Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by DanielRigal (talk | contribs) at 13:17, 19 May 2010 (→More players - Discount-Licensing Article: reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Hello, welcome to my talk page! If you want to leave a message, please do it at the bottom, as a new section, for better formatting. You can do that by simply pressing the plus sign (+) or "new section" on the top of this page. And don't forget to sign your messages with four tildes, like this: ~~~~ Attention: I prefer to keep discussions unfragmented. If you leave a comment for me here, I will most likely respond to it on this same page—my talk page—as an effort to keep the entire conversation in one place. By the same token, if I leave a comment on your talk page, please respond to it there. Remember, we can use our watchlist and topic subscriptions to keep track of when responses are made. At the same time, feel free to send an alert to me on this page about a comment you have left elsewhere. Thank you!

Archives 2006. 2007. 2008. 2009. 2010. Automated Messages.

Sockpuppet investigation involving you

Just a heads-up in case you feel the need to defend yourself against this silliness. Snied (talk) 06:11, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I needed a laugh. --DanielRigal (talk) 12:22, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of The Wimpy Kid Movie Diary

A tag has been placed on The Wimpy Kid Movie Diary requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Misplaced Pages:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. iBen 00:51, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Don't worry. I was just adding the content and references when you tagged it. It should be a valid stub now. --DanielRigal (talk) 00:58, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

February 2010

Thank you for your recent contributions, such as The Wimpy Kid Movie Diary. Getting started creating new articles on Misplaced Pages can be tricky, and you might like to try creating a draft version first, which you can then ask for feedback on if necessary, without the risk of speedy deletion. Do make sure you also read help available to you, including Your First Article and the Tutorial. You might also like to try the Article Wizard, which has an option to create a draft version. Thank you. iBen 01:13, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

On Glasgow and Lanarkshire

Daniel, I have commented on the talk page of my entry. You are incorrect to state that the subject is covered in the main article as the question is not even mentioned. However I will accept your deletion of my Glasgow, Lanarkshire page on condition that you remove it completely, including the redirect. the effect of leaving the redirect in place is to reinforce the misapprehension that I am trying to remedy. it would be like redirecting Washington, Tyne and Wear to Washington DC.

Paul Coyne (talk) 20:09, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

I didn't make the redirect and I was a little surprised when it was created. If you think it is misleading, and that could well be the case, then you can either propose it for deletion or change the redirect to point to Lanarkshire instead.

As for the Glasgow article, it does make Glasgow's status as a Unitary Authority very clear. It doesn't go into detail about people using older terminology and I can't see any real encyclopaedic reason to do so. It is a bit like some people saying that London is in Middlesex (which doesn't even exist any more). There are many such misapprehensions out there. Unless this one has received significant coverage in reliable sources I don't think we need to cover it. --DanielRigal (talk) 23:12, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

+ Daniel, how do I propose the redirect be deleted? Your point about London/Middlesex is exactly one of the points I make when correcting people. There very definitely is a need to state that Glasgow is not in Lanarkshire as it is frequently asserted to me that it is. About 50% of post sent to Glasgow is incorrectly addressed as a result of this ignorance. I don't see the same mistake being made wrt London, which is precisely my point. Paul Coyne (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:21, 1 March 2010 (UTC).

I have done it now using the PROD (proposed deletion) tag. I doubt anybody will object. --DanielRigal (talk) 20:34, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

OK. It seems that PROD was the wrong tag so I am trying again with RfD. I am sure we will get there in the end. --DanielRigal (talk) 22:54, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Mukkulathor Wiki Page

Hi, both edits are false. The initial intro page has been vandalized by user T22878. The actual intros tell that these 3 castes (more than 10% of the Tamil population) are of Tamil Royal lineage!!... The ref given are false, just playonwords (thevar, dewar are (respectable) words before being a caste name). These castes used to be soldiers of the kings and Land lords (please check the initial refs) and after the collapse of then ancient order some of them managed to found their little kingdoms (this was the initial intro of this wiki page, much more accurate). Thanks.90.46.32.29 (talk) 18:58, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

