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. |
Hey Thryduulf, haven't seen you around in a little while. Hope things are going well for you in meatspace. I can't speak for everyone, but you are missed when you're away. Your efforts and insights are always appreciated. BigNate37 (T) 22:52, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Your name just keeps coming up! The Д. Ловато RfD got me thinking about why this isn't a CSD criterion if consensus is so clearly against these redirects. Well I found a February 2011 CSD discussion on Deletion of foreign redirects and your thoughts on the matter effectively ended the discussion. I wanted to ask you in particular about one thing you said: "…a significant number of people object to their deletion…" Do you think there's still a consensus to keep this sort of redirect? I mean I certainly understand your rational argument for not deleting them, but the impression that the Ловато RfD gave me makes me wonder whether the community at large feels differently. BigNate37 (T) 19:36, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
Could you at least delete the hoax material from the page history?— Ryulong ( 琉竜) 10:29, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Username policy. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 13:41, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
Your categorisation of what is, or isn't, a rationale for deletion relies too heavily on policy, I think. ( especially because any rationale for deletion can be supported by policy). Indeed, even the guideline is wishy-washy (you might want to delete if ...) - not at the "compelling reasons to delete are, and here's why". The last bit is key - the guideline doesn't provide a reason why you'd want to delete in those cases, so it's up to the nominator to. If they fail to, there's no rationale for deletion. Merely being listed as a reason you might want to doesn't provide a rationale for deletion (beyond "I want to!", perhaps). In comparison, WP:GNG says why we should delete articles that fail GNG (mostly, they're unverifiable, and there's no hope of making them remotely NPOV).
The - uhm - the very short of it is that presumably, you disagreeing with me in the discussions promotes fuller discussion and is thus probably an asset to RfD, and thus reasonably worth your time. If you think you're going to convince me that your overall position is right, and my overall position is wrong, and I just don't understand something - you're wasting your time. I understand the position you're taking, but I reject it as wrong. Saying "This redirect should be deleted because the term doesn't appear in the article" is no more a rationale for deletion than "This redirect should be deleted because cheese is delicious" is a rationale for deletion. Both are just non-sequitars. Either way is fine by me, depends on what your motivations are, I guess. Wily D 10:30, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Hello Thryduulf,
I've bid a stall on behalf of the Cambridge University Wikipedia Society at the Cambridge University fresher's fair, 2-3 October. If you are around, it would be great if you can come and help by staffing the stall for a few hours!
The fair will run, roughly, from 9am to 7pm on the 2nd, and 9am to 4pm on the 3rd; details are yet to be confirmed. [1] You certainly won't be expected to stay the whole day unless you really want to! It'll be a sign-up stall for the campus Wikipedia Society, and we'll give out Wikimedia freebies at the event to promote awareness for Wikipedia-editing and Wikimedia UK.
Please contact me if you're interested in helping, even if it's just a few hours. Thanks! (You're receiving this message because you've signed up for a recent Cambridge meetup - apologies if you aren't around anymore) Der yck C. 22:33, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:PC2012/RfC 1. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 14:16, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 14:16, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
In a deletion discussion you voted "defer". At first I thought you voted "delete", and if there had been more votes, instead of just yours, I likely would have keep thinking you voted "delete". In the future I recommend using another wording that doesn't look so much like "delete", e.g. "no action". Emmette Hernandez Coleman ( talk) 19:59, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
You don't need to ask permission at RFD to ad {{ R from typo}} an obvious typo redirect, you're free to add it yourself. Emmette Hernandez Coleman ( talk) 11:41, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
Do you see my request?-- Vivaelcelta { discusión · contributions} 18:26, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
What you do think my gadget? Please give your opinion here.-- Vivaelcelta { discusión · contributions} 18:50, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:File mover. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 15:15, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Help talk:Archiving a talk page. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 16:15, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
I'm sorry I missed September but I was rather busy. Enjoy. Simply south.... .. wearing fish for just 6 years 23:12, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi. I was curious about the reverts you made to three articles recently: this edit to the City Liner article, this edit to the Cityliner article, and this edit to the City Line article. In each case, you quote " WP:INTDABLINK". The problem I see is that the guideline mentioned there about "creating links to disambiguation pages" applies to regular wikilinks within articles, and not in disambiguation pages as we are dealing with here. I can't see why intentionally add a piped link to a redirect makes any sense in the three cases here. If you look at the "User Guidelines" section at WP:DABLINKS, however, it does explicitly say that piping should not be used to change the title of disambiguation entry links. Isn't this what you did in your recent edits? I'm not an expert on the intricacies of disambiguation pages, so hopefully you can correct me if I am reading things wrong, but as I understand the guidelines, the linking method currently used is incorrect and unnecessary. I hope you can clear any confusion on my part. Thanks. -- DAJF ( talk) 10:36, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Hello. You have a new message at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2012 October 4's talk page. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ Contrib. 19:18, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Notability. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 16:16, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi there. You commented on my List of Demon Stone characters RfD yesterday. I understand that deleting the history of that article is incorrect, but my concern is that there is a cluster of useless and redundant redirects now:
