⁂ Main Talk - Archives: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 ⁂ |
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
I noticed that you have been making changes to DEFAULTSORT tags. The way I understand it, you should not use characters with diacritical marks in DefaultSort tags. The system uses these to sort, so they should be converted to regular characters. Bubba73 (talk), 04:45, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
Hey \ /, thanks for your note. I am now more amenable to the thought of doing an RfA than I was a few months ago when you mentioned it before, but I think I'm going to be pretty busy for the next couple days, so is it all right if we hold off on this until around the weekend?
In the meantime, I will do some thinking about whether or not to go ahead with it. On the one hand, I don't see any harm in applying now. On the other hand, I think my main use for the tools would be helping at DYK, doing CSD/AIV, and occasionally editing protected templates...but lately I have been too busy to be very active at DYK or with CSD, so it might not make so much sense for me to have the tools if I won't have time to do much with them until around mid-May. (Then again, I guess getting them a bit early wouldn't hurt, either.) I believe it's been about a month and a half since I've been in any sort of dispute (another run-in with Ottava Rima in mid-Februay), which some people might think is a bit recent but who knows. Anyway, I guess I'll spend a couple days thinking about whether I'd rather run now-ish or May-ish, and then get back to you...does that sound all right? rʨanaɢ talk/ contribs 04:35, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
{{
helpme}}
I was going to set up
User: ClueBot III to archive this page, but I can't work out the template. I'm up to
/Archive 4. ∗
\ / (
⁂)
12:51, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
{{User:MiszaBot/config |maxarchivesize = 100K |counter = 2 |algo = old(100h) |archive = User talk:Chzz/Archive %(counter)d }} {{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn|target=User talk:Chzz/Archive Index|mask=User talk:Chzz/Archive <#>|leading_zeros=0|indexhere=no|template=}} {{archive box|auto=yes}}
Hehe, thanks. :) – Juliancolton | Talk 12:59, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi Backslash. This one is hard to judge, in my opinion, and I don't think I am knowledgable enough to make the call on whether it is or isn't reliable. I'd advise posting a note at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Sorry I'm not able to help further. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. ( talk) 01:12, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
Pointless thread for arch test Chzz ► 01:55, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
Replied on my talkpage. - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 04:20, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
Hey there \/, I'm doing my long overdue review that you requested... The good news is that I didn't see any thing that you nominated for CSD that was clearly wrong. There were several where I felt that your rationale was wrong. Here are just a few examples:
Your work at this point in time at CSD probably wouldn't garner an oppose, but it might prevent me from supporting. I'd have to the see the rest of the body of your work.--- I'm Spartacus! NO! I'm Spartacus! 06:05, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
Hopefully this works. :) ∗ \ / ( ⁂) 07:13, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I have radically cut and altered this entry. Do you think the neutrality and advertisement boxes could now be removed? Peter Elman ( talk) 08:31, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
For every category you create, you should specify parent categories to which it belongs. You can do this by listing the parents near the bottom of the page, each enclosed in double brackets like so:
[[Category:Songs by artist]] [[Category:Hypothetical second category]]
I've added at least one parent to the category. I invite you to check my work for accuracy and completeness.
I am a human being, not a bot, so you can contact me if you have questions about this. Best regards, -- Stepheng3 ( talk) 05:24, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
This is an automated message. Your editor review is scheduled to be closed on 29 April 2009 because it will have been open for more than 30 days and inactive for more than 7. 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. End of line. DustyBot ( talk) 07:32, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
Ok, I've transcluded it. Thanks for the quick response! rʨanaɢ talk/ contribs 13:43, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Please change your age, Backslash Forwardslash, as I'm sure you are not 4 years old. Webster6 Yo, So 08:00, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
...Backslash, it was also my mistake with that redirect. Just now I have a limited connection and I'm forced to stay only on Wikipedia (can't use Google etc..) - not very useful for new pages checking. It's better to concentrate on something different, and that's what I'll do :) Sorry for that confusion. -- Vejvančický ( talk) 08:05, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
The
April 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk)
22:27, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on UtilisateurDodoïste/Brouillon requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{
hangon}}
to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on
the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact
one of these admins to request that they
userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. ∗
\ / (
⁂)
11:19, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi \/! Thanks a lot for your contribution. Cheers. CeeGee ( talk) 17:28, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I hope you are doing well. I am sending you this message since you are a member of the GA WikiProject. I would like to invite you to consider helping with the GA sweeps process. Sweeps helps to ensure that the oldest GAs still meet the criteria, and improve the quality of GAs overall. Unfortunately, last month only two articles were reviewed. This is definitely a low point after our peak at the beginning of the process when 163 articles were reviewed in September 2007. After nearly two years, the running total has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A new worklist has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. All exempt and previously reviewed articles have already been removed from the list. Instead of reviewing by topic, you can consider picking and choosing whichever articles interest you.
