User talk:UtherSRG/Archive 3

Done, elevated to AFD. - UtherSRG (talk) 09:30, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi Uther, can I know the reason why my article is being considered for deletion. I think your bot is not working properly. Udgikerian (talk) 09:43, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

There was no bot involved. Look at the AFD entry, the reason is there. - UtherSRG (talk) 09:45, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

I am unable to find any appropriate reason anywhere, can u please explain me in detail whats an AFD entry and when it is tagged. Udgikerian (talk) 09:55, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Look here. This link is in the AFD warning on the article. - UtherSRG (talk) 09:57, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

This article may look too general, but I wanted to add an ICD code which can not be found anywhere else. I was stil researching for this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Udgikerian (talk • contribs) 10:28, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

You have about a week, as that's the time period for an AFD review. Is there only 1 ICD for viral syndrome? Or do various viral infections of their own ICD codes? - UtherSRG (talk) 10:31, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Plz check my comment on list of Medicine-related deletion discussions Udgikerian (talk) 11:03, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Delete. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:14, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Hello! Can you please recreate the article

Do you have appropriate references that indicate the notability? I'll userfy the article into your userspace here. When you've updated the article the notability information and supported that information with appropriate references, let me know and i'll move it into the main encyclopedia. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:40, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Done. KzKrann (talk) 12:56, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I still don't see how this passes

WP:ATHLETE. Please tell me how it meets either of the two criteria. - UtherSRG (talk)

13:55, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

"People who have competed at the fully professional level of a sport". World Cup is the highest level and Muranka has competed in World Cup twice. As Continental Cup is the best amatuer leauge even those jumpers are actually notable. KzKrann (talk) 21:30, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi. I notice that you've recently moved

Sorry about that. I was doing CSD patrol. I believe the new standard is to have the disambiguation at the non-tagged title, while the tagged title redirects. This makes it easier on various bots, particularly User:WildBot. In otherwords, as I moved the article. Like I said, I was just doing some clean up, so I shouldn't be a further annoyance to you. If you want me to give the final products a look-over when you are done, I'm more than happy to do so. Cheers! - UtherSRG (talk) 18:01, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks very much. I agree about having disambiguation at the non-tagged title. I'll let you know when I'm done. SamuelTheGhost (talk) 21:26, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Please let me know how I can read the depleted log you have depleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.3.103.229 (talk) 01:47, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Create an account or log in, for starters. - UtherSRG (talk) 04:46, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi UtherSRG, I created an Article called 'Good Return' on 18 May. it was deleted and I am not be able to create new article under the same title now, I think there might be some misunderstandings about the deletion, and I’d like to explain the reason why I think it this way, could you please let me know what should I do now? Do I need to explain the reasons to you? And could you please let me know the chance to re-create a ‘Good Return’ article please? Many Thanks, Grweal2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Grweal2010 (talk • contribs) 02:46, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

You are the return of a COI-named user that originally created that article. The article is promotional. Do you understand why either of those is bad, and why both together is horrendous? your current name is still COI-named. If you wish your article to return, go to

WP:DRV and list it for deletion review. I will not restore your article. - UtherSRG (talk)

04:48, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

You're right. I thought it was an amateur player. I've restored and declined speedy. - UtherSRG (talk) 13:55, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Many thanks. ϢereSpielChequers 14:10, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

No prob. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:29, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Well, i just wanted to say, if you think Klemens Murańka is not notable. How about Faik Yüksel and Samet Karta (i nominated for deletion)? KzKrann (talk) 00:09, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Yup. - UtherSRG (talk) 04:21, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi, could you please advise as to why my page was deleted? After reading over the text, it is factual and neutral, was it because of the links/sources? Thanks OceanBlue2010 (talk) 09:41, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

It was tagged "CSD R2 as page was moved to WP:AFC as it is an open request. BOT MWOAPBot" but I can not see if this process was ever completed. I've restored it. Please contact that AFC folks to ensure the process is worked upon it. - UtherSRG (talk) 09:50, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

How do you consider the article about Chinthana Dharmadasa as an advertie4stment?... He is one of the directors of Sri Lankan Film How I Wonder What You Are, which is notable even than most of other Sri Lankan film because it claims to be the first "Low budget" feature length film produced in Sri Lanka.. Please contact any contributor from Sri Lanka to verify facts, if following links are not enough

• Offical Site of the Film "How I Wonder What You Are"
• Feathers for Fallen Angels - Review on "The NAtion" newspaper about film
• Article in "The Nation" Newspaper
• A aeticle ib "Daily News" about the film
• A Review

Nidahasa (talk) 10:06, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Please take your complaint to

WP:DRV and list the articlethere for deletion review. Thank you. - UtherSRG (talk)

10:06, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

re Jeffrey Street, Kirribilli NSW Australia

Dear Uther

A couple of days ago you nominated my first article for deletion (which I thought was a bit unkind) and put a note on my home page to contact you. At the time it was just the start of an idea, 20 minutes old, and still forming.

