User talk:Bongomatic/Archive 8

If you leave me a message here, I will reply on this page to keep the conversation together, so please add it to your watchlist. Likewise, if you are here to reply to a note I left on your talk page, please reply there—I will check it to see—no need for a {{talkback}} or a note here.

Archives

• Conversations though 25 September 2008.
• Conversations through 11 November 2008.
• Conversations through late December 2008.
• Conversations through mid-February 2009.
• Conversations through 30 April 2009.

DYK for Benjamin Edwards (stockbroker)

On May 1, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Benjamin Edwards (stockbroker), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 12:56, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Irving Chais

A tag has been placed on Irving Chais requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. God Emperor (talk) 11:28, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi God Emperor

If you think that the subject fails to satisfy the notability guidelines, I suggest you take it to AfD. Someone is sure to remove the speedy, and same with a {{prod}}. People who receive full-length obituaries in the NY Times have generally been found to be notable. I have never seen one deleted.

Regards, Bongomatic 11:39, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Steamed clams

On May 3, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Steamed clams, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

thx B Victuallers (talk) 15:22, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Balanced Ball

Hello, what does it mean it is not mentioned in "CSD category" ? How can I make it right ? --Slando (talk) 17:55, 3 May 2009 (UTC)Slando

Hi Slando

As per my message to your talk page, I don't believe that Balanced Ball meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion. Please see WP:N for Wikipedia's notability guidelines. As you can see, they focus on references: specifically, significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. After a search, I was unable to find any significant coverage of Balanced Ball.

If there is any such significant coverage in independent reliable sources, you may try to recreate the article, this time including citations to those sources.

Wikipedia is not about what is TRUE but about what is VERIFIABLY NOTABLE.

My comment about CSD referred to Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion. There happens not to be a category for non-notable products (as there is for non-notable people or companies), so I was pointing out that if there were such a category, the article would be subject to deletion per such a category. However, another editor pointed out that since it was a website, that the A7 category applies.

Regards, Bongomatic 01:04, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

The IP you want blocked

Go to User talk:Drmies. I've got something! --Sky Attacker (talk) 06:09, 4 May 2009 (UTC) IP has been blocked. --Sky Attacker (talk) 06:16, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! What an unproductive way to try to get a (possibly) valid POV reflected in the encyclopedia. Bongomatic 06:23, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I know--you'll see I added a weasel tag to that section, which has been marked since 2007 anyway. By the way, this new kind of activity for me, and on my talk page, is all the result of the combination of roll back and my discovery of "recent changes"--it's somewhat addictive, I have to say. Later! Good luck on the DYKs, and congrats with Steamed clams! Drmies (talk) 14:20, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

User talk:Bongomatic/IC

Hi, I have actioned your delete request but User talk:Bongomatic/IC is still left. Mark that one too if you want it deleted. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 07:27, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks—have done so. Appreciate the consideration and apologies in advance for not having tagged both. Bongomatic 07:30, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

And congrats on your adminship. Bongomatic 07:32, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that, that talk is cleaned now too. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 07:40, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

PROD at Lealman Intermediate

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Lealman Intermediate, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! --Unionhawk ^Talk 18:25, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tiffany Apan

I can understand why you'd consider several blogspot blogs unreliable, but that still leaves several references I see no problem with. Could you please clarify why you don't consider any of the sources in the article as reliable or indepth. - Mgm|^(talk) 08:37, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi MacGyver. I think my comments are pretty self-explanatory. WP:RS says:

Material from mainstream news organizations is welcomed, particularly the high-quality end of the market, for example the Washington Post in the United States and the Times in Britain, as well as widely used conglomerates such as the Associated Press. (emphasis added)

My threshold is lower than that, but tell me which sources in particular you think would qualify as reliable. Bongomatic 01:11, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Sam Cohn

Greetings. I appreciated your creating this article and I hope you find my additions helpful. Cohn was not always easy to do business with, but always fun to read (and write) about; I'd think this article is a natural for DYK. I wanted to apologize for not following your lead in using cite templates. I still find them cumbersome to use, I'm never quite sure which are the right ones, and I wanted to get the information into the article quickly. I keep thinking there ought to be a program that could automatically generate the complete cite just from the URL! --Arxiloxos (talk) 20:27, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for expanding. I was going to add some information from the long New Yorker profile, but got tied up with something else. Yes, I think this is a great topic for an article and/or DYK. I've added the cite templates. (I don't mind doing it. for me it's like flossing–I feel clean afterwards.) But I suggest you get into the swing of it. It's really easy once you start—you only need to remember a couple of fields to do a credible job:

• title
• first and last (and first2 and last2, etc. if applicable). authorlink if the author has a Wikipedia article
• date for news / magazine, year for book
• page or pages for book or magazine (optional)
• work for news / magazine, publisher for book (can be wikilink)
• isbn for book
• agency for newswire, if applicable (can be wikilink)
• url (optional)
• accessdate (for anything with an URL)

That's it!

Regards, Bongomatic 01:33, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Also, I made the reference to the book reprinting the article explicitly to the book, and made all the other references to the original article—I think that makes better sense chronologically. The reference to the reprint is to give people a chance to see free excerpts and to find the book if they like, but the chronology and significance of the reference is more meaningful with the original, I think. Bongomatic 02:01, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

I think the article has reached a pretty good point now, so I've taken the liberty of nominating it for DYK.[1] Regards,--Arxiloxos (talk) 20:34, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Nice working with you. Bongomatic 22:54, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry, Bongo is very flexible about citation styles. He's always saying: "as long as the content is cited that's the important thing". He's such a wonderful editor. You just can't beat him... get it? Beat him? HAHAHAHAHAHA!!! ChildofMidnight (talk) 05:39, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

New signature

It now links to both my user page and my user talk. HOORAY! --The Legendary Sky Attacker 02:09, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Have a look at this...

