User talk:Irishguy/Archive 18

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

→

Archive 25

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page .

By one interpretation, I have clearly broken the 3-revert rule on that article, having reverted the colors 4 times today. However, the combatants in this are alleged to be sockpuppets of each other, and I have treated their "work" as vandalism. Also, the semi-protection doesn't seem to be working very well. I wonder if I should just leave that page alone, or if I myself should get blocked, or what? Baseball Bugs 20:20, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

The semi protection appears to have expired already. Frankly, semi protection wouldn't alter anything because the accounts aren't new enough to get caught with it. You can go to

WP:RPP and request page protection outlining what the problem is. You will probably need to ask for full page protection. IrishGuy ^talk

20:22, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Done. Now we'll see if they take any action, or if they do, whether it's after the alleged sockpuppets have switched him back to the Mets. Thank you! P.S. I'm only watching that page because of User:Ron liebman vandalism. What a nuisance. Baseball Bugs 20:30, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Don't pay attention to them, and sometimes they go away. It's only fun when you keep reverting them and they know that it bugs you. Peace.Lsi john

20:35, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I already filed for it. What I don't get is, if these guys are sockpuppets, why aren't they blocked? Baseball Bugs 20:38, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

FYI, at least 2 or 3 other users were already combating this nonsense, I just wondered into it thanks to the Ron Liebman situation. You're probably right, that they're doing it just to be annoying. But they're Mets fans, which might figure into it. >:) Baseball Bugs 20:45, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Well I suppose that it is arguable that there is no such thing as a good Met's fan. Heh. Peace.Lsi john 20:51, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't quite make that argument. I'm just going on averages. >:) Baseball Bugs 21:05, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Now that JoeIdaho has been a user long enough, he has resumed posting Mets colors to Casey Stengel. Rather than get into another stupid revert war, I would like to know what the appropriate course of action would be here. Baseball Bugs 17:26, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi IrishGuy, I'd like to question the deletion of an article I wrote recently. Don't worry I'm not here for a childish tirade. The article was called rocknwrestling.co.uk and was about one of my favourite websites. I've met some of the guys behind the site so I know that my inforamtion is accurate in terms of how many visits it's had in it's four month history (several thousand) and I thik the article was concise and well written. Basically I don't understand what a person is supposed to do to emphasise the importance of the subject of an article. When I read articles on companies, organizations or indeed people, I can find nothing that sets the subject matter away form anything else as more important. I explained that rocknwrestling.co.uk has quickly become like a bible to British Wrestling fans, incredibly important to us all, and I feel that it deserves a mention. There is an article on wikipedia about US wrestling journalists Daver Meltzer and RD Reynolds, now I don't know if you are at all interested in wrestling and therefore I shall not demean by assuming you are not and don't know what your talking about in my argument, I wouldn't eb presumptuous as to do this, but even if you are a wrestling fan and just wasn't aware of the website, let me explain that rocknwrestling is as important to British Wrestling fans, as the views of Dave Meltzer and RD Reynolds are to wrestling fans in the US; and to add to this, the site also gets international visits, the coutries now include Germany, Finland, Spain, the Cocos Islands (south pacific) and more. I emplor you to allow the creation of a Wikipedia article on rocknwrestling.co.uk.

Thank you for taking the time to read this message. Please contact me via my email adress (*******@hotmail.com) if you wish to repsond to the message as I chekc that more often than I do my Wikipedia messages.

Yours Sincerely, Michael Chalkley

As noted on your talk page, the article didn't meet the criteria at

WP:NOTE. It was written in an advertisement fashion. It has only been online for a few months and the article was written very promtionally (e.g. "The site has become very popular very quickly"). IrishGuy ^talk

21:53, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

denzil

why did you delete my article, i was trying to make more pages link to late night talk —Preceding unsigned comment added by Denzillacey (talk • contribs)

Please read the guidelines at

WP:NOTE. IrishGuy ^talk

00:53, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

sorry about that Denzillacey 00:57, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi Irishguy, I saw that you've deleted a link I've inserted inside the Croatia wiki page. The problem is that my intention was not to make some advertising or so. Croatianet.org is really a nice project and maybe it's the only one where people from all around the world can speak and discuss all about Croatia. The whole project is growing fast and we're working on a daily basis. I thought that was the right place to put such a link. So, once again, there was no such an idea of eg. spam or so. The Community project portal http://www.croatianet.org/community is one of the very few croatian sites where international users may discuss using a multilanguage interface etc....

However thanx for your advice and I've read the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:External_links

Thanx

Sorry about that . . . didn't think it was a spam article. (Wow, first time I mistook a spam article as being legit. Most of my mistakes are the other way around.) Anyway, I had moved the page so there's a redirect here: Interwrite learning. -WarthogDemon 19:48, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, he's been recreating that article under different usernames. Why do people think that Wikipedia will help them sell their products? Crazy.... IrishGuy ^talk 19:49, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

You've probably seen it but a little recently someone was trying to not only recreate their non-notable band articles but attempted to "protect" them as well. And a few days ago I a vandal harassed me saying that I should be blocked for being "unfair" for tagging an nn-band article. And not to mention all the boyfriend/girlfriend articles . . . I may write an essay about boyfriend/girlfriend articles sometime. -WarthogDemon 19:52, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

My favorite is when they recreate the article and add a "protect" tag...but forget to remove the speedy tag. IrishGuy ^talk 19:53, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

You mean hangon tag? Because this was the first time I saw them recreate with the protect tag. O_o -WarthogDemon 19:54, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

No, the actual speedy tag. Often they will simply cut and paste without realizing they left the speedy tag on the new article. It happens more often than you would think. IrishGuy ^talk 19:55, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh yes I've seen that too. :D Anyways, I'll stop taking up talk page space with my curiosity before you need to place a {{subst:uw-chat1}} on mine. Happy editing. :) -WarthogDemon 19:57, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

I know you're pretty busy, but I was wondering whether you wanted to help a concerted effort to clean up, reference, image, and otherwise spit-shine the Yanks-Sox rivalry article. I'm hoping to get a small cabal of people together for the drive from both sides of the rivalry (and neutrals too to keep things on the up-and-up) and for a GA rating by the end of the season. Interested? I'm personally going to be away from my computer for two weeks starting at the end of this week, but I think it's something that could be within reach.

Oh, and one other thing... it's been bugging me for some time, I wanted to apologize for getting into a spat with you a month or two ago over something relatively simple. I guess it tends to happen to the best (or even, in my case, the mediocre) of us from time to time. - RPIRED 20:05, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

No problem, I apologize from my end as well. :)

Sure, I'd be more than happy to pitch in and help shape it up. Do you have a list of ideas? Anything in particular you think needs work? IrishGuy ^talk 20:07, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

I think the most important thing right now is probably making sure that things are referenced, but we should also try and pare down some of the history section where it's needlessly wordy (probably including parts of the opening two historical background paragraphs in debate now). I like the Key Moments sections but those should probably be reconfigured to some extent too.

It's hard to do since a lot of the relevant pictures aren't ones that can be considered fair use, but we should probably find some pictures somewhere of things like the Dent/Boone homeruns, the Varitek/A-Rod incident, Ortiz's homeruns from '04, the '04 ALCS celebration, and of course older stuff too where it can be found. Not too many images but definitely we need more than we have now (one picture of Babe Ruth) as an illustration of how bitter the rivalry can be. Perhaps some pictures of fans in Yankees Suck t-shirts (and/or anti-Boston shirts, maybe side by side) that can be done by users. We definitely have a lot of good information here and it seems like it's almost enough to be considered GA once we polish it up a tad. I'm gonna go look for more people to help with the project, I'll let you know who I find. - RPIRED 20:29, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

So I can't make that page?

Anyway...what does it take in order to be remarkable enough to have a page on Wikipedia??

Let me know...thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leematthews2242 (talk • contribs)

Please read

WP:NOTE. IrishGuy ^talk

23:08, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Invitation to Join WikiProject Crime

Would you like to upgrade from an honorary member to a full member of the

Wikipedia:WikiProject Criminal Biography

? Your work on Danny Greene was greatly appreciated. I feel you would be a great asset to our project.

IP is a sock of

17:55, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

70.144.10.27 03:10, 12 July 2007 (UTC)nah Irish dude, you stop. leave the editing of church history to us folks who are actually educated on the subject. You are obviously very blinded by the 1500 year old cult of Roman Catholicism and can't be objective or neutral on the matter. I'll keep doing my part to educate the public that ends up at Wikipedia searching for factual answers. Have a good day though :o)

Please read

WP:ATTACK. IrishGuy ^talk

03:11, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

ooooo, you scare me so much. Your ignorance is what leads you to be the real vandal. hmmmmm, who's gonna block you for reverting true and scholarly information. It is people such as yourself that makes Wikipedia a joke to the public and academic community. Go read some real history and get your nose away from your computer dude. There's a whole world of real knowledge out there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.144.10.27 (talk • contribs)

Please participate in the discussion on the talk page.

Great job, again, on Tecmo. A shame he wastes so much of our collective time. I fear him doing it again -- as he has done it twice.

Can you, as an admin, leave a note on the Tecmo page that he has now been found to use both his prior sockpuppet, and now Longlevi as a sock? That would allow future admins to follow all of the sock activity from one spot -- his Tecmo page. Otherwise, the trail is more confusing for the uninitiated I would think.