It has now been almost totally rewritten and is a far better article.

Quite a few people have helped with this effort, frankly I am astonished at the efforts and willingness of people who have never even been to Australia to spend hours editing my work (it needed editing etc) when there is the risk that it will be deleted.

You did not really state your reasons on the site, one of the other people was kind enough to note that the article was only created 20 minutes prior and I should be given more time. At the time I had no idea that there was a deletion process that could delete an article in a week (or less). At the time I was a complete innocent, but have learnt quite a lot over the past couple of days.

I have asked friends and family to review, most of them have no idea... which is apparent in their comments.

Can I please ask you now to review the article and reconsider if appropriate, or comment accordingly on areas for review.

Thank you Andrew AWHS (talk) 12:19, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

I've given it a relook, and while the article has certainly improved, the references are still lacking in that they don't show that the street itself as a topic is notable. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:49, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Do you have any suggestions? I find it extraordinary that in the US (and other places) there are wiki pages for garbage dumps and minor parks in small towns but one of the most central places in Australia is not notable. The area has hundreds of thousands of tourists and visitors per year. Are you suggesting a rewrite to make it "locality" specific? Thanks for your advice.AWHS (talk) 13:30, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Has the street (not a location the street) been in the news? Is there a report on how people are flocking the Jeffrey Street for some reason? there are certainly plenty of notable places on the street, but there doesn't seem to be anything particular notable about the street itself - at least no

WP:RS showing the street is anything but NN. - UtherSRG (talk)

13:34, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Does this help?

• God's Window
  is a popular vantage point ...
• Tour du Millénaire is a vantage point...
• Felsenegg is a vantage point...
• Red Lake Peak is believed to be the vantage point...

By comparison,

Kirribilli is famous as the vantage point for one of the most widely recognised views on earth.... AWHS (talk

) 13:42, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for looking at this for me. Have I gone down the wrong track with this? I have been looking for references for the historical properties in the street, which interest me. I have avoided the references created by less than professional, government or academic sources etc. But for example if you do a google search for "Jeffrey street" NYE or similar there are hundreds of references that identify Jeffrey Street as one of the key locations to watch the fireworks on New Years Eve etc.AWHS (talk) 14:15, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes, that would indeed be a better (pun intended) road to go down. :D - UtherSRG (talk) 15:14, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

What do you think about the page now? I initially tried to avoid talking about the half million people who visit each year just to look at the bloody view, the police, the crowds, the Japanese brides etc and the whole rigmorole, but if wikipedia demands notability I think that it now comes much closer to passing the test. Thoughts appreciated. AWHS (talk) 14:07, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

It looks like the post you removed was a good faith attempt at improvement. I've restored it and explained to the newcomer that those sources aren't sufficient. --

ok. - UtherSRG (talk) 06:37, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi, you deleted the article on Rafael La Porta, and I was just hoping that you would reconsider. La Porta wrote one of the most influential and well-read works in political economy, and a simple search of Google Scholar shows that he has written numerous pieces that are heavily cited. Thanks for hearing me out! Adamc714 (talk) 19:32, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

None of that is in the article. Please take this to

WP:DRV. - UtherSRG (talk)

06:38, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Am curious as to why it was deleted? Under A7 Let me explain the importance

The importance is such: Awarded Low Goal Team of the Season last year, large contributer to Walking with the Wounded (with HRH Harry Wales), Potentially playing at the Cartier Polo this year, In Argentina- Pilara is one of the leading teams/clubs and Sciurus is watched by potentially over 10,000 each season.

