User talk:CactusWriter

Welcome! If you need help with something, feel free to ask. To leave a message for me, press the "new section" tab at the top of the page. Remember to sign your message with ~~~~. I will respond to all civil messages. If you are requesting administrative help and I am not currently active, here are some other options for you: If you need to get a repeat vandal blocked, report them to Administrator Intervention against Vandalism. If you need a page to be protected from editing, use Requests for page protection. If you would like to request rollback rights or account creator rights, ask at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions. If your problem does not fit into any of the above criteria, and your issue is urgent, make a post on the Administrators' noticeboard, the Incidents noticeboard, or one of the other noticeboards. If you want to ask for help, you can ask at the help desk for questions about Wikipedia, and at the reference desk for more general questions. You may also simply ask a question on your talk page and add {{helpme}} before your question. This will attract the attention of experienced users who will most likely be able to help you. Administrators, if you see that I've made a mistake, please fix it. I will not consider it wheel-warring if you reverse my admin actions, however I do expect you to leave a message here explaining your reasons.

edit count | edit summary usage Archives 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Deletion of "Bangladesh Aquarists‎" Hi, CactusWriter you didn't mention why did you deleted my article Bangladesh Aquarists . I ‎wrote that this society already has significant notability to have an Wikipedia presence. The problem is I cannot provide references from well known media because most Bangladeshi media remove their past pages from their archive. Thanks in advance. I'v found an article on similar organization en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorado_Aquarium_Society‎ . This article also don't have reliable sources though it has notability. Bangladesh Aquarists has adequate notability. The what's wrong with Bangladesh Aquarists article? Thanks in advance. rijans (talk) 07:47, 27 August 2013 (UTC) rijans (talk) 07:39, 27 August 2013 (UTC) rijans (talk) 07:39, 27 August 2013 (UTC) Hi, Rijans007. The article about the Bangladesh Aquarists organization was deleted per WP:A7 speedy deletion criteria because there was no assertion of significance. Significance is generally established by significant coverage about the org in independent reliable sources. Please note that the mere existence of an organization is not enough to establish this significance. (Also note that the existence of other articles on Wikipedia is not considered a valid argument for inclusion. You may wish to read WP:OTHER.) More importantly, Rijans007, please be aware that it was necessary for me to mark all of the images which you uploaded for deletion , because they were blatant copyright violations copied from various on-line sources -- yet you had marked them as your own work. I suggest you familiarize with Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright policy before uploading anymore images to Wikipedia or Commons. — CactusWriter (talk) 17:39, 27 August 2013 (UTC) I admit the wrongs and odds I have done. But many images are my own work - although you mentioned all. CactusWriter , my last question is what will be the reason if you approve my article. Thanks. rijans 17:19, 29 August 2013 (UTC) 17:13, 29 August 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rijans007 (talk • contribs) Hi, Rijans007. I do note that many images you uploaded last May were properly licensed on Flickr -- but I referred to the pictures on this article. And please note that even if you have cropped the picture, it is still not your "own work", but remains a derivative of the original author and copyrighted to them. If you wish to try and recreate the article again, I suggest you read WP:FIRSTARTICLE and then use WP:ARTICLES FOR CREATION so that experienced editors can advise you through the process. Good luck. — CactusWriter (talk) 18:28, 4 September 2013 (UTC) Simona Williams article. Holy crap & Congratulations! You just manged to re-write the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simona_Williams, adding most or all the factual information I've got on file for it. Considering that you just wrote up pretty much exactly what I in April.2013 had intended, then: it really truly pains me to point out that there (in my eyes) is good reason for the article to be deleted. The deletion discussion is at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Simona_Williams