YaHero

Just wanted to say thanks. I was actually leaving a note for the speedy-tagger, a conscientious and hard-working patroller, to explain my declining his tag. I'm grateful for your application of the stub tags, general clean-up and moving the article to its correctly-spelled title. If you have any ideas of a portal where this article could find someone to champion it further, I would be grateful; I think this has barely enough for retention, but needs work by someone interested in the topic. But thanks for your help. Accounting4Taste:talk 17:49, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

I've found a way to bring it to the attention of the Games portal and will leave it at that, unless you feel like contributing something further. Thanks again. Accounting4Taste:talk 18:01, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

AfD:Reverse scientific method

Please, go make your voice heard in the discussion Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Reverse scientific method! Rursus dixit. (bork!) 14:46, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Michelle Thorne

To answer your question, it was my goof. When I saw that the first reference was for her age, I accidentally went to the external links section. That's where I got '77 from, the first link of the ext. links. Whether that link is considered reliable or not, I don't know. But I know that IMDb is not considered reliable for biographical info, so I've removed the date entirely. I don't have the time now to look into whether or not that first ext link, Eros-something, is reliable or not. I just know that IMDb isn't. If this is so contentious, then it should probably have a section on the talk page. If for no other reason than to help clarify for those who haven't done all the research and seen the manager's attempts to set back the clock. Dismas| 19:54, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

BBC Radio 7

Thanks for reverting anonymous IP's repeated attempts to remove any reference to audience figures for children's programmes on Radio 7. I've tried starting a discussion to check out what the objection is but nobody answers so it becomes hard not to get involved in an editting war. With your revert it looks less like I'm some lonely maniac fighting against the sea. Alistair Stevenson (talk) 13:31, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Sinusitis - removal of natural nasal spray section

The majority of people reading this article will be suffering from sinusitis or will know someone who is. Very few people, unless they are studying medicine, would choose to read up on a subject such as sinusitis. You are correct in stating that wikipedia is encyclopedic however that should not stop plain language being used and references being made to everyday products so that the average reader can better understand the concept (in this case natural nasal sprays). The word 'claim' has been used extensively with regards to natural nasal sprays so their is no bias. You state that the trials are laughable, which in effect means you think that the Institute of Asthma and Allergies in the U.S. is laughable. I can assure it is far from it and has helped many people - please try visiting their website. Why you seen fit to remove a section of this article which could be beneficial to peoples health is beyond me.

I look forward to your comments. P.s. I have undone your changes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Trump22 (talk • contribs) 13:36, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

I make no comment on any organisation. I merely point out that a trial with 24 people in it seems meaningless. If you can provide a reliable reference that show bodies independent of the organisation taking that trial seriously then it can go in, whatever its faults, but not without. A double blind trial with only 24 people in it seems laughable to me but if you can show that respectable medical professionals writing in respectable medical journals think otherwise then I will accept that.

More generally, I think you are confused about what Misplaced Pages is for. It is not a directory or a self-diagnosis site. We should be helping people to understand the subject but not offering them advice. In fact, it would be dangerous and irresponsible for us to do so.

Finally, I think there is a problem with your use of the term homoeopathic. Homoeopathy is a mystical belief in treatments that have no active ingredients and no reputable research body has found them to be effective beyond their placebo effect. If these natural sprays are effective then they can not be homoeopathic. Possibly they contain a small amount of active ingredient?

