On 23-Sept, you added a {{ rfd}} tag to WP;-). However, you never listed this redirect at WP:RFD. If you still wish to nominate this redirect for deletion, please complete your nomination. The instructions are listed at WP:RFD. If you don't list it or remove the tag within a reasonable time, I'll assume you don't wish to proceed and remove the tag. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks! -- JLaTondre 17:53, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
Hi Gavia immer - I made a comment on one of RFD votes here regarding the 'Redirect pages to South African farm attacks'. Would you please read my comment and consider my request. Please let me know if you have any questions or comments. Thank you. Cheers, Jason Lionchow - Talk 20:00, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the note on Template:Uncyclopedia, missed the tab, fixed it now. — xaosflux Talk 16:42, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
With reference to this all the lines are made by me only. So I have modified your edit to make sure that there is no confusion Doctor Bruno 21:45, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
D'oh! That's what happens when you wiki for too long. Thanks for catching that! — Swpb talk contribs 17:51, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
What other redirects are there? 100110100 22:40, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Your monobook is in Category:Wikipedia tools. This is most likely because when you were copying scripts into yout monobook you accidentaly copied their category. Since your monobook is not a tool itself, please remove this category from it. If you intend for your monobook to be a tool, please consider creating a subpage with a more descriptive name, and moving the category there. Thank you, -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 22:33, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 20:46, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
re: Tfd on W2c: Delete. I have yet to see a member of the project describe, anywhere, why we need or should want these sort of templates on enwiki. Gavia immer 17:45, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
-- Sorry, don't follow the question.
A) Are you referring to things like
Template:Commonscat1A(
talk
links
history) which with it's brothers populates:
1, &
2, it's complimentary templates on the sister projects, which populate similar categories, or the links allowing people to locate maps, find pictures for articles and the like?
B) Or Template sharing using {{
Interwikitmp-grp}}, which is for the under staffed other sister projects AND our productivity when we happen to go foreign,
C) or 'W2c' which is primarily used in both category text such as is very convienient to only type out and proof one version of, and get that right so it can be pasted in categories here and on the commons?
D) Or the overly complicated sisterlinks templates (see long list
Interwiki utility templates which use w2c (See example in:
Music) and are the current Meta interlinqual preferred templates for tagging categories... only hardly used as are so combersome and prone to breakage.
Short answer, links are a good thing per
WP:Btw, but making it easier to navigate to other Foundation sister projects just helps --unless you are really good at typing fast and can recall long url's-- most of us can't, and our customer/readers won't know it's there unless a link is given. 'A' and 'D' are two different approaches that will hopefully be supplanted some day by a system software change, that links via the interwiki's on a page and the user's browser 'lanugage preference' to the same article on their home space and same category on their home wikipedia, from the commons. The alternative possibility is Commonscat and Wikipediacat tags on the commons are used as a trigger in page processing like (
Magic words, which are then used to modify the links into the vistor's language's links and pages.
From each of those non-English language sister's, their will have to be some kind of tagging equivilent to Commonscat1A providing the same kind of Magic word in the page-cache-processing and the whole 'SYSTEM' will need an auxillary database that maps interwiki's by our category systems (I'm including the commons's too, since it's English, and categories there differ a lot in some cases) and by English language article interwiki's back to the coresponding pages in the viewers home language. Those three places and their interwiki's are the key 'COMMON' points, three legs of a stool as it were, between the whole Wikimedia Foundation scope of projects... excluding Media-wiki, which is another animal entirely... it just makes the software changes possible.
So is it important for us here on en.wikipedia to get to the commons... yeah, much of the time... Is it good to get back and join the two catgory systems so that the system software can map and populate that database... yeah. Is it nice to have clear text on both sister's pages, especially such as would link to a gallery collection related to a category here or there? Yeah... some of us like pretty pictures. Check out Flowers for example, or the Atlas project on the commons.
So is w2c important? The better question to me is why the heck would anyone in their right mind want to take away a tool which is doing a valuable job when they know {{I0}A) not having that tool will cost many man-hours later to others for it's lack.
