![]() | 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. |
You are invited to join the discussion at
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chess Titans.
Dogmaticeclectic (
talk)
23:39, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Microsoft Mahjong.
Dogmaticeclectic (
talk)
23:42, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Purble Place.
Dogmaticeclectic (
talk)
23:39, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
Pseudonymous Rex ( talk) 04:21, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
Hey, Jclemens, I'm trying to understand the interrelationship, if any, between WP:ARBAB (you were one of the drafting arbitrators, which is why I came to you with this inquiry) and WP:AC/DS, where discretionary sanctions are authorized on articles related to abortion. The issue came up in the context of War on Women, whose talk page has a discretionary sanctions notice. Thanks for any help.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 22:48, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
I can't have much of a discussion if you don't comment! :) IRWolfie- ( talk) 09:28, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
I know it wasn't raised in the (admittedly horribly attended) AfD, but would you consider amending your close to redirecting the list to God_of_War:_Ascension#Downloadable_content, thus allowing non-admins to upmerge relevant content to the summary style parent of the deleted list? It seems much more consisted with WP:ATD. Cheers, Jclemens ( talk) 02:57, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for your offer to mediate. Feel free to comment on current issues at Wikipedia_talk:Four_Award#Scribbled_Thoughts.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 17:47, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
A variant of Laocoon's warning in the Iliad with a bit of a pun added re the current TPm arbcom "proposed decision" motion. I have not the foggiest idea what sort of denizens that committee has, but I have a slightly diminished respect for them at this point. (Proper quote is Φοβού τους Δαναούς και δώρα φέροντες but my Greek is not all that great now) Collect ( talk) 17:08, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
LGA talk edits 07:51, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
I agree with reverting it. If not for my crappy phone, with its slowness and touchscreen inviting errant rollbacks and other problems, I would have done it already. However, two things. I've noticed that a number of editors appear all too eager to throw around "famous" WRT to Sarah Palin, ignoring that WP:PEACOCK applies here, too. Second, this "fame" in re her association with Wasilla only applies to the past five years' history of a community whose overall history goes back nearly a century. She was only on the radar of the average follower of Alaska politics for about a decade before that, and that was mostly due to a news story about a wedding she presided over at the Walmart in Wasilla while mayor, where even back then she made some of the same sort of remarks she would later become "famous" for. Sounds to me like we're also eager to propagate undue weight here just because it's Sarah Palin we're talking about. Wasilla is probably just about as well-known today for its frequent appearances as a setting in Alaska State Troopers. RadioKAOS – Talk to me, Billy 06:37, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
Some editors are spending a considerable amount of effort trying to get remove articles about particularly brutal or well publicized attacks on persons on the basis of WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENT. No lasting effects or national/global scope. This will have the effect of removing any mass shooting or terrorist event short of shooting a school or president. Redhanker ( talk) 00:40, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
One particular editor User:Transcendence has been very busy on these articles:
Removed
It looks like this editor has declared some sort of editing war. He is trying infer that my edits are not balanced, but they always present all points of view rather than censoring out only one point of view. His choice of deletions appears to not promote a neutral point of view, but censoring to show only one side, or not show anything to do with terrorist plots, or media related to the government of a major nation-state Redhanker ( talk) 05:34, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
Hello. There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Transcendence (
talk)
02:40, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
and he is deleting more terrorism and politics related articles
I noticed that you've already helped out with the Tacoma Mall Shooting but you were probably unaware that this was a part of a pattern of an obviously abusive AFD campaign, as he had done a series of these. It would be as if these were related terrorist events and someone who had knowledge that they were connected wanted to remove any documentation of these events knowing that there is no penalty for at least trying to find which AFDs would not be contested. It is all too easy to delete articles for which there is little traffic and nobody notices. What would you recommend to be the proper way to bring this to the attention of the community or an appropriate admin? There seems to be a recurring pattern of any article that covers a terrorist event, or an event that is similar to a terrorist attack is soon nominated for deletion no matter how much international coverage it gets. This was the only other editor I contacted, so it's not a case of CANVASS, and it is something that needs the help of more than one editor as there are a few editors that seem to work with each other to help these AFD's along
Could you help restore the Portland shooting article? Redhanker ( talk) 04:35, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
|
WIKIPEDIA TAKES PORTLAND 2013! You're invited to participate in the upcoming "Wikipedia Takes Portland" campaign, to be held during the month of September. The local campaign occurs annually in conjunction with Wikipedia Takes America and Wiki Loves Monuments in the United States. Photographing sites included on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) is the main focus of Wikipedia Takes Portland. In typical Wikipedia fashion, you can work individually or create a team. Details and signup here! |
---|
-- Another Believer ( Talk) 15:31, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
You might notice the wisdom of ArbCom does not impress me currently, so I am "outta here" except for matters of substantial concern. I shall, of course, note their "wisdom" in any ACE2013 essay, and invite others to do so as well. Please remove grave-dancers from my page, as I expect two of them <g>. With deepest respect, Collect ( talk) 12:39, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
I'm not a "reformed sockpuppetteer". Per WP:AVOIDYOU, "discussion of a user's conduct or history" outside of the proper venue is a personal attack, and AfDs are made exclusively to discuss whether or not a topic deserves a stand-alone article, not to discuss user conduct. Besides that, I will not allow you to propagate gratuitous lies about me, so remove that part of your comment, and leave TTN alone. If you think you have reasons to complain, go to WP:ANI. Folken de Fanel ( talk) 18:59, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi! As you were one of the keep voters of this article at the AfD, i thought of informing you of the discussion started at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2013 September 14. Good day! §§ Dharmadhyaksha§§ { T/ C} 10:36, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I am sorry that I got upset and said things that you apparently construed as potentially being a legal threat. That was absolutely was never my intention. I hope that my actions in the future will never cause you to have any such concerns again. And I hope that I never allow your actions inspire me to say something that offends you. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 03:05, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
Wait, so Jclemens is personally attacking me on other users' talk pages, now ? I am not a sockpuppeteer and will not tolerate to be called as such. Please remove the personal attacks you wrote about me on TRPOD's talk page. Folken de Fanel ( talk) 01:41, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello. There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --
TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom
04:09, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
Jclemens, Delta Pi Delta was marked for proposed deletion on 6 October 2010 and was ultimately deleted because the proposal expired with no objections. This article is about a (the only) fraternity at Mount Olive College, and passes the notability test required for such organizations. Can you please revert the deletion so that I can add it to my sandbox and provide proper sources so that it is not deleted in the future? Thanks much, Cc09091986 ( talk) 23:11, 25 September 2013 (UTC).
Could you put a copy of deleted article into my user space? There seems to be a lot of effort to delete articles on incidents that look like terrorist-style attacks with no motive other than to cause death and mayhem no matter how much interest they generate in the media, including articles on Al Shabab atrocities and industrial accidents in China. Belton generated a ton of controversy on the heels of the Treyvon case Redhanker ( talk) 21:13, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
[2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], etc. ad nauseum (I only use the last week -- this has now been going on for four years) I believe may quite reach the epitome of persobal attack/stalking. I think you might look into that editor's seeming predisposition to comment on my every act. [8] I consider four years long enough to abide such conduct. Cheers. Collect ( talk) 13:26, 27 September 2013 (UTC) [9] shows his further intent to stalk -- by announcing that he is on "wikistrike" etc. I rather think the evidence of his stalking my edits is irruftable, as is his stated intent to seek my departure from Wikipedia. Cheers. Collect ( talk) 15:54, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Jclemens, Please remove protection from Randy Gage, I have a new content for it. I made same request to Joe Decker. Thank you. — JOHNMOORofMOORLAND ( talk) 18:57, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Jclemens, Please, look at my discussion with Joe Decker and help review Randy Gage (prosperity coach). I want protection removed from Randy Gage, so I can move Randy Gage (prosperity coach) there. Thank you. — JOHNMOORofMOORLAND ( talk) 10:48, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
May be I let my emotions get the better of me there, sorry, but is the last revision before deletion a blatant or unambiguous advertising or promotion which cannot be kept?! Joe Decker was too busy then to guide me through what needs to be done, so expected that DGG should have provided a guide, but he slammed a speedy. — JOHNMOORofMOORLAND ( talk) 12:16, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
|
WIKI LOVES LIBRARIES 2013! You're invited to attend the upcoming "Wiki Loves Libraries" edit-athon. The event will be held from 1–4pm on Sunday, October 13, 2013 at the Portland Art Museum's Crumpacker Family Library, located on the second floor of the Museum's Mark Building (formerly the Masonic Temple). The edit-athon will focus on the local arts community (but you can work on other topics as well!). It will also kick off the Oregon Arts Project, an on-wiki initiative to improve coverage of the arts in Oregon. Details and signup here! |
---|
Hope to see you there! -- Another Believer ( Talk) 16:23, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello, Jclemens. I'd like your opinion on the reason given for an AfD, namely Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Content_audit . I know you look at lots of AfDs and that you tend to be an inclusionist. The reason for deleting Content audit seems to be "the sources could be better". For my own personal information, I'd like to know if, in your opinion, that's a valid reason to nominate an AfD. (As I said at the AfD, I looked at WP:DELETE and I don't see this rationale on the list of 14 reasons to delete). I recognize that Yoninah is one heckuvan editor and his expertise should not be dismissed lightly. On the other hand, neither should yours! I have already voted "Keep" and commented at the AfD, and the trend is toward "Keep". Thank you for your time. -- 96.231.113.61 ( talk) 22:41, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Update: it was closed as Keep, but I'd still appreciate your opinion. Thanks. -- 96.231.113.61 ( talk) 23:43, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
I've restored the ten pages in question. I've left a message for the editor who expressed an interest in improving those articles, requesting that they be improved within ten days, or I'll take them to AfD.
There is respect for process, and then there is worship of process. Sometimes the line between the two can be a little blurry; ultimately, however, I do not approve of glorifying process for its own sake. Bureaucracy is meant to be a tool, not a master. There's a difference between guidelines and rules.
I make mistakes on occasion, and I'm certainly willing to apologize when that happens — and in fact, I have done so many times before. I utterly reject your premise, however, that it was a mistake for me to differ from the consensus which subsequently emerged.
On a tangentially related point, how much newpage patrol do you do? DS ( talk) 13:21, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
I'm new to creating articles and have had a hard time researching/finding people in charge to provide advice and insight on how to create articles and publish correctly. I am wondering if you could provide any insight on what I've done so far, the usual review process, and when I should submit my page for approval? As mentioned before, very new to this. Thanks for your time! DrDillard ( talk) 11:22, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
Ok, thanks for time and advice. Yeah, I still need to find some specific sources for those inline comments. I'll be sure to look up some articles on formatting before submitting the article for approval. Thanks again! DrDillard ( talk) 09:06, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
In regards to this DRV [10] is there a way I can get a copy of the article from the last deleted version? It took me a while to format all the refs and stuff and I could really benefit. I was hoping that the DRV process would restore it, but new events have transpired: a red link user recreated the article in bad shape, another user speedied, another user declined the speedy, now it sits in bad shape and I still don't have access to the version I was working on earlier from the last speedy.. sigh. -- Green Cardamom ( talk) 20:49, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
As you participated in the above AFD, as per the close I have opened up a proper merge discussion at Talk:Dragon Ball and you are welcome to participate.— Ryulong ( 琉竜) 07:18, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
I left you a message by Memoserv on IRC. Please respond ASAP; thank you. DS ( talk) 17:19, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Have you had a chance to check the correctness of your note at WP:Articles for deletion/Plane (Magic: The Gathering)? Flatscan ( talk) 05:14, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
Do you intend to respond? You haven't replied to my detailed comments from November 11–12. Flatscan ( talk) 05:11, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
[12] yet again. My talk page at the very top tells folks not to redact the edits of others, which is a matter of principle IMHO. Collect ( talk) 20:28, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi, you participated in Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 December 29#T:, some of which I have relisted at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2013 November_18#T:WPTECH. Please come along and share your thoughts .. ;-) John Vandenberg ( chat) 15:38, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
![]() In past Backlog Drives, the goal was to reduce the backlog of Good article nominations. In the upcoming drive, another goal will be added - raising as much money as we can for the Wikimedia Foundation. How will this work? Well, its pretty simple. Any user interested in donating can submit a pledge at the Backlog Drive page (linked above). The pledge should mention the amount of money the user is willing to donate per review. For example, if a user pledges 5 cents per review and 100 nominations are reviewed, the total donation amount is $5.00. At the time this message was sent out, two users have submitted pledges for a total of 8 cents per review. All pledges, no matter how much money, are greatly appreciated. Also, in no way is this saying you must make a pledge. |
Hi!
I see that you deleted, quite rightly and deservedly, the article for Mateo Roskam, a Croatian football (soccer) player, in 2009. /info/en/?search=Mateo_Roskam
He has, however, become eligible for inclusion in 2013, playing for a club in a fully professional league (Slaven Belupo in the Croatian Prva HNL) -> http://www.transfermarkt.com/en/mateo-roskam/leistungsdaten/spieler_46790.html (for example), and I thought it would be cool if the article was restored - I'd update it immediately with relevant data.
Thank you for your help!