We are always looking for new members to assist with the remaining articles, so if you are interested or know of anybody that can assist, please visit the GA sweeps page. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. If only 14 editors achieve this feat starting now, we would be done with Sweeps! Of course, having more people reviewing less articles would be better for all involved, so please consider asking others to help out. Feel free to stop by and only review a few articles, something's better than nothing! Take a look at the list, and see what articles interest you. Let's work to complete Sweeps so that efforts can be fully focused on the backlog at GAN. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help with a particular article, please contact me or OhanaUnited and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 ( talk • contrib) 07:59, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
Unfortunately, my RFA was closed recently with a final tally of 75 ½/38/10. Though it didn't succeed, I wanted to thank you for your support and I hope I can count on it in the future. Even though it didn't pass, it had a nearly 2 to 1 ratio of support and I am quite encouraged by those results. I intend to review the support, oppose, and neutral !votes and see what I can do to address those concerns that were brought up and resubmit in a few months. If you would like to assist in my betterment and/or co-nominate me in the future, please let me know on my talk page. Special thanks go to Schmidt, MICHAEL Q., TomStar81, and henrik for their co-nominations and support. — BQZip01 — talk |
FlyingToaster Barnstar
Hello Backslash Forwardslash! Thank you so much for your support in my
recent RfA, which passed with a tally of 126/32/5. I am truly humbled by the trust you placed in me, and will endeavor to live up to that trust.
Flying
Toaster
A tag has been placed on Lin jia jun, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.
Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that
administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template {{
hangon}}
to the page and state your intention on the article's
talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this.
auto /
decltype (
talk)
04:32, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
The Metaform page you previously nominated for an A7 speedy deletion, it's now supported enough by references? I'm not an admin, but the page doesn't seem to have articles or references outside of magazine reviews and a personal myspace page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.41.18.225 ( talk) 06:05, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
We don't generally "fix" redirects per WP:R2D. weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 12:09, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Best wishes with your RfA. :-) I hope all goes well (and you pass). At least we can be thankful that it's calm and without drama (besides something about the age 4 thing). Don't do anything crazy, keep answering the questions reasonably and you should be fine. Cheers, Jamie ☆ S93 23:42, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
You'll pass. Hopefully your FA drives will be going strong still YellowMonkey ( cricket calendar poll!) 06:09, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Regarding request #30585, it would appear that declining this request as too similar would not be appropriate, as the possibly conflicting username has no contributions. Please take a little more care in future. If there was another reason for declining this request, please let me know. Stifle ( talk) 13:17, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi, B.F. This is a poem by Rafael Pombo. His Wikipedia article states that he died in 1912; therefore, his works are in the public domain. -- R'n'B ( call me Russ) 11:33, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
.... new admin! -- RegentsPark ( My narrowboat) 12:52, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Hello. Please forgive the tortoiselike speed of the arrival of this message. It seems I'm having to crank the internet by hand.
I've closed your RfA as successful at 110/8/6. Congratulations on receiving your shiny new mop and a "good reason" place in WP:100.
I'm tempted to patronise you by suggesting some reading you might like to do, but I assume that like most of us, you read a fair number of manual pages before your RfA. If you find your memory rusty, while you can of course resort to reading the guides again, I can also strongly recommend asking for help from other admins experienced in that area. An idea some find helpful is asking another admin to review some of your tooluse early on, either before or after you press the button.
Anyway, thank you for offering to help and running the gauntlet a second time. -- Dweller ( talk) 13:29, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Well done YellowMonkey ( cricket calendar poll!) 03:13, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly. |
Hope you fare better than the last kid who got vaccinated :/ Benders Game 14:58, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
The
May 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk)
22:09, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations BF - nice to see you get through your RfA and gain the buttons. Looking forward to seeing you on the track.-- VS talk 22:34, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
I am surprised that you gave my brother, User: Joe Cool 72 another chance (I just found out what he did). If he ever puts up articles about patent nonsense again, do not hesitate to block him.
