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. |
Sorry if I'm not posting correctly - I just wanted to let you know that fellow Tokyo group member Fg2 passed away last month. He was a frequent contributor to Wikipedia and Commons. I'm not sure of the etiquette on posting things such as this, but his obituary is here:
http://www.legacy.com/obituaries/bostonglobe/obituary.aspx?n=frank-j-gualtieri&pid=131905563 203.181.14.206 ( talk) 13:16, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Nihonjoe. Sad news above, indeed... About the capitalization issue you brought up at the Takeo Kimura filmography review, you pointed to: wp:MOS-JA#Titles_of_books_and_other_media, which, as I read it now, doesn't seem to address this particular issue. It seems to address the issue of the Japanese use of English words in titles titles with odd capitalization. It doesn't seem to apply to the romanization of the Japanese title. The issue in question is the practise of putting the romanization in the form of first word in caps, remaining words (except for proper nouns) in lower case. (for example: This Day's Life (今日のいのち, Kyō no inochi), as opposed to This Day's Life (今日のいのち, Kyō no Inochi)) The section refers to Wikipedia:ALBUMCAPS#Capitalization, which says, "In titles of songs or albums in a language other than English, the project standard is to use the capitalization utilized by that language, not the English capitalization."... which doesn't really address non-Roman scripts... Am I reading it wrong? Or is there another part of MOS-JA that does specifically address this?... I'm preparing to go through my own filmographies, and, not having any strong preference either way, would just as soon they be in line with MOS-JA recommendations. Regards. Dekkappai ( talk) 19:46, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for participating in WP:Requests for adminship/Kww 3 | |
---|---|
Sometimes, being turned back at the door isn't such a bad thing |
Wikiproject: Did you know? 20:43, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
Because I found that someone had moved several pages from non-Hepburn romanized titles for living persons to Hepburn versions, reverted the moves (subjects such as Yoko Kanno and Ryuichi Sakamoto), and brought it up on WT:MOS-JA, there's now a discussion to drastically change the method by which names of modern people are romanized (use Hepburn only, disregard established or common spellings except as redirects), because the subject of an article is not a reliable source for how to spell his or her own name in the English alphabet.— Ryūlóng ( 竜龙) 00:41, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
I've just started to use the Lupin anti-vandal tool and thought I was reverting vandalism. Sorry! I wasn't trying to move the block notice on User:Leecorso11's page. WWE Socks 04:57, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
See Talk:The End of Evangelion#Newtype review. As far as I can tell, the review must've been 2002 or earlier, which would make it one of the first Newtype USA issues; if you could double-check the link's transcription's general fidelity (modulo the obvious typos), that'd be great. (Also nice would be any opinion on whether to include the little spat.) -- Gwern (contribs) 15:38 30 October 2009 (GMT)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of six World Club Challenge winners templates. Because you deleted them, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Tim Song ( talk) 07:39, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
When I requested protection on this page back in April, I was told that the transcluded doc pages weren't protected. You may want to socialize your decision to protect it. Celestra ( talk) 15:15, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
I would like to request that the template above be reinstated. It was deleted under G6. It has been asked of me to speak to you directly in order to expedite the situation. Many thanks. Lando09 ( talk) 16:09, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your efforts. The page was created by a persistent sockpuppet and it's hard - too hard sometimes - to tell whether his efforts are facetious / malicious or if they contain a kernel of merit! JohnInDC ( talk) 19:50, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Your comment notwithstanding, I blocked the account ... the associations of that term are just too strong to allow it. Daniel Case ( talk) 20:41, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello, this is user:IMMORTAL SAMURAI, a frequent Wikipedia contributor to the Japanese "project" here. I've read into the history of most of the samurai articles that once existed here on Wikipedia and it said that you, personally, for not the first time, deleted over 100--even 200--samurai related articles within the past few months without any reason stated. I understand Wikipedia's administration recruiting policies are very non-rigorous, but don't you think this is stepping the line too far in what power you have here?