However, in case the outcome of the deletion process is to keep the article, then: The infobox needs correction: She was born "Simona Anastasia Fleur Levin" as is correctly written in the article, but the infobox says "Simone Levin". The name she's been using while living in Denmark, and is in Denmark also known by, thru all her life (or at least since her teenage years) is "Simone Levin". The name "Simona Williams" came by marrige to Chad Williams, whom she divorced. (ref. http://www.bt.dk/kendte/klassebilledet-afsloerer-dig-simone which states: "Heller ikke i ægteskabet med den amerikanske læge Chad Williams, som hun var gift med i ti år, var der nogen åbenhed om Simones sande alder.") BTW: In case the age issue (yet again) gets disputed, then another school photo from 1984 also exists! (but the already referenced model photo from 31.Dec.1980, at age 16, is as solid evidence as it gets ... well, only short of a photocopy of her birth-certificate) off-topic, from the top of your userpage: >> ... in the lovely land of herring Popsicles.<< a hva' ?!? Sildeispinde?!? Er det en særegen (og for mig absolut ukendt) specialitet i Thyborøn, Esbjerg, eller ... det må være noget Jydsk! ... ja, sig det bare: "Du må være Køvenhavner". Korrekt! ;-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Something20130828 (talk • contribs) 06:10, 30 August 2013 (UTC) Hi, Something20130828. I added sources and copyedited the article for my own benefit -- it always helps me decide whether to keep or to delete an article listed at AFD. I disagree with your delete !vote at the AFD because we do not assess an individual based upon the quality of the work. Whether we personally like or dislike a tv show or a celebrity is irrelevant to the discussion. All that matters is whether or not there has been significant coverage of them in independent reliable sources. Thus passing Wikipedia's WP:GNG guideline for notability. In this case there was. However, I added a "weak delete" !vote at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Simona Williams based upon the concept of WP:ONEEVENT. Sild ispind er en joke, selvfølgelig. Og vi bor i nærheden til København - der ejede et lille hus på Amager siden 2000. Ha' det godt. — CactusWriter (talk) 18:47, 4 September 2013 (UTC) Hi/Hej I've never seen Gordon Willey referred to with his full middle name, either without it or with just the initial. So I think you should move it back where it was located, and start a move discussion./Jeg har aldrig set Gordon Willey betegnet med sit fulde mellemnavn (kun som Gordon R. Willey) saa jeg synes du skal flytte hans artikel tilbage hvor den var.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 17:58, 11 September 2013 (UTC) Hi, Maunus. So you mean you've never seen it listed as Gordon Randolph Willey on title pages like at Harvard University, or the JAR, or the Encyclopedia Brittanica or the National Academy of Sciences or The life of Gordon Randolph Willey, 1913–2002, etc.? I don't really have any affiliation with the page -- I ran across it today after spotting redlinks to Gordon Randolph Willey and found there was already an article. It had been poorly written and outside of our MOS for several years -- so I only edited it to a more presentable standard; and then moved it to the title commonly used on most formal bio presentations about him. Frankly, I find most arguments about page titles to be of rather silly and of very little import (redirect serves their purpose) -- but if you wish to revert the move, then suit yourself. Just please make sure that a redirect does remain so that no redlinks will return. Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk) 18:51, 11 September 2013 (UTC) Not being an admin I cant revert the move. Google gives <"Gordon R. Willey" archeology> 173,000 hits, and <"Gordon Randolph Willey"> 32,900. You do know that we have a move discussion proces so that we can discuss moves before they happen, which if you had used it would mean that I don't have to bother you by asking you to revert it nor in doing so subject myself to your snark? By the way it is a convention to always use the full name spelled out in obituaries, so they are generally not very good for establishing the most common usage.