That someone will have to implement this decision, and will in all probability find there is no easy fix... there is no abbreviation like {W:, B:, Q, ... S:, M, V:} which work on Mediawiki sites... go check. Wikispecies has the same issue... for the same reasons apparently, it's also hosted by Mediawiki Commons server.
I forgot Template sharing... which is aimed at providing a minimal set of templates to sites populated mainly by specialists (biologists, lexicography specialists, librarians, etc.), not technically good with computerese, but who still have the same adminsistrative needs as are served here--and what techies they do attract, get drafted into sys-ops duties and don't have time for writing templates. {{
interwikitmp-grp}} is a link system that will handle the execeptions (That name is 'busy' and does something different there), The unwanted (The sister's icon will be off, and no link displayed), the Name variant (remapped common name), and of course dead on matches.
WP:TSP is also providing a common category scheme and so the links from the templates connect to ours, or to the categories, and back to their catgories. If something won't do the task, part of TSP is to write up and catalog what we already have--others are already screening templates, adding usage to
W:DPP, and in general, it all plays together.
Hope that covers it for your question... it's all important one way and another. Usually to other people, so if you're the selfish uncaring type, you probably don't see any value in such things. If not, perhaps you can pitch in and help. One little help-- would be to keep this template around -- it's hard to replace without using inline {{#if:{{SITENAME}}... }}, and far smarter to have that test in one shared template. No one's asking YOU to use it, or remember it's name. But try {{
w}} here, and realize all the other sister's 'W' says [[W:{{{1}}}}]] or usually [[W:{{{1}}}}|{{{1}}}]] just like {{
tl}}
just says [[Template:{{{1}}}]] . W2c is more of the same Smart thing.
Where would we be with out it? Care to list the NEXT 5,000? //
Fra
nkB 03:16, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Surely every article with this link means gay people in the plural? What else could "gays" mean? Proud dyke 17:16, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
It could mean anything listed at Gays (disambiguation) - admittedly, most of the links there are related to "gay" in the sense of "homosexual", but not all are. In most cases, it's fine and even encouraged to redirect plural forms to the singular, but in this case, there has been some disputation (see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2006_October_8#Gays_.E2.86.92_Gays.2C_Illinois and the history of the redirect), so it's best if it stays targeted to the disambiguation link. Gavia immer 19:55, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
Please don't tag the camel case (ie, ones with InternalCapitals) redirects for speedy deletion. They are some of the oldest pages on Wikipedia and are kept for historical reasons. I tried deleting one once and got (politely) chewed out by a more senior admin. Thanks, NawlinWiki 15:44, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
I hear you. I was probably tagging too fast in any case (e.g., not looking), so I'll slow down now. Gavia immer 15:52, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Welcome to the WikiProject Firearms. I hope you enjoy being a member.-- LWF 17:22, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for letting me know that you want to work on the article. You could have removed the prod template to work on the article there only. However, there was nothing significant in the article to create a userspace page for it, so I am pasting the content here only. Except for a vandalism, it contained "Xenon is the name of a manga comic book created by Kanzaki". Regards, -- soum (0_o) 18:17, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
Hello Gavia immer. The Firearms Wikiproject is having an infobox drive. The purpose of this is to ensure that most (if not all) of the articles within our scope have the relevant infoboxes. The start date will be May 28th. If you choose to participate, go to our project page and pick an article under the To-do list's Infobox section or look for firearm articles that need an infobox. Before you start editing an article, please cross it out on the list so that we don't have editor's work clashing. The drive will last for five days. If you are interested, please RSVP to LWF. Thank you, the Firearms Wikiproject. -- Seed 2.0 09:16, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi and thanks for helping with the redirects to Kven people. I think you made a small mistake that I have asked to be corrected by the administrator that deleted the redirectes: User_talk:John_Reaves#RFD_Redirects_to_Kven_people. Sorry for all the trouble, and again thank you for the help. Labongo 10:10, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