Hcps-hoytca ( talk) 00:16, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
you better edit it with your correct information rather than deleting it. right ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Asdthegreat ( talk • contribs) 01:11, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | |
Since your successful RfA you've been all over my radar blocking vandals, deleting attack pages and generally just helping keep Wikipedia free of junk. You are much appreciated! t'shael mindmeld 04:28, 5 June 2009 (UTC) |
Sorry you didn't agree with the icon on your page. I took a chance hoping you wouldn't mind, but if you don't want it there I won't put it back. Have fun. – BuickCentury Driver 10:01, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi: you declined my speedy tagging of this with the comment "no advertising here". For what it's worth, and for the record, I had tagged it as A7 ("an article about a company that does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject") - not as G11 (promotional). I wasn't say the page was advertising, but when I tagged it the article said only "A liquor distribution company located in Australia. Imports the following brands PAMA Pomegranate Liqueur and Sagatiba Pura Cachaça", and I didn't see any assertion of importance there. Gonzonoir ( talk) 13:25, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi \ /, Congrats on your RFA. I noticed in your note on Wikiwikikid's talk page, you said "... while there isn't anything 'wrong' with readding a contested speedy ...". I could have sworn the db templates or WP:CSD specifically said the tags are not to be re-added, but I can't find that wording now. Either it's been changed, or my memory is faulty. The best I can find is the WP:Deletion policy#Speedy deletion: "Renominations: Either a page fits the speedy deletion criteria or it does not. If there is a dispute over whether a page meets the criteria, the issue is typically taken to deletion discussions." (emphasis mine). Just curious if you know whether this has been changed relatively recently to be less black and white or not. In practice, I was fairly sure re-adding a disputed speedy tag is actively discouraged. Anyway, glad you agreed with my inital declines, and let me know if you have any additional insight into whether this used to be more formal or not. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 23:19, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
I nom'd Dan Benayer for CSD as a G10, which you declined with a comment of "not negative tone and sourced."
Firstly, I think that given the article's statements about the subject's drug abuse, his links to "organised crime and prostitution," and accusations of sexual assault and theft... well, imo, they do cause the subject to appear in a negative light. Secondly, if you'd looked at the references, you'd see that none of them backed up the accusations--in fact, some of them never even mention him.
Anyhow, this is just to say that I've sent it to AFD, where I expect it will go away, just later rather than sooner. Dori ❦ ( Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 23:34, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
If so, please see user talk:Bookbros. ;) t'shael mindmeld 23:44, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks a lot for deleting my subpages. Thankyou. -- Srini vas G P hani 06:11, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Which parts of Black Rock Congregational Church do you consider to be non-neutral? All my information is cited in the citations given. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crixxx ( talk • contribs) 04:53, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
The editors seem to have plenty of time finding fault with the article and slapping critical banners on it but little interest to actually do anything about it, as they have failed to do in the past. I, however, do have such an interest, as the originator of the article and will make the changes you advise, as I have done recently.
Hi there. I think it's a bit too soon to move Bavarian Pigeon Corps to the DYK queue while we're still figuring out vital aspects of the hook. Bavaria (or the German Empire of which it was part) did not have an enemy over whose lines to send pigeons in 1903. The image info from the German Bundesarchive say that recon pigeons were used during the First World War. Manxruler ( talk) 11:36, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
A little late but congrats on your adminship. Well done. Best regards -- Samir 22:36, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
There was no personal attack, it was just news that is reported around the world, please restore. Xodó ( talk) 09:05, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Please see User talk:MSGJ#Question 2, regards — Martin ( MSGJ · talk) 15:11, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi. Actually I had already declined a couple of those Pizza requests (e.g. User:Pizza1512/Userboxes/Bris/BGS) because they had transclusions. It didn't seem fair to delete them without at least informing the users that they would have a redlink on their userpage. — Martin ( MSGJ · talk) 08:21, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Heh, nice catch. Those TLAs tend to blur together after a while... ~ Amory ( user • talk • contribs) 15:40, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
I just got the following email from TownDown: Hello, I also believed that the block is justified with "Hayden120", but the other admin "Backslash Forwardslash" said that he doesn't see a serious amount of edit warring on that page, and he was leaning towards an unblock, and curiously both are from Australia. Sometimes I believe the nationalism really matters in Wikipedia because when I see that it is when the users are from the same nation, but "Hayden120" committed WP:Etiquette, judging my knowledge and how I wrote the english language. I think 24 hrs blocked were justified, but he tells lies all the time, for example he told me about a previous consensus justifying his reverts, but there wasn't a consensus, or even a other user reverted him because of it, so anyway, I also requested to lock the article. Please tell me what do you think?