Therefore I ask that you please begin revising these articles, for what you've done to Wikipedia has been critically thoughtless and harmful to our project. If you choose to ignore this warning, however, I will be forced to speak to other administrators concerning your violation of power and have you suspended or banned from it. Talk to IMMORTAL SAMURAI 12:23, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
'Baseless accusations'? Is that really what an administrator of Wikipedia should be saying when I not only have a base for what I say but evidence as well? I don't know how many other mass positive edit reversions you've done to other articles here, but seeing that you want to ignore me as if I'm trying to annoy you implies that you've probably been criticized multiple times before for similar reasons. This isn't the time for your personal wants; you've made crucial mistakes to the database of Feudal Japan here and something better needs to come of it by way of group effort and care.
I made my petition here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:JA Talk to IMMORTAL SAMURAI 22:09, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
Could you please take another look at the report I made? The user in question is apparently not the article subject (which would have raised COI issues), but someone pretending to be the article subject and trying to direct traffic to a phony Myspace page. I believe this violates the "Real Names" provisions of the username policy, in particular "Do not edit under the name of a well-known living person unless it is your real name, and you either are that well-known person or you make it clear that you are not." Thank you. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz ( talk) 02:15, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated Petit Apple Pie, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Petit Apple Pie. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. -- Collectonian ( talk · contribs) 02:25, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
The Righteous Sock Barnstar | ||
Awarded to Nihonjoe for meritorious editing. Thank you for your good work reviewing speedy deletion tags on new articles written by an unknown editor. As part of this project I created an account with a dubious username and wrote ten referenced but badly formatted stubs about Antarctic mosses. Two of those articles were nominated for speedy deletion; you rejected one of the nominations with a note that the article did not qualify for A7 speedy criteria. Thank you for prompt and conscientious reviewing. Durova 362 04:28, 10 November 2009 (UTC) |
Hi! I was warned by Caspian blue at here. See my reverts, please. [1], [2], and [3]. I only edited per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Korean)#Sea of Japan (East Sea) and Wikipedia:MoS#Section name. It is true that, as Caspian blue pointed out, there is no mention that using the "Sea of Japan (East Sea)" for a heading is prohibited, but at the same time there is no mention that the using of it for a section or a subsection name is permitted. I thought the subsection name "Sea of Japan or East Sea naming dispute" was not appropriate because Sea of Japan (East Sea) was already used in a preceding sentence and section names should not explicitly refer to higher-level headings. Did I miss something or do something wrong? Please clarify if my understanding of MoS is not good enough. Of course I am fully aware that I did three reverts and have to be careful. Thank you. Oda Mari ( talk) 15:09, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Not sure if you read it yet, but I replied on my talk page. Thanks for the suggestion. 72.216.3.171 ( talk) 07:46, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Talk:Japonic languages#Remove protection and fix ink! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sigmundur ( talk • contribs) 18:48, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
And {{ trout}}! :) – Juliancolton | Talk 14:40, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
I wish you good luck in your envandor. Since I discovered that you were experienced and democratically, good enough to become a bureaucrat, I decided to support you in your decision to become a bureaucrat. Maybe, you should join the ArbComs long after you have been strong enough as a 'crat!---- Boeing7107isdelicious| SPRiCh miT meineN PiloteN 14:07, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
{{ CSRT-Yes}} has been the subject of a lot of debate, since it was agreed upon by groups like Wikiproject:Terrorism and Wikiproject:Templates as the only "manageable" way to handle Guantanamo BLPs - since otherwise there was a need to have hundreds of biographies each incorporating identical text...but one of them would say "Bush's unfair tribunal system", the other one would say "the terrorist was placed before a tribunal", etc. The unorthodox use of the template allowed orthodoxy and NPOV to be ensured across hundreds of BLPs. The template was proposed for deletion in June 2009, but Kept as a necessary tool. ( Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2009_June_2#Template:CSRT-Yes) The following month, a sister template was proposed for deletion and all parties agreed it should be merged into CSRT-Yes (including myself). ( Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2009_June_27#Template:ReadingCSRTNotice ). However, eight weeks later the CSRT-Yes template was again nominated for deletion, apparently on the basis of the editor finding it "messy" and disliking the images in the template. The images were removed per consensus, but User:Plastikspork nevertheless closed the debate as a Substitute and Delete. ( Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2009_September_4#Template:CSRT-Yes). Now AFDs are typically difficult because a "Keep" will just be met by a steady stream of attempts until finally one succeeds (see, for example, the great fun had with Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel Brandt (14th nomination)), whereas a successful closure as "Delete" is rarely able to appeal and have the article restored.
