Misplaced Pages

Not really - if the film does got made, the proper page would be at You Were Never Here. This thing isn't even in production yet - I think it's waaaay too soon at this stage. MikeWazowski (talk) 23:21, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Not disagreeing that the topic is too soon for its own article, nor that a redirect would have to be the correct title as you observe. But as it IS already spoken of in the director's article, a redirect of the correct title to the one place where policy indicates it may be spoken of in context seems to make sense... as long as it is properly sorced. Policy states: "It is appropriate to report discussion and arguments about the prospects for success of future proposals and projects or whether some development will occur, if discussion is properly referenced." As the director's article IS the place for such, my suggestion just as policy indicates. Schmidt, 02:18, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Return of the Jedi cast list

Hi there,

I just posted some new info on the Return of the Jedi page, which was removed by you, stating, "very minor character with no lines." Well, please read Gerald Home's website (hisnamedotcom) and you'll learn otherwise. Also check out his Misplaced Pages page and the links to 3 excellent interviews at the bottom of the page, where you'll find lots more info and photos. You'll also see he had dialogue that wasn't used in the film. Also, size of part, and whether or not the character has lines, is not and should not determine whether a character can be listed on this page. Jeremy Bulloch is listed for Boba Fett, quite rightly, but Gerald Home has more on screen time than him, and is in the film's credits (as a Mime Artist, near the end of the credits) - so it's entirely correct that his characters should be included here. I'll await your reply before re-posting my info in the ROTJ section. Thank you very much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sallyandyates (talk • contribs) 23:47, 18 November 2011 (UTC) --Sallyandyates (talk) 23:50, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

If you really are Gerald Home, then you really shouldn't be editing articles related to yourself, as this is a clear conflict of interest. It doesn't matter what you have posted on your website - as far as the article goes, that's irrelevant. As for the cast list, we only list those with significant contributions to the film. Your name is not listed in the "supporting cast" section of the film credits - it only shows up under "mime artists" - you weren't credited with a character name on the actual film, and both the roles you claim are essentially background characters. They do not belong in the list of cast members, and will be removed should you add them again. MikeWazowski (talk) 00:09, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Hello again MikeWazowski,

Yes, I really am Gerald Home, and I'd like to give you some more information, facts which you don't know, I can see - so I invite you to email me so we can have a calm, friendly chat. I don't know if you're advised not to enter into email communications, but I'm a Star Wars actor, not in the business of arguing with people, and as you see from my website, I'm still a working actor, involved in prestigious productions, including working in conjunction with Lucasfilm, so you know I am who I say I am and that I'm a respectable person, not exactly a "stranger", inviting you to email him. Everything you see on my site is the truth, as it is on all Star Wars actors' sites, so rest assured I just want to give you some info which I guarantee will help you in your future editing activities. Email me through the calamarimen...etc email address on my website and you'll get straight to me. If I don't hear from you, I'll post further here, though I'd rather keep what I have to say private between you and me and it's easier for me to use email than this talk system. (I'm not clever online - my Misplaced Pages page, for example, was not created by me.) With thanks and best wishes. Gerald Home — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sallyandyates (talk • contribs) 15:47, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Funny, you claim not to have created the article on you, but according to your list of contributions, your very first edit to Misplaced Pages on January 25, 2007 was to create the Gerald Home article. Putting that aside, I'm not saying that your acting career is a fake, nor am I trying to delete that article. The original point was your insertion of your name onto the Return of the Jedi page as a main character, when that is demonstrably not true. I was correct to remove it, and I will be correct in removing it again, should it be re-added to the article. MikeWazowski (talk) 16:02, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Mike, Please help

Hi Mike,

Yesterday you helped me change the wordings of my posting about Miadore.com so the entry would be in line with Wiki's guidelines, for which my big thanks.

However, this extremely rude guy by the name of Barek (http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:Barek) thought it would be fun to delete the whole entry. I cant believe it! Is there any way you can get the page back?

Or can I email you with my original text for you to modify it again, before I post it? (I know, so sorry and embarassed to ask you).

I really can't believe this guy just deleted it without any explination and especially after you had rewritten some sections to make it in line with Wiki's guidelines. Really feel sad about this guy's actions :-(

Thank you

Shi JaxueShijiaxue (talk) 14:38, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm afraid Barek was not being rude, he deleted the article because it met the specifications for speedy deletion - which I believe was the correct decision, because there was nothing in the article as I remember it to indicate any real notability, nor was there reliable sourcing to indicate that either. MikeWazowski (talk) 14:43, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Sorry to hear you feel that way Mike. I thought this shop is fantastic, it's a token for China's development, especially in a market that you wouldn't immediately think of.

Also a bit confused that you helped me out editing it, which I still appreciate a lot, instead of deleting it like Barek, while you now say it wasn't worth it :-(

Hope somebody else will create this entry and it will not be deleted. It's more special than so many other things you can find on Wiki.

