User talk:Acroterion/Archive Q4 2011

James S. Snyder

James S. Snyder was recreated with the same (copy-vio) text. Another editor declined the SD, can you take some action? Thanks! --Mr. Vernon (talk) 15:33, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of The Journal Cafe page

Dave kappa (talk) 22:25, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Acroterion,

I have just helped to create an article about The Journal Cafe in Melbourne which you have listed for speedy deletion.

I am not sure why this has been done and was wondering if you could explain a little further.

The Journal cafe is an institution in Melbourne and deserves to have a listing. It has been noted in many newspapers, food guides, web articles by publishing houses etc around Australia and internationally and has even featured in design publications in the past.

The article has been written as neutral as possible to show a little but of its history how it came about etc. It actually copies the direct formatting of a few other cafes/bars that are listed in wikipedia.

I am a little confused as to how they get a standing on wikipedia and the Journal Cafe does not?

There are also other cafes and local eateries with no notable listings that appear on wikipedia. I am a little confused as to how they also get listed.

I have also cited 1 newspaper publication to keep it simple. Should I be adding more of these.

In your opinion, how can I make this article better? I have read as much as I can on wiki about it and still end up here.

Your help would be greatly appreciated and I look forward to hearing from you soon.

regards, David

As the article was written, it appeared to describe a nice, but not unusual restaurant, frequented by celebrities. That isn't enough to establish (or claim) notability. If there is indeed coverage on the scale you describe above, then it may well be notable, but that would be established by coverage from publications outside of Melbourne, indicating a national standing rather than local notoriety. Coverage in the Sydney Morning Herald would be better for establishing more-than-local notability than The Age, which could reasonably be expected to cover any moderately good Melbourne restaurant. The article is written in a promotional tone: not exactly advertising, but too far toward feature writing than is appropriate for an encyclopedia. It needs a rewrite and references that indicate real notability, whether for food or design. The number of celebrities who dine there is entirely irrelevant: notability is not established by association, the subject must stand on its own. If you wish, I can put the content in a sandbox in your userspace for you to work on at User:Dave kappa/sandbox. Acroterion (talk) 00:06, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

It would be great if you could pop it into the sandbox Acroterion. Thanks very much. I'll see if I can make it better over the week or so. Certainly is harder then I would have thought. Is there anyone who might have the time to check it once I think it might be ready in a week or so?

Thanks again for you information. Great help :) Dave kappa (talk) 01:27, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Jaeksoft

I was starting to enter an article about my company and even before I finished I saw you notification for deletion because we do not meet wikipedia's criterias. I understand this as I am a new user and my article is not yet finished. Is it possible that my article is not visible as long it is not finished so I can work it correctly and make necessary to include all your expectation ? Thanks to reply to my talk page. Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raphael Perez (talk • contribs) 01:23, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Mic Righteous

I do not understand how you can delete the page under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion because 'the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant' when it CLEARLY states he is a UK RAPPER! Very ignorant. Notify me of your response on my talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shiftz619 (talk • contribs) 16:00, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Replied on user's talkpage. Acroterion (talk) 16:28, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	For the quick revert of vandalism on ClueBot Commons. Many thanks. methecooldude and the ClueBot NG/III Team Rich(MTCD)T|C|E-Mail 08:17, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! They were obviously up to no good. You should never insult a bot. Acroterion (talk) 19:16, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Spazmatics deletion?

Hey there,

I posted on the page for SPAZMATICS some reasons why it shouldn't be subject to quick (or long term, for that matter) deletion.

Were my comments even reviewed?

Thank you, Leland — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lelandgrant (talk • contribs) 19:00, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

I did review the comments, and it appears to me than there could be an article on the band, provided it asserts and substantiates the claims you made on the talkpage, and provided it's not a copyright violation: the version posted was a word-for-word copy of copyrighted material, which isn't permissible. I encourage you to rewrite the article, making sure to cover the band's claims to notability (as seen in WP:BAND and try again, carefully avoiding copyright issues. Acroterion (talk) 19:09, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Assistance

Hello. I was wondering if you could perhaps help me with something? I recently filed what I felt was an obvious SP report [1], but an admin later closed it down because he felt that the evidence wasn't conclusive. Well the same user has since that time returned with two additional SPs and openly admitted that he is all of the same usernames in this edit. He also appears to be using the accounts, among other things, to avoid breaching 3RR. I understand that this is all against wiki policy but I'm not quite sure what to do here. As an experienced admin, your help would be greatly appreciated. Soupforone (talk) 20:50, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Obvious sock is obvious: I see Fastily took care of the blocks and the protection. I'll watch out for more. They can't possibly have "forgotten" their password for two accounts in one day. Acroterion (talk) 00:48, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Cool. Cheers, Soupforone (talk) 03:31, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

my bad thought i was in sandbox lol

thoiught i was in the sandbox — Preceding unsigned comment added by Southerntouch (talk • contribs) 18:33, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

help to understand image use

I wonder if you could please take a look at this deletion and tell me what I messed up or if it might be an oversight. I want to figure out how to get the justification right so i'm not wasting my time chasing down great images that might be objectionable. Seems like you're busy from what I read so I understand if you don't have time - thanks. Teda13 (talk) 03:24, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Sexlog

There was an AFD opened for Sexlog at the same time I tagged it after it's second creation. Just wanted to give you a heads up. Sperril (talk) 03:25, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

The version I deleted was spam. I'll see if the AfD needs to be closed. Acroterion (talk) 03:27, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Sexlog deleted why?

Hi Dear, please tell me what wrong with name "sexlog" ??? what to do for this name stay in wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.64.28.168 (talk) 05:57, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

The entries so far have been advertising. You may not advertise on Wikipedia. Any encyclopedia article on the subject should assert notability by reference to substantial reports in independent media. Acroterion (talk) 11:30, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

not my fault you cant find it i have the book right in front of me — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.51.108.30 (talk) 20:46, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

thanks for looking out and reverting whatever that was someone added to my talk page (diff) -- Cheers! Petiatil »Talk 03:00, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, we have a troll who likes to leave what he thinks are clever remarks on random userpage. Acroterion (talk) 03:16, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

First of all, I am not a troll, and that is very offensive. Yes, I am short and it is somewhat unsettling that you know that, but I am not a troll; I was simply asking you why the "Kutta" page was changed. Deleting my question is censorship; see WP:NOT . Second of all, @Petiatil, you said you were there to help out in case I had a problem. Whatever happened to all the WikiAdmin older brother/sister hospitality you were displaying before. And @Acroterion, no personal attacks, ie; "...who likes to leave cleaver remarks". I'm sending this link to other WikiAdmins so they can assess the sich for themselves. - 90.148.10.22 (talk) 10:54, 22 October 2011 (UTC) - Yahya Al-Shiddazi (WikiReformer)

I think you're probably aware of it but in case you're not, Y.A.S. makes a legal threat here. (I'm notifying User:JamesBWatson too.)Looks like you're on top of it. EEng (talk) 11:26, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Indeed. I've sent the most recent IP incarnation off for a week. Do we have an SPI or LTA for this guy lying around somewhere? Looks like a ban may be called for. Favonian (talk) 11:33, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

That's the third or fourth in the last few days: looks like they're trying to branch out from harassing Jeff3000.I'll see if I can put together an LTA or SPI report when I have a little time to research it. Acroterion (talk) 13:05, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Listen, do you think he's just kidding about the troll = short thing? I was up all night tossing and turning trying to decide. He's either clueless or a master of irony. EEng (talk) 20:54, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Don't lose sleep: they're de dacto banned. See User talk:Yahya Al-Shiddazi and related contributions from a few hours ago. Acroterion (talk) 21:02, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

You blocked him? But... Oh,no! Now we'll never find out whether he's kidding about troll = short! EEng (talk) 21:25, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Survey for new page patrollers

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Acroterion/Archive Q4 2011! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only. If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Wiki Media Foundation at 10:43, 25 October 2011 (UTC).

unformatted code!

it's a spoof on one of their silly patents, the fact it fits in that small gap /IS/ the joke — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.148.93.156 (talk) 15:38, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXVII, September 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Book reviews: Nick-D and Ian Rose look at Australian air power Op-ed: Buggie111 ruminates about WikiLife and WikiDeath

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 01:46, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of HUMANIST LIFE GOALS AND VALUES

I would suggest that when speedy deleting a page listed at AfD that you consider closing the AfD discussion contemporaneously with your deletion.

