Jump to content

User talk:Courcelles/Archive 92

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 85←Archive 90Archive 91Archive 92Archive 93Archive 94Archive 95

User:Jasinskibolak

Hi, now this one perfectly looks like a sock. He has made a lot of personal attacks on my talk page. Those edits need a rev deletion. --Commander (Ping Me) 14:18, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Editors Survey (Nov 2011): Your feedback is welcome!

Thanks for your feedback on the previous iteration of the Editor Survey. The latest iteration of the survey questionnaire is available at Wikipedia Editors Survey November 2011 and we would appreciate your feedback.Ayushk (talk) 17:35, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Hey...again

I'm sure you are fed up with me coming and asking you stuff, but could you take a look at this page - Olivia Scott. It may need an AfD and their have been several allegations to and from editors. Dontforgetthisone (talk) 16:41, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

  • A few of the sources I checked didn't mention her much, if at all. An AFD doesn't appear to be unreasonable to me, her notability, if she is, is marginal. Courcelles 23:07, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Recent editing at Amanda Knox‎

You were the last admin to take an administrative action at Amanda Knox‎, to my knowledge. Could you review recent editing at that article and do whatever needs to be done? Hipocrite (talk) 18:37, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

  • The small edit war seems to have died out, and people have migrated to the talk page for a discussion. I can't see how mashing admin buttons at this point would improve the situation. Courcelles 23:23, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

RevDelete request

These edits have some cynical racial connotations and should go: [1] [2]. Revert diff: [3]. —Yk Yk Yk  talk ~ contrib 00:17, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

  • RD3'ed as BLP violations, and I actually removed that entire section until someone other than the Sun finds this worth talking about as BLP violations and hardly notable. Semi'ed, as well, because that page gets too much crap from IP's right now. Courcelles 00:37, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Clear-up

Can you close this AfD [4], I am unable to close them, Thanks again. Dontforgetthisone (talk) 16:47, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Oops, it broke

File:CastleAdventure1.png was accidentally deleted sorta, when you were deleting old revisions. Strange, but not as strange as the first time I saw that happen. Can you undelete the page and fix that up? Reach Out to the Truth 23:18, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Strange and stranger, given the image apparently still "existed". Repaired. Courcelles 23:23, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Mail

Hey, I sent you an email earlier. Also, can you take a look at this list, would you agree there are 124 nominations and 37 wins? - JuneGloom Talk 23:47, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Haven't seen you about in a while, hope everything's ok with you :) 5 albert square (talk) 23:58, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
  • I've been around a good bit, but we tend to move on different parts of the wiki out in article space, so I haven't seen your name in a while, either. Good to see, you, though! How have you been? Courcelles 03:46, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Edit needed to Chihuahua Sources

Hi, Hope I am doing this right! Just wanted to let you know that source link #5 on the Chihuahua dog entry points to the wrong page -- it goes to FCI Cavalier King Charles standard. Correct link should be http://www.fci.be/uploaded_files/218g09-en.doc I tried to fix it but the section was protected. If you get a chance, you may want to fix this. Thanks! doplgangr (talk) 05:58, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi doplgangr, Courcelles is traveling this week, but I made that change for you. Thanks for letting us know about the error - in the future, you can also request a change like that on the article's talk page rather than having to ask any person in particular. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 12:36, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

New Page Patrol survey

New page patrol – Survey Invitation

Hello Courcelles/Archive 92! 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

The Signpost: 24 October 2011

Interview with Wikimedia Foundation

Hi Courcelles, I hope you are well. My name is Matthew Roth and I'm a Storyteller working on the 2011 fundraiser with the Wikimedia Foundation in San Francisco. In past years, we've relied on Jimbo to carry the bulk of the fundraising weight and he's done very well helping us hit our yearly funding targets. This year, however, we're broadening the scope and reach of the fundraiser by incorporating more voices and different people on the funding banners and appeals that will start running full-time on November 7th. We're testing new messages and finding some really great results with editors and staff members of the Foundation. You can see the current progress of the tests here. I'm curious if you would want to participate in an interview with me as part of this process? The interviews usually last 60 minutes and involve a number of questions about your personal editing experiences, as well as general questions about Wikipedia and its impact in the world. Please let me know by emailing mroth (at) wikimedia.org. Thanks! Matthew (WMF) 17:12, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Outreach Oceania

We have an itinerary set. If this doesn't work for you, please let me know as we've booked that on. (If you want to do stuff on either side of it, that's awesome. This is just for what we can do given our time constraints.) If not, please let me know so I can ass about the possibility of recruiting another person. --LauraHale (talk) 19:48, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:TT Logo.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:TT Logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 08:01, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

stagnant AFD determination

On 24 July you closed this deletion discussion as a merge. In the 97 intervening days, nobody has merged the content. Counting myself among the 75% who felt the article should have been deleted, I'm not interested in making what I feel is an unnecessary merge. I'm not interested in taking anything to WP:DRV or anything, but to whom should I speak or petition to have your concluding decision acted upon? — Fourthords | =Λ= | 07:44, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Quick question...