Anyways, more than two months after User:Plastikspork closed the CSRT-Yes's second nomination as "Substitute and Delete", there has been zero attempt by editors to work on deciding the best wording for a substitution, and any attempts to fix BLP articles with POV templates (such as Akhtiar Mohamad, tagged as POV bias since December 2007, a serious breach to allow a BLP to sit with that for two years) are being undone and the POV concerns edited back INTO the article "because CSRT-Yes should be deleted", rather than used to fix the BLP concerns across so many Guantanamo BLPs. (And those POV concerns were raised ages before I strayed onto the battlescene, so no, nothing to do with me on either side) Rather than improving the project, the issue is stagnating attempts to fix BLP articles.
I am not sure User:Plastikspork can retroactively change his decision on the TfD, but I would be interested in hearing whether you still believe that keeping the template is the best route - and how things might be set in motion to focus on helping with hundreds of BLP concerns that have existed for years - where attempts to fix the concerns are met with rigid and stoic "This is not how WP does things" rules, in sad mockery of official policy WP:IAR which seems to be a textbook case in these Guantanamo BLPs. (Cross-posted to those three administrators involved, no bias towards any of them, I assume good faith decisions have just led us to this unfortunate dead end) Sherurcij ( speaker for the dead) 16:16, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
I don't want to jinx you or anything... ;) ... but you now have as many Support votes as you've ever gotten at RfB, and only one oppose. :) Good luck, but so far so good! BOZ ( talk) 20:27, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
At 14:25, 27 October 2009 (UTC), you wrote "and anyone under 18 who does has that information removed fairly quickly)."
I don't think this is generally the case. In particular, the older the minor is, the less likely it seems it is paternalisticly removed, and if it is restored after removal and discussion and it's clear the minor knows the risks, it generally stays. I've been involved in a few such removals myself and on one case initiated an edit-deletion of a self-described and apparently very naive young editor. There's a big difference between a naive 12 year old who thinks his user page is Facebook and a 17 year old high school senior on the cusp of legal adulthood. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 00:41, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Heh. I had no idea what to support was, so I enlisted Google Translate's help and it spat out "私を支援午前" for "I am supporting", but I should have caught the missing arimasu which should have been there. :-) — Coren (talk) 11:54, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
It's generally never a good idea to decline unblocks on users you blocked - especially if said user is attacking you. - Jeremy ( v^_^v Stop... at a WHAMMY!!) 05:20, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for running. I'm sorry I've come to the conclusion that I felt I had to in the Crat Chat. I had hoped that my question in the RfB would prevent the need for a close call. I'm still unsure which way we'll go (I'm certainly open to persuasion there, as ever) but either way, I'm glad you ran, and am sorry you've had (having) a hard time of it. Either way it goes... good luck and thank you again. -- Dweller ( talk) 11:16, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
I want to offer my support. I do not see what you were doing as supporting anything; more like asking "why?". I don't edit very much; I don't like the crap that goes on. But, I do look at a lot of pages, and believe you to be one of the more stable folks here, having good responses and input. Keep up the good work, and it is things like this that prove yout mettle. King Pickle ( talk) 03:54, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
This was a bot-reported possible username violation. The block/unblock sequence has removed the bot report from
WP:UAA, and I have reinserted the report manually. -- Blanchardb -
Me•
MyEars•
MyMouth- timed
16:34, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the note. I was in a bit of a rush and added {{Japan-stub}} without thinking too much about subcategories. I'll keep them in mind from now on! armagebedar ( talk) 05:42, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
You're right that A7 doesn't apply to moss, but the most important thing to clear up is A7 is about individual organisms, not about species of organisms. I added this to the A7 criteria since it confused a couple of readers. I write organism stubs and thank you for realizing these species articles are appropriate to wikipedia, removing the A7 tags, and notifying the editors applying them. -- IP69.226.103.13 ( talk) 08:22, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
Quick message about your speedy deletion of the Zumba article. Could you please read this conversation re the last speedy deletion of it. The article has been in existence for years however recently changed and should be reverted back to this version and not the one you deleted (which admittedly still isn't a great article but at least the sources and references in my opinion establishes enough notability that it should not be deleted under A7). I'm getting a little discouraged that other administrators don't be appear to be taking care when applying A7. A quick look at this reference which was referenced in the article too. I'm tempted to restore it myself and send it to AFD but I have a personal policy of not wheel warring and as such will leave the ball in your court. Glen 04:41, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
The page of an important contemporary Lebanese polymath "Wissam Shekhani" was deleted by you; please help us to bring it back again. We are afraid to be deleted again if we created another time. Can you please Nihonjoe help us. Regards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ALBA-BALAMAND ( talk • contribs) 01:15, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
to say congrats! [4] You'll do some good work, I know it. Best, ceran thor 16:04, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
So... for RfA promotions, I've got some nifty boilerplate that I share so that the newbies don't try to delete the Main Page, etc. I think this might be my first RfB promotion, so I don't have squat.