There was a lot of confusing moving and redirecting done about six years ago with the titles, with the bottom two articles ending up pointing at the top one. Nothing is linked to any of the articles now. Are the last two good candidates for deletion? Or what about moving the article with the history to one of the other two titles as a more likely search term and then deleting the top article? Three orphan redirects seems excessive to me, and I'm trying to get an idea of what the limit is on search term style redirects. The original game's article title is Forgotten Realms: Demon Stone for reference. Thanks. — Torchiest talk edits 17:41, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Um, Malleus and I have had no interaction aside one brief one 3-4 months ago. If he needs so many interaction bans with so many others, perhaps the best thing to do is ban him outright? The arbitration committee is trying to reign in the excesses Malleus has presented the community...if the community fails to handle it themselves as they have. Your suggestions took a lot of time to write up, but it seems like an awful lot of compromise and accomodations for one editor.-- MONGO 20:07, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
I think your detailed and well thought-through proposal is very sensible. I would support it there, but that forum is meant to be "not a discussion". Thank you for trying to find a middle way. If only this, or something similar, had been suggested by someone 24 hours ago - it is unfortunate that some ArbCom members seem to have rather shot themselves in the foot over this (and with a boomerang, apparently... quite a neat trick.) Martinevans123 ( talk) 20:12, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
On one hand, I don't care about an interaction restriction, because (afaik) I've not intereacted with mf prior to him attacking me at the arb page.
On the other hand, I did nothing wrong there, and stayed WP:CIVIL.
(And to be honest, what I initially said, was little different than what many of MF's supporters said.)
So I'm curious why you suggest I should be sanctioned? - jc37 16:57, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Jimmy Savile. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 17:15, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mixed martial arts. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 17:16, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
Kaliningrad Oblast was played in the main section of the expansive grid. Are we allowed to repeat words from the main in the branches? I was going to remove it but thought I'd check first. Hiding T 15:22, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 18:15, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
You didn't create this article (can't tell who did because the history is messed up) but you were one of the early contributors.
The article Matt Hunter has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Meters (
talk) 23:51, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/China-related articles. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 18:15, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar | |
For exhibiting rational judgement on a certain list which caused considerable overreaction and worse case scenario concerns. ♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 19:07, 27 November 2012 (UTC) |
In the face of the irrational panic, something important seems to have been overlooked by most of them in that having an open category system is potentially far more damaging than a single list which is under scrutiny on watchlists, even protected. Anybody can slop the category on any biography they don't like, and many of course are off the wiki radar and might go undetected for a long time. Far worse is the unsourced material about pedophiles in numerous articles. In fact I'd go as far to say that it would actually be less damaging to have a single sourced list and greatly minimizes the possibly of long standing real damaging vandalism. The list existed for nearly a month without a single act of vandalism. I think the categories should be deleted and all entries placed on a sourced list. That this could have been overlooked by the endorsers reveals flaws in logic.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 19:44, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
I noticed your username commenting at an Arbcom discussion regarding civility. An effort is underway that would likely benifit if your views were included. I hope you will append regards at: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Civility enforcement/Questionnaire Thank you for considering this request. My76Strat ( talk) 11:27, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:History of Hungary. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 18:15, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
Issue 46: December 2012
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Sorry this edition is so late. Simply south.... .. walking into bells for just 6 years 11:52, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Non-admin closure. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 18:16, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
Since this closed keep (which makes no sense to me), I feel that I must ask: How does:
Of what possible use is the word "in"? "In" what? "In" where? "In" whom? Nothing, nowhere, and nobody, in order. The word "in" refers to nothing, and means nothing; therefore it has no place in the redirect. Winding up a bit, why is this "in" business being perpetuated? Why was it ever added? Please, no snark. I want a serious explanation, or I want it gone.-- Lexein ( talk) 13:46, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 18:17, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your re-explanation of why it was pointing where it was and why it should point to where it's now pointing. Please accept the following:
The Redirect Barnstar | ||
Thanks for your (re)-explanation of why it was pointing where it was and why it should point to where it's now pointing Tonywalton Talk 00:11, 31 December 2012 (UTC) |
I've responded to your comment about the Robotic Richard Simmons. I'm concerned that you've substantially misrepresented what the nominator wrote, and I'd appreciate it if you would take a second look. Best, Mackensen (talk) 19:30, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
I would like to extend a thank you, as well as a Happy New year, for sorting everything out for WP:TUF. I like how it turned out that the person nominating it ,for whatever their reason was, turned out to be the best thing that ever happened to the essay. Cheers. PortlandOregon97217 ( talk) 07:41, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Notability (music). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 19:15, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Issue 47: January 2013
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Simply south.... .. walking into bells for just 6 years 20:46, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
When you said at the FfD for this file that "reproductions of the cover (including the headline, etc) are being offered for sale" (I assume Sports Illustrated), did you just mean it was for sale directly by SI (a la here) or by third-parties? VernoWhitney ( talk) 19:42, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for saying in no uncertain terms that you think I am "nobody" around here. It's one thing to disagree with the point someone makes. It's entirely another to personalise things like that. Guettarda ( talk) 00:03, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Resysopping practices. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 19:16, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello,
As one of the participants in the original Village Pump RFC about getting the Simple Wiki to the top of the Languages, you are invited to participate in the reopened discussion of the same. Your feedback will be appreciated.
