JohnCD

Welcome to my talk page. to leave me a message. If you have come here about a page I deleted, you will probably find the explanation here; if that does not answer your question, click the link just above to leave me a message. Please mention the name of the page, and sign your post with four "tilde" characters ~~~~ so that I know who you are. If I have left a message on your talk page, please reply there; I am watching it. If you leave a message here I will usually reply here, but if my reply contains advice I hope you will find useful, I may place it on your talk page. (Talk page stalkers: you are welcome; if you see no reply here, there is probably one on the other talk page; I have decided to stop making a note here when I reply there). You may E-mail me via the "E-mail this user" link under "Toolbox" in the left-hand sidebar, but you will get a faster response here; I suggest you do not use e-mail unless you need privacy. I will normally reply on your talk page, not by e-mail.

G12

I had thought that an actual unattributed copy-and-paste of an existing article to draft space would qualify for G12. Thank you. I see that an admin agrees. I run into this situation on Articles for Creation occasionally. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:33, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Well, it's a bit of a technical violation, but it's generally not a good idea to have multiple copies floating around, in case they get edited in parallel. I do think it's desirable to explain the reason to the copier, who may well be puzzled by a simple copyvio notice, and I have done that for this one. JohnCD (talk) 20:38, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Creating multiple copies happens in several ways. Occasionally enthusiastic inexperienced editors create several copies of the same article with different titles because they don't know how redirects work and don't realize that multiple copies will get out of sync. In that case the answer is of course to replace all of the non-primary pages with redirects and to explain to the enthusiastic inexperienced editor. Creating multiple copies of drafts in draft space is relatively common for at least two reasons. The first is good-faith confusion, in which an editor thinks that, when their draft is declined, they have to enter it all over again to resubmit it. This is well-meaning, but it really mucks up the job of reviewing. The second is gaming the system, in which an author knowingly creates multiple copies, either in draft space or in article space , or sometimes in Wikipedia space because they don't know what Wikipedia space is, or in one case today in portal space. However, none of those are actual rip-offs. In this case, it was an actual copy-and-paste from main space into draft space. That's only copyright infringement because of the highly technical way that we have defined copyright, but it is plagiarism, and that is reason enough. What also happens occasionally is an editor writing and submitting a draft that is already in article space. What also happens occasionally is two (or three) different editors independently creating drafts on the same topic. That gets detected when the reviewer tries to move the draft into draft space with the proper title and it hits the existing draft, and then the reviewer has to ask the two authors if they can coordinate with each other. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:59, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Omixon

Hello,

I've tried to edit the Wiki page of our company, but the whole page was deleted. The name was "Omixon". Can we restore the original page we had before my edits? Something was against your policy, but I'm not sure which part of my edits was wrong and caused the deletion.

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.133.23.193 (talk) 15:38, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

I guess you are user Norinagy (talk · contribs). (It helps communication if you sign in before editing). The important point, which we do not explain clearly enough to new users, is that Wikipedia is not a place for companies to tell the world about themselves. I will reply in more detail on your talk page tomorrow; in the meantime, read the Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide and User:JohnCD/Not a noticeboard. JohnCD (talk) 22:14, 25 November 2016 (UTC) WP:SOAP

Thank for your help. It was absolutely my fault what happened I'll review your suggestions and edit the page accordingly. When you suggest "add to the article references that show significant coverage of the company from sources independent of it, particularly those that verify what the article says " you mean atricles, scientific discussions? Where and how can I add these references? Thank you in advance! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Norinagy (talk • contribs) 12:16, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

@Norinagy: sorry for delay in replying. What sort of references: anything that discusses the company in some depth, probably articles in newspapers or trade press, not press releases, see WP:Identifying reliable sources. Basically, for any statement in the article, there should ideally be a reference to answer the question "How do you know? Who says?" For how to add references, see WP:Referencing for beginners. JohnCD (talk) 22:51, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Peerless Network

Hi JohnCD - you deleted the page I created Peerless Network - although it doesn't appear that you left a reason why on the deletion page. I'm assuming that you don't believe that it qualifies as "notable" although at this point, I've no idea how to make it more so, as I've provided ALL the links that I can to document the contribution that this company has made to the telecommunications space - in terms of the services they provide and the patents that they've been awarded. So as my last ditch effort to prove "notability" I'll describe Peerless' contributions here to you - in the hopes that you'll be convinced to "approve" the article as a permanent addition to Wikipedia. Peerless Network provides a service that is an alternative to the traditional ILEC business model in that it allows most telecommunications providers to interconnect amongst each other and therefore significantly reducing costs. This process and their switch design (for which they received a patent) made this new business model possible, and is a major contribution to why the majority of Americans and US businesses now enjoy significantly reduced telecommunications rates. And then Peerless invented a process (for which they they also received a patent) that allows a wireless call to move seamlessly between wifi connections and cellular connections - which again, makes the process of placing a wireless phone call significantly less expensive, as well as improving quality and opening up a host of new consumer and business services. Are there a ton of articles about these technologies? - Nope - it is the underlying mechanism that allows services to be offered (by all major carriers), and is not the "marketed" service themselves - and thus, not anything that anyone really wants to write about. BUT without these technologies, the telecommunications industry would not have progressed to its current state. I'll ask you to reconsider your deletion - on the grounds that Peerless Network has made significant contributions to the US telecommunications industry - and thus is notable for its contributions and achievements - documented via the receipt of many patents. Thank you Jlk0221 (talk) 14:53, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

@Jlk0221: the page is not deleted - as a result of the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peerless Network, Inc. it was moved to the Draft space at Draft:Peerless Network where you can work on it. The admin who closed the discussion and moved it left a note on your talk page to tell you where it is. All that I deleted was an orphaned redirect left behind at Peerless Network, Inc. when you moved the page to a title without "Inc". I will give some advice on your talk page in a day or so. JohnCD (talk) 16:23, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