Um... don't rename Jimbo. Yeah, that's about the only thing I can think of.
Congrats. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
What? I thought he already was a steward. Support. -- Hoary ( talk) 16:14, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
I think this may set a new precedent, that RfBs don't need such a sky-high standard to pass. Good luck with everything! Jamie S93 16:20, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Congrats! Ged UK 16:44, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations! GreenGourd ( talk) 16:30, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
There was never any !doubt ;) hydnjo ( talk) 16:33, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations and good luck! — Oli OR Pyfan! 16:48, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations for becoming a standard question on further RfBs. :-) — Coren (talk) 17:19, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Welcome to the team and ... good luck! WJBscribe (talk) 17:52, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations from me also, I didn't update my support since before the controversial revelation, but I would have maintained it if I had the chance. Camaron · Christopher · talk 20:35, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
License updated to 3.0 as requested - Leonard G. ( talk) 18:11, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations Joe. Needless to say, we have a strong difference of opinion regarding the Tyciol affair, but I hope we can put that firmly behind us now and move forward in a more collegial manner. Please accept my apologies - after rereading your RfB, I see I came over as overly combative when I was merely trying to express my opinion. In the future, I'll try hard to put my thoughts across more eloquently. Best regards and good luck with the new buttons. Sincerely, Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 21:52, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Wow, that's a lot of up and downs - congrats, and at least that part is finally over. :) BOZ ( talk) 06:22, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Just saw this. Congratulations! Cirt ( talk) 08:16, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
(I hope nobody minds me adding this here.) Congratulations, myself from the future. :) Despite not having an account, I observed the request from a distance and I think you deserve this. If it's worth anything to you, I must say that I found myself agreeing with your stance on the external forum issue. Congratulations again. :) - (From AHR.) 86.179.252.154 ( talk) 06:47, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Wow, I can't believe I missed your whole 'crat run! Congratulations on your new shovel! =) 「 ダイノガイ 千?!」 ? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 22:53, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
It's nice to know that you were able to pass as I kept frantically checking the Bureaucrat alert board constantly as I was fearful that it was going to go down the toilet quickly. Honestly if you had lost, I would have lost all faith in the RFB system and people might've had serious reason to call for change. Good luck! Kevin Rutherford ( talk) 03:07, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Wow, information doesn't travel fast enough in wikipedia and it just reached my hear. My congratulations from France. -- KrebMarkt 15:56, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi,
I sent you an email - just want to make sure the address that applied to the bureaucrat list is you. If it is, just post here (or somewhere on-wiki) and I'll let you on. Congrats, and welcome aboard!