I hope I am being clear ... long day.

tx.--Epeefleche 23:37, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

• Hey, take the weekend off. You've got my permission. I want to mention that I saw there are these auto-linked categories when a "sockpuppet" or "suspected sockpuppet" template is posted. Maybe all of his sockpuppets, including El redactor, Blacksoxfan, and the two IP addresses from way back when, could be tagged uniformly, i.e. with the one currently on Long levi's page. I also created the red-link categories, but I'm not at all sure I did that the appropriate way, but it's a start toward what you're asking for: [1] and [2] Baseball Bugs 23:55, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

He is back and in my humblest of opinions trolling every talk page that he visits. Can anything be done about this?--Vintagekits 11:07, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

No, Vintagekits, because I am NOT trolling, neither have I been away. Please give me examples. I thought a troll was a diminutive supernatural being in Scandinavian mythology. Perhaps your definition is a southern Protestant member of Fine Gail who says things you disagree with. And was it you who deleted my words about Sinn Féin's performance in the 2007 elections (drawing from Mark Hennessy of the Irish Times)? Millbanks 22:39, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Here's a red-link user whose only purpose appears to be to post spam links: [3] Baseball Bugs 12:10, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

What is the problem with the entry? Do you know anything about philadelphia sports? Or the fact that "Mamula" is with out a doubt, slang that is used? Removing this slang would be like removing the "crap" reference from Thomas Crapper. You would be doing a disservice to pop culture. This is not a joke. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sox21 (talk • contribs)

You are making unreferenced personal attacks. Please stop. IrishGuy ^talk 20:54, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

You are a fool. It is actual slang in Philadelphia. You can call WIP Sports talk in Philadelphia and verify. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sox21 (talk • contribs)

You need to read

WP:BLP. IrishGuy ^talk

21:06, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

How is this a personal attack? If that is the case, then the "crap" reference would be a personal attack against Thomas Crapper. See the post for Izel Jenkins. Another ex-Eagle. His nickname of "toast" is referenced. Again, another valid reference. But I guess you would not know anything about valid sports references since you spend your time as a "hall monitor" on a free website. Not allowing the Mamula reference is ridiculous. I can see your point with the reference to Bill Clinton that was added but this was done out of anger towards you. There was absolutely nothing wrong with the original post. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sox21 (talk • contribs)

Using someone's name to describe the act of failing is most assuredly a personal attack. IrishGuy ^talk 20:33, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Here are valid web references. This shows that the slang Mamula'd is not just Philadelphia slang but sports slang in general. http://galleyslaves.blogspot.com/2006/05/nfl-draft-post-mortem.html and another: http://www.igtc.com/pipermail/celtics/2004-June/001842.html and another: http://www.blackandgold.com/forums/archive/index.php?t-12458.html

I would like to escalate this matter.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sox21 (talk • contribs)

Blogs and forums aren't

reliable sources. IrishGuy ^talk

20:35, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I wasn't done: http://www.sptimes.com/2005/04/20/Columns/Avoid_a_lousy_pick_in.shtml

I understand that blogs may not be a valid reference but combine the blogs with the use of Mamula'd on this site and I feel this is sufficient proof of this as a slang word. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sox21 (talk • contribs)

Wrong. That article states: A team could get Couched. It could get Mandariched. It could get Mamulaed. It isn't using "Mamulaed" as a slang term for failure, but is instead comparing the article subject to three other players. IrishGuy ^talk 20:48, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

And what is the article subject, genius? Here is another. How many places do you need to see this used as a word? I didn't make all these posts. You still never said anything about Izel Jenkins.
http://www.geocities.com/philadelphiaeagles2k6/hallofobscurity-mamula.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sox21 (talk • contribs)

Read

WP:ATTACK

before continuing. Should you continue being incivil, I will simply delete further comments by you.

One again, the article didn't in any way use "Mamula" as a word describing failure. It reported on McCants being a draft bust and then went on to name three other draft disappointments...one of which was Mamula. That is a very different thing than the personal attack you continue to add to that article. Fan sites, blogs, and forums aren't

reliable sources and are therefore completely irrelevant. IrishGuy ^talk

21:05, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

The Point Article

I would like to find out why my page was deleted. I neither work for the Depot or have any business relationship with the venue, yet this was you claim for deleting my post. Please respond with an appropriate answer soon or I will make a complaint to Wikipedia of your actions,

Regards, Robmark23 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robmark23 (talk • contribs)

The article was an advertisement for a venue and as such was deleted. Please don't make threats. IrishGuy ^talk 23:54, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

I wasn’t making threats, I was asking a legitimate question why my article was deleted. My post didn’t include any advertisement of up and coming shows or ticket prices or box office locations. It included a brief introduction to the venue, it's capacity, previous events and official links. What else am I supposed to provide for an encyclopedia site? I wanted to edit this page over time and while searching for information this evening I came across another page covering the Point Theatre. Aside from quantity between the pages, what was the difference? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robmark23 (talk • contribs)

It isn't quantity, it is quality. There must be some level of

notability. IrishGuy ^talk

00:06, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

True, but you had it deleted by within a few minutes of posting. I am writing it from scratch and I wanted to add to it over the next few hours. Every page has to start somewhere. Also, as someone with no connection to the PD, apart from having attended concerts there, how could I be advertising it? Surly I am simply sharing information as I noticed there was no link for it when I accessed the Unholy Alliance Tour page? Please let me know why you didn’t give me a chance to update this page, which you must have clearly noticed I was doing when I reactivated the page just after you had deleted it and added to it. Regards, Robert —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robmark23 (talk • contribs)

People constantly recreate deleted pages without adding anything new. Recreation doesn't denote improvement. Additionally, one doesn't necessarily have to be affiliated with something to advertise it. Bands play in venues. A single venue isn't notable simply because bands played there. It must have something to set it apart like CBGB for instance. IrishGuy ^talk 00:14, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I am afraid I completely disagree with that. I am simply interested in music. The bands, the artwork, the people and the venues. When bands i like go on tour I like to know the sort of venues they play as it gives me an insight into the popularity of the band the record sales often mislead you on. I have been attending concerts in the Point since I was eight years old and i is one of my favorites venues so I wanted to honor that love I feel for the place and give it a page. I am glad I found another more detailed page already in place as it means I have something to edit. I trust you will have no problem with me adding any information I can to that page?
I think you need to have a serious think about what you feel should be displayed on the pages of this site and what the people reading them think.
Regards,
Robert

I would also like to point out that I have no affiliation with any band currently (much to my own regret, I work in an office :(—Preceding unsigned comment added by Robmark23 (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, as such the article must be

notable and illustrate importance. This isn't a fan site. IrishGuy ^talk

00:23, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

But this is a site dedicated to information. Are you saying that you cant write about something factually that you are passionate about. I am also very passionate about Greek and Roman studies. If I edit an article of Plato or Rome’s fall will you delete that because I am a 'fan' of it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robmark23 (talk • contribs)

Actually,

Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. As for the rest of your comment, I feel no need to respond to straw men. IrishGuy ^talk

00:30, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Well if that’s how you argue then what can I say. I think you'll find you haven’t given proper evidence for deleting my article, the most obvious being 'there was already a page for the subject'. I’m afraid with people like you in the world it is hard to be passionate about anything, because it gets in the way of protocol.
Have a good night, I'm sure this site is alot poorer for your actions over the years
Robert —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robmark23 (talk • contribs)

Possibly it makes you feel important and superior to make petty personal attacks...possibly you simply refuse to read what I have written. Your article illustrated no level of notability. None. It was an advertisement for a venue that didn't outline any degree of importance. The other article you allude to, Point Theatre, does in fact illustrate importance. Therein lies the difference. IrishGuy ^talk 00:41, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Ah, but if you had given me five minutes chance to update the page before deleting it maybe it could have grown into a page that contained importance, what else but a general overview do you expect from an INTRODUCTION. With regards to your comment "Possibly it makes you feel important and superior to make petty personal attacks", the 'attack' in question is merely an observation I have made to the way you carry out your duties on this site. Lets not forget, I’m not the one deleting peoples pages within minutes of them being created. Do you think these pages are written up straight go? I wanted to put something up straight away as I could not see a dedicated page, my mistake I'll admit but you could have given that as a reason in the first place instead of this advertising rubbish you keep harping on about.
I created this site to add to its information, instead I get deleted and my points mocked (Straw Man Argument)by one of its administrators within minutes of starting. User Friendly yes—Preceding unsigned comment added by Robmark23 (talk • contribs)

So the comment I'm sure this site is alot poorer for your actions over the years isn't rude or mocking? The article met the speedy deletion criteria. You simply recreated it identically each time with nothing new added. Why should I assume that given time it would magically illustrate importance? You were immediately rude to me (Please respond with an appropriate answer soon or I will make a complaint to Wikipedia of your actions) and now have the temerity to claim I wasn't patient enough with you? Nice. IrishGuy ^talk 01:02, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I did not intend to sound rude (for the complaint comment), I simply wanted to understand your decision. In your first comment you made no mention to an identical site, you simply dismissed it as advertising (Blatant if I recall). If you had said deleted due to Duplicate work then that would have been reasonable.
I still disagree with the manner you dealt with this complaint but there’s not a lot I can do about it. I'm just glad you didn’t dealt my other posts of the evening.
As for the comment about the site being poorer, well, for my own benefit, I’ll wait and see how your judgment goes on other posts.
Rob —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robmark23 (talk • contribs)

I am inquiring about your deletion of the Sonim Technologies article. This company is one of the few producers of VoIP, Push to talk mobile phones. A wikipedia page about a mobile phone manufacturer is not advertising. If it is advertising, you need to delete the pages for Nokia, LG, blackberry, etc. Please correct your mistake. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arponline (talk • contribs)

There was no mistake. The article was a blatant advertisment. IrishGuy ^talk 00:09, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually, he was a vandal so I think he should have been {{

22:47, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

He was impersonating WoW in name and actions. As such, either way he would get a hardblock. :) IrishGuy ^talk 22:51, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Well done blocking

23:54, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

User:XAndreWx, to whom you placed a 3RR block on, subsequently had it removed by User:Evilclown93 (also known as User:Maxim) who removed the block on User:Giggy's request has gone on to follow the exact same pattarn of behaviour - at least six times since he was unblocked.