My apologies - I overlooked the capital F / lowercase f difference. Bencherlite 13:56, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi, you recently participated in the Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:DieWeisseRose/Userboxes/EndUN discussion. I have reluctantly submitted the closing statement by User:Tony Sidaway for deletion review. Please consider taking a look at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2007_July_1#User:DieWeisseRose.2FUserboxes.2FEndUN. Thanks. -- DieWeisseRose 02:34, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Just curious why you moved Volume Three to Volume Three (album)? There was no collision with another article, so no disambiguation was necessary. According to your edit summary, it was a "confusingly generic title". I find myself confused by your confusion - it's simply the name of the issue in question. I'm not sure why that would be confusing. Please do not move the rest of the Volume magazine articles for the same reason. — Wwagner 23:33, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
The "confusingly generic" point could be explained better, I suppose — there's only so much space in an edit summary. It isn't really a question of whether there is a collision with other names (if we take that tack, there are probably a huge number of collisions: books, albums, videos, etc. with "volume three" in the title). It's a question of whether we want generic concepts such as "Volume N" to point anywhere at all. Remember the principle of least astonishment: if a random Wikipedia user searches on "Volume Three", are they likely to expect being directed to information on one issue of an audio magazine? Most likely, they are not. Consequently, I would prefer moving such generic titles to something more informative ( Volume Three (album) was my test case, to see if anyone objected to it; since you did, I'll be glad to discuss it with you and not move forward as of yet) and deleting the generic redirects since I feel they don't add much and can detract from navigation. Other possibilities include disambiguation (this would be much larger and more painful than you probably think it would be) or redirecting to an article on the generic concept of volumes — if we have one of these, it's well hidden, but see Chapter (books) for an example of what's wanted if we do this.
For the record, thanks for not just doing a knee-jerk revert of the move. I know that page moves are always sensitive, which is why I did a test case like this. Hopefully, we get good results from it, one way or the other. -- Gavia immer (talk) 14:41, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm wondering what other "central discussion" things you have on your watchlist? >Radiant< 15:16, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks... I can't type to save my life and I forgot to check that.-- Isotope23 talk 13:38, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
The image of Plopper as Harry Potter is a better representation, as this is the state he was in when Homer formally addressed him as "Harry Plopper". -- Silva Storm
He he. It seems that with the same intentions we have both found the same problem. I also could not find this template, so I just made it using the example at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log. However, it would be best if we were to collaborate on creating one, and then add it to {{ Rfd starter}} as you said. - Mtmelendez ( Talk| UB| Home) 16:45, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Heh, I'm working on the same thing right now. --- RockMFR 17:53, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Oh btw, I found the origins of this - check the history at Template:Afd log. --- RockMFR 16:45, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
It wasn't a personal attack. I was just redirecting it to mental retardation because that's what the term means, even though it's derogatory. Retard is also a redirect to mental retardation.-- Avant Guard 17:23, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
A MFD you recently participated in, arguing to keep the content has been closed with a non-standard closure, requiring additional action to maintain the content. Please review my closing and participate with the required move action if you desire. Thank you, — xaosflux Talk 01:37, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
Fair enough. But please amend to Wikipedia:MOBY (not Moby). You'll also need to adjust the MfD tag at the top of the essay, or move the MfD, so the tag's no longer pointing to a redlink. Cheers, -- Dweller 13:44, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
On
User talk:Bobo192,
Gavia immer said:
Your most recent edit is good; thanks for making it.
There are of course two sides to the debate. This is the first time people have been encouraged to exercise their wish to remove themselves from the list - but on the same side there are people who have clearly wished for this to be the case for a long time - people who have left, as equally as people who are exercising a similar wish to simply not care - and so forth. I had a friend describe it as a "urination contest", but really the page itself is just a list of words and numbers which is as easy to update as the software allows it to be.
