![]() | This 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. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | → | Archive 15 |
I guess you can see what I was talking about now? He isn't going to give up. Tothwolf ( talk) 17:53, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
Hello! I nominated this article for speedy deletion. You declined with the comment "claims of notability are enough (even weak ones)." The man was a high school drama teacher. In my opinion, this does not qualify him for a Wikipedia article, which probably was written by one of his former students. If one about him is allowed to remain, what is to stop people from starting to write articles about their high school history, biology, or math teachers? Could you please explain in greater detail why you believe this man is notable? Thank you very much. LiteraryMaven ( talk) 20:34, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
P.S. Please see Galen Marshall, who appears to have as little notability as Kenneth. L. Ton. Both articles were created by User:Sallyrob. Note in both she cites "Eyewitness account by Robert E. Nylund" as a reference, which doesn't remotely meet Wikipedia criteria. Will we eventually see articles about everyone who ever taught her? LiteraryMaven ( talk) 20:48, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
Dear SoWhy,
Thank you for your input on my RfA. I wanted to take a minute to explain myself, but I wasn't sure that it would be appropriate to do so in the RfA itself.
As to the mistaken CSD nom, you're right. I jumped on that one too quickly, and picked a reason that didn't stand up to even a little bit of scrutiny. I still feel that it has failed to assert why it is notable enough to stay on Wikipedia (and I wonder to myself if the deletion had gone through if I had tagged it with {{db-a7}} instead), but I'm not about to start a fight over it.
And why do I have so many edits over just the last three days? Well...turns out that I was one of the victims of Office Depot's downsizing last week, so I've had a lot of extra time at home lately. It's not that I was desperately trying to get my edit count up -- I didn't even know what people looked for in an admin candidate until after my nom.
I'd welcome any other feedback you'd want to give.
Anywho, cheers. Matt ( talk) 21:38, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
Remember this discussion, about a sockpuppet/anon IP's editing? I think it is one user using these IPs: ( 86.148.109.115, 86.165.82.109, 81.157.88.230, 86.132.132.78 86.145.113.100 and quite frankly, I have no idea how to counteract it. The user seems to be watching my contributions, as none of those IPs edited the articles My Name Is Bruce and Conflict: Desert Storm II until after I had edited them recently, and simply reverted my edits. I reported the activity at AIV, when the user was editing three articles Resident Evil 3, Syphon Filter: Dark Mirror and Syphon Filter: Logan's Shadow, resulting in the semi-protection of RE3 but leaving the other two unprotected. Don't really know what to do here, I can't just edit war away until it gains more attention, AIV doesn't seem to be the answer (put in another report) and I'm not sure anything else really applies. Any help or advice appreciated. Geoff B ( talk) 18:37, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
Oh well. I guess that it's pointless to implement all those page-move protections I asked for because trolls hop all over the place. But look at the log for the Thailand article: Its move-protections were allowed to expire, and it got vandalized a second time, which looks like possible motive for move protection. I'm not forcing you to protect it; you decide for yourself as an admin.
If you've seen the "Protecting BLP articles feeler survey" you might think that Wikipedia isn't as safely open as it used to be. Pretty soon if page-move is being abused most of the time I might find page-moves to be an admin privilege. -- Andrewlp1991 ( talk) 06:26, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Sorry about this closing lark, just edit conflicted with you. I was about to close, but you did it first. Anyway, I've detranscluded from WP:RfA. Cheers. — Cyclonenim ( talk · contribs · email) 00:06, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi there! Nice to be on your talk page again, :-) Odd request, I know, but just wondering if you would put a welcome template on my talkpage at the de wiki. I don't like having the red link. I was going to give myself one but I couldn't find the templates (seeing as I don't know German!) Thank you, :-) Maedin\ talk 16:02, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi there,
A few days ago (maybe a week) an admin (I think it was you!) posted on an AfD a link to a discussion somewhere where the consensus that places are inherently notable was agreed. Sadly I can't remember where I saw it, but if you have it to hand, i'd be grateful (and I'll file it away properly this time!) -- Ged UK 13:17, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 10, which includes these articles:
Delivered by §hepBot ( Disable) at 00:53, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Regarding the deletion of all those F1 portal subpages, would a G7 have been a more appropriate tag than a G6? Thanks, Aptery gial 11:13, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
I think you have been hoaxed. This was previously described as an author of poems and short stories, which may or may not have been included in some books, which may or may not have actually been sold. The ISBNs don't work. There was no article I could find in the author's native language Wikipedia. Perhaps I should have used {{hoax}} but that seems so offensive. sinneed ( talk) 14:40, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
I put in a request but as soon as I did (its still in there though) I thought i'd ask you if you could help me? THanks and Peace Out— Permethius RFP ( talk) 15:44, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, most of those edits have been at the heavy metal/hard rock etc. articles.I guess i just want to learn everything so when my edits get around the 1500 to 2k mark (which will be very soon) I wont have any problems .But Thanks and Peace Out— Permethius RFP ( talk) 16:47, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
dear sowhy,
I would like to know why you deleted potomac backyard wrestling page. potomac backyard wrestling is a backyard wrestling leage based in potomac, maryland. the page is liget according to the if i deleted your artical.
