User talk:Cntras

Cntras is busy and is going to be on Wikipedia in off-and-on doses, and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Archives

Junk

Ahhh yessss, a cheeseburger! My favourite! Thank you kindly for the note of encouragement and appreciation. Have yourself a great day, stay well, and happy editing! :)  -- WikHead (talk) 14:56, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Cntras. You have new messages at DRAGON BOOSTER's talk page.
Message added 16:45, 23 June 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 16:45, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cntras, I came across the article Teamwork PM I think it does not meet Wikipedia notability standards. I looked at the editing history, when the article was written it was nominated for speedy deletion but the original author simply removed the deletion tag. I'd appreciate some explanations on how this is possible and how the process works. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Guy.other (talk • contribs) 09:30, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Guy.other. As you're probably aware, users cannot remove speedy deletion templates from their own page. So with this in mind, you could restore the G11 tag. However, a better option would be to nominate it for deletion via PROD or AfD. -Cntras (talk) 11:45, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick reply and the useful links. That's what I thought and being new to Wikipedia editing, this is why I'm asking. I might be missing something but when I look at the page editing history I see someone added the speedy deletion request:

13:39, 22 April 2010‎ Xtzou (talk | contribs)‎ . . (1,386 bytes) (+12)‎ . . (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD G11). (TW)) (undo)

Then the original author removes it after a few minutes:

13:46, 22 April 2010‎ Mercuryfrost (talk | contribs)‎ . . (1,396 bytes) (+10)‎ . . (undo)

14:44, 22 April 2010‎ Mercuryfrost (talk | contribs)‎ . . (1,375 bytes) (-21)‎ . . (undo)

I thought that in the process of deletion the notability is discussed somewhere but I couldn't find any information in the article Talk page. Can I see somewhere why the article was eventually not deleted and what led to this decision? I tried finding it on the "Search current and archived AfD discussions" but couldn't find it.

I would also appreciate your thoughts, Do you think this article is actually notable? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Guy.other (talk • contribs) 13:50, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You may have confused CSD with the AFD. For CSD, an article is deleted on the discretion of the reviewing administrator. There is no discussion because it is essentially a 'quick fail' procedure for (generally) non-contentious deletions. AFD on the other hand is mediated via discussions of notability and other relevant policies. As for the notability of Teamwork PM, you could probably argue that it fails WP:GNG. -Cntras (talk) 14:29, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help. I tried following the guide "How to nominate a single page for deletion" on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion#How_to_list_pages_for_deletion. I managed to complete steps I and II but I'm not able to complete III. I tried following the steps, adding the line "subst:afd1 | pg=Teamwork PM" (with double "{") at the top of the list and writing "Adding Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Teamwork PM" in the edit summary but it doesn't expand correctly. Any idea on what I'm doing wrong? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Guy.other (talk • contribs) 13:51, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

First, you should replace the content on the Teamwork PM AfD page with: {{subst:afd2 | pg=Teamwork PM | cat=web| text=The article fails [[WP:GNG]]. I could not find independent reliable sources about it}}. Then, add {{subst:afd3 | pg=Teamwork PM}} here. -Cntras (talk) 14:55, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again, I think I finally managed to get it right. Hope it's fine that I added it to the 25th and it's already the 26th. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Guy.other (talk • contribs) 07:37, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article was nominated on the 25th, so it should be fine. Everything else seems to be in order. -Cntras (talk) 12:12, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Cntras. You have new messages at Electriccatfish2's talk page.
Message added 23:52, 26 June 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Electriccatfish2 (talk) 23:52, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - I've removed rollback from your account as per your request on my talk page. Sorry for the delay, but I've been out of the country without internet access for the last few days. If you change your mind, let me know or re-request it at WP:RFR.  An optimist on the run! 18:40, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine. Thanks! -Cntras (talk) 06:11, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! :) Oz ^talk 13:25, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

	WP:Globalization
	Welcome to WikiProject Globalization! We look forward to your contributions towards improving Wikipedia's coverage of globalization. Please feel free to ask questions or make suggestions on the project's talk page.