Thanks -- Pak aran 04:52, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Joe, it's ages since we had a good fight. Take a look at this and tell me where to get off. (Or, conceivably, even agree with me.) -- Hoary ( talk) 05:21, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
For the articles you listed under "To be created" and "To be considered" on your user page. Shove them onto Wikipedia:Requested articles/Japan/Anime and Manga so we can deal with them as a project. Congrats again for cratship. Extremepro ( talk) 05:56, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
I don't know you, but this RfB was important to me. I'm happy it ended with the right result, so good luck with the new responsibilities.-- SPhilbrick T 16:30, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations, Nihonjoe! Dekkappai ( talk) 17:19, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations, Joe! Now time to wield that power mop. :-) King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:10, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Congrats to 日本穣 from 中国海米. At least, that'll be a good enough faking of my name the purposes of this page. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 14:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
I spotted this -- Dweller ( talk) 10:49, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated Category:High School! Kimengumi ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Extremepro ( talk) 08:41, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Sorry if I'm not posting correctly - I just wanted to let you know that fellow Tokyo group member Fg2 passed away last month. He was a frequent contributor to Wikipedia and Commons. I'm not sure of the etiquette on posting things such as this, but his obituary is here:
http://www.legacy.com/obituaries/bostonglobe/obituary.aspx?n=frank-j-gualtieri&pid=131905563 203.181.14.206 ( talk) 13:16, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Nihonjoe. Sad news above, indeed... About the capitalization issue you brought up at the Takeo Kimura filmography review, you pointed to: wp:MOS-JA#Titles_of_books_and_other_media, which, as I read it now, doesn't seem to address this particular issue. It seems to address the issue of the Japanese use of English words in titles titles with odd capitalization. It doesn't seem to apply to the romanization of the Japanese title. The issue in question is the practise of putting the romanization in the form of first word in caps, remaining words (except for proper nouns) in lower case. (for example: This Day's Life (今日のいのち, Kyō no inochi), as opposed to This Day's Life (今日のいのち, Kyō no Inochi)) The section refers to Wikipedia:ALBUMCAPS#Capitalization, which says, "In titles of songs or albums in a language other than English, the project standard is to use the capitalization utilized by that language, not the English capitalization."... which doesn't really address non-Roman scripts... Am I reading it wrong? Or is there another part of MOS-JA that does specifically address this?... I'm preparing to go through my own filmographies, and, not having any strong preference either way, would just as soon they be in line with MOS-JA recommendations. Regards. Dekkappai ( talk) 19:46, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for participating in WP:Requests for adminship/Kww 3 | |
---|---|
Sometimes, being turned back at the door isn't such a bad thing |
Wikiproject: Did you know? 20:43, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
Because I found that someone had moved several pages from non-Hepburn romanized titles for living persons to Hepburn versions, reverted the moves (subjects such as Yoko Kanno and Ryuichi Sakamoto), and brought it up on WT:MOS-JA, there's now a discussion to drastically change the method by which names of modern people are romanized (use Hepburn only, disregard established or common spellings except as redirects), because the subject of an article is not a reliable source for how to spell his or her own name in the English alphabet.— Ryūlóng ( 竜龙) 00:41, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
I've just started to use the Lupin anti-vandal tool and thought I was reverting vandalism. Sorry! I wasn't trying to move the block notice on User:Leecorso11's page. WWE Socks 04:57, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
See Talk:The End of Evangelion#Newtype review. As far as I can tell, the review must've been 2002 or earlier, which would make it one of the first Newtype USA issues; if you could double-check the link's transcription's general fidelity (modulo the obvious typos), that'd be great. (Also nice would be any opinion on whether to include the little spat.) -- Gwern (contribs) 15:38 30 October 2009 (GMT)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of six World Club Challenge winners templates. Because you deleted them, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Tim Song ( talk) 07:39, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
When I requested protection on this page back in April, I was told that the transcluded doc pages weren't protected. You may want to socialize your decision to protect it. Celestra ( talk) 15:15, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
I would like to request that the template above be reinstated. It was deleted under G6. It has been asked of me to speak to you directly in order to expedite the situation. Many thanks. Lando09 ( talk) 16:09, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your efforts. The page was created by a persistent sockpuppet and it's hard - too hard sometimes - to tell whether his efforts are facetious / malicious or if they contain a kernel of merit! JohnInDC ( talk) 19:50, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Your comment notwithstanding, I blocked the account ... the associations of that term are just too strong to allow it. Daniel Case ( talk) 20:41, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello, this is user:IMMORTAL SAMURAI, a frequent Wikipedia contributor to the Japanese "project" here. I've read into the history of most of the samurai articles that once existed here on Wikipedia and it said that you, personally, for not the first time, deleted over 100--even 200--samurai related articles within the past few months without any reason stated. I understand Wikipedia's administration recruiting policies are very non-rigorous, but don't you think this is stepping the line too far in what power you have here?