Shi JiaxueShijiaxue (talk) 14:57, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Six families of endor

Hi there; you have nominated this article for speedy deletion as a hoax. I am not certain that it is a hoax, as the mythology does hae a degree of background to it. I am not suggesting that the article should remain; but could I ask you to re-submit it under AfD? --Anthony Bradbury 16:17, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

I posted my reasoning for the hoax tag on the talk page of the article - I could find no evidence this is real. But if you think AfD is the place, I'll try that - but I still think it's a prime speedy candidate. MikeWazowski (talk) 16:34, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Your Revert

I am not disputing that this the entry on the YouTube personalities list is notable or not. But having an article is not essential to being notable. As long as the reference shows how the person is notable, they can be added. Mr. C.C._{I didn't do it!} 18:26, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Austenasia

Hello MikeWazowski. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Austenasia, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: There are some refs. Thank you. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 20:16, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

There are some refs is not a reason to decline a speedy, especially when they're poor - however, I'll take it to AfD. MikeWazowski (talk) 20:19, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Mike, speaking of references, why do some people have 4 references for a short single line in article? I've seen that elsewhere and they all say the same thing, just from different sources (like from a press conference/interview). Is it okay to delete those when come across them? And I agree, just because every line is referenced, it doesn't make a good article. There's probably a lot more to read in those references than the subject for deletion.WylieCoyote (talk) 22:13, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

I can't say why everyone does it, but many times, it's people overcompensating, trying to topload very short articles with refs to prove notability. I would be careful about removing references, tho - as a new editor, it would be best for you to propose and discuss that on the talk page first. MikeWazowski (talk) 22:20, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Surf Punks/Tony Creed

Why did you arbitrarily redirect the article I was marking up Tony_Creed to the Surf_Punks? --EdWissing (talk) 23:23, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Because I did not find the article as written to indicate notability enough for a standalone article. MikeWazowski (talk) 23:28, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

your edits on 24/7 Real Media

Sir, please explain why you put these tags on the article - COI, advert, notability. I need to understand so that i can fix the article. Thank you in advance. Best regards. Standard2211 (talk) 00:21, 21 November 2011 (UTC) I further reviewed notability guidelines, and in my view the company is notable because it has been mentioned in a variety of reputable publications - WSJ, NYT, Business week, Bloomberg. As for neutrality and advertising - can you remove the sections and words that make it read like that - i am not sure myself what you mean. The fact that company almost went out of business and its founders considered a bankruptcy is hardly an advertisement. I must be be missing something here. Standard2211 (talk) 00:59, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

helo help please

i dont know what to do on this anymore,I made my arcticle on a gamer clan and it says some one wants to delete it and i tryed to look up my arctile on google and i cant find it do i still have to do stuff so it will go on the internet?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jsuarez33 (talk • contribs) 03:54, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion of Jonny Lines

I am asking you to withdraw your speedy deletion of my page. As I am still in the process of setting the page completely up.

Why punish another artist, who deserves to have a page? So people can research and find useful information on modern day poets, such as english students at school.

I feel that your speedy deletion request is a choice you have made in haste.

And therfore I ask kindly for you to withdraw.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonnylines (talk • contribs) 04:20, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) If you need time to work on a rough edit of an article it's best to do that in your own user space. Official articles have to meet certain minimum requirements to be kept. When they do not meet those minimum standards we have to delete them. If you want to work on a rough draft at your own pace create a page at User:Jonnylines/sandbox. Then when you are done polishing it ask somebody to check it over.

Remember that all Misplaced Pages articles need to use sources such as newspaper articles, books, and magazines. If the artist doesn't yet have newspaper, magazine, or book coverage they may not qualify yet for an article here. Cloveapple (talk) 05:28, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Viwinco user page

Hi Mike,

You had emailed me on Friday about a page I created for Viwinco. I apologize for not responding right away - I was home from work for the weekend.

I thought the user page just got me set up - I didn't realize it was subject to the same rules as a public page.

I'm confused - our competitors Andersen Windows and Pella have Wiki entries. Why can't my business? If someone within the organization doesn't create the Wiki page - who else will?

Thanks. I tried doing some research on Wiki before creating that page to make sure it followed the format of other window manufacturers - I'm sorry for doing it wrong.

Any advice is appreciated - especially if creating a company page is even feasible.

Thanks. Kimberly — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.40.143.238 (talk) 16:58, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Redirect using "No indications of separate notability"

Hi Mike,

Department of APECE,University of Dhaka has been organised there at University of Dhaka, Bangladesh recently. It needs information for the students of APECE and the page University of Dhaka unable to meet the needs. I'm a student of University of Dhaka. Please don't redirect the page to University of Dhaka. We, the students of APECE will add informations there. And I'm really sorry for some little mistakes.

