User talk:Ron Ritzman/Archive 13

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15 Archive 16

Accidental revert?

Sure about this? I have re-reverted you. ;) Nageh (talk) 23:16, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

A big honking nuclear "OH SHIT!!. I was checking my watchlist with Opera Mini and for some reason clicks started activating the wrong links. Example, I would click Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Tholden28/Canadian federal election, 2015 and User:Drmies would load. One of those misclicks must have been a rollback. They really need to remove rollback from watchlists. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:59, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
:) Nageh (talk) 05:50, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Question on Ballyhoo afd close...

Hope you don't mind a question... regarding Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ballyhoo (lighting cue)... the article had, if I remember correctly, two references, to offline books on theatrical lighting (or something like that). WP:V doesn't mean that the sources have to be easily accessible, only that they exist. I'm assuming that you didn't personally check these two books to make sure that they didn't contain information on the subject, so how do you draw the conclusion that the article fails verification? I have always assumed a lot of good faith when dealing with offline sources. Nothing that User: Whpq said in the deletion discussion leads me to believe that he read the sources either—I read his responses to say that the sources available to him don't have any information, not that he examined the cited sources himself.

I've got no dog at all in this fight—I'd never seen the article before I reviewed it at AfD... I'm just trying to reconcile how I think Wikipedia policies should be applied vs. your application (and presumed community consensus, assuming that your decision reflects consensus). Thanks! Livit⇑Eh?/What? 18:05, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

It's likely that the term exists but the article's claim about its origin is what is unverifiable. Without that then it's a dictionary definition and that's all it can ever be, If someone with access to the 2 "sources" can provide inline citations for those claims (page/chapter), then maybe we can reconsider. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:50, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of the Wikipedia entry on Ali PayaAlipayaa (talk) 11:37, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Dear Ron Ritzman

On 22 March 2012 you announced that you had decided to delete the entry which had been created in my name in Wikipedia. The link to the page in which you stated your decision is as follows: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_Paya Below please find my reasons in objection to your decision:

I am Associate Professor of Philosophy at National research Institute for Science Policy in Iran and also Visiting Professor and Senior Research Fellow at the Department of Politics and International ReAlipayaa (talk) 11:37, 14 April 2012 (UTC)lAlipayaa (talk) 11:37, 14 April 2012 (UTC)ations, University of Westminster in the UK. Contrary to what is suggested in the comments in the above link, the posts of Visiting Professor and Senior Research Fellow are academically very prestigious. Only those academics who are well qualified in their fields are invited as Visiting Professor and Senior Fellows.

In my capacity of a Professor I have published many scholarly books and papers in both English and Persian in academic journals, held many senior departmental positions, taught numerous postgraduate and undergraduate courses, and supervised many Master dissertations and PhD theses both in Iran and in the UK.

In my capacity of a public intellectual I have also published many books and articles which deal with issues related to the debates in the public sphere.

If you like I can send you a full version of my CV which runs into 20 pages.

In view of the above I would appreciate it if you could undelete the last version of the article which bore my name in Wikipedia. I have reproduced a version of this last update entry for your convenience. If you have any query concerning my academic background and records please do not hesitate to get in touch via the following e.mail address: a.paya@westminster.ac.uk

My answer to your first query still stands. All biographies of living persons are required to have sources and the article on you had none except a page at the University of Westminster which required a login and password to view. Therefore, I will not restore this version of the article but any logged in editor is free to write a new article on you. However, per our guidelines on autobiographies and conflict of interest, that editor should be somebody other then you or anybody associated with you. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 13:36, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Dear Ron Ritzman

Thank you for your reply. My profile at the University of Westminster is available without the need for a user name and password. Here is the link: www.westminster.ac.uk/about-us/directory/paya,-ali Alternatively, you can do a simple Google search for my name 'Ali Paya' and then click on the following link: University of Westminster - About us - Professor Ali Paya By the way a Google search will also provide many samples of my scholarly papers published in academic journal and also information on my books published by well-known Iranian and international publishers. The above, I guess, should suffice for the demand for 'sources' on autobiographical articles.

Regards,

Ali Paya Alipayaa (talk) 18:05, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Neopolitan Business Park

Can you send me a copy of the Revision History of the Neopolitan Business Park? I need that to add a section to the CAT:BJAODN Clarence froggy (talk) 13:27, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Close of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rory Jenkins (Footballer)

Just a heads up, when closed this afd, all you deleted was a redirect. The actual article was moved to Rory Jenkins (footballer) after the afd started. Sir Sputnik (talk) 02:54, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

  •  Done. Sorry I sometimes miss those. for future reference the right tag to use in such cases is the little known {{db-afd}} tag. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 03:00, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Never Give In (Black Veil Brides EP)

Hello. Really I don't know how use the English Wikipedia (I am from the Spanish Wikipedia, but now i'm blocked). I think I proposed the page for something called... PROD? yeah, think that is. Can you see it and say to me if I made good? Thank you!... And sorry for my poor English, you know, my native language is Spanish. Renegade Mons†er 22:04, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cuba at a Cross Roads (2nd nomination)

File:Cuba at a Cross Roads Cover.jpg is to go too. Staszek Lem (talk) 16:26, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zulkifli Abdhir

Hi. I've opined to the above deletion discussion, and like to point out - there are now four keeps with no outstanding delete votes. Although numbers do not count, I think consensus has been established. Thanks, Till I Go Home (talk) 05:39, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Actually "numbers" do count somewhat but if that was all it was, I would have punched it "keep". I still might have if it were an article about a Pokemon or a video game weapon but we need to be a little more careful with BLPs. I just didn't feel comfortable closing it with only 1 "real" keep argument. At this point it probably will be kept but let's keep it open for another few days. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:54, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Tags for International Organization for a Participatory Society