Just thought you should know, as there might be an underlying problem here that we should take to AN. Your thoughts? Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry ( talk) 11:41, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
I would greatly appreciate it if you try to assume better faith next time instead of referring to users like myself as "immature" (see [8]). We're all trying to better the encyclopedia here, but pot-shots like that doesn't help any. Thank you, MuZemike 16:18, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
Emmette Hernandez Coleman ( talk) 00:26, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
In Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Albert Awol, I'm curious how you came to a conclusion that there was a consensus for deletion. Reading the arguments, it seems clear to me that the consensus was trending toward merging the information into another article, rather than outright deletion. Powers T 13:23, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
Wikipedia Administrator's Award | |
You have been an Sysop for a little over a week and you have been doing a great job at administrative tasks. I just want to be the first to tell you that. Congratulations, Otis Jimmy One 14:16, 11 June 2009 (UTC) |
I should stress I am reasonably happy with the outcome of your decision to delete Beale (I might well have called it as delete) but I would take issue with some of your summary? I agree the review is not a vote but at a count it was only 15-10 in favour of deletion. Several long standing low contributing editors had falsely been marked as SPAs and there was evidence of canvassing both ways, off wiki by Beale and on-wiki against him. What I was less sure about though was the implication of your wording that in these conditions the onus was on people voting "keep" to explain what notability they saw: all the notability claim was there in the article (at least when I got to it) and it was a question of subjective judgement whether it met WP:NOT as a mixed bag of whatnot without onus on one side to produce further evidence? -- BozMo talk 18:26, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Just curious, but what did you find in GB3DR that expressed any semblance of notability? There was nothing but directory-style information. — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 04:18, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi there. It seems you decided to delete my article about our company Rohea. If that's a true consensus of administrators, I accept the decision. However, I'd like to bring a few things up.
ps. I'm not very familiar with the discussion methods of Wikipedia. I hope this message reaches you in proper way. ( TomiS80 ( talk) 07:37, 12 June 2009 (UTC))
On a related note, you may wish to read about editing with a conflict of interest. It is clear that you have some relation to Rohea and with such a clear link it may be difficult for your arguments for including the article to seem sincere and indifferent. \ Backslash Forwardslash / { talk} 08:13, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi again. And thanks for the quick answer. I'd still like to point out a few of things. Yep, I definitely have an interest of having the Rohea page there. I'm not trying to hide or deny that. But isn't the quality of the content the one that counts? (there were references and such). And I tried to rip of all the 'advertising-like' pieces of text. I admit it is naive to use the fact that there are other small company pages in Wikipedia as an argument to get ours there too, but I also find it quite naive to resent pages created by people with so-called conflicting interests. What difference would it make if I just asked my grandma or some random people from the street to create the same page with the same content but without the straight connection to the company in question. I could even pay him/her if I would really be nasty. I think all statements in an article should be referred like in any academical article. That should be the only thing that counts. And this is what I tried to do in my article too. But anyway, I see there is lots of discussion going on in Wikipedia about these topics, so I'm not wasting anymore of your time (and mine) after this. If getting deleted is the only outcome after 4 hours of work, I can't say I'm too happy and, thus, just like to conclude that the deletion policy this strict doesn't really encourage creating content (of any sort) to Wikipedia. But maybe you guys have enough of it. ( TomiS80 ( talk) 08:41, 12 June 2009 (UTC))
You should double-check your deletion of Toon Zone. CSD G4 specifically requires an article to be substantially identical to a deleted version. My version was significantly different from the one previously deleted. I'm assuming this was an honest mistake. You can still nominate it for a normal deletion process if you have concerns.
And just so you know, it's common courtesy to notify the creators of an article when you delete it. Thanks, sorry for the hassle. -- Morning ( talk) 15:51, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Re this article; I note that you declined the speedy tag on the basis that notability had been asserted. My own thought was that the notability was being asserted on behalf of a film in which he appeared, rather than for the individual. I don't particularly mind one way or the other, but I'm wondering if there was a criterion other than WP:PORNBIO that you were using to cover this situation; I'm trying to get the boundaries of WP:PORNBIO clear in my mind, because I do a lot of new page patrol and find that adult film companies (and enthusiasts) are anxious to add articles about individual performers. Your comments would be welcome. Accounting4Taste: talk 13:40, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
i was adding the sources to my page and you deleated it Alec more fan ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:45, 12 June 2009 (UTC).