The Uninvited Co., Inc. 20:18, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

I didn't know it was up at AfD, thanks to the contributor's determined blanking of deletion templates. Thanks for tidying up. Acroterion (talk) 20:20, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

I was just about to check a diff and revert his AFD tag removal when your delete happened. ;) Eeekster (talk) 20:41, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, didn't realize the author was doing that. Thanks for clarifying the situation. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 20:34, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Question

Is there any plausible possibility that Nachteilig (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is someone other than 108.82.100.8 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)? (I only blocked him for 31 hours, not indef, but maybe that was too generous.) After blocking him I noticed from the history of Leander Kahney that the guy has been inserting that same vandalism for a long time indeed. Maybe indef would be right. What do you think? Antandrus (talk) 23:08, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

The IP is from the US and the user claims to be German, but based on their straighforward lack of interest in respecting BLP policy, I think they can be indeffed. If they have a sincere repentance and wish to be unblocked they can post an unblock request discussing their understanding of the policy and what was wrong with their edits. I hadn't realized that you blocked for 31 hours; I don't mind giving them a chance to repent. Acroterion (talk) 23:17, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

FYI; that redlined even my ridiculous levels of AGF. I just blocked them both. No great loss, is my opinion. Antandrus (talk) 00:06, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

No question, not even a close call. Acroterion (talk) 00:10, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Luthorsteele

FYI, Interface Designer seems to think that Luthorsteele, whom you blocked, is the same person as Andyjsmith. Not quite sure why he thinks this, but your input might be helpful. Nyttend (talk) 12:50, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Heskeyanity et. al.

Thanks a lot for your swift action. _noisy jinx ^huh? 02:49, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome. The coordinated action and general abuse led me to block the whole lot. Acroterion (talk) 02:51, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Why did you delete the page 'Heskeyanity' ?

Hoping to hear back. Thanks :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ebster047 (talk • contribs) 02:58, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Because it was pure vandalism, followed by a stream of explicit abuse in its defense. I therefore blocked your mates. Since you've been more polite, your editing privileges remain intact. Acroterion (talk) 03:01, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

NRHP table system change

There is a table formatting system change being discussed at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_National_Register_of_Historic_Places#New_system_for_tables and your input has been requested. Any help appreciated. Smallbones (talk) 04:12, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

it™

I've registered it™ and itṨ™ as a trademark but more importantly it™ and was wondering if I could post it on here. If so, it was deleted a while ago. I have also uploaded registered images to the trademarks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saintjamais (talk • contribs) 09:02, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Unless a product or company associated with the term is notable according to WP:NOTE, a bare trademark would not be eligible for inclusion, and in any case an article title would never use the TM superscript. Acroterion (talk) 11:36, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Twinkles

Any objection to making the previously thrice deleted Twinkles page a redirect to Occupy hand signals? It could be argued that it is Wikipedia:Avoid_neologisms#Neologisms, but I think notability is well covered by several reliable secondary sources.--Nowa (talk) 12:54, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

None at all: it's more useful than the class for three and four year olds that I deleted. I have to step away for the moment, but will do the redirect when I get back. Acroterion (talk) 12:58, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

External Links

Hello Acroterion, I wanted to set up some external links in the reference section of the "Private Islands" article. I noticed, that it's not possible at the moment. Is there a chance to edit it somehow? I would like to link to articles like:

http://www.privateislandnews.com/powering-your-private-island-%e2%80%93-the-basics/ or http://www.privateislandnews.com/richard-branson-opens-new-makepeace-island-luxury-resort-to-the-public/

I know there were a couple of conflicts in the past, but maybe you can check out, if http://www.privateislandnews.com/ fits the demands of wikipedia. The page reflects the subject "private islands" all over the world.

Thanks for your help

--Privatinsel (talk) 16:06, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure why it's not possible: is the site blacklisted? You should review WP:ELNO, since the power generation link goes to a blog, which is not appropriate. The site as a whole is perhaps on the borderline of acceptability as a single link. Links to such sites should be employed sparingly, if at all. The article was the scene of spamming in the past, so you'll want to tread carefully, particularly if you're connected with the website: see WP:ADV. Acroterion (talk) 17:00, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

help

Hey, I need some help on creating a page for the Chinese Club at our school. I was going to ask for some suggestions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xiangliang (talk • contribs) 01:06, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

The first thing to check is to see if it passes the notability guidelines: see WP:ORG and WP:NOTE, which require significant coverage in reliable sources, allowing the content to comply with Wikipedia's requirements for verifiability. Generally, school clubs don't meet those requirements. Acroterion (talk) 01:13, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Judge William Adams

Hi, Acroterion. I'm just wondering why you changed my speedy deletion rationale for this article from A3 to A10. Even if A10 suffices, why did A3 mot suit it? Metricopolus (talk) 12:19, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Either worked, but since we already have an article on the subject, I though A10 would be apropos. I would have made it a redirect, as the OP appears to have intended, but the deletion discussion is at the moment headed toward deletion, so I thought I'd minimize housekeeping. Acroterion (talk) 12:35, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

173.64.109.64 is a block evading sockpuppet that needs to be indef blocked, not just 24 hours

Hello, you recently blocked 173.64.109.64 (talk · contribs) for 24 hours. He has admitted here User talk:DoDo Bird Brain that he is an indefinite blocked user that has been blocked many times. This IP also told me to die of cancer at User talk:Vodello#hey vodello. Please upgrade to an indef block. Agent Vodello^{OK, Let's Party, Darling!} 14:21, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Just a note that IPs are generally not blocked indefinitely- ISPs often rotate IP addresses to new users. TNXMan 14:35, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Interestingly, the IP is currently blocked, presumably the result of an autoblock, since no new block appears in the block log since my 8/24 block. I've made it a week, which would be the usual escalation in such a case. A little more investigation by a checkuser might be in order given the autoblock to see if there's a sock that should be linked. Acroterion (talk) 14:47, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Upon being unblocked, he's already reverted to his old behavior of threatening users. He admitted that he is permanently blocked user DoDo Bird Brain, yet he is continued to be allowed to edit and threaten other users under this IP. He shouldn't be allowed to make edits at all. The one week block was completely useless. Agent Vodello^{OK, Let's Party, Darling!} 23:40, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

FYI, I have already filed a sockpuppet investigation on this user. Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 23:48, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

GNIS

The GNIS system appears to be down....here amd trying to click the link to Search Domestic Names provides a HTTP 404 Not Found response...do you know if this is temporary?...or have you no idea?--MONGO 04:44, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

I haven't worked with GNIS much, but my experience with NRIS (the National Register database) indicates that it'll be down until Monday morning. I assume the two are equally fussy and prone to odd error messages. Acroterion (talk) 15:35, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

(talk page stalker): In an attempt to help, I gave the link a try, loaded fine. Tried the "Search Domestic Names" link and it timed out on me. So, it might be a server issue. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 19:01, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Okay...that's pretty much what happen to me too.....thanks to both of you for your insight.--MONGO 22:08, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

It's back up now....must have been down for upgrades...sorry to bother you about it, I thought you used it more but must have you confused with Mike Cline.--MONGO 03:19, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Anybody who saw me trying to fly-fish would not confuse me with Mike. Acroterion (talk) 03:21, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Me neither....whenever I tell folks I was born in Montana, they automatically assume I can fly fish (must be derived from too many viewings of A River Runs Through It)...I can't...in fact, I'm a terrible fisherman...on my last fishing venture near Jackson Lake dam, my Nebraska cohort caught 4 cutthroat and I managed 2 Mountain suckers...BTW...Mike is is a natural...I've seen pictures of some of his catchings. Anyway, I've become used to using the GNIS data as a ref for coordinates....and it is almost always dead on (as I have cross referenced it with other sources), but I have never understood why their elevation data is usually so divergent from the USGS Quads and reported altitudes for various geographical locations...I think I saw an explanation for this, but can't remember where.--MONGO 03:37, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Belchman

Too late, blocked for 2 weeks when I saw his revert of you--Jac16888 ^Talk 01:00, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Good call. No possible excuse for that. My internet connection is incredibly slow today, so I can't respond very quickly. Acroterion (talk) 01:02, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

No problem, I seriously contemplated making it indef, his comment was so uncalled for it was inexcuseabl. I suspect I'm not the only one who will be watching his talk page now with an itchy trigger finger--Jac16888 ^Talk 01:06, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

He can always request a block review: I expect sympathy will be conspicuously lacking. Acroterion (talk) 01:16, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

I already endorsed the block before he posted his unblock request, so I won't be the reviewing admin, but I'm not impressed by his behavior, and I don't think others will be either. Newyorkbrad (talk) 01:17, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

At this point further interaction amounts to troll-feeding, so I'm going to find something more rewarding to do.Acroterion (talk) 01:23, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Hopefully you mean further interaction with him rather than with me. :) Newyorkbrad (talk) 01:25, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Ha! Yes, I meant the very polite and gently-spoken Mr. Belchman. Acroterion (talk) 01:28, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Acroterion, I've raised the matter @ Wikipedia talk:Reference desk#Belchman. Your name gets a mention too, because I'm not satisfied reversion was an appropriate way to deal with this. Cheers. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 01:33, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

