User talk:Cntras/Files

Welcome

Twinkle

Hi, I noticed you've been tagging a bunch of pages with PROD and speedy deletion tags. This is definitely useful work and I haven't seen any egregious mistakes. However, you should always check before speedying an article under the A7 criteria (no credible assertion of notability for person, corp, etc). For instance Mark Stevenson turned out to be notable if you had but done a simply google search. Anyway, if you want to make your life easier, you should start using twinkle which will automatically notify authors when their pages are nominated for various types of deletion. Welcome to wikipedia! Sailsbystars (talk) 00:22, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

I did a quick google search - though the name appeared to be too ambiguous to produce any relevant results. -Cntras (talk) 00:27, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Dario Ortiz

Hi Cntras,

I noticed your speedy delete on Dario Ortiz. I did a quick google on the original text and couldn't find it - however, you might have have discovered something that I didn't, and if the article is copyright then obviously it, or vio parts of it, has to go. He does appear notable, however. Acabashi (talk) 14:16, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

The original article was a copyvio of an art website (I can't seem to find the link). The second incarnation however, is fine. -Cntras (talk) 23:44, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Administrator intervention against vandalism

Thank you for your report at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism about User:Fiercecom. I have indefinitely blocked the user and deleted the spam user page. However, for future reference in any similar case, rather than edit-warring with the user by continually blanking the user page, it is better to tag it for speedy deletion with {{db-spam}}. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:14, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Noted, though I think that it would make much difference. -Cntras (talk) 11:19, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

New Page Patrol

Hi Cntras. Please see User_talk:REEONE123. Two minutes after creating their article you tagged it for deletion and left some unfrinedly templates on their page. You gave them no space to work on the page, improve it and no friendly advice or helpful support. Not surprising they immediately ceased and have not edited since. This is as WP:BITEy as it gets. Please think about this and work up from the bottom of the new page feed and not the top to avoid scaring away the noobes. Spartaz ^Humbug! 11:24, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't consider it to be 'bitey' at all. The welcome message + in depth (albeit automated) message regarding the rationale for the CSD is more than sufficient. -Cntras (talk) 11:27, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

The fact of nominating the article for deletion 2 minutes after creation is bitey. I'm deletionist but I can't see the sense of that. Give them a half hour or so at least to see if the page gets further improved before you scare them away. There is no competition to delete pages as quickly as possible. Work from the bottom and work up is much better. Spartaz ^Humbug! 11:39, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:NPP#Be_nice_to_the_Newbies addresses this. Spartaz ^Humbug! 11:40, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Well, the {{holdon}} procedure is there for a reason. It's not the end of the world, most articles take anywhere from 30min to an hour to be deleted. If a user is 'scared' and gives up so easily, it makes me wonder why they bothered in the first place. -Cntras (talk) 12:11, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

And we have so many new editors joining that we can afford to scare away the ones who don't get it right first time??? Look the instructions are clear - I really don't understand why you are being so stubborn about this. The fact of the tag is enough. Think about it. You submit a new page and someone immediately tells you its not good enough and will be deleted. Is that really the impression we want to make on new users? Spartaz ^Humbug! 12:18, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry for having expectations about the quality of the content on Wikipedia. For the sake of good etiquette, I will allow junk articles that will eventually be deleted anyways to pass. Just so that the new users will feel included in this online-editing fellowship. We must nurture their redundancy.-Cntras (talk) 12:30, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Don't be silly, of course we delete the dross - I'm just asking you to follow the guidelines and wait a few minutes before tagging. Is that so awful? Spartaz ^Humbug! 12:45, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Delusional Downtown Divas

Hi Cntras. Just letting you know, as reviewing admin I declined your suggestion of speedy-deleting this article. From what I can tell from a quick Google News archive search, the show appears to meet our notability guidelines. Thanks, Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 04:37, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Altered speedy deletion rationale: Mexican Nationalist Army

Hello Cntras. I am just letting you know that I deleted Mexican Nationalist Army, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 02:10, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Altered speedy deletion rationale: Anatolia orlando

Hello Cntras. I am just letting you know that I deleted Anatolia orlando, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 02:12, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

It's not unusual for articles to fall under multiple CSD categories. Both tags are accurate. -Cntras (talk) 02:13, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Raymond Jungles Inc.

I had initially deleted the above article, but following a request from the creator, I have looked at it again, and undeleted it.

The article at NY Times would appear to give enough to prevent it being speedily deleted. If you still feel that it is not suitable for inclusion, you will need to take it to Articles for deletion for a discussion.

Regards, PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 03:15, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Rollback

I have granted rollback rights to your account; the reason for this is that after a review of some of your contributions, I believe you can be trusted to use rollback correctly, and for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck and thanks.  —  Tivedshambo  (t/c) 13:03, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. -Cntras (talk) 01:25, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged revisions, underwent a two-month trial which ended on 15 August 2010. Its continued use is still being discussed by the community, you are free to participate in such discussions. Many articles still have pending changes protection applied, however, and the ability to review pending changes continues to be of use.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under level 1 pending changes and edits made by non-reviewers to level 2 pending changes protected articles (usually high traffic articles). Pending changes was applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't grant you status nor change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:31, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

About CouponSmarter

Hi, Cntras, I just saw you placed an advert on my article CouponSmarter, actually it was created one year ago and recently it was updated by administrator NawlinWiki talk, I've communicated with NawlinWiki and he recovered this page to my user space User:Sharoncollinsr/CouponSmarter, then I recreated this page and I'm improving it now, could you give some suggestions? Thank you very much! Sharoncollinsr (talk) 02:13, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

See WP:ARTSPAM. Apparently you want my input and yet you went ahead and removed the tag even before I had a chance to reply. -Cntras (talk) 02:21, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm very sorry, it's my fault and I'm not very familiar with the rules, could you help me sort this out? it's highly appreciated! Sharoncollinsr (talk) 02:23, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

update: Hi Cntras, I did a revision and change it to its previous status, could you help me make some necessary changes? Thank you very much! Sharoncollinsr (talk) 02:26, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

The article still comes across as an advertisement. -Cntras (talk) 08:31, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi, this page has been existed more than one and half year (before updated by NawlinWiki), actually it's not an advertisement and it contains no promotional language, it objectively described a notable website that among the top ones within the vertical marketing, if you did a simply google search using keywords like "coupon codes", you'll find the website is listed on the top 10 position. Thanks for your attention and help, any update is highly appreciated! Sharoncollinsr (talk) 09:49, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

The impression that I get is that it falls under the category of WP:ARTSPAM. -Cntras (talk) 09:51, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi Cntras, thank you very much for telling me more details, I'll make some necessary changes to make this article more health and useful, I found Wikipedia was a really great place where everyone can participate and share, thanks again! Sharoncollinsr (talk) 10:19, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Niaz Diasamidze

Hello Cntras, I'm sorry but, I don't understand why my page abaut niaz diasamidze is deleted. if you don't know abaut Niaz Diasamidze, this isn't problem you can See 33a. I think this page deleted because Niaz is Georgian and not famous in USA & UK, I think so niaz is better singer then Mick Jagger, Bob Dylan and Fred Neil. Niaz's band 33a is a most famous band in georgia. and if our countrey's guests (from USA, UK, Australia or from not English language countries) interesting abaut Niaz, they can't Search in Wikipedia, because in English wikipedia we have not place for Niaz and other not english singer.
If you know abaut Katie Melua, She is also from Georgia, but famous, because he singing to English. Also if you know French U can listen Niaz's French songs. :)))) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gaga.vaa (talk • contribs) 07:26, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

niaz diasamidze was deleted under the A7 criteria which states 'An article about a real person, individual animal(s), organization (e.g. band, club, company, etc., except schools),or web content that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant'. Basically, this means that you haven't provided enough third party references to verify the notability of the subject. -Cntras (talk) 08:29, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: User:Lilbit411

Hello Cntras. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of User:Lilbit411, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Users are given wide freedom on their own user pages. This is not speediable as vandalism. If you think it should be deleted, nominate it at WP:MFD. Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 14:08, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

With all due respect to JohnCD, I have speedied the page at MfD. To a certain extent, the issue was moot as the page had already been replaced with an indefblocked-user template, but I nonetheless found the material on the page so inappropriate that deletion was required as a matter of principle (see, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Billy Ego-Sandstein). Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 03:09, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Page vandalising

Hi Cntras can it please be noted that the following IP: 109.144.218.230 is repeatedly vandalising the 'Pierre Lewis' page.

many thanks. Colonel Music verify s.contact@colonelmusic.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.30.227.76 (talk) 03:18, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Yeah I'm aware of the situation - I've requested for temporary semi-protection. -Cntras (talk) 04:02, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined for Specim

Hello Cntras, I've declined your speedy deletion tag on the article Specim because I believe that notability has been asserted and backed up using references. You may still send this article to AFD or propose its deletion if you wish. Regards, Airplaneman ✈ 18:48, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Commendations

Commendations on your rapid vigilance against vandalism!