Rashtab. --Rashtab (talk) 18:50, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Not everything deserves a page, and Misplaced Pages should not be used by your university for adverting something that their own websites should cover. With that in mind, and since you're determined to contest the redirect, I've nominated the page for deletion - see Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Department of APECE, University of Dhaka and make your case there. MikeWazowski (talk) 19:05, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Mike, this is Terry another employee of WZMH Architects Firm. We are currently in the process of creating a brand new Website that will launch within the next weeks. One of the tasks that I have given to my team is to search various search engines to understand who and how we go about advising of the changes. Upon coming across old/outdated/and not approved images of our projects that are being populated on Misplaced Pages site, it was my instructions to the team to see how we go about changing them. WE are not changing text, however changing approved images. Do you really have that much time on your hands to be policing the site, 11 time to be exact for editing image/ or deleting. I'm not a big user of this site, but there has to be some legality to wrongful publications of images or content which I like to pursue. Given your available, I see no reason why you cannot provide this information in a timely. Thanks for your assistance and education in this matter. Terry — Preceding unsigned comment added by WZMH (talk • contribs) 19:11, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Changes to Wiki Images that meet approval for our Firm

Mike, this is Terry another employee of WZMH Architects Firm. We are currently in the process of creating a brand new Website that will launch within the next weeks. One of the tasks that I have given to my team is to search various search engines to understand who and how we go about advising of the changes. Upon coming across old/outdated/and not approved images of our projects that are being populated on Misplaced Pages site, it was my instructions to the team to see how we go about changing them. WE are not changing text, however changing approved images. Do you really have that much time on your hands to be policing the site, 11 time to be exact for editing image/ or deleting. I'm not a big user of this site, but there has to be some legality to wrongful publications of images or content which I like to pursue. Given your available, I see no reason why you cannot provide this information in a timely. Thanks for your assistance and education in this matter. Terry

Terry Reid

WZMH (talk) 20:01, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Amy Lemons

Hello MikeWazowski, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Amy Lemons, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. – GorillaWarfare (talk) 20:22, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

I did not tag the page for speedy deletion. I just restored the tag when it had been improperly deleted by the page creator. MikeWazowski (talk) 20:25, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Dead Last (Band)

Hey, why was my page deleted? I came home from work and it was gone?!!!? I got all the facts right from the members and I don't think there was any mistakes made. I couldn't figure out how to add pictures, so they were not on the page, but everything else looked alright. What happened? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dave MacDonald Racing (talk • contribs) 22:31, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Your username?

I love Monsters, Inc also! --Eta-theta 02:12, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

please take a look into this

This article does not meet notability guidelines. It mentions an award in 2004, but in fact it seems like it is a lie. There is no record of the subject receiving this award, and in fact there is a record of someone else receiving it. Standard2211 (talk) 22:19, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

MIB multiple issues and notability

Since the day that it was tagged with those, I haven't gotten an answer to why it was tagged and what parts of the article needs to be fixed. Can you help and explain what needs to be words correctly? Jae ₩on (Deposit) 16:47, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Deletions / Undos

I am unsure why you seem to be targeting my posts. While I am new to it, is wikipedia not about sharing information? I am not a spammer.

You seem to want to delete and undo things very quickly. There is no way you have considered the material. Please take some time to compare the links and where they are posted and you will see that they are all interconnected and relevant. That's all I ask.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Birdsong2010 (talk • contribs) 17:37, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Actually, I have considered the material - every article you've created has been a blatant copyright violation of material lifted from Stephens Gerard Malone's website, and every contribution you've made (both in your account and from your original IP address) has been to add content promoting Malone and his books to various articles. You have not provided a single valid independent reference as to why any of this is notable, and I have been well within the guidelines to remove content or flag articles as necessary. MikeWazowski (talk) 17:51, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

-All I have had any time to do is chase you around as you chase me. How does anything ever get posted (or updated to make it current and more relevant - as i was only attempting to do) on Misplaced Pages with folks like you deleting items before they are even really completed or fully referenced properly? It doesn't make any sense and is not working in the spirit of sharing information freely and openly.

Again, I ask - how does a highly relevant historical reference to a book that isn't even available for sale any longer constitute book spam?

For the record, I was only copying material that already existed on Misplaced Pages. Again, if you would take the time to read before simply deleting items, you could investigate that.

I am not trying to start a war - far from it - but I am also not trying to spam anyone. I am only trying to update information and you are making that completely impossible.

You have to understand that not everyone works as fast as you are able to delete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Birdsong2010 (talk • contribs) 18:07, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Ooops Dept

The marketing award thingy - you tagged it db-band... ~I've prodded it. You might like to prod2 or try another CSD (but not A7 - doesn't apply to awards, but the group behind it were A7ed quite legitimately). I don't think it's spammy enough for db-spam. Peridon (talk) 20:42, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Odd - I thought I tagged it just a plain A7... MikeWazowski (talk) 21:18, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Megamind Misplaced Pages

I wanted to know why the changes I submitted are deleted and why they are considered promotional material? How does one go about to mention Megamind's fans without it getting deleted from the Misplaced Pages page? Many other Misplaced Pages pages have been written referencing fans and their activities, so it is not unheard of. How should we word it differently so that it meets Misplaced Pages's standards? Here is the latest update I made, with citations. Of course, many of the citations are to fan sites and communites, but how is that considered promotional? Would it be better to write the same information down, but without the citations? Please help clarify what we need to change instead of just deleting it without asking first. Thank you.