Zlopseto ( talk) 17:32, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi, this discussion concerns a remark you made in an AfD that I closed almost a month ago. Just a heads up. Cheers! -- Randykitty ( talk) 08:16, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
I think the edit history [14] may be mentioned without further comment? I can not raise anything specific even at BLP/N as I understand it, hence and only am noting the aggregate contribution history. Cheers. Collect ( talk) 20:12, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
![]() If you know anyone outside of the WikiProject that may be interested, feel free to invite them to the drive! |
That Earl DRV saw 6 endorses and 4 overturns, you can't just toss that aside in favor of your own opinion on the matter. We don't promote people to the admin corps to make decisions for us, we promote you to act according to the consensus of the community. Or in the brief 2 days this DRV was open, a lack thereof. This will get ugly if you don't have a change of heart; re-delete the article and allow the DRV to run its course, please. Tarc ( talk) 02:06, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
(e/c): Hi Jclemens. I have undone your out-of-process close of the DRV. I understand that you are passionate about this, but it is not appropriate to short-circuit our review processes in such a manner. If you are right that my AfD close was incorrect, I am sure you will be able to persuade the other DRV participants of that, and a neutral editor will close the DRV accordingly. Please note that I have not re-deleted the article (and I will not) because, as you say, that could be interpreted as wheel-warring. At the end of the 7 days, the closer will either re-delete or keep restored the article as appropriate. Let's just both be patient and let the DRV run its course. 28bytes ( talk) 06:36, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
Sorry to pile on here, but I think your use of BLP special enforcement is quite dubious. My understanding is that BLP spec is to ensure that articles are compliant with the BLP policy. And there is nothing in there about keeping an article because the presence of the article might earn the subject money. In fact I think this is somewhat opposed to Wikipedia's purpose, which is to document notable people/companies/etc not a place to promote people. Also WP:Deletion review#Temporary undeletion states that articles should be blanked, rather than the decision be completely reversed. Anyway, interested in your reasoning. Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 09:02, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
Do not do this [15] again. Your invocation of BLPBAN has been found to be frivolous, by a clear and active consensus of uninvolved observers at WP:ANI, and I – as an uninvolved administrator – have therefore formally marked it as overturned. As your BLP invocation has been found invalid, you are at this point neither entitled to hand out further "warnings" in this matter, nor to edit-war and invoke 3RR exemptions on the article. If you continue to edit against consensus in this matter, it will very likely end in you being blocked, and if you continue to abuse your admin role in the same way, it will end in your being desysoped. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:19, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
Saying that deletion would "deprive him of charitable contributions" means that you want it kept to advertise his charity. Violation of WP:CONSENSUS (your supervote), WP:SOAPBOX and probably WP:COI. Dark Sun ( talk) 17:57, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
You have been blocked for 24 hours due to a growing consensus on ANI that your recent actions have constituted a disruprive abuse of adminship, as well as a seeming failure to admit the problem and a seeming likelihood for the problem to reoccur. A discussion is underway regarding your suitability to continue to hold admin privileges. If you wish to be unblocked to take part in this discussion, this can be done provided you agree not to return to the issues which have caused this block. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 18:18, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
Jclemens ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
The result of the AfD is still objectively unreasonable and should not stand; the deletion of Mr. Earl's page serves to harm him by obscuring public awareness of the notable individual's plight; and I expect that an arbitration committee well versed in BLP matters will find that I have acted within their designated remit, while the other administrators involved have not. Jclemens-public ( talk) 20:04, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I'm declining this request for unblock for now because of the edit warring on Henry Earl. I think 24 hours is suitable time for a preventative block and for the ANI thread to complete. I won't bother blocking your alternate public account, which I think would just be an insult to an otherwise trustworthy admin, unless you stray from your talk page. However, if you can assure me that you will restrict yourself to your talk page, the ANI thread discussing you, and if you choose, Arbcom, then I will consider unblocking you under those restrictions (for the remainder of the 24 hours).--v/r - T P 22:51, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
The sanction you invoked on prevention of blanking is ownership and it was not official. Please stop insisting it should be kept as a soapbox. Dark Sun ( talk) 20:24, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
I have closed the proposal that you banned from using your administrative tools where it concerns the policy on biographies of living persons as no consensus. Some opposed the sanction outright, others believe that this should an ArbCom issue.
Just speaking as an observing editor with an eight year track record (which includes sparking off a controversy by blocking Tony Sidaway over a DRV dispute several years ago), I don't think that your interpretation of the BLP enforcement policy will gain any more traction on ArbCom than it did in the community. Using IAR in this manner is also rather implausible. While "no firm rules" is indeed a pillar, it is not one that can be used as a club to knock down other pillars (in this case, people may think you have been swinging at the "Wikipedia is an encyclopedia" pillar). If the issue is not resolved, and the case winds up with ArbCom, I don't think they would be sympathetic to you here. Since I would hate to lose you as an administrator and editor, I recommend that you commit not to do something like this again. Sjakkalle (Check!) 20:39, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect T:AD. Since you had some involvement with the T:AD redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). WOSlinker ( talk) 11:22, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
Regretfully, since this situation appears likely to recur, I am filing a request for arbitration regarding the Henry Earl issue. DavidLeighEllis ( talk) 16:52, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The Resilient Barnstar |
I'm sorry things unfolded the way they did. Keep your head out of drama, keep your chin up, and have a positive outlook. Take a short break to let your mind clear up and then create some awesome content. Best wishes, Sportsguy17 ( talk • contribs • sign) 02:36, 16 December 2013 (UTC) |
The arbitration case request that you were a party to has been declined by the Committee. For the Arbitration Committee, Rs chen 7754 05:26, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
Please do not follow the direction of your current inclination! Take a couple days to fully consider your steps; weighing the ramifications. Do not move with haste, choosing instead thoughtful deliberation. You owe this much to yourself, and to those who will render support if given a chance. Please, wait two more days; in peaceful meditation, then comment on what you have decided. Sincerely.— John Cline ( talk) 01:03, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
Please excuse me if I don't respond individually at all promptly. I'm serious about the Wikibreak bit--I don't believe in posting later-rescinded retired templates. I still believe in the Wikipedia ethos, but I think I'm going to go back to working into less Balkanized areas, like, oh, getting recent television episodes to GA. The saying "friends come and go, but enemies accumulate" is not entirely true, but it's true enough that no matter what the case outcome, every significant admin action I tried to take would be marred by the fallout--indeed, this was the first one taken since I was not reelected, and I suppose being surprised at the vitriol and ferocity of the response was naive of me. For now, I'm going to see The Desolation of Smaug. I'll be back once I find the time to do some encyclopedia-building. Cheers, Jclemens ( talk) 02:15, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
On your promotion! There is a reason they call admin tools the mop. Its much more fun to write articles and participate in discussions as an editor with only your power of persuasion. The people who have impaired Mr. Earl's livelihood in a paternalistic spasm of intended do-gooder censorship will have to live with their sins. Seriously, I hope you are able to return and have fun, otherwise there is no reason to be here. Cheers.-- Milowent • has spoken 17:27, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
|
Hello Jclemens: Thanks for all of your contributions to improve the encyclopedia for Wikipedia's readers, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, BusterD ( talk) 06:34, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
![]()
|
It's that time again! Starting on March 1, there will be another GAN Backlog Drive! There will be several changes compared to previous drives:
Also, something that I thought I would share with all of you is that we raised $20.88 (USD) for the WMF in the December 2013 drive. It may not sound like a lot but considering that that was raised just because we reviewed articles, I would say that's pretty good! With that success, pledges can be made for the upcoming drive if you wish.
More info regarding the drive and full descriptions regarding the changes to this drive can be found on the the drive page. If you have any questions, feel free to leave a message on the drive talk page.
I look forward to your participation and hope that because of it, some day the backlog will be gone!
--Dom497
-- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 00:58, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
This article Veterans Today which had a lot of wikilinks from articles was just deleted. Could you drop off a copy of the deleted article someplace where it I could look at it? I could not even find any record of any discussion of deletion. Bachcell ( talk) 16:53, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
Bachcell, if you want to work on this article in your userspace, please do so, and focus on rewriting it to make sure that BLP violations are removed. If you are unable to do so, I am going to have to delete this article again. BOZ ( talk) 09:11, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
The March 2014 GAN Backlog Drive has begun and will end on April 1, 2014! Sent by Dom497 on behalf of MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 21:01, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi Jclemens, you are invited to come meet fellow wiki enthusiasts at WikiWednesday, a series of meetups for fans of Wikipedia, PortlandWiki, and wikis in general. If you are interested in attending, we will be meeting at NedSpace (619 SW 11th Avenue, Suite 250, at the corner of SW 11th and Morrison) at 6pm on Wednesday, May 21. You would be welcome to work on Wikipedia articles of your choosing, or other preferred wikis. I'll be there to help out. Hope to see you there! (Feel free to RSVP on my talk page or here.) -- Another Believer ( Talk) 23:16, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi, you deleted this page in 2009. Could you post what was deleted on my talk page, so I can get a sense of what's needed? thanks-- Aichik ( talk) 19:32, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello Jclemens,
I would like to re-establish the page for myself as Trevor Snarr or create a new one. I'm heavily back into acting again and would like to note other life accomplishments as in college degree, military service, LDS ministry service along with humanitarian service. Please view my imdb page www.imdb.me/trevorsnarr
Any help with this request would be greatly appreciated. Hope your well and hope to hear from you soon.
Best, Trevor Snarr — Preceding unsigned comment added by TrevorSnarr ( talk • contribs) 05:07, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello everyone! Hope you've all been having a great summer!
TheQ Editor recently proposed the idea of having another Backlog Drive in either September/October or November/December of this year. For those of you who have participated in the past two drives you know I was the one who organized them, however, come September, this will be my most important year in school so I will not be able to coordinate this drive (if it happens). TheQ Editor has volunteered to be a coordinator for the drive. If any of you would like to co-coordinator, please notify TheQ Editor on his talk page.
If you would be interested in participating in a Backlog Drive sometime before the end of this year, please notify TheQ Editor. Also, make sure to specify what month(s) work best for you.
At the time this message was sent out, the backlog was at 520 nominations. Since May, the backlog has been steadily increasing and we are currently near an all time high. Even though the backlog will not disappear over one drive, this drive can lead to several others which will (hopefully) lead to the day where there is no longer a backlog.
As always, the more participants, the better, and everyone is encouraged to participate!
Sent by Dom497-- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 15:52, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
Greetings. Because you have already cast a vote for the 2013 Arbitration Committee Elections, I regret to inform you that due to a misconfiguration of the SecurePoll we've been forced to strike all votes and reset voting. This notice is to inform you that you will need to vote again if you want to be counted in the poll. The new poll is located at this link. You do not have to perform any additional actions other than voting again. If you have any questions, please direct them at the election commissioners. --For the Election Commissioners, v/r, TParis
BOZ (
talk) is wishing you a
Merry
Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes
WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{ subst: User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
I'm wishing you a Merry Christmas, because that is what I celebrate. If you don't like Christmas or just don't celebrate it in any of its forms, then please accept a generic "Happy Holidays". If you celebrate no holidays at this time of year, then hopefully you will be satisfied with an even more generic "Season's Greetings". :)
You are invited! Wiki Loves Pride | |
---|---|
You are invited to participate in Wiki Loves Pride, a global campaign to create and improve LGBT-related content at Wikipedia during the month of June, culminating with a multinational edit-a-thon on June 21. The project is being spearheaded by two organizers with roots in the Pacific Northwest. Meetups are being organized in some cities, or you can participate remotely. Wikimedia Commons will also be hosting an LGBT-related photo challenge. In Portland, there are two ways to contribute. One is a photography campaign called "Pride PDX", for pictures related to LGBT culture and history. The Wiki Loves Pride edit-a-thon will be held on Saturday, June 21 from noon–4pm at Smith Memorial Student Union, Room 236 at Portland State University. Prior Wikipedia editing is not required; assistance will be available the day of the event. Attendees should bring their own laptops and cords. Feel free to showcase your work here!
If you have any questions, please leave a message here. You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Oregon-related events and projects by removing your name from this list. |
Greetings, my user:WayneRay page was deleted for supposed vandalism etc. I have been incarcirated for three years and had instructed my daughter to edit and update my main page and delete the previous vandalisms. She was not internet savvy as I had thought so her mistakes were considered the errors of which you speak. Can my user page be replaced? I can use this new one but have to edit all the updated links WayneScottRay ( talk) 18:24, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello everyone! We hope you have all been having a great summer!
As we all know, the recent GAN Backlog Drives have not had any big impact on the backlog. Because of that, me (Dom497), Figureskatingfan, and TheQ Editor have worked on an idea that could possibly finally put a dent into the massive backlog. Now, I will admit, the idea isn't entirely ours as we have took the general idea of the WikiCup and brought it over to WikiProject Good Articles. But anyways, here's what we have in mind:
For all of you that do not know what the WikiCup is, it is an annual competition between several editors to see who can get the most Good Articles, Featured Article's, Did You Know's, etc. Based of this, we propose to you the GA Cup. This competition will only focus on reviewing Good articles.
For more info on the proposal, click here. As a FYI, the proposal page is not what the final product will look like (if you do go ahead with this idea). It will look very similar to WikiCup's page(s).
The discussion for the proposal will take place here. Please let us know if you are interested, have any concerns, things to consider, etc.