You'd rather have had a flame war on the reference desk? Acroterion (talk) 01:35, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

I gave my reasons there. Belchman's offence stands, and your reversion has not changed that. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 02:10, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Of course the "offense stands," and Belchman is currently blocked for two weeks partly as a result of it. But that doesn't mean it's useful for the offensive comment to be read by every passerby who might look for the next week at today's posts on the reference desk. See also my comment on the RD talkpage thread. Newyorkbrad (talk) 02:15, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Apparently Acroterion I'm your "admin friend" and you called on me to block belchman. How did he know about our super-seekrit-admins-only group? It seems there's a mole--Jac16888 ^Talk 01:48, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Jedi mind tricks. Perhaps me banging my forehead against the monitor creates a disturbance in the Force. Or perhaps the offending comment simply appeared intemperate to any passing admin. Go figure. Acroterion (talk) 01:52, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

2011 Oklahoma earthquake

I felt the tremor for the 2011 Oklahoma earthquake while sitting at my computer desk last Saturday night...it was a very minor motion, but it was causing a half day old cup of coffee at my desk to also oscillate...I wasn't sure what I felt, but suspected it was an earthquake...I checked the news...nothing...then about 40 minutes after the vibration, I checked the USGS website and they were reporting the tremor...double checking the issue, I saw it was quickly upgraded to a 5.6 magnitude..almost as powerful as the one which hit Virginia a few months back...so I checked and it looked like a record for Oklahoma...and started the linked article...a first for me to be on top of a current event...cool. Anyway...you're a big time NRHP editor, so I see a lot of damage was sustained at a listed building...at St. Gregory's University the Benedictine Hall had damage to several turrets, including the collapse of one of the turrets...reports I am seeing such as this one says Benedictine Hall is on the NRHP...but I am not as familiar as you are with the navigation to see if that is indeed the building listed or if it is for the abbey at that same campus...St. Gregory's Abbey (Oklahoma)...so do the news reports have the buildings confused, or, well, is it just me that's confused?--MONGO 03:16, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

The NRHP nomination can be found here [2], and pictures (which aren't public domain) here [3]. The NRHP building is the same one that's pictured in the Times article. It's the Queen of Angels Priory at the Benedictine Convent and Academy Administration Building at , now St. Gregory's U. Acroterion (talk) 03:23, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Me still a dunderhead....I guess it's the same building with different names?--MONGO 03:29, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes, the names have evolved over time. The NRHP nom is dated 1981, so it was either called that then or the nomination decided to use the antique name. The Times article says that it was the campus's original building. Acroterion (talk) 03:35, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Now, see..I'm going to make a arse of myself I think but I guess the whole campus is on the NRHP? The Hall and the Abbey, according to the various different years of satellite imagery I use on Google Earth...are two different buildings. The Hall sustained the turret damage and the Abbey has not had any damage...--MONGO 03:39, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Hold on, I had the wrong page up (the links above are still correct): I was preoccupied with the description of a two-story "prune drier" building at another Benedictine college, this one in Oregon, so strike that Queen of Angels Priory business - the brothers appear to have had issues with their diet. OK. The church/abbey at the campus in Oklahoma was built in the 1940s. The admin building, the one with the turrets, is the historic one. You're on the right track. It's not a historic district. Acroterion (talk) 03:55, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

See...I am a real pain...the Hall is the building in this image...the Abbey is this building...which is 50 yards ESE of the Hall...isn't this the kind of thing you wanted to discuss on a Monday night?????--MONGO 04:05, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Also...hold onto your socks...but they just had a 4.7 aftershock...hum...I wonder if the real quake is yet to come?--MONGO 04:06, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Correct. The abbey isn't damaged, isn't historic, isn't on the NRHP and isn't the building in the Times photo. The Hall is all that. It takes me back to architecture school in architectural history class: identify this building, its date, architect and style from this image of a 6' x 6' detail. I doubt that these are foreshocks, but who knows? the Virginia quake had lots of similar aftershocks, which friends in Richmond reported feeling. Acroterion (talk) 04:12, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

I suspect you're correct about the quakes...a bigger one isn't desirable...OK City is only 40 miles away and nothing there is built to handle a 7 magnitude or worse I imagine....but that's more your realm as my understanding of such things (building codes) is limited. Do we have a list of NRHP for Oklahoma on Wikipedia? I thought we did....somewhere.--MONGO 04:18, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

National Register of Historic Places listings in Pottawatomie County, Oklahoma. There's already an article on the college (St. Gregory's University) and the abbey (St. Gregory's Abbey (Oklahoma)). I have no idea whether a new article should be created for the building or whether it could be integrated into one or the other. My feeling is that the building could sustain its own article. It's certainly distictive, but the building does seem to be just about the entire university; the rest is the abbey. Acroterion (talk) 04:24, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

By the way, I'm presently trying to turn El Tovar Hotel into something other than a steaming pile. 50-odd people look at that article every day and go ... hmm, and go somewhere else for useful information. It's my general plan to improve the gamut of articles on the very extensive built environment in GRCA and write a summary article like I did for GRTE. Acroterion (talk) 04:46, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps after I resume the effort to get GRTE up to FA level (though I have no plans to submit it for approval), I can help improving the Grand Canyon article.MONGO 15:43, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

The article on Grand Canyon National Park is the neglected stepchild of the pretty-good-but-not-without-problems Grand Canyon article. It's another example of the sort of problematic article overlap we were looking at just above, although at Grand Canyon I agree that separate articles on park and canyon are warranted . I've come to the conclusion that I can write a stand-alone article just focusing on the building that was damaged. I'll give it a go a bit later. I've tried to establish a personal practice of improving an existing bad or stubby article to at least a tolerable level for every new article I write. Acroterion (talk) 15:48, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Iggy Azalea

Hi, I'm planning on making a page about Iggy Azalea and I noticed you deleted someone's previous page about her. Any reason why??Desadawitch (talk) 12:30, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

It was a three-line promotion piece with no indication of notability. There's no prejudice to the creation of an appropriate, referenced article indicating notability; go for it. Acroterion (talk) 12:53, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

How to study

why was the previos page deleted

i wish to recreate it in a different form --(Oleson)(Oleson18 (talk) 18:39, 8 November 2011 (UTC))

The deleted article was filler for linkspam originated by a search engine optimizer who erroneously thought it would improve their pagerank. Wikipedia isn't a how-to guide: please read WP:NOT#HOWTO for further guidance. We already have an article on the subject at study skills, so I'm going to redirect "How to study" there. You may wish to see if you can improve that article appropriately. Acroterion (talk) 18:53, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

numi post

Hi,

I recently posted my first wiki article on Numi Organic Tea and I am wondering why you deleted it? What kind of information are you looking for? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Taracd (talk • contribs)

I didn't delete it: it was deleted by Peridon (talk · contribs) as advertising. You may wish to discuss it with him. You should review WP:YFA, for advice on your first article, WP:CORP for advice on notability guidelines for companies and products, and WP:SPAM for issues pertaining to advertising. Please note that anything resembling advertising or promotion is regarded poorly, and that editors with conflicts of interest should act accordingly. Acroterion (talk) 22:34, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Deleted page

Hey you deleted a page i was not done with editing, can you undelete it or give me the info off of it and give me some help on how i can make it better.