This is the latest version I made of the new "Legacy" section I was trying to add to Misplaced Pages. Should it just be under the reception page instead? I could understand that and would put it under Reception.

Your reference to BoxOfficeJunkie (the only marginally acceptable reference you have) makes no mention of word-of-mouth reviews, and so can't be cited as "one factor". The rest is just promoting unremarkable fan sites. I'm sorry, but the Livejournal, Deviantart, and Facebook links you're using absolutely fail WP:RS - they should never be used as references, and would probably even be deleted as external links. Just because something exists doesn't mean that it's notable enough for inclusion. Nothing you've added has the kind of coverage necessary from independent reliable sources for inclusion. MikeWazowski (talk) 21:47, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

ITF Dubai

I would think you should not delete all the results of this tournament, because there IS , in my opinion, a need for an extra article for singles and doubles as well. Thanks Catgamer (talk) 22:37, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Would like to here why you think it should NOT have an extra article? Kante4 (talk) 23:35, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

It seems incredibly excessive - we shouldn't list every little detail of every sporting event. Displaying the winners on the main page seems to be appropriate coverage, if the event is actually notable. MikeWazowski (talk) 23:37, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Did you checked the other tennis articles from 2011/2010/2009 and so on? Kante4 (talk) 23:43, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

These caught my eye because they were edited by a new editor, largely empty, and seemed to be unnecessary forks when one master article would suffice. Misplaced Pages is not the tournament's webpage, and perhaps those other articles to refer to need to be looked at as well. MikeWazowski (talk) 23:49, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

So, we talk about it right here and you go ahead and make it a speedy deletion? No way... Kante4 (talk) 23:45, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

The speedy was filed before you posted your last message. MikeWazowski (talk) 23:49, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

I don´t see the problem with having extra articles. Maybe talk to other tennis editors aswell. Kante4 (talk) 23:53, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Mike , look at 2010 there they did it with an extra article page for the Singles and Doubles as well, so I just thought that in that case it was a proper work that I did and I still think so, like Keroks said it.Catgamer (talk) 00:06, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

And why is it allowed to have an article for each ATP challenger in singles and doubles and for the same or higher price money ITF Women's tourneys it is deleted? I cannot understand that. :-(( Catgamer (talk) 00:11, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Johnathan James Recor

Hey Mike, I recognize your truly a busy guy and not to waste anymore of your time here but I have to honestly say that I don't rightly understand why this particular page doesn't establish notability. And not to sound overly rude here but, if the page is going to continually be deleted, flagged, monitored, and tagged by you indefinitely, I would appreciate an answer that explains how a person who dresses up as a giant beer can (http://en.wikipedia.org/Keggy_the_keg) can have a sustainable page but this other artist/mascot/performer at Dartmouth can not? I don't understand. More specifically, how is this not notable: http://www.vnews.com/webextras/webextras-sungod.html?? Again I don't mean to sound rude in anyway, it's just that I worked hard and spent many hours trying to re-create this page again from scratch and now you deleted it again without much consideration to the fact that 80% of it's former self has been removed. I want to understand. It goes without saying that I feel very frustrated and upset because I don't know what it is you need to give this the 'okay'. Thanks for your understanding and I'm sorry if I sound upset. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheGildedEdge (talk • contribs) 00:58, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

I did not delete anything - I merely flagged the article for deletion as a recreation of deleted material - which it was. The page was deleted by DGG the first time, and Fastily this time. As for the other pages, please read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS - I don't care about the other pages, as they have nothing to do with this discussion. And a webvideo from a local news site doesn't scream notability to me. I'm sorry, but I just don't see this as a notable individual, especially when the person in question had to create all the articles about himself the first time around, and you appear to have shown up the first time right soon after Recor asked people on his personal page to come sway the deletion discussion, and you recreated the article using elements uploaded by him. MikeWazowski (talk) 01:12, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply Mike but I never said you deleted anything. Rather, you contributed to it's deletion, which is more then relevant for discussion. The fact that you won't allow the page to be reviewed by other admins without your prior approval makes me strongly feel that you have a personal vendetta against the subject. Browsing through your post history with this subject, I can't help but notice the following entry deletions:

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Dartmouth_College&action=history

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Keggy_the_Keg&action=history

This is a cause for concern.

You mention "other pages", again Mike, I don't know what your talking about or what this has to do with the question at hand. "I'm sorry, but I just don't see this as a notable" -- Mike, my friend, this is the problem. By not allowing other admins on Misplaced Pages to pass judgement the second time around, it's only natural that you pose a bias towards the page. Regarding the WebVideo, are you aware that this simple slideshow won the national NEAPNEA contest - which apparently, is a big deal. Here is one of several thousand links I found on google: (http://bangordailynews.com/2011/07/27/business/neapnea-2011-website-contest-winners/).