--Dom497, Figureskatingfan, and TheQ Editor
MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 01:29, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
![]() |
You are invited to the Feminist+Queer Art Wikipedia Edit-a-thon, to be held on Saturday, September 13, 2014 from noon–4pm at the Independent Publishing Resource Center (IPRC), located at 1001 SE Division (97202). Prior Wikipedia editing is not required; assistance will be available the day of the event. Attendees should bring their own laptops and power cords. Female editors are particularly encouraged to attend, but all are welcome. Hope to see you there! If you have any questions, please leave a message
on the talk page. -- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 15:59, 4 September 2014 (UTC) |
---|
![]() WikiProject Good articles is holding a new competition, the GA Cup, from October 1, 2014 - March 28, 2015. The Cup will be based on reviewing Good article nominations; for each review, points will be awarded with bonuses for older nominations, longer articles and comprehensive reviews. All participants will start off in one group and the highest scoring participants will go through to the second round. At the moment six rounds are planned, but this may change based on participant numbers. Some of you may ask: what is the purpose for a competition of this type? Currently, there is a backlog of about 500 unreviewed Good article nominations, almost an all time high. It is our hope that we can decrease the backlog in a fun way, through friendly competition. Everyone is welcome to join; new and old editors! Sign-ups will be open until October 15, 2014 so sign-up now! If you have any questions, take a look at the FAQ page and/or contact one of the four judges. Cheers from NickGibson3900, Dom497, TheQ Editor and Figureskatingfan. -- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 19:04, 15 September 2014 (UTC) To receive future GA Cup newsletter, please add your name to
our mailing list.
|
First of all, let me know what I do wrong at any stage of the process here. I'm brand spanking new to editing wikipedia and I'm probably making all kinds of errors.
I read your page about deletion and as far as I can tell I'm going about this correctly. In 2009 you deleted the page for Massive (music software) for "No demonstration of notability independent of the company that produces the product; no third party sourcing." I don't know if Massive was as well known in 2009 as it is today, but it's phenomenally important now, as far as EDM production goes. Quite a few major bass music producer have publicly acknowledged using it, and its sound was very influential.
http://www.musicradar.com/us/tuition/tech/the-54-best-vst-au-plugin-synths-in-the-world-today-262145/53 Skrillex listing Massive as one of his favorite synths: http://www.musicradar.com/us/news/tech/interview-skrillex-on-ableton-live-plug-ins-production-and-more-510973 Excision listing Massive as his go-to synth: http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/1dwbbj/i_am_excision_dubstep_producerdjrobot_dinosaur/c9ugd8x Some pages dedicated to tutorials/use: https://www.facebook.com/MassiveSynth http://adsrsounds.com/synth/massive/ http://www.massivesynth.com
Just let me know what to do next and I'll give it a shot.
The RfC: Is Westeros.org a suitable source for this content? was closed with the result that Westeros.org is reliable but that whether the disputed text was valuable enough to include should be addressed separately. The closing editor recommended that all participants in the RfC and related RSN discussion be informed that such a discussion was under way:
RfC: RfC: Should the article state which chapters appear in the episode?
If any of you wish to make a statement on this matter, you are welcome to do so and your contribution would be greatly appreciated. If any of you would prefer to stay away from this dispute, I think we can all get that too. Darkfrog24 ( talk) 16:08, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
Your post in Oathkeeper was a bit attack-y, don't you think? I find it amazing that you jump down my throat over a matter that I did not start, over content that should not be in the article, instead of focusing on the one person who fought tooth and nail against no less than three different consensus' and RfCs. I think that, at best, you might want to rephrase your snarky post about my Wikipedia experience. And I am saying please. - Jack Sebastian ( talk) 17:08, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for this most astute statement. ( Littleolive oil ( talk) 15:50, 7 December 2014 (UTC))
Hey Jclemens, good to see you around. Have ayed you on autopatrolled, rollback & pending. Write back if you want any other assistance any time. Wifione Message 14:43, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
You are invited!
Hope you can make it! If you have any questions or require any special accommodations, please let me know.
Thanks,
To unsubscribe from this newsletter, remove your name from this list. - MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 04:19, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Hello and good afternoon (at least it is afternoon where I am). I was looking at the Wikipedian firefighters category and noticed that you are one of the members of the Wikipedia community that lists yourself as being a firefighter. First and foremost let me say thank you for your service. While I myself am not a firefighter, I do work as a photographer with multiple local fire departments. I am honored to have firefighters as some of my closest friends.
I have been taking an active role in the Fire Service WikiProject and am trying to recruit more members to this cause. If this is something you have any interest in, please let me know? You can leave me a message on my talk page. Obviously there is zero obligation. An interest can be anything from helping out with a couple of pages in your local area to helping to overhaul major templates, and anything in between.
Once again, thank you for your service. Hope to hear from you soon. Stay safe! -- Zackmann08 ( talk) 17:52, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for uploading File:SansapleadsforNed.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.
If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Josh Milburn ( talk) 15:01, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
My ability to assume good faith is dwindling. This message very clearly constitutes canvassing. Perhaps the fact that it has been ignored/the only voice its brought to the discussion has been a negative one should tell you something. Josh Milburn ( talk) 08:46, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
The article I started some years ago on Journal of Physical Security was deleted by you as discussed at /info/en/?search=User_talk:Nealmcb#Proposed_deletion_of_Journal_of_Physical_Security. It has become more active since then, and now has an ISSN. Could you provide the most recent content from the deleted article as a Draft so we can review it and consider whether it is notable, worth updating and making an article again? Thanks. ★NealMcB★ ( talk) 14:07, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Thank you very much for the kind words about my recent Quality improvement efforts.
Much appreciated,
— Cirt ( talk) 00:51, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
13:58, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
BOZ (
talk) is wishing you a
Merry
Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes
WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{ subst: User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
I'm wishing you a Merry Christmas, because that is what I celebrate. If you don't like Christmas or just don't celebrate it in any of its forms, then please accept a generic "Happy Holidays". If you celebrate no holidays at this time of year, then hopefully you will be satisfied with an even more generic "Season's Greetings". :) BOZ ( talk) 18:55, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Sure, but is that the case when whiners dishonestly define the tamest statements of fact as "harm" merely to ban people for wrongthink? I don't think you fully realize how corrupt and dishonest this current ArbCom is. 70.56.27.239 ( talk) 21:51, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
Hawkeye7 RfA Appreciation award |
Thank you for participating in and supporting my RfA. It was very much appreciated. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 20:57, 1 February 2016 (UTC) |
Waaaay back during the dawn of time, I reviewed the "Fire and Blood" Game of Thrones episode for you. Almost four years later, I have returned to ask a (perhaps random) favor. I'm currently in grad school working on an MA thesis on Wikipedia, fandom, and canon. Judging from your GA content, it seems that you have a soft spot for some TV shows, and I was wondering if I could ask you a few (~10) questions about how fans like yourself aggregate and define "canon" on Wikipedia in regards to cultural media objects (e.g. TV shows, movies)? You're under no obligation to say yes (I realize that you are semi-retired), but I just thought I'd ask! I'm sorry that this might seem super-weird or out of the blue!-- Gen. Quon (Talk) 22:21, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi Jclemens, As part of a series of articles on women in video games, I'm looking to create an article on Mieko Ishikawa. I notice that a previous version was deleted in February 2010; likely because of insufficient sources. While this is a long time ago, I'm wondering if it is possible to have a copy restored to my Sandbox. I notice that you are now listed as semi-retired, so will create a new draft in User space in any case. Thanks in advance. - Ryk72 'c.s.n.s.' 01:40, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
You are involved in a recently-filed request for clarification or amendment from the Arbitration Committee. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment#Amendment request: Rodhullandemu and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the Wikipedia:Arbitration guide may be of use.
Thanks, -- George Ho ( talk) 06:16, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi; just to say, thank you for your explanation, and for responding to this; I shall go and have think about it (but not tonight!) Regards, Xyl 54 ( talk) 23:42, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
Hi, since we interacted on the article Ark Encounter, where you rendered a 3O, I'm reaching out to you for an opinion. It has been suggested to me by editor Coretheapple in the Discussion area of a current GA reassessment that the review be brought to the attention of a wider audience. The reassessment raises the questions of sourcing; neutrality; and level of detail present in the article. The article in question is Hyacinth Graf Strachwitz.
I would welcome input or a review of the article to see if it still meets Wikipedia:Good article criteria and whether it should be retained or delisted as a Good article. I would appreciate any feedback you could share. K.e.coffman ( talk) 20:04, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for looking. I don't think your opinion would be redundant, as there was a lot of comments from MilHist coordinators to the effect of: "This source is fine"; "I think the lede is excellent"; "The more detail the better"; "No, this is important"; "I suggest you have a look at some other military biographical articles and educate yourself, because you are way off base with this"; "And at a glance I can see important points, like the fact that he spent twelve years as an Oberleutnant"; "You would need to establish that Gordon Williamson is not reliable"; "I strongly disagree. I personally prefer the German version"; "...this GAR has been a complete waste of the valuable time of a number of experienced editors"; "this is arrant nonsense" [my comments]; much more. I'm concerned that the MilHist community would treat this a "no consensus" and this lack of consensus would block further reassessment of similarly flawed articles, such as Heinz-Wolfgang Schnaufer, Otto Kittel and Kurt Welter, among what appears to be dozens of others.
I've already seen this in edit summaries from the editor who opposed the edits to the Strachwitz article, such as:
I see a lot of emphasis on "this is how we who? do things" and "this has been established by consensus", resulting in articles that look similar to the Strachwitz one.
If you'd rather not contribute, that's totally cool and then thanks for letting me vent! :-). But if you have any suggestions on how to handle things going forward, that would be much appreciated. Either way is fine. K.e.coffman ( talk) 00:40, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
I know neither of us is particularly active these days, but I'm glad to see we're both still breathing. Best wishes and if I can ever be of service, please feel invited to call on me. BusterD ( talk) 04:15, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
I need to check the OTRS permissions of two files in Nadia Kaabi-Linke as part of a GA review. I've not used OTRS in years and my account is long since gone--can any Talk Page Stalker log in and find/update the status of those two images? Thanks! Jclemens ( talk) 02:18, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi
Did you know about Wikiversity Journal of Medicine? It is an open access, peer reviewed medical journal, with no publication charges. You can find more about it by reading the article on The Signpost featuring this journal.
We welcome you to have a look the journal. Feel free to participate.
You can participate in any one or more of the following ways:
The future of this journal as a separate Wikimedia project is under discussion and the name can be changed suitably. Currently a
voting for the same is underway. Please cast your vote in the name you find most suitable. We would be glad to receive further suggestions from you. It is also acceptable to mention your votes in the wide-reachwikiversityjournal.org email list. Please note that the voting closes on 16th August, 2016, unless protracted by consensus, due to any reason.
Diptanshu Talk 14:08, 11 August 2016 (UTC) -on behalf of the Editorial Board, Wikiversity Journal of Medicine.
Hello Jclemens,
I would just like to inquire on your status on WikiProject Computer Security as the list of WikiProject Computer Security/Members is going to be improved to list active and inactive users.
This is update is being done according to a request for comments on the WikiProject Computer Security talk page. Be sure to state your status at the User status section in the WikiProject Computer Security talk page before the end of four weeks as this will state your status as inactive in the project if not done before then.
FockeWulf FW 190 ( talk) 19:55, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi. I saw you deleted the following content: Insertion of an NPA is absolutely contraindicated in patients with severe head or facial injuries, or have evidence of a basilar skull fracture ( Battle's sign, raccoon eyes, cerebrospinal fluid/blood from ears, etc.) due to the possibility of direct intrusion into brain tissue. from Nasopharyngeal airway with the reason: "That's not only uncited, it's factually incorrect."
I have heard this on several courses and think I also saw in my advance life support manual from ERC (I have not checked before posting). I have reverted your edit for now but if you could provide any form of evidence why this is incorrect I would love see it. I tried to do a quick search and only found this [18], an article I do not have access to (maybe you do). ...I know it is apples and oranges but I have seen a CT-scan of a nasogastric tube displaced into the lateral ventricle in a patient with a basilar fracture, so I have decided to revert you edit for now.
Kind regards JakobSteenberg ( talk) 20:16, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Sorry for the slight delay. I have been reading more on the biology sections and should have a rewrite ready in the article of the last parts that need reorganisation at the end hopefully tomorrow. Then I will ping you again. I'm really sorry this has lasted this long but I want the article to really deserve the green plus at the end of it. Double sharp ( talk) 16:14, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi Jclemens: Thanks for reviewing! I have copy edited the article and provided replies at Talk:ReaLemon/GA1. North America 1000 22:44, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Multiple Good Article Reviewer's Barnstar | |
Thank you for your participation in the August 2016 GAN backlog drive! For reviewing 15 articles, you get this award. Thanks again. JAG UAR 14:03, 1 September 2016 (UTC) |
I read what you said in the DRV about the Larry Y. Wilson article I have been trying to get reinstated. I would welcome the chance to work off the old article to make a new one better, but I would need that page userfied so I could have access to it. You could even restore it to my sandbox or whatever needs to be done in that regard. I would also be open to having an impartial, non-LDS editor look at the article before it's published again, just to make sure everything's in order. Thanks for letting me know that is an option. I was not aware of this. -- Jgstokes ( talk) 05:41, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
I like your suggestion of "curationist" as alternative inbetween wp:inclusionist and wp:exclusionist. I would sport a curationist userbox at my User-page, if/when you create one! Maybe it would require an essay over at meta, however. BTW, I admire your array of userboxes. I hope to achieve dan rank in a martial art someday, too. Cheers, -- do ncr am 19:31, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for the good sources you provided during the Thought eater AFD. I tried to use some of those same sources to restore Quickling, Flail snail, and Vegepygmy but they were all promptly reverted. I am not sure if they just need more sources like that. 65.126.152.254 ( talk) 21:13, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
I realize that was likely just a typo in your response to SwisterTwister, but with "automagically" I think you may have just coined a new phrase! And if it was intentional, then it was a bit of genius. ;) BOZ ( talk) 11:30, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
Actually, I vacated only SSTflyer's NAC of the DRV, not his closure (or relisting) of the AfD. But I suppose it does not matter. Sandstein 21:28, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
Thx for the flowers and the helping hand. I recently got some flak, when I stated that theology is a wissenschaft - the German expression (not at all synonym) for science in the broad sense. But I still stay with that ;) The encyclopedic entries used are true secondary sources about interesting issues, quoting the bible is primary and more of a bore now and then. Let us see what comes out of it. Polentarion Talk 19:13, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Sigh, been reverted. I would prefer to contribute to the GA, less to hinder the process.