Meclee (talk) 21:02, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is an automated message. Your editor review is scheduled to be closed on 5 July 2012 because it will have been open for more than 30 days and inactive for more than 7 days. You can keep it open longer by posting a comment to the review page requesting more input. Adding <!--noautoarchive--> to the review page will prevent further automated actions. AnomieBOT⚡ 00:26, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Msys Test Automation Solutions. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. The IP user is perfectly entitled to remove the speedy deletion tag, unless you can prove s/he is the author of the page. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 14:27, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is highly likely given that the IP attempted to add the same company to this list just last week and then suddenly returns to remove a CSD tag to a newly created article by the same name. Coincidence? I think not. -Cntras (talk) 14:33, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think it isn't clear enough to add it back, especially since, when an article of the same name was at articles for creation the IP didn't edit it, and the contest reason given by the author and IP are quite different see here. I am not saying this is true and even close to true, however if the IP has an interest in it (say they work there) then it's perfectly reasonable to suggest that they could be different people.

Well an admin has deleted it and it's been recreated so feel free to take it to AFD. Thanks for talkback template :). Regards, Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 14:57, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It was deleted under the rationale that I originally tagged it - G11. The evidence is overwhelming. -Cntras (talk) 15:05, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I agree with you that it qualifies for G11. But it's back there if you want to take it to AFD. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated.

The point is that if the administrator thought that it was indeed a different person then he/she wouldn't have bypassed the PROD to speedy the article-Cntras (talk) 15:11, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps, but it was deleted moments after the PROD, but it doesn't really matter all that much. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 15:23, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am still unsure whether my photo is suitable for Wikipedia. The wikicommons page is confusing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyresire (talk • contribs) 02:42, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cyresire. When you go through the uploading process you will be asked about the source of the photo. Simply choose the option that best suits your given image and you'll be notified as to whether or not it is appropriate to upload. -Cntras (talk) 04:10, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, I don't think I can upload it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyresire (talk • contribs) 07:52, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Helmy Bahgat Badawi (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Civil law

Social structure of China (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Imperial China

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:40, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Cntras. You have new messages at GregJackP's talk page.
Message added 05:10, 16 July 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

GregJackP Boomer! 05:10, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Cntras. You have new messages at [[User talk:Eastlaw#Speedy decline on Yamang pisikal|Eastlaw's talk page]].
Message added 09:42, 16 July 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Eastlaw ^talk ⁄ _contribs 09:42, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Cntras. You have new messages at 50.131.220.134's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, Cntras. You have new messages at 50.131.220.134's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello there.

What is with the speedy deletion? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ebram72 (talk • contribs) 02:23, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ebram. Your article was deleted because it did not meet the guidelines for inclusion. Specifically, the problem is that it was written in an overtly promotional manner. If you want to learn more about the appropriate style of writing you could take a look at WP:YFA and WP:PROMO. -CTS talk 04:27, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Cntras. You have new messages at SwisterTwister's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, Cntras. You have new messages at TheIrishWarden's talk page.
Message added 08:12, 21 July 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Thєíríshwαrdєn - írísh αnd prσud (talk) 08:12, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello I wish to find out exactly why this article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/ECDL_Foundation is being rejected as it appears to me as being unbiased , neutral and well sourced. Please give an example of why it reads like an advertisement as you say.

Thanks, ecdl. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ecdl (talk • contribs) 10:28, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ECDL. I declined your initial submission because it seems to read more like press release or a general prospectus of the organisation rather than a neutral encyclopaedic article. The general tone of the article is promotional in nature. I would encourage you to read WP:PROMO, and WP:YFA before attempting to address the above issues. Also I've noticed that you may have a conflict of interest as it appears that you are representing the organisation in question. -CTS talk 10:43, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cntras. I appreciate your feedback. I will add additional information such as an article that was published in the miami herald. It may take some time as I am new to this process. Please note that I have read through the guidelines and am doing my best to comply. My main purpose for doing this is the following. Ono is to help spread the word and show the world that art can heal and the other is to help alleviate the pain and suffering of the masses by showing them cost effective ways to survive and save our environment at the same time. Therefore, there is no "puffery" in my bio. I am self effacing and do not have an ego. Through bridging humanity I am starting to submit proposals for humanitarian projects. By the way, bridging humanity is strictly a volunteer based non profit. All money raised goes to support the less fortunate and is not used for salaries, administrative or operating costs. This bio is not meant to raise money. It is meant to help share information with people who may want to learn more about what I am doing when fact finding is required. I wanted you to know this so you can further help me to streamline this project. Lastly, you may want to check my website www.bridging-humanity.org so you can have a better understanding what we do. Please feel free to let me know what other information would be useful to strengthen the sources section. Thank you Cntras! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tinacornely (talk • contribs) 14:02, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]