db-g5}} or some other such criteria) or should I just leave it alone. Thanks! meshach (talk) 21:07, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

To be honest, I'm really not sure... might want to ask a more experienced admin. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:26, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Okay Mark, I will ask on WP:AN or some such place. Thanks for the quick reply. meshach (talk) 21:32, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Request to pick up Irving Gottesman, now a GA, for a peer review (trying to get to FA)

I expanded the article, covering, I believe, all major aspects, fixed some MOS issues, and tightened the language a bit. Thought the logical next step was a PR, before FAC. Thanks. Churn and change (talk) 21:21, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Sounds interesting. I'll give it a PR, probably won't get to it for a few days though. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:26, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
K. Thanks. Churn and change (talk) 02:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi protection

I have already requested semi protection for the article Take Me Home (One Direction album) at semi protection. Could you protect. AdabowtheSecond 22:36, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Not needed anymore. AdabowtheSecond 22:58, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Roy Mitchell

Thanks, re: Mitchell. Unfortunately I only have one major source - Patricia Bernstein's book on the lynching of Washington - all other sources I could find mention Mitchell in passing, more or less. I'll improve the article when I can. I actually made the page on Mitchell after reading the interview you conducted, and then reading your page on Jesse Washington. It got me to reading more on lynchings during Jim Crow and I felt I had to write something on it; Mitchell seemed to be a fitting subject. Thanks for your work on these things. -Darouet (talk) 20:39, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

You're very welcome, glad to know that you read the interview and it helped inspire you. Hopefully more sources will turn up! Mark Arsten (talk) 23:21, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Frank's Cock

Now here's a fun debate: would a TFA article be eligible for DYK? I was thinking of running the film for World AIDS Day (Frank's Cock went through this morning. What a release.) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:04, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

I would hold out for Valentines day... but that's just me. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:09, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Church of the SubGenius

Sorry I didn't get to this before the peer review closed, but I've left my comments at User:Acdixon/Review‎. Hope there's something helpful for you there. Acdixon 16:24, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Oh yes, my error there. Thanks for the comments, much appreciated. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:01, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Look over this for me?

Hi Mark, hope all's well in your neck of the woods!

I've been doing a lot of work on Light in August over the weekend and wondered if you (or any interested talk page stalkers :D) could take a look at it for me and let me know what you think. It's one of my favorite novels, but when I found the article the other day, it was a sad mess of original research and Sparknotes plagiarism. Hope to keep expanding it with more solid lit crit and take it to GA. Any comments/suggestions/critiques would be most appreciated! Thanks as always, Accedie 19:47, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Sounds interesting, I'm doing a bit of a wikibreak at the moment, but I'll try to get to it if I can. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:01, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
No worries! I might go ahead and nominate it at GAN, cos I think it's in a good place, but feel free to jump in at your leisure. Enjoy your wikibreak – you've earned it :) Accedie 21:21, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, I realized that Misplaced Pages was causing me to neglect the important things... Mark Arsten (talk) 17:50, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Help request

Hi there, Mark. Could I possibly ask you a favour? The article Beylerbeydom should better be moved to the correct name of: "Beylerbeylik". If you look at the TP you will see that there is a consensus among concerned users in this change. However, possibly due to ignorance of this situation (no-one would expect that the concept of "Beylerbeylik" would be treated with an invented word such as "Beylerbeydom"; it looks something like instead of "kingdom" we say "kinghood" or "kingness") someone redirected "beylerbeylik" to "eyalet". If you kindly remove that redirect, we would like to move "Beylerbeydom" to "Beylerbeylik". Thank you very much, in advance, for your collaboration, help and time. All the best. --E4024 (talk) 21:37, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Ok, done. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:49, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
Thank you very much again and please enjoy some Turkish tea. Best. --E4024 (talk) 10:45, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
Sounds good, brings back the memories of my trip to Turkey last year. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:50, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we are requesting your participation to help find a resolution. The thread is "Microsoft Security Essentials". Please take a moment to review the simple guide and join the discussion. Thank you!

Guide for participants

If you wish to open a DR/N filing, click the "Request dispute resolution" button below this guide or go to Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution noticeboard/request for an easy to follow, step by step request form.