Hi Ron,

The article was up for deletion and you relisted it. Secondfletcher thinks it should stay. I do too now. After more than a week no opposing views have been articulated. How long do the tags need to stay?--JohKar (talk) 14:02, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

inre Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Strange Frame

I was the only one to comment at the AFD two mionths ago, and you then moved it per my reccommendation to the incubator. The nominator's concern toward it being "apparently in post-production" is addressed by sources showing it as set to finally screen in 6 days.[1] As concerns toward WP:NFF are addressed, I have assessed it as ready enough to be returned to mainspace for further expansion and sourcing by the community, but feel I should not be the one to actually move it back. Might you consider making the move? Thanks, Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 20:35, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

User:EEMIV

Special:Contributions/EEMIV. 500 edits

  • Redirects without discussion
  • Actions against consensus of discussion
  • Subversion of AfD process
  • Use of redirects to bypass the AfD process
EEMIV seems to think that mentioning proposals at the Star Trek project page gives rights superseding the AfD process. So I guess that makes the others at that project page complicit in this as well. I have seen this sort of behaviour before, but it has always been isolated incidents. This user does it habitually, and seems to have the backing of other editors as well. I think a message needs to be sent, that nowhere in WP:REDIRECT does it say that redirects are what you do with articles you do not like and cannot be bothered to nominate for deletion, or that you think might have a chance of being improved later (as many and various guidelines and essays indicate that stubs are for that purpose).

After the decision to Keep by closer, User:Ron Ritzman, at:

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ambush (Star Wars: The Clone Wars)

Wholesale redirect of a series of Star Wars The Clone Wars episodes to a list of episodes, against consensus, and without further discussion

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hostage_Crisis&diff=362738005&oldid=362702487

Keeps no record of archives on talk page. He has his TALK PAGE locked so only Users can edit it.

Redirects

Plo Koon, redirected to List of Star Wars characters#K

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Plo_Koon&diff=488578144&oldid=488576242
Talk page. Proves he is not doing redirects for the purposes of WP:REDIRECT #13 : "Sub-topics or other topics which are described or listed within a wider article. (Such redirects are often targeted to a particular section of the article.)"
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3APlo_Koon&diff=488578097&oldid=477058778

Redirect (two of many, of Star Trek spaceship articles

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Starfleet_ship_registry_and_classes_in_Star_Trek&diff=484220024&oldid=482393620
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=USS_Excelsior&diff=482409508&oldid=478713241
Stubifying, outside of the Star Trek genre

Tropes in Agatha Christie's novels. Made Stub of article.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tropes_in_Agatha_Christie%27s_novels&diff=483753776&oldid=478348348

I stopped after less than a week's worth of Edit History. There is no telling how much material this user has removed from mainspace

Copies of this message sent to editors who participated in the Ambush AfD: User:Ron Ritzman, User:DGG, User:Jclemens, User:Peregrine Fisher, User:Torritorri, and added to the Talk page of the Star Trek Project page, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Star Trek
Anarchangel (talk) 00:44, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Why did you remove tricking?

Why did you remove the Tricking section of wikipedia?

Freerun and parkour are totally different things, and we're sick as practitioners of getting confused with them, then shit like this happens. Dude you dont know our sport, and you prolly dont know what parkour is either. Parkour is getting from point A to B in the most efficient way possible, freerunning is getting from point A to B in the flashiest way possible (precision jumps and elements of tricking). Tricking is a sport done on flat ground ALWAYS where you link together moves in order to accomplish high end combos. Its not based on jumping on buildings. If you gotta compare it to anything, gymnastics and bboying is closer. Also tricking evolved from Martial Arts and it first appeared in martial arts Naska circles. You must kick in Tricking. it's what sets it apart from anything else. The kicks!!!

GAAAHHH HOW COULD YOU DO THIS! REVERT THE ARTICLE AT ONCE YOU FIEND! Our sport needs more decent exposure and that article did a decent job on it.

Tricking deletion

Dude, why on earth did you delete tricking?

I understand the entry in it's original form likely still needed a lot of work but "Tricking" is it's own entity. It's an internationally recognised and practiced discipline that has a huge body of practitioners from all over the world. It grew out of sport karate open forms and has expanded into it's own discipline often being defined as "an aesthetic blend of flips, twists, and kicks" (trickstutorials.com, 2010). To give you some background, the term used to describe the discipline is simply "Tricking" sometimes also called "Martial Arts Tricking", due to the simplicity of it's name, i.e. "tricking" you can be forgiven for assuming it's just word used to describe aspects various activities, but I assure you it's a very real discipline in it's own right. Practitioners of the discipline are called "Trickers" or "Tricksters" and attended "Gatherings" all over the world. To help support my argument for undeletion (sic) the following web resources should help highlight it's significance: www.trickstutorials.com www.tricksession.com/forum/index.php www.club540.com www.trickingtube.com www.justtheskills.com www.aeriformmat.com www.dogentricks.com www.nztricker.com www.theunito.com www.trikkaus.com www.trickingaustralia.com.au www.tricksociety.com If you want more I can start with the thousands of gathering pages, youtube channels and facebook groups also. Also, just look at the 540 kick page on wikipedia, it's the cornerstone 'trick' of tricking, all of the variations belong to tricking and trickers. How can there be pages about actual tricks within tricking, but no page for the discipline itself?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.98.31.34 (talk) 23:59, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

If you click on the link that says "afd" above you will see that there was a discussion about the fate of this article and almost every editor who participated in it said "delete". The AFD could not have been closed any other way and if it weren't be it would have been another admin. However, I can view deleted articles and some sourcing was added to the article between the time it was nominated for deletion and the time it was deleted. Therefore, you might have a case for deletion review. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:14, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

I've read the discussion that lead to the deletion, it appears nobody really knew what they were talking about, did minimal research, and the entry ended up getting deleted out of ignorance (to be honest). Are you seriously going to force this through the 'deletion review' process? Can't you just undo your mistake? Edit: I just re-read the discussion, it happened over a one week period, that's a shockingly short turn around for deletion.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.98.31.34 (talk) 02:12, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

No it isn't. --Orange Mike | Talk 02:18, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Articles in Wikipedia must have verifiability; the AfD was closed because no evidence of notability was ever provided that could be verified, other than to self-referencing "tricking" websites. Where is the coverage in the press? In books or magazines? --Orange Mike | Talk 02:18, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Okay, here's an article from cbs news http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504784_162-57413781-10391705/tricking-adds-a-new-level-of-difficulty-to-any-sport/ 

here's another news article http://fairfield-advance.whereilive.com.au/news/story/ninjas-are-bringing-it-on-for-youth-festival/

Team Unito (a team of trickers) featured on Finland's Got Talent and ended up getting 2nd in the grand final http://www.nelonen.fi/ohjelmat/talent-suomi/etusivu/video/talent-suomi-semifinaali-1-unito-trikkasi-finaaliin — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.98.31.34 (talk) 03:56, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Tricking

bring it back YO — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.167.119.96 (talk) 02:44, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

About the tricking thing.