72.234.139.249 (talk) 08:43, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Removal

Hi there, I'm curious to know why you removed the link to the Actuary occupational profile? Many thanks

Read WP:EL.-Cntras (talk) 10:20, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for responding. I'd looked at this though and thought it relevant under 'What can normally be linked', point 3. The main issue being copyright if it is integrated. Would be good to hear your thoughts on this —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.152.255.33 (talk) 10:25, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

The approach towards external links should be 'why', rather than 'why not'. In this case, I don't think that the addition of the link to a career site is really beneficial for readers as it doesn't add any new information. -Cntras (talk) 10:32, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for that. As I deem it to be beneficial (mainly because there isn't any detail relating to the topic specifically of how to become an actuary on this page), what is the best etiquette so to speak to submit it? Is it best to start a discussion suggesting its inclusion? Or submit it with an explanation of why it has been included? Many thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.152.255.33 (talk) 10:38, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Any response to that would be greatly appreciated —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.152.255.33 (talk) 11:47, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

The best thing to would probably be to integrate the relevant information into the body of the article. -Cntras (talk) 23:38, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for that —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.152.255.33 (talk) 10:37, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Hwoarang

You can delete it..I was making that article at first but didnt found much references afterwards and this is not my first article, THANKZ. HunterZone (talk) 13:02, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Mabo Day

Cntras, shortly after you declined the deletion of this article by Noq, the latter went ahead and deleted it, adding a perfunctory reference to it in the Eddie Mabo article. I have posted a request on Noq's talk page for the article to be reinstated. Please could you have a look at this? Simon Kidd (talk) 12:54, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

The article was redirected to the Eddie Mabo article that the majority of the content had been copied from. The opening sentence of the Mabo day article is the perfunctory reference that was added to the Eddie Mabo article along with the reference you gave on your edit summary. If either of you believe that a single sentence is sufficient for an article, undo the edit I made and I will be happy to take it to a formal deletion discussion. noq (talk) 13:00, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

I can't see why the article can't be treated basically as a stub. I merely copied the content to flesh it out and provide a basis for further editing. It seems to me that this deletion is over-zealous! Simon Kidd (talk) 13:05, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

If you have to pad it out with infomration from another article would it not be more appropriate to be in that article? noq (talk) 13:07, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

No, it's basically a stub, but with content from another article to provide a basis for editing. I'd be quite happy to remove most of the content and have it as a stub with a view to further editing, according to Wikipedia principles. But I really don't think there is any harm in leaving the content in for the time being. I don't think it will cause any problems in the world! Simon Kidd (talk) 13:25, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Mujahid Kamran

Hi Cntras, Can you stop editing the wikipedia for Prof Dr Mujahid Kamran http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mujahid_Kamran Whatever you revert it back to is wrong, misleading and untrue. Just leave it the way it is now and do not bother editing it any more. You are wasting yours and others time for no good reason. Thanks for understanding. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.141.35.184 (talk) 10:38, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

   If you care so much about references and you bother checking things on internet look here 

http://www.pu.edu.pk/faculty/descriptions.asp?faculty=1000001

If you tried again editing the page, we will start litigation against you, you understand. Read the above mentioned link carefully and read his CV. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Manobe13 (talk • contribs) 08:21, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of HITM - review requested

Hi Cntras,

I was setting up the HITM site, a reputable association in healthcare IT. I was surprised to see that you have marked it for speed deletion. I am working in this field as journalist and did only use the template from a similar US association (HIMSS). I have even made this text more neutral as I do not want that HITM should be promoted.

Can you please review your comment as in my point of view it is wrong.

Thank you very much,

E-healthinformer — Preceding unsigned comment added by E-healthinformer (talk • contribs) 13:15, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

West LA Picture

Did you undo the edit because of the size of the picture? I was in the process of reducing it. As for the picture on there now, its of downtown Los Angeles and the section is about the geography of the district of West LA so it doesn't make too much sense for it to be there. The picture I had uploaded was of the borders of the district as described in the article. Boder111 (talk) 06:52, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

I reverted in good faith, the incorrect formatting gave the impression that it may be a test edit. -Cntras (talk) 06:52, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

I see, no worries. Boder111 (talk) 06:58, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Would you happen to know why the History header's underline doesn't go to the end of the page? And how I can fix it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boder111 (talk • contribs) 07:34, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

It seems to be ok now - ?? -Cntras (talk) 11:57, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

nice going

Good job, making a noob feel unwelcome. why dont you actually LOOK at the WHOLE SERIES OF EDITS before clicking "undo"!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr shish kebob (talk • contribs) 03:54, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

• Cntras, while I don't approve of the tone in the message above, I do believe that it had been better if you had explained why you reverted their good-faith edits (which actually had a valid source and included an edit summary), perhaps with a Welcome message, instead of just hitting "rollback", without any further explanation. Remember, rollback is to be used only in clear instances of vandalism--and this was certainly not such a case. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 04:16, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
• This also really isn't vandalism--and again, that's from a new user, whom you easily could have given a welcome template with some guidance. Drmies (talk) 04:18, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Userified User:Janet.Eldar/Britannia Anchor Removals

Greetings, I removed your {db} tag from Britannia Anchor Removals, as the editor has requested feedback at RfF, so I will provide guidance to the author there on what must be changed in order to move the article to the mainspace. We're putting out some effort to userify and advise on unacceptable articles by newb editors, in hopes that they will learn and stay longer rather than be rejected and leave. MatthewVanitas (talk) 13:41, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Gizmaestro Speedy Deletion

Hello Cntras, Why is my article Gizmaestro is currently tagged Speedy Deletion? I have made it in the right informations for Gizmaestro.

It fails WP:WEB. -Cntras (talk) 12:34, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

What you mean by "It fails"? Please example properly in order Sulaiman7799

It does not meet the criteria of WP:WEB. -Cntras (talk) 12:50, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

You mean I have to do in the right order to meet criteria? Sulaiman7799 —Preceding undated comment added 12:54, 20 April 2011 (UTC). Cntras, I would like to have permission to create my article on wikipedia. if it possible please decline my speedy deletion tag on the article Sulaiman (talk) 8:32, 20 April 2011 (GMT)

dB South Speedy Deletion

Why did you mark my article on this local business for deletion? It has significant resources and a .gov about it's information. It poses as vital information for Georgia Business' and economic data of Georgia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FrederickMS (talk • contribs) 10:34, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

It does not credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject. See WP:CORP. -Cntras (talk) 10:37, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

1. How is economic data of Georgia not important in economic trialling times such as now?
2. How is it not important in enriching and adding to the categories of business' in Georgia?
3. What exactly are you referring to in WP:CORP, please be more specific.

Frederick Smith 10:44, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

See WP:CORPDEPTH. Provide reliable third party sources that actually provide substantive information, not a general business directory. -Cntras (talk) 10:46, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

After looking at WP:CORPDEPTH I noticed secondary sources claims of revenue is NOT listed as trivial and general business. Also you did not answer my questions 2 and 3.