What this noticeboard is:
  • It is an early step to resolve content disputes after talk page discussions have stalled. If it's something we can't help you with, or is too complex to resolve here, our volunteers will point you in the right direction.
What this noticeboard is not:
  • It is not a place to deal with the behavior of other editors. We deal with disputes about article content, not disputes about user conduct.
  • It is not a place to discuss disputes that are already under discussion at other dispute resolution forums.
  • It is not a substitute for the talk pages: the dispute must have been discussed extensively on a talk page (not just through edit summaries) before resorting to DRN.
  • It is not a court with judges or arbitrators that issue binding decisions: we focus on resolving disputes through consensus, compromise, and explanation of policy.
Things to remember:
  • Discussions should be civil, calm, concise, neutral, and objective. Comment only about the article's content, not the other editors. Participants who go off-topic or become uncivil may be asked to leave the discussion.
  • Let the other editors know about the discussion by posting {{subst:drn-notice}} on their user talk page.
  • Sign and date your posts with four tildes "~~~~".
  • If you ever need any help, ask one of our volunteers, who will help you as best as they can. You may also wish to read through the FAQ page located here and on the DR/N talkpage.

EarwigBot  19:45, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Dispute over FA status Microsoft Security Essentials

I have opened a dispute over the decision to award this article FA status which you were to some extent involved. You may wish to comment on the case here. Quantumsilverfish (talk) 19:57, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, but I don't think I'll get involved. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:50, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Re: question

Thanks for asking, it was a really good one that made me stop and think. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs 19:41, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Merchandise giveaways

A Tshirt! I thought that you deserved something a bit extra for all of the amazing work you've done for the project.
I've nominated you for a gift from the Wikimedia Foundation!
TBrandley 03:24, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
Oh cool, thanks. I'll have to check that out. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:27, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Captain Underpants AFD

Because you participated in Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Captain Underpants and the Perilous Plot of Professor Poopypants you might want to participate in Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/The Adventures of Captain Underpants. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 01:09, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

B.C. Kochmit (2nd nomination)

Dear Mark: The talk page for Kochmit has the second nomination for AfD directing to the first discussion instead of the second, which should link to Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/B.C. Kochmit (2nd nomination). Can you please fix this? Thanks!--Jax 0677 (talk) 03:49, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

3 CD Collector's Set (Rihanna album)

Hey Mark. Can you protect this page from being re-created? Thanks. Statυs (talk) 22:43, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Note: I nominated for CSD (recreation of a deleted article, which was deleted yesterday) and the article cannot be fixed or improved because Status wants it to be protected from be created. What's the point of it existing? No logic or reasoning at all. Status reverted me twice and edit warred with me. AARON• 22:45, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
It was not a RECREATION of a deleted article, it was a REDIRECT of a deleted article. Notice the difference. If someone is looking for the article, it will be redirected to her discography article. Simple. Statυs (talk) 22:50, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
What do you call it then? If someone is looking, it will no longer appear in a few days. Simple. AARON• 22:51, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
A redirect. Statυs (talk) 22:53, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
... of a recreated, deleted article. Ending this discussion now as it's someone else's user talk. AARON• 22:55, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Calvin/Aaron, I have to agree with Status here. A redirect is a valid option as there may be links to the collection both on or off Wiki, which would be broken by deletion. You can try WP:RFD if you are pretty certain this is not needed. BTW, recreation means recreating the content. A redirect is a completely different ball of wax — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:56, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
Why is it needed if Status wants it to be protected from being created? What's the point of it being a redirect? It may as well not be there. AARON• 23:00, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
Because the point of a redirect is to redirect someone to a similar topic. In this case, they can see it's chart position on the page it is redirect to. It can be protected so no other person can recreate the article, as it's been at AFD like 5 times. Statυs (talk) 23:02, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
I don't see the point in this case. Deleted articles disappear from the search after a few days. End of. AARON• 23:03, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Information

I noticed your username commenting at an Arbcom discussion regarding civility. An effort is underway that would likely benifit if your views were included. I hope you will append regards at: Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Civility enforcement/Questionnaire Thank you for considering this request. My76Strat (talk) 08:21, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, but I don't know if I'll get involved. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:39, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Oscillant/Oscillatory pools

Hello Mark Arsten. I notice you've just deleted "Oscillant", however after that article had been proposed for deletion, the article's creator changed the article's name to "Oscillatory pools", and it is still in existence under this latter title. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 20:18, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Ahh, got it now, thanks. I see someone was playing trick-the-admin again :) Mark Arsten (talk) 20:19, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the speedy response - I wish everything in life happened as quick as that! (caveat: only if I've asked for it to happen, that is....) PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 20:24, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Happy December!

The Holidays are coming up... enjoy this lovely brownie as your first treat! Statυs (talk) 02:24, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, much appreciated. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:34, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of article about Miko Kung Fu

Dear Mark,

I created an article about the martial art I have been training for the last 6 years - Miko Kung Fu. This article provided some basic information about the style and my intention was later on to add some more details concerning its history, specifics and relation to other martial arts. The credibility of the information could be checked easily at the official internet sites of the Miko Kung Fu schools across Europe, that I referred to.