That's fine with me. Sorry for not being around, been busy with my exams, but they finish on Tuesday. Am I still ok to send any questions your way?-- Lotsofinterviews ( talk) 19:34, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
⁂ Main Talk - Archives: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 ⁂ |
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
I noticed that you have been making changes to DEFAULTSORT tags. The way I understand it, you should not use characters with diacritical marks in DefaultSort tags. The system uses these to sort, so they should be converted to regular characters. Bubba73 (talk), 04:45, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
Hey \ /, thanks for your note. I am now more amenable to the thought of doing an RfA than I was a few months ago when you mentioned it before, but I think I'm going to be pretty busy for the next couple days, so is it all right if we hold off on this until around the weekend?
In the meantime, I will do some thinking about whether or not to go ahead with it. On the one hand, I don't see any harm in applying now. On the other hand, I think my main use for the tools would be helping at DYK, doing CSD/AIV, and occasionally editing protected templates...but lately I have been too busy to be very active at DYK or with CSD, so it might not make so much sense for me to have the tools if I won't have time to do much with them until around mid-May. (Then again, I guess getting them a bit early wouldn't hurt, either.) I believe it's been about a month and a half since I've been in any sort of dispute (another run-in with Ottava Rima in mid-Februay), which some people might think is a bit recent but who knows. Anyway, I guess I'll spend a couple days thinking about whether I'd rather run now-ish or May-ish, and then get back to you...does that sound all right? rʨanaɢ talk/ contribs 04:35, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
{{
helpme}}
I was going to set up
User: ClueBot III to archive this page, but I can't work out the template. I'm up to
/Archive 4. ∗
\ / (
⁂)
12:51, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
{{User:MiszaBot/config |maxarchivesize = 100K |counter = 2 |algo = old(100h) |archive = User talk:Chzz/Archive %(counter)d }} {{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn|target=User talk:Chzz/Archive Index|mask=User talk:Chzz/Archive <#>|leading_zeros=0|indexhere=no|template=}} {{archive box|auto=yes}}
Hehe, thanks. :) – Juliancolton | Talk 12:59, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi Backslash. This one is hard to judge, in my opinion, and I don't think I am knowledgable enough to make the call on whether it is or isn't reliable. I'd advise posting a note at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Sorry I'm not able to help further. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. ( talk) 01:12, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
Pointless thread for arch test Chzz ► 01:55, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
Replied on my talkpage. - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 04:20, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
Hey there \/, I'm doing my long overdue review that you requested... The good news is that I didn't see any thing that you nominated for CSD that was clearly wrong. There were several where I felt that your rationale was wrong. Here are just a few examples:
Your work at this point in time at CSD probably wouldn't garner an oppose, but it might prevent me from supporting. I'd have to the see the rest of the body of your work.--- I'm Spartacus! NO! I'm Spartacus! 06:05, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
Hopefully this works. :) ∗ \ / ( ⁂) 07:13, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I have radically cut and altered this entry. Do you think the neutrality and advertisement boxes could now be removed? Peter Elman ( talk) 08:31, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
For every category you create, you should specify parent categories to which it belongs. You can do this by listing the parents near the bottom of the page, each enclosed in double brackets like so:
[[Category:Songs by artist]] [[Category:Hypothetical second category]]
I've added at least one parent to the category. I invite you to check my work for accuracy and completeness.
I am a human being, not a bot, so you can contact me if you have questions about this. Best regards, -- Stepheng3 ( talk) 05:24, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
This is an automated message. Your editor review is scheduled to be closed on 29 April 2009 because it will have been open for more than 30 days and inactive for more than 7. 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. End of line. DustyBot ( talk) 07:32, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
Ok, I've transcluded it. Thanks for the quick response! rʨanaɢ talk/ contribs 13:43, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Please change your age, Backslash Forwardslash, as I'm sure you are not 4 years old. Webster6 Yo, So 08:00, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
...Backslash, it was also my mistake with that redirect. Just now I have a limited connection and I'm forced to stay only on Wikipedia (can't use Google etc..) - not very useful for new pages checking. It's better to concentrate on something different, and that's what I'll do :) Sorry for that confusion. -- Vejvančický ( talk) 08:05, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
The
April 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk)
22:27, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on UtilisateurDodoïste/Brouillon requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{
hangon}}
to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on
the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact
one of these admins to request that they
userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. ∗
\ / (
⁂)
11:19, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi \/! Thanks a lot for your contribution. Cheers. CeeGee ( talk) 17:28, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I hope you are doing well. I am sending you this message since you are a member of the GA WikiProject. I would like to invite you to consider helping with the GA sweeps process. Sweeps helps to ensure that the oldest GAs still meet the criteria, and improve the quality of GAs overall. Unfortunately, last month only two articles were reviewed. This is definitely a low point after our peak at the beginning of the process when 163 articles were reviewed in September 2007. After nearly two years, the running total has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A new worklist has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. All exempt and previously reviewed articles have already been removed from the list. Instead of reviewing by topic, you can consider picking and choosing whichever articles interest you.