1. 3) How is it not important in enriching to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Companies_based_in_Cobb_County,_Georgia (which has only 1 listing)
2. New, 4) Most importantly if I add more than just what I've found will you delete speedy deletion tag? Frederick Smith 10:56, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Final point: Since the page is deleted I shall return with what you have requested. Thanks

Content stalker

Hi Cntras,

Ref: the edits in Wiki page Mumbai

the references which i have removed from sports section in Mumbai are inappropriate because they point out to articles different from what is mentioned in the wiki page. you can check those individual articles yourself

I am New to Wikipedia, So not well versed with its entire functioning. How can we communicatate using talk please let me know :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Contentstalker (talk • contribs) 07:46, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Everybody Draw Mohammed Day

Hey! I noticed that you have previously reverted an edit at Everybody Draw Mohammed Day to declare it an annual event. I've was having a conversation with a new WP:SPA about why it isn't inherently an annual event. The conversation has degraded into two editors flinging derogatory words at me. The degradation of the conversation has resulted in the two editors pushing to edit war which I won't have a part of. I'm leaving this message here for you and any other editors who have been involved with the subject being an annual event or not as an invitation to either join the conversation or simply edit the page as you see fit. Regardless of your opinion and how it compares to mine, I feel like the situation is degrading and more eyes on the situation will only help work things out. OlYeller^Talktome00:14, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

The extent of my activity on the page was the removal of blatant vandalism - I have no interest in other disputed content. -Cntras (talk) 12:44, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Yellowleg.com

Hey, noticed your change and comment "surely there's something more substantive in the source....". Care to elaborate? The line that you removed was: It claims to stock only the best travel books ^[1][2] for every destination in the world and promises to deliver them throughout India in 3 business days.

There really isn't much to substantiate that they make a certain claim. If your issue is with the reference listed then just the ref tag can be moved to the bottom. Chinug (talk) 12:20, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm sure you can find something more substantive to talk about, i.e. brief description of Aashish Gupta. -Cntras (talk) 12:23, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Understand. But you don't have anything against the lines that you removed, right? It's a new article and maybe someone else who does know more about Mr Aashish Gupta will add to it. In the meantime, do you mind if I undo your change? Chinug (talk) 12:29, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

The lines are the problem. It doesn't matter if it is verifiable - it's still a subtle form of spam -Cntras (talk) 12:31, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Ummm, not sure I catch your drift. How is it spam if it only states facts about what the company sells or offers -- by that logic all of the content in Amazon.com's Product and Services section would be spam.Chinug (talk) 12:40, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

See WP:PROMO. Think about it this way: would the sentence be appropriate within an encyclopedia? No. Cntras (talk) 12:46, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Maybe you could suggest a different wording so the relevant content remains intact.Chinug (talk) 13:39, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Should probably find something else to discuss. -Cntras (talk) 10:10, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion converted to PROD: Saint Bottom

Hello Cntras. I am just letting you know that I have converted the speedy deletion tag that you placed on Saint Bottom to a proposed deletion tag, because I do not believe CSD applies to the page in question. I am reluctant to speedy anything as a hoax unless it is really obvious, because strange things sometimes turn out to be true: this certainly looks suspicious, and I can't by a quick search find any confirmation, so I have PRODded it and will ask the author if she can provide sources. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 11:00, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Yeah ok. -Cntras (talk) 05:59, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Helen Rogers Reid

Hi, just letting you know I declined the speedy delete for Helen Rogers Reid because:

On the one hand, the article is pretty poor, and its sole claim to notability (co-owning the NY Tribune) is not only buried at the end but mispelt. Plus notability not being inherited, this of itsef may not be sufficient.

On the other hand, a quick Google search shows Mrs Reid was the driving force behind reviving the paper, merging it with the NY Herald and driving it into second place for sales behind the NY Times. Reid was also a confidant of the Eisenhower and Roosevelt families and notable for her impact on publishing and American society in her time.

So while the article as it stands looks like a possible speedy delete, notability is asserted as it stands, and a small amount of work can make that much clearer. I'll add the sources and improve the article later today.

Just letting you know why I declined the speedy on what is (I agree) presently a bad and barely notable article, but one that should justifiably remain if improved. Euryalus (talk) 04:28, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Regarding the PrimeTel page

Hello Cntras. I would like to let you know that i will be going through the PrimeTel page and editing the part(s) where they may look as if it's promoting a product or service. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Athos1983 (talk • contribs) 12:21, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Editing "Masters of Science in Electrical Communication Engineering" Page

Hi,

The page I am trying to edit is part of a different category, namely, Education in Germany, instead of " Academic degrees -> Master's degrees"

Thanks for your understanding

Ibrahimkassel (talk) 07:11, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Well there's no reason to make it specific to a particular country. The article should provide objective information regarding the master's degree - not a promo for a particular institution. -Cntras (talk) 07:14, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

The page is intended to be an information page, just like the pages http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Art_Crime_Studies_Masters_Program or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Master_Program_in_Biomedical_Sciences are. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ibrahimkassel (talk • contribs) 07:17, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

The two articles should be converted to a more objective reflection of the said degrees. As I said, there's no need to make it specific to a particular institution/country. -Cntras (talk) 07:20, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

How would you recommend creating a page, for a program which is specific to a particular institution?-Ibrahimkassel (talk) 07:33, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

You could merge the relevant information to the university article. -Cntras (talk) 13:28, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Ibrahim, please see the general notability guidelines to see if the program is eligible for inclusion as a stand-alone article. But stop writing about U of Kassel. ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 17:35, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Genre warriors

What? I never genre war. It's called reverting, not genre warring. What I'm doing is reverting the genre warriors. And yes it is vandalism if you can get blocked for it. • GunMetal Angel 10:58, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

The concept applies to both those who change it as well as those who insist on sticking with a particular genre. Given that it is 1. unreferenced and 2. a related genre, that change can hardly be considered as 'vandalism'. -Cntras (talk) 11:01, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

I just sourced that the band is metalcore. Okay? I didn't try to apply onto thinking I was in a content dispute when it seemed like vandalism seeing how actual hardcore is way noticeably different. When it gets to music on this site, what is deemed vandalism is hard to tell if you don't know the music. I'm not being rude about that, I'm just saying that ya know it can be pretty ridiculous from someone like my own point of view where both my parents grew up in the punk scene and I fell into metal and can easily tell if something is hardcore or not. It can apply that way to several others who listen to Parkway Drive as well. -- GunMetal Angel 11:14, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

What it comes down to is verifiability not personal opinion/experience. That is, if the user can find a reliable source for 'hardcore' then you really have no argument against the insertion of that genre. -Cntras (talk) 11:21, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Because there are some complications. Such as how fans of black metal would defend the fact that Gorgoroth is black metal when there's several sources on the net that would call them heavy metal or dark ambient or whatever metal and whatnot. The same would go for Parkway Drive. Those that know they are metal would hold up the argument to go along with the sources. Heck even a beaker can be classified as a jar or pitcher by sources, but by the standards of identification on this site are strengthened by common knowledge of person well-aware towards what the subject is. GunMetal Angel 11:28, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Read the first sentence of the WP:VERIFY article. -Cntras (talk) 11:42, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

article source

Why was the article source reverted?Powerpolitics (talk) 02:18, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

The source was a deadlink. Also, the referencing style is not appropriate. -Cntras (talk) 02:22, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for acknowledging me about the Neutral Tone criteria

I have written this article Biba Singh on Wikipedia. I am thankful to you to guide me regarding the neutral tone of a wikipedia article. I will try to do it accordingly as I get time. Thanks Prakashpanwar (talk) 05:23, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

America Invents Act

I noticed that you reverted the three additions I made to the article on 20 and 21 June 2011 (UTC) without comment on the article discussion page or on my talk page. You annotated your changes with the phrases (a) "COI issues"; and (b) "rm ref spam".

I would like to begin by taking issue with your accusation that I have a conflict of interest. Your accusation is baseless on its face. You mention not a single fact or shred of evidence to support this accusation.