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 19:21, 11 September 2013 (UTC) I didn't realize your administrator tools had been removed -- otherwise I wouldn't have suggested you to revert, but rather done it myself. And you do know that WP:REQUESTED MOVES operates on the initial statement: If you have no reason to expect a dispute concerning a move, be bold and move the page. -- rather than starting another move discussion. As I stated already, I have no dog in this hunt other than to attempt to clean up the text. I'll revert and leave it to project members to care for the article and any redlinks to it. Good luck. — CactusWriter (talk) 20:44, 11 September 2013 (UTC) Richard Hopkins hoax Hi Cactus, good job on the Richard Hopkins hoax. (I'm curious to learn/know, how did that article get on your radar? Also curious, it seems to me reasonable the editor-author s/b banned from WP on the basis of creating a hoax article, do you know how that is typically implemented or even if it is implemented at all in similar cases?) Thank you. Ihardlythinkso (talk) 07:37, 14 September 2013 (UTC) Hi, Ihardlythinkso. Thanks for your input at the AFD. I ran across the article after tracking the edit history of an IP account -- the IP had commented recently at the WP:List of hoaxes page and their history indicated mostly vandalism edits. Their single edit on the Richard Hopkins talk page led me to investigate it. Yes, you are correct that blatant hoaxers are typically blocked indefinitely -- over the years I have blocked far too many of those types of vandalism accounts, unfortunately. However, I do first wait for comments on any deletion discussion just in case my analysis is faulty. Afterwards, I'll take the appropriate action. (WP:HOAX may provide you with more answers.) By the way, it appears that you have access to the ECO C volume. Could you please check the C77 listings and read whether or not Hopkins name is listed in any footnotes there? I would like to know what, if anything, is written there. I'd appreciate your help. Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk) 16:04, 14 September 2013 (UTC) I responded re ECOs on the AfD page. Thanks for explaining how you achieved detection. Sincere, Ihardlythinkso (talk) 23:14, 14 September 2013 (UTC) Themos Mexis Page Hi CactusWriter. Thank you for your info on how to avoid being biased. Before I was able to action changes to the profile, it was speed deleted. I am rewriting the profile so that it isn't biased. Though I wouldn't have thought that a paragraph stating that someone has certain qualifications, lives somewhere and a brief outline of what they have done be construed as biased. If I was to send you a copy of the new script before it went live would you be able to give it the once over? Last thing I want is for the page and my account to be blacklisted. Thanks Mexisdesign (talk) 00:03, 17 September 2013 (UTC) Hi, Mexisdesign. I may not be readily available, so I suggest that you use Wikipedia:Articles for creation -- editors there can review your article and address any concerns before it is moved into the Wikipedia mainspace. Please note that any article, especially a biographical one, requires significant coverage of the subject by independent reliable sources (for example, newspaper, magazines or journals.) And these must be cited. Facebook pages or the subject's own website are not independent and are invalid as secondary sources for text. Good luck with your editing. — CactusWriter (talk) 00:12, 17 September 2013 (UTC) vandalism in Lurs and Luristan page Hi CactusWriter "HistoryofIran" user vandalism in Lurs and Luristan page. He remove All Historical images and "Lur people of iran" map no valid reason. I ask you to stop doing this "HistoryofIran" user. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:HistoryofIran https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorestan_Province https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lurs Thank youSetenlyacc (talk) 05:46, 19 September 2013 (UTC) I was considering taking both of them to ANI. The articles they are edit-warring on are a mess. However, I discovered that Setenlyacc ignored my warnings about copyvio and, as I did earlier with HistoryofIran, I have blocked him indefinitely which means he is blocked until we can be sure he understands our copyvio policy and can edit it without breaking it. Dougweller (talk) 07:11, 19 September 2013 (UTC) Thank you for taking care of this, Doug. It's much appreciated. — CactusWriter (talk) 14:24, 20 September 2013 (UTC) No problem. This has led me to raise the issue of images of BLPs in articles such as Lurs at Wikipedia talk:BLP - people just add images to articles without reliable sources, even when the subject's artcle doesn't make the claim. Dougweller (talk) 18:20, 20 September 2013 (UTC) Talkback Hello, CactusWriter. You have new messages at Dougweller's talk page. Message added 08:59, 2 October 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Dougweller (talk) 08:59, 2 October 2013 (UTC) Chip Chocolate Hello, CactusWriter. I see you deleted Chip Chocolate; could you please restore it to User:Launchballer/Chip Chocolate because he has just had a #68 hit on the UK Singles Chart thus passing WP:MUSICBIO criterion #2? Thank you.