Cheers, TheOriginalSoni ( talk) 16:00, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
Sorry about the confusion with the misplaced RfD nomination. That was a Twinkle glitch of some sort, but I must confess I have absolutely no idea how it happened. Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:54, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:A4118 Olchfa Bridge east.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. :Jay8g Hi!- I am... - What I do... WASH- BRIDGE- WPWA - MFIC 17:42, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Moderators/Straw poll. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 20:15, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi there. When you made this comment at ANI, I was unable to comment because of a pending libel matter exacerbated by Flyer22 which has since been oversighted. Would you be willing to take another look now that I am able to comment? These editors have abused AN/I process before in attempts to censor the medical and legal consensus at hebephilia and similar controversial topics. They know that getting in at AN/I before their victims can defend themselves means a lot of editors will make a decision before all the information is presented. A number of people have revised their opinions once they had more information. Thanks! Jokestress ( talk) 19:59, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
If you two wish to continue this discussion, please use a venue other than my talk page. Further messages not directed at me may be reverted without further comment. Thryduulf ( talk) 21:36, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Hey Thryduulf. I noticed that your statement is 710 words long, but only a maximun of 500 words are permitted in a statement for a case request (including responses). Therefore, I'd like to request you to reduce your statement to meet the 500-word limit before an arbitrator or one of the clerks (including me) reduce it by ourselves (which might remove information you may consider important).
From the Arbitration Committee, — ΛΧΣ 21 23:27, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
Good job closing this off; I'm more than happy with your decision. We've a few handfuls of (IMHO) horribly over-redirected-to titles - I'll figure out a better way to present them to XfD before presenting them. - TB ( talk) 20:53, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ward-Nasse Gallery. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 21:15, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
An arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Sexology. Evidence that you wish the Arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence sub-page, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Sexology/Evidence. Please add your evidence by February 22, 2013, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can contribute to the case workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Sexology/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Ks0stm ( T• C• G• E) 03:25, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi,
Regarding this redirect: This was quite a while ago now, but originally I created the Wikipedia Reference Desk article, asserting its notability based on a scholarly article about it. This caused an immediate nomination for deletion, prompting a flurry of discussion on the AFD page from the WP:RD regulars. The consensus seemed to be to redirect to the Wikipedia article, but since WP:RD is on en, I personally thought that the proper redirect was to a section about the Reference Desk that should be in the English Wikipedia article.