Rather that make baseless ad personam allegations, I think Wikipedia's audience would be better served if you focused on facts, such as the language of the article. If there is specific language in the article you would like me to revise into a more neutral tone, please refer me to that language.

Regarding your annotation "rm ref spam", I have reviewed the text you deleted. The text includes a source's name and affiliation, and a website URL. There is no email address or other spam target in the text. Please explain why you deleted this text.

One of the central purposes of Wikipedia is to better inform its readership. I believe my contributions to the America Invents Act article serve this purpose. Specifically, I: (a) added a section on Budget impact and U.S. Treasury liability, a topic which all other contributors completely ignored; (b) addressed provisions of the pending legislation dealing with venue and attorney's fees, another topic which all other contributors ignored; and (c) added the perspective of a venture capitalist who funds the commercialization of inventions, a perspective all but absent from the article but critical to understanding the long-term impact of the legislation. My additions were from verifiable sources including an expert in U.S. constitutional law, a managing director of a venture capital firm, a record of testimony before the U.S. House of Representatives, the text of the House bill 1249 which is the subject of the article, and the website of a company worth $5 billion. I provided complete citations to all sources. I believe Wikipedia's audience is better informed as a result of my contributions.

Please restore all my additions by 13:00 UTC, 21 June 2011.

Please post the language in the article you would like me to revise and the reason you object to it to my talk page. ChagSameach (talk) 06:58, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure that I would classify the addition of lengthy quotes as an 'improvement' to the article. Essentially the three edits are simply lengthy quotes from various sources with little to no additional detail. Whether it was done intentionally or otherwise, the references in this paragraph clearly constitutes as WP:REFSPAM. As follows, the question of COI stems from the fact that generally speaking, those who engage in such actions tend to have some affiliation with the given link. -Cntras (talk) 10:05, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your response.

In the article, the quotes I included from Massey and Neis each cogently and succinctly present their respective concerns about the pending legislation and the reasons for their concerns. Each speaks as an expert within his area of expertise, constitutional law and invention commercialization, respectively. While the quotes are lengthy, so is the United States Constitution, but no one is advocating deleting the Bill of Rights for the sake of brevity. The question is not absolute length but whether, given the complexity of the subject matter, the text is cogent and reasonably succinct. Massey reaches a legal conclusion. Each point he makes, e.g. the procedure Section 18 creates, the Fifth Amendment problem with ex post facto legislation, and potential federal government liability under relevant U.S. Supreme Court decisions, is a link the chain. If any link is missing or deleted, the chain fails because the conclusion is inadequately supported. Neis describes the startup company funding process well known to those involved in the business of invention commercialization. A reader must understand this process and the factors bearing on each decision point in the process to appreciate how the pending legislation will impact the process. For example, why is the predictability of cost of patent acquisition and defense important, and how does the time line for obtaining undisputed patent rights affect the viability of a startup? I cannot improve on the words of these experts, so I quoted them.

It appears you did not understand the text you deleted in your "rm ref spam" deletion. Detkin is a founder of a company which has acquired one of the largest patent portfolios in the world. One can reasonably infer that Detkin knows whether large or small entities are primarily responsible for patentable inventions. This is the subject matter of the quote, which is verifiably sourced to the website of Detkin's company. This is clearly not an advertizement.

Your "rm ref spam" deletion of information from the article, in violation of the Wikipedia policy of warning an editor of alleged spamming, WP:SPAM, may constitute vandalism. Please see WP:VANDAL for Wikipedia's policy on vandalsim.

I have reverted your reversion and "rm ref spam" deletion.

Turning now to your baseless accusation of conflict of interest, your unsubstantiated and conclusory statement that "generally speaking, those who engage in such actions tend to have some affiliation with the given link" is completely inadequate to support a serious accusation against an individual. Furthermore, I am not affiliated with any of the sources I have cited in the article.

I demand that today you change the annotation to your edit on the article's revision history page, and, on this talk page, retract your accusation and post an apology, each to remain immediately viewable to viewers of the page for one year from posting.ChagSameach (talk) 18:28, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Really? You don't see anything wrong with linking to a company's product and services page? Read WP:RS and WP:REFSPAM. With regards to the quotes - learn to summarise the content, it shouldn't be too difficult given that you are clearly capable of writing in prose. The insertion of such quotes is not an improvement and some may also consider this to be a form of POV pushing. Oh and I would post an apology - but would that really be enough? Perhaps I should also contact the local news station and apologize on live television. What do you think? -Cntras (talk) 08:14, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Your recent history of Wikipedia edits (User Contributions page) reveals that you object to and undo much of the work of others. During the one month period between 23 May 2011 and 22 June 2011 you undid the work of each of the following Wikipedia contributors:

1. Saltman333 (22 June 2011)
2. Richardndeal
3. 221.107.186.166
4. 178.106.209.211
5. Ratpackcassidy
6. 118.94.43.4
7. 124.6.181.91 (21 June 2011)
8. 93.139.76.124
9. 138.217.142.35
10. ChagSameach
11. Mekinnam1
12. 203.51.169.214
13. 59.182.184.232
14. Vindicator01
15. 2.28.146.168
16. 24.190.97.9
17. 108.36.147.69
18. Kevinfiesta
19. 108.85.248.124
20. Jcave23
21. Anabela99
22. 76.19.83.154
23. 97.85.58.231
24. Bobhope556699
25. Stefanocabelo
26. 70.16.162.147 (20 June 2011)
27. 202.89.67.202
28. 78.191.46.112
29. 194.160.140.18
30. Roxette09
31. 118.101.187.77
32. Cleverbotgenious
33. 76.106.176.59
34. Quinnpisa
35. 174.252.36.5
36. The Tatendangs (19 June 2011)
37. 190.162.176.236
38. 174.29.91.242
39. 72.74.213.35
40. Ricardothebeaner1
41. Peach3972
42. 58.169.136.228
43. 24.164.94.62
44. Wilsonnancy
45. 58.169.136.228
46. 68.98.126.10
47. 58.160.98.103
48. 69.247.88.190
49. 70.73.42.219
50. 70.133.75.89
51. 119.93.223.179
52. 59.177.44.222 (18 June 2011)
53. Ouchocinco
54. 24.188.213.111
55. 71.203.94.98
56. 71.20.8.226
57. 88crushox242 (17 June 2011)
58. Powerpolitics
59. 121.97.99.218
60. Bill2285
61. 76.252.2.236
62. JohnnyB313
63. Jeffrey95
64. 220.253.44.60
65. 121.54.17.14
66. 178.106.5.188 (16 June 2011)
67. Moh8888
68. 155.136.80.79
69. Billyjonny
70. 178.106.5.188
71. Dimpy21
72. LemyAddum
73. Dazx99gertoip
74. 89.248.29.142 (15 June 2011)
75. Tonettekirubin
76. 14.96.16.212
77. 2.113.18.18
78. Ggrraaffee
79. 161.76.196.45
80. 118.209.121.191
81. 188.222.225.188
82. CedricDazzles
83. 134.91.226.90
84. 115.119.226.98
85. C.m.mann
86. Asdfasdffdsaasdf
87. 116.228.215.163
88. 24.34.195.61 (14 June 2011)
89. 24.24.169.215
90. Bumblethought
91. 178.149.129.205
92. 86.177.153.199
93. 124.6.181.75
94. Will2703
95. 194.242.148.48
96. 77.100.102.33
97. Acidknight
98. Toothietroothie
99. 121.215.179.6
100. 122.2.48.20
101. 2.89.12.54
102. 118.210.239.137
103. 61.246.57.2
104. y 69.171.166.210
105. AlphaMan22
106. Galdalind
107. 27.61.178.79 (13 June 2011)
108. 169.244.38.65
109. 62.7.92.50
110. 79.246.153.5
111. Zeitergeist
112. 71.240.246.44
113. 119.30.39.54
114. 76.174.72.191
115. 175.139.199.253
116. 76.170.251.33
117. 70.66.216.116 (12 June 2011)
118. 87.112.90.90
119. 124.182.53.72
120. 121.1.61.208
121. Mirandathechicken (10 June 2011)
122. 82.110.216.172
123. Connorlinfoot
124. 58.106.232.132
125. 71.7.225.52
126. 207.136.225.146
127. 218.103.207.170
128. Davidjkibbie
129. Fredredman
130. 80.194.52.26
131. 42.109.137.6
132. 86.53.207.162
133. Bobbobbob1711
134. 70.25.66.168
135. 74.162.91.217
136. 62.150.134.138
137. 79.202.83.38
138. 76.3.76.202
139. Johngrath
140. 71.236.73.215
141. 50.50.117.197
142. 110.142.59.5
143. 75.76.109.214
144. SpinningBall
145. Xerythx (9 June 2011)
146. 58.181.129.146
147. ICantBeTamed
148. 212.85.14.130
149. MurphAndy
150. Muxammadkh
151. 160.217.214.53
152. 78.146.10.134
153. 212.219.204.173
154. Kiskanal89
155. Andyashby
156. 77.234.251.32
157. 93.82.140.97
158. Maluigix
159. 122.224.219.102
160. Lymphaticvessels (8 June 2011)
161. Tikboy Bubuyog
162. 85.187.0.191
163. 118.96.111.183
164. 110.137.57.237
165. 124.6.181.201
166. 220.253.201.42
167. Franky1992
168. 123.211.154.72
169. 96.42.28.150
170. Thunderchunqy
171. 98.80.128.170
172. Johnlennonimagine
173. 108.85.184.241
174. 166.133.176.215
175. 217.60.29.66
176. 70.166.89.121
177. 203.156.141.195
178. 59.97.121.220
179. Heromage46
180. 216.251.112.134 (7 June 2011)
181. 121.216.231.253
182. 112.202.162.241
183. 70.119.199.69
184. Captainnemo55555
185. 71.210.143.36
186. 24.249.4.129
187. 173.230.119.244
188. 98.27.162.126
189. 220.237.134.202
190. 72.195.145.243
191. Pi54820
192. 75.5.198.11
193. 190.137.212.188
194. 180.191.52.94
195. 154.5.38.214
196. 184.147.57.96
197. 180.95.18.12
198. Historian73
199. 114.78.17.6
200. 71.58.179.143
201. 59.161.254.21
202. 121.45.112.252 (6 June 2011)
203. 72.224.198.9
204. 118.208.185.201
205. 197.178.130.100
206. 58.175.193.238
207. 97.84.138.152
208. 190.135.22.170
209. 71.58.179.143
210. 144.36.217.85
211. 76.184.98.99
212. Nunu39
213. F4xf0x2
214. Digitalgayster
215. 24.236.114.44
216. 164.100.1.212
217. 222.154.174.127
218. 68.80.213.226
219. 97.122.227.251
220. Kayyali18 (5 June 2011)
221. 202.134.14.26
222. 67.162.30.88
223. 122.105.136.17
224. MissMondayMourning
225. 68.207.250.67
226. 76.91.168.198
227. Goldgoldgold
228. 67.163.98.119
229. 67.255.44.65 (4 June 2011)
230. Lolcakes15
231. 69.158.114.61
232. Hillbillyskolfir
233. 108.26.71.6
234. 76.238.130.122
235. 70.106.215.118
236. 187.76.10.82
237. 117.196.227.136
238. 2.96.210.72
239. Peter North666
240. Lolbeemer
241. Bopper95
242. 68.32.132.100
243. 75.34.33.73
244. 2.96.210.72
245. 69.171.166.243 (31 May 2011)
246. 169.241.28.79
247. 94.1.74.175
248. 190.237.148.15
249. 173.76.249.224
250. 64.234.111.232
251. 68.42.66.38
252. Wweufc12334
253. Stephen.moss88
254. ManliusIND
255. 112.205.226.108 (30 May 2011)
256. 27.33.180.52
257. 202.144.148.181
258. 82.92.117.144
259. 94.5.189.150
260. 109.152.53.110
261. 82.24.102.239
262. AnonGuy69
263. 58.167.44.234 (29 May 2011)
264. 24.1.91.12
265. 59.100.163.46
266. 112.135.26.209
267. Wiki13321
268. 203.45.74.147
269. 24.16.127.103
270. Athos1983 (27 May 2011)
271. 173.246.35.185
272. 180.191.156.123
273. 98.216.32.234
274. Davidf123 (25 May 2011)
275. 83.70.230.216
276. Cat10001a
277. Bubbab98
278. Robobob13
279. 72.48.94.34

In the same one month period, you filed 94 reports of vandalism.

The month above appears to be representative sample of your activity on Wikipedia, based on your User Contribution pages back to January 2011. Assuming this is so, annually you revert the work of approximately 3,348 contributors and file 1,128 reports of vandalism.

Predictably, your undoing the work of contributors discourages people from contributing to Wikipedia. As one administrator noted on your Talk page, "Not surprising they [a new contributor you targeted] immediately ceased and have not edited since." (Spartaz Humbug!, 28 January 2011) Administrators have admonished you against reverting contributor's work without explanation (Drmies, 6 April 2011) and for tagging articles for deletion two minutes after page creation (Spartaz Humbug!, 28 January 2011).

Given these enormous numbers of reversions and vandalism reports, one must ask whether your actions are in concert with Wikipedia's policy of encouraging the contributions of users. How many of these 3,348 contributors are no longer contributing because you have undone their work or harassed them by reporting them as Wikipedia vandals? Would the Wikipedia encyclopedia today include significantly more information and be significantly more useful to its audience had your access been barred some time ago? Going forward, will Wikipedia's audience be better off, on balance, with the contributions of these thousands of users or with the your solitary contributions?

Please let me know on this page today whether you will stop undoing the work of others or whether it will be necessary for me to bring your activities to the attention of Wikipedia staff and let them take whatever action they deem appropriate. ChagSameach (talk) 23:14, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't quite follow. Are you suggesting that my counter-vandalism efforts is somehow an indictment against my judgment? Maybe if you bothered to check the revisions and the block log of each editor, you would realize the redundancy of your argument. But I understand - when all else fails, you can always rely on Ad hominem attacks. Am I right? -Cntras (talk) 03:27, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Soulforge

Hello Cntras. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Soulforge, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Having members who are or were members of a band (whose article cannot be speedy deleted under A7) indicates importance/significance. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 06:16, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

I thought that the members had to have individual notability. Anyhow, I'll probably pursue an Afd. -Cntras (talk) 11:02, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

For a band to be notable, it has to meet WP:BAND. Surviving an WP:A7 speedy deletion request only requires an assertion of "importance", and a band that has a member whose old band has a Wikipedia article is probably "important" enough not to be speedy deleted (but not necessarily notable). I hope that makes some sense. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 04:25, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Tesoro

Hello, I am new to this. Why did you delete my entry? The oil sale from Libyan rebels was reported by Reuters and I got confimation by email from Reuters. The Tesoro website IS down. Try. Dissappointed ZZ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zitbart Zark (talk • contribs) 08:17, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Remember WP:VERIFY, please provide references for any additions. As for the website, do you really think it's noteworthy? -Cntras (talk) 11:02, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

How can I make footnotes? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zitbart Zark (talk • contribs) 09:00, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

See WP:REFBEGIN. -Cntras (talk) 11:02, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

why i removed the template.

because i thought that a csd was a little over the top. give him a chance to write the article. it does look like advertising, but none that cannot be fixed.

It was blatant advertising and has already been deleted. -Cntras (talk) 03:44, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks a lot for the warm welcome, really appreciated. Overmannus (talk) 10:11, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Size of degree abbreviations?

Thank you so much for the welcoming! I really appreciate it! :) I have a quick question.

On politicians' pages, their alma mater would list their university, then in parentheses the abbreviation for the degree they earned in small text. Would one use the small text for degree abbreviations for People pages, where the text on the info boxes isn't as large as the text for politicians' info boxes?