Thats the one point that needs currently to be dealt with. I had a look on other "iron articles" and they are quite disappointing.
That said, WP fails to deliver on the humanities. Polentarion Talk 09:00, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
The entry is a good article now - congratulations! I saw that our sceptical friend stays in reversal mode without discussion and went on the talk page. Polentarion Talk 13:40, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Jclemens. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
I've just nominated nitrogen for GA: since you gave a wonderfully detailed review for iron that massively improved the article, I thought you might be interested. Double sharp ( talk) 05:03, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
Not everyone was contacted apparently for the strawpoll, so I'm telling you about it now. Talk:List_of_Rozen_Maiden_characters#Straw_Vote_Redirect_Dec_2016 Dream Focus 19:54, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Just letting you and the other editors who took part in the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Five Families (The Godfather) discussion know: it's been closed with a consensus to redirect, in case you want to create that target article and perform the merge. Joyous! | Talk 00:44, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
You are receiving this notification because you participated in a past RfC related to the use of extended confirmed protection levels. There is currently a discussion ongoing about two specific use cases of extended confirmed protection. You are invited to participate. ~ Rob13 Talk 16:12, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
Please refrain from accusing me of anti-Mormon bigotry, as you did here. It's not bigotry, it's common sense. Deseret News is indirectly owned by the LDS Church and has pledged to push a pro-Mormon point of view. How the hell can that be considered a neutral, independent source? And doesn't it seem problematic for a Mormon official to be only sourced from that and/or LDS Church websites? p b p 02:29, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
BOZ (
talk) is wishing you a
Merry
Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes
WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{ subst: User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
I'm wishing you a Merry Christmas, because that is what I celebrate. If you don't like Christmas or just don't celebrate it in any of its forms, then please accept a generic "Happy Holidays". If you celebrate no holidays at this time of year, then hopefully you will be satisfied with an even more generic "Season's Greetings". :) BOZ ( talk) 01:30, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi, I completed everything on your list for my 1984 review. I don't know if I formatted the comments correctly, since it's my first GA review. thanks -- Jennica✿ / talk 04:22, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello! I don't know if Wikipedia_talk:Sockpuppet_investigations/TTN is submitted correctly, but looking at http://tools.wmflabs.org/sigma/editorinteract.py?users=TTN&users=64.183.45.226&users=&startdate=&enddate=&ns=&server=enwiki it seems obvious something's up... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.112.201.254 ( talk) 23:00, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for your review of OR-7 and your kind comments. I'm glad you liked the article, and I'm especially pleased that you found it to be well-written and well-sourced. Finetooth ( talk) 04:52, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
I very much appreciate your offer, and I will contact you before nominating any Star Trek article for deletion. Are you by any chance interested in Babylon 5 topics as well? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 21:45, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
I am compiling data about The Unipiper as part of a Portland State University assignment. The subject mentioned his birthday on an episode of the podcast, The MarkandToddCast on August 12, 2016. I will be making more updates to the wiki article about this subject and I will try not to make too many mistakes. I will be adding television appearances, and awards and honors next. Nicholasbeatty ( talk) 12:08, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
User:Cylon B is identified as suckpuppeteer in a case filed by an anonymous IP user whom I helped by moving that case from talk page as IP users like him couldn't make a page. The pages he deleted must be reversed and I let you know as you know him right? Java777 ( talk) 11:27, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
![]() |
The Million Award | |
For your contributions to bring Nikola Tesla (estimated annual readership: 4,653,081) to Good Article status, I hereby present you the Million Award. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers! Laurdecl talk 05:08, 13 February 2017 (UTC) |
![]() |
The Premium Reviewer Barnstar | |
For your outstanding reviewing skills and dutiful work. Laurdecl talk 07:15, 13 February 2017 (UTC) |
I haven't been as vocal as you, but I also oppose the TVPLOT changes which only allow for one level of plot summary following an article's lead. I'm sure there are plenty of other editors who would be upset – if they knew about the changes. If you still want to pursue the matter, I defer to your judgement. (I'm a little worried about being accused of canvassing if I notify editors the wrong way, and don't want to do anything that might undermine a possible second vote/poll.) Respectfully, Reidgreg ( talk) 15:18, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
The article
Game of Thrones: Season 1 (soundtrack) you nominated as a
good article has been placed on hold
. The article is close to meeting the
good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See
Talk:Game of Thrones: Season 1 (soundtrack) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Aoba47 --
Aoba47 (
talk)
16:02, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
If you're still interested, I've worked on getting silver to GAN: now it is there, and I remembered how many great points you raised for iron last year that I would never have thought of by myself. ^_^ Double sharp ( talk) 23:47, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Could you do the book for me? I can’t do that... Thanks! Best regards, Cartoon network freak ( talk) 12:13, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
I may look silly on occasion, but IMHO so do you when you are trying to defend totally meaningless fictional uber-footnote articles like Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eastern Alliance (2nd nomination). I presume you have watchlisted Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Fictional elements, so we can both meet there. If I am unsure, I won't hesitate to ask, and I do appreciate that you can dig out sources better than me, but I don't want to bother you with each and every fiction-related AfD I will start, since again we can all see them in the linked page collecting them. PS. But since I am interested in saving content where possible, I'll alert you to one more ST deletion that so far has not been listed on that page: Mackenzie Calhoun. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:11, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
Sometimes you are right, sometimes you are wrong, just like me. Sometimes I just tag things with notability for few months, sometimes I propose a merge and sometimes I take them to AfD when I don't think there is any benefit for us to keep the article. I guess I could just redirect them, but I feel bad doing so with no prior discussion. But when I post on the talk page nobody replies. Unless I ping you, then you always say keep, then we have to take it to AfD. And if I just redirect it, what would stop you from reverting me at which point we would end up at AfD anyway? At least at AfD you'll see it and so will others and we can have a decent discussion. Otherwise the article either won't change or would be 'stealthily' deleted. Btw, I am always ok with soft deletions, i.e. deletion through redirect, while leaving the history of old article in place. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:09, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Diplomacy |
This was one of the best, most gracious comments I've read in a long while. Thank you for your kindness, perspective, and gentle advocacy against grudge-holding. WhatamIdoing ( talk) 20:31, 8 May 2017 (UTC) |
You are invited to join the discussion at
Talk:Timeline of computer security hacker history#Really suitable for inclusion?.
198.98.51.57 (
talk)
04:40, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
Talk:Timeline of computer security hacker history#Listcrufts removal .
John1234ou812 (
talk)
04:49, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
A clarification to WP:UP/RFC2016 § B4 has been proposed. You participated in that discussion; your input is welcome at Wikipedia:User pages/RfC for stale drafts policy restructuring/B4 clarification. Thanks, — Godsy ( TALK CONT) 15:55, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello again. I read your comments at Talk:Firefly (TV series), indicating some interests, especially since you contributed to the article. I assume that you already know Wikipedia:Featured article review/Firefly (TV series)/archive1, though I'll remind of you this, just in case. -- George Ho ( talk) 23:57, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
Now the article is a candidate to become a former Featured Article with a broken star icon. Please comment there. Thanks. -- George Ho ( talk) 08:09, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The article was written entirely from an in-universe perspective, and the title is misleading and would be unhelpful to anyone who has not heard of "Space Ghost" (i.e. most people in the world). The context is simply inadequate, and the creator is not new, though his immediate recreation of the page shows that he has not read the guidelines. However, I agree that a redirect would have been preferable in the first instance. Deb ( talk) 07:08, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
Do what you like. Here I was, thinking that you'd been hard done by when you lost your adminship, but now I can see the reasons for it. Deb ( talk) 08:26, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
Thank you greatly for your thorough and thoughtful review, the article has improved greatly through your commentary - we have both devoted a lot of time to improving this article and it really is looking much better.
As it is, in my opinion (as the nominator), I think the article meets the good article criteria and think we have addressed the main GA-related issues and are now at the point of mostly stylistic improvements more styled towards an WP:FA review.
I have attempted to address all the issues you have raised, I feel we are getting to a point where our stylistic or linguistic preferences are diverging and this has the potential to have another month or so of discussions... this is going to result in my limited wiki time being spent less fruitfully than on improving other articles (which is my main joy here).
I would ask that you have a quick look at any issues you believe are outstanding based strictly on the good article criteria that would block promotion. Any other issues we can continue to discuss on the talk page... I am getting itchy feet. As it is, I am going on holiday for 2 weeks and look forward to seeing your reply then (or, let's face it I'll probably check whilst on holiday anyway!) Cheers, -- Tom (LT) ( talk) 14:16, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
![]() |
The Reviewer Barnstar | |
For your comprehensive and attentive review of Myocardial infarction. The article has improved dramatically because of your careful and well thought-out review. A stellar job! Tom (LT) ( talk) 16:04, 10 July 2017 (UTC) |
You are invited to join the discussion at
Talk:Nival_(company)#Nival got hacked last year. Encyclopedic to include?.
Pavel Novikov (
talk)
07:06, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
Since you have experience with Good/Featured topics, and I've seen you around several Christianity-related AfDs, I thought I might prod you to see if you have an opinion on my question at Wikipedia_talk:Featured_topic_questions#17th_century_papal_conclaves. Hope all is well. TonyBallioni ( talk) 20:27, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, this is the first article I've wrote that has been nominated for deletion, so I'm a little nervous about the whole thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Navarre0107 ( talk • contribs) 20:02, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
As a former admin you should know better then to make unsubstantiated personal attacks against another editor as you did here [21]. Comment on content not individuals. The ArbCom case you referenced was declined without me even making an opening statement. Heck I only typed one word before they started declining. Need more proof? User:Legacypac/CSD_log Feel free to retract your comment. Legacypac ( talk) 02:37, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
Hey Bro,
It looks like you are a good fighter. Can you plese give him - Luke Shen-Tien Chi and Spokenology: You and Me - a shot.Thanks man! peace.
Sorry for naming it generically, I tried to launch the RFC with as neutral of title as possible to be as neutral as possible about the question at hand while at the same time trying to trout both sides of the debate for edit warring over some meta commentary about CSDs. Hasteur ( talk) 00:41, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Just as an FYI since your involved in the AfD that I tagged Jared Andre Sawyer Jr. as undisclosed paid due to behavioral evidence here and on Commons. The main reason there is because I know some work is being done with ORES using that category. I've already said more than my fair bit in that AfD, so I don't want to raise it there, but did want to give you a heads up in case you were confused. All the best. TonyBallioni ( talk) 07:27, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Can you create the redirect discussion on theElisa_Jordana article? -- Eng. M.Bandara -Talk 08:22, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
An article you recently wished to contribute to,
Grey Council has been moved to
draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:
" before the article title) per the outcome of the AfD. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's
general notability guideline, feel free to mainspace it.Regards:)
Winged Blades of Godric
On leave
05:25, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
re your comment here - [23] - thanks for the kudos on the 1E argument (which is also a hard argument to "win" - people who do BEFOREs end up seeing oodles of sources (that all say the same thing (paraphrased or are brief mentions - but that's a different matter))... I don't think putting this up for a merge discussion now would be correct (the AfD nom itself was arguing that the content for the part already exists in Line Mode Browser, so a merge wasn't necessary (though it retrospect there is some content that could be merged)) - wouldn't this be forum shopping to advance the same argument twice in close succession? Icewhiz ( talk) 07:06, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
Maybe Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Common outcomes needs a nutshell, but the discussion on the talk page makes loud and clear that this is not a neutral version to improve the page but an attempt to bolster Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Common outcomes against people who are willing to judge school articles on face value and sources and not on AfD-history. Better no nutshell than a biased one. The Banner talk 20:19, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
@Jclemens with regards to the Deletion Review for the article, "Selena Zhao", the article has been reinstated but given that the presentation of multiple new sources demonstrates the potential for WP:GNG, how would you suggest expanding the article to incorporate these sources and improve it? Sources: http://web.icenetwork.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20120916&content_id=38517104&vkey=ice_news http://www.thewhig.com/2015/01/21/zhao-doesnt-disappoint https://skatecanada.ca/2014/10/trading-places-us-born-selena-zhao-proudly-represents-canada/ http://web.icenetwork.com/news/2016/09/12/200902400/the-inside-edge-chen-edmunds-headline-ewc https://goldenskate.com/2015/07/selena-zhao/ https://skatecanada.ca/2015/01/selena-zhao-wins-junior-womens-title-in-kingston/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.112.8.201 ( talk) 04:12, 27 November 2017 (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. |
You are invited to join the discussion at
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chess Titans.