thanks for your time, have a wonderful day
zach wikipoff —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Zach wikipoff (
talk •
contribs)
19:44, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
No, I have to say, I disagree. Taking a hard line against the removal of information that cites and considers multiple sources in favor of hard line positions in fanwank debates is not something to be taken seriously. It is something to be treated with a hard-line, uncompromising "No, we are not doing that." Phil Sandifer ( talk) 22:04, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
You state that you need more recent activity -- the vandalism/NPOVandfansite drive-by occurred in the last week. How is that not recent enough? I only just checked my watch page and caught it there today. I'm not pissed that you declined, but it's a pain in the butt to have to repeatedly fix the page after the same set of dynamic IP addresses swing through and alter stuff, when a semi-protect can at least eliminate it for a little while. I had corrected the fansite inclusion only one week ago, only to have several sections altered within the next day. I'm willing to accept your ruling regardless, but I'd at least like to understand better why multiple alterations in the last week, as part of a long-term pattern, is not enough to warrant even a short protection of some sort. Thanks in advance for the help! JasonDUIUC ( talk) 07:56, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi. re this article, why is it not an A3 (blatant nonsense), when there's no evidence the book is anything more than WP:MADEUP ? CultureDrone ( talk) 13:01, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Actually, the IP bounces:
With the exception of two anonymous edits from a Croatian editor on Jan 11, the anonymous editing on the article appears to be one editor from Newark using a Verizon connection, going back to at least July 2008.— Kww( talk) 13:57, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
My sincere apologies about mistagging the article, do you think I should work on moving it to [Wiktionary]]? I Grave Rob §talk♥ stalk§
I'm confused by your response on this request. I wrote:
and you responded:
Logically that means 'Never request it'. (Since, per the original statement, they never do enough on one day.).. Do we permanently do nothing in cases like this? Thanks. Quaeler ( talk) 14:23, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Good point, thanks! Flying Toaster 17:36, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Hey, I was the user who requested a speedy of IslandDefence due to A7, but you declined. But technically, wouldn't it be A7 as the map type was not notable, and not like big news or anything. I mean, grifball was big news, as it was made by the red vs blue creators, as well as be given a special map by Bungie, however, the map IslandDefence is not notable, so wouldn't it fall under A7? Deavenger ( talk) 20:13, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
I noticed a massive removal of content from an article on Jam Nizamuddin II by user:Andyjsmith, which puzzled me because I thought the material was taken from a book in the public domain. I tracked down the book and author, and found that it is indeed public domain, so restored the material. But then I looked at the talk page for the main editor on the article, User talk:Dawoodabro and found a mass of other copyvio notices. They include several on other members of the Samma Dynasty based on material from the same public domain source, easy to identify because the names all start with "Jam". I put a note explaining why I am confident the source work is public domain on Talk:Jam Unar. What is the right way to get all these copyvio notices removed and articles restored? Not that the articles are very good, but as powerful rulers of a major state the Jams deserve articles and these are the best we have until a historian comes along and improves them. Aymatth2 ( talk) 15:52, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
As I have just registered here and have no idea who can edit the page currently as it is on a lock down due to vandalization. Could you please add the following names to the 2009 guest list at the bottom table
Todd Haberkorn, Hideo Okamoto, David Stanworth
the names can be verified here: http://www.sakuracon.org/programming/guests.php
thank you, SeijinDinger ( talk) 06:44, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
Why did you remove my page Cityzone? It seems that big businesses can have pages and so can bands and artists but when you wish to describe the work of smaller organisations that have no tangible revenues, such as Cityzone, but deliver a good service for their industry they are considered advertising. Please explain?