I hope we can reinstate it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Polotimes (talk • contribs) 14:10, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Can you put this in terms of how it passess

WP:NSPORT? I don't see that it does. Your *assertions* of notability don't count. What counts is that you can *prove* it is notable against the listings of our policy as laid out in NSPORT. - UtherSRG (talk)

14:17, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --IllaZilla (talk) 17:12, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:14, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for moving the

Will do. - UtherSRG (talk) 03:20, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi, UtherSRG. Because you participated in Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 May 12#Muir Skate Longboard Shop, you may be interested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Muir Skate Longboard Shop (2nd nomination). Cunard (talk) 02:09, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. - UtherSRG (talk) 03:20, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

The band Azmyth is indeed notable. Check the facts. They meet at least three of the requirements.

• Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability. OCALA, Orange Springs, Florida
• Has won or placed in a major music competition.Pat Traver's Battle Of The Bands / Shredder Shootout , ETC
• Has been the subject of a half-hour or longer broadcast across a national radio or TV network.Is frequently covered in publications devoted to a notable sub-culture. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Positiveoutlook5 (talk • contribs) 04:13, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Those all fail. You haven't done it right. Go to

WP:DRV. - UtherSRG (talk)

04:27, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi, you have deleted a page I created, after a colleague of yours previously deleted another on the same subject. I emailed the following message to [email protected] and have not receieved a reply:

"Dear Sir/Madam,

I am the Project coordinator for the EC FP7 project, InTopSens. I created the original webpage (www.intopsens.eu) which is property of KTH, my employer. Twice now I have tried to create a page using text which I have permission to use publicly and which is in the public domain and twice it has been deleted citing unmabiguous copyright infringment: • 10:32, 11 May 2010 UtherSRG (talk | contribs) deleted "InTopSens" ‎ (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement) • 13:02, 5 May 2010 Nancy (talk | contribs) deleted "InTopSens" ‎ (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement: http://cordis.lu/fetch?CALLER=PROJ_ICT&ACTION=D&DOC=2138&CAT=PROJ&QUERY=01271455c49d:a18f:3d327053&RCN=87603) Please tell me how to proceed. Cheers,

Daniel" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dannyhill (talk • contribs) 11:04, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Ok, if you say so. What do you want me to do about it? - UtherSRG (talk) 13:08, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

I am a newbie. I do not know if this is the right place to write or not. If not please delete these comments. This is regarding the article that i created '

You want to go to

WP:CSD speedy deletion to a week-long discussion. (And since no one has said anything at all on the article's AFD page, it'll probably go longer than a week.) Good luck! - UtherSRG (talk)

16:17, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Chinthana Dharmadasa. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Nidahasa (talk) 17:21, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:44, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Template:Cite tweet has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. -— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 20:29, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks - UtherSRG (talk) 10:06, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

I have rewritten Shunsuke Miyake, which had been deleted. Could you review the rewritten article ? --Ichiro Kikuchi (talk) 11:01, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't see how this passes

WP:AFC and have them review it. - UtherSRG (talk)

11:15, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Very nicely done! That's awesome! - UtherSRG (talk) 13:10, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Dear Sirs, I would like ask you to please mantain my page published. Its a importante service for poor people in Brazil. We help a lot of people - about 500 a day - to get a job. Stay in Wikipedia is important because American and foreign people is trying to contact us to provide some help. We have 200.000 people that needs this help. In despite of it, how many e-groups do we know joining 200,000 people? In my opinion, its a important information. Please follow this ling and check this information. I changed the link on site published direct to the web community: http://br.groups.yahoo.com/group/riovagas. If you have any question, please let us know. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Augustoschaffer (talk • contribs) 14:51, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Declined. That is not the purpose of Wikipedia. - UtherSRG (talk) 15:02, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

This page was deleted by you yesterday. The talk page gave valid details of notability. There was no response to these details. This is uncivil. Please reinstate. Redheylin (talk) 15:22, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Declined. You have to prove notability, not assert it. The article, as it stood, did neither. Your assertion on the talk page was just that - an assertion. Do you currently have the proof needed to show notability? If so I will gladly userfy the article so you can quickly bring it into compliance. Otherwise, you should seek support for restoration by listing the article for

deletion review. - UtherSRG (talk)