"Especially when the person in question had to create all the articles about himself the first time around" -- Mike is this really true? -- The original page was up for two months before another user added substantial changes, in which you reverted back to it's original (passed/accepted) form as logged in the "view history". You also mention that I "appear to have shown up the first time right soon after Recor asked people on his personal page to come sway the deletion discussion" -- Mike, again, this is a biased assumption and note that the facebook page (which I have just reviewed for the past 20 minutes) has no record or post of anything concerning Misplaced Pages and because this point was the contributing factor that led to the deletion of the page, is a major cause for concern especially given this quote below in defense of the subject:

"Keep - The article has a subject of minor notability. "Clearly not notable" is not a viable position. Subject was a primary part of Dartmouth College/Hanover culture with a wide-spread message and cultural significance. With proper editing and clean-up to maintain neutrality, this article will provide important information on an significant series of events that defined an entire town and college community. Contents are verifiable. Please note: many people on Dartmouth College have a personal vendetta against J.J. Recor and many entries in favor of deletion may be the result of prejudice and personal opinion, unrelated to any concern for Misplaced Pages guidelines. Naysayers have also been brought to this discussion by Recor's Facebook page and are not impartial. Their disruption of this article due to personal prejudice against the article's subject is a violation of Misplaced Pages's anti-harassment policy. ALSO, no concrete proof of sock puppetry. Fellow editors who have broken no Misplaced Pages rules are being banned just for editing or associating with this article. This is unjust and against Misplaced Pages policy to ban users who have done nothing wrong. People need to take a careful look at what's going on here and understand that this isn't a trolling fest; some of us here are actually concerned about the important/relevant content of this article! Thank you. GW9IFAL804 (talk) 19:00, 7 November 2011 (UTC)— GW9IFAL804

Mike, I appreciate all your efforts in keeping Misplaced Pages a safe and friendly place, I would just politely ask that you reconsider this deletion. As a result of all these contributing factors, I see no reason why this page should not be up.

Thank you for your time, Rob

Sigh - you turn around and say " I never said you deleted anything", when you had *just posted* (and it's still visible right above your claim) "now you deleted it again". As I mentioned before, I did not delete anything, so there is nothing I can reconsider, and nothing I can do. The page was deleted as a recreation of deleted material (barely two weeks after it was deleted!) by a reviewing administrator - by deleting the article, they obviously felt it was close enough to the prior article (which was deleted after a standard and fairly run Articles for Deletion discussion) to merit such action. Your claim that I "won't allow the page to be reviewed by other admins" is therefore demonstrably false, as another admin had to review and then delete the reposted article. I also find it interesting that you claim that the Facebook page "has no record or post of anything concerning Misplaced Pages", when it clearly shows the seven most recent items are all a call for his fans to go "update this page back to it's original form" - perhaps you need glasses? I've taken screenshots, just in case you or Recor feel the need to edit the page to remove those items.

The original admin who deleted the article did so purely because of its unambiguous promotional nature, which means your idea that Facebook was the contributing factor is rather doubtful. As I mentioned when I first nominated the article for deletion, I did not feel the subject was notable enough for an article. You obviously feel differently, but I have not changed that opinion. MikeWazowski (talk) 17:29, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

I was unaware that there were multiple pages on Facebook for this subject as I was clearly going by the thread that was posted in the deletion discussion (http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Johnathan_James_Recor). And I don't appreciate you calling me names as it is a violation of Misplaced Pages's anti-harassment policy. You obviously have some beef with this guy and I'm not going to waste any more of my time trying to get in the middle of you two. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheGildedEdge (talk • contribs) 17:58, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Please, don't play the victim card here - where did I call you a name? Questioning your eyesight when something is so blatantly displayed (after you supposedly had looked for 20 minutes) was sarcastic, yes, but not name-calling. I have no beef with the Recor - I'd never heard of him before coming across his page on a patrol of new editor's contributions, and it (rightly) set off multiple warning bells about notability and self-promotion. I've tried to be civil with you, even after being called biased and being (falsely) accused of having a vendetta. I see hundreds of pages a day - this was just one of many. Sorry that doesn't fit your narrative casting me as Recor's Misplaced Pages Boogeyman, but it's the truth. MikeWazowski (talk) 18:08, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Regarding the David Jubb page. He is a pioneer within the raw foods movement. Many of the current leaders in the movement, ie. David Wolfe, have gotten their information or inspiration from him.

I understand that the page should have more information, but feel that simply threatening to delete the page with every mis step is discouraging to participate in wikipedia.