--DanielRigal (talk) 13:55, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

You seem unbiased

I noticed your comment here about using (or misusing) Archive.org to push a point of view. Could you take a look here, and if you feel that you can form an opinion based on the evidence you see, help advise this dispute? - CRedit 1234 (talk) 18:44, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Further, take a look at this, and think about what that means regarding saying a business was identified as having been "operating illegally", when not a single mainstream news source, or any public court record, seem to substantiate the exceptional claim. A few of us think two tag-teamers are trying to use Misplaced Pages to push a libelous claim, but I'd like an independent analysis. - CRedit 1234 (talk) 18:47, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Dont come for discussion in mukkulathor forum

Its meant for our community alone if u belong to the community u can take part, its complicated to handle users like you please dont mistake me.The discussion about the kshatriyas is unwanted because Tamil is far superior and older than sanskrit and kshathriya is a sanskrit terminology for martial race and mukkulathor need not prove anything to so called "aryans" our community belong to southern region in India dont mix up with northerners our traditions and culture are different and yes THEVARS belong to the Great emperors of CHOLA, PANDYA, and CHERA dynasty. South region of india belongs to the KUMARI KANDAM(LEMURIAN CONTINENT),Where languages and culture born please refer to it. I'm sorry i'm not here to argue with you i want to tell the fact. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Karikala thevar (talk • contribs) 21:47, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Everybody is entitled to comment on any talk page so long as the comments are sensible and polite. You can't delete people's comments because you don't feel they belong. Nobody owns an article or talk page. If you continue removing content you are likely to get yourself blocked. I recommend to stop and read the welcome message for information about how Misplaced Pages works. --DanielRigal (talk) 23:58, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Comments were not sensible and polite

Thanks for your feedback, The people who discussed were not polite and the statements were harsh and the truth is been covered, moreover people don't have any idea and ignorant about the community and they can clarify the doubts but must not make irrelevant statement and that is the reason for removing unwanted topics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Karikala thevar (talk • contribs) 09:54, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

I disagree. You removed valid discussion and replaced it with claims of ethnic/cultural superiority. That is unacceptable. Please stop before you get blocked. --DanielRigal (talk) 10:15, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Page-move request

Hello, My request to move this to an article page has been denied because that title is blacklisted. I'm a bit unclear on how to request a controversial move. Any help? Bruce Swanson 23:55, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm. I am not sure either. You need to ask why it got blacklisted and show that your draft is not subject to the same problems. Maybe somebody repeatedly used it as a coat-rack to push their agenda or was generally abusing it. I had a quick look at your draft and it might need a bit of work however it certainly seems a reasonable start and I can't see anything fundamentally wrong with the subject. --DanielRigal (talk) 08:36, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism???

I'm not editing or removing anything how can u call vandalism?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.202.134.104 (talk) 09:01, 7 April 2010 (UTC) I'm expecting ur answer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.202.134.104 (talk) 09:13, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Removing valid tags is a recognised type of vandalism. Given that the tags have been removed and put back a few times now I thought it reasonable to tag it as vandalism. --DanielRigal (talk) 09:35, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Do you own this wikipedia Mr.Daniel? I simply discussed in that page u r so rude and harsh anyways thanx for forigners contribution to Tamil people. I'm quiting this wiki and u'r taken in to notification once again thanx a lot.--Be2bi (talk) 20:26, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

That's entirely up to you. You are perfectly free to stay and try to learn to edit within rules. If language is the problem then maybe one of the other language Misplaced Pages's would suit you better. Anyway, whatever you decide to do, it is your decision. --DanielRigal (talk) 20:40, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

What entirely up to me? U r not the owner for Misplaced Pages, Its a discussion for the topic which can be included in that article i was just asking the opinion and u please don't try act too smart Mr.Grammar by saying language problem blah blah blah lets stop it u try to be decent moderator first u analyze a issue and then discuss and raise u cant simply judge anyone statement just like that.--117.202.129.114 (talk) 21:12, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

I am sorry but I really can't understand what you are saying or why you are so upset. I have not been rude to you. I have not tried to make you leave Misplaced Pages. All I have done is try to stop you using the talk pages as a general forum for discussing opinions, which is against our policies. I have tried to make helpful suggestions. If you are going to misinterpret everything I say as rude then I might as well stop. --DanielRigal (talk) 21:16, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