(Pulsarnians (talk) 15:34, 9 November 2011 (UTC))

Replied on your talkpage. Acroterion (talk) 15:41, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of page about Khalid Hamid,Olympian

Like to know about the reason to delete above mentioned page and its content?Its no way Hoax,...Khalid Hamid was the member of Pakistan Hockey Team Squad and played 23rd Olympic games held at Los Angeles.This team won Gold medal in Field Hockey. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sahi77 (talk • contribs) 14:17, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

The version I deleted appeared to be about another Khalid Hamid, who wanted to impress his friends at school. You are welcome to create an article about the notable Khalid Hamid. Acroterion (talk) 14:20, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Reginald Davis Johnson

Excellent start; I should be able to get some pictures for you, once it stops raining. The Post Office is an obvious and easy one. The Biltmore has been remodeled and changed, but I'll go by anyway. Not sure exactly which part of the Music Academy is his. Antandrus (talk) 04:10, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Sounds like it might be a while before the rain stops. I've treated this kind of expedition as a sort of treasure hunt sometimes, doing things like trying to find all the Washington family houses in eastern West Virginia and get their picture, which led me to places I had no idea existed. In the case of Southern California architects I'm a little handicapped by distance and a lack of familiarity with the area: there's a big gap in my travels in California, between La Jolla and Carmel. I've used up what I can find on the Internet about Wilson and Johnson, but there are some print sources I might be able to use if I can track them down. Acroterion (talk) 04:19, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

If you ever locate specific street addresses of houses, that would be great. It's a crapshoot with Montecito because at least four-fifths of everything is behind a hedge or wall. That realtor site you gave me curiously listed street numbers but no street names; for example the Biltmore is at 1260 Channel Drive, but on his list it's just "1260". I can query them out of the assessor's database next time I'm at work, and probably figure them out. It would be nice to have a couple pictures of residences, not just public buildings. Antandrus (talk) 04:26, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

I'll try asking the Architectural Foundation of Santa Barbara; I would think they have something fairly complete. Acroterion (talk) 04:30, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

This is Wilson's 'El Nido', right? [4] Antandrus (talk) 21:40, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes, it matches the drawing in the neighborhood tour guide. Acroterion (talk) 22:00, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

El Nido and Alexander Gardens

Nice day for a walk, but the sun was gone by the time I got there. Let me know if these work. I took a lot of pictures, but that's the only angle on El Nido from the street that is unobstructed by wires, poles, stop signs, and passing trucks, and only the Santa Barbara Street side of Alexander Gardens is open to a passing pedestrian. The whole complex is hidden behind dense vegetation -- that may be the best angle. I may try this again on a sunny day. Antandrus (talk) 23:53, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

• 
  Hopkins Home, Santa Barbara, 1898; Francis W. Wilson. At least two renovations since, one of which likely restored it close to its original look.
• 
  Alexander Gardens, Santa Barbara, 1906; Francis W. Wilson. Currently a senior living facility.

Those are great; much more typical of Wilson's work than the Grand Canyon depot, which was a one-off. Thanks for tracking them down. It's always hard to exclude all the street clutter in these kinds of pictures. Photoshop can remedy some of it, but not all. I've added them to the article. I really like the Hopkins home - it has elements that are reminiscent of Charles Rennie Mackintosh (the turret bottom and arch), C.F.A. Voysey and a little bit of John Nash's Cronkhill. Acroterion (talk) 00:44, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll try to photograph some of Reginald Johnson's work soon, and also I'll get some of the public buildings. The library has a permanent homeless encampment on the front lawn, which will be part of the scenery. I enjoy these little trips ("treasure hunting expeditions" as you called them -- indeed -- I've walked past some of these places hundreds of times without really giving them a close look!) Voysey's article alas has no pictures. Appears to be another part of Wikipedia where there is still work to be done! -- fancy that. Antandrus (talk) 02:51, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for helping out. Johnson's Post Office seems promising from the images I've seen on the web. I should have a go at improving the Voysey article, considering I admire his work and have a monograph on him, but there's not much I can do for images. Voysey had one foot in Arts and Crafts and the other in Modernism (even though he disputed that). He's wretchedly absent from Commons. This page on one of his best buildings [5] gives a taste of his work. Acroterion (talk) 03:10, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Johnson with some Wilson

Greetings again -- I just returned from a little photo expedition. I have some Reginald Johnson for you (the Post Office, inside and out), and I also took pictures of the Francis Wilson library -- which is undergoing renovation or earthquake retrofit, possibly both. I'll upload a few and see what you think. The Post Office interior is stunning -- I love the relief work (not by Johnson, but by William Atkinson, also 1937). I'm amazed that I've walked around my own city most of my life without even noticing how wonderful these buildings are -- one gets used to them, like faces you see every day. Haven't gotten to the Biltmore yet. (Btw I'm following the thread below and on ANI -- there's a lot of IPs there, and he's been active for a very long time indeed.) Antandrus (talk) 19:44, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Here are four of the Post Office -- let me know what you think of these. Not sure if Atkinson is notable enough for an article, but I took a few pictures of his reliefs. One of them shows amusingly how New Deal art is not always leftist -- the Indians are impeding progress, i.e. interfering with mail delivery. (I should go back and photograph that one.) Antandrus (talk) 21:33, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

• 
  Santa Barbara Post Office (93101). Reginald Johnson, architect, 1936. Commissioned as part of the New Deal.
• 
  Santa Barbara Post Office interior
• 
  Santa Barbara Post Office lobby
• 
  Relief by William Atkinson, "The Transportation of the Mail" (one of six). 1937. In the lobby of the Santa Barbara Post Office.

It's a fabulous building and the pictures are great! I've found from experience that sometimes you have to try to look at your hometown, or at least your familiar surroundings, from a distance to properly appreciate them Photography is a good excuse to do that. I'd like to see more. I'd seen a couple of pictures of the Post Office that made me think that there was good material there. The reliefs are quite fine: I'll have to look up Atkinson. See this [6] for more. He appears to be William Osborn Atkinson (1913-1942), which leads me to believe he may have been a casualty of WWII.

As for the kind dispenser of advice farther down the page, I wasn't born yesterday and I've been an admin in these parts for four years as of today, so courtesy of zzuzz I know who it is and what they're about. Acroterion (talk) 02:55, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Happy anniversary! Tempus fugit. Soon I will have been here eight years -- incredible. -- I was just looking at that NRHP list; silly me -- I walked right past some other things without photographs today without realizing it. I did take a bunch of Wilson's 1917 library though. Being mid-November, with the best exposure on the north, the lighting was difficult with the sun right over the building. (Summer evenings are wonderful for that spot, but that's a ways off.) By the way do you know anything about William Mooser III who built the Santa Barbara County Courthouse (the LA Times called it "the most beautiful public building in the United States" -- well, whatever they think, it's really not too bad). He probably deserves an article. Antandrus (talk) 03:14, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Hell yes he deserves an article - he designed the bathhouse at Aquatic Park, a fabulous building [7]. Acroterion (talk) 03:30, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Might want to consider salting...

The three-time created and speedy del'd: Pleasantly Retarded Flims. jheiv ^{talk contribs} 02:19, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Already done: three times and out is my policy to save further embarrassment. Acroterion (talk) 02:21, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Keeping myself regular.

Thanks for the templated 3RR warning, it always go down well to the regulars. I'm so embarrassed at the lengths you were willing to go to to communicate your thoughts. A couple of micro-seconds to click a button, I'm so honoured. You really mustn't, I'm not worthy of your precious time. --The Pink Oboe (talk) 11:31, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Replied on user's talkpage. Acroterion (talk) 12:35, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the warning

Thanks for the warning, I actually didn't realize I was breaking the 3-revert rule. So I do appreciate that. And please do not be to hard on my new friend Pink Oboe, he told me he has a hairy ass, is addicted to Twinkies and he loves the United States of America so much that not being an American is just eating him up inside, so he tries to hide his affection and love for the USA with anti-American comments. He is going through alot, I am going to pray for him.7mike5000 (talk) 13:31, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Ah, see now. I just knew you were the kinda guy who had problems counting to three. And anyone who prays just has to be suspect. --The Pink Oboe (talk) 13:34, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

You don't need three reverts to be edit-warring. I note that you both stopped after the warning, which was the whole point of warning you rather than summarily blocking you both for disruptive editing, or protecting the article. I strongly suggest that you reconsider your approach to interactions with other editors. Acroterion (talk) 13:38, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Point of order, we both stopped BEFORE you 'timely' intervention. I went to bed before you decided to template a regular. In spite of Mike's above assertion he knew what he was doing which is why he also stopped. Acroterion, I think you give your power of command too much credit. --The Pink Oboe (talk) 13:42, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

You give my powers of clairvoyance too much credit; my connection to the Internet can't discern whether it's bedtime for irritable edit-warriors. Acroterion (talk) 13:45, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Actually I didn't know I was breaking the three-revert rule because I didn't think reverting vandalism counted. So the warning was the reason I stopped, I was just about to call the Pink Oboe person an ******** *******!, which may have gotten me blocked, and that would have been a crying shame for humanity. As far as counting to three, I know how to count to five, they learned me real good in "Fortress America". So the warning is appreciated, also the back and forth rhetoric with the Pink individual was cutting into my internet pornography time. MiketheYank

PO's edits weren't vandalism: edits with which you simply disagree, which were made in good faith (however obnoxious the edit summaries might have been) are not vandalism. Vandalism involves words like "poop", "ghey", "yur mom", page blanking and the like, not rearrangement of images. Reversion of "vandalism" is exempt from 3RR only when it's clear-cut, unambiguous vandalism. As I was planning on going to bed myself I didn't leave an extended dissertation on the subject, but labeling disagreement as vandalism is an excellent way to ratchet up a disagreement to an argument. Acroterion (talk) 15:42, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Disrupted?