DELETE REQUESTS

I SELECTED THOSE PAGE ONLY THOSE MUST BE DELETE... THANKYOU — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mission Kashmir III (talk • contribs) 14:31, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

@Mission Kashmir III: pages are speedy-deleted only if they meet one of the criteria at WP:CSD. JohnCD (talk) 14:37, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Deletion of page Haim Dotan Haim Dotan (talk) 14:41, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Dear JohnCD,

About the page you deleted called Haim Dotan. A Hebrew Wikipedia article about Haim Dotan was written by the journalist Michael Yacovson 5 years ago. Haim Dotan is now known and cited in news organizations worldwide as the designer of the world's longest and highest glass pedestrian bridge in ZhangjiaJie, China. I, an employee of Haim Dotan Architects, thought it fitting that an article should be written in the English Wikipedia in addition to the Hebrew one.

Is this enough explaination to allow this article? If not, what are the rules around who can post an article?

Best regards,

Lisa Roberts

Haim Dotan (talk) 14:41, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

I have replied on your talk page. JohnCD (talk) 15:37, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

IP Address for Rush Alzheimer's Disease Center

Hi JohnCD, it seems that the "talk" comment I made is not on the history of this site - I am guessing (as a new user) that talks don't get reported the same as edits. Thanks! ROSMAPROSMAP (talk) 19:55, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

@ROSMAP: talk pages have their own edit history, but there are no IP edits on the article talk page history, either. Might it have been a user talk page? JohnCD (talk) 20:13, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

RADC

Hi John, yes, a talk page directly to another editor. Looks like all is well. Happy holidays!ROSMAP (talk) 21:31, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

BBC 12-hour Editathon - large influx of new pages & drafts expected

AfC Reviewers are asked to be especially on the look out 08:00-20:00 UTC (that's local London time - check your USA and AUS times) on Thursday 8 December for new pages. The BBC together with Wikimedia UK is holding a large 12-hour editathon. Many new articles and drafts are expected. See BBC 100 Women 2016: How to join our edit-a-thon. Follow also on #100womenwiki, and please, don't bite the newbies :) (user:Kudpung for NPR. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:02, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

deleted page Carr-Chellman

HI I understand that my students created a page on my work prior to my departure from Penn State. I'm now the Dean at the University of Idaho College of Education. I'm thinking it may make sense to reconsider this deletion based on new information (my new position, I have around 250 publications, and a high level on google scholar, and a TED talk, global, that has around 900K views, serving as Editor in Chief of the e-Learn magazine published by the Association of Communication Machinery. Am I allowed to create the article myself? It's likely that my own work on this will be more balanced than my students' work was as I'm able to be quite self-critical. ˜˜˜˜ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.145.154.17 (talk) 04:02, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

I deleted the article after a deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alison A. Carr-Chellman. That was nearly three years ago, so things may well have changed.

Writing about oneself is strongly discouraged, but not forbidden. Read WP:Autobiography, noting in particular that any article will not "belong" to you - others can and probably will edit it. Then, if you want to go ahead, read:

• Wikipedia:Your first article
• Wikipedia:Notability (people)
• Wikipedia:Notability (academics)

It is advisable to register an account, which will make communication easier. Don't post an article directly, but use WP:Articles for creation to make a draft, which you can send for review by an experienced user, who will either accept it or give you feedback. If accepted, I will need to decide whether it meets the objections from the deletion discussion, or needs further review.

It will probably be more difficult than you expect. Understand that an encyclopedia article is not the same as a CV; it is not the story you want to tell the world but what an uninvolved author, surveying the published sources, would consider a general encyclopedia reader would be interested to read. If you copy from existing sites a formal copyright release from the actual copyright owner would be required, but better to write in your own words. There is good advice from a user very experienced with academic biographies at User talk:DGG/Archive 0.5#Academic articles, what I think is important - just that section, not the whole archive. In para 2, for BFAQ read WP:PSCOI, in para 3 for WP:PROFTEST read WP:PROF. JohnCD (talk) 22:17, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Yuri N. Maltsev

Hello. Any chance I could see what Yuri N. Maltsev looked like before it was deleted please?Zigzig20s (talk) 21:54, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

@Zigzig20s: I have emailed you a copy of the text. It was deleted after WP:Articles for deletion/Yuri Maltsev. JohnCD (talk) 22:55, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

I am recreating the article you had deleted.

Hi. You had deleted the page named "Shoaib Tantray". The reason behind the deletion was "a real person who has not public importance". The article had poor and lesser number of reference links that could explain the article fully. It's therefore requested to you that now I'm recreating this article with more content and reference links. Hope you will leave your worthy message on the talk page of that article. I'm waiting for your reply. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamkash1234 (talk • contribs) 13:06, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

I have replied on your talk page. JohnCD (talk) 14:38, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Iranian vandal?

Hey John! See Eilya Monfared (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), and the fact that it was later given a disambuated page title. This seems very much like our good old JR-vandal friend from Iran (who hasn't quacked so much recently here, just once or twice on Wikidata). Other editing from the account is incredibly similar; Iranian singers and the like (not to mention markup, links or even origin). Definitely not notable, if the "musician" exists at all indeed. Do you think it's worth making a case at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/جواد رمضانی شوراب again? Sorry to bother you and take up your time, the account and all the rest just seems a bit fishy to me. Jared Preston (talk) 16:27, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

I don't really see it, apart from a shared interest in Iranian singers - this user has been around for a year and seems to be editing constructively, and his subjects seem to be real, though I'm not sure about their notability. I doubt whether JR could have refrained for so long from introducing his own name. JohnCD (talk) 16:54, 14 December 2016 (UTC)