We are always looking for new members to assist with the remaining articles, so if you are interested or know of anybody that can assist, please visit the GA sweeps page. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. If only 14 editors achieve this feat starting now, we would be done with Sweeps! Of course, having more people reviewing less articles would be better for all involved, so please consider asking others to help out. Feel free to stop by and only review a few articles, something's better than nothing! Take a look at the list, and see what articles interest you. Let's work to complete Sweeps so that efforts can be fully focused on the backlog at GAN. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help with a particular article, please contact me or OhanaUnited and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 ( talk • contrib) 07:59, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
Unfortunately, my RFA was closed recently with a final tally of 75 ½/38/10. Though it didn't succeed, I wanted to thank you for your support and I hope I can count on it in the future. Even though it didn't pass, it had a nearly 2 to 1 ratio of support and I am quite encouraged by those results. I intend to review the support, oppose, and neutral !votes and see what I can do to address those concerns that were brought up and resubmit in a few months. If you would like to assist in my betterment and/or co-nominate me in the future, please let me know on my talk page. Special thanks go to Schmidt, MICHAEL Q., TomStar81, and henrik for their co-nominations and support. — BQZip01 — talk |
FlyingToaster Barnstar
Hello Backslash Forwardslash! Thank you so much for your support in my
recent RfA, which passed with a tally of 126/32/5. I am truly humbled by the trust you placed in me, and will endeavor to live up to that trust.
Flying
Toaster
A tag has been placed on Lin jia jun, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.
Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that
administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template {{
hangon}}
to the page and state your intention on the article's
talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this.
auto /
decltype (
talk)
04:32, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
The Metaform page you previously nominated for an A7 speedy deletion, it's now supported enough by references? I'm not an admin, but the page doesn't seem to have articles or references outside of magazine reviews and a personal myspace page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.41.18.225 ( talk) 06:05, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
We don't generally "fix" redirects per WP:R2D. weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 12:09, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Best wishes with your RfA. :-) I hope all goes well (and you pass). At least we can be thankful that it's calm and without drama (besides something about the age 4 thing). Don't do anything crazy, keep answering the questions reasonably and you should be fine. Cheers, Jamie ☆ S93 23:42, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
You'll pass. Hopefully your FA drives will be going strong still YellowMonkey ( cricket calendar poll!) 06:09, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Regarding request #30585, it would appear that declining this request as too similar would not be appropriate, as the possibly conflicting username has no contributions. Please take a little more care in future. If there was another reason for declining this request, please let me know. Stifle ( talk) 13:17, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi, B.F. This is a poem by Rafael Pombo. His Wikipedia article states that he died in 1912; therefore, his works are in the public domain. -- R'n'B ( call me Russ) 11:33, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
.... new admin! -- RegentsPark ( My narrowboat) 12:52, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Hello. Please forgive the tortoiselike speed of the arrival of this message. It seems I'm having to crank the internet by hand.
I've closed your RfA as successful at 110/8/6. Congratulations on receiving your shiny new mop and a "good reason" place in WP:100.
I'm tempted to patronise you by suggesting some reading you might like to do, but I assume that like most of us, you read a fair number of manual pages before your RfA. If you find your memory rusty, while you can of course resort to reading the guides again, I can also strongly recommend asking for help from other admins experienced in that area. An idea some find helpful is asking another admin to review some of your tooluse early on, either before or after you press the button.
Anyway, thank you for offering to help and running the gauntlet a second time. -- Dweller ( talk) 13:29, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Well done YellowMonkey ( cricket calendar poll!) 03:13, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly. |
Hope you fare better than the last kid who got vaccinated :/ Benders Game 14:58, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
The
May 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk)
22:09, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations BF - nice to see you get through your RfA and gain the buttons. Looking forward to seeing you on the track.-- VS talk 22:34, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
I am surprised that you gave my brother, User: Joe Cool 72 another chance (I just found out what he did). If he ever puts up articles about patent nonsense again, do not hesitate to block him.