What do you mean? I didn't vandalize.Greg Heffley 20:49, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

I have no idea. Context, please? Acroterion (talk) 20:56, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

HereGreg Heffley 21:07, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

You'll see that the IP stuck my signature in between the template message and the IP's actual signature. Sicne they revised it in the next edit, they were probably copying a template they found, so the inclusion of my signature was probably inadvertent. Acroterion (talk) 21:09, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Disagreement is not vandalism, but vandalism is vandalism

The status quo is being maintained by me. The other users, however, continue to push their point of view before the discussion has concluded and before a consensus has been reached. Their repeated reverts amounts to vandalism, so I suggests you pay closer attention to the situation you are attempting to deal with before making accusations.

I suggest you take this up further with user 143.239.102.198, who is making wild claims of sockpuppetry and is vandalising the page by attempting to push his POV through. 90.196.241.238 (talk) 15:00, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Then perhaps he was the only one you should have taken it up with.

No, I am not edit warring, I am maintaining the status quo until the discussion has concluded. I fail to see how preventing someone from pushing their POV on a page without breaking any of the codes of conduct myself warrants an admin getting in touch with me. I have no intention of breaking the 3RR rule and I won't be doing so anytime soon, so your warning was not really neccessary.

If you are not going to contribute to the discussion at hand, please leave me be until a rule actually gets broken. 90.196.241.238 (talk) 15:19, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

I am an uninvolved administrator with no agenda on the subject matter warning you that you are in danger of breaching 3RR if you haven't already done so. I'm also warning you that applying the label "vandalism" is inappropriate. Edit-warring to "maintain the status quo" is edit-warring: it is not exempt from 3RR. If necessary I will protect the article without regard to the "correct version": I am required to be neutral with respect to content, dealing only with behavior. If you revert again, you will be blocked for edit-warring; you can be blocked for fewer than three reverts, but more than three is a bright-line offense. Acroterion (talk) 15:26, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

I've semi-protected the article without reference to the version so that discussion can continue on the talkpage. Acroterion (talk) 15:37, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

As you are an uninvolved admin, will you comment on the current wording of the CS Lewis article, I created a new section on the talk page in order to reach consensus, will you be a mediator or must I go to the admin noticeboard?Sheodred (talk) 18:11, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

I'll take a look at it; I have to run out for a bit.Acroterion (talk) 18:15, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. Sheodred (talk) 18:17, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

I've looked the discussions over and have formed some general impressions of the issues and their implications. I'll add a summary of my thoughts on the discussion when I have a little time to compose my words. Acroterion (talk) 19:07, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm not convinced that I'm being much help, but perhaps I can highlight the core issues for others to review. Acroterion (talk) 23:03, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Not at all, your input is welcome, it is difficult with one or two particular editors, it is like talking to a wall, one of them decided to go over to Peter O'Toole and started being disruptive as well, ridiculous and unneccessary behaviour IMHO, but hopefuly we can bring the issues on CS Lewis to a close. Sheodred (talk) 18:28, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Well, you can see the unfortunate history where a rather one-sided argument occurred over a matter where no disagreement in fact existed. However, it did clarify that some editors do not care for distinction between ethnicity, nationality and citizenship. As for citing Google statistics as proof, it's often been tried but has never succeeded in that application. Acroterion (talk) 18:34, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Uninvolved or not, you are still wrong. I did not require a warning as I had yet to break any rule, nor did I appear to be about to break any.

The label of “vandalism” is not inappropriate in the slightest. In fact, it is highly appropriate. A user was breaking the rules by ignoring the discussion entirely, not waiting for consensus to be achieved and aggressively pushing his biased and un-sourced POV. This is, by any definition, vandalism; something someone in your position should be able to readily recognise.

It is not edit warring, plain and simple. Removing vandalism is not an edit war – this is akin to removing an invading force from your national borders and then being criticised for war-mongering. Therefore, your label of “edit-warring” is wholly inappropriate.

Feel free to protect the page, but you are still required to uphold the rules of wikipedia and stamp out vandalism. This is an infinitely more pressing matter than chastising the person who is doing your job for you. Neutral or no, this is something you should have done on your own initiative without needing me to prompt you.

If you are here to deal with behaviour – which is, as already stated, a far less pressing matter – then perhaps you should be dealing with vandals instead of those upholding the rules.

I shall revert again, yet I shall NOT be blocked for edit warring as I have yet to enter an edit war. If I had done so you may have a point, but as I have not been edit warring, not been displaying any negative behaviour and not broken the three revert rule, you shall not be blocking me without some repercussions on your end for failing in your duties as a moderator/admin.

Furthermore, while I respect your attempt to add your two cents to the discussion, you are sadly misinformed. I don’t think any further input is necessary on your end. 90.196.241.238 (talk) 20:12, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

You may be blocked for disruptive editing at any time: edit-warring is not the same as 3RR, and continuing to characterize reversion of your edits as vandalism will not be received well: see your edit here [8]. You are clearly here to push a particular point of view, masking your behavior by calling disagreement vandalism. Please stop and discuss your edits with other editors rather than resorting to bluster. Your justifications for your actions are wholly inappropriate for a collaboratively-edited encyclopedia.

This kind of nationalistic POV has been received coldly by the community in the past, and may result in sanctions on editors who display a determination to edit against consensus or policy, or who fail to constructively discuss their concerns. Acroterion (talk) 21:07, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

I am aware that users may be blocked for edit-warring at any time, but that of course includes the pre-requisite of taking part in an edit war. I have yet to do this, so I personally shall not be blocked as I have yet to break any rules, as I have clearly pointed out.

It is unfortunate that it won’t be received well, but that is the nature of the vandal – they do not like having their crimes being pointed out. This does not mean I should simply neglect to point out that they are breaking the rules.

No, I am not here to push any point of view, I am simply preventing others from pushing theirs. There is no disguise – I am simply pointing out the fact that the edits they are making is vandalism. Once again, this is far more than some simple disagreement; their edits undeniably constitutes vandalism, and to be honest, you should not be attempting to mediate anything at all if you cannot see that.

Of course I shall not stop. If people like you point-blank refuse to uphold the laws and rules of wikipedia, what hope is there for a site such as this if editors like me do not act to stamp out vandalism? Once again, I have nothing to stop as I have yet to break any rules, and in fact, my edits are quite effective in UPHOLDING said rules. That is quite a far cry from “bluster”, and such a claim is utterly nonsensical.

That is exactly the point here, I DID discuss my edits with other users and contributed heavily to numerous discussions relating to this particular edit you seem to have pointlessly taken offence to. However, before the discussion could be concluded and a consensus reached, the page was vandalised and an erroneous point of view was pushed with absolutely no regard to the discussion at hand. The ONLY course of action in such a case is to revert the vandalism, prevent the POV-pushers from having their way and direct them to the talk page.

My justifications for my highly useful contributions are not only entirely appropriate and utterly just under the circumstances, but they are the EXACT thing wikipedia recommends doing in events such as these. If you cannot see that my edits are the exact sort of thing you should be doing, then not only should you be stripped of any powers you have on this site but you should not be editing at all, at least not until you have brushed up on the rules and codes of conduct. It is your edits that are disruptive here – not mine.

Once again, I am not pushing any sort of POV and it certainly isn’t nationalistic. It has indeed been received coldly by the community, as my edits have demonstrated – I do not tolerate nationalistic POV pushers and neither should you. Perhaps you should try harder to correctly identify said POV pushers, rather than bother me.

My edits fall in line perfectly with both consensus and policy, in both instances you have needlessly brought to my attention. In both cases I am either A) perfectly in line with the consensus reached on the page, or B) preventing POV-pushing and maintaining the page as it is UNTIL a consensus have been reached. This has been done without breaking a single rule, and without making a single disruptive edit. Not only that, but a quick glance at the discussion page will show that I have constructively “discussed my concerns” numerous times, and my edits to the page were simply to prevent a POV-pusher vandalising the page against consensus and policy – a user who failed to constructively discuss their concerns.

If you haven’t worked it out yet, I have been doing exactly what you are trying to do, only unlike you, I dealt with the perpetrators of said crimes instead of wasting the time of the person effectively handling the problem.

So, to recap. As I:

1. Haven’t broken the 3RR;

2. Haven’t been edit warring;

3. Haven’t been making disruptive edits;

4. Haven’t been making false accusations of vandalism;

5. Haven’t been point-of-view pushing;

6. Haven’t edited against consensus;

7. Haven’t edited against policy;

8. And have effectively conveyed my concerns,

I shall continue with my edits and I shall not be blocked. In fact, considering that my edits have recently been focused on stamping out vandalism and tackling POV-pushers without even appearing to be in danger of breaking wikipedia’s rules, should I continue doing what I have been doing (and continue I shall), then I am more likely to receive a barnstar further down the line than I am a block.