Grenadetoenails (talk) 04:22, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

I don't think there's any particular rule with the use of small text. Just use it as you see fit. -Cntras (talk) 05:03, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion converted to PROD: The Stoneridge Group

Hello Cntras. I am just letting you know that I have converted the speedy deletion tag that you placed on The Stoneridge Group to a proposed deletion tag, because I do not believe CSD applies to the page in question. Thank you. Danger (talk) 05:38, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

I don't think there's any credible assertion of notability. -Cntras (talk) 05:41, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Golden Triangle (UK universities)

I noticed that you removed my edits without just cause (i.e. no stated reasons). Censorship without validity is unlawful.

Thetruthnow2012 (talk) 09:16, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

I am well aware of your 3RR violation and the impending ANI discussion. Besides, it's not as though you've been responsive to previous explanations by other editors. Feigned indignation won't get you anywhere. -Cntras (talk) 09:34, 7 July 2011 (UTC).

CSD rationale

I'm curious why you removed the CSD from Olga Kalyuzhnaya, a tennis player with no wins and no references. Looks like an A7 to me, am I missing something?--SPhilbrickT 19:07, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

The article was tagged with an a1, which I declined as context was clearly given for the subject. I added some references to the article, but that was later removed by another editor. -Cntras (talk) 01:08, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Cntras

Thannks for your message and comments - I have gone in to make some edits and add some sources after you marked the Billiter article. In the process I mistakenly deleted your speedy deletion tag - apologies! This is my first article and my intention was to profile some of the companies working in the anti-corruption due diligence space such as Billiter, Risk Advisory, and Diligence which are big companies and warrant mention alongside companies such as Control Risk Group.

Please let me know if the amendments are satisfactory. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maggiemec (talk • contribs) 03:32, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

RCP proposal

Adamrce, Anna_Frodesiak, Baseball_Bugs, Csloomis, Cntras, Evaders99, Fæ, Shrike, Qwyrxian, WWGB, Who.was.phone:
met you guys at edit conflicts for undoing vandalism/ warning the same vandals/reporting at AIV.
I've made a proposal at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#Recent_Changes-_tags_for_patrolled_and_reverted_edits. This is regarding managing vandalism at RCP. What do you think?Staticd (talk) 11:22, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Spelling out degrees.

Thank you for answering my last question!

When talking about an individual's education, should one spell out their degrees or abbreviate? Also, if the degrees are spelled out, should they be capitalized (Bachelor of Science or bachelor of science)?

Grenadetoenails (talk) 05:58, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

See MOS:ABBR. Abbreviations are fine, but if you decide to spell it out then you should capitalize where appropriate. -Cntras (talk) 11:15, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

User:Leonamcdoo/Roger Saul

Hi Cntras

Thank you for the helpful hints for User:Leonamcdoo/Kilver Court, really appreciated! I would as that you have another peruse as I have altered parts of it, and would like any further feedback and if possible to get this uploaded... :)

I am also in the process of writing User:Leonamcdoo/Roger Saul and would be grateful for any feedback on this one too!

Thanking you in advance!!

Leonamcdoo (talk) 10:00, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for being awesome.

Thanks for catching and reverting the vandalism on my page-- I didn't think people patrolled user pages! It's the first time it has happened (though I suppose it was inevitable since I spend a good deal of time on recent changes). I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 02:34, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

No problem. I was just following up on a vandal which I came across the previous day. -Cntras (talk) 10:55, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Soulforge (Band)

Hey i am new to Wiki, and i am slowly working my way around it, i have always LOVED wikipedia and always wanted to join and i have done, and most recently have made a page for SOULFORGE a rising band that i am now Manager of. and i created a page for them here as they have proper creditations and the like, but i was wondering if you could give me any advice on the page (in basic terms plz :P ) as i am having trouble with someone flagging it for deletion (when i had one of the band members sort something out with wiki at one stage during the week and it was approved)... now all i mainly done was "edit" it as it was fairly poor quality in terms of layout, wording and structure, and i just mainly fixed all that and added links to other websites for people to read, and make it look nicer and more proffesional. and all of a sudden its being flagged again i was wondering (and thank you for your time reading and if u dont mind doing this),just having a look for me and seeing where i have gone wrong and if you think it looks satisfying enough for wiki

Cheers

Matolocalypse (talk) 17:42, 21 July 2011 (UTC)Matthew

Have a read of WP:BAND and try and align the article with the said criteria. To save the article, you need to add some more reliable third party references. -Cntras (talk) 00:26, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

speed deletion

why do you flag or do speed deletion on my post? i did not write anything promotional. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bruinkid (talk • contribs) 07:11, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

The website is not notable. -Cntras (talk) 07:30, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Laissez-faire fraternity

Hello Cntras. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Laissez-faire fraternity, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: a claim of importance is made on the talk page. If credible (which I admit is arguable) that claim is enough to escape A7. I shall take to AfD. Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 15:09, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

The claim is enough to escape A7? It's just delaying the inevitable for the sake of "procedural soundness". -Cntras (talk) 11:49, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Edlesborough

Why have you tried to remove my post on the green? The facts about the sports facility are correct. Considering i actually live in the village i can assure you that over 80% of the residents that live there will agree that the council does not do enough for kids. This is not my own anaylsis at all this is the view of the residents. If you want more facts you can go on the council's website and look at there budget for the last 10 years you can see a very minimal amount has been spent on funding projects for teenagers and that they have a huge savings they carry over every year unwilling to spend it. Regardless to countless appeal by the youth of the village. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edlesborough4 (talk • contribs) 10:04, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

The tone is not appropriate for an encyclopaedia - '...The Green is very beautiful on a summers day filled with families'. -Cntras (talk) 11:54, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Well would you not see it fit to edit the section rather then deleting altogether? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edlesborough4 (talk • contribs) 14:38, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

That would be a legitimate claim - if there was something worth saving. -Cntras (talk) 09:56, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Remco Cables

Please do not delete the page, I will amend the page and try to change the style of the page and add some references. But please give me some time. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wajahat malik (talk • contribs) 18:19, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

See WP:SPAM. -Cntras (talk) 01:26, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Diffuzion

Why did you nominated the article Diffuzion for speedy deletion? I just started the article for God sake! Deepblue1 (talk) 09:53, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Read the deletion template -Cntras (talk) 09:55, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

So, if the article is about a band, you immediately try to delete it? It needs time to develop. Deepblue1 (talk) 10:26, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

"This article may meet Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion as an article about a band, singer, musician, or musical ensemble that does not credibly indicate the importance or significance". -Cntras (talk) 22:39, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Please stop vandalizing the America Invents Act page

Just because you disagree w/the POV of a section does not give you the right to delete it. If you feel a POV is under-represented, then ADD IT.LadyArguer (talk) 08:55, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Notice how in the edit summary I referred to a particular policy known as WP:QUOTEFARM. You should probably read it. By the way, who am I speaking to? LadyArguer or ChagSameach? -Cntras (talk) 11:32, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for working on this Cntras. We should probably get a moderator in on the issue. I think The America Invents Act page should be nearly entirely re-written. The entire For and Against section is unnecessary and so infused with POV that it's hard to imagine keeping it. VivekVish (talk) 20:13, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Having a moderator probably won't help - given that SPA accounts are unlikely to heed suggestions. If it continues I'll have to start another ANI thread. -Cntras (talk) 12:09, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

I've commented on the DRN page. I took a harder look at her information, and the sourcing on it is (predictably) bad. I'm chuckling that some of the "valuable information on section 18 and interest groups" is from (shock!) an interest group! Ravensfire (talk) 15:02, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the input! Hopefully this matter can be resolved quickly. -Cntras (talk) 03:03, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Boston Merchant Financial

Trying to create page for Boston Merchant Financial, but it is asking me to delete. It is only information page, nothing else, mostly just one sentence about the company and it's history, not trying to sell anything at all. Then I tried create the short version "bmfn" still wants me to delete it not sure why? This is the content below. Please advise

The article was deleted under the A7 rationale, which means that it did not credibly assert the significance of the subject. -Cntras (talk) 12:05, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

deleting berly thomas page.

