User talk:Edgar181/Archive13

---

Archives

Oct 2005 - May 2006 Jun 2006 - Sep 2006 Oct 2006 - Feb 2007 Mar 2007 - May 2007 Jun 2007 - Sep 2007 Oct 2007 - Dec 2007 Jan 2008 - Mar 2008 Apr 2008 - Jun 2008 Jul 2008 - Sep 2008 Oct 2008 - Dec 2008 Jan 2009 - Mar 2009 Apr 2009 - Jun 2009

Not much apparently. I am new to wikipedia and am learning about proper citations and article posting. I'm sorry if it did not include enough significance according to your arbitrary system. The article clearly is under construction considering you deleted it a few hours after it was posted. This is a non-profit community for artists not a "company" trying to make money. Thank you for helping the community grow by deleting an attempt to let others know about it. I don't think it contained any propaganda or was an eye sore to those who came across it. I would greatly appreciate it if you put the article back up and advised me on how to make it better. (in response to the deletion of Artists Intel page)

Actually, the decision whether or not to delete an article is not dependent on knowledge of art and music - it is simply the application of Wikipedia's guidelines. Wikipedia has inclusion guidelines that depend on notability (see WP:N for details). Articles about organizations (whether they are businesses, non-profits, or whatever) which do not make any assertions of notability are routinely deleted. If you think Artists Intel meets Wikipedia's guidelines for inclusion, I would be happy to provide you with a copy with the deleted text so that you can work on it some more. Also, you might want to take a look at Wikipedia's conflict of interest guidelines, which seem to apply here. -- Ed (Edgar181) 17:22, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Edgar,

Thank you for the input. What can we do to make this article available? Perhaps you can tell me how we can word it better to make it sound more neutral. Do we have to wait till Artists Intel gains more popularity? People often ask what Artists Intel is and what better place to look for the answer than Wikipedia? It is in Wikipedia's best interest to have the most (and most accurate) articles in the world so how is are we conflicting in interest. There are no links to the website, just a short explanation to what it is. I look forward to your response and guidance on how to resolve this. Thanks again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ArtistsIntel (talk • contribs) 19:39, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

The guidelines say that a topic should have "significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject" in order to be included in Wikipedia. If you can find such sources and write an article based on what they say, then the article will probably be kept. If there aren't such sources, then maybe you do have to wait until Artists Intel gains more popularity as you say. -- Ed (Edgar181) 01:02, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Ed, thanks for your note on my page regarding my recent AIV report. The problem has continued; see these 3 July user contributions from yet another IP address. In some cases, the IP is just adding the www.plwha.org address (although with bad format); in others, the IP is deleting information from the article and inserting the address. In the past, the vandal has evaded blacklists by changing the address (.net, .com) or the format (spaces, spelling out, etc.). Keepcalmandcarryon (talk) 15:56, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I have made a couple of range blocks that cover the recently used IPs. With the user changing IPs so much, I don't know how effective this will be. This might be a situation that the abuse filter can help with. Would you be willing to make a request there, since you're probably more familiar with the history and m.o. of this user? If not, I'll give it a try. -- Ed (Edgar181) 22:09, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Ed. I've noticed only brief activity from one more IP, and nothing since your message above. I'll let you know or go to AF if the problem persists. Keepcalmandcarryon (talk) 17:17, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

More new activity; IP has switched to 86.121.194.... Keepcalmandcarryon (talk) 14:04, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I have blocked the 86.121.194.0/24 range. But this is unlikely to help much, so I have made a request for an abuse filter at Wikipedia:Abuse_filter/Requested#plwha.org. Please feel free to correct and/or add to that request as you see fit. -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:19, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. Your abuse filter request is perfect. Keepcalmandcarryon (talk) 14:27, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I understand the reason for deletion. I am now recreating the article in my personal workspace, rather than on the active site. I am new to Wikipedia and still learning the rules and procedures. I will repost the article when it satisfies me, and look forward to any additional criticism and assistance from you and others.Music43lover (talk) 14:37, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Hey there Edgar181, you recently blocked Overcastkid94 (talk · contribs) and this user went on to leave a less than friendly request on his talk page. Regards. — Σxplicit 22:35, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

OK, thanks for letting me know. I just went ahead and deleted the page. -- Ed (Edgar181) 22:37, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

You recently speedy deleted this article. You may also want to see PlanningForce. Bmg916^Speak 19:23, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Nevermind, deleted by Dank (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) Bmg916^Speak 19:32, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

• Can you delete my edit history on the Chesnoff page? Letsgetit136 (talk) 21:23, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure exactly what you are asking, but from the conversation on your talk page, I think I have an idea. If you wish to have older versions of the article which include your edits removed from the page history, this is generally not permissible. Wikipedia content is based on the licencing scheme known as GFDL. My understanding is that this license requires keeping track of individual contributions to the content. Deleting specific edits from the history of an article would violate the conditions of GFDL. If you really want to pursue this, I would recommend making a request at the administrator's noticeboard where others more familiar with the details of GFDL and of Wikipedia's policy may be able to give you a more certain answer. Sorry I can't help much. -- Ed (Edgar181) 23:02, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I just wanted to know why you deleted the page "Club Crackers". I'm just asking because it seems kind of pointless. Thank you!