I have raised another WP:3RR over here User:XAndreWx reported by User:Sprigot

Furthermore I believe that he has also resorted to sock puppeteering - and have raised a sock puppet notification over here Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/XAndreWx‎

I look forward to your response regarding the flagrant attitude to your original block for 3RR on XAndreWx's part.

Sprigot 10:00, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Irish guy, there is a huge dispute over colors on Reggie Jackson's page. Two users, Pascak and Joeidaho (who is suspected as a sockpuppet) have been changing the colors on Reggie Jackson's and Casey Stengel's pages off the Yankee colors (they appear to hate the Yankees). On July 19th, during a huge edit war, they both reverted the colors twice, hinting that they were doing that to avoid the 3RR rule [4]. If you can discipline them or warn them you will discipline them, then, by all means do so. They need to be stopped. Thanks for your time Soxrock 17:38, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

So I found a non-notable independent record company on here: Open Mind Productions and I start putting it up for afd. I prepare to warn the user and stop. Acting on a sudden hunch I checked the user's contributions and then at the history and realized that a music artist trying to promote himself changed the article from this: [5] to this [6]. Is this considered vandalism? -WarthogDemon 20:17, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, blanking an existing article and rewriting it with non-notable promotional material is vandalism. IrishGuy ^talk 20:58, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

I gave the person an appropriate warning. Thanks! -WarthogDemon 21:04, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

I'll thank you to stop deleting my page. I did everything I could to bring the entry into compliance with Wikipedia's terms, if you're not happy with that then kindly tell me what information I can include that would allow me to fulfill your terms. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Archangel M (talk • contribs).

Again, please be specific about what it is you want in the entry. I included a link to the former owner's web site, which if you bother to click the link would tell you what you need to know about the man, as well as the fact that the site was until very recently at or near the top of Google's ranking list. Surely that is a significant piece of information. This is ridiculous. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Archangel M (talk • contribs).

Please read

WP:ATTACK before making any more edits like this. Your talk page is filled with links to the criteria for notability and inclusion. Please read them. IrishGuy ^talk

20:58, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Minstral article deletion

Hi Irishguy,

I just spent two hours putting together a page on the band Minstral, only to have it deleted a second later. Please explain why you deleted it.

Thank you

Revirvlodlaku —Preceding unsigned comment added by Revirvlkodlaku (talk • contribs)

It was an article about a band that outlined no level of importance or notability. Please read

WP:BAND for inclusion criteria. IrishGuy ^talk

22:16, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Yankees/Red sox

That doesn't even makes sense. You could said that to anyone who disagrees with contoversial topics. You obviously have a vested interest in this bias. This article is clearly biased, there is no ifs and or buts about it. It's not just me, several people have brought up objections. And thats what makes it a POV issue! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xxdrkthreatxx (talk • contribs)

Actually, you complained then you simply logged out and posted again as an IP to make it appear there were more people angered. Again, the article is referenced. IrishGuy ^talk 22:18, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

That's not true at all! So on top of biased editing you hurl selacious accusations my way. First I complained, then I decided to log in and add the POV banner. And so what if it's referenced; there are all kinds of false information from biased sources on the internet. That quote uses weasel words to denigrate the great city of New York. Who cares Im not even gonna fight this anymore who cares about Boston. They're yesterdays news. John Kerry and Ben Affleck that's all I have to say. You can have Wikipedia. Good Day Sir. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xxdrkthreatxx (talk • contribs)

So you claim the article is biased against New York...and then you write a tirade about how much you hate Boston and it's natives? Ironic... IrishGuy ^talk 00:20, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Muscling in on this one... the complaining user did not cite any specific items on the talk page. Posting a "this article is biased" and then disappearing is, in my opinion, deserving of reversion. As far as "yesterday's news", apparently he hasn't checked the standings lately. The Yankees are as far back of the Red Sox as the Twins are behind the Tigers. And the Twins are definitely "yesterday's news" as far as this season is concerned. Baseball Bugs 00:24, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a

22:48, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

I've seen articles about The Catch, The Shot, etc. I'm wondering what one game in all the history of sports could possibly be singled out as The Game. Baseball Bugs 23:20, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

This one. It's rather silly, to be honest. IrishGuy ^talk 23:21, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

"Silly" covers it, yep. Baseball Bugs 23:36, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

That one account definitely bears watching. I just think it's risky to openly accuse someone, as SoxRocks did, without compelling evidence. It is kind of funny that he was only on for a day, like maybe "testing the waters". But there was an obvious sockpuppet that turned up the next day, a 75... subnet that belongs to Verizon Wireless and whose edit pattern and comments were definitely Tecmo, and I posted just such a notice on that page. We'll see. One thing to be aware of is one comment by Mondegreen on the notice page that hinted that she was in an e-mail discussion with Tecmo. She needs to be aware of the risks of "editing by proxy". However, she does so little actual editing that she doesn't get in the way. Baseball Bugs 00:08, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I created an article about a company that addresses the green cars movement. The article describes a brief synopsis of what the company does, the uniqueness of their strategy (a broad approach, rather than narrow and specific), refers to current prominent highlights about the green cars (US Legislation) movement with full references.

I thought this article would meet CSD G11 as it deals with the subject of the green cars cause, the company Green Cars Now and provides information on current prominent issues. If you could elaborate on how CSD G11 is violated I would appreciate it.

I looked over WP:SPAM#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles which mentions the need for a neurtal point of view. The article is about a company and more than half the article is about the green car movement it seeks to advocate. Was the last paragraph of the article the most offensive? Should I empasize the subject it advocates rather than specific services it provides?

Thanks,

Paul —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pfezziwig (talk • contribs)

The article was written with sentences like: Green Cars Now counters this traditional arguement by promoting a broader solution to cleaner more efficient running cars and oil independence by advocating many smaller components as a solution and Green Cars Now provides resources in the form of articles, latest news headlines and a discussion forum on the increasingly numerous and complex components of the green car movement. which are clearly promotional in nature. Even the three references were about the enviromental cause and not the organization itself. Nothing in the article outlines any level of importance or notability. IrishGuy ^talk 01:16, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Is it possible to write an article on a company and it not be promotional? The statement alone is a contridiction, writing about a company is promotion. Can you provide me with edititorial guidlines on how to write an article on a company without promoting it? Thanks.

Would you suggest I write about the green car movement based on proponents for and against it? Rather than focusing on a company devoted to it's advocacy? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pfezziwig (talk • contribs)

Writing about your own websites is promotional. It is a clear

conflict of interest. IrishGuy ^talk

18:46, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Conflict of Interest

I suspected that might come up. It depends if you believe that the fact I'm aware of the speedy deletion because I am related to the author is a conflict of interest. It's not really the deletion I have issue with, rather the mechanism. I wouldn't vote on an AfD, as I believe there would be conflict of interest there, but I do believe that the article deserves undeletion and an immediate nomination to AfD rather than the speedy deletion that it got. I would, of course, accept any community consensus on the article but it seems to me that, despite the closing comment, the result of the last AfD discussion was not a clear consensus. – drw25 (talk) 08:36, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

When an article has undergone multiple AfDs and it deleted as failing

WP:RS, etc. it shouldn't be recreated without having some substantial improvements. This article didn't. At all. There is no valid reason for a deletion review. As you haven't edited in days, why was your first edit to contest the deletion? IrishGuy ^talk

10:21, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

re: Deletion of Healthcare Reviews

Hi. I have been reviewing Wiki guidelines and editing formats in an attempt to make a correct entry like Healthcare Reviews , can you supply some details why this article doesn't conform to wiki policies and differs from standard company entries that are not multimillion dollar companies. Does Wiki primarily want large business entries and no small business entries?