Therefore I ask that you please begin revising these articles, for what you've done to Wikipedia has been critically thoughtless and harmful to our project. If you choose to ignore this warning, however, I will be forced to speak to other administrators concerning your violation of power and have you suspended or banned from it. Talk to IMMORTAL SAMURAI 12:23, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
'Baseless accusations'? Is that really what an administrator of Wikipedia should be saying when I not only have a base for what I say but evidence as well? I don't know how many other mass positive edit reversions you've done to other articles here, but seeing that you want to ignore me as if I'm trying to annoy you implies that you've probably been criticized multiple times before for similar reasons. This isn't the time for your personal wants; you've made crucial mistakes to the database of Feudal Japan here and something better needs to come of it by way of group effort and care.
I made my petition here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:JA Talk to IMMORTAL SAMURAI 22:09, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
Could you please take another look at the report I made? The user in question is apparently not the article subject (which would have raised COI issues), but someone pretending to be the article subject and trying to direct traffic to a phony Myspace page. I believe this violates the "Real Names" provisions of the username policy, in particular "Do not edit under the name of a well-known living person unless it is your real name, and you either are that well-known person or you make it clear that you are not." Thank you. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz ( talk) 02:15, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated Petit Apple Pie, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Petit Apple Pie. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. -- Collectonian ( talk · contribs) 02:25, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
The Righteous Sock Barnstar | ||
Awarded to Nihonjoe for meritorious editing. Thank you for your good work reviewing speedy deletion tags on new articles written by an unknown editor. As part of this project I created an account with a dubious username and wrote ten referenced but badly formatted stubs about Antarctic mosses. Two of those articles were nominated for speedy deletion; you rejected one of the nominations with a note that the article did not qualify for A7 speedy criteria. Thank you for prompt and conscientious reviewing. Durova 362 04:28, 10 November 2009 (UTC) |
Hi! I was warned by Caspian blue at here. See my reverts, please. [1], [2], and [3]. I only edited per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Korean)#Sea of Japan (East Sea) and Wikipedia:MoS#Section name. It is true that, as Caspian blue pointed out, there is no mention that using the "Sea of Japan (East Sea)" for a heading is prohibited, but at the same time there is no mention that the using of it for a section or a subsection name is permitted. I thought the subsection name "Sea of Japan or East Sea naming dispute" was not appropriate because Sea of Japan (East Sea) was already used in a preceding sentence and section names should not explicitly refer to higher-level headings. Did I miss something or do something wrong? Please clarify if my understanding of MoS is not good enough. Of course I am fully aware that I did three reverts and have to be careful. Thank you. Oda Mari ( talk) 15:09, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Not sure if you read it yet, but I replied on my talk page. Thanks for the suggestion. 72.216.3.171 ( talk) 07:46, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Talk:Japonic languages#Remove protection and fix ink! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sigmundur ( talk • contribs) 18:48, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
And {{ trout}}! :) – Juliancolton | Talk 14:40, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
I wish you good luck in your envandor. Since I discovered that you were experienced and democratically, good enough to become a bureaucrat, I decided to support you in your decision to become a bureaucrat. Maybe, you should join the ArbComs long after you have been strong enough as a 'crat!---- Boeing7107isdelicious| SPRiCh miT meineN PiloteN 14:07, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
{{ CSRT-Yes}} has been the subject of a lot of debate, since it was agreed upon by groups like Wikiproject:Terrorism and Wikiproject:Templates as the only "manageable" way to handle Guantanamo BLPs - since otherwise there was a need to have hundreds of biographies each incorporating identical text...but one of them would say "Bush's unfair tribunal system", the other one would say "the terrorist was placed before a tribunal", etc. The unorthodox use of the template allowed orthodoxy and NPOV to be ensured across hundreds of BLPs. The template was proposed for deletion in June 2009, but Kept as a necessary tool. ( Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2009_June_2#Template:CSRT-Yes) The following month, a sister template was proposed for deletion and all parties agreed it should be merged into CSRT-Yes (including myself). ( Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2009_June_27#Template:ReadingCSRTNotice ). However, eight weeks later the CSRT-Yes template was again nominated for deletion, apparently on the basis of the editor finding it "messy" and disliking the images in the template. The images were removed per consensus, but User:Plastikspork nevertheless closed the debate as a Substitute and Delete. ( Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2009_September_4#Template:CSRT-Yes). Now AFDs are typically difficult because a "Keep" will just be met by a steady stream of attempts until finally one succeeds (see, for example, the great fun had with Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel Brandt (14th nomination)), whereas a successful closure as "Delete" is rarely able to appeal and have the article restored.