Please also let me know where I can take this complaint further?
Further Examples (and these are profit making organisations):
Morganjbryan ( talk) 17:29, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
You recently semi-protected Wikipedia:Wikiproject User scripts/Scripts/livepreview.js... almost all user scripts are fully protected, so I was curious as to why you only semi'd this one. Thanks! – Drilnoth ( T • C) 17:54, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
Barring any new uprisings during the night, there would appear to be a compromise paragraph formed in the talk page. Unless you find disagreement posted between now and whatever time tommorow, feel free to unlock the article and/or make the alteration noted on the talk page. Thanks for catching the edit war. -- Human.v2.0 ( talk) 04:55, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Does this seem better? :-) — Coralmizu (Mizu onna sango15) Drop a line 20:40, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I saw your name in the list of adopters and you're also an administrator. I want to get adopted are you willing to adopt? So far I've had a problem with picture upload but I sorted it out now my monobook.js isn't working as expected, can you help?— StaticVision ( talk) 13:56, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Yes I'm fine with that I think that's what I want. I added importScript('User:Ioeth/friendly.js'); importScript('User:AzaToth/twinkle.js'); to my monobook. js but it doesn't show [rollback (Vandal)] like that [4]— StaticVision ( talk) 14:35, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
{{
adoptee|SoWhy}}
on your talkpage to advertise your status. As for the Twinkle problem, have you done a cache bypassing reload? It tells you at the top of
User:StaticVision/monobook.js how to do that.Delivered by §hepBot ( Disable) at 23:58, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Fuhghettaboutit#Little_Fyodor thx riffic ( talk) 12:05, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed that you deleted the article I tagged under a different criteria (A7 instead of G10). Was I in error, or do you feel that the article could have been deleted under G10 as well? Thanks in advance. decltype ( talk) 12:14, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi,
you deleted the young director award page due to copyright violation.
The text used on the page has been created for Young director award by a PR agency.
It is used in many other places, as it is a description of what the young director award is. It can for example be found on the official yda homepage http://youngdirectoraward.com.
I have the permission of young director award to use this text.
For clearance you can refer to info@yda2009.com.
I hope the page will soon be restored.
Best Hannes Jakobsen —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hannes jakobsen ( talk • contribs) 13:29, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Sure, I can do that; but it won't even require a drop-down list of options, unless you want a different summary for each criterion. What would you like the standard edit summary (or summaries) to be? — Animum ( talk) 22:52, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The Original Barnstar | |
You Are one of the most helpful admins on Wikipedia,Thanks for all the help you provide! Permethius ( talk) 15:29, 17 March 2009 (UTC) |
As I had noted on the vandalism page, the edits made are not vandalism as they really do need to be done. The removals this user initated are pretty much required under neutrality and notability for the Lisa Pin-Up, and do not seem to warrant an indefinate block. -- Human.v2.0 ( talk) 19:19, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Hello! I am taking you up on your offer for pointers on admin actions. I do a lot of work at UAA and somewhat confused by the block options, specifically, disabling account creation. I understand what it does, but when are appropriate times to choose that action? The summary lists "bad-faith usernames" should have account creation blocked, but are there other times when it should be disabled as well? Thanks in advance. TN X Man 21:56, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
importScript('User:Animum/easyblock.js'); //
User:Animum/easyblock.js
to your monobook.js. You'll never have to worry about block options again. :) –
Juliancolton
Tropical
Cyclone
22:02, 17 March 2009 (UTC)Hey SoWhy...
Around the article Sacred Heart Primary School (which redirects to Sacred Heart Primary School, Kew, Victoria), it should be removed. The reason behind this is that many links point to the generic Sacred Heart Primary School article that do not necessarily mean to point to the school in Kew. I asked for it to be deleted.
-- ric_man ( talk) 02:13, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
Awarded to SoWhy for being particularly dedicated to RfPP. Perhaps I'll be able to assist you there one day. Enigma msg 08:02, 18 March 2009 (UTC) |
Hi there.