may i know the reason behind deleting the page of berly thomas. as he is the only blogger in Malayalam ( south indian language) having more than 3 million hits. and as with my best of knowledge wikis aim is to provide the truth and best avilable date of any person or any thing to general people. its up to u. thats all i can say — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deepaklalu (talk • contribs) 13:08, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

There's a certain criteria for the inclusion of any article on Wikipedia. "Berly Thomas" did not meet the said criteria (WP:BIO). -Cntras (talk) 03:49, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Haplogroup J1 (Y-DNA)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/78.101.34.219 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_J1_(Y-DNA) Please help me understand why you did a mass reversion to badly sourced comments, the improper use of copyrighted material and the deletion of updates of poorly constructed references without titles or names of the scientific journals involved. I want to hear your argument before I report your action. Your reversion deleted my request for a Silver Lock. JohnLloydScharf (talk) 17:48, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

I reverted in good faith, as the rationale for the removal did not appear to be valid. Half the article was deleted under the rather vague explanation of 'stop inserting patent nonsense into a page. STOP the biase misinformation'. -Cntras (talk) 03:49, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for reviewing my article Fantasy (Regine Velasquez album) :)

IMPORTANT

Hello, may I point out User:AltiusGifts, I believe his name is agaionst the username policy. I noticed he recently vandalised gift by placing advertising which featured his name in a URL.Ice Hockey Hero 11:55, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

If you believe that it is a violation of username policy then you can report the user to WP:UAA. Conversely, if the user continues spamming you can simply report to WP:AIV as a 'promotion only' account. -Cntras (talk) 11:58, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

thank you

Thanks for the kind welcome message. My first page, Auburn Community Baseball, remains unreviewed. If you have a minute and wouldn't mind taking a look, I would appreciate it. Thanks again. -- NY-13021 (talk) 22:54, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Done. It's not a bad start in terms of the prose and referencing. -Cntras (talk) 13:32, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

new article, new user

Thanks for the welcome message! I created my first article Project Team Builder. If you have some time I'd appreciate if you have a look and tell me what you think. Thanks again, Guy.other (talk) 06:49, 14 August 2011 (UTC)Guy.other

beginners questions

I'm editing an article and I have some questions:

• Are there any guidelines as to what should be included in the "see also" section of an article?
• In the text of the article I have some words such as "project" that appear many times. When should I leave the word as it is (e.g. "project") and when should I link it to the Wikipedia article (e.g. Project)? If I do link it, should I do so every time it appears in the article?

Thanks in advance! Guy.other (talk) 07:09, 15 August 2011 (UTC)Guy.other

There's no specific rule when it comes to the use of a 'see also' section (WP:ALSO). As for the links, you should generally only link the first occurrence. Hope that helps, -Cntras (talk) 10:02, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

That helps, thanks. Guy.other (talk) 07:34, 16 August 2011 (UTC)Guy.other

:)

Hello. You have a new message at CharlieEchoTango's talk page.

Request for feedback on article

Hi Cntras,

I saw the message on my talk page. Thank for that. I'm still waiting for feedback to my article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_feedback/2011_August_11#User:MPIntl.2FITMA_.28Internationale_Textilmaschinen_Ausstellung.29). However, there's no comments till date. Could you please help? Thanks once again! MPIntl (talk) 09:14, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

The general tone of the article isn't particularly encyclopaedic as it is plagued with weasel words and promotional language. Also, you need to add some reliable third party references. -Cntras (talk) 12:57, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi Cntras, thank you for your reply. Don't really understand the tone of the article I should tweak to. Could you elarorate more on some examples in the article that is plagued with weasel words/promotional language? And probably some examples/references I could refer to? Thanks much!MPIntl (talk) 07:06, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

If you don't recognise the issues with the promotional language then you probably have some sort of conflict of interest with the subject. For referencing see WP:RS. -Cntras (talk) 10:51, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi Cntras, I've further edited the article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:MPIntl/ITMA_%28Internationale_Textilmaschinen_Ausstellung%29). Can help to see if it is ok to move on to Wikipedia? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MPIntl (talk • contribs) 02:47, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi Cntras, could I trouble you to help have another look at the edited article (User:MPIntl/ITMA (Internationale Textilmaschinen Ausstellung))? Hopefully it's better and could bring the page live to wiki soon. Thank you for your help! MPIntl (talk) 03:22, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, the problems I mentioned above haven't been addressed. In order to be encyclopaedic it needs more factual information that doesn't include overblown promotional language. Also, for more information about referencing see - WP:RS, WP:ABOUTSELF. -Cntras (talk) 23:58, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Feedback for my article

Hi Cntras

I'm awating feedback for my wikiarticle in William Sieghart, which I drafted a couple of weeks ago. Can you advise how I can get this moved on to the main page. Manu thanks Leahroisin (talk) 12:00, 24 August 2011 (UTC)Leahroisin

The F-Word (Feminist blog)

Hi, I've removed the speedy from The F-Word (Feminist blog), as it asserts notability on the basis of an award won. If you still think it isn't notable enough for inclusion, you might want to take it to WP:AFD. Thanks, Gurt Posh (talk) 14:07, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

PROD'd. It didn't win an award, it was 'recommended' by the Women in Publishing New Venture Awards. -Cntras (talk) 14:13, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Non English sources

Hi Cntras, I want to expand an existing article but the only reliable sources I can find are not in English. What do you think about such sources? Should they still be used? Thanks, Guy.other (talk) 11:53, 30 August 2011 (UTC)Guy.other

See WP:NOENG - that should cover all of your concerns. -Cntras (talk) 01:06, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

speedy deletion

Hi,

the page is not finalised yet, and is not a and ad at all as you said!!

regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cgoudouly (talk • contribs) 12:00, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Rollback

Hi Cntras, please use an editsummary (undo, not rollback) if you remove edits that aren't obvious vandalism. like this one. For these linkadditions, note also that these links have been approved by user:armbrust, who is the main contributor to these articles, , . Best regards, Finn Rindahl (talk) 05:37, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

I'd say that concerns over coi-spam holds more weight than the 'approval' of another editor. -Cntras (talk) 12:59, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

My main concern is that you should use an edit summary for this kind of removal. Appropriate linkaddition or not - this clearly wasn't "obvious vandalism". The second point: COI is indeed something that holds a lot of weight, and I've reverted quite a few coiadditions myself over the years. Whenever a link is considered useful by those who are actually writing about the subject that should also be taken into consideration when judging if a link should be removed again or not. Best regards, Finn Rindahl (talk) 13:58, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Driving While Black disagreement.

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Driving While Black". Thank you. Mmyers1976 (talk) 02:00, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Feedback for my article (User:Asc S2B/Ascendas)

Hi Cntras,

I've edited my article - Ascendas on my user page. Could you help to give me feedback pls? Thank you for your help in advance.

User:Asc S2B/Ascendas ‎ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asc S2B (talk • contribs) 02:43, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

It comes across as an advertisement - see WP:ADVERT. Also, there needs to be more third party references. -Cntras (talk) 10:38, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion Request Made By You

Hello Cntras, I'd like to ask your reasons for requesting a speedy deletion for the Backyardpoultry.com article (Which as since been deleted)? The article, although brand new, covered an important topic relating to Australian agriculture, and poultry and I'd like to, just for future reference, ask why you tagged it to be deleted. Anjwalker (talk) 04:13, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

It was deleted because it did not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant. For future reference, see WP:YFA. -Cntras (talk) 10:34, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Kashmir white granite

I have declined your speedy deletion tag on Kashmir white granite; it is clearly not promotional in tone. Ironholds (talk) 03:05, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

It was tagged based on the user's intention - which was to create an article solely for purpose of promoting a particular company (refspam). -Cntras (talk) 06:55, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

And the users intentions are normally irrelevant. Judge the content, not the contributor. Ironholds (talk) 20:13, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

I would say that it is relevant - given that this is a pretty clear case of coi-spam. The username alone should raise alarm. -Cntras (talk) 02:17, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

I removed it because it was all incorrect. Either people put up correct material or don't use wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andiethewestie (talk • contribs) 13:18, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Request to review edited article

Hi Cntras, I've re-edited my article (User:MPIntl/ITMA (Internationale Textilmaschinen Ausstellung)). Appreciate if you could help to review it again. Thanks! MPIntl (talk) 02:12, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Cntras, Not sure if you've helped to review my article again. Your help is greatly appreciated. Hope to get the article live on Wikipedia soon. Thank you. MPIntl (talk) 02:01, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

David Kinkade

Good faith edits? He asked me to change some stuff on his page, so I did. I even made him a user name in which I am also using for him. Whats the problem? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drumsrfun1124 (talk • contribs) 08:53, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately we cannot go by your claim - you'll still have to satisfy the WP:VERIFY guidelines. Also, the previous version is perhaps more neutral. -Cntras (talk) 08:56, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

alice springs

Charlie Murphy was elected mayor of Alice Springs two weeks ago on the 3rd of October. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theblackblur (talk • contribs) 00:46, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

please help me!