Thank you for your compliments. Bobo . 21:45, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for correcting my mistake, I appreciate it. That userbox was one of my first "experiments". Altairisfar 18:20, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
On 23-Sept, you added a {{ rfd}} tag to WP;-). However, you never listed this redirect at WP:RFD. If you still wish to nominate this redirect for deletion, please complete your nomination. The instructions are listed at WP:RFD. If you don't list it or remove the tag within a reasonable time, I'll assume you don't wish to proceed and remove the tag. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks! -- JLaTondre 17:53, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
Hi Gavia immer - I made a comment on one of RFD votes here regarding the 'Redirect pages to South African farm attacks'. Would you please read my comment and consider my request. Please let me know if you have any questions or comments. Thank you. Cheers, Jason Lionchow - Talk 20:00, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the note on Template:Uncyclopedia, missed the tab, fixed it now. — xaosflux Talk 16:42, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
With reference to this all the lines are made by me only. So I have modified your edit to make sure that there is no confusion Doctor Bruno 21:45, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
D'oh! That's what happens when you wiki for too long. Thanks for catching that! — Swpb talk contribs 17:51, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
What other redirects are there? 100110100 22:40, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Your monobook is in Category:Wikipedia tools. This is most likely because when you were copying scripts into yout monobook you accidentaly copied their category. Since your monobook is not a tool itself, please remove this category from it. If you intend for your monobook to be a tool, please consider creating a subpage with a more descriptive name, and moving the category there. Thank you, -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 22:33, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 20:46, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
re: Tfd on W2c: Delete. I have yet to see a member of the project describe, anywhere, why we need or should want these sort of templates on enwiki. Gavia immer 17:45, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
-- Sorry, don't follow the question.
A) Are you referring to things like
Template:Commonscat1A(
talk
links
history) which with it's brothers populates:
1, &
2, it's complimentary templates on the sister projects, which populate similar categories, or the links allowing people to locate maps, find pictures for articles and the like?
B) Or Template sharing using {{
Interwikitmp-grp}}, which is for the under staffed other sister projects AND our productivity when we happen to go foreign,
C) or 'W2c' which is primarily used in both category text such as is very convienient to only type out and proof one version of, and get that right so it can be pasted in categories here and on the commons?
D) Or the overly complicated sisterlinks templates (see long list
Interwiki utility templates which use w2c (See example in:
Music) and are the current Meta interlinqual preferred templates for tagging categories... only hardly used as are so combersome and prone to breakage.
Short answer, links are a good thing per
WP:Btw, but making it easier to navigate to other Foundation sister projects just helps --unless you are really good at typing fast and can recall long url's-- most of us can't, and our customer/readers won't know it's there unless a link is given. 'A' and 'D' are two different approaches that will hopefully be supplanted some day by a system software change, that links via the interwiki's on a page and the user's browser 'lanugage preference' to the same article on their home space and same category on their home wikipedia, from the commons. The alternative possibility is Commonscat and Wikipediacat tags on the commons are used as a trigger in page processing like (
Magic words, which are then used to modify the links into the vistor's language's links and pages.
From each of those non-English language sister's, their will have to be some kind of tagging equivilent to Commonscat1A providing the same kind of Magic word in the page-cache-processing and the whole 'SYSTEM' will need an auxillary database that maps interwiki's by our category systems (I'm including the commons's too, since it's English, and categories there differ a lot in some cases) and by English language article interwiki's back to the coresponding pages in the viewers home language. Those three places and their interwiki's are the key 'COMMON' points, three legs of a stool as it were, between the whole Wikimedia Foundation scope of projects... excluding Media-wiki, which is another animal entirely... it just makes the software changes possible.
So is it important for us here on en.wikipedia to get to the commons... yeah, much of the time... Is it good to get back and join the two catgory systems so that the system software can map and populate that database... yeah. Is it nice to have clear text on both sister's pages, especially such as would link to a gallery collection related to a category here or there? Yeah... some of us like pretty pictures. Check out Flowers for example, or the Atlas project on the commons.
So is w2c important? The better question to me is why the heck would anyone in their right mind want to take away a tool which is doing a valuable job when they know {{I0}A) not having that tool will cost many man-hours later to others for it's lack.