You recently locked the ACMA webpage citing disruption to prove a point. That isn't what has happened here. One user has quoted an article from a very unreputable site ( the site is a company that produces glossy magazines, they aren't journalistic ) because it suits his personal views. If you read the references included on the page itself you will see the issue is far more involved than that. I have added a summary for you to read on the talk page if you care.
There is politics here, but it is on the side of the people that want to keep the actions of the ACMA secret. I encourage you to read up on the issue at least a little, and then reconsider your decision. I'm following this issue with the ACMA and Censorship quite extensively, and would be happy to provide you with *reliable* references from mainstream news to back up anything you have questions over. Please reconsider. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Reasonwins ( talk • contribs) 09:04, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
So you are an inclusionist, but only when it doesn't involve actual links to real information? And a deletionist when it suits you? ;-) Leo ( talk) 09:41, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
I have an account but normally edits with my IP. Recently I was involved in a somehow awkward misunderstanding and my IP was blocked for vandalism. May I ask you to kindly assist in this matter and review my unblock request? I understand it is violates Wikipedia policy to circumvent a block, but I really hope to resolve this misunderstanding quickly and I found you to be an active administrator. Thanks a lot. Naur ( talk) 09:13, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Due to edit conflict, I found it simplest to just copy-paste my content over yours. Hope you don't mind. decltype ( talk) 12:22, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
I reviewed what is considered non-criterion. Thank you for the heads-up. I will keep this in mind in the future. I'm trying to do my best, so don't be too harsh :3 -Axmann8 (Talk) 12:55, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Came across Zeus for Windows and Agent SVN while new page patrolling. I couldn't find independent reviews via Google, though there were lots of trialware download sites. Should the original author be encouraged to show notability, or are these so blatant that they should be speedied? I'd appreciate your advice - Pointillist ( talk) 15:57, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Hey SoWhy - I just wanted to check in with you about a speedy deletion decline here. You turned a copyvio article into a good stub, which is awesome, but I did want to mention (since you said "check Google news" in the edit summary) that I believe my tagging was nonetheless correct. A purely copyright violation article with no non-infringing content, even about a notable subject, can still be deleted under g12. Of course making a stub from scratch, as you did, is probably preferable - but I just wanted to make sure you didn't think this was a mistake on my end. Thanks very much for the good work on this. :) Flying Toaster 16:27, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
I see this article has been restored. Would you mind adding something to the talk page about the restoration and the rationale behind it? Particularly the improvements you saw over previous versions. -- Rtphokie ( talk) 02:05, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, I just realised that this article was create-protected. Had I realised I would have approached you first. Could you take a look and see if your okay with this article now? It does seem to be well sourced and I don't believe it is a copyright violation now. Admittedly it is not written very neutrally yet though. If you have any doubts I'll move it back into project space whence it came and we can discuss further. Cheers, — Martin ( MSGJ · talk) 22:40, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Hey SoWhy. As you're so familiar with CSD, could you review Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2009_March_18#RentLaw.com and let me know if you think my deletion was crazy? Thanks! – Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 13:50, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I've been off Wikipedia for about a week and saw that my userpage was deleted and then restored. Could you please explain what happened as I must have missed all the action? Thanks! SMSpivey ( talk) 04:05, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi Dude,
Thanks a lot on helping me with my page. I edited the page to have richer content and more discription on what the software is. It would really appreciated and helpful if you could please spend some time out of you busy schedule and let me know of what the corrections i need to do. I am adding more details for which i would need some more time. Your help would be appreciated.
Thanks .....