Hi Cntras,

I have to write a secondary research report on Glanbia. Unfortunately I cannot find any information to create a SWOT analysis or Porter's Five Forces Analysis. As you saw that you've edited the Wikipedia Glanbia page a few times I was wondering if you have a tip where I'll find some for my analyses information? Sorry for my bad English. I just started to study in Ireland two months ago.

I really hope that you can help me.

Kind regards Aleksandra — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aleks ka (talk • contribs) 18:50, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

See WP:HW. -Cntras (talk) 00:37, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

New Page Patrol survey

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

deleting page of berly thomas

Hey man atleast you have time to delete one page. but didnt have the time to reply.. holy shit.

I've replied - but the discussion has since been archived. -Cntras (talk) 03:59, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

page deletion

Hi, What can I do to keep this page? Yes, it is a term I made up, but all terms are made up at one time or another. Since i thought of squirt present, the term is going around my area like wildfire, several of my friends have contacted me and want to know more about it and a couple have gotten presents. I really think this is a valid term, and should be included in wiki. But please tell me what i can do to keep the page up, I have no sources, just me. Thank you for your help, Scott — Preceding unsigned comment added by Loadss (talk • contribs) 13:24, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Article that comes across as an advertisment [User:MPIntl/ITMA (Internationale Textilmaschinen Ausstellung)]

Hi Cntras, I've tweaked the article slightly. I've read the reference link given. However, it will be good if you could advise the particular section of the article that come across as an ad. Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:MPIntl/ITMA_%28Internationale_Textilmaschinen_Ausstellung%29 Thank you for your help! MPIntl (talk) 04:58, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

The Samsung electronics article

Hey you're really pissing me the hell of ya know!!!! Ok have you read the samsung electronics article? Its blatantly lying just outright lying!!!! It saying how Samsung is the second chip maker in the world when thats just not true at all!!!! AMD is second!!!! Its saying how Samsung is going to overtake Intel in 2014!!! I mean its all lies for crying out loud so what kind of shit are you trying to pull huh!!!! All computer innovations take place right here in America!!! Samsung is a far cry from a chip maker!!!! Intel completely dominates the whole world!!!! Heres my proof http://newsroom.intel.com/community/intel_newsroom/blog/2011/09/13/intel-ceo-outlines-companys-plans-to-lead-future-of-computing and http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Desktops-and-Notebooks/Intel-Grows-Share-of-Improving-PC-Chip-Market-IDC-663030/ Ok Intel and AMD dominate the semiconductor industry!!! So what the fuck!!! This is outright bull shit and you know it!!! What I said was fact!!! The whole article is a sham!!!! http://newsroom.intel.com/community/intel_newsroom/blog/2011/09/13/intel-ceo-outlines-companys-plans-to-lead-future-of-computing seriously what kind of shit are you trying to pull huh!!! intel leads in the area of photonics http://techresearch.intel.com/ResearchAreaDetails.aspx?Id=26 intel reinvents the transistor intel reinvents the transistor http://newsroom.intel.com/community/intel_newsroom/blog/2011/05/04/intel-reinvents-transistors-using-new-3-d-structure listen this is supposed to be an encyclopedia so I want people to know the truth. Thats all I'm trying to do is tell the truth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TechnologyIsPower (talk • contribs)

Until you learn to adhere to the principles of WP:NPOV, I'm afraid you're going to have a hard time on this website. -Cntras (talk) 13:22, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Black Shot

Why did you delete all my articles on Black Shot!? >:( — Preceding unsigned comment added by Awesomediewif (talk • contribs) 11:37, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you!

Hi Cntras!

Thank you for your reply.

I'm still learning the ropes here, but another user said I couldn't submit my article yet - so I'll wait until I'm more 'notable', I guess! :)

Thanks again, Maayan Maayani (talk) 04:51, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Help

hi,i just wondering why the content i wrote on AdChina page all be deleted? the text are all about the company,product and service introduction.can you tell me which part of the content shows the promotion or the advertising?thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kittytsang (talk • contribs) 02:55, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

The content is blatantly promotional - to the point where you're using first person descriptors such as "we". Please read WP:PROMO. -Cntras (talk) 03:59, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

help again

hi ,would you please point out which part of the introction on AdChina showing the promotional intention.thanks a lot ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kittytsang (talk • contribs) 10:02, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

The problem has more to do with the overall tone of the article rather than a specific section. -Cntras (talk) 00:12, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Removal of headstone inscription for Samuel Rosewell

Hi For future reference, what is your reason for removing the headstone inscription from my article on Samuel Rosewell? I thought it provided useful information on how Samuel was perceived. Colinrosewell (talk) 11:21, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

I have been trying to find a photo of Samuel's headstone but discovered that it was destroyed by bombs in WWII. I thought it would be useful to reinstate the inscription as it is no longer available for anyone to view. Colinrosewell (talk) 22:48, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

It's just unconventional and in my opinion, unnecessary. There's no specific rule against it though. -Cntras (talk) 00:40, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. I appreciate your thoughts and I will keep your opinion in mind with any future articles. Colinrosewell (talk) 07:42, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

thank you

thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.85.23.126 (talk) 04:28, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Georgian people

there is wrong information about Georgian people. In Georgia lives about 3 985 000 Georgians in Russia about 800 000 in Turkey 115 700 Georgians and 300 000 Laz in Greece more than 200 000 Georgians in Iran about 400 000 Fereidan Georgians in USA 250 000-300 000 in EU 300 000-350 000 and in other countries about 150 000. So write true information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Explayer1993 (talk • contribs) 19:21, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Your information about Georgian people isn't true so don't write stupid things — Preceding unsigned comment added by Explayer1993 (talk • contribs) 10:20, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Only in Turkey lives 1 000 000 Chveneburi, so first get true information and than write and don't change it again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Explayer1993 (talk • contribs) 10:38, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Here, it clearly states that the total population of all countries is 4,255,270 which is ~4.3 million, not 7 million. -Cntras (talk) 00:21, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Hang on a minute Mr Deletion

I was in the middle of amending the article - you're a bit too trigger happy my friend, and you didn't wait for the final version. I'd be grateful if you could return it so that I can finish.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.208.182.166 (talk) 00:55, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Boogie Balagan

Hi, I am a fan of the band Boogie Balagan, a band that has a purpose of bringing peace between the Arabs and the Jews through funny and groovy rock n roll music. You keep on deleting my page and I don't understand why. It does not have any advertisement nature and it looks the same as any other band's volume. I have only wrote the history part so far since you just keep deleting it and I'm tired doing it over and over again. I realy don't understand what is the problem with this volume. It seems as if you have something personal against them.

Thank you, Chen — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chenchook (talk • contribs) 09:51, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

To be considered appropriate for Wikipedia, all band articles must meet the criteria of WP:GNG and WP:MUSIC. Unfortunately your article does not meet that criteria. -Cntras (talk) 09:58, 12 December 2011 (UTC)