Dogmaticeclectic (
talk)
23:39, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Microsoft Mahjong.
Dogmaticeclectic (
talk)
23:42, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Purble Place.
Dogmaticeclectic (
talk)
23:39, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
Pseudonymous Rex ( talk) 04:21, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
Hey, Jclemens, I'm trying to understand the interrelationship, if any, between WP:ARBAB (you were one of the drafting arbitrators, which is why I came to you with this inquiry) and WP:AC/DS, where discretionary sanctions are authorized on articles related to abortion. The issue came up in the context of War on Women, whose talk page has a discretionary sanctions notice. Thanks for any help.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 22:48, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
I can't have much of a discussion if you don't comment! :) IRWolfie- ( talk) 09:28, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
I know it wasn't raised in the (admittedly horribly attended) AfD, but would you consider amending your close to redirecting the list to God_of_War:_Ascension#Downloadable_content, thus allowing non-admins to upmerge relevant content to the summary style parent of the deleted list? It seems much more consisted with WP:ATD. Cheers, Jclemens ( talk) 02:57, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for your offer to mediate. Feel free to comment on current issues at Wikipedia_talk:Four_Award#Scribbled_Thoughts.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 17:47, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
A variant of Laocoon's warning in the Iliad with a bit of a pun added re the current TPm arbcom "proposed decision" motion. I have not the foggiest idea what sort of denizens that committee has, but I have a slightly diminished respect for them at this point. (Proper quote is Φοβού τους Δαναούς και δώρα φέροντες but my Greek is not all that great now) Collect ( talk) 17:08, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
LGA talk edits 07:51, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
I agree with reverting it. If not for my crappy phone, with its slowness and touchscreen inviting errant rollbacks and other problems, I would have done it already. However, two things. I've noticed that a number of editors appear all too eager to throw around "famous" WRT to Sarah Palin, ignoring that WP:PEACOCK applies here, too. Second, this "fame" in re her association with Wasilla only applies to the past five years' history of a community whose overall history goes back nearly a century. She was only on the radar of the average follower of Alaska politics for about a decade before that, and that was mostly due to a news story about a wedding she presided over at the Walmart in Wasilla while mayor, where even back then she made some of the same sort of remarks she would later become "famous" for. Sounds to me like we're also eager to propagate undue weight here just because it's Sarah Palin we're talking about. Wasilla is probably just about as well-known today for its frequent appearances as a setting in Alaska State Troopers. RadioKAOS – Talk to me, Billy 06:37, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
Some editors are spending a considerable amount of effort trying to get remove articles about particularly brutal or well publicized attacks on persons on the basis of WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENT. No lasting effects or national/global scope. This will have the effect of removing any mass shooting or terrorist event short of shooting a school or president. Redhanker ( talk) 00:40, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
One particular editor User:Transcendence has been very busy on these articles:
Removed
It looks like this editor has declared some sort of editing war. He is trying infer that my edits are not balanced, but they always present all points of view rather than censoring out only one point of view. His choice of deletions appears to not promote a neutral point of view, but censoring to show only one side, or not show anything to do with terrorist plots, or media related to the government of a major nation-state Redhanker ( talk) 05:34, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
Hello. There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Transcendence (
talk)
02:40, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
and he is deleting more terrorism and politics related articles
I noticed that you've already helped out with the Tacoma Mall Shooting but you were probably unaware that this was a part of a pattern of an obviously abusive AFD campaign, as he had done a series of these. It would be as if these were related terrorist events and someone who had knowledge that they were connected wanted to remove any documentation of these events knowing that there is no penalty for at least trying to find which AFDs would not be contested. It is all too easy to delete articles for which there is little traffic and nobody notices. What would you recommend to be the proper way to bring this to the attention of the community or an appropriate admin? There seems to be a recurring pattern of any article that covers a terrorist event, or an event that is similar to a terrorist attack is soon nominated for deletion no matter how much international coverage it gets. This was the only other editor I contacted, so it's not a case of CANVASS, and it is something that needs the help of more than one editor as there are a few editors that seem to work with each other to help these AFD's along
Could you help restore the Portland shooting article? Redhanker ( talk) 04:35, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
|
WIKIPEDIA TAKES PORTLAND 2013! You're invited to participate in the upcoming "Wikipedia Takes Portland" campaign, to be held during the month of September. The local campaign occurs annually in conjunction with Wikipedia Takes America and Wiki Loves Monuments in the United States. Photographing sites included on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) is the main focus of Wikipedia Takes Portland. In typical Wikipedia fashion, you can work individually or create a team. Details and signup here! |
---|
-- Another Believer ( Talk) 15:31, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
You might notice the wisdom of ArbCom does not impress me currently, so I am "outta here" except for matters of substantial concern. I shall, of course, note their "wisdom" in any ACE2013 essay, and invite others to do so as well. Please remove grave-dancers from my page, as I expect two of them <g>. With deepest respect, Collect ( talk) 12:39, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
I'm not a "reformed sockpuppetteer". Per WP:AVOIDYOU, "discussion of a user's conduct or history" outside of the proper venue is a personal attack, and AfDs are made exclusively to discuss whether or not a topic deserves a stand-alone article, not to discuss user conduct. Besides that, I will not allow you to propagate gratuitous lies about me, so remove that part of your comment, and leave TTN alone. If you think you have reasons to complain, go to WP:ANI. Folken de Fanel ( talk) 18:59, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi! As you were one of the keep voters of this article at the AfD, i thought of informing you of the discussion started at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2013 September 14. Good day! §§ Dharmadhyaksha§§ { T/ C} 10:36, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I am sorry that I got upset and said things that you apparently construed as potentially being a legal threat. That was absolutely was never my intention. I hope that my actions in the future will never cause you to have any such concerns again. And I hope that I never allow your actions inspire me to say something that offends you. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 03:05, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
Wait, so Jclemens is personally attacking me on other users' talk pages, now ? I am not a sockpuppeteer and will not tolerate to be called as such. Please remove the personal attacks you wrote about me on TRPOD's talk page. Folken de Fanel ( talk) 01:41, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello. There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --
TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom
04:09, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
Jclemens, Delta Pi Delta was marked for proposed deletion on 6 October 2010 and was ultimately deleted because the proposal expired with no objections. This article is about a (the only) fraternity at Mount Olive College, and passes the notability test required for such organizations. Can you please revert the deletion so that I can add it to my sandbox and provide proper sources so that it is not deleted in the future? Thanks much, Cc09091986 ( talk) 23:11, 25 September 2013 (UTC).
Could you put a copy of deleted article into my user space? There seems to be a lot of effort to delete articles on incidents that look like terrorist-style attacks with no motive other than to cause death and mayhem no matter how much interest they generate in the media, including articles on Al Shabab atrocities and industrial accidents in China. Belton generated a ton of controversy on the heels of the Treyvon case Redhanker ( talk) 21:13, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
[2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], etc. ad nauseum (I only use the last week -- this has now been going on for four years) I believe may quite reach the epitome of persobal attack/stalking. I think you might look into that editor's seeming predisposition to comment on my every act. [8] I consider four years long enough to abide such conduct. Cheers. Collect ( talk) 13:26, 27 September 2013 (UTC) [9] shows his further intent to stalk -- by announcing that he is on "wikistrike" etc. I rather think the evidence of his stalking my edits is irruftable, as is his stated intent to seek my departure from Wikipedia. Cheers. Collect ( talk) 15:54, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Jclemens, Please remove protection from Randy Gage, I have a new content for it. I made same request to Joe Decker. Thank you. — JOHNMOORofMOORLAND ( talk) 18:57, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Jclemens, Please, look at my discussion with Joe Decker and help review Randy Gage (prosperity coach). I want protection removed from Randy Gage, so I can move Randy Gage (prosperity coach) there. Thank you. — JOHNMOORofMOORLAND ( talk) 10:48, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
May be I let my emotions get the better of me there, sorry, but is the last revision before deletion a blatant or unambiguous advertising or promotion which cannot be kept?! Joe Decker was too busy then to guide me through what needs to be done, so expected that DGG should have provided a guide, but he slammed a speedy. — JOHNMOORofMOORLAND ( talk) 12:16, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
|
WIKI LOVES LIBRARIES 2013! You're invited to attend the upcoming "Wiki Loves Libraries" edit-athon. The event will be held from 1–4pm on Sunday, October 13, 2013 at the Portland Art Museum's Crumpacker Family Library, located on the second floor of the Museum's Mark Building (formerly the Masonic Temple). The edit-athon will focus on the local arts community (but you can work on other topics as well!). It will also kick off the Oregon Arts Project, an on-wiki initiative to improve coverage of the arts in Oregon. Details and signup here! |
---|
Hope to see you there! -- Another Believer ( Talk) 16:23, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello, Jclemens. I'd like your opinion on the reason given for an AfD, namely Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Content_audit . I know you look at lots of AfDs and that you tend to be an inclusionist. The reason for deleting Content audit seems to be "the sources could be better". For my own personal information, I'd like to know if, in your opinion, that's a valid reason to nominate an AfD. (As I said at the AfD, I looked at WP:DELETE and I don't see this rationale on the list of 14 reasons to delete). I recognize that Yoninah is one heckuvan editor and his expertise should not be dismissed lightly. On the other hand, neither should yours! I have already voted "Keep" and commented at the AfD, and the trend is toward "Keep". Thank you for your time. -- 96.231.113.61 ( talk) 22:41, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Update: it was closed as Keep, but I'd still appreciate your opinion. Thanks. -- 96.231.113.61 ( talk) 23:43, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
I've restored the ten pages in question. I've left a message for the editor who expressed an interest in improving those articles, requesting that they be improved within ten days, or I'll take them to AfD.
There is respect for process, and then there is worship of process. Sometimes the line between the two can be a little blurry; ultimately, however, I do not approve of glorifying process for its own sake. Bureaucracy is meant to be a tool, not a master. There's a difference between guidelines and rules.
I make mistakes on occasion, and I'm certainly willing to apologize when that happens — and in fact, I have done so many times before. I utterly reject your premise, however, that it was a mistake for me to differ from the consensus which subsequently emerged.
On a tangentially related point, how much newpage patrol do you do? DS ( talk) 13:21, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
I'm new to creating articles and have had a hard time researching/finding people in charge to provide advice and insight on how to create articles and publish correctly. I am wondering if you could provide any insight on what I've done so far, the usual review process, and when I should submit my page for approval? As mentioned before, very new to this. Thanks for your time! DrDillard ( talk) 11:22, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
Ok, thanks for time and advice. Yeah, I still need to find some specific sources for those inline comments. I'll be sure to look up some articles on formatting before submitting the article for approval. Thanks again! DrDillard ( talk) 09:06, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
In regards to this DRV [10] is there a way I can get a copy of the article from the last deleted version? It took me a while to format all the refs and stuff and I could really benefit. I was hoping that the DRV process would restore it, but new events have transpired: a red link user recreated the article in bad shape, another user speedied, another user declined the speedy, now it sits in bad shape and I still don't have access to the version I was working on earlier from the last speedy.. sigh. -- Green Cardamom ( talk) 20:49, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
As you participated in the above AFD, as per the close I have opened up a proper merge discussion at Talk:Dragon Ball and you are welcome to participate.— Ryulong ( 琉竜) 07:18, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
I left you a message by Memoserv on IRC. Please respond ASAP; thank you. DS ( talk) 17:19, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Have you had a chance to check the correctness of your note at WP:Articles for deletion/Plane (Magic: The Gathering)? Flatscan ( talk) 05:14, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
Do you intend to respond? You haven't replied to my detailed comments from November 11–12. Flatscan ( talk) 05:11, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
[12] yet again. My talk page at the very top tells folks not to redact the edits of others, which is a matter of principle IMHO. Collect ( talk) 20:28, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi, you participated in Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 December 29#T:, some of which I have relisted at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2013 November_18#T:WPTECH. Please come along and share your thoughts .. ;-) John Vandenberg ( chat) 15:38, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
![]() In past Backlog Drives, the goal was to reduce the backlog of Good article nominations. In the upcoming drive, another goal will be added - raising as much money as we can for the Wikimedia Foundation. How will this work? Well, its pretty simple. Any user interested in donating can submit a pledge at the Backlog Drive page (linked above). The pledge should mention the amount of money the user is willing to donate per review. For example, if a user pledges 5 cents per review and 100 nominations are reviewed, the total donation amount is $5.00. At the time this message was sent out, two users have submitted pledges for a total of 8 cents per review. All pledges, no matter how much money, are greatly appreciated. Also, in no way is this saying you must make a pledge. |
Hi!
I see that you deleted, quite rightly and deservedly, the article for Mateo Roskam, a Croatian football (soccer) player, in 2009. /info/en/?search=Mateo_Roskam
He has, however, become eligible for inclusion in 2013, playing for a club in a fully professional league (Slaven Belupo in the Croatian Prva HNL) -> http://www.transfermarkt.com/en/mateo-roskam/leistungsdaten/spieler_46790.html (for example), and I thought it would be cool if the article was restored - I'd update it immediately with relevant data.
Thank you for your help!