WP:SPI

There appears to be quite a bit of backlog for the CheckUsers on WP:SPI. Thankfully, the sockpuppet you have been monitoring is fairly easy to identify, even if his rapid edits are tedious to revert. Hopefully the backlog will clear soon. The upcoming elections might help matters, though the results of the elections are pretty far off in the future. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 00:54, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

about your comment on Tel Keppe

Hello Daniel,

I hope you are right, but good faith is hardly there when it comes to Chaldeans vs Assyrians. Assyrian Nationalists have been forcing the name "Assyrian" for a while. I just didn't know they were doing it in Misplaced Pages as well. Anyway, what I have removed from the article is simply the "Assyrianization" stuff that has no references to it. I had to clean this article from that nonsense. I believe that politics should not produce fault information. My intentions are solely for the correctness of this Misplaced Pages article.

Thanks --King Of Babylonia (talk) 11:13, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

More players - Discount-Licensing Article

Daniel,

My name is Jonathan Horley and I have read your article on discount-licensing.com which you wrote a number of months ago. On the discussion page you asked if there were any other competitors or players in the market apart from Usedsoft. I founded discount-licensing.com along with Noel Unwin in 2005 and left the company 2 years ago. There are a number of articles from the November 2005 launch, of which this is one.

They can all be found by typing "Noel Unwin" "Jonathan Horley" into google. Last year I started Value Licensing which can be accessed at .

Given that I co-founded discount-licensing.com and I am have set-up Value Licensing in the same area, I believed it would be worth mentioning in the discount-licensing.com article. Even though I think that this information is appropriate to go into the article, I do however realise that if I wrote directly into the article this would be a clear conflict of interest. This is why I have come to you directly.

My suggested line in the article would read as follows under the Company history section incorporating the first line which is already there:

Updated belowJonhorley (talk) 14:16, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

I apologise if the above is not in the correct format but this is the first one I have attempted!

Kind regards, Jonathan--Jonhorley (talk) 12:22, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm. I'd like to help but I would be happier if the there was some independent coverage of Value Licensing. Unfortunately, "Value Licensing" is a very hard thing to Google for as it gets lost in hits for "open value licensing" and similar terms. Without any independent coverage of the company it is hard to justify its inclusion. I am happy to add the sentence naming Noel and yourself as the original directors though. The other bit can go in if you can point me towards some media coverage for Value Licensing. If that does not exist at the moment then it can always be added later.

In the meantime, welcome to Misplaced Pages. I hope you will consider having a look at how the articles on MS Licensing can be improved as they are in a pretty poor state at the moment. I am sure you could add some value there. I will add the standard welcome message to your talk page. That has lots of helpful links on how to get started. --DanielRigal (talk) 15:37, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

There is now independant verification relating to Value Licensing so I have redone the edit to the discount-licensing page and added a link to that verfication you asked for.

"Discount-licensing.com was founded as Disclic Ltd in July 2004 by Jonathan Horley and Noel Unwin. Jonathan Horley left discount-licensing.com and has subsequently set-up 'Value Licensing' which is also a vendor or broker of second hand Microsoft software licences. In 2006 Disclic Ltd changed its name to Discount-licensing.com Ltd."

Can you update the page please or if not let me know the correct way to go about getting it changed? Thank you.

JonathanJonhorley (talk) 14:16, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

I have put it in more or less as you suggested. I did drop the link to Value Licencing's website and swapped the order slightly. --DanielRigal (talk) 09:31, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Shouldn't the Value Licensing link be in the external links? Discount-licensing.com is there along with Usedsoft another competitor. Also in the same section the eopen site should be replaced with Volume Licensing Service Center(VLSC). The new link is here. It is now the sole website for users to access Volume licensing agreements and replaces MVLS and eOpen. I've noticed there isn't a Misplaced Pages page on the VLSC. It had a lot of problems and bad press at the turn of year 2009/10. Is it worth doing one? Jonhorley (talk) 10:43, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Noel has registered an account and removed the new material. I reinstated it but this could get difficult if he does it again. Is there bad feeling between the two of you? I don't see why he should object to you getting a brief mention. It is not done in a way that detracts from Discount Licensing at all.