Rohitsmallya ( talk) 14:31, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
I made it! Thanks for your co-nom and support :) -- Ged UK 15:15, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
You declined a speedy on this one on the grounds that A7 does not apply to churches. I've decided to send it to AfD to "establish jurisprudence" on whether a church is a group of people (in which case A7 would apply) or whether we have to consider also the building, if any is mentioned, which the congregation uses for its Sunday services. Your comments are welcome. -- Blanchardb - Me• MyEars• MyMouth- timed 19:58, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
I think that there is some kind of edit warring on this page. Some users change the encyclopedic term "partially recognised" to forumish "minimally recognised" or "little-recognised". Can you protect this page?-- Yuriy Kolodin ( talk) 15:15, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
![]() | This 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. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | → | Archive 15 |
I guess you can see what I was talking about now? He isn't going to give up. Tothwolf ( talk) 17:53, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
Hello! I nominated this article for speedy deletion. You declined with the comment "claims of notability are enough (even weak ones)." The man was a high school drama teacher. In my opinion, this does not qualify him for a Wikipedia article, which probably was written by one of his former students. If one about him is allowed to remain, what is to stop people from starting to write articles about their high school history, biology, or math teachers? Could you please explain in greater detail why you believe this man is notable? Thank you very much. LiteraryMaven ( talk) 20:34, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
P.S. Please see Galen Marshall, who appears to have as little notability as Kenneth. L. Ton. Both articles were created by User:Sallyrob. Note in both she cites "Eyewitness account by Robert E. Nylund" as a reference, which doesn't remotely meet Wikipedia criteria. Will we eventually see articles about everyone who ever taught her? LiteraryMaven ( talk) 20:48, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
Dear SoWhy,
Thank you for your input on my RfA. I wanted to take a minute to explain myself, but I wasn't sure that it would be appropriate to do so in the RfA itself.
As to the mistaken CSD nom, you're right. I jumped on that one too quickly, and picked a reason that didn't stand up to even a little bit of scrutiny. I still feel that it has failed to assert why it is notable enough to stay on Wikipedia (and I wonder to myself if the deletion had gone through if I had tagged it with {{db-a7}} instead), but I'm not about to start a fight over it.
And why do I have so many edits over just the last three days? Well...turns out that I was one of the victims of Office Depot's downsizing last week, so I've had a lot of extra time at home lately. It's not that I was desperately trying to get my edit count up -- I didn't even know what people looked for in an admin candidate until after my nom.
I'd welcome any other feedback you'd want to give.
Anywho, cheers. Matt ( talk) 21:38, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
Remember this discussion, about a sockpuppet/anon IP's editing? I think it is one user using these IPs: ( 86.148.109.115, 86.165.82.109, 81.157.88.230, 86.132.132.78 86.145.113.100 and quite frankly, I have no idea how to counteract it. The user seems to be watching my contributions, as none of those IPs edited the articles My Name Is Bruce and Conflict: Desert Storm II until after I had edited them recently, and simply reverted my edits. I reported the activity at AIV, when the user was editing three articles Resident Evil 3, Syphon Filter: Dark Mirror and Syphon Filter: Logan's Shadow, resulting in the semi-protection of RE3 but leaving the other two unprotected. Don't really know what to do here, I can't just edit war away until it gains more attention, AIV doesn't seem to be the answer (put in another report) and I'm not sure anything else really applies. Any help or advice appreciated. Geoff B ( talk) 18:37, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
Oh well. I guess that it's pointless to implement all those page-move protections I asked for because trolls hop all over the place. But look at the log for the Thailand article: Its move-protections were allowed to expire, and it got vandalized a second time, which looks like possible motive for move protection. I'm not forcing you to protect it; you decide for yourself as an admin.
If you've seen the "Protecting BLP articles feeler survey" you might think that Wikipedia isn't as safely open as it used to be. Pretty soon if page-move is being abused most of the time I might find page-moves to be an admin privilege. -- Andrewlp1991 ( talk) 06:26, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Sorry about this closing lark, just edit conflicted with you. I was about to close, but you did it first. Anyway, I've detranscluded from WP:RfA. Cheers. — Cyclonenim ( talk · contribs · email) 00:06, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi there! Nice to be on your talk page again, :-) Odd request, I know, but just wondering if you would put a welcome template on my talkpage at the de wiki. I don't like having the red link. I was going to give myself one but I couldn't find the templates (seeing as I don't know German!) Thank you, :-) Maedin\ talk 16:02, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi there,
A few days ago (maybe a week) an admin (I think it was you!) posted on an AfD a link to a discussion somewhere where the consensus that places are inherently notable was agreed. Sadly I can't remember where I saw it, but if you have it to hand, i'd be grateful (and I'll file it away properly this time!) -- Ged UK 13:17, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 10, which includes these articles:
Delivered by §hepBot ( Disable) at 00:53, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Regarding the deletion of all those F1 portal subpages, would a G7 have been a more appropriate tag than a G6? Thanks, Aptery gial 11:13, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
I think you have been hoaxed. This was previously described as an author of poems and short stories, which may or may not have been included in some books, which may or may not have actually been sold. The ISBNs don't work. There was no article I could find in the author's native language Wikipedia. Perhaps I should have used {{hoax}} but that seems so offensive. sinneed ( talk) 14:40, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
I put in a request but as soon as I did (its still in there though) I thought i'd ask you if you could help me? THanks and Peace Out— Permethius RFP ( talk) 15:44, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, most of those edits have been at the heavy metal/hard rock etc. articles.I guess i just want to learn everything so when my edits get around the 1500 to 2k mark (which will be very soon) I wont have any problems .But Thanks and Peace Out— Permethius RFP ( talk) 16:47, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
dear sowhy,
I would like to know why you deleted potomac backyard wrestling page. potomac backyard wrestling is a backyard wrestling leage based in potomac, maryland. the page is liget according to the if i deleted your artical.
thanks for your time, have a wonderful day
zach wikipoff —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Zach wikipoff (
talk •
contribs)
19:44, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
No, I have to say, I disagree. Taking a hard line against the removal of information that cites and considers multiple sources in favor of hard line positions in fanwank debates is not something to be taken seriously. It is something to be treated with a hard-line, uncompromising "No, we are not doing that." Phil Sandifer ( talk) 22:04, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
You state that you need more recent activity -- the vandalism/NPOVandfansite drive-by occurred in the last week. How is that not recent enough? I only just checked my watch page and caught it there today. I'm not pissed that you declined, but it's a pain in the butt to have to repeatedly fix the page after the same set of dynamic IP addresses swing through and alter stuff, when a semi-protect can at least eliminate it for a little while. I had corrected the fansite inclusion only one week ago, only to have several sections altered within the next day. I'm willing to accept your ruling regardless, but I'd at least like to understand better why multiple alterations in the last week, as part of a long-term pattern, is not enough to warrant even a short protection of some sort. Thanks in advance for the help! JasonDUIUC ( talk) 07:56, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi. re this article, why is it not an A3 (blatant nonsense), when there's no evidence the book is anything more than WP:MADEUP ? CultureDrone ( talk) 13:01, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Actually, the IP bounces:
With the exception of two anonymous edits from a Croatian editor on Jan 11, the anonymous editing on the article appears to be one editor from Newark using a Verizon connection, going back to at least July 2008.— Kww( talk) 13:57, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
My sincere apologies about mistagging the article, do you think I should work on moving it to [Wiktionary]]? I Grave Rob §talk♥ stalk§
I'm confused by your response on this request. I wrote:
and you responded:
Logically that means 'Never request it'. (Since, per the original statement, they never do enough on one day.).. Do we permanently do nothing in cases like this? Thanks. Quaeler ( talk) 14:23, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Good point, thanks! Flying Toaster 17:36, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Hey, I was the user who requested a speedy of IslandDefence due to A7, but you declined. But technically, wouldn't it be A7 as the map type was not notable, and not like big news or anything. I mean, grifball was big news, as it was made by the red vs blue creators, as well as be given a special map by Bungie, however, the map IslandDefence is not notable, so wouldn't it fall under A7? Deavenger ( talk) 20:13, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
I noticed a massive removal of content from an article on Jam Nizamuddin II by user:Andyjsmith, which puzzled me because I thought the material was taken from a book in the public domain. I tracked down the book and author, and found that it is indeed public domain, so restored the material. But then I looked at the talk page for the main editor on the article, User talk:Dawoodabro and found a mass of other copyvio notices. They include several on other members of the Samma Dynasty based on material from the same public domain source, easy to identify because the names all start with "Jam". I put a note explaining why I am confident the source work is public domain on Talk:Jam Unar. What is the right way to get all these copyvio notices removed and articles restored? Not that the articles are very good, but as powerful rulers of a major state the Jams deserve articles and these are the best we have until a historian comes along and improves them. Aymatth2 ( talk) 15:52, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
As I have just registered here and have no idea who can edit the page currently as it is on a lock down due to vandalization. Could you please add the following names to the 2009 guest list at the bottom table
Todd Haberkorn, Hideo Okamoto, David Stanworth
the names can be verified here: http://www.sakuracon.org/programming/guests.php
thank you, SeijinDinger ( talk) 06:44, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
Why did you remove my page Cityzone? It seems that big businesses can have pages and so can bands and artists but when you wish to describe the work of smaller organisations that have no tangible revenues, such as Cityzone, but deliver a good service for their industry they are considered advertising. Please explain?