Now that a year or so has gone by, I'd say the redirect you have implemented (to WP:RD) seems OK to me, until the Reference Desk qualifies for notability and gets an article written about it. Comet Tuttle ( talk) 07:13, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Article feedback. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 22:15, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Railway stations in Birmingham city centre, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Birmingham International Airport ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:07, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Reference desk. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 22:16, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
Issue 48: March 2013
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Simply south.... .. catching SNOWballs for just 6 years 22:06, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:PD-US-no notice. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 23:15, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (people). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 00:15, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
An RfC that may interest you has been opened at MediaWiki talk:Bad image list#Restricted-use media list, so please come and include your opinion. – PAINE ELLSWORTH CLIMAX! 09:33, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Integrity. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 01:15, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
Any interest? ~ Amory ( u • t • c) 00:25, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:How to write a plot summary. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 01:16, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
Issue 49: April 2013
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Simply south.... .. eating shoes for just 7 years 20:45, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
I should have thought to ask here first rather than going to WT:UKRAIL, but... where is this? - mattbuck ( Talk) 12:47, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Hiya, would just like to request further discussion regarding WP:RFD for Mojo. I'm still learning :D All the best Charon123able ( talk) 23:37, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
Choosing "where" to merge the information really doesn't matter considering literally all of this information is already in the four other articles specified. The page is just a copy of all that information. If you feel the consensus was that the article should merged into another one, then just deleting it would carry out the consensus considering there's no extra information to add to any of the other articles. Feed back ☎ 20:14, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:User pages. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 02:15, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
I thought it'd be appropriate to tell you about Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2013 April 19#Butcher of the Balkans. You were the only person who voiced a concern about a distinction between a full disambiguation and a partial disambiguation (a primary topic with a hatnote) during the original RfD discussion. Can you please assess the state of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC there now, and tell us if you actually object to full disambiguation? -- Joy [shallot] ( talk) 08:51, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/No big deal?. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 17:25, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
Sorry for the lack of attribution -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 01:44, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
I have filed a request for clarification of ArbCom's decline of Will Beback's ban appeal. The clarification request is here. You are being notified as you recently participated in discussion of this ban appeal. MastCell Talk 18:31, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
The Redirect Barnstar | ||
I hereby award User:Thryduulf this shiny Redirect Barnstar for their excellent work at WP:RFD Lenticel ( talk) 08:57, 30 April 2013 (UTC) |
Thank you! Thryduulf ( talk) 08:59, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
I need Transcendence (film) redirect to be deleted. It already exists and since there's no other film with this title, there doesn't need to be this overthrowing redirect.Rusted AutoParts 03:01, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
I had a history in this? Could you be more clear? Hasteur ( talk) 16:26, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
- Knowledgekid87 ( talk) 22:53, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
I assumed this was a routine maintenance thing, so I didn't give it any more thought than that. I think I'll steer clear of templates (: Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:57, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
You participated in the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (people)#RFC-birth date format conformity when used to disambiguate so I thought you might want to comment at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (people)#Birth date format conformity .28second round.29.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 15:05, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
You wrote, "My understanding is that the straw poll was just to establish the current state of play - i.e. whether there was sufficient in principle support for allowing TimidGuy back with conditions...." [4] Note that my ban was vacated by the Arbitration Committee. The discussion is related to the indefinite ban of Will Beback. Perhaps just a typo. TimidGuy ( talk) 14:36, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi Thryduulf. While I totally agree with you that alt proposal 3 on the talk page at 2013 Cleveland, Ohio, missing trio should be snow-closed - in fact, I'm the one who requested it - you and anyone else who has participated in any of the current proposals, including myself, cannot and must not be the one to do it. Therefore, it's been reverted. The close needs to be done by someone uninvolved; an editor who has not !voted or materially participated in any of the proposals. But I wouldn't worry, alt proposal 3 is effectively dead and hopefully we'll get the article title issue resolved soon. Thanks for your good intentions. -- 76.189.109.155 ( talk) 18:18, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
An arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Race and politics. Evidence that you wish the Arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence sub-page, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Race and politics/Evidence. Please add your evidence by May 21, 2013, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can contribute to the case workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Race and politics/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Ks0stm ( T• C• G• E) 01:56, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Notability (people). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 19:16, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
Albert.philander (
talk) 21:55, 16 May 2013 (UTC) hii angelo i want to talk to you about the article wedlock(band) which u deleted
Even though I was unable to post for two week, please don't think I missed those posts where you blamed me for your failure to post an obvious story in a timely manner. Whether you're prepared to repeat them now remains to be seen. I continued to browse in that time, noticing the lack of consequences for HiLo despite him repeatedly misquoting you, or the lack of actoin against anyone who simply continued to do what others at ANI correctly recognised as basic trolling rather than informed opposition. I also noticed that the only people who complained about the story once it went up, were the same people who you claimed all had valid points to make in opposing it. Points that didn't refer to a single source, and in many cases, showed complete and utter ignorance of the entire sport/country they were commenting on. Given how close you characterised the debate as being, that's very odd, don't you think? Still, all my fault eh. Mind, not editting for two weeks at least meant I could fully take in the continued coverage the story got, which you may or may not have noticed, wasn't even overshadowed by David Beckham's own retirement news a week later. Gruesome Foursome ( talk) 11:39, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
On 23 May 2013, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2013 Stockholm riots, which you recently nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. |
ThaddeusB ( talk) 23:18, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 19:17, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 20:18, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Rules for Fools. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 21:15, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
Dusti *poke* 21:32, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Accessibility. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 21:16, 24 June 2013 (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. |
Hey Thryduulf, haven't seen you around in a little while. Hope things are going well for you in meatspace. I can't speak for everyone, but you are missed when you're away. Your efforts and insights are always appreciated. BigNate37 (T) 22:52, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Your name just keeps coming up! The Д. Ловато RfD got me thinking about why this isn't a CSD criterion if consensus is so clearly against these redirects. Well I found a February 2011 CSD discussion on Deletion of foreign redirects and your thoughts on the matter effectively ended the discussion. I wanted to ask you in particular about one thing you said: "…a significant number of people object to their deletion…" Do you think there's still a consensus to keep this sort of redirect? I mean I certainly understand your rational argument for not deleting them, but the impression that the Ловато RfD gave me makes me wonder whether the community at large feels differently. BigNate37 (T) 19:36, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
Could you at least delete the hoax material from the page history?— Ryulong ( 琉竜) 10:29, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Username policy. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 13:41, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
Your categorisation of what is, or isn't, a rationale for deletion relies too heavily on policy, I think. ( especially because any rationale for deletion can be supported by policy). Indeed, even the guideline is wishy-washy (you might want to delete if ...) - not at the "compelling reasons to delete are, and here's why". The last bit is key - the guideline doesn't provide a reason why you'd want to delete in those cases, so it's up to the nominator to. If they fail to, there's no rationale for deletion. Merely being listed as a reason you might want to doesn't provide a rationale for deletion (beyond "I want to!", perhaps). In comparison, WP:GNG says why we should delete articles that fail GNG (mostly, they're unverifiable, and there's no hope of making them remotely NPOV).
The - uhm - the very short of it is that presumably, you disagreeing with me in the discussions promotes fuller discussion and is thus probably an asset to RfD, and thus reasonably worth your time. If you think you're going to convince me that your overall position is right, and my overall position is wrong, and I just don't understand something - you're wasting your time. I understand the position you're taking, but I reject it as wrong. Saying "This redirect should be deleted because the term doesn't appear in the article" is no more a rationale for deletion than "This redirect should be deleted because cheese is delicious" is a rationale for deletion. Both are just non-sequitars. Either way is fine by me, depends on what your motivations are, I guess. Wily D 10:30, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Hello Thryduulf,
I've bid a stall on behalf of the Cambridge University Wikipedia Society at the Cambridge University fresher's fair, 2-3 October. If you are around, it would be great if you can come and help by staffing the stall for a few hours!
The fair will run, roughly, from 9am to 7pm on the 2nd, and 9am to 4pm on the 3rd; details are yet to be confirmed. [1] You certainly won't be expected to stay the whole day unless you really want to! It'll be a sign-up stall for the campus Wikipedia Society, and we'll give out Wikimedia freebies at the event to promote awareness for Wikipedia-editing and Wikimedia UK.
Please contact me if you're interested in helping, even if it's just a few hours. Thanks! (You're receiving this message because you've signed up for a recent Cambridge meetup - apologies if you aren't around anymore) Der yck C. 22:33, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:PC2012/RfC 1. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 14:16, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 14:16, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
In a deletion discussion you voted "defer". At first I thought you voted "delete", and if there had been more votes, instead of just yours, I likely would have keep thinking you voted "delete". In the future I recommend using another wording that doesn't look so much like "delete", e.g. "no action". Emmette Hernandez Coleman ( talk) 19:59, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
You don't need to ask permission at RFD to ad {{ R from typo}} an obvious typo redirect, you're free to add it yourself. Emmette Hernandez Coleman ( talk) 11:41, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
Do you see my request?-- Vivaelcelta { discusión · contributions} 18:26, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
What you do think my gadget? Please give your opinion here.-- Vivaelcelta { discusión · contributions} 18:50, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:File mover. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 15:15, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Help talk:Archiving a talk page. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 16:15, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
Issue 45: October 2012
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
I'm sorry I missed September but I was rather busy. Enjoy. Simply south.... .. wearing fish for just 6 years 23:12, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi. I was curious about the reverts you made to three articles recently: this edit to the City Liner article, this edit to the Cityliner article, and this edit to the City Line article. In each case, you quote " WP:INTDABLINK". The problem I see is that the guideline mentioned there about "creating links to disambiguation pages" applies to regular wikilinks within articles, and not in disambiguation pages as we are dealing with here. I can't see why intentionally add a piped link to a redirect makes any sense in the three cases here. If you look at the "User Guidelines" section at WP:DABLINKS, however, it does explicitly say that piping should not be used to change the title of disambiguation entry links. Isn't this what you did in your recent edits? I'm not an expert on the intricacies of disambiguation pages, so hopefully you can correct me if I am reading things wrong, but as I understand the guidelines, the linking method currently used is incorrect and unnecessary. I hope you can clear any confusion on my part. Thanks. -- DAJF ( talk) 10:36, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Hello. You have a new message at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2012 October 4's talk page. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ Contrib. 19:18, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Notability. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 16:16, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi there. You commented on my List of Demon Stone characters RfD yesterday. I understand that deleting the history of that article is incorrect, but my concern is that there is a cluster of useless and redundant redirects now:
There was a lot of confusing moving and redirecting done about six years ago with the titles, with the bottom two articles ending up pointing at the top one. Nothing is linked to any of the articles now. Are the last two good candidates for deletion? Or what about moving the article with the history to one of the other two titles as a more likely search term and then deleting the top article? Three orphan redirects seems excessive to me, and I'm trying to get an idea of what the limit is on search term style redirects. The original game's article title is Forgotten Realms: Demon Stone for reference. Thanks. — Torchiest talk edits 17:41, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Um, Malleus and I have had no interaction aside one brief one 3-4 months ago. If he needs so many interaction bans with so many others, perhaps the best thing to do is ban him outright? The arbitration committee is trying to reign in the excesses Malleus has presented the community...if the community fails to handle it themselves as they have. Your suggestions took a lot of time to write up, but it seems like an awful lot of compromise and accomodations for one editor.-- MONGO 20:07, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
I think your detailed and well thought-through proposal is very sensible. I would support it there, but that forum is meant to be "not a discussion". Thank you for trying to find a middle way. If only this, or something similar, had been suggested by someone 24 hours ago - it is unfortunate that some ArbCom members seem to have rather shot themselves in the foot over this (and with a boomerang, apparently... quite a neat trick.) Martinevans123 ( talk) 20:12, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
On one hand, I don't care about an interaction restriction, because (afaik) I've not intereacted with mf prior to him attacking me at the arb page.
On the other hand, I did nothing wrong there, and stayed WP:CIVIL.
(And to be honest, what I initially said, was little different than what many of MF's supporters said.)
So I'm curious why you suggest I should be sanctioned? - jc37 16:57, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Jimmy Savile. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 17:15, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mixed martial arts. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 17:16, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
Kaliningrad Oblast was played in the main section of the expansive grid. Are we allowed to repeat words from the main in the branches? I was going to remove it but thought I'd check first. Hiding T 15:22, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 18:15, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
You didn't create this article (can't tell who did because the history is messed up) but you were one of the early contributors.
The article Matt Hunter has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Meters (
talk) 23:51, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/China-related articles. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 18:15, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar | |
For exhibiting rational judgement on a certain list which caused considerable overreaction and worse case scenario concerns. ♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 19:07, 27 November 2012 (UTC) |
In the face of the irrational panic, something important seems to have been overlooked by most of them in that having an open category system is potentially far more damaging than a single list which is under scrutiny on watchlists, even protected. Anybody can slop the category on any biography they don't like, and many of course are off the wiki radar and might go undetected for a long time. Far worse is the unsourced material about pedophiles in numerous articles. In fact I'd go as far to say that it would actually be less damaging to have a single sourced list and greatly minimizes the possibly of long standing real damaging vandalism. The list existed for nearly a month without a single act of vandalism. I think the categories should be deleted and all entries placed on a sourced list. That this could have been overlooked by the endorsers reveals flaws in logic.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 19:44, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
I noticed your username commenting at an Arbcom discussion regarding civility. An effort is underway that would likely benifit if your views were included. I hope you will append regards at: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Civility enforcement/Questionnaire Thank you for considering this request. My76Strat ( talk) 11:27, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:History of Hungary. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 18:15, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
Issue 46: December 2012
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Sorry this edition is so late. Simply south.... .. walking into bells for just 6 years 11:52, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Non-admin closure. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 18:16, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
Since this closed keep (which makes no sense to me), I feel that I must ask: How does:
Of what possible use is the word "in"? "In" what? "In" where? "In" whom? Nothing, nowhere, and nobody, in order. The word "in" refers to nothing, and means nothing; therefore it has no place in the redirect. Winding up a bit, why is this "in" business being perpetuated? Why was it ever added? Please, no snark. I want a serious explanation, or I want it gone.-- Lexein ( talk) 13:46, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 18:17, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your re-explanation of why it was pointing where it was and why it should point to where it's now pointing. Please accept the following:
The Redirect Barnstar | ||
Thanks for your (re)-explanation of why it was pointing where it was and why it should point to where it's now pointing Tonywalton Talk 00:11, 31 December 2012 (UTC) |
I've responded to your comment about the Robotic Richard Simmons. I'm concerned that you've substantially misrepresented what the nominator wrote, and I'd appreciate it if you would take a second look. Best, Mackensen (talk) 19:30, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
I would like to extend a thank you, as well as a Happy New year, for sorting everything out for WP:TUF. I like how it turned out that the person nominating it ,for whatever their reason was, turned out to be the best thing that ever happened to the essay. Cheers. PortlandOregon97217 ( talk) 07:41, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Notability (music). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 19:15, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Issue 47: January 2013
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Simply south.... .. walking into bells for just 6 years 20:46, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
When you said at the FfD for this file that "reproductions of the cover (including the headline, etc) are being offered for sale" (I assume Sports Illustrated), did you just mean it was for sale directly by SI (a la here) or by third-parties? VernoWhitney ( talk) 19:42, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for saying in no uncertain terms that you think I am "nobody" around here. It's one thing to disagree with the point someone makes. It's entirely another to personalise things like that. Guettarda ( talk) 00:03, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Resysopping practices. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 19:16, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello,
As one of the participants in the original Village Pump RFC about getting the Simple Wiki to the top of the Languages, you are invited to participate in the reopened discussion of the same. Your feedback will be appreciated.
Cheers, TheOriginalSoni ( talk) 16:00, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
Sorry about the confusion with the misplaced RfD nomination. That was a Twinkle glitch of some sort, but I must confess I have absolutely no idea how it happened. Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:54, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:A4118 Olchfa Bridge east.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. :Jay8g Hi!- I am... - What I do... WASH- BRIDGE- WPWA - MFIC 17:42, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Moderators/Straw poll. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 20:15, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi there. When you made this comment at ANI, I was unable to comment because of a pending libel matter exacerbated by Flyer22 which has since been oversighted. Would you be willing to take another look now that I am able to comment? These editors have abused AN/I process before in attempts to censor the medical and legal consensus at hebephilia and similar controversial topics. They know that getting in at AN/I before their victims can defend themselves means a lot of editors will make a decision before all the information is presented. A number of people have revised their opinions once they had more information. Thanks! Jokestress ( talk) 19:59, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
If you two wish to continue this discussion, please use a venue other than my talk page. Further messages not directed at me may be reverted without further comment. Thryduulf ( talk) 21:36, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Hey Thryduulf. I noticed that your statement is 710 words long, but only a maximun of 500 words are permitted in a statement for a case request (including responses). Therefore, I'd like to request you to reduce your statement to meet the 500-word limit before an arbitrator or one of the clerks (including me) reduce it by ourselves (which might remove information you may consider important).
From the Arbitration Committee, — ΛΧΣ 21 23:27, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
Good job closing this off; I'm more than happy with your decision. We've a few handfuls of (IMHO) horribly over-redirected-to titles - I'll figure out a better way to present them to XfD before presenting them. - TB ( talk) 20:53, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ward-Nasse Gallery. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 21:15, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
An arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Sexology. Evidence that you wish the Arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence sub-page, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Sexology/Evidence. Please add your evidence by February 22, 2013, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can contribute to the case workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Sexology/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Ks0stm ( T• C• G• E) 03:25, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi,
Regarding this redirect: This was quite a while ago now, but originally I created the Wikipedia Reference Desk article, asserting its notability based on a scholarly article about it. This caused an immediate nomination for deletion, prompting a flurry of discussion on the AFD page from the WP:RD regulars. The consensus seemed to be to redirect to the Wikipedia article, but since WP:RD is on en, I personally thought that the proper redirect was to a section about the Reference Desk that should be in the English Wikipedia article.
