User talk:Tone/Archive 8

• see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Belldandy --Jack Merridew 14:38, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to see somebody is interested in cleaning up the trivia on the Stargate pages. Keep up the good work.

I second that, if something is accurate and relevant to the article, then there really shouldn't be any problems to intergrate it into the article instead of putting it as trivia. One thing that I've noticed though, is that articles like the Dr Who episode guide (for the new series) try to hide the fact that a section is a Trivia section by calling it things like; Notes, Continuity etc. 129.16.49.136 14:58, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You deleted the page List of professional lacrosse players. Why? I was watching that page, and I don't remember seeing any warnings or notifications that this was going to happen. --MrBoo (talk, contribs) 15:45, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was tagged as prod 5 days ago, so the procedure was quite standard. Of course you can contest the deletion if you think it shouldn't have happened. In my opinion, the list is redundant to the categories. --Tone 16:24, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'm just surprised I didn't see the prod tag. Quite honestly, most of the list was redlinks, and I kept forgetting to add players to it as I added pages, so you're probably right about the categories. Thanks --MrBoo (talk, contribs) 00:28, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I noticed you deleted Triangle OS. Can you put the page's old contents in a subpage rooted at my user name? I want some info that was on that page. Thanks. Fresheneesz 00:49, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Tone,

Can you please undelete the two articles from the AfD above, which you started yourself and then closed yourself, despite one other editor suggestion a merge rather than a delete. I suggest you list them again at AfD. Usually, when only little discussion has been generated, AfDs are relisted to gain more opinions. Also, closing an AfD you started yourself is not very appropriate. Looking at it further, that particular AfD listing was never in the AfD logs, explaining why no one replied. You nominated two articles, but you only listed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Stargate Command personnel in the logs, which I closed and linked to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Atlantis personnel in Stargate, because your argument was presented in that one (but which was now turns out to have never been added to the AfD logs). --Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 06:09, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr). - Rollof1 14:47, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I'll do it. The thing is that noone closed the debate and it was a way over time afd articles close usually so I presumed other admins forgot it. I will afd it again, hope it gets more debate this time. --Tone 17:17, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No one closed it, because it was not in the list of AfD debates. Anyway, thanks for relisting and please let another admin close this one. Cheers, --Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 20:39, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You have still not answered the question of why you removed the wikipedia entry for Whitney Bedford. Please explain. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Illwood (talk • contribs) 00:35, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Sorry, didn't see your comment before. The article was proposed for deletion so it got deleted under a standard procedure. You can rewrite it but please provide much more content (before it was only one sentence!). Regards. --Tone 17:54, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you even look at the pages before deleting expired prods? Please provide a reason when deleting, like "expired prod" or CSD G8 (for talk pages). Punkmorten 21:07, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Of course I check every article before deleting it. I just open them in tabs before. I thought that the automatic edit summary already mentiones the prod and is therefore enough. Besides, it's a way faster than changing it. Don't you think so? Prods don't usually get deleted prior to date. --Tone 21:10, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, My name is Yair, I was writing under the name Foxyesty with a friend (esty). I know the policies of Wikipedia are not designed for the type of blog we kept. Truthfully, I only knew about the rules of editing a personal page once our was already deleted. I can promise you that I won't be contributing in that way again. I really do understand the intentions of Wikipedia, to keep the site as an encyclopedia and not as a social networking tool. That being said, we were using the page to keep in touch while she is overseas. She is traveling by ship to many countries of south east Asia and the middle east, and has very few ways to be in contact. We discovered this method as one of a select few that we could keep in touch without paying exorbitant sums of money. On her ship, Wikipedia is one of only a few sites that she has free access to and so we thought this would be a good way of keeping in close contact. As I'm sure you have seen the content was of a personal nature. We thought the password protection to the blog would be enough to keep it private, but now we are concerned that the writing is more public than we thought. With that in mind I have two requests. Can you give me reassurance that the content will remain confidential? The second I imagine might be more difficult. We have been keeping all of our correspondences while she is away, and now that this page was deleted we lost a lot of those posts. We, and I especially, as the one writing to you, would appreciate if you could send me a copy of the postings. I know this probably is not in line with the traditional protocols of deleted articles, but i was hoping that under the circumstances you could make an exception. It would really mean a lot to both of us, and I can assure you that we will not use Wikipedia for those reasons again. Thank you so much for taking the time to read this, and I hope this letter finds you well. Thank you very much for understanding, Yair —Preceding unsigned comment added by Foxyesty (talk • contribs) 20:36, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I see your problem. What I can do is I can restore the article temporarily and you copy the content, notify me and I re-delete it again. Then it will be seen only to the admins, who tend to keep it private. I guess you could use a blog site instead or just e-mails? Anyway, tell me if I restore the article, we can do it in a very short time. Greetings. --Tone 20:47, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds like it would work fine, If you can restore it for the next lets say hour, or half hour even, i can copy and paste it elsewhere. I really appreciate your help. Please let me know when you will restore it, and if it will be under a different heading. Thank you so much. ---Yair —Preceding unsigned comment added by Foxyesty (talk • contribs) 21:13, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ALso, will I still have access to the history? We had I think archived some older posts, and I hope I will have access to that history as well to copy into a different document. Again, I really appreciate your help, thank you---Yair —Preceding unsigned comment added by Foxyesty (talk • contribs) 21:49, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HI Tone, I want to make sure I am available when you make the postings available. There is no real urgency, I only want to make sure I am at a computer when it happens. Do you have any idea when that might be possible? Thanks again —Preceding unsigned comment added by Foxyesty (talk • contribs) 02:21, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You know what, I think the best idea is just to redirect everything to your talkpage. So noone will really mind having it there and when you want the content to be deleted, you just put a speedy delete tag on it and the first admin who comes across will delete it. I guess you won't object if I do this now? Regards. --Tone 08:51, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tone, Thanks for handling this. 72.1.134.252 01:48, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Administrator,