Can you check this out and make sure it all looks okay so I can notify some of the non-cabal members who might want to participate? Feel free to add rules, commentary, formatting, or whatever. It also has an active talk page. Thanks. ChildofMidnight (talk) 06:17, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

I hope I'm not being unbelievably think, but what "this" are you referring to? Bongomatic 06:36, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

I thick I forgot to include the link User:ChildofMidnight/Baconchallenge2009. ChildofMidnight (talk) 07:06, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Might want to simplify it and come up with something for the Wikipedia:Reward board. I think there are plenty of interesting CoM-sponsored awards possible. Bongomatic 07:10, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Could offer a reward of a bacon barnstar for creating a bacon related DYK usable in the challenge...--kelapstick (talk) 21:32, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Kind request for advice

Dear Bongomatic,

I am new to Wikipedia, and you have tagged an article I contributed with the following tag:

{{articleissues}} template deleted as categories should not refer to talk pages

The person who is the subject of the article is in my humble opinion definitely notable. He has had papers published in the Republic of Croatia (sourced in References by link to the Croatian Association of Scientific and Technical Translators where he is a member of the Management Board and to his most notable paper directly), one of his papers is being used as required reading at one of Germany's most distinguished universities (sourced by links to the German University of Tubingen and to the Department of Slavic Languages where his paper is listed among other required reading materials), he had translations published (sourced by direct link to the Union Catalog of Croatian Libraries website as well as to list of his published works) and his activism regarding the profession of translating was covered by Croatian national media (sourced by TV screenshots). I believe these are all very reliable third party sources. This person is most definitely notable in Croatia, in Europe (if a well-known University considered his paper worthy of having students study it) and should be noted in our US Wikipedia. It should be noted also that this person is ambassadoring (is there such a word?) the English language and literature in the world. Anyhow, I have gone on too long, sorry. Please, let me know if I may remove the tag you placed, and if not how or where can I now constructively argue the case of this person's notability since I believe all aspects of Wikipedia's notability requirements were met? Thank you in advance for your response. Turqoise127 (talk) 16:32, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Turquoise127

Have you read WP:PROF? If you can find reliably sourced evidence of meeting those criteria, you can remove the {{notability}} tag. The tags {{cleanup}} and {{wikify}} refer to the copyediting of the article and the internal links.

Regards, Bongomatic 16:48, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Hello again Bongomatic, I apologize for misunderstanding your correspondence. I looked at the article, felt it satisfied at least one criteria and deleted your tag. I was not aware I needed to present arguments on the talk page. Well, now I have presented some what I hope to be constructive arguments, please take a look and let me know if you think it is ok or not... Turqoise127 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:57, 11 May 2009 (UTC).

• I have amended the article to indicate more clearly that the national television coverage of the person was not just him being interviewed on site but that one tv screenshot actually mentions in the caption that he was the "inicijator" (Croatian language word meaning organizing party, organizer of initiative). I also added more comments on the talk page. Please review and advise at your discretion. Thanks.Turqoise127 (talk) 21:54, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Re: Buddha Jumps Over the Wall

You removed this material from Buddha Jumps Over the Wall with the edit summary, rm inappropriate material not relevant to this article. According to this article in The Independent, the material is relevant. There's another link that talks about the problematic use of abalone as well. And this one. Please restore the material. Viriditas (talk) 23:46, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm assuming you are offline. Looking at the edit history, you removed this material twice. All of it is supported by other sources naming "Buddha Jumps Over the Wall" as a source for the harvesting of shark and abalone. By removing it, you are violating NPOV. Viriditas (talk) 00:22, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Is it possible to include it with better placement? Maybe a sentence further down in the ingredients section or in another section? It seems to kind of stick out there in the ingredients list. ChildofMidnight (talk) 00:49, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, anything is possible. I would even encourage Bongomatic to write it himself, per WP:ENEMY. Viriditas (talk) 00:51, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Please read WP:UNDUE. Note that not a single one of the references cited in shark finning references this dish. No doubt there is at least one reliable source about shark finning that mentions each notable shark fin dish. That does not mean that a separate section is required in the Wikipedia articles for each of those dishes. The existing "see also" link, along with the text and link I provided in the context of the ingredient list, is the appropriate level of referencing to the related but not directly pertinent topic. In each of the examples you cite—and intrinsically—references about shark finning are about shark finning, not about specific preparations. If you disagree, please initiate a discussion on the talk page (where I will add these sentiments). I will initiate a discussion of this at the talk page for all to opine at a more central location. Bongomatic 14:42, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

The three examples I cite above mention this dish by name. Please help work towards resolution by adding the material to the article with those sources per WP:ENEMY. This does not concern "undue weight". The issue is covered by dozens if not hundreds of sources and is significant enough to spawn regulatory discussions between governments. If the presentation of the topic in the article concerns you, then I invite you to solve the problem using the sources above and composing the material yourself. What is your objection to this solution? Viriditas (talk) 20:45, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

I do not intend to continue discussing this topic here. Please continue whatever you wish to convey on this topic at the article's talk page. Bongomatic 23:35, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/BQZip01 4

I noticed that you commented within my RfA, but I didn't see a !vote. Your feedback beyond the comment would be appreciated. Thanks! — BQZip01 — ^talk 01:17, 14 May 2009 (UTC)