Anyways, more than two months after User:Plastikspork closed the CSRT-Yes's second nomination as "Substitute and Delete", there has been zero attempt by editors to work on deciding the best wording for a substitution, and any attempts to fix BLP articles with POV templates (such as Akhtiar Mohamad, tagged as POV bias since December 2007, a serious breach to allow a BLP to sit with that for two years) are being undone and the POV concerns edited back INTO the article "because CSRT-Yes should be deleted", rather than used to fix the BLP concerns across so many Guantanamo BLPs. (And those POV concerns were raised ages before I strayed onto the battlescene, so no, nothing to do with me on either side) Rather than improving the project, the issue is stagnating attempts to fix BLP articles.
I am not sure User:Plastikspork can retroactively change his decision on the TfD, but I would be interested in hearing whether you still believe that keeping the template is the best route - and how things might be set in motion to focus on helping with hundreds of BLP concerns that have existed for years - where attempts to fix the concerns are met with rigid and stoic "This is not how WP does things" rules, in sad mockery of official policy WP:IAR which seems to be a textbook case in these Guantanamo BLPs. (Cross-posted to those three administrators involved, no bias towards any of them, I assume good faith decisions have just led us to this unfortunate dead end) Sherurcij ( speaker for the dead) 16:16, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
I don't want to jinx you or anything... ;) ... but you now have as many Support votes as you've ever gotten at RfB, and only one oppose. :) Good luck, but so far so good! BOZ ( talk) 20:27, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
At 14:25, 27 October 2009 (UTC), you wrote "and anyone under 18 who does has that information removed fairly quickly)."
I don't think this is generally the case. In particular, the older the minor is, the less likely it seems it is paternalisticly removed, and if it is restored after removal and discussion and it's clear the minor knows the risks, it generally stays. I've been involved in a few such removals myself and on one case initiated an edit-deletion of a self-described and apparently very naive young editor. There's a big difference between a naive 12 year old who thinks his user page is Facebook and a 17 year old high school senior on the cusp of legal adulthood. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 00:41, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Heh. I had no idea what to support was, so I enlisted Google Translate's help and it spat out "私を支援午前" for "I am supporting", but I should have caught the missing arimasu which should have been there. :-) — Coren (talk) 11:54, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
It's generally never a good idea to decline unblocks on users you blocked - especially if said user is attacking you. - Jeremy ( v^_^v Stop... at a WHAMMY!!) 05:20, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for running. I'm sorry I've come to the conclusion that I felt I had to in the Crat Chat. I had hoped that my question in the RfB would prevent the need for a close call. I'm still unsure which way we'll go (I'm certainly open to persuasion there, as ever) but either way, I'm glad you ran, and am sorry you've had (having) a hard time of it. Either way it goes... good luck and thank you again. -- Dweller ( talk) 11:16, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
I want to offer my support. I do not see what you were doing as supporting anything; more like asking "why?". I don't edit very much; I don't like the crap that goes on. But, I do look at a lot of pages, and believe you to be one of the more stable folks here, having good responses and input. Keep up the good work, and it is things like this that prove yout mettle. King Pickle ( talk) 03:54, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
This was a bot-reported possible username violation. The block/unblock sequence has removed the bot report from
WP:UAA, and I have reinserted the report manually. -- Blanchardb -
Me•
MyEars•
MyMouth- timed
16:34, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the note. I was in a bit of a rush and added {{Japan-stub}} without thinking too much about subcategories. I'll keep them in mind from now on! armagebedar ( talk) 05:42, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
You're right that A7 doesn't apply to moss, but the most important thing to clear up is A7 is about individual organisms, not about species of organisms. I added this to the A7 criteria since it confused a couple of readers. I write organism stubs and thank you for realizing these species articles are appropriate to wikipedia, removing the A7 tags, and notifying the editors applying them. -- IP69.226.103.13 ( talk) 08:22, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
Quick message about your speedy deletion of the Zumba article. Could you please read this conversation re the last speedy deletion of it. The article has been in existence for years however recently changed and should be reverted back to this version and not the one you deleted (which admittedly still isn't a great article but at least the sources and references in my opinion establishes enough notability that it should not be deleted under A7). I'm getting a little discouraged that other administrators don't be appear to be taking care when applying A7. A quick look at this reference which was referenced in the article too. I'm tempted to restore it myself and send it to AFD but I have a personal policy of not wheel warring and as such will leave the ball in your court. Glen 04:41, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
The page of an important contemporary Lebanese polymath "Wissam Shekhani" was deleted by you; please help us to bring it back again. We are afraid to be deleted again if we created another time. Can you please Nihonjoe help us. Regards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ALBA-BALAMAND ( talk • contribs) 01:15, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
to say congrats! [4] You'll do some good work, I know it. Best, ceran thor 16:04, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
So... for RfA promotions, I've got some nifty boilerplate that I share so that the newbies don't try to delete the Main Page, etc. I think this might be my first RfB promotion, so I don't have squat.