Would you recommend I write about patient safety concerns and the problem with healthcare providors policing themselves rather than a company advocating patient feedback and safety? Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pfezziwig (talk • contribs)

In this edit you admit that it is your own website you are writing about. That is a clear

conflict of interest. The article itself was a blatant advertisement with lines like: Fortunetely it’s now very easy for patients to submit online feedback through HealthcareReviews.com. Your only other edits have been to add your websites to other articles ([7] [8]). Wikipedia is not a venue to advertise your websites. IrishGuy ^talk

18:44, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Braindead

Yeah sorry about the copy vio -I forgot to rewrite it! I have rewritten it anyway - I guess I was braindead for a few seconds there! it should be ok now ♦ Dr. Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you?" Contribs} 19:07, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

is it illegal to write about the basketball team i play for?WeAreMagicWiki 23:25, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Illegal, no. :)

You shouldn't write about something you are associated with as that is a

conflict of interest. Additionally, the article made no claims of notability or importance. IrishGuy ^talk

23:27, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Lemon (Game)

It was not patent nonsense in any sense of the way explainexd on Wikipedia:Patent nonsense, it was just an article about a game played with pen and paper, fine, delete it, but give me a viable reason as to why, please? As well, it should be noted that if you delete someone's article, it should be moved to that person's "talk" page

KitsuneDragonRA

00:25, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually, there are no guidelines at all that state I should move a deleted article to a talk page. The article was nonsense with no meaningful content. IrishGuy ^talk 00:37, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Right, what do you mean in 'meaningful content'? As long as the subject behind the article exists, does that not give the article meaning, the game is real, therefore the article had perfect meaning.

KitsuneDragonRA

00:45, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Meaningful doesn't mean "takes place in reality". I ate some cookies earlier...that fact doesn't deserve an article. Subjects must have notability and importance. IrishGuy ^talk 01:31, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for the clarification, and for admitting that it was not "Patent nonsense", you can delete it if you so wish, but it was not "made up in school one day" just to clarify...

KitsuneDragonRA

01:55, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

At what point did I say it wasn't patent nonsense? It was and remains so. IrishGuy ^talk 02:22, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

I assume that you are finding it as the second definition of PN: "Content that, while apparently meaningful after a fashion, is so completely and irredeemably confused that no reasonable person can be expected to make any sense of it whatsoever." I do not believe it is so irredeemably confused that no reasonable person can be expected to make any sense of it whatsoever... I mean... if you read my article straight through you can understand the game, so it is, therefore, not Patent Nonsense

Hi Irishguy,

I just started working on the BigBand Networks article and got the notice that it was previously deleted due to lack of significance. Would you please elaborate why? The company is a $1B company traded in NASDAQ under the BBND ticker, not to mention being innovators of several technologies that revolutionized video delivery (that last sentence sounds like some marketing promotion, yet the company did revolutionize video delivery for Verizon, Time Warner Cable, Cox, CableVision, Comcast etc...). I have worked on several articles for companies in the same space, most being a tenth of the size of BBND yet they did not get deleted.

Thanks in advance.

Tal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MajorT (talk • contribs)

The article was a single sentence. It didn't assert importance or notability. IrishGuy ^talk 22:11, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

I just pressed save in the middle (ok, beginning) of my work (and I do understand that a single sentence does not an article make). I just want to make sure that if I invest in this article a few days it will not be deleted again (providing the article itself is any good).

Thanks, Tal. MajorT 11:41, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, considering you have very few edits and your other major edit is this and your other deleted article, (

conflict of interest with the subject. Do you? IrishGuy ^talk

11:50, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

I have thoroughly read the

conflict of interest

article and believe I can write a neutral encyclopedic article. I have worked in the past for several of the companies in the same space (which makes me a good source of information) yet I have no financial incentives that can bias my work. Providing the article is neutral, will you approve the contribution?

BTW - Switched Video is just another name for Switched Broadcast. MajorT 14:20, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Minstral article deletion

Ok, that's fair enough. I wonder, do you still have that article somewhere in your database, or is it lost forever? If you still have it, would you mind emailing it to me at [email protected] ? Thanks. Revirvlkodlaku —Preceding unsigned comment added by Revirvlkodlaku (talk • contribs)

I am trying to install a valid link to the Gomery Commission of inquiry. The original links are now invalid. The link I am trying to install is: http://epe.lac-bac.gc.ca/100/206/301/pco-bcp/commissions/sponsorship-ef/06-02-10/www.gomery.ca/en/phase1report/default.htm Upon completion and after testing, the link is redirected to: http://www.collectionscanada.ca/000/007/000007-404-003008.html This redirection does not link to the document. What Is wrong? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johncaron.ca (talk • contribs)

Apparently they redesigned the website and moved all the documents to new URLs. Were you looking for this and this? IrishGuy ^talk 22:16, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

You gave this dude: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/209.121.69.16 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:209.121.69.16 a final warning, yet he totally continues to vandalize pages. I am just a casual user, yet every single day I see pages that are vandalized. This fucking idiot thinks he is being cute, but that shows what an antisocial person he really is. Ban this dude please! Leondegrance

I haven't left any trolling comments - I'm just making slight edits to colleges that I attended because I'm bored. Have a good day. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.180.165.142 (talk • contribs)

Hello. I inadvertantly came across percussionist Daniel de los Reyes' Wikipedia page which at the time had about two sentences. I work directly with Daniel and DRUMJUNGLE INC. including maintaining his official websites. I created an account for us called DRUMJUNGLE, however each time I made changes to his page they were immediately deleted for some reason. I see the page now has more content which is fine. I wrote the website content I was trying to post on the Wikipedia page so it is mine/ours to use freely just so you have a heads up in case we decide in the future to add more content and you are the one editing it. I have no idea who created this page for him. You can contact me at our websites if you want verification of who I am. Thank you for your time.

Regards, DrumJungle 22:13, 24 July 2007 (UTC) DRUMJUNGLE INC.

If you work for Daniel, you shouldn't edit his article. It is a blatant

conflict of interest for you to do so. IrishGuy ^talk

22:56, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

That's fine, the page looks good. I didn't know. Thanks. DrumJungle 01:40, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

hello, I was trying to create a page for a tasty new product that I discovered recently. Why was it considered advertising if I am writing about a product that I like? There are Coke and Pepsi pages on Wiki... what is the difference? If i don't put ny contact information, just info about the product does that work? Let me know. Cheers, MacMartin 22:35, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

It is a blatant advertisement and you have been warned numerous times. Stop recreating it. IrishGuy ^talk 22:37, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Thought you could use this. =) -WarthogDemon 22:47, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. :) IrishGuy ^talk 22:48, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

You are welcome. :) Btw, you accidentally moved a page to Mark D, West with a comma instead of a period. I moved it appropriately now. -WarthogDemon 23:02, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Whoops. Good catch. Thanks. IrishGuy ^talk 23:02, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

And one more thing . . . wouldn't this Aby barbu border on illegal vandalism here? -WarthogDemon 23:46, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, it might not be as bad as you think, depending upon the age of the person who wrote it. Either way, it is definitely vandalism and was deleted accordingly. IrishGuy ^talk 23:47, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

This is the first time I have tried to use wikipedia, and I have done nothing wrong. I am trying to talk about the artistic nature of my project, and not sure how to craftfully navigate these editing tools. How is my article "blatent advertising" if I haven't even completed it yet? My article has more artistic merit, and is definitely less "blatent" than any other film article on here (i.e. Silent Hill, Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon, Die Hard, etc.) Can I please have my article back? I am not doing anything wrong. My article is TV Face. --Pompomspower 23:06, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

You are attempting to use Wikipedia to advertise and promote a non-notable horror webseries. IrishGuy ^talk 23:07, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

"Non-notable" is a subjective call. I suppose that's up to your opinion, and not due to any specific guidlines. I have never dealt with a site with such a fascist and subjective regimin. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pompomspower (talk • contribs)

Actually, it

WP:CIV before posting again. IrishGuy ^talk

23:13, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Jennifer Austin

One of the definitions of "notable" was national radio airplay.

This article referenced that fact.

Thanks for reconsideration.

Austinmdpedi 23:11, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

The official website doesn't exist yet and the myspace link is broken. Do you have anything to corroborate this claim? IrishGuy ^talk 23:15, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

I will work on getting you the information you need. Thank you for your time.

Irishguy, Just so you know, it was my first time posting and when it was removed I didn't know what happened that is why I kept on reposting. So maybe there is a better way of informing people when they have been removed and why. Thanks, 204.11.203.50 23:22, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Per discussion on my talk page, could you move

00:33, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Wizardman just took care of it, no worries :) — Moe ε 00:36, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Hey hey, I am fairly new to wikipedia, and I stumbled across your user page. So now I'm making a pointless post to say hey! HEY!!! Actually, even though I'm new here, my article creating abilities are atrocious, so I've just taken to looking at newly created pages and tagging the ones for csd that deserve it. I noticed you deleted one of the pages that i tagged for csd so I must be doing the right thing :D yay!!! GBenemy ^{(talk . it.wiki)} 00:35, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Why did you delete my page? Moparisthebest has great significance and no page. I was writing the usual holder page with many misspelled words and alot of grammar mistakes on purpose until I had time to write a meaningful page. Any chance you can undelete it —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lolhaxwut (talk • contribs)

The article was complete nonsense. IrishGuy ^talk 00:41, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

excuse me. my favorite band deserves a page and i spent hard time making it.

why did you delete it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Swimtheocean (talk • contribs)

They are a non-notable band. Please read

WP:BAND. IrishGuy ^talk

00:41, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

are you kidding me? they were in teen vogue, urb magazine, alternative press and are going to tour AMERICA.

if your definition of "notable band" is the N*SYNC type, then you have got to be shitting me. "non-notable" is your own opinion, they have a record contract. does that not signify anything? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Swimtheocean (talk • contribs)