We posted a new article last night titled

It is true that the article is an updated version of what appears on the www.polyphonic.org site. But, both articles were written by the secretary of ICSOM and posted with her approval. ICSOM has a relationship with polyphonic, and the chairman of ICSOM is a contributor to that site.

We feel that this posting on Wikipedia would be very valuable to symphonic musicians all over the world.

We would be so grateful if you would reconsider the deletion and allow the article to be posted.

with best regards... —Preceding unsigned comment added by BruceRidge (talk • contribs) 04:49, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. If you have an approval from the original author, I see no probelms in restoring the article. However, some cleanup needs to be cone in order to fit WP standards and I will rename it to International Conference of Symphony and Opera Musicians (without acronym). Next time you simply write on the talkpage that the author allows to post the content and noone will complain. Regards. --Tone 08:48, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Tone,

Many thanks for restoring the article. I will study the clean up rules as you have suggested and I will work to improve the entry.

with our appreciation... —Preceding unsigned comment added by BruceRidge (talk • contribs) 16:23, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen lot of Movie articles with trivia why cant a tv show have one ,that way we should not have any of these TV episode specific articles they too are unencyclopedic .Atul83 16:46, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there. You deleted an article I originated on the singer-songwriter Jason Myles Goss, who is not me nor a relative or friend of mine. This page is therefore not a vanity entry. At your deletion, you cited his failure of

Hey Tone, have you seen this yet? I'd like to discuss this with you, as I believe you weren't acting without reason, but if you're not interested in a discussion I am going to recreate this article and am prepared to defend it with the above argument. Thanks again, Nietzscheanlie (talk) 07:25, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Sorry, I guess I must have missed your message last time... I had a look at the article again, the reason why it got deleted is that it was tagged as not-notable in the prod process, in the standard process the article gets deleted if noone objects. In this case, I guess you can work a bit on notability. Two self-released albums are not perfect, but it's a good start. I'll restore it for you. Regards. --Tone 10:00, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot! Nietzscheanlie (talk) 16:09, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this article should have been deleted. I was going to use the "hangon" template but did not get to it in time. The chain has been covered in New Orleans media (see http://listings.bestofneworleans.com/gyrobase/Location.html?Location=oid%3A10874). Tulane97 23:05, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I work with Stan and he asked about this article -- is there any chance it can be restored so we can look at cleaning it up to meet the quality standards or worst case -- just grab the content from it? Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.129.132.130 (talk) 21:51, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This summer I wanted to work on

Thank you so much! Being an inclusionist, I cry when I see articles going bye-bye. I will try to build something out of it so other can benefit. Appreciated. Maksdo 23:43, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The naming issue was previously discussed at Template talk:Serbian local elections. The people saying it was controversial failed to provide any evidence to prove it is. Kosovan as an adjective appears in English dictionaries, Kosovo doesn't.