Would you like to assist me to bring information about this persons work to wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Etonw (talk • contribs) 23:48, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Independence of Namibia

Ouky ,i,get your message now what must i do if i want to publish my page on wikipedia? You said i copy the information ,but i just learn it from namibian history since grade eight to twelve. I request some help from you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wilkandahafa (talk • contribs) 11:02, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

The Challenger Selling Model

Mike,

I wanted to reach out and introduce myself. I serve as part of the communications team for Corporate Executive Board. We recently posted a page on The Challenger Selling Model. The Challenger Selling Model has been cited and recognized by leading media outlets and sales professionals throughout the industry. I wanted kindly request feedback from you and inquire about what we might do to make the article in your view more fitting for Misplaced Pages. Thank you in advance for sharing your thoughts and feeback.

Best, Shannon EckhartShannonEckhart (talk) 19:37, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello,can you please give me a valid reason for removing the entire TAKRL discograpy ?

Hello

I notice that you have removed the entire TAKRL discograpy due to an unknown reason.I put all this information up on Misplaced Pages due to the lack of information about this labels released.I base all the information on the fact that I have ALL THESE RECORDS IN MY PERSONAL COLLECTION.I also have valid information about the TMOQ/TAKRL label from a friend of the people who actually set up the label in the -70ths.I cant see how you have the authority to remove it all and I would like to hear your reason for doing so.Regards Rune Skulstad.Bergen.Norway — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flyspes (talk • contribs) 17:54, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Had you read my edit summary, you would know that the reason was, in fact, because it was unreferenced. Your original research is not an acceptable source, nor is Misplaced Pages a marketing outlet for this label. Without valid referencing to a reliable source, it should not be re-added. MikeWazowski (talk) 18:03, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

ok,so question 1..what is a "reliable source" ? as the label have been defunkt since 1978

I have the vinyl proof as I have all titles in my own collection

question 2...why are you stopping me from giving collectors a discography on this label and at the same time the "mother label" TMOQ have had a discography on wikipedia for many years.What is the difference between the main label and the sub-label ? sorry I dont get it

question 3..what authority do you have to remove all this information ?

I have the authority any user has when confronted with unreferenced original research. I do not need your permission to remove it - in fact, it's actively encouraged. And since you're edit-warring on the page now using multiple accounts (a named one and an IP), you're in violation of those same guidelines, and have been reported to the appropriate board. Enjoy your block from editing which should be coming soon. MikeWazowski (talk) 20:29, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello again Mr Wazowski

I want to "play by the book" and obay the Misplaced Pages rules,so I have now linked all the information I uploaded on Misplaced Pages to the book Hot Wacks page 769&&770.This book was published in 1992 and is still on sale on amazon.com.Here is a link http://www.amazon.com/Hot-Wacks-Book-XV-Whack/dp/0969808038.I hope by doing this that I have corrected all my prevous mistakes and that I can finish the discography..regards rune Flyspes (talk) 19:13, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Warriors

Hi. Every so often you come across a new editor who looks like he might have a bit of promise - such as a guy who creates a list of the books for a series of novels that he's interested in, for instance. Sure he signed it and didn't do the formatting right, but we all start somewhere. How much more welcoming to try to help such a guy by recognising that his work isn't total rubbish... So how about undoing your redirect and giving him the chance to improve the tentative list that he's created? I may be completely wrong of course, but there's no harm done if he does nothing and we redirect it later. Don't forget that we're concerned about editor retention these days.  —SMALLJIM  20:57, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

No comment? I think that we should do it soon in case he comes back and wonders what's happened, so if I don't hear in half an hour, I'll revert. Just for clarity, I'm suggesting that don't bite the newbies is sometimes more important than slavishly following the rules.  —SMALLJIM  21:25, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

3RR report

Just a minor thing: you might want to refactor your recent 3RR report since that last diff isn't the article talk page. Cloveapple (talk) 22:30, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

--Flyspes (talk) 11:25, 4 December 2011 (UTC)== Re:Removing the TAKRL discography..ok so what is a .."reliable source" ???? ==

Hello everybody who is reading this last comment about my contribution to Misplaced Pages.

This is my first time every to share information and I am not familiar with the rules and no-no.I actually didnt think it was a big thing to upload information without being signed in to my account.I see quite clearly that I was wrong and I appologise for my my mistake.I agree that puting information on wikipedia from an anonymos IP-ID is no good.

Mr Wazowski accuse me of quote "edits appear to constitute vandalism".I am afraid I dont really understand this comment as I was simply sharing information about a record label which is mentioned on Misplaced Pages in a very general way.No point to mention a record label if you cant give details about the output.I do however understand Mr Wazowski*s point about documenting my information.I hope the following details will be accepted' 1. all the information about serial number/artits/titles can be found in the book HOT WACKS"THE LAST WACKS" page 769+770. This book was published in 1992 by THE HOT WACKS PRESS.PO BOX 544. OWEN SOUND,CANADA and can be found for sale on Amazon 2. I DO have all the LPs in personal collection as I have been collecting for 45 years.I understand that this is not very valid proof.I can supply a scan of all album at any time upon request 3.this information ca be found on the website :http://www.larkin.net.au/takrl/ .The information have been there since 2007