15:34, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Policy says "Notability requires only that these necessary sources exist, not that the sources have already been named in the article." In fact, you cannot expect work on the article to continue when tagged for speedy deletion. A note on the talk page - the proper response - drew attention to reviews in trade mags and to over 50,000 hits for exact phrase "MTR Audio" - all verifiable. A blue link showed that the managing director is a also a notable musician. Lastly, you are obliged to show good faith towards a bare assertion on my part, particularly since you are in a position to verify my expertise. You failed to respond to this note or to discuss your reservations regarding the issue of notability, and this was unnecessarily discourteous and disruptive. You may userfy the page, but please also provide an exact answer on the talk page stating how your standard of "compliance" is precisely based upon policy. Thanks Redheylin (talk) 22:55, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Take it to

WP:DRV, as I said to do. - UtherSRG (talk)

06:36, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

No, I'd like you to do as you said you would and userfy the page, adding your personal reservations to my note on the user-page to indicate the exact requirements that you think are lacking in the evidence offered. It is your edit that is in question, not mine, and you have offered no rationale for it. Or you may state here the policy that leads you to decline this. Redheylin (talk) 13:17, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Userfied here. - UtherSRG (talk) 20:13, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Thankyou. Now, if you'd point me to;

• Your reasons for contesting notability
• The means of reinstating the page...

Redheylin (talk) 01:40, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Edit the article to show the notability and sources proving notability. Flag down any admin and have them give it a review. They can also move it back into the main namespace. Or list it at

WP:DRV as I've said. - UtherSRG (talk)

03:45, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

"Notability requires only that these necessary sources exist, not that the sources have already been named in the article." Redheylin (talk) 10:13, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Go talk to some other admin. I've already stated what I would do and what I want. Find someone else. Specifically, take it to

WP:DRV where you'll get a wider audience than just one admin. - UtherSRG (talk)

10:15, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

You are not able to provide a reason for your edits, then? You are the person who deleted the article and you are not willing to discuss the article's shortcomings or to assist with reinstating it, and you are ignoring policy? I do have this correct, do I? By the way, you have also failed to userfy the talk page - I'd be grateful if you would. Redheylin (talk) 22:23, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Userfied days ago. Read up at 20:13, 23 May 2010 (UTC) - UtherSRG (talk) 03:27, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Sorry? At which page, please? A couple more things - first, I cannot find any answer to my pointing out that your edit and conditions for reinstatement are non-policy, nor do I understand why you are failing to co-operate. Second, I have a little difficulty understanding your summary "get lost" - could you clarify your meaning, please? Redheylin (talk) 14:57, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

On this page. Up a few paragraphs. At the timestamp I indicated. Get lost = stop bothering me. Go away. Find something else to do. Scram. Beat it. Further replies from you will be ignored. - UtherSRG (talk) 15:00, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, still unable to locate the userfied talk page at the location indicated. Redheylin (talk) 19:05, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

FYI - I have undeleted the

No problem. - UtherSRG (talk) 03:25, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

It was a spam tag, not an A7 tag; text like "What do you get when two entities with deep roots in the local, regional, and national music scene combine forces ... BROKEN ENGLISH RECORDS. Broken English Records was started by John Naclerio in early 2004. Naclerio owner of Nada Recording Studio is most well known for manning the boards for some of today's most popular and influential bands including My Chemical Romance, Brand New, Matchbook Romance, The Ataris, Armor For Sleep, Senses Fail, and Midtown. The signature Nada sound can be heard on all these recordings and is considered by many to be the soundtrack of today's youth." seems to me to be classic spamming. Ironholds (talk) 10:11, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Actually, that text was vandalism added after the creation by a different editor. I've now removed it. - UtherSRG (talk) 10:38, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Ahh, didn't realise that. Facepalm moment! Ironholds (talk) 01:03, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Heh. :) I should have removed it before. - UtherSRG (talk) 04:30, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Given the edit history that I saw and the applied block, I think the protection level should probably be reduced to edit=autoconfirmed, move=sysop. mechamind90 17:04, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Ok. - UtherSRG (talk) 04:30, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Why did you revert the revert on

Because I was viewing from my watchlist. Sorry, My bad. - UtherSRG (talk) 04:48, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Please do not make bad faith vandalism warnings and

Sorry, didn't know TEMPLAR. Even so, his edit was still wrong. - UtherSRG (talk) 04:57, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

"Wrong" does not mean it merited a vandalism templated warning. Have you even tried to discuss this issue before? Either on a user talk page somewhere, or the article's talk page, anywhere? -- Cirt (talk) 04:58, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