I see that you are away for a few more days, but since this isn't a life-or-death question, I'm still going to post here :) Today, while in the course of random-Wiki-wanderings, I stumbled across User:Markeyatgnapcorg/sandbox. This appears to be a copy of an Italian WP article that the user in question was planning to translate into English (he had created a corresponding English article, which was deleted as having no content to identify the topic). However, the sandbox hasn't been touched since June, and has no English content - just the copied Italian. Is there something we can/should do about this? What would be the proper venue for a discussion of this page? Thank you, Dana boomer (talk) 21:36, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

stagnant AFD determination

On 24 July you closed this deletion discussion as a merge. In the 97 intervening days, nobody has merged the content. Counting myself among the 75% who felt the article should have been deleted, I'm not interested in making what I feel is an unnecessary merge. I'm not interested in taking anything to WP:DRV or anything, but to whom should I speak or petition to have your concluding decision acted upon? — Fourthords | =Λ= | 07:44, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Quick question...

I see that you are away for a few more days, but since this isn't a life-or-death question, I'm still going to post here :) Today, while in the course of random-Wiki-wanderings, I stumbled across User:Markeyatgnapcorg/sandbox. This appears to be a copy of an Italian WP article that the user in question was planning to translate into English (he had created a corresponding English article, which was deleted as having no content to identify the topic). However, the sandbox hasn't been touched since June, and has no English content - just the copied Italian. Is there something we can/should do about this? What would be the proper venue for a discussion of this page? Thank you, Dana boomer (talk) 21:36, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Reupping deleted media

I'm going through adding posters and romanization to various Korean films and I was blocked for the The Bow (film). It says (Deleted because "CSD F5; Orphaned non-free media tagged for seven days".(TW)) and to contact the deleting admin. I'd like to upload the file and match it to the page. Please let me know what I can do. Thanks Rickinasia (talk) 09:07, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 October 2011

Robert Douglas Hartmann

I saw him linked on fraud, and I see that you deleted the entry through prodding. I think he may be notable (some sources: [5], [6]); could I suggest undeleting and AfDing to reach a consensus in a wider group? Thanks, --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 17:35, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Cleveland article protection

Once again there is a problem with edit warring between registered users and those who are IP address (i.e. unregistered) editors, which is turning into what is more like vandalism in its tone (and I should add that the main offender has a history of causing problems on other articles as evidenced by the warnings on his/her talk page). Could you put the protection back up on the article like it was before? Thank you Ryecatcher773 (talk) 18:26, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Got it. In the meanwhile, now he's messing with my talk page. I don't want to have any dialogue with the guy -- he's been uncooperative/unreasonable in the past and frankly, serves no purpose but to be an agitator. Would you do me a huge personal favor and please put a permanent protection on my talk page? Thanks. Ryecatcher773 (talk) 04:00, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Cleveland Article... again

Hey, I know you're busy, so I understand if you didn't have time to quite read through what was deemed an 'edit war' before you locked the article. The thing is, the issue in question was discussed on the article talk page a while back, and it was agreed to include the nickname 'The Mistake By The Lake', but the wording wasn't supposed to be antagonistic (as the guy from Columbus with the IP Address who started this war earlier this year, which resulted in semi-protection for six months, has intended to make it). All I did was revert the wording back to how it had been before someone removed it in an effort to make its inclusion in the article a more NPOV wording, rather than it sounding inflammatory like the other guy keeps changing it (and has the audacity to call it vandalism). Please, I am asking you to put a normal semi-protection on the article so that those of us who are responsible Wikipedians, who are actually trying to do constructive things on Wikipedia, can continue to maintain and edit the article, which is the core article for Wikiproject Cleveland. We're not looking for an edit war, just that the article is not making inflammatory statements. Ryecatcher773 (talk) 17:01, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Courcelles/Archive_92&oldid=1171650543"