Using your admin powers to lock the page in a place which you approve of is not exactly fair play either. пﮟოьεԻ 57 13:11, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As stated, please use the talkpage to reach the consensus about the particular article. I locked it to the certain title to prevent edit warring, if a consensus is reached for the other title, I will be happy to unlock it and move it back. Regards. --Tone 13:14, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't mind you locking it if you hadn't been involved before, but given that you have stated a preference for the title in the past on the talk page, I don't think it is appropriate for you to do so (I'm an admin too, and would definitely not do so). пﮟოьεԻ 57 13:18, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your comment. Indeed, I made a preference, but if I hadn't come across the article in the first place, I wouldn't even notice the movings. I see that some discussion has begun already, let's see... Regards. --Tone 18:04, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

12:28, 15 September 2007 Tone (Talk | contribs) deleted "TermiSoc" ‎ (content was: '{{dated prod|concern = No reliable sources, nothing to indicate notability|month = September|day = 10|year = 2007|t...')

Can I ask why you deleted the TermiSoc article?

Hi. The article was deleted in standard prod procedure, the reason was No

notability. Regards. --Tone 19:29, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

why did you delete the scuzzfest article

Darth armitage (talk) 22:00, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right, you've put hangon on, I should have explained myself first. The reason is that it does not assert notability and it doesn't cite independent sources (myspace does not count). Regards. --Tone 22:03, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ok i wasnt finished with the article i was trying to pull up the schools website which has it on the callendar is that a good enough source http://www.school-portal.co.uk/Grouphomepage.asp?GroupId=191839 or http://school-portal.co.uk/GroupCalendarDisplay.asp?Groupid=191839&EventID=125551

Darth armitage (talk) 22:08, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, it's still a school project, it does not convince me much... We can still give it to a review if you want... --Tone 22:13, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

yes please Darth armitage (talk) 22:30, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. I will recreate it for now, add the content and then we can discuss. --Tone 22:31, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Could you please give my a reason why did you delete the seekda page. I really spent today considerable time going through examples of how other companies are presented on wikipedia and I really have problems now to figure out, which part caused that you removed this page again. The only comment I received from you, is that the page contains too little information and is irrelevant, as well as that I should use stubs. The stub was used as it is used by other companies and the page is the same relevant as a page of any other company on wikipedia. So I do not understand where is the problem now (actually you have pages of many companies on wikipedia, which does not use stubs and they are not getting removed). Have not you overeacted based just on the fact that this page was removed today already 3 times (only based on fact, that I have been learning myself on how the page for the company on wikipedia should be structured and I have been doing mistakes before).

Greetings, Michal —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mzaremba (talk • contribs) 22:23, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Four different admins deleted this article today, asserting it was an advertisment for the company (my decision wa not influenced by the previous ones). The thing is that far too many companies on the WP actually don't deserve their article and would get deleted if contested. The problem is notability criteria. We can still run a deletion review but I doubt it would succeed.... Regards. --Tone 22:30, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Every time the article was deleted today, I was taking comments into considerations trying to improve it (this is my first article on wikipedia, so please be aware that people are making misteakes :)). If you take a look into what was in previous versions of this article and what you have now, you will find a completely different text. Could you please let me know which parts still sound to you as advertisement so I can get them fixed. I can only make fixes if I understand the concern and I must admit that this is the first time today that I do not understand the problem of deletion (the article does not differ from hundreds of other articles you have about other companies). Could you please let me know what you mean also by notability criteria. Greetings, Michal

Ok, I'll take some time and have a look but it will be tomorrow since it's already late here. Hope it's ok. Greetings. --Tone 22:41, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, Thanks a million. I will than wait for comments. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mzaremba (talk • contribs) 22:59, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, this took a little longer... I reread the article, the style is quite ok, the only consideration would be notability. I guess you should put it on deletion review to make it clear. After soveral admins deleted it, I would prefer having some more opinions in favour before restoring it still. Greetings. --Tone 22:12, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. done. Thanks, Greetings --Mzaremba 00:06, 26 November 2007 (CET)

Hi Tone. Based on argumentation used by DGG on deletion review page can you please restore seekda article. Greetings --Mzaremba 14:12, 26 November 2007 (CET)

Thank you for [3]. Can you take care of [4] as well? Thanks.--72.76.0.8 (talk) 13:47, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You deleted an article entitled "the Fon of Batibo " without explicitly stating why, and hence I want to challenge your action. The Young Fon succeeded his father who was on the throne for more than seven decades, and was mayor to the entire Batibo Municipality (Headquarters of the Batibo Subdivision of Cameroon, with a population of more than 100000 inhabitants,), and a member of the centre committee of the the ruling party of Cameroon. How else do you expect a man to famous before being given a page on wikipedia? What is wikipedia?