Now that a year or so has gone by, I'd say the redirect you have implemented (to WP:RD) seems OK to me, until the Reference Desk qualifies for notability and gets an article written about it. Comet Tuttle ( talk) 07:13, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Article feedback. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 22:15, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Railway stations in Birmingham city centre, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Birmingham International Airport ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:07, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Reference desk. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 22:16, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
Issue 48: March 2013
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Simply south.... .. catching SNOWballs for just 6 years 22:06, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:PD-US-no notice. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 23:15, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (people). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 00:15, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
An RfC that may interest you has been opened at MediaWiki talk:Bad image list#Restricted-use media list, so please come and include your opinion. – PAINE ELLSWORTH CLIMAX! 09:33, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Integrity. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 01:15, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
Any interest? ~ Amory ( u • t • c) 00:25, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:How to write a plot summary. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 01:16, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
Issue 49: April 2013
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Simply south.... .. eating shoes for just 7 years 20:45, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
I should have thought to ask here first rather than going to WT:UKRAIL, but... where is this? - mattbuck ( Talk) 12:47, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Hiya, would just like to request further discussion regarding WP:RFD for Mojo. I'm still learning :D All the best Charon123able ( talk) 23:37, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
Choosing "where" to merge the information really doesn't matter considering literally all of this information is already in the four other articles specified. The page is just a copy of all that information. If you feel the consensus was that the article should merged into another one, then just deleting it would carry out the consensus considering there's no extra information to add to any of the other articles. Feed back ☎ 20:14, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:User pages. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 02:15, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
I thought it'd be appropriate to tell you about Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2013 April 19#Butcher of the Balkans. You were the only person who voiced a concern about a distinction between a full disambiguation and a partial disambiguation (a primary topic with a hatnote) during the original RfD discussion. Can you please assess the state of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC there now, and tell us if you actually object to full disambiguation? -- Joy [shallot] ( talk) 08:51, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/No big deal?. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 17:25, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
Sorry for the lack of attribution -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 01:44, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
I have filed a request for clarification of ArbCom's decline of Will Beback's ban appeal. The clarification request is here. You are being notified as you recently participated in discussion of this ban appeal. MastCell Talk 18:31, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
The Redirect Barnstar | ||
I hereby award User:Thryduulf this shiny Redirect Barnstar for their excellent work at WP:RFD Lenticel ( talk) 08:57, 30 April 2013 (UTC) |
Thank you! Thryduulf ( talk) 08:59, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
I need Transcendence (film) redirect to be deleted. It already exists and since there's no other film with this title, there doesn't need to be this overthrowing redirect.Rusted AutoParts 03:01, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
I had a history in this? Could you be more clear? Hasteur ( talk) 16:26, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
- Knowledgekid87 ( talk) 22:53, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
I assumed this was a routine maintenance thing, so I didn't give it any more thought than that. I think I'll steer clear of templates (: Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:57, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
You participated in the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (people)#RFC-birth date format conformity when used to disambiguate so I thought you might want to comment at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (people)#Birth date format conformity .28second round.29.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 15:05, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
You wrote, "My understanding is that the straw poll was just to establish the current state of play - i.e. whether there was sufficient in principle support for allowing TimidGuy back with conditions...." [4] Note that my ban was vacated by the Arbitration Committee. The discussion is related to the indefinite ban of Will Beback. Perhaps just a typo. TimidGuy ( talk) 14:36, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi Thryduulf. While I totally agree with you that alt proposal 3 on the talk page at 2013 Cleveland, Ohio, missing trio should be snow-closed - in fact, I'm the one who requested it - you and anyone else who has participated in any of the current proposals, including myself, cannot and must not be the one to do it. Therefore, it's been reverted. The close needs to be done by someone uninvolved; an editor who has not !voted or materially participated in any of the proposals. But I wouldn't worry, alt proposal 3 is effectively dead and hopefully we'll get the article title issue resolved soon. Thanks for your good intentions. -- 76.189.109.155 ( talk) 18:18, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
An arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Race and politics. Evidence that you wish the Arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence sub-page, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Race and politics/Evidence. Please add your evidence by May 21, 2013, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can contribute to the case workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Race and politics/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Ks0stm ( T• C• G• E) 01:56, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Notability (people). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 19:16, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
Albert.philander (
talk) 21:55, 16 May 2013 (UTC) hii angelo i want to talk to you about the article wedlock(band) which u deleted
Even though I was unable to post for two week, please don't think I missed those posts where you blamed me for your failure to post an obvious story in a timely manner. Whether you're prepared to repeat them now remains to be seen. I continued to browse in that time, noticing the lack of consequences for HiLo despite him repeatedly misquoting you, or the lack of actoin against anyone who simply continued to do what others at ANI correctly recognised as basic trolling rather than informed opposition. I also noticed that the only people who complained about the story once it went up, were the same people who you claimed all had valid points to make in opposing it. Points that didn't refer to a single source, and in many cases, showed complete and utter ignorance of the entire sport/country they were commenting on. Given how close you characterised the debate as being, that's very odd, don't you think? Still, all my fault eh. Mind, not editting for two weeks at least meant I could fully take in the continued coverage the story got, which you may or may not have noticed, wasn't even overshadowed by David Beckham's own retirement news a week later. Gruesome Foursome ( talk) 11:39, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
On 23 May 2013, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2013 Stockholm riots, which you recently nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. |
ThaddeusB ( talk) 23:18, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 19:17, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 20:18, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Rules for Fools. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 21:15, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
Dusti *poke* 21:32, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Accessibility. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 21:16, 24 June 2013 (UTC)