Hcps-hoytca ( talk) 00:16, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
you better edit it with your correct information rather than deleting it. right ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Asdthegreat ( talk • contribs) 01:11, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | |
Since your successful RfA you've been all over my radar blocking vandals, deleting attack pages and generally just helping keep Wikipedia free of junk. You are much appreciated! t'shael mindmeld 04:28, 5 June 2009 (UTC) |
Sorry you didn't agree with the icon on your page. I took a chance hoping you wouldn't mind, but if you don't want it there I won't put it back. Have fun. – BuickCentury Driver 10:01, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi: you declined my speedy tagging of this with the comment "no advertising here". For what it's worth, and for the record, I had tagged it as A7 ("an article about a company that does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject") - not as G11 (promotional). I wasn't say the page was advertising, but when I tagged it the article said only "A liquor distribution company located in Australia. Imports the following brands PAMA Pomegranate Liqueur and Sagatiba Pura Cachaça", and I didn't see any assertion of importance there. Gonzonoir ( talk) 13:25, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi \ /, Congrats on your RFA. I noticed in your note on Wikiwikikid's talk page, you said "... while there isn't anything 'wrong' with readding a contested speedy ...". I could have sworn the db templates or WP:CSD specifically said the tags are not to be re-added, but I can't find that wording now. Either it's been changed, or my memory is faulty. The best I can find is the WP:Deletion policy#Speedy deletion: "Renominations: Either a page fits the speedy deletion criteria or it does not. If there is a dispute over whether a page meets the criteria, the issue is typically taken to deletion discussions." (emphasis mine). Just curious if you know whether this has been changed relatively recently to be less black and white or not. In practice, I was fairly sure re-adding a disputed speedy tag is actively discouraged. Anyway, glad you agreed with my inital declines, and let me know if you have any additional insight into whether this used to be more formal or not. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 23:19, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
I nom'd Dan Benayer for CSD as a G10, which you declined with a comment of "not negative tone and sourced."
Firstly, I think that given the article's statements about the subject's drug abuse, his links to "organised crime and prostitution," and accusations of sexual assault and theft... well, imo, they do cause the subject to appear in a negative light. Secondly, if you'd looked at the references, you'd see that none of them backed up the accusations--in fact, some of them never even mention him.
Anyhow, this is just to say that I've sent it to AFD, where I expect it will go away, just later rather than sooner. Dori ❦ ( Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 23:34, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
If so, please see user talk:Bookbros. ;) t'shael mindmeld 23:44, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks a lot for deleting my subpages. Thankyou. -- Srini vas G P hani 06:11, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Which parts of Black Rock Congregational Church do you consider to be non-neutral? All my information is cited in the citations given. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crixxx ( talk • contribs) 04:53, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
The editors seem to have plenty of time finding fault with the article and slapping critical banners on it but little interest to actually do anything about it, as they have failed to do in the past. I, however, do have such an interest, as the originator of the article and will make the changes you advise, as I have done recently.
Hi there. I think it's a bit too soon to move Bavarian Pigeon Corps to the DYK queue while we're still figuring out vital aspects of the hook. Bavaria (or the German Empire of which it was part) did not have an enemy over whose lines to send pigeons in 1903. The image info from the German Bundesarchive say that recon pigeons were used during the First World War. Manxruler ( talk) 11:36, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
A little late but congrats on your adminship. Well done. Best regards -- Samir 22:36, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
There was no personal attack, it was just news that is reported around the world, please restore. Xodó ( talk) 09:05, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Please see User talk:MSGJ#Question 2, regards — Martin ( MSGJ · talk) 15:11, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi. Actually I had already declined a couple of those Pizza requests (e.g. User:Pizza1512/Userboxes/Bris/BGS) because they had transclusions. It didn't seem fair to delete them without at least informing the users that they would have a redlink on their userpage. — Martin ( MSGJ · talk) 08:21, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Heh, nice catch. Those TLAs tend to blur together after a while... ~ Amory ( user • talk • contribs) 15:40, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
I just got the following email from TownDown: Hello, I also believed that the block is justified with "Hayden120", but the other admin "Backslash Forwardslash" said that he doesn't see a serious amount of edit warring on that page, and he was leaning towards an unblock, and curiously both are from Australia. Sometimes I believe the nationalism really matters in Wikipedia because when I see that it is when the users are from the same nation, but "Hayden120" committed WP:Etiquette, judging my knowledge and how I wrote the english language. I think 24 hrs blocked were justified, but he tells lies all the time, for example he told me about a previous consensus justifying his reverts, but there wasn't a consensus, or even a other user reverted him because of it, so anyway, I also requested to lock the article. Please tell me what do you think?