Did you delete the page solely because The New Fon does not deserve it or that the people of Batibo who he represents are not worth being mentioned on Wikipedia? Please reconsider your action and restore that page.

cheers —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eracha (talk • contribs) 21:30, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, after closer reading I think it is not db-bio, so I restored it. But please, fix the style and add references. Cheers. --Tone 21:55, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please check WP:CSD A7. Schools are not among the things that can be deleted via speedy as non-notable. Please undelete it and send it to afd. there is no point using prod, since its a high school and deletions of high schools are always challenged. DGG (talk) 00:15, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The bot creates the categories using Template:Prod subcategory starter as their initial text. I see the purge button has been recently removed with the rationale "doesn't affect logged in users". I don't know about this, but I suppose it's true. Tizio 12:45, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, done. This will not of course affect categories that have already been created, but you can add the purge link back to each of them, if you want. Tizio 15:17, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you deleted Talk:Film and Television Institute of India a few days ago. Unfortunately, there were still perfectly valid project tags on the page when you did that. I've restored the tags, but in the future you might want to look out for that. Regards, Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 13:12, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You removed the border issue coverage in Slovenia, and your explanation was that it's covered in another article. Where is it covered? Giftoffer (talk) 23:29, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gulf of Piran and probably more. In Croatia, there is a whole section in the international relations article. --Tone 23:56, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the reference to Gulf of Piran. Giftoffer (talk) 00:25, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a way to userfy a copy of

As an addendum,

notable. Thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 06:01, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

Eek - they *are* in pitiful shape, aren't they :) Thanks much! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 14:47, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya, I'm sorry for not noticing the prod at

New York Blade. I was out of the country for a week and didn't have internet access. I do dispute the deletion though. Would it be possible for you to please undelete the article? Thanks, Elonka 17:52, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

Done, no problem. Greetings. --Tone 18:00, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I'll see what I can do about getting some more sources into the stub, to help "weight it down."  :) --Elonka 18:18, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, falsely calling clearing out old junk vandalism is against the rules at Wikipedia. I don't know which one, but I'm sure it's one of them. 71.72.65.241 (talk) 23:57, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In turn, persisting with

personal attacks is against policy. I've protected Talk:Slovenia for a week. Húsönd 02:02, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

What the hell are you talking about? 83.16.85.237 (talk) 03:56, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, let me start at the begining (you should have seen my first draft). I have been a network admin in my job for several years. I'm old school (14.4 old school, if you know what that means). So I know my way around a permissions set and I'm pretty non-judgemental. I'd like to become an admin but I don't know what that means or what kind of approval process they go through. Umm, basically what do I need to be coached in? I can do the research or what-not on my own but I figured I'd ask someone that had been exposed to me so we could start from a basic knowledge of each other. I saw you listed as not having much time right now and I don't know if I even need a full time coach but I do need an outside POV to get me started. Thanks for any help you can give. Padillah 13:31, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello... regarding the merge, the problem arose from a Wikipedia software upgrade that caused "ref" tags being rendered as strings of numbers within the text of articles that were saved during a (roughly) 14 minute window. Unfortunately, your merge of "Ted Sprague" occurred within that window and had to be reverted. Thanks for re-doing it. --Ckatz^chat_spy 23:56, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, why did you delete the article on EnigmaWarsaw? It's a new formula of city game, which shows what's most special about Warsaw - the relationship between what was lost 70 years ago (Warsaw was destroyed from 80%) and what's now and still somehow incomplete. The content is fully verifiable: http://www.warsawtour.pl/index.php?id=41&olang=5 Best regards, TomazzzTomazzz

Tone, you did not respond to my argument. Please undelete my article. It was not just from you to delete it. (Tomazzz (talk) 22:26, 5 December 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Sorry, I haven't had time to check before. Ok, I will undelete it but as it was tagged as not enough sourced and notability issues (prod procedure), you may want to improve this, otherwise it may get deleted again. Greetings. --Tone 22:33, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. You are right that the article can be better. I hope either I am able to improve it more, or it will get improved. Anyway, things can be better only if they can exist. Tomazzz (talk) 22:47, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You have deleted the page, even though I have responded to the notice that there are plans to expand the article, by moving much of the subsection in Assam to it. I am not aware of any other votes on the deletion issue (I have it on my watch list and am not aware of any edits to the talk page). Please restore the article. Thanks. Chaipau (talk) 17:19, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Well, the article practically had zero content and someone tagged it as prod. So it got deleted 5 days after tagging. If you are willing to expand it, I will gladly restore it. Greetings. --Tone 17:21, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is we don't have a category for "saints from what is now Croatia", there are just too few of them. So, Marinus gets put in the generic Croatia cat. It's mainly for geographical reasons; this is standard practice for all the saints articles (For example saints from what is now America go in the American saints cat, even if they lived before the US was founded). There's really no better way to do it.--Cúchullain ^t/c 20:55, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how they do things on other Wikipedias, I'm only in the saints WikiProject at this one. The Ancient Roman saints category is not useful as a geographical designation since it included many modern nations, and that's what we are trying to do with these categories. We are using "Croatia" as a geographical term, as in