Zlopseto ( talk) 17:32, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi, this discussion concerns a remark you made in an AfD that I closed almost a month ago. Just a heads up. Cheers! -- Randykitty ( talk) 08:16, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
I think the edit history [14] may be mentioned without further comment? I can not raise anything specific even at BLP/N as I understand it, hence and only am noting the aggregate contribution history. Cheers. Collect ( talk) 20:12, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
![]() If you know anyone outside of the WikiProject that may be interested, feel free to invite them to the drive! |
That Earl DRV saw 6 endorses and 4 overturns, you can't just toss that aside in favor of your own opinion on the matter. We don't promote people to the admin corps to make decisions for us, we promote you to act according to the consensus of the community. Or in the brief 2 days this DRV was open, a lack thereof. This will get ugly if you don't have a change of heart; re-delete the article and allow the DRV to run its course, please. Tarc ( talk) 02:06, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
(e/c): Hi Jclemens. I have undone your out-of-process close of the DRV. I understand that you are passionate about this, but it is not appropriate to short-circuit our review processes in such a manner. If you are right that my AfD close was incorrect, I am sure you will be able to persuade the other DRV participants of that, and a neutral editor will close the DRV accordingly. Please note that I have not re-deleted the article (and I will not) because, as you say, that could be interpreted as wheel-warring. At the end of the 7 days, the closer will either re-delete or keep restored the article as appropriate. Let's just both be patient and let the DRV run its course. 28bytes ( talk) 06:36, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
Sorry to pile on here, but I think your use of BLP special enforcement is quite dubious. My understanding is that BLP spec is to ensure that articles are compliant with the BLP policy. And there is nothing in there about keeping an article because the presence of the article might earn the subject money. In fact I think this is somewhat opposed to Wikipedia's purpose, which is to document notable people/companies/etc not a place to promote people. Also WP:Deletion review#Temporary undeletion states that articles should be blanked, rather than the decision be completely reversed. Anyway, interested in your reasoning. Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 09:02, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
Do not do this [15] again. Your invocation of BLPBAN has been found to be frivolous, by a clear and active consensus of uninvolved observers at WP:ANI, and I – as an uninvolved administrator – have therefore formally marked it as overturned. As your BLP invocation has been found invalid, you are at this point neither entitled to hand out further "warnings" in this matter, nor to edit-war and invoke 3RR exemptions on the article. If you continue to edit against consensus in this matter, it will very likely end in you being blocked, and if you continue to abuse your admin role in the same way, it will end in your being desysoped. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:19, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
Saying that deletion would "deprive him of charitable contributions" means that you want it kept to advertise his charity. Violation of WP:CONSENSUS (your supervote), WP:SOAPBOX and probably WP:COI. Dark Sun ( talk) 17:57, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
You have been blocked for 24 hours due to a growing consensus on ANI that your recent actions have constituted a disruprive abuse of adminship, as well as a seeming failure to admit the problem and a seeming likelihood for the problem to reoccur. A discussion is underway regarding your suitability to continue to hold admin privileges. If you wish to be unblocked to take part in this discussion, this can be done provided you agree not to return to the issues which have caused this block. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 18:18, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
Jclemens ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
The result of the AfD is still objectively unreasonable and should not stand; the deletion of Mr. Earl's page serves to harm him by obscuring public awareness of the notable individual's plight; and I expect that an arbitration committee well versed in BLP matters will find that I have acted within their designated remit, while the other administrators involved have not. Jclemens-public ( talk) 20:04, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I'm declining this request for unblock for now because of the edit warring on Henry Earl. I think 24 hours is suitable time for a preventative block and for the ANI thread to complete. I won't bother blocking your alternate public account, which I think would just be an insult to an otherwise trustworthy admin, unless you stray from your talk page. However, if you can assure me that you will restrict yourself to your talk page, the ANI thread discussing you, and if you choose, Arbcom, then I will consider unblocking you under those restrictions (for the remainder of the 24 hours).--v/r - T P 22:51, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
The sanction you invoked on prevention of blanking is ownership and it was not official. Please stop insisting it should be kept as a soapbox. Dark Sun ( talk) 20:24, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
I have closed the proposal that you banned from using your administrative tools where it concerns the policy on biographies of living persons as no consensus. Some opposed the sanction outright, others believe that this should an ArbCom issue.
Just speaking as an observing editor with an eight year track record (which includes sparking off a controversy by blocking Tony Sidaway over a DRV dispute several years ago), I don't think that your interpretation of the BLP enforcement policy will gain any more traction on ArbCom than it did in the community. Using IAR in this manner is also rather implausible. While "no firm rules" is indeed a pillar, it is not one that can be used as a club to knock down other pillars (in this case, people may think you have been swinging at the "Wikipedia is an encyclopedia" pillar). If the issue is not resolved, and the case winds up with ArbCom, I don't think they would be sympathetic to you here. Since I would hate to lose you as an administrator and editor, I recommend that you commit not to do something like this again. Sjakkalle (Check!) 20:39, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect T:AD. Since you had some involvement with the T:AD redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). WOSlinker ( talk) 11:22, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
Regretfully, since this situation appears likely to recur, I am filing a request for arbitration regarding the Henry Earl issue. DavidLeighEllis ( talk) 16:52, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The Resilient Barnstar |
I'm sorry things unfolded the way they did. Keep your head out of drama, keep your chin up, and have a positive outlook. Take a short break to let your mind clear up and then create some awesome content. Best wishes, Sportsguy17 ( talk • contribs • sign) 02:36, 16 December 2013 (UTC) |
The arbitration case request that you were a party to has been declined by the Committee. For the Arbitration Committee, Rs chen 7754 05:26, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
Please do not follow the direction of your current inclination! Take a couple days to fully consider your steps; weighing the ramifications. Do not move with haste, choosing instead thoughtful deliberation. You owe this much to yourself, and to those who will render support if given a chance. Please, wait two more days; in peaceful meditation, then comment on what you have decided. Sincerely.— John Cline ( talk) 01:03, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
Please excuse me if I don't respond individually at all promptly. I'm serious about the Wikibreak bit--I don't believe in posting later-rescinded retired templates. I still believe in the Wikipedia ethos, but I think I'm going to go back to working into less Balkanized areas, like, oh, getting recent television episodes to GA. The saying "friends come and go, but enemies accumulate" is not entirely true, but it's true enough that no matter what the case outcome, every significant admin action I tried to take would be marred by the fallout--indeed, this was the first one taken since I was not reelected, and I suppose being surprised at the vitriol and ferocity of the response was naive of me. For now, I'm going to see The Desolation of Smaug. I'll be back once I find the time to do some encyclopedia-building. Cheers, Jclemens ( talk) 02:15, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
On your promotion! There is a reason they call admin tools the mop. Its much more fun to write articles and participate in discussions as an editor with only your power of persuasion. The people who have impaired Mr. Earl's livelihood in a paternalistic spasm of intended do-gooder censorship will have to live with their sins. Seriously, I hope you are able to return and have fun, otherwise there is no reason to be here. Cheers.-- Milowent • has spoken 17:27, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
|
Hello Jclemens: Thanks for all of your contributions to improve the encyclopedia for Wikipedia's readers, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, BusterD ( talk) 06:34, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
![]()
|
It's that time again! Starting on March 1, there will be another GAN Backlog Drive! There will be several changes compared to previous drives:
Also, something that I thought I would share with all of you is that we raised $20.88 (USD) for the WMF in the December 2013 drive. It may not sound like a lot but considering that that was raised just because we reviewed articles, I would say that's pretty good! With that success, pledges can be made for the upcoming drive if you wish.
More info regarding the drive and full descriptions regarding the changes to this drive can be found on the the drive page. If you have any questions, feel free to leave a message on the drive talk page.
I look forward to your participation and hope that because of it, some day the backlog will be gone!
--Dom497
-- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 00:58, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
This article Veterans Today which had a lot of wikilinks from articles was just deleted. Could you drop off a copy of the deleted article someplace where it I could look at it? I could not even find any record of any discussion of deletion. Bachcell ( talk) 16:53, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
Bachcell, if you want to work on this article in your userspace, please do so, and focus on rewriting it to make sure that BLP violations are removed. If you are unable to do so, I am going to have to delete this article again. BOZ ( talk) 09:11, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
The March 2014 GAN Backlog Drive has begun and will end on April 1, 2014! Sent by Dom497 on behalf of MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 21:01, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi Jclemens, you are invited to come meet fellow wiki enthusiasts at WikiWednesday, a series of meetups for fans of Wikipedia, PortlandWiki, and wikis in general. If you are interested in attending, we will be meeting at NedSpace (619 SW 11th Avenue, Suite 250, at the corner of SW 11th and Morrison) at 6pm on Wednesday, May 21. You would be welcome to work on Wikipedia articles of your choosing, or other preferred wikis. I'll be there to help out. Hope to see you there! (Feel free to RSVP on my talk page or here.) -- Another Believer ( Talk) 23:16, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi, you deleted this page in 2009. Could you post what was deleted on my talk page, so I can get a sense of what's needed? thanks-- Aichik ( talk) 19:32, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello Jclemens,
I would like to re-establish the page for myself as Trevor Snarr or create a new one. I'm heavily back into acting again and would like to note other life accomplishments as in college degree, military service, LDS ministry service along with humanitarian service. Please view my imdb page www.imdb.me/trevorsnarr
Any help with this request would be greatly appreciated. Hope your well and hope to hear from you soon.
Best, Trevor Snarr — Preceding unsigned comment added by TrevorSnarr ( talk • contribs) 05:07, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello everyone! Hope you've all been having a great summer!
TheQ Editor recently proposed the idea of having another Backlog Drive in either September/October or November/December of this year. For those of you who have participated in the past two drives you know I was the one who organized them, however, come September, this will be my most important year in school so I will not be able to coordinate this drive (if it happens). TheQ Editor has volunteered to be a coordinator for the drive. If any of you would like to co-coordinator, please notify TheQ Editor on his talk page.
If you would be interested in participating in a Backlog Drive sometime before the end of this year, please notify TheQ Editor. Also, make sure to specify what month(s) work best for you.
At the time this message was sent out, the backlog was at 520 nominations. Since May, the backlog has been steadily increasing and we are currently near an all time high. Even though the backlog will not disappear over one drive, this drive can lead to several others which will (hopefully) lead to the day where there is no longer a backlog.
As always, the more participants, the better, and everyone is encouraged to participate!
Sent by Dom497-- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 15:52, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
Greetings. Because you have already cast a vote for the 2013 Arbitration Committee Elections, I regret to inform you that due to a misconfiguration of the SecurePoll we've been forced to strike all votes and reset voting. This notice is to inform you that you will need to vote again if you want to be counted in the poll. The new poll is located at this link. You do not have to perform any additional actions other than voting again. If you have any questions, please direct them at the election commissioners. --For the Election Commissioners, v/r, TParis
BOZ (
talk) is wishing you a
Merry
Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes
WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{ subst: User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
I'm wishing you a Merry Christmas, because that is what I celebrate. If you don't like Christmas or just don't celebrate it in any of its forms, then please accept a generic "Happy Holidays". If you celebrate no holidays at this time of year, then hopefully you will be satisfied with an even more generic "Season's Greetings". :)
You are invited! Wiki Loves Pride | |
---|---|
You are invited to participate in Wiki Loves Pride, a global campaign to create and improve LGBT-related content at Wikipedia during the month of June, culminating with a multinational edit-a-thon on June 21. The project is being spearheaded by two organizers with roots in the Pacific Northwest. Meetups are being organized in some cities, or you can participate remotely. Wikimedia Commons will also be hosting an LGBT-related photo challenge. In Portland, there are two ways to contribute. One is a photography campaign called "Pride PDX", for pictures related to LGBT culture and history. The Wiki Loves Pride edit-a-thon will be held on Saturday, June 21 from noon–4pm at Smith Memorial Student Union, Room 236 at Portland State University. Prior Wikipedia editing is not required; assistance will be available the day of the event. Attendees should bring their own laptops and cords. Feel free to showcase your work here!
If you have any questions, please leave a message here. You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Oregon-related events and projects by removing your name from this list. |
Greetings, my user:WayneRay page was deleted for supposed vandalism etc. I have been incarcirated for three years and had instructed my daughter to edit and update my main page and delete the previous vandalisms. She was not internet savvy as I had thought so her mistakes were considered the errors of which you speak. Can my user page be replaced? I can use this new one but have to edit all the updated links WayneScottRay ( talk) 18:24, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello everyone! We hope you have all been having a great summer!
As we all know, the recent GAN Backlog Drives have not had any big impact on the backlog. Because of that, me (Dom497), Figureskatingfan, and TheQ Editor have worked on an idea that could possibly finally put a dent into the massive backlog. Now, I will admit, the idea isn't entirely ours as we have took the general idea of the WikiCup and brought it over to WikiProject Good Articles. But anyways, here's what we have in mind:
For all of you that do not know what the WikiCup is, it is an annual competition between several editors to see who can get the most Good Articles, Featured Article's, Did You Know's, etc. Based of this, we propose to you the GA Cup. This competition will only focus on reviewing Good articles.
For more info on the proposal, click here. As a FYI, the proposal page is not what the final product will look like (if you do go ahead with this idea). It will look very similar to WikiCup's page(s).
The discussion for the proposal will take place here. Please let us know if you are interested, have any concerns, things to consider, etc.