The version of Club Cracker I deleted was just vandalism. -- Ed (Edgar181) 19:22, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

I see now that I also deleted Club Crackers as an unneeded redirect to the deleted Club Cracker. But there were some good versions in the history before it became a redirect, so I have now restored those edits. -- Ed (Edgar181) 19:26, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Please could you tell me why you deleted the Burrda page but Nike's page is still live?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Burrda (talk • contribs) 08:48, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

It was written clearly like an advertisement and therefore met criteria for deletion (see WP:CSD#G11). If you think Burrda meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, you can write a neutral article about the company, rather than an advertisment. Also, usernames that match the name of company are not permitted, so you should sign up with a different name. Wikipedia's conflict of interest guidelines seem to apply here as well. -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:03, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Why did you delete the Alpha Theta Chi page? All items on the site were correct. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lisalu22 (talk • contribs) 19:01, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

The article was deleted over a year ago by the Wikipedia:Proposed deletion process. The editor that nominated it for deletion used the reasoning, "Non-notable in both cases". Since there were no objections after five days, I deleted the article according to procedure. If you think either or both of the organizations described in the article meet Wikipedia's notability criteria for inclusion, the article can be undeleted upon request. For inclusion in Wikipedia, just containing information that is correct is not necessarily sufficient. A topic should demonstrate that it has "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". -- Ed (Edgar181) 19:48, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

It was not deleted a year ago, I read the page only a month or so ago. I am confused by your reference to both organizations, there is only one organization that was referenced in the article. I would like the page undeleted.how do I request this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.52.254.239 (talk) 21:26, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

I deleted the article Alpha Theta Chi on June 2, 2008 according to the deletion log. The article was a mix of descriptions about Alpha Theta Chi fraternity of Hope College and Alpha Theta Chi sorority of University of Michigan. Are you sure we are talking about the same article? I have put the text of the deleted article here: User:Edgar181/sandbox3. If that is the text you want, I will undelete Alpha Theta Chi. If that's not the text you are referring to, we'll try to figure out where the confusion is. -- Ed (Edgar181) 22:06, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

yes that is the article I am referencing. can you please undelete it. I am for the Alpha Theta Chi sorority at UofM and would like to clear it up and have our information on wikipedia. thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.52.254.237 (talk) 16:25, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

OK. I have now undeleted it. -- Ed (Edgar181) 17:10, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

WHY DID YOU DELETE THE PIG ASSOCIATION PAGE! we are deadly serious, just check out our website www.thepigassociation.piczo.com grrrrr >:( —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.106.86.192 (talk) 09:34, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not for things made up one day. -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:38, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Hey Ed, one question. Does Naphthol Green B really contain Fe^III? If this is the case I will change my old pic. I had the structure from an old book btw. Greetings, --Yikrazuul (talk) 22:25, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

ChemAbstracts, PubChem, and Sigma-Aldrich all describe it as containing Fe³⁺. Feel free to replace my .png with a new .svg. -- Ed (Edgar181) 23:51, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Ok, to be really sure I will have a look in "Conn's biological stains" (2002). It's a compendium as to dyes and stains ;) --Yikrazuul (talk) 08:31, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

You are right, according to Conn's biological stains is is really Fe(III). I've expanded the article and replaced my structure. Cheers, --Yikrazuul (talk) 17:56, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Your image is a better way of representing the compound because it shows the coordination to iron. Thanks for expanding the article too. -- Ed (Edgar181) 18:08, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing the backlog at improper usernames. I was just about to use the administrator noticeboard to call attention it! =D

Cya around Wikipedia! Netalarm 15:38, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. I got through most of them, but I'll have to leave the rest for another admin. -- Ed (Edgar181) 15:55, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Hello Edgar, Can you explain why you deleted Cristina Re? She is still an active commercial designer and has a thriving business in Australia. A few of her fans have made comment to us that her Wilipedia listing has been deleted... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.101.159.4 (talk) 01:51, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