Your comments are disruptive and unhelpful. Please, actually go and deal with vandals instead of bothering the people doing your job for you. 90.196.241.238 (talk) 16:47, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

As for the nonsense you left on Shirt58's page - you are utterly misguided if you believe the community has anything but respect for editors such as me, and profoundly mistaken yourself if you believe that any of my edits thus far have been anything but helpful and constructive efforts to stamp out nationalistic POV-pushing and edit warring.

Your comments on his page suggest an utter blindness to the actual situation at hand, and a crippling inability to assess what is and what is not a problematic edit/attitude. I am opposing Shirt58's edit because it was nationalisticn POV-pushing, edit-warring vandalism, yet you erroneously accused me of such things. Not only does this make your stance rather hypocritical, but it also shows an ineptitude at handling any form of vandalism, a degree of bias and even some thoughtless biterness.

If you believe your edits and comments in relation to both situations have been anything more than bothersome and disruptive, you are sadly mistaken. You have clearly displayed that you have absolutely no ability to correctly recognise what is and what is not vandalism, and have even go so far as to show a bias against me simply because I have had to lecture you. Although I can imagine that it may be rather aggravating for an administrator to be scolded by an IP user, such a situation should not lead you to make wild, disruptive and innappropriate accusations of nationalistic POV-pushing, edit-warring and vandalism. Your comments have become rather hypocritical with a faint hint of biterness - leaving you without a leg to stand on in this discussion.

Perhaps it is time you laid this to rest. 90.196.241.238 (talk) 17:15, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

User blocked for one week for straightforward edit-warring. Acroterion (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of my post - LVR Fashion

Hi there, I just realized that a post I had put up back in January was quickly deleted by you. I remember having tried my hardest to keep the notes on "LVR Fashion" as factual as possible, but because of the delete, it must not have been in your mind. Can you help me by letting me know what specific wording I used that made it seem that I was using Wikipedia as a marketing tool for the brand? My main goal was to put information up about LVR Fashion without putting any personal opinions / adjectives about the clothes, and would love for there still to be information about the company like other companies have on Wikipedia. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Insights10 (talk • contribs) 23:11, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

The wording was not the issue: the problem was that there was no indication that the subject was notable. See WP:NOTE and WP:CORP. Articles on companies and organizations must make a credible assertion of notability. Acroterion (talk) 23:13, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Bright Angel Lodge

Hello! Your submission of Bright Angel Lodge at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Jezhotwells (talk) 01:37, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Building 7 article

I would like to have your input in talk page sections here and here.--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 00:57, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

I'll take a careful look at it when I get some time to look it over in detail, as a quick glance would not be of much use to you or anyone else. My attention span right now isn't very impressive. Acroterion (talk) 03:14, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

I submitted an RfC on the article talk page but it is not getting any input. Would you mind offering your position?--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 17:54, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

At last: talk page drama!

Hi Acroterion!
Five quiet years correcting apostrophe usage, adding articles about novels by Nobel Prize winners, and identifying binomial authorities for pretty butterflies with no drama at all... and then in less than a fortnight I get not just one but two talk page messages from blockedy-socks, just like Real Wikipedians^® do! It's been a long apprenticeship, but it appears I finally must be doing something right.
--Shirt58 (talk) 12:05, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Don't you just love getting free advice from people who can't follow the rules? I urge you to become an administrator so you can receive verbose advice on a near-daily basis on how wrong, disruptive and contributing-to-the-decline-of-civilization-as-we-know-it your activities are. And you thought writing an encyclopedia would be dull ... Acroterion (talk) 15:11, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

My red warning lights start blinking any time I see an anon IP changing someone's nationality or ethnicity. Question that proud and angry nationalist at your own risk! About one time in ten, your polite note to the IP results in 20,000-character rants to your talk page, a noticeboard, two or three article talk pages, and then Jimbo's talk page, accusing you of complicity in all manner of atrocities over hundreds of years. There comes a time when you just have to laugh. Once a few years ago I got into two tangles on the same day: one angry editor accused me of being a Nazi, and another, unrelated, a Communist.

Yesterday's event shows that it's worthwhile to dig for a sockpuppet investigation before taking a lot of time to explain policy, especially if your first, second, and third attempts bounce off. Long-winded rants are a giveaway it's no one new. Antandrus (talk) 15:46, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Deleting The Page Samsung NP-RF711

I am sorry about uploading the "advertisement Samsung NP-RF711". May I ask you to leave it there for few days? It is for my school work. I promise that I will delete it after the thing is over. Thank You. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Omega4000 (talk • contribs) 05:32, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not an appropriate place to post hardware reviews or promotion. Acroterion (talk) 13:07, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Where to check is the wiki page suitable

I write message to page "Talk:Discussion_Only", and you Acroterion delete it. I hope, that here we can discuss the problem which I state. There is wikipedia condition what can be one wiki page. But this criteria are not absolute. Writing page, and next wait will somebody deleted is bad idea - why to waste your time, if your work will be deleted? What is the alternative?83.228.38.242 (talk) 06:32, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

You created Talk:Discussion Only, which appeared to be an attempt to create a general discussion page in article talk space. Such pages without a corresponding article are deleted. Please remember that Wikipedia isn't a free webhost for general discussion, and that the creation of random pages such as this is not appropriate. You must be a registered user to create articles. As to the apparent question "Is it possible to exists wikipedia page without Article content, but with Discussion contents? For example, if you want to discus is it subject suitable for wikipedia page, or not", the answer for IP users is to submit your proposed article at articles for creation. Talkpages support articles and don't exist by themselves. Acroterion (talk) 12:58, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXVIII, October 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D analyzes three books from Osprey Publishing Review essay: Nick-D reviews the new Bundeswehr Military History Museum

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 07:46, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Eric Holder's Brother

I know that he does have a brother because he lives right next to me. And I kinda can't cite that because it is my own information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Coolmon54 (talk • contribs) 21:47, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Lots of people have brothers, but it's not necessarily important enough to be mentioned on Wikipedia; the only reason a notable person's siblings would be mentioned would be because the sibling is notable too. That said, don't let that discourage you; we appreciate your interest in adding to Wikipedia, just remember that everything about a living person should be sourced and should make sufficient claim of notability. Acroterion (talk) 21:50, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Yeah I know I was just saying.Coolmon54 (talk) 21:53, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Northlake Christian School

Hi, you just deleted my page. I went to the link you provided, but do not understand why it was removed. I am providing reliable information about the school. I work at the school and have been tasked with getting a Wiki up and going. If you could give me some more information it would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Northlakechristian (talk • contribs) 00:27, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for seeing to the Talk:Suicide methods nonsense. LadyofShalott 23:28, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome, it really was nonsense, and I have no patience for edit-warring to post silly forum crap on article talkpages. I was called away before I could protect the article, but I see that's been sorted. Acroterion (talk) 00:00, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Bright Angel Lodge

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:03, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Deletion?

Why did you delete my page Wikipedia talk? It's just to talk about Wikipedia and ask questions.

LordComputerHero (talk) 20:31, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

RD/M revert

Hmm, I guess this revert was a slip-of-the-mouse? The content you removed was fine, so I've assumed butterfingeredness and restored it. -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 23:30, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

You're right: must have clicked and not noticed. Thanks for catching it. Acroterion (talk) 00:38, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Kailey Huba

I was wondering if I could get the contents of that page e-mailed to me real fast. I won't post it up again, but I want to show it to whom I made it for. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Turnerb001 (talk • contribs) 05:50, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Done. Acroterion (talk) 13:51, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

im sorry if the edit ofendened you

You recently commented on the edit i made to pugs but, on my computer it said it was spelled wrong and i always thought that was the wrong way to spell it i didn't think it was a different way of spelling it . Thank you for need my message please respond — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cosmorox (talk • contribs) 22:17, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

No offense, replied on your talkpage concerning national varieties of English. Acroterion (talk) 22:22, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

im sorry thanks for responding

Again im sorry if it offended you i didnt realize thats how you spelt it ill leave it alone next time

No problem, don't worry about it. Acroterion (talk) 22:24, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

thank you

thanks you seem like a really nice person, did you write the page called "pug" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cosmorox (talk • contribs) 22:27, 8 December 2011 (UTC) --Cosmorox (talk) 22:31, 8 December 2011 (UTC) 5:24 PM Cosmo Rox

Thank you, but I didn't. A lot of different people wrote the article beginning in January 2003. If you click the "view history" button you can see the most recent edits, then all the way back - there are thousands of edits. Miyagawa (talk · contribs) seems to have done most of the work on it to get it up to Good Article status. Acroterion (talk) 22:33, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Oh thank you. do you like pugs --Cosmorox (talk) 22:38, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