Man you can do whatever you want its your site. We just thought you guys actually wanted to spread information to the people. Dont really care. Have fun with life... But sooner or later you'll have to put it back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.197.165.28 (talk) 04:11, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Tricking

Please undelete tricking.

I'm a tricker and tricker does exist and is a thing unrelated to skateboarding and other acrobatic sports.

Please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.100.120.99 (talk) 04:43, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Your free 1-year HighBeam Research account is ready

Good news! You are approved for access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research.

  • Account activation codes have been emailed.
  • To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1
  • The 1-year, free period begins once you enter the code.
  • If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
  • A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:HighBeam/Citations.
  • HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
  • Show off your HighBeam access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/highbeam_userbox}} on your userpage
  • When the 1-year period is up, check the applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi t | c 04:47, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Question about erasing Puertorrican architech Ricardo Alvarez- Diaz

Good evening Mr. Ritzman.

I do hope that when you read my lines you are doing great. First i will like to apologize due to my lack of knowledge both in the English language and in the internet field so excuse any weird questions or bad spelling. My brother is Architech Ricardo Alvarez-Diaz, very well known, respected and praise in his field, not only in Puerto Rico but in thee States as well as in the Caribbean an Latin America. Some of his work have even been selected as actual case study for the Clinton Foundation among many accolades.

I wonder why did you erase him? Can you help me understand or guide me so he can be re established? I know we can supply you with information than you request for validation

Www.adgpr.com

Kind regards,

--Elena Alvarez-Diaz-- (05/03/12)


— Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.137.225.192 (talk) 03:07, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

If you click on the link that says "afd" above you will see that there was a discussion about whether or not this article should be deleted and the result was unanimous. If it weren't be it would have been some other admin. I'm sure your brother is a great man but it was felt that there wasn't much that set him apart from other architects yet. He may indeed be well respected and known across the Caribbean and Latin America but are there any sources for any of this? Have any journalists written articles about him? --Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:32, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of Grupo Capoeira Batuque

Dear Ron Ritzman,

I am very new to Wiki entries, editing and so on. My very first entry was an assignment (still is actually), which turns out right now it was unsuccessful. I still have chances to make it successful (hoping for that), and that's why I am here: to ask for help.

I've researched before submitting "[Capoeira Batuque]" article, and I do understand there was no other reference in spite of people from the group. Although, I quite didn't get it how different would it be from this article [Capoeira Brasil]

I'd much appreciate your time in helping me to understand Wiki processes a bit better. Many thanks in advance!

--Cinlms (talk) 05:52, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

It's not really about whether or not you understand or don't understand our processes. The discussion on the fate of this article ran for 7 days and it was felt that there wasn't anything that set this school apart from other Capoeira schools aside from an unsourced claim that it's the oldest in Southern California. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:22, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Understood...I appreciate your prompt reply. Still, how different regarding resources and references it would be from the article [Capoeira Brasil]? How could this not be seen more commercial than not allowing other groups on Wikipedia? Thanks in advance for your time in replying it.

--Cinlms (talk) 13:22, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of John A. Patti Wikipedia page

Ron,

I am responding to the deletion of John A. Patti's page. I understand that users felt the subject was not notable enough. What are some steps I can take following a deletion due to lack of notability? I believe, given further sourcing, that Mr. Patti can meet this criteria. Thank you. --craigsko Craigsko (talk) 20:43, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

From reading the discussion it seems that right now there's nothing you can do. He appears to be an ordinary lawyer doing his job. If there is more news coverage about him in the future, this may change. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:14, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Regarding deletion of article S.K. Mohanty

I would like to know the procedure for undeletion of the article "S.K. Mohanty". Would you please guide me with your valuable suggestions. --Nprantik (talk) 06:39, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

While the AFD in question didn't have much participation and notibility was borderline, it was felt that the article was too promotional. At this point I think it would be best if someone with absolutely no connection to the subject write a new article from a neutral point of view. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:21, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Restoration of the Neopolitan Business Park

I am attempting to restore the page Neopolitan Business Park before I took a long Wikibreak. The reasons for deletion is Notability, but the fact that the business park have rel-estate and advertisments in the net proves it notable. Verifiability now is no longer a problem as I found new references and external links that I believe are unbiased. Kj plma (talk) 12:49, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm afraid the consensus was clear but if you have sources that show notability then you are welcome to present them to deletion review. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:26, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

AFD Deletion?