That someone will have to implement this decision, and will in all probability find there is no easy fix... there is no abbreviation like {W:, B:, Q, ... S:, M, V:} which work on Mediawiki sites... go check. Wikispecies has the same issue... for the same reasons apparently, it's also hosted by Mediawiki Commons server.
I forgot Template sharing... which is aimed at providing a minimal set of templates to sites populated mainly by specialists (biologists, lexicography specialists, librarians, etc.), not technically good with computerese, but who still have the same adminsistrative needs as are served here--and what techies they do attract, get drafted into sys-ops duties and don't have time for writing templates. {{
interwikitmp-grp}} is a link system that will handle the execeptions (That name is 'busy' and does something different there), The unwanted (The sister's icon will be off, and no link displayed), the Name variant (remapped common name), and of course dead on matches.
WP:TSP is also providing a common category scheme and so the links from the templates connect to ours, or to the categories, and back to their catgories. If something won't do the task, part of TSP is to write up and catalog what we already have--others are already screening templates, adding usage to
W:DPP, and in general, it all plays together.
Hope that covers it for your question... it's all important one way and another. Usually to other people, so if you're the selfish uncaring type, you probably don't see any value in such things. If not, perhaps you can pitch in and help. One little help-- would be to keep this template around -- it's hard to replace without using inline {{#if:{{SITENAME}}... }}, and far smarter to have that test in one shared template. No one's asking YOU to use it, or remember it's name. But try {{
w}} here, and realize all the other sister's 'W' says [[W:{{{1}}}}]] or usually [[W:{{{1}}}}|{{{1}}}]] just like {{
tl}}
just says [[Template:{{{1}}}]] . W2c is more of the same Smart thing.
Where would we be with out it? Care to list the NEXT 5,000? //
Fra
nkB 03:16, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Surely every article with this link means gay people in the plural? What else could "gays" mean? Proud dyke 17:16, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
It could mean anything listed at Gays (disambiguation) - admittedly, most of the links there are related to "gay" in the sense of "homosexual", but not all are. In most cases, it's fine and even encouraged to redirect plural forms to the singular, but in this case, there has been some disputation (see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2006_October_8#Gays_.E2.86.92_Gays.2C_Illinois and the history of the redirect), so it's best if it stays targeted to the disambiguation link. Gavia immer 19:55, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
Please don't tag the camel case (ie, ones with InternalCapitals) redirects for speedy deletion. They are some of the oldest pages on Wikipedia and are kept for historical reasons. I tried deleting one once and got (politely) chewed out by a more senior admin. Thanks, NawlinWiki 15:44, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
I hear you. I was probably tagging too fast in any case (e.g., not looking), so I'll slow down now. Gavia immer 15:52, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Welcome to the WikiProject Firearms. I hope you enjoy being a member.-- LWF 17:22, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for letting me know that you want to work on the article. You could have removed the prod template to work on the article there only. However, there was nothing significant in the article to create a userspace page for it, so I am pasting the content here only. Except for a vandalism, it contained "Xenon is the name of a manga comic book created by Kanzaki". Regards, -- soum (0_o) 18:17, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
Hello Gavia immer. The Firearms Wikiproject is having an infobox drive. The purpose of this is to ensure that most (if not all) of the articles within our scope have the relevant infoboxes. The start date will be May 28th. If you choose to participate, go to our project page and pick an article under the To-do list's Infobox section or look for firearm articles that need an infobox. Before you start editing an article, please cross it out on the list so that we don't have editor's work clashing. The drive will last for five days. If you are interested, please RSVP to LWF. Thank you, the Firearms Wikiproject. -- Seed 2.0 09:16, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi and thanks for helping with the redirects to Kven people. I think you made a small mistake that I have asked to be corrected by the administrator that deleted the redirectes: User_talk:John_Reaves#RFD_Redirects_to_Kven_people. Sorry for all the trouble, and again thank you for the help. Labongo 10:10, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