Um... don't rename Jimbo. Yeah, that's about the only thing I can think of.
Congrats. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
What? I thought he already was a steward. Support. -- Hoary ( talk) 16:14, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
I think this may set a new precedent, that RfBs don't need such a sky-high standard to pass. Good luck with everything! Jamie S93 16:20, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Congrats! Ged UK 16:44, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations! GreenGourd ( talk) 16:30, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
There was never any !doubt ;) hydnjo ( talk) 16:33, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations and good luck! — Oli OR Pyfan! 16:48, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations for becoming a standard question on further RfBs. :-) — Coren (talk) 17:19, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Welcome to the team and ... good luck! WJBscribe (talk) 17:52, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations from me also, I didn't update my support since before the controversial revelation, but I would have maintained it if I had the chance. Camaron · Christopher · talk 20:35, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
License updated to 3.0 as requested - Leonard G. ( talk) 18:11, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations Joe. Needless to say, we have a strong difference of opinion regarding the Tyciol affair, but I hope we can put that firmly behind us now and move forward in a more collegial manner. Please accept my apologies - after rereading your RfB, I see I came over as overly combative when I was merely trying to express my opinion. In the future, I'll try hard to put my thoughts across more eloquently. Best regards and good luck with the new buttons. Sincerely, Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 21:52, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Wow, that's a lot of up and downs - congrats, and at least that part is finally over. :) BOZ ( talk) 06:22, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Just saw this. Congratulations! Cirt ( talk) 08:16, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
(I hope nobody minds me adding this here.) Congratulations, myself from the future. :) Despite not having an account, I observed the request from a distance and I think you deserve this. If it's worth anything to you, I must say that I found myself agreeing with your stance on the external forum issue. Congratulations again. :) - (From AHR.) 86.179.252.154 ( talk) 06:47, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Wow, I can't believe I missed your whole 'crat run! Congratulations on your new shovel! =) 「 ダイノガイ 千?!」 ? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 22:53, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
It's nice to know that you were able to pass as I kept frantically checking the Bureaucrat alert board constantly as I was fearful that it was going to go down the toilet quickly. Honestly if you had lost, I would have lost all faith in the RFB system and people might've had serious reason to call for change. Good luck! Kevin Rutherford ( talk) 03:07, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Wow, information doesn't travel fast enough in wikipedia and it just reached my hear. My congratulations from France. -- KrebMarkt 15:56, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi,
I sent you an email - just want to make sure the address that applied to the bureaucrat list is you. If it is, just post here (or somewhere on-wiki) and I'll let you on. Congrats, and welcome aboard!
Thanks -- Pak aran 04:52, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Joe, it's ages since we had a good fight. Take a look at this and tell me where to get off. (Or, conceivably, even agree with me.) -- Hoary ( talk) 05:21, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
For the articles you listed under "To be created" and "To be considered" on your user page. Shove them onto Wikipedia:Requested articles/Japan/Anime and Manga so we can deal with them as a project. Congrats again for cratship. Extremepro ( talk) 05:56, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
I don't know you, but this RfB was important to me. I'm happy it ended with the right result, so good luck with the new responsibilities.-- SPhilbrick T 16:30, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations, Nihonjoe! Dekkappai ( talk) 17:19, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations, Joe! Now time to wield that power mop. :-) King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:10, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Congrats to 日本穣 from 中国海米. At least, that'll be a good enough faking of my name the purposes of this page. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 14:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
I spotted this -- Dweller ( talk) 10:49, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated Category:High School! Kimengumi ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Extremepro ( talk) 08:41, 3 December 2009 (UTC)