However I saw that you deleted this article. Could you, please, explain why? The article was based purely on facts and there were no personal opinions expressed. Could you, please tell me, why I shouldn't consider this as censorship from your side.

Additionally - I see this deletion as an act of discrimination. If there are articles about Karate, Aikido, Ving Tsun, Capoeira and other martial arts, which is the objective reason that there cannot be an article about Miko Kung Fu?

It is hard to create something and obviously - it's very easy to destroy it. If there were some problems with the content, why didn't advise on them to be corrected on the first place? I don't understand how this corresponds with the values of Misplaced Pages - "The free Encyclopedia"...

Herewith I am asking you restore the article I wrote about Miko Kung Fu. Thank you in advance!

Regards, Teodor Totev — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kestenite (talk • contribs) 19:32, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello, your article was deleted because there was a consensus (WP:CON) that it was not notable (WP:N). We define notability as "significant coverage in reliable sources" (see WP:GNG & WP:RS for more). To have the article restored, you'll have to show notability by providing example of coverage. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 21:17, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi There

I appreciate your dedication to wikipedia

that was a test and you passed

here, have a q

q — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.70.115.25 (talk) 01:16, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

LOL, thanks for the q. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:19, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Doubt regarding Bollywood movies

I am shocked to see that Misplaced Pages provides figures pertaining to bollywood box office business from www.boxofficeindia.com which is not genuine. There are other releant sources like bollywoodhungama.com, addatoday.com, koimoi.com which provide accurate figures of box office. I request you to remove restriction from movie "Ek Tha Tiger" so that I can make changes to its collection which is about INR.198cr nut Misplaced Pages mentions it as INR 186 cr (Source boxofficeindia.com which is not accurate at all). Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Afzal57hhh (talk • contribs) 15:31, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi, my advice is to discuss the issue on Talk:Ek Tha Tiger, and try to form a consensus among interested editors. Thanks! Mark Arsten (talk) 15:34, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

A redirect?

I'm truly astonished that the AFD for Eunice Penix ended this way. Other than Jax0677, there was only one editor who favored redirect. The very last, Stuartyeates, and even then he said delete or redirect. Nobody argued for redirect except Jax0677, I word searched redirect and that's how I know this.

Can you change the outcome or do I need to DRV this?...William 15:57, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

I'm curious, why are you bothered by the existence of this redirect? Also, I count Jax, Stuart, and Stalwart approving or explicitly not objecting to a redirect and only one person voicing an opinion against one. So I don't think redirection is unreasonable, no. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:08, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
And the one argument against redirection is pretty poor, as well. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:14, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
The person clearly fails WP:POLITICIAN and most everyone who chimed in at the AFD, admitted that? If the person fails notability guidelines, why does it have to be a redirect? Silence on redirects doesn't mean editors approve of it. I guess this is going to DRV...William 16:17, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
I fail to see why I interpreted consensus incorrectly... you chose to remain silent, so your (unspoken) opinion wasn't counted. Also, there is no requirement that individuals must meet notability guidelines to have a redirect. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:31, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
Incorrect. I did take part in the AFD. As Niteshift states below your redirect outcomes goes clearly against the consensus....William 16:38, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
You took part in the Afd, but you didn't express an opinion about redirection. If someone doesn't say whether they support a redirect or not, I take that as no !vote with regards to redirection. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:45, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • So the author said "redirect", stuart says delet or redirect and Stalwart said "I think it would be a bit pointless. Also concerned it might encourage recreation of an article later". Really one supporting a redirect, one saying he doesn't care and one saying he wouldn't fight a pointless effort......and that becomes the close despite the other six deletes. My concern, like Stalwart, is that it encourages recreating the article of a person that is clearly non-notable. Even the two who said re-directing was ok chose delete as their main choice. I'm not going to fight about it, but I do think the choice to re-direct was the wrong one and that it essentially ignored the clear consensus to delete. Niteshift36 (talk) 16:22, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • You were the only one to voice opposition to a redirect. Three people were amenable to that close. To go against the numerical consensus would require a strong argument. That a "redirect" would encourage the recreation of an article is not a particularly strong argument against a redirect, in my view. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:31, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • You did go against the numerical consensus. 6 said delete, 2 said delete bet they didn't oppose redirect and 1 said redirect. Note that "not opposing" re-direct isn't supporting it. 1 even said it was pointless to do it. Now, what was the argument FOR redirect? WP:CHEAP was the sole arguement put forth by a single person and that isn't a strong reason either. The other 2 that didn't oppose it didn't argue for it and even expressed reasons why not to do it. Niteshift36 (talk) 16:52, 3 December 2012 (UTC)