Misplaced Pages

User talk:Ron Ritzman

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.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ron Ritzman (talk | contribs) at 13:15, 8 September 2011 (→Question regarding delete: adding revisions tag). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 13:15, 8 September 2011 by Ron Ritzman (talk | contribs) (→Question regarding delete: adding revisions tag)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Note to administrators. You are free to undo any of my administrative actions once. I will not consider it wheel warring if you have a good reason. However, if it's an AFD close then please discuss it with me first unless the close is completely backwards.


Note to all editors. 75% of you are probably better editors then I am. If you disagree with an edit I make, feel free to revert and discuss. If I'm uncivil or otherwise violating a policy/guideline then let me know. (but please don't use a template :)
This is Ron Ritzman's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16

Deleted Pseudoscience Page Comes Back to Life

A Wiki page entitled CrossFire Fusor, that was deleted in October 2010, as a result of this AfD debate:

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/CrossFire_Fusor

now appears to have come back to life, in a new page here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/CrossFire_Fusor

As discussed in the AfD, the above page appears to be pseudoscientific nonsense, strung together by a 42 year old guy named Moacir L. Ferreira, from Curitiba, Brazil, who has a degree in computational science, and clearly a very active sci-fi imagination.

Another apparent bit of pseudoscience by Moacir L. Ferreira implanted on Misplaced Pages can be found here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/Phase_Displacement_Space_Drive

These pages should be nominated for deletion.

Clearly there is an intent to populate Misplaced Pages with his self-published pseudoscience.

Drgao (talk) 08:45, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Message to 50.99.244.233 wrt Kunjaliyan

The article was not deleted. It was moved to the article incubator as a result of this discussion because the film has not yet been released. If I had not done this then the article most likely would have been deleted. The article is at Misplaced Pages:Article Incubator/Kunjaliyan. You are welcome to work on it there and when the film is released and/or it gets more coverage then it can be moved back into article space. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:22, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

User:Amyabaker/Noddle

Anthony, you were involved at User talk:Amyabaker/Noddle. I think the full protection in this situation is uncontroversial enough that you can unprotect it yourself. I will have to log off soon, and I'd like to post the changes now instead of later. Cunard (talk) 09:10, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

I'll trust Anthony's judgement on this matter but normally it's reasonable to protect pages that are temporarily restored for DRV. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 12:27, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

I understand that pages restored for DRV are generally protected. However, because this was a speedy deletion, and because I had addressed the speedy deletion reason with a rewrite, I think it was a good application of unprotection. Cunard (talk) 15:15, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

An AFD you closed was restarted two days later

You closed Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/World of Books Ltd as No consensus, and Phearson, who said delete in that debate, two days after your close opened a new AFD at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/World of Books Ltd (2nd nomination). Can you speedy close this and warn him of the rules? Dream Focus 00:14, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

AbleNET

Please userfy deleted article under User:Lexein/AbleNET. SchmuckytheCat has been asked repeatedly by many editors NOT to delete, and to discuss before deletion, and to involve IRC-interested editors in any such intended activities. Refuses to follow WP:BEFORE. --Lexein (talk) 02:11, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Question regarding delete

Hello ron, im sorry, i fail to see why you would delete my wiki.

The result was speedy delete. I'm going to close this as a CSD G11 so if someone wishes to write sourced neutral article on the subject they may do so. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:37, 1 September 2011 (UTC) 4pm 

   4pm (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)
   (Find sources: "4pm" – news · books · scholar · free images)

Blatant advertisement for a non-notable company. No third-party hits on Google, and article cites subject's own website and non-English references as sources. sixtynine • spill it • 14:57, 25 August 2011 (UTC) 

   Delete 95% of the content as blatant advertising. This is basically a sales brochure for the product. After that, I'm not sure whether it meets wp:notability. North8000 (talk) 18:08, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

First, non-notable company? What, just because we are a start-up we are not allowed to post on wikipedia? Im sorry, but if you consider our wiki blatant-advertising, take a look at any other software on the list comparing project management sofware, the wiki i set up was absolutely no different from any of the others. Article cites subject's own website: again look at the list of comparable project management software, but if that is a problem there is absolutely no problem for us to delete that reference.

In essence, could you please explain why you are deleting our wiki while keeping comparable others online.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Satejb (talk • contribs) 09:29, 8 September 2011 (UTC)