I noticed you closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Justin Bethel as a delete and was curious about your reasoning behind it. Why was it "going to be a no consensus close" and then ended up being a "delete" ?--Paul McDonald (talk) 02:23, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

It's actually "delete without prejudice" which means it won't be subject to CSD G4 if recreated. I just don't feel comfortable with leaving unsourced biographies of living persons in article space. If this was a "keep" close I would have moved it to the incubator until sourced. Like I said at the AFD, if you wish to source this article then I will be happy to move it to your userspace. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:29, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
Incubated to Wikipedia:Article Incubator/Justin Bethel per request by email. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:09, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Time extension

Please read Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Editor deliberately confusing his responses at AfD and see whether you agree about giving that AFD discussion a bit more time. Uncle G (talk) 22:19, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Damn, by the time I was able to check that out, both the ANI and AFD discussions had been closed. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:17, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Sierra Lamar Deletion

Curious why you deleted this article? Seems like some of the folks on wikipedia would just like to undo some of the work that others do, why did you delete this? THANKS! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sbscottw (talk • contribs) 23:46, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

If you click where is says "afd" above you can see why. It was a deletion discussion about the fate of the article that you were informed about and were welcome to participate in. I hope for Sierra's safe return but it was felt by those who participated in the discussion that the case doesn't warrant a Wikipedia article at this time. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:24, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

We As Human Undeletion

"I would like to open an undeletion discussion about an article I created about the band We As Human. File:We As Human.jpeg I can prove that they meet the WP:MUSIC, WP:GNG & WP:BAND criteria. They are a very notable rock band signed to a MAJOR music label (Atlantic Records) and have been on national television for years, i.e., xbox commercials, music channels, television interviews on frequent rotation, etc. They recently finished the winterjam Tour that afterwards took the #1 position (in the world) on the tour charts - which meet the WP:GOODCHARTS criteria - for the first quarter! http://instagr.am/p/JQWDcpCnmU/

I'm not sure why this article was actually deleted. The researched cited in the deletion discussion was unfounded at best, and I feel this band is more than worthy of an article. They are currently in the studio with world renowned -multi grammy award winning producer Howard Benson, and they are about to release a full length record on Atlantic records and have done MAJOR touring for 4+ years now. Please undelete this article as it meets all of the aforementioned Wikipedia acceptance criteria. Thank You, --Jamnashville (talk) 06:47, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

When I closed the AFD, I did so as a neutral admin and only carried out the consensus. However, in response to your post here I did some googling and I can't find any significant press coverage for this band. I did find this and this but these are only trivial mentions. WP:BAND requires multiple news articles either about the band or with at least several paragraphs about the band. I'm sorry but if I were to have !voted in this AFD instead of closing it I would have !voted "delete". However, if your own research came up with sources that I or those who participated in the AFD discussion have missed then you are welcome to have the AFD decision reviewed. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:39, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Your decision to keep the An Nisa, 34

Extended content

Visit Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/An-Nisa,_34#An-Nisa.2C_34

AfDs are not about voting. The outcome of a deletion discussion is determined on the basis of reference to policies and guidelines, not a simple headcount.
..Many AfDs in the past have had a final outcome that contradicts the numbers, and many will in the future. It is possible for an AfD that has 1 keep and 10 deletes to be kept (or vice versa) if that single argument is really good and the remainder are just votes.

— WP:SUPPORT

I tried to refute most opposing votes with references to various Wikipedia policies. I even explained that why the verse-article ought to be deleted. Yet you decide to just close the discussion with a heading “[t]he result was keep. No arguments for deletion aside from the nominator.” So what? If I'm only one who presents arguments for my view, is that a wrong thing? I humbly suggest you reconsider your decision one more time and please go through the points I raised again. Please do it. You might see what the problem is.
Please ponder upon the fact that the subject of controversy is “Islamic approval of domestic violence.” And not anything else. But that subject already has a page. That's the reason why An-Nisa, 34 is a coatrack article. An article that ostensibly discusses the nominal subject, but in reality is a cover for a tangentially related biased subject. If anything suits the description of a coatrack article it's this verse-article. I explained every point that could have been raised on that AfD page.

Further information: WP:FRINGE and WP:COAT
 Brendon ishere 09:22, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
I'm sorry but no admin could have closed this discussion any other way. (though I suppose that an admin's discretion "no consensus" was possible but that would be a stretch) If I had deleted this article it would get overturned at DRV. As for my closing rationale, please do not take it personally, I use that phrase on most of my closes where there is a unanimous decision to keep an article. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 13:32, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
"I'm sorry but no admin could have closed this discussion any other way." - I respect your view, although I doubt that it's true.
"please do not take it personally" - of course not, I never took it personally. That's not my point. If you read my points carefully (which I'm sure you do) you'll find that it's nothing more than a coatrack article. A verse from qur'an, by itself, doesn't merit an Individual page.
Wikipedia is not dedicated to doing the job of a lexicon or a tafsir.

Just tell me this much, do you see my point or not? See, I need your help (please don't mistake it for connivance or sufferance) in this.
The thing is, I would like to appeal again for deletion of that coatrack article, so could you tell me where to go from here? Or, could we just do something to draw more administrative attention to it? I don't think the right amount of people were notified. That short referendum doesn't reflect the true consensus, IMO.

Help me improve Wikipedia, please.

New Addition: The primary rationale behind the votes for keep, was that “this verse seems to be the subject of much commentary and debate” and thus worthy of an individual page.

But this bears little relation to reality.

You need to understand what Islam is, to preclude the unjustifiable belief that the verse itself is the subject of controversy and deserves a page. There is no controversy regarding the verse, there can't be. Within Islam it is believed that Qur'an is the "clear truth and the best explanation" [Quran 25:33].
Then, what is this article discussing about? Mere interpretations (based on conflicted interest). That is also unneeded because the verse is pretty express about its approval of wife-beating (Sura 38:44 even describes the procedure to beat one's wife).  Brendon ishere 14:56, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

We've got quite a few articles about individual notable verses of the New Testament (Category:Gospel_of_John_verses, Category:Gospel of Matthew verses...); this seems to be an individually notable verse of the Quran. --GRuban (talk) 18:22, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
This is a false argument (probably a non-sequitur logical fallacy). The nature of Wikipedia means that you cannot make a convincing argument based on what other articles exist; because there is nothing stopping anyone from just creating an article. There are plenty of articles on wikipedia that probably should not exist (that's one reason why WP:AfD is still in business). So just pointing out that an article on a similar subject exists does not prove that the article in question should also exist.
Would the fact that there is an article on every Grey's Anatomy character mean there necessarily should be an article on every character on The Office? It may not. So, it is better to look at the debates in question and see what policies were cited and make an argument based on how they apply to the current debate than just say "x was kept so this should be too".  Brendon ishere 11:20, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Brendon, enough already. You came here and asked the reviewing admin a question; it's been answered. You cannot rehash the deletion discussion again. If you're not satsified with the response, and STILL think the article requires a policy-based deletion, then go to deletion review and bring it to the community to review. Stop badgering (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:24, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Let me add, I found your attempts to counter all the arguments in the original AFD to be counter-productive, and bordering on bullying - you made your passionate deletion discussion. The !votes are theirs - leave them be. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:27, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
"Brendon, enough already." - Hey, you better mind your tone, Bwilkins.