--Launchballer 21:27, 2 October 2013 (UTC) --Prograce (talk) 05:46, 3 October 2013 (UTC)  Done. — CactusWriter (talk) 22:13, 2 October 2013 (UTC) Thanks for clearing up my Edits Hi CactusWriter, Thanks for giving me a hand with the Mandukasana page, i was hoping the poem would generally be presumed to be mine but howandever :) --Prograce (talk) 05:46, 3 October 2013 (UTC) Hi, Prograce. To edit the close paraphrasing was no problem -- I was happy to help your effort. And Rabindranath Tagore's beautiful poem on your user page deserved proper attribution... but, yeah, for a second there, I presumed your brilliance. Hope that was enough. ;) — CactusWriter (talk) 16:31, 3 October 2013 (UTC) Ditto. For all your work on the Gerald May article which I created. I'd give you a BarnStar but I don't remember how and I'm sure you are too wise to care about such things. Happy editing! SmokeyTheCat 08:07, 3 October 2013 (UTC) Thanks, Smokey! Glad we could keep the article. And "too wise" has never been a common descriptor for me -- so I'll try to keep that in my mind. Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk) 16:32, 3 October 2013 (UTC) Hey Why did you delete my film page? it was completely legit, and it WASN'T FAKE, i was developing it, which is the reason why THERE WAS NO INFOBOX OR POSTER, you better listen to me, or else i'll never come here again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hug0905 (talk • contribs) 01:32, 23 October 2013 (UTC) Please read both WP:MOVIE and WP:PROMOTION. It can be tempting to write about yourself or projects which you have created, but Wikipedia is not for self-promotion. You should examine the reasons each of the pages you have created have been deleted. If you wish to contribute to Wikipedia, then it is best to first focus on improving pages which have already been created so that you can learn the necessary criteria for an encyclopedic article. — CactusWriter (talk) 01:46, 23 October 2013 (UTC) Deletion Hi CactusWriter, I saw that my page for A Couple of Boys Have the Best Week Ever was deleted. I understand why, I just did not mean to save that article as a page. I thought I was in my sandbox and logged out before double checking. I was hoping you could take the flag off of the page so I can continue it. Thanks, Wanderlustjourney — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wanderlustjourney (talk • contribs) 04:48, 23 October 2013 (UTC) Hi, Wanderlustjourney. I understand. No problem -- there is a definite learning curve on Wikipedia. To avoid that kind of mistake in the future, create a subpage in your userspace for articles on which you are working. For example, I have created the page User:Wanderlustjourney/A Couple of Boys Have the Best Week Ever for you. You can build the article there at your own pace. When it is ready, use WP:MOVE to rename it without the "User:Wanderlustjourney/" prefix and it will be active for reviewing in the mainspace. The previous deletion message that you currently see for the article will no longer be seen -- it does not affect the recreation of an article -- nor does a tag about an empty page created by a new user reflect on that user. It is not uncommon; happens to all of us on occasion. By the way, I suggest first reviewing WP:NBOOK to understand the criteria for book titles that are considered notable for inclusion on Wikipedia. Good luck with your editing. — CactusWriter (talk) 16:14, 23 October 2013 (UTC) Larry Santos albums Hi. I'm surprised by your comment on turning down my speedy request for Larry Santos albums, to the effect that the PROD was sufficient. I'm trying to understand the merit, if an article meets the criteria for speedy deletion, in leaving it in place for a week (and giving its creator a chance to remove the tag in the meantime), solely because an editor who didn't see what I saw happened to get there first and tagged it PROD. —Largo Plazo (talk) 03:52, 12 November 2013 (UTC) I've endorsed the proposed deletion, which would bypass the seven day wait.