What's even worse is that we're both not even seeing that who did the bad edit wasn't Peter but an anon... Sorry man, i'm so freaking tired by getting no sleep for a week.... I should just give up and take a day or two wikivacation... UtherSRG (talk) 07:49, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Okay, no worries. -- Cirt (talk) 16:20, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

And I didn't fix the right edit, and it took me multiple times to get it right. I fee like yesterday's xkcd.... LOL! - UtherSRG (talk) 05:03, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Hey. I noticed you're deleting many of the articles created by this user. They've created quite a bit of work as all of the articles they've created are either copies of an already existent article or copied directly from another website. Twinkle doesn't have any warnings for pasting in copyrighted material or I would apply it. They've been idle for almost an hour but is there any way to stop all this? I don't know that they've broken any policies but they sure are creating a lot of work for others. OlYeller^Talktome 14:07, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Sure it does. Look at uw-create in the 1-4 level warnings. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:10, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Ah, ok. I was looking for something copyvio specific but this will work just fine. OlYeller^Talktome 14:28, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

There ain't much that isn't in Twinkle... and if you find something that isn't and know a template for it, they can add it at WT:Twinkle. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:58, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

I'd like to know why the page was deleted. I understand that an AfD discussion was in progress because of verification of sources, but as the largest pen pal web site on the Internet, it seems that the site would be notable enough to escape speedy deletion. Is there any way to appeal this decision? Thanks Mefistofele (talk) 14:28, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes, go to

WP:DRV - UtherSRG (talk)

14:29, 28 May 2010 (UTC)+

Is invalid as your claim is null and void. According to you "which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject is notable" and the quote, no movies from the studio (such as machine girl) should be in this encyclopedia at all because they are not noteworthy. I am adding this page back again as your claim was invalid. --∑ssarege∑ (talk) 14:54, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

I made no claim. I was only the deleting admin, but you are correct, films are not A7. So I've restored and elevated to AfD. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:57, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Hey there, this article has now been significantly expanded now with good sources (Ny Times, LA Times, etc.). Definite keeper,I think nom could be withdrawn if you are so inclined.--Milowent (talk) 18:30, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

AFD time period is a week. Let's see what others have to say first. - UtherSRG (talk) 03:45, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

No problem.--Milowent (talk) 11:47, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Why did you delete Satiristas without answering my question or helping in anyway? I had legitimate permission from the authors of the book and website and was asked to post for them - I credited the website, and frankly the way this whole thing is set up is impossible to understand - how else I would credit the website (WHICH I WROTE BY THE WAY)?? I guess I will waste an incredible amount of time and write a stupid differently worded article instead?? I would have been happy to send you any verification needed. GEEZ! Leannemcneil (talk) 22:15, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Take it to

WP:DRV. - UtherSRG (talk)

03:45, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

You speedy deleted my COPYVIO nomination of User:Arup Roy Choudhury. The user recreated the exact same COPYVIO content shortly afterwards. Time for a wikislap? --Biker Biker (talk) 11:37, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Three times is the charm. ;) - UtherSRG (talk) 12:42, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Why did you delete the English Article for Thomas Lutz while I was currently working on it?

For "A7: Article about a real person, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject" see the German article.

Regards, Franklin.harding (talk) 13:36, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Please read

WP:BIO and explain how the subject passes our notability requirements. - UtherSRG (talk)

13:44, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

I know the criteria. Although it says "The person is or has been an editor-in-chief of a major well-established journal in their subject area." and "The person's academic work has made a significant impact in the area of higher education, affecting a substantial number of academic institutions." you are deleting it? The person has achieved a lot in holocaust remembrance and is still working in the field. Think about your actions!

Franklin.harding (talk) 16:21, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Take it to

WP:DRV. - UtherSRG (talk)

03:43, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Deletion review for Thomas Lutz

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Thomas Lutz. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Franklin.harding (talk • contribs)

Thanks. - UtherSRG (talk) 10:53, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

I have made a comment there that you probably will wish to reply to. DGG ( talk ) 16:49, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Trouted. - UtherSRG (talk) 03:37, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi

Apparently you have deleted a page entry for Terry Smith. I learnt this just now after having created one. I understand Wikipedia's policy on living people, and that they should be notable. Terry Smith meets this criterion. He is certainly notable. It is true that he is less well known than many financiers who have their own entries in Wikipedia. Terry has a track record of doing finance right, so his firms has not (so far) had to have a bailout by government because of incompetent or immoral management. In many regards, Terry Smith stands out as the moral financier par excellence. he is very well known in the finance community in London, although perhaps not well known in the USA. His book was so controversial that at one time it carried the strapline "The Book they Tried to Ban." I may have misremembered, but this was because of legal actions on behalf of companies furious at his revealing some of the accounting tricks used in annual reports and accounts. In these days of financial catastrophe, brought on largely by financiers, regulators and governments using smoke and mirrors to hide real risks in capital markets, Terry Smith is one of the very small number of people who are both highly successful in finance and who have a track record of exposing financial chicanery, at no small personal costs.