"it's been answered" - you don't have to sit in judgement of that. It's between Ron and myself. If he minds my presence he could always say so himself. I am not here to fight a war of acrimony. I was in the middle of a discussion. This is Ron's user-page. What's your problem if I want to discuss things with Ron? I will do what I feel like doing, you don't tell me what to do.

I don't need your assistance now, otherwise I would have visited your talk page, not Ron's. BWilkins, I would advice you to not poke your nose in where you're unneeded.
Ron is a capable administrator, and presumably he can handle himself.

"I found your attempts.." - I really don't give a rat's behind about what you found. You leave me alone. I don't care if your views are correct or not. I don't care. I am willing to talk to Ron and anybody else but you.  Brendon ishere 11:42, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Besides,

Wikipedia is not an experiment in democracy or any other political system. Its primary, but not exclusive, method of determining consensus is through editing and discussion, not voting. Although editors sometimes use straw polls in an attempt to test for consensus, polls or surveys sometimes impede rather than assist discussion.

— WP:DEMOCRACY

— Brendon ishere 11:49, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Brendon, you said that There are plenty of articles on wikipedia that probably should not exist and that was why AFD is still in business and you are right. However, you have to convince other editors that an article needs to be deleted and in this case you failed to do so. While AFD is not a "vote", neither is it an "admin's suggestion box". Somebody besides you has to say "delete". Even if I were to agree with every one of your arguments above, I could still not re-close the AFD as "delete" without it getting overturned at DRV. Now please, it's time to drop the stick.--Ron Ritzman (talk) 12:20, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Ron ... sorry that I had to enforce a dropping of the stick for 48hrs. As he said, you're a competant admin, but I had seen more than enough aggressiveness towards you on the topic. If you disagree with the block, feel free to reduce its length accordingly, but WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT was deafening (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:22, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
...and just in case you have not seen it, he's asking to talk to you. Note: his talkpage access has been revoked - obviously, based on his talkpage usage and edit-summaries (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 22:17, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Answer regarding Architect Ricardo Alvarez-Diaz

Mr. Ritzman,

Thank you very much for your answer regarding the deleting of Architect Ricardo Alvarez-Diaz. Ricardo have had articles written by journalist Mario Belaval and Eva Llorens from The Caribbena Businnes News Paper , probably 5 or 6 , also by Marisol Torres at El Nuevo Dia news Paper, 2, or 3. Also he is constantly called to be qouted regarding retrofit and energy efficient epc,s plus he is at least once a month invited to be the principal speaker at renowend associations, Universities, companies etc.

This month, for example, he will be the principal speaker at the azko Novel Yearly Proshow speaking about the new governmental tendencies in design and right afger he is a panelist at the USGBC (united States Green Building Council) with speakers from the Mainland. This is just an example because he is also invited yearly to University of Notre Dame in Indiana to speak, among many other places were international journalist are invited. As I also mentioned berore you may check at the Clinton Foundation website and find Ricardo,s works also as the Case Study choosen by the Foundation. There is information written anout him and his work.

If you so kindly give the opportunity of sending me an email address were I can send you all material backing up all this words plus much more, then maybe you and your collegues may re visit your desition.

Thank you again for your time.

Elena Alvarez-Diaz (03:47, 16 May 2012 (UTC))

There's a few things you need to understand. First of all, even if you were to send me the material, I couldn't unilaterally undelete the article because the decision to delete it was made by community, not me. Secondly, articles have to be verifiable That is, it should be possible for anybody to check the sources in the article and/or do research and find potential sources. And lastly, I think the main problem here is that the article was created and significantly edited either by your brother or somebody related to him. While not strictly prohibited, this is strongly discouraged. One reason for that is that the first indicator that a subject may be notable (but in itself not enough for inclusion) is if a neutral editor with no connection to the subject "takes note of" the subject and chooses to write an article about him and one cannot "take note of" oneself. It's also difficult for someone (or a relative) to write an article on himself from a neutral point of view. For more on this, read our guidelines on autobiographies and conflict of interest. You might just have to accept the fact that there is not going to be an article on your brother until somebody not connected to him takes interest in him, does some research, finds publicly available sources, and writes one. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 13:09, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Error

Could you please help fix this error with yesterdays log see here. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 09:18, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Never mind this guy fixed it thanks anyway. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 11:35, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Re: Deletion of Jed Rose

Hi Ron, Regarding the page for Jed Rose, there has been a featured interview on BBC regarding his work around improv and the workplace. (Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/p00rknv5, starting at 11m40s). This adds another credible source. Just curious on your feedback regarding potentially re-listing it. Megapixel2000 (talk) 15:49, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Considering that and considering that the original AFD had little participation, I've reopened it. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 03:25, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
Actually the report speaks toward Cambridge University and other facilities offering courses in improv so as to inspire "creative leadership" and the report of Jed Rose begins a minute later than above... at 12m40s. While his portion is only 40 seconds, it is directly about Rose... and media recognition in a reliable source does count toward WP:GNG. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 05:02, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Deleted page Pamela Cox

Hi wondering why this page was deleted as she is an author who is linked to from other pages on this site?

http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/c/pamela-cox/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.32.157.209 (talk) 03:12, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

I deleted it because it was an unsourced biography of a living person. However, any logged in editor is free to write a new article. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 03:38, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Articles moved during AfD discussions

Looks like a pair of AfDs you closed had pages moved during the discussions, resulting in you deleting only the redirect that resulted from the move. See Bay Alarm Company and Masatoshi Fujitani. I've tagged them G6, but I thought I should drop you a note so you can be on the lookout for such moves. Monty845 04:46, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Klaus Kronenberg Deletion

Dear Mr Ritzman,

Sometime ago, I found a Wikipedia page on Dr. Klaus J. Kronenberg (at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klaus_Kronenberg). As his son, I was frankly concerned by the content and the emphasis on magnetic treatment of water, which he became involved in late in life but surely did not constitute his best contribution to physics. I was busy at the time and I had not signed up as a Wikipedia contributor. Therefore, I did not make any corrections to the article. Now that I see that the article has been deleted, I'm sorry that I let so much time pass.