--Dom497, Figureskatingfan, and TheQ Editor
MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 01:29, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
![]() |
You are invited to the Feminist+Queer Art Wikipedia Edit-a-thon, to be held on Saturday, September 13, 2014 from noon–4pm at the Independent Publishing Resource Center (IPRC), located at 1001 SE Division (97202). Prior Wikipedia editing is not required; assistance will be available the day of the event. Attendees should bring their own laptops and power cords. Female editors are particularly encouraged to attend, but all are welcome. Hope to see you there! If you have any questions, please leave a message
on the talk page. -- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 15:59, 4 September 2014 (UTC) |
---|
![]() WikiProject Good articles is holding a new competition, the GA Cup, from October 1, 2014 - March 28, 2015. The Cup will be based on reviewing Good article nominations; for each review, points will be awarded with bonuses for older nominations, longer articles and comprehensive reviews. All participants will start off in one group and the highest scoring participants will go through to the second round. At the moment six rounds are planned, but this may change based on participant numbers. Some of you may ask: what is the purpose for a competition of this type? Currently, there is a backlog of about 500 unreviewed Good article nominations, almost an all time high. It is our hope that we can decrease the backlog in a fun way, through friendly competition. Everyone is welcome to join; new and old editors! Sign-ups will be open until October 15, 2014 so sign-up now! If you have any questions, take a look at the FAQ page and/or contact one of the four judges. Cheers from NickGibson3900, Dom497, TheQ Editor and Figureskatingfan. -- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 19:04, 15 September 2014 (UTC) To receive future GA Cup newsletter, please add your name to
our mailing list.
|
First of all, let me know what I do wrong at any stage of the process here. I'm brand spanking new to editing wikipedia and I'm probably making all kinds of errors.
I read your page about deletion and as far as I can tell I'm going about this correctly. In 2009 you deleted the page for Massive (music software) for "No demonstration of notability independent of the company that produces the product; no third party sourcing." I don't know if Massive was as well known in 2009 as it is today, but it's phenomenally important now, as far as EDM production goes. Quite a few major bass music producer have publicly acknowledged using it, and its sound was very influential.
http://www.musicradar.com/us/tuition/tech/the-54-best-vst-au-plugin-synths-in-the-world-today-262145/53 Skrillex listing Massive as one of his favorite synths: http://www.musicradar.com/us/news/tech/interview-skrillex-on-ableton-live-plug-ins-production-and-more-510973 Excision listing Massive as his go-to synth: http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/1dwbbj/i_am_excision_dubstep_producerdjrobot_dinosaur/c9ugd8x Some pages dedicated to tutorials/use: https://www.facebook.com/MassiveSynth http://adsrsounds.com/synth/massive/ http://www.massivesynth.com
Just let me know what to do next and I'll give it a shot.
The RfC: Is Westeros.org a suitable source for this content? was closed with the result that Westeros.org is reliable but that whether the disputed text was valuable enough to include should be addressed separately. The closing editor recommended that all participants in the RfC and related RSN discussion be informed that such a discussion was under way:
RfC: RfC: Should the article state which chapters appear in the episode?
If any of you wish to make a statement on this matter, you are welcome to do so and your contribution would be greatly appreciated. If any of you would prefer to stay away from this dispute, I think we can all get that too. Darkfrog24 ( talk) 16:08, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
Your post in Oathkeeper was a bit attack-y, don't you think? I find it amazing that you jump down my throat over a matter that I did not start, over content that should not be in the article, instead of focusing on the one person who fought tooth and nail against no less than three different consensus' and RfCs. I think that, at best, you might want to rephrase your snarky post about my Wikipedia experience. And I am saying please. - Jack Sebastian ( talk) 17:08, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for this most astute statement. ( Littleolive oil ( talk) 15:50, 7 December 2014 (UTC))
Hey Jclemens, good to see you around. Have ayed you on autopatrolled, rollback & pending. Write back if you want any other assistance any time. Wifione Message 14:43, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
You are invited!
Hope you can make it! If you have any questions or require any special accommodations, please let me know.
Thanks,
To unsubscribe from this newsletter, remove your name from this list. - MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 04:19, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Hello and good afternoon (at least it is afternoon where I am). I was looking at the Wikipedian firefighters category and noticed that you are one of the members of the Wikipedia community that lists yourself as being a firefighter. First and foremost let me say thank you for your service. While I myself am not a firefighter, I do work as a photographer with multiple local fire departments. I am honored to have firefighters as some of my closest friends.
I have been taking an active role in the Fire Service WikiProject and am trying to recruit more members to this cause. If this is something you have any interest in, please let me know? You can leave me a message on my talk page. Obviously there is zero obligation. An interest can be anything from helping out with a couple of pages in your local area to helping to overhaul major templates, and anything in between.
Once again, thank you for your service. Hope to hear from you soon. Stay safe! -- Zackmann08 ( talk) 17:52, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for uploading File:SansapleadsforNed.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.
If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Josh Milburn ( talk) 15:01, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
My ability to assume good faith is dwindling. This message very clearly constitutes canvassing. Perhaps the fact that it has been ignored/the only voice its brought to the discussion has been a negative one should tell you something. Josh Milburn ( talk) 08:46, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
The article I started some years ago on Journal of Physical Security was deleted by you as discussed at /info/en/?search=User_talk:Nealmcb#Proposed_deletion_of_Journal_of_Physical_Security. It has become more active since then, and now has an ISSN. Could you provide the most recent content from the deleted article as a Draft so we can review it and consider whether it is notable, worth updating and making an article again? Thanks. ★NealMcB★ ( talk) 14:07, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Thank you very much for the kind words about my recent Quality improvement efforts.
Much appreciated,
— Cirt ( talk) 00:51, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
13:58, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
BOZ (
talk) is wishing you a
Merry
Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes
WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{ subst: User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
I'm wishing you a Merry Christmas, because that is what I celebrate. If you don't like Christmas or just don't celebrate it in any of its forms, then please accept a generic "Happy Holidays". If you celebrate no holidays at this time of year, then hopefully you will be satisfied with an even more generic "Season's Greetings". :) BOZ ( talk) 18:55, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Sure, but is that the case when whiners dishonestly define the tamest statements of fact as "harm" merely to ban people for wrongthink? I don't think you fully realize how corrupt and dishonest this current ArbCom is. 70.56.27.239 ( talk) 21:51, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
Hawkeye7 RfA Appreciation award |
Thank you for participating in and supporting my RfA. It was very much appreciated. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 20:57, 1 February 2016 (UTC) |
Waaaay back during the dawn of time, I reviewed the "Fire and Blood" Game of Thrones episode for you. Almost four years later, I have returned to ask a (perhaps random) favor. I'm currently in grad school working on an MA thesis on Wikipedia, fandom, and canon. Judging from your GA content, it seems that you have a soft spot for some TV shows, and I was wondering if I could ask you a few (~10) questions about how fans like yourself aggregate and define "canon" on Wikipedia in regards to cultural media objects (e.g. TV shows, movies)? You're under no obligation to say yes (I realize that you are semi-retired), but I just thought I'd ask! I'm sorry that this might seem super-weird or out of the blue!-- Gen. Quon (Talk) 22:21, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi Jclemens, As part of a series of articles on women in video games, I'm looking to create an article on Mieko Ishikawa. I notice that a previous version was deleted in February 2010; likely because of insufficient sources. While this is a long time ago, I'm wondering if it is possible to have a copy restored to my Sandbox. I notice that you are now listed as semi-retired, so will create a new draft in User space in any case. Thanks in advance. - Ryk72 'c.s.n.s.' 01:40, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
You are involved in a recently-filed request for clarification or amendment from the Arbitration Committee. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment#Amendment request: Rodhullandemu and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the Wikipedia:Arbitration guide may be of use.
Thanks, -- George Ho ( talk) 06:16, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi; just to say, thank you for your explanation, and for responding to this; I shall go and have think about it (but not tonight!) Regards, Xyl 54 ( talk) 23:42, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
Hi, since we interacted on the article Ark Encounter, where you rendered a 3O, I'm reaching out to you for an opinion. It has been suggested to me by editor Coretheapple in the Discussion area of a current GA reassessment that the review be brought to the attention of a wider audience. The reassessment raises the questions of sourcing; neutrality; and level of detail present in the article. The article in question is Hyacinth Graf Strachwitz.
I would welcome input or a review of the article to see if it still meets Wikipedia:Good article criteria and whether it should be retained or delisted as a Good article. I would appreciate any feedback you could share. K.e.coffman ( talk) 20:04, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for looking. I don't think your opinion would be redundant, as there was a lot of comments from MilHist coordinators to the effect of: "This source is fine"; "I think the lede is excellent"; "The more detail the better"; "No, this is important"; "I suggest you have a look at some other military biographical articles and educate yourself, because you are way off base with this"; "And at a glance I can see important points, like the fact that he spent twelve years as an Oberleutnant"; "You would need to establish that Gordon Williamson is not reliable"; "I strongly disagree. I personally prefer the German version"; "...this GAR has been a complete waste of the valuable time of a number of experienced editors"; "this is arrant nonsense" [my comments]; much more. I'm concerned that the MilHist community would treat this a "no consensus" and this lack of consensus would block further reassessment of similarly flawed articles, such as Heinz-Wolfgang Schnaufer, Otto Kittel and Kurt Welter, among what appears to be dozens of others.
I've already seen this in edit summaries from the editor who opposed the edits to the Strachwitz article, such as:
I see a lot of emphasis on "this is how we who? do things" and "this has been established by consensus", resulting in articles that look similar to the Strachwitz one.
If you'd rather not contribute, that's totally cool and then thanks for letting me vent! :-). But if you have any suggestions on how to handle things going forward, that would be much appreciated. Either way is fine. K.e.coffman ( talk) 00:40, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
I know neither of us is particularly active these days, but I'm glad to see we're both still breathing. Best wishes and if I can ever be of service, please feel invited to call on me. BusterD ( talk) 04:15, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
I need to check the OTRS permissions of two files in Nadia Kaabi-Linke as part of a GA review. I've not used OTRS in years and my account is long since gone--can any Talk Page Stalker log in and find/update the status of those two images? Thanks! Jclemens ( talk) 02:18, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi
Did you know about Wikiversity Journal of Medicine? It is an open access, peer reviewed medical journal, with no publication charges. You can find more about it by reading the article on The Signpost featuring this journal.
We welcome you to have a look the journal. Feel free to participate.
You can participate in any one or more of the following ways:
The future of this journal as a separate Wikimedia project is under discussion and the name can be changed suitably. Currently a
voting for the same is underway. Please cast your vote in the name you find most suitable. We would be glad to receive further suggestions from you. It is also acceptable to mention your votes in the wide-reachwikiversityjournal.org email list. Please note that the voting closes on 16th August, 2016, unless protracted by consensus, due to any reason.
Diptanshu Talk 14:08, 11 August 2016 (UTC) -on behalf of the Editorial Board, Wikiversity Journal of Medicine.
Hello Jclemens,
I would just like to inquire on your status on WikiProject Computer Security as the list of WikiProject Computer Security/Members is going to be improved to list active and inactive users.
This is update is being done according to a request for comments on the WikiProject Computer Security talk page. Be sure to state your status at the User status section in the WikiProject Computer Security talk page before the end of four weeks as this will state your status as inactive in the project if not done before then.
FockeWulf FW 190 ( talk) 19:55, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi. I saw you deleted the following content: Insertion of an NPA is absolutely contraindicated in patients with severe head or facial injuries, or have evidence of a basilar skull fracture ( Battle's sign, raccoon eyes, cerebrospinal fluid/blood from ears, etc.) due to the possibility of direct intrusion into brain tissue. from Nasopharyngeal airway with the reason: "That's not only uncited, it's factually incorrect."
I have heard this on several courses and think I also saw in my advance life support manual from ERC (I have not checked before posting). I have reverted your edit for now but if you could provide any form of evidence why this is incorrect I would love see it. I tried to do a quick search and only found this [18], an article I do not have access to (maybe you do). ...I know it is apples and oranges but I have seen a CT-scan of a nasogastric tube displaced into the lateral ventricle in a patient with a basilar fracture, so I have decided to revert you edit for now.
Kind regards JakobSteenberg ( talk) 20:16, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Sorry for the slight delay. I have been reading more on the biology sections and should have a rewrite ready in the article of the last parts that need reorganisation at the end hopefully tomorrow. Then I will ping you again. I'm really sorry this has lasted this long but I want the article to really deserve the green plus at the end of it. Double sharp ( talk) 16:14, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi Jclemens: Thanks for reviewing! I have copy edited the article and provided replies at Talk:ReaLemon/GA1. North America 1000 22:44, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Multiple Good Article Reviewer's Barnstar | |
Thank you for your participation in the August 2016 GAN backlog drive! For reviewing 15 articles, you get this award. Thanks again. JAG UAR 14:03, 1 September 2016 (UTC) |
I read what you said in the DRV about the Larry Y. Wilson article I have been trying to get reinstated. I would welcome the chance to work off the old article to make a new one better, but I would need that page userfied so I could have access to it. You could even restore it to my sandbox or whatever needs to be done in that regard. I would also be open to having an impartial, non-LDS editor look at the article before it's published again, just to make sure everything's in order. Thanks for letting me know that is an option. I was not aware of this. -- Jgstokes ( talk) 05:41, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
I like your suggestion of "curationist" as alternative inbetween wp:inclusionist and wp:exclusionist. I would sport a curationist userbox at my User-page, if/when you create one! Maybe it would require an essay over at meta, however. BTW, I admire your array of userboxes. I hope to achieve dan rank in a martial art someday, too. Cheers, -- do ncr am 19:31, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for the good sources you provided during the Thought eater AFD. I tried to use some of those same sources to restore Quickling, Flail snail, and Vegepygmy but they were all promptly reverted. I am not sure if they just need more sources like that. 65.126.152.254 ( talk) 21:13, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
I realize that was likely just a typo in your response to SwisterTwister, but with "automagically" I think you may have just coined a new phrase! And if it was intentional, then it was a bit of genius. ;) BOZ ( talk) 11:30, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
Actually, I vacated only SSTflyer's NAC of the DRV, not his closure (or relisting) of the AfD. But I suppose it does not matter. Sandstein 21:28, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
Thx for the flowers and the helping hand. I recently got some flak, when I stated that theology is a wissenschaft - the German expression (not at all synonym) for science in the broad sense. But I still stay with that ;) The encyclopedic entries used are true secondary sources about interesting issues, quoting the bible is primary and more of a bore now and then. Let us see what comes out of it. Polentarion Talk 19:13, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Sigh, been reverted. I would prefer to contribute to the GA, less to hinder the process.