By the way, I have no personal interest in whether Wikipedia carries or does not carry an entry. I have no connection whatsoever with Mr Smith nor any of his businesses. As a qualified finance practitioner, I was surprised that Terry Smith has no entry in Wikipedia, and even more surprised that his entry has previously been deleted. If some editor arbitrarily decides to ban Mr Smith from being covered in Wikipedia, it won;t make any difference to my life but it will be a poor reflection on Wikipedia, and will be in the tradition of trying to ban Gillian Tett from having an entry, which is surely one of the low points in Wikipedia's collective judgement.

I have no idea, nor much interest, in the source of your authority over these decisions, but I expect you are doing a good job at watever it is you do on Wikipedia and I salute you for that and tank you. I hope you will not censor a man who is a rare moral giant in today's financial world.

SUDFA —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sudfa (talk • contribs) 15:58, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

The deletion has nothing to do with how poorly or how well Mr. Smith does in life, but how poorly the article is written according to our policies. An article on a living person must immediately show notability. Please read our policies:

WP:V. - UtherSRG (talk)

03:49, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Not having a chance to read the article (since you deleted it). I was wondering if you could clarify exactly how it didn't meet the context threshold.

Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.60.168.129 (talk) 18:53, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

I didn't tag it, I deleted it. The tagger said A1, which is context. I deleted it even though it wasn't A1. It was A3 (no content) and A7 (no notability). - UtherSRG (talk) 03:49, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Hello. I saw you deleted Internet Rockstar, but this version (with the lower-case r) still exists. Could you delete it, too? Thanks! 81.152.72.174 (talk) 19:30, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Got it. thanks! - UtherSRG (talk) 03:49, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

I believe that Close To Torah should have a page on Wikipedia so that people may find information of its origin, goal, and intentions. We receive hits from several hundred people a day and growing. Like anyone when first going anywhere I'd like to know its credibility, so I would search Wikipedia to help me. I am new to Wikipedia but I believe that Close To Torah among other websites should be referenced to in another article discussing the different Torah Content websites available for Jewish users, then have a page about each of them and what they are geared towards. This should be under the category of Judaism...I just didn't have the chance to research how to do that. These Torah Content websites allow people from around the world who may not have too much exposure to Judaism to have insights on words of wisdom. More than 'just a website' we aim to teach people and enlighten them with the wisdom of the Torah.Dovidkopel (talk) 12:21, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Denied. Please read

WP:CSD, particularly A7 and G11, and the other links in the speedy notice on your talk page. - UtherSRG (talk)

12:24, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

The draft can be found at User:Dannyhill/InTopSens. Thanks in advance. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 15:18, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm not seeing anything that addresses the lack of notability. So it's a project to do "X". What is notable about that? Look at

primary source papers submitted to a single journal. There's nothing in the wider literature that this is anything more than a science project that is going no where. Sorry, I can't place a non-notable subject into the main space. - UtherSRG (talk)

04:04, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, it seems I pre-empted this. The user provided about 5 or 6 reliable secondary sources on his talk page, but apparently didn't insert them into the draft. I'll put in the references and let you know when that's done. You might like to take a quick look at a couple of them though, I looked at the first 3 or 4 and was satisfied that the article could meet the notability criteria once they're added:

• http://www.sflorg.com/comm_center/unv_science/p662_175.html
• http://www.azonano.com/news.asp?newsID=10434
• https://www.grace-lrti.org/NR/rdonlyres/F6E9171F-9597-4449-9D85-1ED7AE79AA85/2217/GRACENewsJanuary2010LR.pdf
• https://www.mosar-sic.org/mosar/en-GB/Recommended+links/
• http://www.vdivde-it.de/polynet/public/knowledge/newsletters/quadriga-newsletter-october-2009
• http://www.vinnova.se/upload/remiss%20antibiotikaresistens.pdf