You have no references to corroborate the press claims. Having a record contract doesn't automatically grant notability. Please learn to be

civil. IrishGuy ^talk

00:52, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

i was GETTING THERE. if you would let me finish, i have my "claims" uploaded and you can SEE THEM. i swear, they're amazing and i just want people to know them. i have my proof, if you'd just let me get to it.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Swimtheocean (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia is not a venue to advertise non-notable indie bands. IrishGuy ^talk 01:00, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

they're not a "non-notable indie band". and i'm not advertising, i'm educating. and why are you so against sharing information to the masses? isn't that what wikipedia's about? besides, shouldn't you be patroling wikipedia for pages made for someone's dog instead?

i just want to share with the world. and i can back every speck of "press claim" i have. PLEASE. Swimtheocean 01:25, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Hey IrishGuy,

You've deleted probably in under 2 minutes my wiki for ArtDC of which you defined as "Blatant Advertising". This is a FREE group that does not make money and supports local artists in the D.C. area. I even wrote in the summary that i'd be adding links yet you appeared to have haphazardly deleted an important group in Washington D.C. Can you explain your logic and reasoning? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Artindc (talk • contribs)

It need not be commercial to be an advertisement. Based on your username, you are clearly here with the single purpose of advertising that group. Please read

WP:COI. IrishGuy ^talk

01:04, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Your presumptions are inaccurate. I'm not sure where you bought your crystal ball but you are inaccurate in what you are saying. The fact that you would delete an article based on someone's username clearly indicates that you are jumping to conclusions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Artindc (talk • contribs)

I deleted it based on the content, not based on your username. I pointed out your username as more evidence that you are a single purpose advertising account. IrishGuy ^talk 01:09, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

You just pointed me to COI (Conflict of Interest)- what does that have to do with trying to advertise? I don't really see your logic. I think you need to expound on your reasoning. You are assuming a great deal here which is simply not fair nor you cannot prove or specifically assert that the Wiki I was attempting to post was advertising or *information* on an *1800* member FREE arts group in Washington, D.C. So IrishGuy, tell me what your "first" evidence is that I have created a "single purpose advertising account". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Artindc (talk • contribs)

Are you joking? Your first edit was to create an article about the same subject your username is. It doesn't get any clearer than that. IrishGuy ^talk 01:16, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

So, for example, you are one of about 15,000 artists in the D.C. metro area. You are an artist yourself (yes, I am an artist, maybe my alias gave that away), and you connecting that fact that my name is "ArtINDC" (although you seem to think that this is exactly the same as "ArtDC") that there is a conflict of interest? Does this mean that based on your name you can't write or comment about anything Irish?

If you aren't even going to attempt to make valid points you can stop posting here. IrishGuy ^talk 01:30, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

This is my last post discussing this because clearly I'm not getting anywhere. I have valid points but you choose not to respond to them. One valid point I may add is that your haste in deleting the article clearly validates the fact that you are racing through Wiki looking for things to delete. I requested you expound on your reasons yet all you have is empirical evidence to support your claim. However, if Wikipedia deletions are allowed based on editors presumptions and empirical evidence then I suppose you win this one. Thanks.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Artindc (talk • contribs)

So you instead resort to making personal attacks on other pages? You have no valid points. You are advertising that subject. You have a conflict of interest. A subject need not be commercial to be an advertisement. You haven't addressed any of those points. IrishGuy ^talk 01:43, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

What do personal attacks have to do with posting a new article? It's true, I did send a message to someone. Are we allowed to do that? I was chided by someone for doing it and I admitted to it. So, now what? Are you going to delete my account because I exercised my freedom of speech? Do you and I have to like each other in order for you not to delete the article I posted? I give up. I'm sure you're glad. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Artindc (talk • contribs)

I do note that once again you failed to address any of the points made. Instead, you think the better route is to call me a nazi. IrishGuy ^talk 01:53, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Ooops! Did you catch that?

Freedom of Speech, first off. Second off, you would not clearly respond to any of my questions. I didn't violate any TOU and when you cited that I did violate it you could not prove or verify it. You did not expound on WHY you deleted the article. Therefore if you are responsible then my only recourse is to give up because it's clear that this is beating a dead horse and that you are clearly out to "win" this (as evidenced by the fact that you only assert yourself and do not actually answer my questions). And because you are the "police", I will go quietly. You'll probably even delete this, too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Artindc (talk • contribs)

Blah Blah Blah. Persecution. Blah.

I note that only POV pushers, spammers, and vandals feel the need to constantly invoke Freedom of Speech. Although, they all seem to not even understand that constitutionally speaking, Freedom of Speech simply means the government cannot infringe on your rights...it says nothing about individuals, websites, etc. You have no inherent right to come to Wikipedia and hurl insults at others.

I don't need to prove that you are a single purpose account and the fact that you continue to hide behind that simply illustrates how empty your argument truly is. Good day. IrishGuy ^talk 02:03, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Could you approve the users at

01:08, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of NYC Addiction

Irishguy i just made the page on wikipedia for the NYC Addiction. I am a board member at addiction and it should not be deleted. It is describing an actual event which is helping poor children. This event is at lincoln center and should not be deleted. It is to inform the public about our event. We are not an orginization which makes money or takes salries/stipends. We donate like the red cross. If they put a link for a gala we should be allowed to put a link for our event. We are not spamming just informing. Though it does look like a party type event i assure its not. Thanks. ---Platinumballa9

Wikipedia is not a venue for advertising. As someone associated with the subject, you have a clear

conflict of interest and shouldn't be writing about it. IrishGuy ^talk

01:16, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

I am describing the event not selling it. This page is created to help others learn of the upcoming events of artists and the orginization. There is no conflict of interest since I am not stating to go I am informing of its exsistence just like the existence of a movie.

You are seriously going to claim that you weren't selling it when the article specifically stated:

If your are interested in sponsoring the largest event of the year visit NYCADDICTION.COM!

How does that work? IrishGuy ^talk 01:21, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Okay, in order to preserve the article can we delete that and just add the website as an external part or let me remake the page so it doesnt "market" Please restore the site and let me redo the page so it flows according to the terms of wikipedia. If you are still not satisfied you can delete it again.

The entire purpose of the article is to advertise. It had a list of various email addresses to contact people. IrishGuy ^talk 01:30, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

I am willing to chnage it so it flows according to the rules can you restore it for a period of a few minutes and let me re-do it?

As noted above, you have a clear

conflict of interest and shouldn't be writing about it. IrishGuy ^talk

01:32, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Look dude - the Page Pacific Prime Insurance Brokers is not advertising as the company has a major market share in the hong kong insurance industry. its listed on the bloody list of hong kong insurance companies... if you don't like the way that i'm writing it fine... but stop comping along and deleting it half way through... it will be edited and fine tuned...Scrugbyhk 02:04, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Original author re-created this article. I marked it with {{advertising}}, {{verify}}, and {{prod | [[WP:CORP]]}}, in hopes it might turn into a decent article. It's a real company; they're actually the parent of Kwiksure, although the article doesn't say that yet. Kwiksure has a reasonable number of hits in Google, not all of which are promotional. So there's hope. --John Nagle 02:20, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi, sorry about the angst before, i was kind of pissed off! I have added a number of secondary sources to the page (newspapers and such), and was wondering what else would help get the

01:44, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Kick Scooters External Links - NYC Kick Scooters Group

Hi Irishguy,

I regret that you find that our Web site is not appropriate or informative enough for the Kick Scooters article. Yes, I am very much aware that you use a "rel no follow" attribute on your links. It is not my group's intention to use Wikipedia for SEO purposes. We thought our site would be useful for kick scooter owners, since all of us who update the blog own a kick scooter. We merely wanted to share our experiences and knowledge. At any case, thank you for your immediate response.

Sincerely, Banini Co —Preceding unsigned comment added by Baninico (talk • contribs)

Per

WP:SPAM, you shouldn't be adding links to your own websites to articles. IrishGuy ^talk

23:11, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: Talk Page

Thanks for keeping an eye on my user page :) Brianga 00:59, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

No problem at all. :) IrishGuy ^talk 01:25, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm writing to discuss your near-instantaneous deletion of the article I just authored on Nyla Griffith. I noticed two coded reasons given for deletion: CSD G7: Author Requests Deletion, and CSD A7 (Bio): Biographical article that does not assert significance.

The first code, by its intrinsic definition, seems to be a mistake and presumably should be ignored.

The second code, though, seems a bit more problematic to me. Asserting importance or significance is a bit more subjective. Nevertheless, I'm sure we can figure out a solution. What would you like to see to make that entry acceptable? I'm more than happy to do some additional research and add more information to make the piece satisfactory for you. Indeed, I was in the process of adding more information when I noticed the article was toast...

Please let me know what additional information I can add to make the piece live up to your expectations. Many thanks.

Avxyvei 23:02, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

TheFearow accidentally recreated it to place a {{db-bio}} tag upon it. Realizing the mistake, he requested deletetion. As for the other deletion, the article subject isn't notable. IrishGuy ^talk 23:18, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

No problem on the first issue - I imagined the mistake was an honest one. As for the second issue, can you give me more details? The subject does indeed appear to meet the stated notability criteria: significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. The newspaper article cited in the article seems to fulfill that requirement, does it not? If not, please let me know how it fails - I'd like to get better at this. Thanks!