I think it is well worth doing an article on VLSC. This is one of several key MS licensing topics that we need good articles on. The problems should be covered but should not the the main thrust of the article. --DanielRigal (talk) 13:17, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Big data

You previously expressed an opinon on this subject at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Big data. There is a new debate at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Big data (2nd nomination) and your comments would be welcome there. I42 (talk) 05:28, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Spiral Architect

Hi. Last October, you PRODded this, and it was deleted. Its undeletion has now been requested here, so per WP:DEL#Proposed deletion I have restored it and given Ms Lindman advice about references on her talk page. I am now notifying you in case you wish to take it to AfD. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 20:14, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

E-mail

Hello Mr. DanielRigal. I have sent you an e-mail (through Misplaced Pages) about an article that caught my eye and the issues surrounding it. Thank you. IronBreww (talk) 03:06, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I have not been following recent developments on the article but to answer your points:

1. Use of Archive.org is legitimate to demonstrate what Interpol published in the past. Nobody has ever suggested that Archive.org alter or falsify their archive and it is considered reliable even though they are not official archivers for Interpol. Using Archive.org is a bit like going to a library to consult old editions of newspapers or public records. That said, it is possible to misuse Archive.org. If somebody were to pick a past version of a website which contains claims that the publisher later repudiated or amended then it could give a false impression. Do we have any proof that Interpol is still after Soriano? If they are then the description as a fugitive can stay. If they have definitely dropped the matter then references to him being a fugitive should be put into the past tense and probably removed from the lead section but kept elsewhere. If they have simply chosen not to mention him following a reorganisation of their website, that is inconclusive. That could indicate that he is no longer seen as a priority for Interpol but may still be wanted.
2. The "Awards" section has, in the past, contained a big list of awards that Soriano's own organisations had given him. If we mention those at all then we have to explain the context. This is likely to make him look ridiculous. I would be inclined to leave those out entirely, unless there is so much RS coverage of them that we can't ignore them. Other awards, that are genuinely independent, can be mentioned (but preferably not in an "Awards" section) and only if they are awards for him personally, not for his organisations. For example, the awards for the popularity of his personal website are best mentioned in the context of demonstrating his continued popular support despite his legal troubles. An "Awards" section can give the impression of a self-aggrandising "trophy cabinet". In the case of a man who gives himself awards, you have to expect people to be suspicious but that should not prevent a brief mention of any genuine and notable awards.
3. Aggressive warning of newbies is not a good thing but I don't see how it would encourage people to engage in sockpuppetry. Genuine, definite sockpuppets and puppeteers need to be dealt with quickly but there are bound to be genuine newbies as well. Rather than diving straight in with the warning templates when a newbie makes a bad edit that might be COI (or whatever) it is better to start with one of the Welcome templates aimed at potentially problematic users. This lets the user know that they did something wrong in a much more gentle way and helps them to get it right in future. Watching how they respond to that will often give a clue as to whether they are a genuine newbie or a sockpuppet. I appreciate that the user you mentioned can be a little "spikey" but it is a general issue with articles where sockpuppetry is rife that it becomes easy for an editor to get trigger-happy with the reverts and warnings. I have found myself doing it from time to time. Editors need to take care to avoid this but the blame lies with the sockpuppeteers because they create the toxic editing environment where every anonymous or newbie edit seems suspect.

I will try to take a bit more notice of what is going on on the article in future. --DanielRigal (talk) 09:11, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

1. Birmingham Post: Disclic spots niche in market
2. Derby Telegraph:
3. Cite error: The named reference profile was invoked but never defined (see the help page).