I am making this inquiry to you to learn whether it might be acceptable to submit a corrected/revised article on Klaus Kronenberg. I now have a Wikipedia Username and password, and I am prepared to enter an accurate and fully-referenced entry. However, I expect that the issue of correcting an article is more complicated with its deletion, and I'd appreciate your advice. If you like, I can send you my revised article, which emphasizes his contributions to the development of commonly-used permanent magnets (AlNiCo and Barium Ferrites), early electron microscopy of magnetic materials, and magnetic suspension systems. In this article, I have cited his publications in peer-reviewed physics journals (J. Applied Physics, Appl. Phys. Letters, and IEEE Transactions on Magnetics) and US Patents. In addition, he wrote a manuscript regarding his experiences as a German soldier at the Russian Front (WWII) which has been registered with the US Copyright Office and which I plan to publish on his behalf. While I cannot deny my father's work on "magnetic water treatment", this was not his most important or well-accepted contribution to physics.

I also note relationships to existing Wikipedia pages that have not been linked, for example the Wiki-page on Dr. Robert Pohl (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Pohl), who was the advisor to Klaus Kronenberg when he was a physics student at the University of Goettingen.

I truly appreciate your considered views, and let me know if you'd like me to send you my draft of a newly corrected article. 

                     Andreas Kronenberg
                     (Kronenberg@geo.tamu.edu
                      979-229-6824
                      http://geoweb.tamu.edu/profile/AKronenberg)


AKronenberg13 (talk) 00:19, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

If in the future, your father gets enough mainstream coverage to justify an article, it will need to be written by an editor with no connection to him. Please review our guideline on conflict of interest. While COI editing is not prohibited, it's strongly discouraged because it's difficult for people related to a subject to maintain a neutral point of view. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:53, 27 May 2012 (UTC)


Klaus Kronenberg Deletion

Dear Mr Ritzman,

Many thanks for your quick response. I'm afraid I am new to the Wikipedia site (as a user at least) so I'm slow to respond (as I'm still figuring it out). The policy you cite certainly looks reasonable. I must admit that I do have special interest when I read an encyclopedia article that has real errors in it - about someone who was very close to me. This was what first motivated me to make revisions to correct the article and eliminate errors in emphasis on his contributions. That said, I think it would be better for someone without conflicts of interest to make any revisions/changes to a Wikipedia article.

Would you be willing to look over a draft of the article and assess its merit? I attempted to revise the earlier article to emphasize real contributions in physics without denying the pseudoscience aspects (which I wish had never happened, but cannot deny), and to provide concrete references. I would be happy to learn your views, and can answer any questions about the revision. The one question that I cannot answer is whether the article would become an "orphaned" article.

From my standpoint, I would not be upset if you decided that an article about my father is inappropriate for Wikipedia. However, I'm concerned that the earlier article is not a good basis for such a decision. I was certainly concerned that the earlier article was posted (by whom, I do not know), as it was wrong on a number of important issues. Also, I continue to be concerned that many other websites (not Wikipedia; but websites maintained by companies that are still marketing magnetic water treatment devises) persist in posting erroneous information, which a Wikipedia article would tend to counteract (ie. by providing accurate information).

If you do not have interest or time to look at my draft, how would I go about finding an appropriate Wikipedia editor? 

    Regards, Andreas Kronenberg

AKronenberg13 (talk) 22:55, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Attempt to get around the salting of an article

If you remember deleting Bleed from Within and salting it so it couldn't be created again, there was the page Bleed from Within (band) created in an attempt to get around this. So since this is a violation of using the dab "(band)" just to get around a block of an article being created, I thought you should know that this was done. • GunMetal Angel 08:27, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Looks like it has already been salted. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:53, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Something to Dance For & TTYLXOX

The least you could have did was to tell me or not if the article was being deleted instead of taking matters into your own hands!! Also, you deleted the cover along with it, so you could have just told me instead of deleting my hard work! I know that you admins are the bosses around here, but we other users are protesting against you and saying that we should get respect from you admins! If I was an admin, you wouldn't like it if I blocked you or deleted your belongings now would it?! Show some respect to us users and we will show respect to you!!! ~ RomeAntic14 05:52, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

I didn't just randomly drop out of the sky and delete that article. There was a deletion discussion that ran for 21 days with everybody who participated in it saying "delete". No admin on this project could have closed it any other way. Also, even though the nominator didn't inform you that he had nominated it for deletion (which he should have) I know you were aware of the discussion because you removed the AFD tag from the article (which had a link to the discussion) on the 6th of May and made an additional 4 edits to the article after the tag was restored. You were welcome to participate in the discussion and say why you thought the article should not be deleted but chose not to. I had nothing against the article and I'm sorry that it's gone but I was just doing my job. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:29, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Userfy Page

Do you mind userfying That's What I Call StarKid! Volume 2? I'm quite busy at the moment, but I may get time to improve it at some point. Eladkse (talk) 08:31, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

AfDs

Hi Ron! I just wanted to tell that this was not necessary as it could have been deleted with votes at that time. This will just increase the work load but its ok as no harms done. →TSU tp* 11:00, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm, Looks like I was relisting too fast. On the log page it appeared as 2 AFDs, one for One page website with no !votes and one for Rahul Mothiya with 4 delete !votes. I was fooled by the fact that for some reason the nominator is using level 2 headings in his signature. Actually, he's just using a signature design that makes it look like a heading. In any case the AFD is closed. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 12:57, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

One page website

I was fooled by size of the nominator's signature into thinking this was 2 AFDs.