Finally,it is my intention to give information about the other labels mentioned in the main Misplaced Pages article such as SODD-HHCER-TKRWM but I see no point in using hours of work and then every- thing will be deleted.Information about the above mentioned labels can also be found in the same book HOT WACKS..

regards Flyspes (talk) 11:25, 4 December 2011 (UTC) Rune Skulstad/Bergen/Norway — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flyspes (talk • contribs) 11:17, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Army of Darkness

This Army of Darkness argument isn't going anywhere fast. So look: I respect your little "Bruce Campbell vs Army of Darkness" thing, and I'm not taking it away, I'm just moving it to the front of the name list. And as for the genre, it was originally "action comedy fantasy film". It was ME who changed it to "horror comedy action film", and now I realize that I shouldn't have. So if I'm changing my own edit, nobody should be giving me any crud about it anymore. If somehow you have an objection to my perfectly legit edits, then write back and tell me so. I don't mean to be rude, but this is just a bit much for me. I'm a flipping seventh grader. The Shadow-Fighter (talk) 23:25, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

V.J. Manzo page

Hi Mike--I am writing in response to the request for deletion under the pretense of being the subject and author. I can assure that this is not the case. I admire the subjects work and, as a fan, have followed his career and chose a screenname that he used for a character in his 2003 book and in the band Cryptic Bay years before he was known. Please don't delete the page in these grounds. The article is shaping up and others, at least one other, is contributing.

Thanks for considering this request.

Merlingoth88 (talk) 05:09, 6 December 2011 (UTC)Merlingoth

My criteria for deletion has nothing to do with whether you're Manzo or not - it's a question of reliable sources and notability, and while you've referenced the hell out of that page, hardly any of them are from independent reliable sources. However, as to your identity, this image of Manzo, which is used on many of his sites, including his personal Twitter page, is specifically credited being authored by Manzo, and it links to your userpage over there. Hi, VJ... 05:18, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Phantasia

I dont understand why the Phantasia page i created was deleted... I was still in the process of updating and completing this article. There are hundereds of bands listed here on wikipedia, so for what reason was mine deleted? Thanks Michael A. StJames — Preceding unsigned comment added by Progologist (talk • contribs) 17:57, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

As the note I posted on your talk page explained, the band did not appear notable enough for an article, and a reviewing administrator obviously agreed. MikeWazowski (talk) 18:02, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

I do not agree with your speedy deletion

I am new to wiki and read your speedy deletion. I have checked and feel it is unjustified. Please either give me advice on how to rectify this and remove the speedy deletion button. I am disappointed at the lack of encouragement here on wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cynthia 76 (talk • contribs) 18:10, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Why are you deleting articles that are not compeleted or finished? on the basis of non importance. I know you have not even investigated as if you have you would not delete. I am requesting you give opportunity for this page to grow and not be so hasty on this decision. i will go through all the right options so that this can be resolved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cynthia 76 (talk • contribs) 18:23, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm not deleting anything - I'm flagging articles I see as not showing enough notability to have an article, and a reviewing admin (who is the one actually doing the deletions) obviously agreed. MikeWazowski (talk) 18:28, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

'Zeronoize' CSD Flag & Resulting Deletion

Hello, I noticed that Zeronoize was flagged for CSD and deleted before I even noticed. The reason for the flagging was that the "article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant." That is in fact true that the article did not contain any information about why it was important but the only reason for that was because of the nature of the article, I was afraid it would be flagged for advertising if I had included information on why it is important/significant. I'm not sure how to go about requesting that the article be undeleted so that I can include some of that information; however, I find it almost pretentious that you have the authority to declare what is important or not when the page was not even completed yet. InfinitelyNothing (talk) 23:35, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Learning to write Misplaced Pages articles can be a bit confusing. I'm glad to hear you were making an effort to make the article neutral and not ad-like. One way to show that your article subject has some importance (and to also meet the higher threshold that Misplaced Pages calls "notability") without sounding like an ad is to show that multiple books, newspapers, or magazines have discussed the subject of your article.

While you are still in the rough draft stage of forming the article it might be helpful to work on an unofficial rough draft page first. You can do that by starting a page at User:InfinitelyNothing/sandbox.

As to where MikeWazowski got the authority, there are some minimal guidelines an article has to meet in order to be an official article. Any Misplaced Pages editor has the authority to mark articles for deletion that don't meet that minimal threshold. (Then the actual deletion is done by an administrator.)

If any of this is still confusing just ask me. Cloveapple (talk) 20:10, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

The article I created.