--Launchballer 10:01, 12 November 2013 (UTC) Hi, Launchballer. Thanks for endorsing the PROD. It helps the deleting editor but, AFAIK, it doesn't change the waiting period. If there is some guideline that states that, please let me know because I have entirely missed it. (Wouldn't be the first time.) — CactusWriter (talk) 16:59, 12 November 2013 (UTC) Hi, Largo Plazo. There was nothing wrong with your CSD tag and I'm sorry if my decline message implied that. My reasons for declining here were: 1.) Time was not of the essence -- that is, the article didn't qualify as immediately detrimental and therefore other previous considerations could be made. 2.) The article had been visited by a couple of other editors who did see the same thing as you (a duplication of information) -- the first tagged it for improvement, the other prodded it for that reason. Since we do allow discography splits from articles (when properly expanded, of course), it's okay to give the editor a little time to prove the merit of it. 3.) IMO, when an inexperienced editor is trying to make genuine contributions but failing to communicate, PRODs and AFDs will draw an editor into discussion better than CSDs and warning templates. And this new editor does appear to need some advice. I see now that they has been creating some articles of borderline quality. And there has been a complete lack of response from them towards your CSD tags and warnings on their articles. That is understandably very frustrating for you. I can write them a more personal note to see if they can understand the current problems with their submissions. And if they are still unwilling to talk, then AFD discussions are excellent for establishing consensus for future actions. — CactusWriter (talk) 16:59, 12 November 2013 (UTC) Thanks, CactusWriter, I appreciate your thoughtful response! FYI, in case you didn't come across my mentions of it, there also seems to be a bit of a conflict of interest in at least some of the articles (mentions of "Laurie Maitland" versus the user's name, Maitlandplace; I found signs of Laurie Maitland's involvement with a couple of the other topics even when she wasn't mentioned in the article). —Largo Plazo (talk) 18:07, 12 November 2013 (UTC) Motor Stories Deleted Hello, I am inquiring about my Motor Stories page that was recently flagged and deleted for content copyright issues. The copyright infringement was flagged from my own blog on the same subject. Since I am the original author of both the blog and the wikipedia site I would like to get the Wikipedia site back up and running. I sent an email from both my univeristy email (with which the blog is associated) and with my regular gmail account (which is associated with my wikipedia account). I have yet to hear back on either email accounts and was curious as to the situation. Thank you, Rachel Yerger RachelLee04 (talk) 14:16, 18 November 2013 (UTC) Hi, Rachel Yerger. I appreciate your efforts to comply with our copyright procedure. Because of the volume of mail at the OTRS office, it can take a week or two before there is a response. Someone will reply to your email, indicating whether the content and your license is acceptable. If it is, then an administrator will restore the page and indicate that the confirmation of the license has been received. Please note, though, that acceptance of the copyright does not necessarily mean that the text is acceptable. All text must still meet the standard Wikipedia guidelines for verifiability, neutral point-of-view and Notability. It's a good idea to review those pages and to edit accordingly. Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk) 18:58, 18 November 2013 (UTC) Baden Colin Beaumont Hi CatusWriter you deleted my family work and research on Mary Elizabeth Lawson Actress yes your write having problems with ref as new and wiki not easy of use so can you replace my work on Mary Lawson aka my Grandmother if you would like to help with ref to all the evidence I have that is fine. as you know there was a newspaper national sensation with the camera man and ten Fred Perry well I have the reason why this being Baden Colin Beaumont Ie my father. so apart from adding ref in all is true. am looking forward to your response from mark grandson of Mary Elizabeth Lawson — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.4.241.89 (talk) 16:38, 24 November 2013 (UTC) Hi. The biographical article that you created did not have any references and therefore fails our guidelines at verifiability. In addition, even if true -- there was no assertion as to the significance of the individual. Simple heritage or familial background is not a case for notability. (See WP:NOTINHERITED.) I also suggest that you familiarize yourself with the Wikipedia policy on Conflict of Interest. At this time, I do not see any sufficient reason to include the alleged family information into Wikipedia. And I strongly advise against creating biographical articles about your family. — CactusWriter (talk) 19:28, 24 November 2013 (UTC) CactusWriter: I don't know if you watch Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard, but Pendragon007 started a thread there. I've replied to it, but you may want to take a look at it. The thread is titled #Mary Elizabeth Lawson (actress). —C.Fred (talk) 