My apologies - I overlooked the capital F / lowercase f difference. Bencherlite 13:56, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi, you recently participated in the Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:DieWeisseRose/Userboxes/EndUN discussion. I have reluctantly submitted the closing statement by User:Tony Sidaway for deletion review. Please consider taking a look at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2007_July_1#User:DieWeisseRose.2FUserboxes.2FEndUN. Thanks. -- DieWeisseRose 02:34, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Just curious why you moved Volume Three to Volume Three (album)? There was no collision with another article, so no disambiguation was necessary. According to your edit summary, it was a "confusingly generic title". I find myself confused by your confusion - it's simply the name of the issue in question. I'm not sure why that would be confusing. Please do not move the rest of the Volume magazine articles for the same reason. — Wwagner 23:33, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
The "confusingly generic" point could be explained better, I suppose — there's only so much space in an edit summary. It isn't really a question of whether there is a collision with other names (if we take that tack, there are probably a huge number of collisions: books, albums, videos, etc. with "volume three" in the title). It's a question of whether we want generic concepts such as "Volume N" to point anywhere at all. Remember the principle of least astonishment: if a random Wikipedia user searches on "Volume Three", are they likely to expect being directed to information on one issue of an audio magazine? Most likely, they are not. Consequently, I would prefer moving such generic titles to something more informative ( Volume Three (album) was my test case, to see if anyone objected to it; since you did, I'll be glad to discuss it with you and not move forward as of yet) and deleting the generic redirects since I feel they don't add much and can detract from navigation. Other possibilities include disambiguation (this would be much larger and more painful than you probably think it would be) or redirecting to an article on the generic concept of volumes — if we have one of these, it's well hidden, but see Chapter (books) for an example of what's wanted if we do this.
For the record, thanks for not just doing a knee-jerk revert of the move. I know that page moves are always sensitive, which is why I did a test case like this. Hopefully, we get good results from it, one way or the other. -- Gavia immer (talk) 14:41, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm wondering what other "central discussion" things you have on your watchlist? >Radiant< 15:16, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks... I can't type to save my life and I forgot to check that.-- Isotope23 talk 13:38, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
The image of Plopper as Harry Potter is a better representation, as this is the state he was in when Homer formally addressed him as "Harry Plopper". -- Silva Storm
He he. It seems that with the same intentions we have both found the same problem. I also could not find this template, so I just made it using the example at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log. However, it would be best if we were to collaborate on creating one, and then add it to {{ Rfd starter}} as you said. - Mtmelendez ( Talk| UB| Home) 16:45, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Heh, I'm working on the same thing right now. --- RockMFR 17:53, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Oh btw, I found the origins of this - check the history at Template:Afd log. --- RockMFR 16:45, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
It wasn't a personal attack. I was just redirecting it to mental retardation because that's what the term means, even though it's derogatory. Retard is also a redirect to mental retardation.-- Avant Guard 17:23, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
A MFD you recently participated in, arguing to keep the content has been closed with a non-standard closure, requiring additional action to maintain the content. Please review my closing and participate with the required move action if you desire. Thank you, — xaosflux Talk 01:37, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
Fair enough. But please amend to Wikipedia:MOBY (not Moby). You'll also need to adjust the MfD tag at the top of the essay, or move the MfD, so the tag's no longer pointing to a redlink. Cheers, -- Dweller 13:44, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
On
User talk:Bobo192,
Gavia immer said:
Your most recent edit is good; thanks for making it.
There are of course two sides to the debate. This is the first time people have been encouraged to exercise their wish to remove themselves from the list - but on the same side there are people who have clearly wished for this to be the case for a long time - people who have left, as equally as people who are exercising a similar wish to simply not care - and so forth. I had a friend describe it as a "urination contest", but really the page itself is just a list of words and numbers which is as easy to update as the software allows it to be.
Thank you for your compliments. Bobo . 21:45, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for correcting my mistake, I appreciate it. That userbox was one of my first "experiments". Altairisfar 18:20, 30 October 2007 (UTC)