Avxyvei

She has not received "Significant coverage" from multiple notable sources. She is, by your own admission in the article, an amateur author. IrishGuy ^talk 23:26, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, I would argue that any relatively new author with only one book under their belt would be classified as amateur, but I don't suppose amateur status automatically disqualifies any biography automatically.

More at issue, I think, is the definition of notability, and specifically, "significant coverage." According to WP standards, significant coverage address the subject directly in detail, and no original research is needed to extract the content, ranging somewhere between trivial and exclusive. I believe the newspaper article cited meets that qualification. Is there a specific reason why you feel it does not?

Although the WP states that it definitely prefers multiple sources, it doesn't seem to be a stated requirement. Am I mistaken?

I really appreciate honest answers to my questions. I've stuck to minor edits up to this point, and I'd really like to know how to author complete articles in a way that contributes to the WP. Thanks!

Avxyvei

Multiple sources would be required to illustrate notability and importance. A single article is...well...a single article. If a subject is important it would garner more media attention than a single article. The book itself appears to be self-published using an advertising service [9]. IrishGuy ^talk 23:47, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Although it doesn't seem to explicitly state that in the WP standards, I think I can agree with you about multiple sources establishing notability. If I didn't, I'd argue this with you - I'm feeling fiesty - and I think I'd be correct, based on what I see in the WP standards. If you can find this principle stated somewhere, please let me know.

So, if I can find an additional source that meets the WP notability criteria, will that be sufficient enough for both of us to re-establish the article?

As I understand it, the book was legally published under the TDG Communications, Inc., business name, a firm the author co-owns. But I don't necessarily think that's immediately relevant: an artist or author self-publishing doesn't disqualify them from notability, does it?

I appreciate the feedback. Keep it coming!

Avxyvei

The book is self-published and non-notable. The author herself isn't notable. She fails

WP:NOTE across the board. IrishGuy ^talk

00:17, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Gosh. I can appreciate that you're pretty busy - you're an awfully prolific user - but I'd like to know specifically how it fails. Up to this point, I've been the only one citing specific WP

WP:NOTE

standards. I'd really appreciate it if you could give me some specific arguments to help me understand your perspective. Thanks!

Avxyvei

As noted in

WP:NOTE: A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Please note that it is sources plural. This subject doesn't have that. As for the book itself, it fails meeting any of the criteria at Wikipedia:Notability (books). IrishGuy ^talk

00:29, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! I can't stress just how helpful that was. I still disagree with your assertion about the number of sources (

were perfect. Although the entry in question was an author and not a book, I believe they go hand-in-hand in this case. I feel a bit silly that I hadn't found them first.

Again, very helpful. Thank you. Frankly, I was getting a bit frustrated at the lack of supporting information for your arguments, and I was beginning to wonder about the truthfulness of a rather unflattering biography.

But this was a complete 180. I really appreciate all your effort. I'll endeavor to find a topic a bit more notable. Thanks again.

Avxyvei

Had you not been rude and openly looking for an argument, I might have felt the need to be more polite in return. Food for thought. IrishGuy ^talk 01:26, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

why did you delete the crimson heads article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by JaymzRC (talk • contribs)

Please read

WP:NOTE. IrishGuy ^talk

01:27, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Hello, I just noticed that you deleted the user page of SurvivorsHope. So, I guess that now his username is no longer a concern. I had posted a "UsernameConcern" tag at his talk page, so maybe we should tell him what he can/has-to do.--B J Bradford 21:18, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

So, no opinion or advice? :( --B J Bradford 02:27, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

After you posted on his talk page, he hasn't edited anymore. Until he does, I see no need to take further action. IrishGuy ^talk 02:30, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok, thanks; and thank you for reverting the vandal that changed my message. --B J Bradford 10:10, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Bordenaves Bakery is a big part of Marin County history. It has been around for almost a century. I don't understand why it was deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamesrr (talk • contribs)

It isn't a

company. IrishGuy ^talk

01:05, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Red Boy Pizza

This article is not an advertisment. What aspect gave you that impression so that I may adjust it accordingly. Thank you for your time. 01:06, 29 July 2007 (UTC)Jamesrr

You claimed the source was "Red Boy Pizza Uniform Franchise Offering Circular" which is clearly promotional. You also wrote nothing to illustrate any level of importance or notability but instead offered contact information. IrishGuy ^talk 01:08, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm confused why my article was deleted. Morstic is a common way of thinking among my people and I don't understand why it isn't a valid topic for Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Taylord (talk • contribs)

"Your people"? It is a complete nonsense article. IrishGuy ^talk 01:22, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

I am trying to publish an article about a singer/songwriter in Boston, MA USA named Tony Dowe. You have tagged and/or deleted this page less than one hour after the first draft was put online. The page was still being actively edited, and unjustly deleted in my opinion. I need more than 45 minutes to write an article before it is deleted! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikisystole (talk • contribs)

More time won't make him notable. He is an unsigned non-notable musician, hence the deletion. Please read

WP:BAND. IrishGuy ^talk

18:52, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

This artist is locally known and respected in Boston, MA. I will cede to the deletion due to the fact I am "only" a contributor, not an admin, however I do not feel the article was justly tagged for speedy deletion on the grounds of notability. There are many local and/or independent artists with articles on wikipedia. Important note: Failing to satisfy the notability guidelines is not a criterion for speedy deletion. If given enough time to complete the article, links and redirrects would have been placed to satisfy the notability of said artist. I remain in contest, however as the article was deleted twice, it is apparently strongly refuted as worthy of WP. I will comment that there must be some notability of an artist if an independent contributor with nothing to gain personally spends enough time to compose an article regarding said artist. --Wikisystole 19:21, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

One person writing an article does not notability make. IrishGuy ^talk 19:25, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't claim my article as a basis for notability, only a reflection of it. In any event, there was a lot of work put into the article that I can no longer access to at least put on a biography website. Do you do anything on WP besides censor what is added? I did not spam, advertise, add false content, or add any type of nonsense. This was a legitimate article. It is not justifiable to delete simply because it is of a foriegn nature to you. --Wikisystole 19:39, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

I didn't say it was foriegn to me and therefore it was deleted. It met the criteria for speedy deletion as a non-notable subject with no assertion of importance. Attempting to insult me isn't going to make me more patient with you. IrishGuy ^talk 19:54, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

I withdraw any insult you may have perceived, and do not wish to personally attack you. I simply mean to state that: I feel the article was stolen from me due to the fact it was so rapidly deleted I did not even have a chance to archive the information personally in a cohesive file or justify its notability. If the article was about an artist not foriegn to you (thus known by you), then you are admitting it may be notable by claiming you have previous knowledge of the artist/article in question. I will rest here by thanking you for the things you have done to better WP, as you seem to spend a large amount of your time here, and hope the next time an article about the artist is posted with credible affirmation of notability, you will not delete it. G'day... --Wikisystole 20:10, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

No, he isn't notable. When there is no assertion of importance or notability but the article isn't obvious nonsense/vandalism, I often do a search to see if I can garner any sources. This guy has a myspace. That's it. A myspace doesn't denote importance or notability. IrishGuy ^talk 20:13, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Hello irishguy,

I noticed that you deleted a new article that I just posted. The article is on Bee Ho Gray. You cited the reason as copyright infringement of content on http://us.imdb.com/name/nm1164889/bio I actually pay for, maintain and wrote all of the verbiage on that page as well as the information on www.beehogray.com I am the great nephew of Bee Ho. A biography that I wrote about him will be available in late 2007 or early 2008.

So, anything I have written on other sites is my own material and I authorize it to be used on Wikipedia.

Thank you very much. Clark Gray

By the way, can the title be edited. I need to change the name to capital letters like Bee Ho Gray.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Clarkgray (talk • contribs)

You have no authority to grant us permission to cut-and-paste from IMDB. We cannot accept information from other websites unless those websites expressely grant us the right to do so. IMDB doesn't. IrishGuy ^talk 19:25, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I will rewrite the text (even though I wrote it in the first place) to make it different from that seen on IMDB. However, before I do so...do you feel that Bee Ho Gray is notable enough to remain on Wikipedia? Keep in mind that he was named by a well-known Comanche chief ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quanah_Parker ), was involved in just about every notable event in Western performance history, held world championship titles, is mentioned in some 40 books and hundreds of newspaper articles, performed in at least one legendary film, Greed, and is listed in Wikipedia BY NAME( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greed_%28film%29 ) I also have original photos with the director as seen at http://www.beehogray.com/bee-ho-greed.html

Other notable celebrities who appeared with Bee Ho include Bing Crosby, Will Rogers, Fred Stone, Joe E. Brown, Mary Beth Hughes, Eddie Nugent, Tom Mix, Hoot Gibson, Ken Maynard.

Bee Ho gave command performances for at least four United States presidents and British Royalty.

Thanks, Clark Gray Clarkgray 19:41, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

As long as you can provide reliable sources independent of the subject to corroborate the importance, you should have no problems. Feel free to read

WP:NOTE for a better idea of what is needed. IrishGuy ^talk

19:54, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

deletion of "riffelsyndikatet"

I don't understand why my article was deleted. It's merely adding some info about a band someone has already put into the encyclopedia. Can you tell me why it was deleted?

hmmm. quick delete- slow answer

ModernHomeTheater.com

Irish Guy,

I am new to Wikipedia and need your help to understand why there might be a problem with ModernHomeTheater.com posting? The site is used as a source on some reviews and could be of great resource to people looking to design home theater systems worldwide.