Please also let me know where I can take this complaint further?
Further Examples (and these are profit making organisations):
Morganjbryan ( talk) 17:29, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
You recently semi-protected Wikipedia:Wikiproject User scripts/Scripts/livepreview.js... almost all user scripts are fully protected, so I was curious as to why you only semi'd this one. Thanks! – Drilnoth ( T • C) 17:54, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
Barring any new uprisings during the night, there would appear to be a compromise paragraph formed in the talk page. Unless you find disagreement posted between now and whatever time tommorow, feel free to unlock the article and/or make the alteration noted on the talk page. Thanks for catching the edit war. -- Human.v2.0 ( talk) 04:55, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Does this seem better? :-) — Coralmizu (Mizu onna sango15) Drop a line 20:40, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I saw your name in the list of adopters and you're also an administrator. I want to get adopted are you willing to adopt? So far I've had a problem with picture upload but I sorted it out now my monobook.js isn't working as expected, can you help?— StaticVision ( talk) 13:56, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Yes I'm fine with that I think that's what I want. I added importScript('User:Ioeth/friendly.js'); importScript('User:AzaToth/twinkle.js'); to my monobook. js but it doesn't show [rollback (Vandal)] like that [4]— StaticVision ( talk) 14:35, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
{{
adoptee|SoWhy}}
on your talkpage to advertise your status. As for the Twinkle problem, have you done a cache bypassing reload? It tells you at the top of
User:StaticVision/monobook.js how to do that.Delivered by §hepBot ( Disable) at 23:58, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Fuhghettaboutit#Little_Fyodor thx riffic ( talk) 12:05, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed that you deleted the article I tagged under a different criteria (A7 instead of G10). Was I in error, or do you feel that the article could have been deleted under G10 as well? Thanks in advance. decltype ( talk) 12:14, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi,
you deleted the young director award page due to copyright violation.
The text used on the page has been created for Young director award by a PR agency.
It is used in many other places, as it is a description of what the young director award is. It can for example be found on the official yda homepage http://youngdirectoraward.com.
I have the permission of young director award to use this text.
For clearance you can refer to info@yda2009.com.
I hope the page will soon be restored.
Best Hannes Jakobsen —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hannes jakobsen ( talk • contribs) 13:29, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Sure, I can do that; but it won't even require a drop-down list of options, unless you want a different summary for each criterion. What would you like the standard edit summary (or summaries) to be? — Animum ( talk) 22:52, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The Original Barnstar | |
You Are one of the most helpful admins on Wikipedia,Thanks for all the help you provide! Permethius ( talk) 15:29, 17 March 2009 (UTC) |
As I had noted on the vandalism page, the edits made are not vandalism as they really do need to be done. The removals this user initated are pretty much required under neutrality and notability for the Lisa Pin-Up, and do not seem to warrant an indefinate block. -- Human.v2.0 ( talk) 19:19, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Hello! I am taking you up on your offer for pointers on admin actions. I do a lot of work at UAA and somewhat confused by the block options, specifically, disabling account creation. I understand what it does, but when are appropriate times to choose that action? The summary lists "bad-faith usernames" should have account creation blocked, but are there other times when it should be disabled as well? Thanks in advance. TN X Man 21:56, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
importScript('User:Animum/easyblock.js'); //
User:Animum/easyblock.js
to your monobook.js. You'll never have to worry about block options again. :) –
Juliancolton
Tropical
Cyclone
22:02, 17 March 2009 (UTC)Hey SoWhy...
Around the article Sacred Heart Primary School (which redirects to Sacred Heart Primary School, Kew, Victoria), it should be removed. The reason behind this is that many links point to the generic Sacred Heart Primary School article that do not necessarily mean to point to the school in Kew. I asked for it to be deleted.
-- ric_man ( talk) 02:13, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
Awarded to SoWhy for being particularly dedicated to RfPP. Perhaps I'll be able to assist you there one day. Enigma msg 08:02, 18 March 2009 (UTC) |
Hi there.