Thats the one point that needs currently to be dealt with. I had a look on other "iron articles" and they are quite disappointing.
That said, WP fails to deliver on the humanities. Polentarion Talk 09:00, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
The entry is a good article now - congratulations! I saw that our sceptical friend stays in reversal mode without discussion and went on the talk page. Polentarion Talk 13:40, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Jclemens. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
I've just nominated nitrogen for GA: since you gave a wonderfully detailed review for iron that massively improved the article, I thought you might be interested. Double sharp ( talk) 05:03, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
Not everyone was contacted apparently for the strawpoll, so I'm telling you about it now. Talk:List_of_Rozen_Maiden_characters#Straw_Vote_Redirect_Dec_2016 Dream Focus 19:54, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Just letting you and the other editors who took part in the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Five Families (The Godfather) discussion know: it's been closed with a consensus to redirect, in case you want to create that target article and perform the merge. Joyous! | Talk 00:44, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
You are receiving this notification because you participated in a past RfC related to the use of extended confirmed protection levels. There is currently a discussion ongoing about two specific use cases of extended confirmed protection. You are invited to participate. ~ Rob13 Talk 16:12, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
Please refrain from accusing me of anti-Mormon bigotry, as you did here. It's not bigotry, it's common sense. Deseret News is indirectly owned by the LDS Church and has pledged to push a pro-Mormon point of view. How the hell can that be considered a neutral, independent source? And doesn't it seem problematic for a Mormon official to be only sourced from that and/or LDS Church websites? p b p 02:29, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
BOZ (
talk) is wishing you a
Merry
Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes
WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{ subst: User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
I'm wishing you a Merry Christmas, because that is what I celebrate. If you don't like Christmas or just don't celebrate it in any of its forms, then please accept a generic "Happy Holidays". If you celebrate no holidays at this time of year, then hopefully you will be satisfied with an even more generic "Season's Greetings". :) BOZ ( talk) 01:30, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi, I completed everything on your list for my 1984 review. I don't know if I formatted the comments correctly, since it's my first GA review. thanks -- Jennica✿ / talk 04:22, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello! I don't know if Wikipedia_talk:Sockpuppet_investigations/TTN is submitted correctly, but looking at http://tools.wmflabs.org/sigma/editorinteract.py?users=TTN&users=64.183.45.226&users=&startdate=&enddate=&ns=&server=enwiki it seems obvious something's up... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.112.201.254 ( talk) 23:00, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for your review of OR-7 and your kind comments. I'm glad you liked the article, and I'm especially pleased that you found it to be well-written and well-sourced. Finetooth ( talk) 04:52, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
I very much appreciate your offer, and I will contact you before nominating any Star Trek article for deletion. Are you by any chance interested in Babylon 5 topics as well? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 21:45, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
I am compiling data about The Unipiper as part of a Portland State University assignment. The subject mentioned his birthday on an episode of the podcast, The MarkandToddCast on August 12, 2016. I will be making more updates to the wiki article about this subject and I will try not to make too many mistakes. I will be adding television appearances, and awards and honors next. Nicholasbeatty ( talk) 12:08, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
User:Cylon B is identified as suckpuppeteer in a case filed by an anonymous IP user whom I helped by moving that case from talk page as IP users like him couldn't make a page. The pages he deleted must be reversed and I let you know as you know him right? Java777 ( talk) 11:27, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
![]() |
The Million Award | |
For your contributions to bring Nikola Tesla (estimated annual readership: 4,653,081) to Good Article status, I hereby present you the Million Award. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers! Laurdecl talk 05:08, 13 February 2017 (UTC) |
![]() |
The Premium Reviewer Barnstar | |
For your outstanding reviewing skills and dutiful work. Laurdecl talk 07:15, 13 February 2017 (UTC) |
I haven't been as vocal as you, but I also oppose the TVPLOT changes which only allow for one level of plot summary following an article's lead. I'm sure there are plenty of other editors who would be upset – if they knew about the changes. If you still want to pursue the matter, I defer to your judgement. (I'm a little worried about being accused of canvassing if I notify editors the wrong way, and don't want to do anything that might undermine a possible second vote/poll.) Respectfully, Reidgreg ( talk) 15:18, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
The article
Game of Thrones: Season 1 (soundtrack) you nominated as a
good article has been placed on hold
. The article is close to meeting the
good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See
Talk:Game of Thrones: Season 1 (soundtrack) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Aoba47 --
Aoba47 (
talk)
16:02, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
If you're still interested, I've worked on getting silver to GAN: now it is there, and I remembered how many great points you raised for iron last year that I would never have thought of by myself. ^_^ Double sharp ( talk) 23:47, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Could you do the book for me? I can’t do that... Thanks! Best regards, Cartoon network freak ( talk) 12:13, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
I may look silly on occasion, but IMHO so do you when you are trying to defend totally meaningless fictional uber-footnote articles like Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eastern Alliance (2nd nomination). I presume you have watchlisted Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Fictional elements, so we can both meet there. If I am unsure, I won't hesitate to ask, and I do appreciate that you can dig out sources better than me, but I don't want to bother you with each and every fiction-related AfD I will start, since again we can all see them in the linked page collecting them. PS. But since I am interested in saving content where possible, I'll alert you to one more ST deletion that so far has not been listed on that page: Mackenzie Calhoun. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:11, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
Sometimes you are right, sometimes you are wrong, just like me. Sometimes I just tag things with notability for few months, sometimes I propose a merge and sometimes I take them to AfD when I don't think there is any benefit for us to keep the article. I guess I could just redirect them, but I feel bad doing so with no prior discussion. But when I post on the talk page nobody replies. Unless I ping you, then you always say keep, then we have to take it to AfD. And if I just redirect it, what would stop you from reverting me at which point we would end up at AfD anyway? At least at AfD you'll see it and so will others and we can have a decent discussion. Otherwise the article either won't change or would be 'stealthily' deleted. Btw, I am always ok with soft deletions, i.e. deletion through redirect, while leaving the history of old article in place. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:09, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Diplomacy |
This was one of the best, most gracious comments I've read in a long while. Thank you for your kindness, perspective, and gentle advocacy against grudge-holding. WhatamIdoing ( talk) 20:31, 8 May 2017 (UTC) |
You are invited to join the discussion at
Talk:Timeline of computer security hacker history#Really suitable for inclusion?.
198.98.51.57 (
talk)
04:40, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
Talk:Timeline of computer security hacker history#Listcrufts removal .
John1234ou812 (
talk)
04:49, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
A clarification to WP:UP/RFC2016 § B4 has been proposed. You participated in that discussion; your input is welcome at Wikipedia:User pages/RfC for stale drafts policy restructuring/B4 clarification. Thanks, — Godsy ( TALK CONT) 15:55, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello again. I read your comments at Talk:Firefly (TV series), indicating some interests, especially since you contributed to the article. I assume that you already know Wikipedia:Featured article review/Firefly (TV series)/archive1, though I'll remind of you this, just in case. -- George Ho ( talk) 23:57, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
Now the article is a candidate to become a former Featured Article with a broken star icon. Please comment there. Thanks. -- George Ho ( talk) 08:09, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The article was written entirely from an in-universe perspective, and the title is misleading and would be unhelpful to anyone who has not heard of "Space Ghost" (i.e. most people in the world). The context is simply inadequate, and the creator is not new, though his immediate recreation of the page shows that he has not read the guidelines. However, I agree that a redirect would have been preferable in the first instance. Deb ( talk) 07:08, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
Do what you like. Here I was, thinking that you'd been hard done by when you lost your adminship, but now I can see the reasons for it. Deb ( talk) 08:26, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
Thank you greatly for your thorough and thoughtful review, the article has improved greatly through your commentary - we have both devoted a lot of time to improving this article and it really is looking much better.
As it is, in my opinion (as the nominator), I think the article meets the good article criteria and think we have addressed the main GA-related issues and are now at the point of mostly stylistic improvements more styled towards an WP:FA review.
I have attempted to address all the issues you have raised, I feel we are getting to a point where our stylistic or linguistic preferences are diverging and this has the potential to have another month or so of discussions... this is going to result in my limited wiki time being spent less fruitfully than on improving other articles (which is my main joy here).
I would ask that you have a quick look at any issues you believe are outstanding based strictly on the good article criteria that would block promotion. Any other issues we can continue to discuss on the talk page... I am getting itchy feet. As it is, I am going on holiday for 2 weeks and look forward to seeing your reply then (or, let's face it I'll probably check whilst on holiday anyway!) Cheers, -- Tom (LT) ( talk) 14:16, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
![]() |
The Reviewer Barnstar | |
For your comprehensive and attentive review of Myocardial infarction. The article has improved dramatically because of your careful and well thought-out review. A stellar job! Tom (LT) ( talk) 16:04, 10 July 2017 (UTC) |
You are invited to join the discussion at
Talk:Nival_(company)#Nival got hacked last year. Encyclopedic to include?.
Pavel Novikov (
talk)
07:06, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
Since you have experience with Good/Featured topics, and I've seen you around several Christianity-related AfDs, I thought I might prod you to see if you have an opinion on my question at Wikipedia_talk:Featured_topic_questions#17th_century_papal_conclaves. Hope all is well. TonyBallioni ( talk) 20:27, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, this is the first article I've wrote that has been nominated for deletion, so I'm a little nervous about the whole thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Navarre0107 ( talk • contribs) 20:02, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
As a former admin you should know better then to make unsubstantiated personal attacks against another editor as you did here [21]. Comment on content not individuals. The ArbCom case you referenced was declined without me even making an opening statement. Heck I only typed one word before they started declining. Need more proof? User:Legacypac/CSD_log Feel free to retract your comment. Legacypac ( talk) 02:37, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
Hey Bro,
It looks like you are a good fighter. Can you plese give him - Luke Shen-Tien Chi and Spokenology: You and Me - a shot.Thanks man! peace.
Sorry for naming it generically, I tried to launch the RFC with as neutral of title as possible to be as neutral as possible about the question at hand while at the same time trying to trout both sides of the debate for edit warring over some meta commentary about CSDs. Hasteur ( talk) 00:41, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Just as an FYI since your involved in the AfD that I tagged Jared Andre Sawyer Jr. as undisclosed paid due to behavioral evidence here and on Commons. The main reason there is because I know some work is being done with ORES using that category. I've already said more than my fair bit in that AfD, so I don't want to raise it there, but did want to give you a heads up in case you were confused. All the best. TonyBallioni ( talk) 07:27, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Can you create the redirect discussion on theElisa_Jordana article? -- Eng. M.Bandara -Talk 08:22, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
An article you recently wished to contribute to,
Grey Council has been moved to
draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:
" before the article title) per the outcome of the AfD. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's
general notability guideline, feel free to mainspace it.Regards:)
Winged Blades of Godric
On leave
05:25, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
re your comment here - [23] - thanks for the kudos on the 1E argument (which is also a hard argument to "win" - people who do BEFOREs end up seeing oodles of sources (that all say the same thing (paraphrased or are brief mentions - but that's a different matter))... I don't think putting this up for a merge discussion now would be correct (the AfD nom itself was arguing that the content for the part already exists in Line Mode Browser, so a merge wasn't necessary (though it retrospect there is some content that could be merged)) - wouldn't this be forum shopping to advance the same argument twice in close succession? Icewhiz ( talk) 07:06, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
Maybe Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Common outcomes needs a nutshell, but the discussion on the talk page makes loud and clear that this is not a neutral version to improve the page but an attempt to bolster Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Common outcomes against people who are willing to judge school articles on face value and sources and not on AfD-history. Better no nutshell than a biased one. The Banner talk 20:19, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
@Jclemens with regards to the Deletion Review for the article, "Selena Zhao", the article has been reinstated but given that the presentation of multiple new sources demonstrates the potential for WP:GNG, how would you suggest expanding the article to incorporate these sources and improve it? Sources: http://web.icenetwork.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20120916&content_id=38517104&vkey=ice_news http://www.thewhig.com/2015/01/21/zhao-doesnt-disappoint https://skatecanada.ca/2014/10/trading-places-us-born-selena-zhao-proudly-represents-canada/ http://web.icenetwork.com/news/2016/09/12/200902400/the-inside-edge-chen-edmunds-headline-ewc https://goldenskate.com/2015/07/selena-zhao/ https://skatecanada.ca/2015/01/selena-zhao-wins-junior-womens-title-in-kingston/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.112.8.201 ( talk) 04:12, 27 November 2017 (UTC)