If it makes you feel better, you were not the only one. JIP | Talk 18:59, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clampco Sistemi

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Non-admin closure question. -- Trevj (talk) 12:27, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Actually, I was already previewing my response when I got the orange bar and I'm sorry, I would not have closed this one back in my NAC days. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 12:30, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Deleted Article

Justin D. Nutt I recently wrote an article on a author named Justin D. Nutt. He is a dating and relationship expert who was on a radio show I work with. I was hoping to find out what the reason for the deletion was. I previously asked the person who nominated it for deletion and he stated quite rudely that he had answered the question, which he really had not. I did attempt to rewrite the article, but when I asked "WikiDan" to explain how I could make it better he failed to respond. I ask you instead for your help on this matter if you could be so kind. The article did contain a number of outside links where available (some links were not available due to the newness of the book) and the article was not written in an advertising manner. So I am trying to understand what it takes to not have the article deleted. Shigone1701 (talk) 15:52, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Did you read all of the comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Justin D. Nutt? (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 16:46, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

I did after talking to WikiDan I better understand what the issue was. I am hoping to get a copy of what I wrote so that I can do some more research and find better external links and update it when more comes of him. Or at the very least send him a copy of the article. Shigone1701 (talk) 15:07, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Although it's pretty horrid, and certainly non-encyclopedic (even includes such things as "private interviews" (which is WP:OR) and blog entries as references), I have userfied it for you at User:Shigone1701/Nutt. You may try to improve it, but it will not be able to remain even in its current state for long without valid third party reliable sources; after all, it is a WP:BLP. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 19:06, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Swiss Lips Wikipedia

Hiya,

I just wanted to inform you that Swiss Lips have now been signed to a major label, Sony and are rapidly gaining support from fans. I am a massive fan of the band I have seen their fans increase greatly since December, I have connected with many other Swiss Lips fans online and everyone is very excited about the band and their music. Swiss Lips have now have a video on Vevo which has currently received over 150,000 views in two weeks. The band are due to play a number or festivals in the UK over the summer which is when their fan base is expected to grow even more rapidly. Swiss Lips are due to release their debut single, Danz in August. There are many online features of the band which also need adding to the page since the first one was created, so there will be a lot more content to fill up the page with. I feel that there is now a sufficient fan base for the band for a wikipedia page to be feasible.

I would therefore appreciate it if you could review your decision and reinstate the Swiss Lips page that was created.

Many Thanks Chooseyourownadventure (talk) 16:43, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

If there are any reliable sources for any of this (not blogs, not forum posts, not press releases) then you are welcome to make your case at deletion review. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:00, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of pastebins

I want to know if this page is actually purged (I want to consult it and moved to my website). Pablo Castellanos (talk) 23:46, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Userfied to User:Pablo Castellanos/Comparison of pastebins. When you are done, tag it with {{db-u1}}. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:56, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! (Tagged) Pablo Castellanos (talk) 21:29, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Maya (entertainer)

hello Ron Ritzman/Archive 13 I am from Thai wikipedia, Please let me know about deletion reason of Maya (entertainer) (in thai th:Mai Thu Hường). I just want to know how to do for this article in Thai wikipedia, I checked to many wikipedia sites in other language,there are deleted too.Give a comment please,Thank you --คนไทย (talk) 08:36, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maya (entertainer) (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:55, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
Thank you --Sasakubo1717 (talk) 12:33, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

AfD relist

I've removed your duplicated AfD contributions here, here and here. I assume you hadn't seen my submissions. SwisterTwister talk 02:41, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Deletion: Team_Solomid

Given that the principals are being interviewed by Forbes and other media outlets for their opinion on the game and it's adoption in the world, some of the pillars of the deletions justification are faltering. RedmondGore (talk) 19:14, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Well, if you can find 1 or 2 more supersources then you may have a case for deletion review. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:22, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
But the summation for the AfD stands, right, so re-creation may be an option? Drmies (talk) 14:48, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Yes it stands and usually, 1 supersource isn't enough. (and IMHO interviews can be supersources) I just thought I'd ask your opinion as the nominator. Should I reopen the AFD? --Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:10, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Durga

May I please recreate this page because it was my first article and now that Ive learned how to make my articles better I could have another chance at improving this article.

Wisdom child will (talk) Wisdom child willWisdom child will (talk)

At this point, if you recreated the article, it will most likely be deleted as a recreation under CSD G4. The problem is that there isn't enough media coverage of this movie that's accessible and easy to find. At this point I would suggest either improving existing articles or find a topic that's easier to research. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:30, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of Page for Horace Mui

Hi Ron, you have previously deleted the page of Horace Mui where his biography was put on wikipedia. I'm hoping to revive the page and please let me know what I need to do (e.g. adding references etc) Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wanpye (talk • contribs) 09:02, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

While it's true that the deletion discussion for this article only had 1 participant aside from the nominator, I deleted it because it was an unsourced biography of a living person. What you need to do is write a new article with reliable sources for each of the facts in the article. I would recommend starting with a userspace draft and then submit it to deletion review. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:34, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Water Music Publishing Wikipedia Page

Hey Ron,

Just contacting you in regards to the Water Music Publishing wiki page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Water_Music_Publishing). Im currently interning at Water and my goal right now is to work on restoring the deleted wikipedia page. Im new to this wikipedia thing but I have to get my job done so I've refrenced the help center and tried making corrections to the page before contacting you but I found out the only way to work on restoring the page is to contact the administrator who deleted the page. What is the neccesary steps in order to restore this page so I can make the proper corrections and help share our companies information with the world. Looking forward to hearing from you your help is much appreciated.

Regards,

-Marc Aliotta Water Music Publishing — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcaliotta (talk • contribs) 17:36, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm afraid the AFD decision has to stand for now. Also, I strongly recommend that you review our guidelines on conflict of interest. If we are to have an article about this subject in the future, it would be best if it was started by someone with no connection to Water Music Publishing. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:14, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Ron Catalano

You need to check deeper into Ron Catalano. Its obvious, you really don't know who he is. This summer alone he is playing with Sonny Turner and the platters, Peter Noone and Hermans Hermit's, Bill Medley and the Righteous Brothers, Paul Revere and the Raiders, The Village People, John Kay and Steppenwolf and others... And that's just over 10 days. Not Notable?...Then explain to me what is? He's top call in the nation. He just finished with George Benson, Natalie Cole and Davy Jones just before he passed for goodness sakes... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.145.132.93 (talk) 04:04, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Do you have any sources for any of this? Those who participated in the deletion discussion, which you can read by clicking "afd" above, couldn't find any. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:05, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

You might try Hot August Nights over recent years. He was featured with The Grass Roots, Davy Jones, The Nelsn Twins, The Village People and many others. Also, He comes up as a notable prodigy of Don Raffell's Wikipedia page as notable student and one of the finest woodwind players in the nation. Re-post his page and I'll collect resources for review. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.145.132.93 (talk) 06:15, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Ron Catalano is all over the internet. He is listed as notable in every city he has lived in and notable in every institution he has been involved with. I would think being Bob Hope's musical director and orchestrator and lead saxophonist for Lawrence Welk would be notable in istelf. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.145.132.93 (talk) 06:27, 11 June 2012 (UTC)</e I Googled Ron Catalano and came up with pages and pages of sources. span>

These are all some amazing claims. How about some sources. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 12:01, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Scott Delaney

Just so you know, yes I was a bit gruff with him, but I've been watching and assisting him for months now, and likely I've been too tolerant and just quietly fixing errors and trying to gently explain to him. Of course, he never replies, and only communicates when he has a question. This is a bit more blunt that my usual methods, but I felt it was the only tool I hadn't used, so I had to be more direct. All those were in one day, and there were still more, I just gave up and went to AN as it became clear that coddling him wasn't working. I still think he is not capable (for the reasons expressed at the AN), but understand why it isn't obvious to others, or that others may disagree. Anyway, I didn't want to think this was my standard "first offense" way of dealing with editors. If you have any experiences to share, please do, because I'm out of ideas. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 02:51, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Well, at least he now seems to be talking and a answering the clue-phone. Aside from his early lack of response, I still think his main problem was blindly assuming that anything tagged by the edit filter was vandalism. I wonder how common this problem is. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 12:36, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Political gaffes

Sorry. My logic may seem a little twisted and violate the Temporal Prime Directive, but most find it sound. Thank you, btw.--Canoe1967 (talk) 04:28, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

It was sound. I was actually upset at myself for suggesting that I was counting your "plans" as !votes when AFD has nothing to do with "vote counting". (well, sometimes it does but it was irrelevant in this case as both sides had plenty of participation). In any case if this is the only message I get about this close I'll be happy because I was expecting the delete !voters to blow up my talk page. Note that I have changed the heading so if they still wish to do so, the thread already exists. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 13:18, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
I doubt they will. I added a 'behave' section to the talk page that they should read first. I don't think it would be a problem to remove any gaffes that may cause dispute until they reach consensus on the talk page. I should add a no archive tag to that post as well.--Canoe1967 (talk) 18:02, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

AFD Reply

Just curious to understand why the page Matthew Hiltzik was relisted for comment on deletion? Thanks (GD23 (talk) 14:53, 15 June 2012 (UTC))

Because in my judgement, it did not have enough participation to make a call. More comments are needed by experienced editors. Also, concerning your !vote, you need to read WP:WAX. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 19:29, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, I understand how my vote needs to be worked on. I understand that experienced editor votes are needed, but how much longer does this process go for? I am learning how AFDs work.(GD23 (talk) 14:51, 18 June 2012 (UTC))

Boabom deletion?

Hi, I was wondering why you deleted the Boabom page. I'm thinking of signing my kid up for classes, and I came to Wikipedia for info on the discipline, and found the page had been deleted. I'd be happy to cobble together a new page from the research results that I'm finding elsewhere if it was just that the old page wasn't up to snuff...

Heykerriann (talk) 15:19, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

If you click where it says "afd" above you will see that there was a discussion about the fate of this article where there was a unanimous consensus that it should be deleted. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 19:23, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

AfD for Species forest

I see that the page has been deleted (sensibly), but the AfD discussion not yet closed. An oversight, I assume? -- 202.124.89.229 (talk) 12:41, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Never mind: I see what happened. -- 202.124.89.229 (talk) 12:42, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

2012 Nehru Cup

Hello. I few months back you closed an AfD regarding the 2012 Nehru Cup here and the result was redirect till information comes out (dates, format) and yesterday they came out. I asked if the redirect could be undone, which it was and then I added the information. Then User:Spartaz came in and redirected the page again because the tournament was still not notable and also the AfD supposedly said that "redirect till the tournament begins" which after looking at the AfD I did not see. So if you dont mind could you undo the redirect for me. Here is the source that indicates the tournament dates and format [2]. --RedBullNewYork2012 (talk) 14:09, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

I reviewed the AFD again. While the consensus to redirect was clear, there wasn't a clear consensus as to "until". (the tournament starts or "more information" comes out) Therefore, I think that at this time it's a WP:BRD issue not an "AFD enforcement" issue. You'll have to work this out at Talk:2012 Nehru Cup. I've already commented there. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 17:16, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Re: Danielle Cortes DeVito

Hi Ron Ritzman, Thank you for that sincere review, I would certainly look for more coverage on the subject and recreate the page when notability can be established. Thank you again. —JOHNMOORofMOORLAND (talk) 10:34, 18 June 2012 (UTC)


Mitläufer

Well done, Ron. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:01, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/User_talk:Ron_Ritzman/Archive_13"