The article Cristina Re met criteria for speedy deletion (see A7) because it was a very short article that did not indicate why its subject is important or significant. If you believe that Cristina Re meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, please feel free to write a more descriptive article. -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:09, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Edgar181: I'm not sure that a block of 48 hours is appropriate for this user, given his 'vandalism only' track-record and the fact that his previous block was for 104 hours. I've just checked a few more of that users diffs, and found this recent one which made an offensive racial attack on Ethiopians (the 'click, click, Click....' text refers to guttural phonemes of an African language; KFC is probably Kentucky Fried Chicken -hahaha, it was really not funny at all) . Wikipedia will be much better off without such miscreants creating work for other editors to fix in legitimate articles. Other admins have imposted significantly longer blocks for much less offensive behavior, and I'm requesting that a much lengthier block, preferably indefinite, by applied in this instance. Thanks for your consideration. HarryZilber (talk) 15:05, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

I hate to say it, but vandalism from this IP address is actually quite low compared to what comes from many other IPs and the edits are likely to be the work of different individuals. For IP addresses with persistent vandalism, admins generally use an escalating series of blocks beginning with 24h and ranging up to one year. You'll generally see the series of blocks something like this: 24h --> 48h --> 1 week --> 1 month --> 6 months --> 1 year. IPs are not indefinitely blocked except in extreme cases. For a second block, I think 48 hours is reasonable, even though the first was longer. If the vandalism persists, longer blocks will be appropriate. If you notice vandalism coming from this IP after the block expires, please let me know and I will promptly re-block for longer. -- Ed (Edgar181) 15:29, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi! You deleted the Talk:Kratom Extraction as a talk page of a non-existant article a couple of weeks ago. I'm pretty sure that the page was meant to be the talk page of Kratom extraction, and there was just a typo when the page was created. Would you mind restoring the page and moving it to Talk:Kratom extraction instead? Thanks, Jafeluv (talk) 08:40, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

OK, done. -- Ed (Edgar181) 19:25, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

I have now redirected the article to mitragynine because it was just a duplicate. -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:39, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

May I ask why you deleated this article? I said give it some time and it will look decent. I hope you realise that it was up for delation less than 30 seconds after i created it. Pattav2 (talk) 12:31, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

I deleted Kilmore warhammer 40,000 championship (six hours after it was created) because it did not make any assertion of notability. You can read WP:CSD to read why this is a criteria for speedy deletion. -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:39, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Someone's making edits using my IP address. What am I supposed to do? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.169.204.122 (talk) 09:36, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

The best way to avoid being confused with someone else using the same IP address as you is to sign up for an account. -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:49, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Edgar181. Please could you move the page bromadol to BDPC? User:Nuklear has moved the page from its original IUPAC name, which I agree is rather long and unwieldy, to the name "bromadol", which while consistent with the naming of related compounds such as tramadol, is nevertheless derived from a name for the compound made up by a user on a drug chat website, and so is not really appropriate for the page name on wikipedia. I advocate using the abbreviation BDPC for the page as this is what is used in the scientific literature. Meodipt (talk) 22:28, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree BDPC is probably the best name, but I've left a question on the talk page first (was this ever a commercial product?) -- Ed (Edgar181) 23:04, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

No the compound has never been marketed. To complicate matters, several members from the mentioned drug chat websites contacted Dr Lednicer, who appears to be slightly bitter that the compound he worked so hard on was never marketed by Upjohn, and was happy to give his blessing to "bromadol" as a name for the compound. However just because the inventor of the compound agrees its a nice name doesn't make it official enough to be the name on wikipedia in my opinion. On the other hand I did name jimscaline after its unofficial name used in the lab that invented it, in preference to its formal chemical name, but in that case the compound didn't have an "official" abbreviation like how this one does. Meodipt (talk) 23:23, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

OK. Since Nuklear doesn't seem to object, I've gone ahead and moved the article to BDPC. -- Ed (Edgar181) 23:32, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

This is not a joke. However, for some odd reason, it is deleted every time it is put in - although it is verifiable in hundreds of online testimonials and in some academic journals.

splendasickness.blogspot.com

Do you have a problem with this? Why? After having explosive gas for weeks bc I was eating low-sugar ice cream, I seriously thought I was going to have to see a doctor and had something very wrong with me. If you have access to ALL of the academic journals, then you would see it is supported in peer reviewed publications. I can only get some of the abstracts when lesser known journals are involved.[1]