Croatia before the Croats; he is not being called a "Croat saint". Also note that "Italy" was a generic geographical term for the are long before the modern nation was founded. In some cases there are enough saints to have subcategories, notably Category:British saints, which has subcategories for Category:Romano-British saints and Category:Anglo-Saxon saints, for example. In this case there are not enough entries to justify that. That is not the case here. There has been long standing consensus in the saints project (and in the saints categories in general) to use geographical terms in this way. If there is another well known geographical term in this case, you could suggest the category be renamed, but I don't know of any. --Cúchullain ^t/c 21:30, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

I have placed a disclaimer at the category explaining the use of the term. How is that?--Cúchullain ^t/c 21:33, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. I was wondering if you could send me a wikilink to the discussion board where it was agreed that Eden, Ted, and Alejandro should be merged into the list of minor characters with abilities on heroes. When I checked the talk pages, only like two users agreed to merge Eden's page, yet you still merged it. That does not seem like a concensus to me, when only a couple of users discussed it. Thanks...--Chrisisinchrist (talk) 22:42, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Check Alejandro talkpage, there were more people discussing. You can't really expect many people to discuss every separate article if it is obvious that they fall under the same group. Regards. --Tone 22:50, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not happy with your CCFinder deletion. I needed information on the program, which I don't even use myself (a colleague of mine does) and I couldn't find any on Wikipedia, so I decided to type up what I know. I did this to make a contribution to the dissemination ofg useful knowledge and no other reason.

As far as I'm concerned it is very valuable to have product information on Wikipedia, and outright ridiculous to delete attempt to provide such as "spam". Not to mention that CCFinder is not a commercial product in the first place.

Sickened,

Rp (talk) 23:29, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, ok, Let's say it is not spam. Nevertehless, it does not establish notability - why should there be an article about it on the WP? Is it a widely used? Associated with some other important software? And it needs references as well. If you are willing to improve the article, I can restore it. But otherwise, Wp is an encyclopedia, it is not a catalogue of everything. Greetings. --Tone 13:37, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote to you a few months ago, when you decided to remove Zachary Gordon from this site as you claimed he was only a bit actor. You didn't respond at that time; however, you might want to compare your sources to IMDB as Zachary has numerous credits, which include two lead roles. He is also a series regular on Bubble Guppies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.109.244.242 (talk) 16:31, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I must have missed your post, sorry. If you are willing to exapand the article, I can restore it. The article didn't mention any lead roles. By the way, I just deleted the article under a standard procedure, someone tagged it as a prod. So, shall I restoer it? --Tone 18:29, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can see that you deleted my friend's page. Hear me out and please reconsider. Me and Mr. Menyhart are very active into this wikipedia page and generally, both of us don't apperciate your automatic action of deletion without any notifications. Of course that the page didn't have much information and of course, the page was still active of work before you deleted it. This took a lot of time and patience for us to met at a certain time to work on the page. I already notified Mr. Menyhart about this.

Good day to you sir.

Hello. The reason why the article was speedy deleted was It is an article about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content that does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject. Are you sure you can fulfill this criteria? The IMDB record isn't really impressive yet... If you can, I can restore the article so you can improve it. Greetings. --Tone 08:45, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

His management are working on it. Unfortunately, new IMDb information takes a long time to update. Good day.

Thank you for removing the POV tag. Tcisco (talk) 20:25, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please restore the original as I didn't write it and don't recall it. Also, I don't know how to add information. Is there coding or can I just type it as I would type a regular document. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.109.244.242 (talk) 05:11, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, restored. If you are not familiar with the wiki syntax, you should first check

Wikipedia:How to edit a page, they have a nice tutorial there. Greetings. --Tone 13:36, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

The standard would be Category:physics organization stubs (as we discussed at some length at the proposals page), to avoid the clumsy double plural. Any objection if I change it back? Alai (talk) 19:37, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No objection. I just thought that we somehow skipped the ploral form as it is in the Category:Physics organizations. By the way, I would really like to find a way to include the experiments in the category but I ran out of ideas. Maybe another time. --Tone 19:43, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]