17:43, 25 November 2013 (UTC) C.Fred, thanks for notifying me about this. I've now read the noticeboard as well as the conversation on your talk page. And I think I should refrain from commenting there -- Pendragon007 appears to be rather upset at me. If I have parsed their comments correctly, their statement that as for family accounts they will not be in written form as Mary Lawson son was kept a secret, then I doubt their family claims could ever be added to Wikipedia. Given their idiosyncratic language skills, any further editing by them may came down to a matter of competency. Anyway, your responses to P007 have been fair and well-reasoned. If you wish for my comments at anytime, please let me know. I'm sorry that this matter got dumped on your doorstep. Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk) 22:44, 25 November 2013 (UTC) Deletion of "Voice to Skull" Hi, CactusWriter, I just registered for my account and are new to editing and creating articles to Wikipedia. Any clarification regarding why the article in question is deleted would be appreciated and if necessary I will explain or provide more sources to prove my case. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Synsepalum2013 (talk • contribs) 01:51, 24 November 2013 (UTC) Hi, Synsepalum2013. Thanks for registering and welcome to Wikipedia. I think the deletion of your article was a mistake and I have restored it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Voice to Skull. The problem was the absence of reliable references which makes any "fringe" topic seem to be made-up. But, after a little research, I did some copy-editing and added a couple of refs. Please note that we already have an article about psychotronics and your V2K article might be more properly merged into that one. In the meantime, you can continue to expand your Article For Creation and the editors there will help you with any problems and with moving the article into mainspace. If you have further questions, please feel free to ask. Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk) 19:08, 24 November 2013 (UTC) Thank you for your prompt response and for rescuing my article. Your rewriting is very well done and since I can't provide any more information in this subject with reliable sources, I'll just go ahead and submit the article and hopefully it will be moved to the mainspace and others will chime in. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Synsepalum2013 (talk • contribs) 22:26, 24 November 2013 (UTC) Hi, Cactuswriter. I have made a lot of improvement to the article in question but it has been declined by another editor. Could you please take a look at the article and give me some advice on further improvement? TIA for your help. — Synsepalum2013 (talk) 05:03, 12 December 2013 (UTC) Hi, Synsepalum2013. I suggest that you discuss this with User:Bellerophon and seek their advice on ways to improve the article. The topic is not one with which I am familiar and I'm afraid that I don't have the time to investigate the subject right now. However, when creating an article, it is necessary to use only those reliable sources which actually cover the topic (such as [1], [2], [3]) -- and not to add, infer or combine information in the article which is not specifically discussed by a reliable source. You can read through WP:SYNTHESIS and WP:ORIGINAL RESEARCH. These explain some core policies on writing for an encyclopedia -- and will help you in further discussions on building an article. (By the way, at a glance, it seems you are trying to expand the topic to include MK-ULTRA but Wikipedia already has an article on that subject.) Good luck with your editing. — CactusWriter (talk) 18:17, 13 December 2013 (UTC) Thank you for your advice CactusWriter and I really appreciate the reliable sources you provided. Have a wonderful day :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Synsepalum2013 (talk • contribs) 17:09, 14 December 2013 (UTC) MusicBlvd.com Links Whitelisted on Wikipedia Hi Mayast, We would like to advocate for MusicBlvd.com, a competitor to MetroLyrics, both licensed lyrics providers. We are trying to get Wikipedia to verify that MusicBlvd.com is indeed compliant with copyright and and lyric licensing laws. You can see MusicBlvd's response here - Dear Wikipedia, We Love Musicians More than Lawyers. This is in response to this Wikipedia thread by other editors https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Songs#Music_Blvd_lyrics_Links MusicBlvd.com should be added under the "Lyrics and Video" section in the Wikipedia page Wikipedia:WikiProject Songs Can you please help us in setting the record straight? Thanks Trystanburke (talk) 23:05, 21 December 2013 (UTC)