I'm pretty familiar with the guidelines, so I think with the addition of these, the guidelines will be met by a wide margin. I'll make sure I add these myself this time. Sorry to have wasted your time without confirming they had been listed. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 12:59, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Whoops, they had been listed; I assume you have already seen these then. They seemed like reliable secondary sources to me; I didn't see any indication that they were primary sources, and each one seemed to be reliable and give a non-trivial mention of the "InTopSens" organisation. Could you explain your reasons for thinking these are primary sources please? Thanks. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 13:02, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

At least the first three which I've looked at myself, appear to be scientific news articles by third parties to me, so I'm slightly confused why this doesn't meet

WP:GNG. GiftigerWunsch [TALK]

13:04, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Ah, you mean the external links. If you think they can support the article, then use them as references. Do they show notability? Since the article is userfied, there's no reason to not get it right before moving it into main space. - UtherSRG (talk) 13:06, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Sorry about that, I got a bit muddled while replying here, and realised that the creator had listed them as external links rather than references. They appear to show notability; I will try to better format the references before this enters mainspace though, I suspect that the list of current references all being given as inline citations in one place is erroneous, and formatting some of the more reliable sources as inline citations would be a good idea. If you could unprotect the

WP:GNG. Thanks. GiftigerWunsch [TALK]

13:10, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Certainly looks like it's nearly ready. I've unprotected the space. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:28, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

I have created an article on the prehistoric cebid

Awesome! I'll take a look at it shortly. - UtherSRG (talk) 08:30, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

I apologize for having created the first version of the article by copy-pasting from the UNESCO web page. I thought that that material would be in the public domain. My mistake. I've now created a new version using my own words. I hope that this is OK.--Gautier lebon (talk) 08:20, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Should be. We'll see. ;) - UtherSRG (talk) 08:30, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

My edit was not a test edit! I would like you to reconsider your revert and apologize. 128.232.240.137 (talk) 08:54, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

You're right, I looked only at your edit and not the destination of the link. Sorry. The revert stands, though, as I've made the better fix by changing the redirect. Please consider

creating an account. - UtherSRG (talk)

09:02, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

You're still screwing up! First off, your redirect does not work (I think you need a capital D). Also, "dental formula" remains unlinked in the article that I edited... 128.232.240.137 (talk) 09:09, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Fixed. - UtherSRG (talk) 10:45, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi Uther. You deleted an article I created on a German actress (Antje Thiele) within nine hours of its creation with the tag A7. I checked A7 and it reads:

A7. No indication of importance (individuals, animals, organizations, web content).

An article about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (e.g. band, club, company, etc., except schools), or web content that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant. This is distinct from

propose deletion, or list the article at articles for deletion

.

• {{db-a7}}, {{db-person}} – for people, {{db-band}} – for bands, {{db-club}} – for clubs, societies, groups, and organizations, {{db-inc}} – for companies and corporations, {{db-web}} – for websites, {{db-animal}} – for individual animals

Note that the guidelines say this is a lower standard than notability. The article did say why she is important: She has appeared in documentaries, television series, and films (not to mention a worldwide theatrical tour), and is appearing as a major character in a major film directed by a major Hollywood director and starring Vanessa Redgrave. This plus her CV of past and upcoming credits (theatrical, film, and television), plus IMDB page were linked. As credible importance was therefore specifically stated in the article, I would like to reinstate it because it met the A7 guidelines and thus seemingly did not merit speedy deletion. Thank you. Softlavender (talk) 14:48, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Like I said on your talk page, she fails

WP:ENT. Denied. - UtherSRG (talk)

14:52, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

You're quoting notability. To repeat and refer you again to the A7 criteria above you used as reason for deletion, judgment for speedy deletion is not notability, it's credible statement of importance. If you like, you could perhaps nominate the article for AfD after it was fully fleshed out (it was only 9 hours old and had hardly even begun) and see if at that point the notability requirements of AfD were met or not in the eyes of an assortment of WP editors over the course of a week or so. However, it must be noted that in terms of speedy deletion, the article was deleted even though it met the requirements for a speedy keep. See A7 above. Softlavender (talk) 15:18, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

WP:DRV. - UtherSRG (talk)

15:27, 1 June 2010 (UTC)