You recently locked the ACMA webpage citing disruption to prove a point. That isn't what has happened here. One user has quoted an article from a very unreputable site ( the site is a company that produces glossy magazines, they aren't journalistic ) because it suits his personal views. If you read the references included on the page itself you will see the issue is far more involved than that. I have added a summary for you to read on the talk page if you care.
There is politics here, but it is on the side of the people that want to keep the actions of the ACMA secret. I encourage you to read up on the issue at least a little, and then reconsider your decision. I'm following this issue with the ACMA and Censorship quite extensively, and would be happy to provide you with *reliable* references from mainstream news to back up anything you have questions over. Please reconsider. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Reasonwins ( talk • contribs) 09:04, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
So you are an inclusionist, but only when it doesn't involve actual links to real information? And a deletionist when it suits you? ;-) Leo ( talk) 09:41, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
I have an account but normally edits with my IP. Recently I was involved in a somehow awkward misunderstanding and my IP was blocked for vandalism. May I ask you to kindly assist in this matter and review my unblock request? I understand it is violates Wikipedia policy to circumvent a block, but I really hope to resolve this misunderstanding quickly and I found you to be an active administrator. Thanks a lot. Naur ( talk) 09:13, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Due to edit conflict, I found it simplest to just copy-paste my content over yours. Hope you don't mind. decltype ( talk) 12:22, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
I reviewed what is considered non-criterion. Thank you for the heads-up. I will keep this in mind in the future. I'm trying to do my best, so don't be too harsh :3 -Axmann8 (Talk) 12:55, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Came across Zeus for Windows and Agent SVN while new page patrolling. I couldn't find independent reviews via Google, though there were lots of trialware download sites. Should the original author be encouraged to show notability, or are these so blatant that they should be speedied? I'd appreciate your advice - Pointillist ( talk) 15:57, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Hey SoWhy - I just wanted to check in with you about a speedy deletion decline here. You turned a copyvio article into a good stub, which is awesome, but I did want to mention (since you said "check Google news" in the edit summary) that I believe my tagging was nonetheless correct. A purely copyright violation article with no non-infringing content, even about a notable subject, can still be deleted under g12. Of course making a stub from scratch, as you did, is probably preferable - but I just wanted to make sure you didn't think this was a mistake on my end. Thanks very much for the good work on this. :) Flying Toaster 16:27, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
I see this article has been restored. Would you mind adding something to the talk page about the restoration and the rationale behind it? Particularly the improvements you saw over previous versions. -- Rtphokie ( talk) 02:05, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, I just realised that this article was create-protected. Had I realised I would have approached you first. Could you take a look and see if your okay with this article now? It does seem to be well sourced and I don't believe it is a copyright violation now. Admittedly it is not written very neutrally yet though. If you have any doubts I'll move it back into project space whence it came and we can discuss further. Cheers, — Martin ( MSGJ · talk) 22:40, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Hey SoWhy. As you're so familiar with CSD, could you review Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2009_March_18#RentLaw.com and let me know if you think my deletion was crazy? Thanks! – Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 13:50, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I've been off Wikipedia for about a week and saw that my userpage was deleted and then restored. Could you please explain what happened as I must have missed all the action? Thanks! SMSpivey ( talk) 04:05, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi Dude,
Thanks a lot on helping me with my page. I edited the page to have richer content and more discription on what the software is. It would really appreciated and helpful if you could please spend some time out of you busy schedule and let me know of what the corrections i need to do. I am adding more details for which i would need some more time. Your help would be appreciated.
Thanks .....
Rohitsmallya ( talk) 14:31, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
I made it! Thanks for your co-nom and support :) -- Ged UK 15:15, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
You declined a speedy on this one on the grounds that A7 does not apply to churches. I've decided to send it to AfD to "establish jurisprudence" on whether a church is a group of people (in which case A7 would apply) or whether we have to consider also the building, if any is mentioned, which the congregation uses for its Sunday services. Your comments are welcome. -- Blanchardb - Me• MyEars• MyMouth- timed 19:58, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
I think that there is some kind of edit warring on this page. Some users change the encyclopedic term "partially recognised" to forumish "minimally recognised" or "little-recognised". Can you protect this page?-- Yuriy Kolodin ( talk) 15:15, 23 March 2009 (UTC)