User talk:Dingfelder

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Livescience.com

Please stop. If you continue to ignore our policies by introducing inappropriate pages, such as LiveScience, to Wikipedia, you will be blocked. Nenyedi • (Deeds•Talk) 02:11, 21 August 2007 (UTC)


Nenyedi, RE your deletion of a page I added (LiveScience), please do not threaten to block me. That is quite inappropriate, espessially given that there was no discussion before this *warning* was given. In fact, your conduct in the removal of the page itself was highly questionable given the facts about this site. Specifically, the website I refered to is quite commonly referred to and deserves some mention.

  1. The site get 5 million unique visitors per month
  2. there are 1,410,000 references to "livescience.com" on google.
  3. More importantly, it is a publisher of content used by yahoo, msn, aol and more.

[edit] Deletions

Please read the deletion log properly and note that the page was deleted for being an advertisement. If it can be written without the advertising content, it may become acceptable. Deb 11:56, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Page Deletion

Hello! I wanted to follow up with your message- I did not delete this page. It was deleted by an administrator, which I am not. I also can not block you, and administrator must do that as well.

I do not remember this page personally, but most likely it did not pass the criteria set forth here at WP:WEB, so I tagged it for deletion.

If you had a history of creating inappropriate pages, or if the page created by you, and was previously deleted and you recreated it again, that is ground for a warning. Any wikipedia can send a warning to another user. There is no discussion that has to take place.

I hope this information helps. Again, I did not delete this page, you should contact the deleting administrator (Available in the deletion log) regarding this matter.

Happy editing! --Nenyedi • (Deeds•Talk) 17:23, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RE Page Deletion

I like the link you posted RE page deletion (WP:WEB) and apprecioate your referring to it.

I think the website in question does meet basically all the criteria, as it one of the larger news publisher of science news and it's news articles are picked up and distributed through some of the largest news portals (yahoo, msn, aol, etc)

I was not annoyed by the deletion of the page in question, (I realize mistakes happen and I think this is one, but things like this can get corrected...) the only thing I was really annoyed with Nenyedi was the unneccessary threat that you were going to block me.

Clearly the website itself merits some coverage (given the selection criteria you referred to) but I assume the issue is that the article itself needs some work. So, perhaps instead of just deleting the page, we need to add more info to the page in order to improve it?

Dingfelder 03:22, 21 September 2007 (UTC) (Deeds•Talk)

A few observations.
First, I agree with you, livescience.com does appear to meet notability for a website. I would encourage you to re-create this article, but with a major caveat: Apparently the reason given for deletion is that the way the article was written, it looked like an ad. If you can re-create it in a neutral tone, with only the facts (and citing outside sources, e.g. reviews and the like from well known reviewers who are not affiliated with livescience) then it will stand a much better chance of avoiding deletion. A hint: don't cut-and-paste text from the site itself, especially parts that promote it or an "About Us" page, as these are almost never neutral in tone. Editors and admins should note that livescience is part of the same company that runs space.com, which does have a long-standing article here.
Second, don't take Nenyedi personally; he has a history of having an itchy trigger finger and has twice been emphatically turned down for adminship (a fact which reinforces my confidence in the integrity of the whole wiki concept). Any threats of deletion or blocking he makes have to be concurred with by someone who was not turned down for adminship - which means if it happens, he was probably right.
-- Dethme0w 15:52, 22 September 2007 (UTC)