I do: our neighbors have them and they come over and snuffle. We have bloodhounds, who are a lot bigger and don't quite know what a pug is, since they're the size of a bloodhound puppy. They snuffle the pugs and look confused. Acroterion (talk) 22:43, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

did u just delete cosmo the pug

did u just delete an article called cosmo the pug--Cosmorox (talk) 22:56, 8 December 2011 (UTC) please post the answer to this ques on my talk--Cosmorox (talk) 22:57, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

But I was going to finish. You didn't give me a chance--Cosmorox (talk) 23:05, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

No

No but he's win curliest tail in the pugfest twice--Cosmorox (talk) 23:19, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately, curliest tail at the pugfest doesn't make him eligible for inclusion in a worldwide encyclopedia. Acroterion (talk) 23:20, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

That's not fair

Wikipedia is for anyone to put things I don't think its right to delete something without even asking--166.137.14.111 (talk) 01:49, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Actually Wikipedia is only for notable, not just real, things. Page creators do not own the pages they make, and have no right to act as if they did.Jasper Deng (talk) 02:23, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

leave my things alone

you know wat if you put something boring out i wouldnt delete it i thought u were nice leave me alone--Cosmorox (talk) 00:09, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

insulating link

I noticed you undid my undoing of edits on this page. I should have explained that I undid those edits because the unregistered users who made them are trying to make the article more general, i.e. I strongly suspect they work for a company that produces insulating links that do not comply with regulations, they are thus trying to remove references to those regulations on wikipedia. Bpf101 (talk) 15:47, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Your edits were fine, and I undid my own revert once I reviewed them; I assume you've fixed the broken reference that attracted my attention at first. Acroterion (talk) 15:50, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Brief question

Greetings. Could you please explain why you reverted my edit to en:User:Nachteilig? As far as I can tell from the logs my edit is correct and CheckUser was not used on this case.

I'd appreciate it if you didn't baselessly refer to me as a "sock puppet" too, as you did in your edit summary.

Warm regards, 174.253.18.252 (talk) 04:19, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nachteilig/Archive. Why is this important to you? Acroterion (talk) 04:24, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. Please note that the archived you linked does NOT contain a checkuser though. I'm sure this was an innocent mistake and I don't blame you for making it. One has to be vigilant against these nasty trolls. 174.253.18.252 (talk) 04:28, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

One certainly must. Familiar IP to you? Antandrus (talk) 04:29, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

It most certainly was CU'd - how do you think sleeper checks are accomplished? Acroterion (talk) 04:33, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Isn't being an admin fun?!--MONGO 04:34, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

If that's the case then the case archive is either screwed up or proper procedures were not followed. Checkuser should have a very specific entry. And there doesn't appear to be an ArbCom case for it as there should be. 174.253.18.252 (talk) 04:38, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

And people wonder why there are so few candidates for admin. Acroterion (talk) 04:37, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

I don't think this response is very civil considering the good faith nature of my inqueries. 174.253.18.252 (talk) 04:41, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

And I don't think your concern is that of a random passer-by. A sleeper check on a grossly abusive account was requested and accomplished per normal practice. ArbComn is not involved with such events. Nothing is out of the ordinary, and your interest is noted, but you are mistaken on several counts. Acroterion (talk) 04:46, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Post-script: Thanks for at least engaging me in conversation, though. Many admins are unwilling to even interface with an IP user for some reason. 174.253.18.252 (talk) 04:53, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Your tone and accusations are really quite inappropriate, and I hope you'll be more civil in the future. The archive most certainly does not even mention a checkuser, "sleeper check" or not, and the tag on the original page of note remains wrong. Such a hostile response to a good faith question is most irregular. Take heed. 174.253.18.252 (talk) 04:51, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Your thanks are noted. Your interpretation of the SPI is wrong; I will not debate this any further with you. The tag will not be changed. Good evening. Acroterion (talk) 04:55, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Kathryn Kates Page

Hi:

Thank you for reviewing my submission for the page: Kathryn Kates. I'm not certain what I need to change to eliminate the error messages I see on the page. Is it simply the all UPPER case words? What else do I need to do and how can I confirm that the information noted on the page is accurate? She is a legitimate entity and her work is verifiable on sites such as IMDB.COM. Thank you! Jnkates (talk) 04:42, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

rReplied on your talk page; she's clearly notable, just needs better sourcing and cleanup. Acroterion (talk) 04:56, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Kathryn Kates Page

Hi:

I've made many edits to Kathryn Kates' page. Can you remove the errors now or do I need to do more? Also, I would like to upload her picture or point to a picture of her on her IMDB page: http://www.imdb.com/media/rm1392688128/nm0441235. Can you assist with that please? Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jnkates (talk • contribs) 07:11, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Kathryn Kates Page

Hi:

I've made many edits to Kathryn Kates' page. Can you remove the errors now or do I need to do more? Also, I would like to upload her picture or point to a picture of her on her IMDB page: http://www.imdb.com/media/rm1392688128/nm0441235. Can you assist with that please? Thank you! Jnkates (talk) 08:46, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

I'll take a look, but I will probably not have time to do much until this evening (US eastern time). Acroterion (talk) 14:06, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Kathryn Kates Page

Hi There:

I believe I have addressed the issues originally mentioned (upper case words & correct brackets as well as verifiable sources). The original message I received said "Please do not remove maintenance tags unless you've addressed the issues mentioned" and I believe I have addressed them. SO I am about to remove the maintenance tags and hope that is okay. I still need some guidance about posting a picture on the right side of the page so if you have time, I could use some assistance. Thanks very much. Jnkates (talk) 23:38, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for your comments and assistance! Jnkates (talk) 01:40, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

December 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States

The December 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumioko (talk) 02:32, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Miss Witherspoon

While I agree that it was a poorly written article, it didn't seem to fall under A1 - it was a potentially notable play, by a notable playwright; that much was clear from reading the first sentence. Now there may be a consensus to delete the page, but I don't think it qualified for an A1 CSD. ΣΑΠΦ (Sapph)^Talk 20:07, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

As all the tags on the revived version note, it's a mess and may be a copyright violation. Feel free to take it to AfD if you wish. Acroterion (talk) 20:26, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

A Suggestion

Heyas, might I suggest an article that I created (shameless promotion) that might help with any "please stop deleting my page" and "why did you delete my page" posts you might have received. It's User:Neutralhomer/WWMAD. What I do is just post it as {{subst:User:Neutralhomer/WWMAD}}~~~~ and it creates the section header and signs it itself, just a copy/paste job. It might help so you won't have to constantly answer those posts. Just slap the template on their talk page. Feel free to tinker with the page at User:Neutralhomer/WWMAD, if you like. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 01:49, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

t might interest you to see my comment at ANB DGG ( talk ) 03:53, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

I saw that and tend to agree: I've resisted making my own canned template, because from time to time I've been able to work with some new editors to get formerly deleted content into acceptable shape, and a canned statement would work against that. Still, as you say, for someone who might be on their way to an indef for inappropriate content, it might be useful. Acroterion (talk) 03:58, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

It can be tweaked to direct the user to the editor-who-placed-the-template's talk page. That way they get all the basic information (GNG, N, V, etc.) and a link for help as well. I just don't know how to do that. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 04:05, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Warisan Eurindo Article

Dear Sir, one of the SEO software I use recommend Wikipedia link for our Company Website. I wrote our company profile but it been categorized as promotional. What should I do the best? Can I post same article with {{Advert}} code on top of the article? Please assist me on this, thank you very much for your time and help.

Best Regards, Hariara

No, you may not advertise at all, and Wikipedia may not be used for search engine optimization: it doesn't work the way people expect, and you may have your editing privileges revoked if you post promotion. Acroterion (talk) 12:29, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Quit.

--GH200 (talk) 01:40, 14 December 2011 (UTC) Stop messing with my user page. I dont mess with yours. So dont mess with mine.--GH200 (talk) 01:40, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) The content was removed per the rule at WP:UP#COPIES, as Acroterion said in their edit summary. HurricaneFan25 01:43, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Don't use your userpage as an alternate host for deleted content, as we've explained. Acroterion (talk) 02:12, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

deleted my page

why did you delete my page "love betweentwo hearts". that was mean! ;p how was it inappropiate or whatever? what was so bad about it? and why do you think i copied that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jenniferdiana828 (talk • contribs) 05:14, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia isn't a free webhost for personal essays on love or on your personal relationships; there are more appropriate places elsewhere on the Internet for things that are obviously inappropriate content for worldwide encyclopedias. Such material is often copied from elsewhere; while yours may be your own reflections, Wikipedia isn't a host for personal musings or expressions of adoration either. Would you expect Encyclopedia Britannica to host a lengthy discussion of your love for your boyfriend?Acroterion (talk) 12:21, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the juvenilia perpetrated upon my page. LadyofShalott 03:36, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome. Your instinct on the original account was obviously correct. Acroterion (talk) 03:37, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

A correction

Yes, edit wars, like real wars, can indeed be necessary. If we cannot settle on a consensus, then we must re-instate the previous lede decided upon by consensus. That is in the rules, and this WILL cause an edit war in this instance. However, if we cannot decide on consensus or achieve any conclusion with this discussion, we must push on with it regardless.