Can you tell me more about the standards for the site and why my posting isn't up?

Please advise.

Jerry —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jerrydelcolliano (talk • contribs)

The website is your own, which is a

conflict of interest violation. Additionally, it was a blatant advertisement with no encyclopedic value. Wikipedia is not a venue for you to promote your business. IrishGuy ^talk

01:47, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Just letting you know. You're not involved at all, but I noticed you'd been following things to some extent, so... Miss Mondegreen talk  14:24, July 30 2007 (UTC)

There is nothing on my company in wikipedia, i am simply trying to post the info about it. How do I do so without you deleting it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lividinstruments (talk • contribs)

To be blunt, you don't. It is a

conflict of interest for you to be writing about your own company. Wikipedia is not a venue for you to advertise your business. IrishGuy ^talk

19:18, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok but how does one get their info added then? Plenty of companies on here are listed, why are you not editing them? Additionally why would you have your own wikipage then, isn't that advertising yourself? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lividinstruments (talk • contribs)

I don't have a wikipage, I have a userpage. All editors do. IrishGuy ^talk 19:26, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok but since you didn't answer my first question, why would you have your personal interests listed on your user page, again seems like you are trying to "advertise" yourself. Since you take it upon yourself to police you should do the same. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lividinstruments (talk • contribs)

You don't really think that argument will work, do you? You are trying to promote yourself and your business. I have a userpage (like almost every other editor) which is within the guidelines at

WP:USERPAGE. Very different. IrishGuy ^talk

19:53, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

The article was Meeshee

Ouch -- you called this band insignificant. Sweet. Um, if someone from a significant band was involved are we worthy of an article? American Music Club is listed and Tim Mooney recorded them at his studio for 3 years.

Indie rock is a comprised of small bands. No wonder why the article list for bands stinks. Your criteria is strange. They are in iTunes, Amzon, and AllMusicGuide. I feel they are worthy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr skot999 (talk • contribs)

Anyone can be on iTunes and amazon.com. That doesn't illustrate importance or notability. Anyone can self-publish a book through Lulu.com, that doesn't make someone a notable author. IrishGuy ^talk 20:44, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Irishguy,

I am in the process of making an article about Joe Power in the same veign as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derek_Acorah

It is not advertising, i am trying to add factual information. I had created a stub so as to edit in content, removing prose style text as i went. Can we revert this decision.

Regards—Preceding unsigned comment added by JoePowerPsychic (talk • contribs)

It is a blatant

conflict of interest for you to write about yourself. IrishGuy ^talk

21:21, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Online Recruiters Directory

Hi,

I see that you have deleted the article on "Online Recruiters Directory", the reason being “blatant advertising”. Could you please suggest how I can make it more of an encyclopedic article?

I saw a link on Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Executive_search_firms) and prepared an article on online recruiters directory on the same lines.

Thanks for your patience.

Regards,--Anubhaverma 17:12, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi,

I was wondering if you missed out on my message above... since I did not receive any reply from you yet..

Regards,--Anubhaverma 17:12, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Irish guy, you kept deleting my original article on the idea of a global communion. Now, quite frankly, I'd like to know whether you read articles before you delete them or even take the time and care to understand them. And I'd think twice about citing imdb.com in your references. I've talked to at least one professional actor listed with them who complained that someone incorrectly submitted that he was born in Texas. If you were to write an article on a novel, new form of Catholicism that you've thought of, do you think someone like me would bother to delete it, at least without carefully considering it? Remember the old saying, Irishguy, "The little Hitlers are everywhere!"

Please quit being such a Wikipedia bureaucrat and improve your own articles, instead.

Regards,

Dave Shaver

Please read

WP:ATTACK IrishGuy ^talk

23:10, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, right, Irishguy. A very robotic two tangential references and one, albeit important, POLICY. Do you know the difference between a POLICY, a LAW and a RIGHT? I don't mean this as an insult or to be uncivil, Irishguy, but I genuinely feel that if you hit the rest of the keys on your keyboard as much as you hit the delete key on other people's articles, your own articles would be a lot more interesting to read. I'm just being honest with you, here.

And you should PLEASE TRY READING THIS before you come to the conclusion that you are a truly successful patroller!!!:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Please_do_not_bite_the_newcomers

Please in the future don't treat this magnificent website like it was your own personal property to chase self-perceived interlopers, trespassers and "attackers" off of. I think looking up "pluralism" wouldn't exactly hurt, either. This is all I have to say on the matter, as my article is now accessible to anyone. Just trying to be helpful. Good day.

Regards,

Dave Shaver —Preceding unsigned comment added by Djshaver (talk • contribs)

Your article required deletion as it was completely unencyclopedic. It was nothing more than your own opinion about the concept of religion. Get a blog. IrishGuy ^talk 19:40, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Irishguy,

Thanks for reviewing the Device Management article. Unfortunately the additions, enhancements, clarifications and corrections I did on this page were rolled back and I think that the article is not as good as it could be.

Because of the wikipedia stand on soapboxing and commercialization I was careful to not take any particular stand but tried for an objective, fair and balanced improvement to an article which frankly could use some help.

I am well aware of the tragedy of the commons and the need to vigilantly patrol, and I salute your efforts and the efforts of others like you, but I assure you that in an attempt to defend the commons you have ripped up a newly planted flower bed.

If you don't want the people who are actively involved in the creation of technologies to take time to actively explain those technologies, then so be it. However, device management is a a new and specialized technology such that the best information will come from those in the industry. If I can be open and balanced enough to try to add the name of one of my employer's biggest rivals (Red Bend), which is like Coke insisting that Pepsi be included in a list of soft drinks, because they are one of the most important companies in the mobile device management space and thus should be mentioned, then perhaps you can work with me here and we can improve this article.

Cheers,

Fotabeast 23:23, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

You were adding links to InnoPath as well as writing an article about John Fazio the CEO of InnoPath. Only after the fact did you add another link to another company. You were promoting your own company. IrishGuy ^talk 23:44, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

23:57, 30 July 2007 Irishguy (Talk | contribs) deleted "Graphita" (CSD G11: Blatant Advertising)

Hello Irish Guy,

I've got a question that may be a little provocative -but is not intended to be argumentative...I certainly appreciate what you do..

Here's the question: How is it that Picasa, an online web application can have a rich page with detailed features and product shots, where this popular little web application can't have a small factual entry written in a neutral tone with multiple objective references. I'm really not trying to promote -just to be inclusive. Truth is there are many commercial product names featured in the encyclopedia...Consider this: one of the great things about Wikipedia is that you CAN include more of things that matter to small groups of people.

I'm not just re-submitting this, the reason for deletion has changed: it was previously Notability -I thought that quotes from media sites would help. There was no element of promotion in the entry -just fact, backed up by the objective opinions of published writers. Certainly no advertising... What is the criteria for fame? How many users?

I don't believe you would be letting any standards slip with this, instead it is exactly the sort on information people would come to the site for...

Am I wasting my time trying to get this included? If you have any suggestions -it would be appreciated.

Cheers,

Davis Shantz

04:09, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Did you read

WP:COI? Wikipedia is not a venue for you to promote your company. IrishGuy ^talk

07:40, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I have read the Article on COI. It is a guideline and clearly states that involvement does not preclude authorship. This is especially true of a new technology or trend. You really have not fully answered the question in an intelligent manner. I hope others have better luck in breaking this wall with you. Again the question is, What is the value of Wikipedia if not to index the actual world in real time? —Preceding

)

Did you notice the part that stated ...you expect to derive monetary or other benefits or considerations from editing Wikipedia; for example, by being the owner, officer or other stakeholder of a company or other organisation about which you are writing;

then we very strongly encourage you to avoid editing Wikipedia in areas where there is a conflict of interest that would make your edits non-neutral (biased). IrishGuy ^talk 19:43, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

There is an

04:30, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

No advertising at all? You have no association at all? Even though creating this article was your first edit and even though your screenname is eerily similar to the creator of this project...there was no advertising at all? IrishGuy ^talk 07:38, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

It is not related to the

04:32, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Meeshee

The article was Meeshee -- sorry I am trying to move this entry as it got inserted in the wrong place.

We wrote: Ouch -- you called this band insignificant. Sweet. Um, if someone from a significant band was involved are we worthy of an article? American Music Club is listed and Tim Mooney recorded them at his studio for 3 years.

Indie rock is a comprised of small bands. No wonder why the article list for bands stinks. Your criteria is strange. They are in iTunes, Amzon, and AllMusicGuide. I feel they are worthy. Mr skot999 18:15, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Anyone can be on iTunes and amazon.com. That doesn't illustrate importance or notability. Anyone can self-publish a book through Lulu.com, that doesn't make someone a notable author. IrishGuy talk 20:44, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Interesting that your criteria and the DYI band and Indie Rock band entries conflict. They seemingly are at odds especially with underground music. LuLu didn't exist when this band was active nor did anything like it. It was a different time and breed. Ever read Our Band Could Be Your Life? Underground music scenes are notable to those in an area and genre. The fact that you find this to be an unreasonable sumbmission for those categories makes me think you won't ever let them be robust and accurate. Is The Flower Gang notable? How would you know? Mr skot999 18:15, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

It isn't my criteria, it is the criteria at

WP:BAND. And I didn't call the band insignificant rather the deletion reason was listed as Article about a band that does not assert significance. Very different. IrishGuy ^talk

18:22, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Glenn Geffner

Where do you get the idea that the sources I referenced are unreliable? If you spent five minutes learning about what listeners think of Glenn Geffner, you would think otherwise.