I suppose it doesnt really matter anyway since anyone can just google "splenda gas" and read what they need to. I still think the article should reflect reality, however...and it's not "original research" just bc it's in a 3rd tier journal. Blogs are not unreliable sources of data either when they have 50 posts about the same thing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Angelatomato (talk • contribs) 00:39, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia policy requires that information can be backed up with reliable sources, and this policy does not include blogs among reliable sources. I read all the documents linked to in your Google scholar search, but none of them contain any claims that Splenda and/or sucralose cause the problems that you suggest, only that sugar alcohols cause those problems. None of the linked documents are academic journals either. If you can provide me with the details of the references in peer reviewed scientific journals that you are referring to, I can probably get full text copies of them and include the relevant information in the article. -- Ed (Edgar181) 01:42, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Last week you blocked 76.172.176.45 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). It was his second (at least) block for disruptive editing. He's back, and he has repeated many of the same edits that caused the issue the last two times. He needs some attention. I'd like to see a good long block where he doesn't get to come back unless he promises to stop editing contrary to guidelines, etc., but I leave it to the cooler head of an Admin to decide what should be done. — John Cardinal (talk) 02:12, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Since the editor is continuing the same types of edits that have led to 3 prior blocks, I have blocked again for a month. -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:30, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Amino acid has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:53, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

sorry if i've done this wrong, not used the talk thing before, just wondering why the page on the abbreviation Lshticmstihtcmbctafocthftw was deleted by you less than 5 minutes after i posted it. are abbreviations and chat-speak not valid subjects for articles? or was it because of the relative rarity of the word? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobbonski (talk • contribs) 12:38, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Abbreviations and chat-speak can be valid topics here, but the guideline that applies in this case is WP:NFT. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:14, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Last June you deleted the page for the Tweed Shire Echo newspaper, a northern NSW shire A3 weekly tabloid. It is the sister publication to The Byron Shire Echo, which has been publishing for over 20 years. It's website is here: www.echo.net.au/ Can you please give back admin to username Tweedshireecho so I can create that page again? www.tweedecho.com.au/ We are not advertising. Thanks in advance, hans@echo.net.au

I blocked the username Tweedshireecho (talk · contribs) and deleted the page User:Tweedshireecho because usernames that match the name of an organization the user is trying to promote are not permitted. You are free to sign up with a new username. You should also have a look at Wikipedia's conflict of interest guidelines, which seem to apply here. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:41, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

On the Potassium peroxymonosulfate page the chemical formula is depicted incorrectly. According to Dupont the potassium ion is bonded to the hydroxyl group and not the peroxy group. It's not a huge problem, but can you fix it? Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.101.13.53 (talk) 22:36, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

You're right, it would be better to have the anion on the less basic oxygen. I have updated the image accordingly. Thanks for catching the error and letting me know. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:42, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry about that, misread it :(. Ale_Jrb^talk 11:27, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

No problem at all.  :) -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:28, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading a corrected structure.

Lhynard (talk) 04:11, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I just switched to an image that someone else uploaded. In any case, thanks for catching the error in the other structure. -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:50, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I just saw in your edit summary of an IP you were blocking 'cannot edit own talk talk page'. I was wondering about this earlier because another annon blanked theirs. What I want to know is, what is the best course of action (in your experience) if someone blanks their own talk page? Regards, RaseaC (talk) 20:12, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

I used the "cannot edit own talk talk page" setting because of the personal attacks on the talk page, not because they were blanking their talk page. Normally, users are allowed to remove warnings, etc. from their own talk pages, but in this situation, I restored some of the blanked content so that other users can know the reason for the block. If this user blanks the talk page after his block expires, it should just be left that way. -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:17, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I thought it would be something like that because as I read it the policy suggested not getting worked up over something so trivial. Thanks again for your help. RaseaC (talk) 20:21, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Please tell me why you deleted the link to lakelivingston.com. it is the FIRST website in east texas and is contributed to by the towns folk with information they want to see. let me know what I can do to keep it from being deleted again. mary —Preceding unsigned comment added by C21cg (talk • contribs) 18:59, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

I deleted the article Web Site for Lake Livingston Texas Recreational Area because it did not make any assertion of notability. According to Wikipedia's notability guidelines (see Wikipedia:Notability (web)), a website should meet certain listed criteria before being included in Wikipedia. These criteria are, for example, being the subject of multiple non-trivial published works. If you think lakelivingston.com meets these criteria, you are free to rewrite the article in a way that demonstrates the subject's notability. -- Ed (Edgar181) 19:09, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

It looks like you accidentally removed the header from the bot report page at UAA. This stops the bot from working. No big deal, I have fixed it. Please try not to do that in the future. Chillum 14:50, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Hmm... don't know what happened. Thanks for catching it and fixing it. -- Ed (Edgar181) 17:30, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Hello Edgar181. Is James Bristow notable? James Bristow was a low rank British soldier. He had written a very popular narrative in 1793: A narrative of the sufferings of James Bristow: belonging to the Bengal Artilley. His narrative is widely cited by secondary sources. (Google Book search on the narrative). Being the author of such a popular narrative, is he notable? This article was previously deleted by you under WP:CSD#A7 on 21 December 2006. Thanks, Kensplanet^T_C 08:35, 9 September 2009 (UTC)