Chmts (talk) 00:37, 8 December 2011 (UTC) I put text for place holder and still new to wikipedia. I'm going to learn more about creating an article and change/add original text. So please don't delete the article. Chmts (talk) 00:37, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Official articles can't really have place holder text. If you want to work on a rough draft you can create a page at User:Chmts/sandbox and work there. Then whenever you want some feedback or think the article is no longer just a place holder feel free to ask somebody for help. Cloveapple (talk) 19:47, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Page Deletion

Hey. I saw you marked my page for deletion which I totally get because it looks like crap right now. How long do I have to get it looking better before it gets taken down? It is a work in progress and a page I was planning to work on over Christmas break. thanks for your input. Zackmann08 (talk) 03:16, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Official articles have to meet some basic criteria right away. Articles that are missing the most basic requirements can be deleted immediately. If you want time to work on a rough draft start a page at User:Zackmann08/sandbox and work there. Then when you think it is ready or want some feedback just ask for somebody to check on it. Feel free to ask me if you've got more questions. Cloveapple (talk) 19:42, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Regarding Peer Gynt

I meant to write "borderline notable", not "borderline referencable". --85.196.118.210 (talk) 21:25, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Regarding Bahadir Kaleagasi

I fail to understand why you have 'speedy deleted' the page of Bahadir Kaleagasi. Is it because of my Misplaced Pages username? I am not representing this person, nor is the article an autobiography. Does an important political figure not deserve to have a Misplaced Pages article? After all, I put my references from independent sources as well as the official website of Dr.Bahadir Kaleagasi. Please state your reason for the deletion of the page, it was written form a neutral point of view.

Kaleagasi (talk) 09:38, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

I did not delete anything - I just flagged it as promotional, which an administrator apparently agreed with. According to the deletion logs, it was deleted for being unambiguously promotional, and it had been deleted once before as a copyright violation. MikeWazowski (talk) 16:42, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Momentum

How is it that 8x8 http://en.wikipedia.org/8x8 can have the same style page as Momentum Telecom, yet my Momentum page is deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SoccerHoodie (talk • contribs) 17:14, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

That page is well referenced (yours was not), and does not appear to be a blatant copyvio of the subject's website, while the page you created undoubtedly was. MikeWazowski (talk) 17:26, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Runaround Sue

If at all possible could you explain why you decided to delete my addition to Runaround Sue? My addition was notable in the fact that it's probably one of the current most well known samples of Runaround Sue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.5.179.107 (talk) 19:03, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

G-Eazy

It seems to me like you think you have a God given right to patrol Misplaced Pages and put any article up for deletion that you see fit. Why is this? Whats your problem? The article is notable, the cover song has 300,000 views on Youtube which for an Independent singer is notable. The artist has opened for million record sellers such as Lil Wayne and Drake and is currently on a tour and can be cited in a number of independent music sites. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drewbik (talk • contribs) 21:06, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Any editor has this right. If you think the person is notable, make your case (with relevant and appropriate citations) on the AfD discussion page. At the time I nominated the article, he did not appear notable enough to me, based on information presented in the article. MikeWazowski (talk) 23:15, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

A misplaced warning

I can certainly see how someone would view that change as a test edit, but you might wish to retract this warning. The editor was actually restoring to the proper name of the person involved, though they failed to restore the remainder of the sentence which was vandalized by an IP editor immediately previous. I have restored the page to its proper version. Regards, Resolute 01:36, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

G-Eazy

Please do not use multiple and extremely redundant maintenance tags, as you did on G-Eazy with this edit. Simply tagging with Template:BLP sources would have sufficed. Additional sourcing is needed because primary sources are in use in the article. Primary sources are not considered reliable sources. All three reference cleanup templates are not needed to explain this. I was also unable to ascertain what sentences you consider to be using peacock terms. The notability tag was unneeded because the article is up for deletion. If the article closes as keep, it is presumed that the subject meets the notability guidelines. Thank you, Alpha_Quadrant 04:20, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Keep the article "Alexandria Everett"

Hi. In this article given all the references. Please keep this article because only 1 article about Brittani Kline from Cycle 16 (min 2). KIRILL95 (talk) 14:24, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Wrong

When you put SNL episode 702, it redirects to the article "SNL season 37". However, this episode is from season 36. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Teen13USA (talk • contribs) 23:34, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Stop redirecting my articles!!!

Stop creating unnecessary SNL articles. MikeWazowski (talk) 23:39, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Mark Kopytman

It's Creative Commons licensed now - on the page mentioned on the talk page. I deleted it, then put it back up. I'm not sure about the notability etc, so I've left those tags up. Peridon (talk) 17:48, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

You said the text was CC licensed - however, the page I flagged it as being a copyvio from (http://www.bmop.org/explore-bmop/musicians/mark-kopytman) makes no mention of that - in fact, it specifically states ©2010 BOSTON MODERN ORCHESTRA PROJECT. FYI. MikeWazowski (talk) 19:12, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi Mike - The BOSTON MODERN ORCHESTRA used the information that was published on www.kopytman.com which I have worked on with the composer himself when he was alive. The http://www.bmop.org/ certainly does not have the copyright, but we don't mind, we have placed the CC notice on the original page http://www.kopytman.com/information.php?info_id=1. I noticed that other people started editing the biography upon the news of his death, so it is a work in progress. I have removed the issues tags because i have added a number of references and so it is no longer based on a single source. I ask that you please remove them.

love your username! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Littlebillbob (talk • contribs) 15:02, 18 December 2011 (UTC)