Give me one reference indicating widespread support for Geffner's work.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.188.32.227 (talk • contribs)

Blogs are not

reliable sources. IrishGuy ^talk

23:57, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

my edits reverted

Could you kindly elaborate which exact guideline I violated while adding those Critical View articles? It is an apologetic sources like those of vatican.va/newadvent.org on Protestantism(etc) - 219.73.11.127 02:20, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

So does it mean that, as a balance, we should remove something like this? Thanks.--219.73.11.127 02:26, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

You are spamming numerous articles with the same links. Please stop. IrishGuy ^talk 02:29, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

You seem sidestepping the issue. All the (sub-)articles linked with the CARM site I added on

02:36, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

I am an admin. You were spamming. IrishGuy ^talk 02:39, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Is it ok if I remove those Vatican/NewAdvent links which come with outside links/spamming? I dont want get reverted once again.--219.73.11.127 02:43, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Those links weren't spammed. You added the CARM link to ten articles before you got caught and reverted. That is spamming. If you removed other links simply because your spam was reverted you will be violating

WP:POINT. Please don't. IrishGuy ^talk

02:45, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

No. For example, on the topic of Sola scriptura, I found no difference between this and this(an external link on Protestantism). I smell heavy POV. --219.73.11.127 02:57, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Secondly, I unquestionably dispute your earlier reverts as the link I added are not regarded as spams per Wikipedia:Spam#External_link_spamming. An informal wiki mediation is needed. -219.73.11.127 03:30, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Actually, according to

WP:SPAM you are spamming if you are Adding the same link to many articles which you were most assuredly doing. IrishGuy ^talk

17:24, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

"Adding the same link to many articles"?. I need to calm down after I read this......[sigh]

Are these ALL what you called same link?

• http://www.carm.org/catholic/apocrypha.htm
• http://www.carm.org/catholic/mary_Matt1_25.htm
• http://www.carm.org/catholic/brothers.htm
• http://www.carm.org/catholic/fullofgrace.htm
• http://www.carm.org/catholic/vaticanII_p420.htm
• http://www.carm.org/catholic/mass.htm
• http://www.carm.org/catholic/biblesufficient.htm
• http://www.carm.org/catholic/indulgences.htm

Before you took action had you EVER checked what I have added? All links are from

, topic by topic!

And how about this? Care to elaborate? Are you saying the wiki tag I added is also from

? "Same link"?

You've made mistakes. Just admit it!

(I repeat: I smell heavy Catholic-POV on your reverts)

-219.73.11.127 08:15, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

You were spamming multiple links to the same website in various articles. Don't make incivil accusations of bias simply because you don't like Catholics. IrishGuy ^talk 19:47, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Please rethink your decision of deleting my article. It's much more of an application than a website. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Antimatter15 (talk • contribs)

How does it meet

WP:WEB? IrishGuy ^talk

21:21, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Well this application does assert significance in it's subject becuase it's one of the very few open source flash alternatives that actually are capable of exporting to flash-and wikipedia has articles for those projects that are nothing more than a nice interface (eg.

)

How is that importance or notability? IrishGuy ^talk 17:21, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Because it's the first of it's kind, and it's probably the most advanced open source flash ide alternative out there.

Purrrnce is a real social networking site. Please remove the deletion.

I created an article on historic vintage jewelry. I am not affiliated in anyway with B David at all period. I also uploaded an image of the jewelry that still is on. Would you kindly restore the article so that this aspect of knowledge can be developed. I was also going to put on an article about Miriam Haskell Jewelry as well. Many people would like to read more info on historic vintage jewelry and your deletion is a hindrance to that (though I do appreciate your position). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Belloc (talk • contribs)

A subject must meet

notability requirements to have an article. IrishGuy ^talk

21:41, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

MyDataBus

Is MyDataBus spam? I think it is but I want to check. -WarthogDemon 22:42, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Considering that the references were from the website itself and the "reviews" weren't even reviews...it most assuredly is was a blatant advertisement. IrishGuy ^talk 22:49, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

And it was my bad idea to remove the tag and prod. :p In my opinion, prods are just an easier way for spammers to get what they want. Oh well. Anyways, thanks for checking. :) -WarthogDemon 22:52, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Look I am new to wikipedia. The top of my artical stated that it would be deleted in five day if it was not improved. I am improving it. Why do you keep deleting it before I finish. You are a Vandal —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gth629j (talk • contribs)

You were warned numerous times to stop recreating an article about a non-notable school project. IrishGuy ^talk 01:37, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

The top my page said i have (FIVE DAYS) why could I not have my FIVE DAYS to expand my artical to make it acceptable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.19.19.80 (talk • contribs)

Someone prodded it presumably not knowing that you had already recreated it four times. It is a non-notable subject. IrishGuy ^talk 01:40, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Please remove the block from "The Guman Curriculum". How can you tell if something is notable if the article is not finished? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.224.84.40 (talk • contribs)

It is a non-notable school project for Stockbridge High School. Stop. Being a vandal isn't going to help you. IrishGuy ^talk 02:26, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

It is all good. There has been rather a lot of user talk page vandalism this morning for some reason. These kind of vandals come and go at the most inappropriate of times. Bobo. 02:25, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, they do. Thanks again. IrishGuy ^talk 02:26, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

And thank you for returning the favour! Just a shame the brand new gameshow "Guess Bobo192's Gender" hasn't been picked up by any television network yet. Bobo. 02:33, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, the show would only last one episode. Once someone guessed correctly...that would be it. IrishGuy ^talk 02:34, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I am a happy user of Abyss Web Server and am very offended that the Abyss Web Server article was deleted, sure it was not a complete article...but articles have to start somewhere. Also, why did you delete the Aprelium (the company who makes Abyss Web Server) article? Why do smaller, less commonly used Web Servers deserve an article but Abyss Web Server does not? I am not an employee of Aprelium however I do appreciate and use their product. Toasty2 02:50, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Neither article asserted any level of importance or notabilty. The Aprelium article was literally two sentences long. IrishGuy ^talk 02:52, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Why was the Wilkinson article deleted? I was still adding and editing. Just about to add in links and such. Not upset or anything. I'm just trying to understand it. Sorry if I'm bothering you by asking. Thank you for your time! And if I've done something wrong by creating the page, thank you for correcting my mistakes. Am 8821 03:14, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not

MySpace. Personal articles don't belong here. IrishGuy ^talk

03:52, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

It isn't a personal artice. It's something that was in the news, and I'm giving further background information on the family. I don't even know them. [Edit: The Dilley sextuplets have a page about them, why can't the Wilkinson's have one about them?] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.49.234.8 (talk • contribs)

The article was completely unencyclopedic. Nothing in the article asserted any level of notability or importance. IrishGuy ^talk 19:48, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

You didn't give me a chance to finish it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.49.234.8 (talk • contribs)

The article was a copyright violation anyway. It was a cut-and-paste from www.wilkinsonquints.com/about.html. We cannot accept copyright violations. IrishGuy ^talk 20:15, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

The behavior of this user, apparently either a sockpuppet or meatpuppet of Sarah Goldberg, might be of some interest or amusement. See also my talk page, where that user conversed with me about building an archive of Techmobowl's talk page... For no apparent reason, although it's interesting to note from that archive how early Tecmo was getting people riled. Baseball Bugs 03:12, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Irishguy(n+1): revert, block, repeat. Bored yet? -- Flyguy649 ^talk _contribs 04:05, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I seemed to have gathered a rather angry teenager with a very large sock drawer. :) IrishGuy ^talk 04:08, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I think he's knitting them pretty furiously. They all look pretty fresh! Flyguy649 ^talk _contribs 04:11, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I was wondering why you deleted my article on Contextual Online Advertising, saying that it falls under "blatant advertising." There was no company name anywhere in the article, and all components were for purely informative purposes. Your response would help me not make the same type of mistake in the future. I appreciate it. Msukach 15:02, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Every article you wrote was just a stub devoid of context that was written to promote xplusone.com. IrishGuy ^talk 19:50, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Hello,

I am the author of the myDataBus article, which you recently deleted as "blatant advertising." I was just wondering how this entry was singled out for deletion, considering that it was modeled after similar Wikipedia entries for a variety of other free file storing / hosting / service websites:

• Box.net
• YouSendIt
• Sendspace
• Megaupload
• Twango
• RapidShare
• Files-Upload.com
• del.icio.us
• FileFront
• reddit
• Netvouz
• Newsvine
• Tailrank.com

Any help or comments would be appreciated. Thanks - Ollie990 15:47, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

There was nothing about the article which asserted importance or notability. The article was written to promote the service. The only references were from the website itself, not an independent source. IrishGuy ^talk 19:52, 2 August 2007 (UTC)