Just thought you should know, as there might be an underlying problem here that we should take to AN. Your thoughts? Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry ( talk) 11:41, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
I would greatly appreciate it if you try to assume better faith next time instead of referring to users like myself as "immature" (see [8]). We're all trying to better the encyclopedia here, but pot-shots like that doesn't help any. Thank you, MuZemike 16:18, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
Emmette Hernandez Coleman ( talk) 00:26, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
In Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Albert Awol, I'm curious how you came to a conclusion that there was a consensus for deletion. Reading the arguments, it seems clear to me that the consensus was trending toward merging the information into another article, rather than outright deletion. Powers T 13:23, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
Wikipedia Administrator's Award | |
You have been an Sysop for a little over a week and you have been doing a great job at administrative tasks. I just want to be the first to tell you that. Congratulations, Otis Jimmy One 14:16, 11 June 2009 (UTC) |
I should stress I am reasonably happy with the outcome of your decision to delete Beale (I might well have called it as delete) but I would take issue with some of your summary? I agree the review is not a vote but at a count it was only 15-10 in favour of deletion. Several long standing low contributing editors had falsely been marked as SPAs and there was evidence of canvassing both ways, off wiki by Beale and on-wiki against him. What I was less sure about though was the implication of your wording that in these conditions the onus was on people voting "keep" to explain what notability they saw: all the notability claim was there in the article (at least when I got to it) and it was a question of subjective judgement whether it met WP:NOT as a mixed bag of whatnot without onus on one side to produce further evidence? -- BozMo talk 18:26, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Just curious, but what did you find in GB3DR that expressed any semblance of notability? There was nothing but directory-style information. — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 04:18, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi there. It seems you decided to delete my article about our company Rohea. If that's a true consensus of administrators, I accept the decision. However, I'd like to bring a few things up.
ps. I'm not very familiar with the discussion methods of Wikipedia. I hope this message reaches you in proper way. ( TomiS80 ( talk) 07:37, 12 June 2009 (UTC))
On a related note, you may wish to read about editing with a conflict of interest. It is clear that you have some relation to Rohea and with such a clear link it may be difficult for your arguments for including the article to seem sincere and indifferent. \ Backslash Forwardslash / { talk} 08:13, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi again. And thanks for the quick answer. I'd still like to point out a few of things. Yep, I definitely have an interest of having the Rohea page there. I'm not trying to hide or deny that. But isn't the quality of the content the one that counts? (there were references and such). And I tried to rip of all the 'advertising-like' pieces of text. I admit it is naive to use the fact that there are other small company pages in Wikipedia as an argument to get ours there too, but I also find it quite naive to resent pages created by people with so-called conflicting interests. What difference would it make if I just asked my grandma or some random people from the street to create the same page with the same content but without the straight connection to the company in question. I could even pay him/her if I would really be nasty. I think all statements in an article should be referred like in any academical article. That should be the only thing that counts. And this is what I tried to do in my article too. But anyway, I see there is lots of discussion going on in Wikipedia about these topics, so I'm not wasting anymore of your time (and mine) after this. If getting deleted is the only outcome after 4 hours of work, I can't say I'm too happy and, thus, just like to conclude that the deletion policy this strict doesn't really encourage creating content (of any sort) to Wikipedia. But maybe you guys have enough of it. ( TomiS80 ( talk) 08:41, 12 June 2009 (UTC))
You should double-check your deletion of Toon Zone. CSD G4 specifically requires an article to be substantially identical to a deleted version. My version was significantly different from the one previously deleted. I'm assuming this was an honest mistake. You can still nominate it for a normal deletion process if you have concerns.
And just so you know, it's common courtesy to notify the creators of an article when you delete it. Thanks, sorry for the hassle. -- Morning ( talk) 15:51, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Re this article; I note that you declined the speedy tag on the basis that notability had been asserted. My own thought was that the notability was being asserted on behalf of a film in which he appeared, rather than for the individual. I don't particularly mind one way or the other, but I'm wondering if there was a criterion other than WP:PORNBIO that you were using to cover this situation; I'm trying to get the boundaries of WP:PORNBIO clear in my mind, because I do a lot of new page patrol and find that adult film companies (and enthusiasts) are anxious to add articles about individual performers. Your comments would be welcome. Accounting4Taste: talk 13:40, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
i was adding the sources to my page and you deleated it Alec more fan ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:45, 12 June 2009 (UTC).
That's fine with me. Sorry for not being around, been busy with my exams, but they finish on Tuesday. Am I still ok to send any questions your way?-- Lotsofinterviews ( talk) 19:34, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |