User talk:Salvio giuliano/Archive 22

questo utente è ormai da cacciare: dopo tanti blocchi persevera nella sua agenda politica e di propaganda attaccando particolarmente utenze italiane con la complicità di alcuni amministratori! Il suo tipo di propaganda è ossessivo e distruttivo: rimuove sempre le fonti contro la sua agenda politica; nell'articolo su Broz Tito rimuove ogni riferimento alle foibe e a qualsiasi crimine compiuto dal dèspota slavo:

[1]

[2]

[3]

Potresti intervenire? Questa persona opera nello stesso modo in tutti gli articoli riguardanti la ex Iugoslavia! Ciao,--Mengardo (talk) 11:54, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Will reply soon, now I can't. Sorry. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 15:14, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

hay dude - just wondering why the ahab page was deleted - was looking for info on their upcoming release for an article.

thanks,

C

I speedily deleted the article because it did not explain why this particular band was significant or important.

Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia and, therefore, can only have articles on notable subjects; to me, this band seems not to be, I'm sorry. So, before recreating the article, please read WP:MUSICBIO, to familiarise yourself with Wikipedia's notability requirements for singers and bands. My suggestion would be to create a userspace draft and, then, ask for feedback at WP:FEEDBACK Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 15:13, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Salvio

I am writing to you with reference to the deletion of my Simply Trak article. I am sorry if I broke the WIKI laws on directly advertising a company. I was however surprised as my article was 'factual' and has no 'sales text'. Here is the Nav Man Wireless allowed article on Wiki, please explain how this is different to my submission

I would like to play by the rules and I still believe a groundbreaking company like Simply Trak who have led with vehicle and asset tracking technology in for example Africa deserve to be part of the Wikipedia encyclopedia. Could you please advise me then of how I can achieve this

Thankyou for your time With Best Regards Simon

I've just restored the article and moved it to your userspace; it's now located here. I have done so, to allow you to improve the article, so that it will comply with Wikipedia's rules regarding neutrality and verifiability. You'll be allowed to work on the article without having to fear speedy deletions and, when you're through, you'll be able to ask for feedback at WP:FEEDBACK.

Before you move the article back to mainspace, however, please familiarise yourself with Wikipedia's notability requirements. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 11:44, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Salvio.

Having some discussion (and you can guess where) over the legal status of people convicted of a crime in Italy but appealing it. I understand if you don't want to, but would appreciate if want to offer any insight, here or there. (Or if you could point me at another Italian-speaking user who has some knowledge of jurisprudence!) Cheers  pablo 19:34, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. pablo 15:20, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're most welcome! Sorry I could not produce sources... Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 15:30, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Salvio. Your recent MfD deletions are linking to the wrong MfDs. Cunard (talk) 01:21, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oooops, thanks for spotting it! The nominator didn't use the correct template and I didn't check. Sigh... Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 01:23, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. Thank you for closing the debate. Do you have to manually delete the many pages because of the nominator's error of substituting the {{mfd}} template? Best, Cunard (talk) 01:26, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I fear I do, sigh...

As a general rule, however, I prefer to delete the pages manually, although I could use Twinkle's deli-batch feature (however, I'd have to untick all the pages I don't want to delete, meaning a very large number of userpages and user talk pages - those of everyone who contributed to the MFD)... Cheers. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 01:30, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Manually? You have a lot of work to do. During times like this, being an admin must be painful. ;) Cunard (talk) 01:34, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And we don't even get paid... ;) Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 01:35, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you said this. I was thinking the same thing especially considering the date of the last entry here and the account creation logged here.

CIreland (talk) 04:25, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly!

It's something I've been suspecting for a bit, now, due to that and to the striking similarity in the way they express themselves — the almost whiny way they claim the existence of a pro-guilt clique trying to silence the pro-innocence faction, the very long rants, the para-legal threats, the offhand dismissal of anything said by non-admins... — (and Z. too maintaned she was a lawyer, IIRC).

Unfortunately, I fear Z.'s account is stale and a, so, checkuser won't be able to help. If I weren't inolved, I'd block as a duck, however... Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 12:12, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• KittenRapist5000 (talk · contribs)
• Hi, do you mind shutting this guy up? He's making a fool of us here. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 11:11, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Too late... Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 11:12, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Salvio giuliano. You have new messages at ConcernedVancouverite's talk page.
Message added 14:38, 13 June 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 14:38, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd appreciate it if someone uninvolved glanced at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Efik language. I interpreted the AfD as vexatious, disruptive, failing to advance a rationale for deletion, and attempting to end a dispute inappropriately: WP:CSK#1-2. Is the above reasonable? Ibibiogrl's erroneous WP:AN3 report against Kwamikagami will also need attention. Meph^talk 23:31, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot understand why you deleted the Kinky Kwartet page. They are a real band. I saw them perform last weekend and was blown away by their harmony. They sang classic songs such as build me up buttercup, my girl, and wake me up before you go-go. My wife was actually brought to tears at how beautifully the three male singers harmonized. So, upon going home that day, I searched for them on Google and Wikipedia and could not find an article anywhere. Ergo, I tried to create one myself for this excellent band, but it gets deleted. How can I make this legitimate band an authentic and constant Wikipedia page? Pokemaster9000 (talk) 17:08, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article was not deleted because I had doubts about this band's existence. I do believe you when you say that they exist and are also very good. The article was deleted because it didn't explain why this band is important or significant.

Wikipedia, being an encyclopaedia, can only have articles on subjects that are already notable, meaning that they have received significant coverage in reliable, third-party sources (which excludes most blogs, facebook pages, forum posts and so on). In this case, your article failed to show that this band's notable (using the Wikipedia-specific term) and that it's even remarkable, for which there is a somewhat lower threshold. I'm sorry! Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 17:16, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Salvio,

I am curious why you decided to delete the basic information about our company. In no way were we advertising our company. If you feel we were in error in some way, please let us know so we can make those changes.

We really appreciate what you do!

Sincerely,

Daniel Christian Whatever Health LLC

I deleted the article because it did not explain how this particular company is important or significant.

As I've said above, regarding The Kinky Kwartet, Wikipedia can only have articles on subjects that are already notable, meaning that they have received significant coverage in reliable, third-party sources (which excludes most blogs, facebook pages, forum posts and so on). In this case, the article you created failed to show that this company's notable (using the term in its Wikipedia-specific meaning) and that it's even significant (again, using the term in its Wikipedia-specific meaning), for which there is a somewhat lower threshold. Again, I'm sorry! Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 17:48, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

With all due respect, I understand your reasoning. However, this group is quite notable in Djibouti. Perhaps that is why there is no page about them already. Nevertheless, I want to make one for them.

Unfortunately, unless you can provide reliable, third-party sources, the article will probably be deleted again; I'm about to userfy the page, however, to allow you to work on the article. Before moving it back, please, ask for feedback at WP:FEEDBACK. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 18:35, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Salvio. I will try to find the sources to prove it.

Hi Salvio guiliano,

Looks like I need a page deleted to move an article, probably because it has some few edits related to redirecting. It's Mohammad Amin al-Husayni. Take a look at my survey and see that the most used name in books is Haj Amin al-Husseini. In fact the current name is at the bottom of the bunch. Delete it quickly please so I can move it? Saw you are active at the moment. Thanks.

Sample search urls:

• All years: http://www.google.com/search?tbo=p&tbm=bks&q=%22Haj+Amin+al-Husseini%22&tbs=,bkt:b&num=100
• Years 2000-2011: http://www.google.com/search?tbo=p&tbm=bks&q=%22Haj+Amin+al-Husseini%22&tbs=,bkt:b,cdr:1,cd_min:Jan%201_2%202000,cd_max:Dec%2031_2%202011&num=100

- Ficusindica (talk) 18:08, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

From what I've seen, this is a bit of a controversial topic, so I don't think a bold move would be wise. My suggestion would be to start a move discussion (WP:RM is the place to go) and if, in a week, consensus is with you, the closing admin will move the page. As a side note, yes, you need an admin to move the page, because the deletion of the target page is required... Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 18:32, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

...for your post explaining the legal status of defendants during the appellate process in Italy. I had floundered around in various sources trying to figure that out a while back without success. What you modestly referred to as OR, I consider as gold. As far as I'm concerned, your "OR" is welcome on the talk page anytime. :)
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 03:02, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're much too kind.

I first started editing Wikipedia because the article, back in 2009, described the Italian legal system as some sort of an inquisition-like trial by ordeal, so I guess that page has become kind of a fil rouge in my wiki-career... Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 08:41, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Salvio,

Apologies but I am new to editing in wikipedia and it looks like I've got it wrong at the first time of trying. BSP International Foundations Ltd is still a thriving manufacturer, but I posted it as an item on wikipedia as I feel it has made a massive contribution to the construction industry during its 106 year history of manufacturing equipment. I stress it is not to advertise what we currently manufacture. The company has pioneered and invented its way through generations of piling techniques. There is also much about the companies history that is unknown by its current staff, so we were hoping that wiki editors can help us complete the story. To get things moving I copied content from the BSP website as I thought it would give a solid foundation to build on (no pun intended). I apreciate now, that this would cause copyright issues, but I hope I have now addressed this by adding "The text of this webpage, is available for modification and reuse under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License and the GNU Free Documentation License" to our BSP web pages relevant to this matter. I would be grateful for any help or guidance you could offer me in getting this page published. Best regards Richard.

Richard Melton (Director -BSP International Foundations Ltd)

That does indeed solve the copyright issue; but it does not solve the underlying problem, which is that the tone of the page is inappropriate... I believe you, when you say that you do not intend to advertise your company, but it can be very difficult to write about something you have strong ties to in a neutral way; there is also a problem of verifiability, because Wikipedia's rules require that everything be sourced to reliable, third-party sources. That's why Wikipedia has a policy on conflicts of interest, which strongly discourages edits to articles about subject you have strong ties to.

If you still would like to try creating an article for your company, you may wish to review the step by step instructions located here: Wikipedia:BFAQ#I think my organization deserves an article on Wikipedia but none exists. What can I do? (the rest of this page also contains very good advice). Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 09:07, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I did not like that user's name either. Thanks for blocking him, man! Mattcrowley2a (talk) 09:59, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! And thank you for reporting him. And welcome to Wikipedia too! You're doing a jolly good job! Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 10:03, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure what original research you thought I was entering in the Murder of Meredith Kercher post?

In this edit, you took the results of the autopsy performed on Meredith and the median time for gastric contents to empty into the duodenum from the a different source and you combined those two bits of information to draw a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources. This is not allowed and that's why I reverted your addition. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 20:59, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So I am not allowed to bring in scientific evidence about gastric emptying? Am I only allowed to cite what the pathologists in the case said, even if it is wrong?

In accordance with WP:SYN, it is unacceptable to combine sources (in this case, one primary and one secondary) to draw one or more conclusions that the sources themselves do not support. SuperMarioMan 21:18, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I added my comments to the discussion page. How is it determined whether and what gets moved to the article? There were a flurry of comments and now it seems to have come to a halt.Dougbremner (talk) 17:22, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects from User space to article space are deprecated. Is there precedent for this? I may have to take this to DRV. This redirect shouldn't be allowed. The Mark of the Beast (talk) 00:37, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's mainly redirects from mainspace to userspace that are deprecated, actually; in this case, two editors opined that the page should be turned into a redirect, because it received many incoming links from various websites. As one editor said: I am just not thrilled with the idea of sending almost 2000 people per month to a deleted user subpage. If you believe I was wrong in my evaluation of consensus (and of the common sense solution), please, do feel free to send to DRV.

Although not common, there are reasons for keeping cross-namespace, as you can see here. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 00:49, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I created the DRV discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2011 June 16, but it doesn't appear to be showing up on the DRV page. Do you have any idea why? The Mark of the Beast (talk) 01:20, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's now live and it's being discussed. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 09:42, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I added some history to this page as it seemed a bit 'light' on content but my amendment was deleted. It was lifted from the history section of their website and checked against other websites like The Manufacturer which I quoted. What do I need to take out to make sure it is OK for Wikipedia? I have looked at other manufacturer's pages like B Braun and they have loads more content. Many thanks for your help. Gord99999 (talk) 06:42, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, first of all, thanks for your contribution!

You're right: the page is a bit short, but you cannot copy text from that was published elsewhere and paste it to Wikipedia, because that violates both copyright law and Wikipedia's policies. And, in this particular case, also the tone was inappropriate, as it was not neutral: it looked like advertisement. That's why it was removed.

If you wish to edit the article, to improve it, you're certainly most welcome to do so, but please, do so using your own words, providing reliable, third-party sources, if you can, and keeping a neutral tone. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 09:50, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]