So yes, edit wars can indeed be necessary, as it is in this case. If an edit war will ensue when you do what the rules command us to, if it is inevitable when ensuring that an article is created to the finest standard, then YES, an edit war is necessary. Freyno (talk) 14:46, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

So, how familiar are you with PowerSane (talk · contribs), whose sockpuppets use much the same language? Acroterion (talk) 15:58, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Unfamiliar, I think you'll find. Freyno (talk) 02:39, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

FYI

Might want to have a look at this Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/PowerSane Mo ainm~Talk 17:15, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for filing that: I had to go out and run some errands and ran out of time. Acroterion (talk) 19:23, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

RevDelete request

Hello Acroterion. Is it possible to RevDelete this and this revision and edit summary? It's pure vandalism. I'm asking you because you're included on CAT:REVDEL. Much appreciated. -- Luke (Talk) 15:08, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

While ordinarily I probably wouldn't revdel such simple vandalism, the size of the addition and its impact on loading time qualifies as disruption in this case, in my opinion. Done. Acroterion (talk) 15:26, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

It almost froze my browser. Thanks for helping. -- Luke (Talk) 15:30, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

According to Microsoft Word, there are 1,013,932 characters in this "message", or 107 × 103 × 23 × 4. When Word is set for 12-point Times New Roman with margins of 1-inch top and bottom and 1¼-inch sides, it takes up 306.1329 pages, at 3,312 characters per page :-) Nyttend (talk) 21:56, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

A favor, please?

Will you please delete all of my user subpages as well as my talk page archives? Thank you. ---RepublicanJacobite_TheFortyFive 04:13, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Sure: I had to think about the TP archives, but since it's all in the history of your talkpage, those should be deletable too. I assume your main userpage stays? Acroterion (talk) 04:15, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

For the moment, yes. Thanks. ---RepublicanJacobite_TheFortyFive 04:18, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

No problem. Give me a few minutes to go give the dogs a snack. Crazies getting you down? Acroterion (talk) 04:19, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

It's one fucking thing after another, and no sign of anything getting better. As life provides enough bullshit, and editing this site no longer gives me any joy or sense of satisfaction, why stay? ---RepublicanJacobite_TheFortyFive 04:31, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

A reasonable position: there are lots of other (fun) things you can and should do if WP just makes you frustrated. I wish you well, and appreciate the work you've done here. Acroterion (talk) 04:35, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

All done as far as I can tell: best wishes and thanks. Acroterion (talk) 04:46, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

I say the same to you. ---RepublicanJacobite_TheFortyFive 04:47, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Deletion review for Austin Mahone

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Austin Mahone. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Keizers (talk) 21:41, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

C.S. Lewis

Hey there, I was just wondering would "Now Northern Ireland" not be good for the C.S Lewis page just so people don't continuously try to change the country to N.I. The reason I propose this is because I have seen this in action on some Wiki pages. Dontforgetthisone (talk) 21:50, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

I think your idea is good in principle, but given the recent history of the article, I don't think it would amount to much of a deterrence. It sort of comes across as a red flag to nationalist edit warriors and sockpuppets, who have been treating the article as a punching bag (note that there are many well-intentioned editors there who don't fit that description). The article history, as you note, is ugly, and I suspect it'll end up as an arbitration case. Acroterion (talk) 21:59, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Are you from oklahoma

--4.245.32.250 (talk) 01:45, 20 December 2011 (UTC) are you--4.245.32.250 (talk) 01:45, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Nope. Acroterion (talk) 01:46, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Deletion question

Hello at 13:50 on the 6th September 2011 you deleted my page "Farley Farm House" for‎ (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement). I was wondering why/what part of my page is an infringement on this rule/regulation? I would like you to understand however i am not necessarily challenging your judgement i am merely trying to find out what i have done wrong so i can correct it / do not repeat it in the future. Cheers. Zakneg. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zakneg (talk • contribs) 11:05, 21 December 2011 (UTC) i am also going to create a new page on the same subject and hopefully it will meet with your regulations. User:Zakneg User talk:Zakneg/talk

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Steiner tunnel test (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to NFPA and Lobatae

Winecoff Hotel fire (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to NFPA

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:29, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Acroterion, I hope you have a Merry Christmas and hope your day is full of the true spirit of the day. Plus, good food, good family and good times. :) Have a Great Day! :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 00:54, 25 December 2011 (UTC) Spread the joy of Christmas by adding {{subst:User:Neutralhomer/MerryChristmas}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thanks, the same to you. I'm about to head off to sleep once the dogs come back in. Standing rib roast awaits tomorrow! Acroterion (talk) 05:17, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

We are having the standard ham. :) Gotta love ham. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 05:25, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

For your assistance with dealing with the upset IP at Stallion.

And have a great Christmas

	Christmas pudding is hot stuff!
	Have a wonderful Christmas. As the song says: "I wish you a hopeful Christmas, I wish you a brave new year; All anguish, pain, and sadness Leave your heart and let your road be clear." Pesky (talk …stalk!) 18:57, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

... and just FYI and to set your mouth watering, we had Trad English Christmas Dinner: roast goose, with roast potatoes and parsnips (done in the goose fat), leeks, Brussels sprouts and chestnuts :o) And the goose was delicious :D Pesky (talk …stalk!) 20:06, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, we just finished cleaning up (mostly). Parsnips and Brussels sprouts (with walnuts) were on the menu here as well. Potatoes were mashed, however. Acroterion (talk) 04:06, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Dispute Resolution on Stallion article started. 83.78.3.62 (talk) 22:22, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Awwwww! You said "Pesky is one of our most patient editors" :o) Big mega-granny-hugs to you (>**)><(**<) Pesky (talk …stalk!) 17:54, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIX, November 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors – MHotY coming; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at the Congolese Wars Review essay: Ian Rose goes to El Alamein Op-ed: DCI's call to revitalize WikiProject History

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Ian Rose (talk) and Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 20:06, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Userpage

WHY DID YOU DO THAT TO MY USER PAGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! IT IS TEMPTING TO DO IT TO YOURS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

15:15, 30 December 2011 (UTC)oscar45596524

"Wikipedia doesn't allow children to post personal information on their userpages. Please remember that this is for your protection. Acroterion (talk) 15:55, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Murtz Jaffer Page Keeps Getting Vandalized

Hello,

My page 'Murtz Jaffer' keeps getting vandalized from a couple of IP addresses (by users that are not registered).

I was hoping you could keep an eye on it with me over the next few days so that we can make sure it doesn't keep happening. I didn't know who else to contact and noticed that you have helped fixed the vandalism before.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.245.31.12 (talk) 09:50, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

I've semi-protected the page so IPs can't edit it for a week. Unfortunately, that would include you, so I encourage you to get an account, which would let you edit the page after four days and ten edits elsewhere. Thanks for letting me know. Acroterion (talk) 14:46, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.245.31.12 (talk) 17:04, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Inte en ante

I used to have a bumper sticker which read "My other rhetorical device is a transparent attack". Most people saw straight through it. Anyway, my comment was referring to the unpleasant bubbling undertow of righteous menace present beneath the previous posts in the thread, used with the implicit assumption that the people I was directing it at, the people who were (by implication) responsible for it, were actually not (yet) exemplifications of the aggression parodied: so, really, it was far more of a call for reasonable conduct, by attempting to move towards a collective condemnation of the unreasonable, than the opposite. Without wanting to generalize, I'd say that makes for a pretty poor example of an "unacceptable" "attack", even before you get to the fact that nothing after the first sentence of my post was specifically directed at anyone. I also don't think you can deny me the right to identify and isolate that aforementioned menacing agenda either, given that you've just done exactly the same thing in reading me. Neither can I see which part of my comment on dude's talk page you're interpreting as "upping the ante": if you want to be more specific, I will be delighted to dispel any unfortunate confusion that has regretfully occurred. --Jemimallah (talk) 20:09, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

I understand exactly what is happening, and have said so in far fewer and plainer words. Acroterion (talk) 20:36, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

One of the clearest examples of WP:SOUP I've ever seen.

Jemimallah, if you have a problem with the images on the gelding article, make your arguments plainly and directly on the talk page, without attacking other contributors. You are more likely to make progress if you base your arguments clearly on policy rather than on personal preference. Antandrus (talk) 20:51, 31 December 2011 (UTC)