User talk:Dabomb87/Archive 24

Archive 20

←

Archive 22

Archive 23

Archive 24

Archive 25

Archive 26

→

Archive 30

Re:Question

Yes, I did welcome User:AcrossTheOcean to Wikipedia, but I don't have any direct connection with that user otherwise. I did realized that the account was just opened, so to be friendly, I added the Welcome template to their talk page. I guess that the user then went through my contributions, noticed that I had discussed on the List of Pearl Jam band member featured list candidates, and added their support after reading the article. That's my only guess. I do agree, that is suspicious, but I have nothing to do with it otherwise. Also, I wouldn't mind if that user's support was removed from the nomination, either. WereWolf (talk) 20:28, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Just a note: All commentary about this case will almost exclusively take place on the case page, so you may want to keep it watchlisted. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 21:19, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for putting the welcome template. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by CJISBEAST (talk • contribs) 04:07, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. If you have any questions about Wikipedia, please ask. Cheers, Dabomb87 (talk) 13:53, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for the MOS cleanup of Shimer College at FAC. I thought it was in pretty good shape but it obviously needed some expert attention. Thanks to your help, it got promoted! --Nasty Housecat (talk) 04:31, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Feel free to ping me if you bring more articles to FAC in the future. Congrats on the FA. Dabomb87 (talk) 13:52, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Gbenga Daniel

I saw you accepted a revision on this one, then did some clean-up. I would say the revision is vandalism. It pastes back the July 9 version (8,155 bytes) once again, wiping out later changes. See the article history and talk page. The effect is to

• Duplicate some basic bio information (you started to clean this up)
• Remove a note, not sourced but probably true, on an honorary title
• Add an external links section with bolded links to two derogatory articles

These two external sources are not solid, even though the assertion seems plausible. Jonathan Elendu is a pundit. Nigerian Village Square is just a public blogsite that runs a lot of attack articles from members. I think it is o.k. to quote Elundu pointing out that it is his opinion in the text, which the previous version did. But not the Village Square, never the Village Square. Take another look. Thanks, Aymatth2 (talk) 15:18, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Sorry about that. I have reverted to a clean version without the links to the derogatory sites or the duplicated info. When I first saw the revision, I considered just reverting outright, but the edit appeared to be in good faith, so I accepted it and did some cleanup. I was not entirely sure about the ELs, but on further consideration I should have taken the safe route and commented them out. Let me know if there is anything else. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:29, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

That looks fine to me. Welcome to the murky world of Nigerian politics! Aymatth2 (talk) 15:38, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Caprice Bourret

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am Caprice Bourret's assitant and am acting on behalf of her in regards to correcting said information on her Wikipedia page. I have either edited information that is incorrect, such as stating that her birthplace is Whittier, California, or updated her information, such as with regards to the timeline for her lingerie line. All of this information can be correctly and legitimately sourced and referenced. If this correct editing continues to be rejected then Caprice will be involving her lawyers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bycapricelingerie (talk • contribs) 15:47, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Signing

Can you explain what you mean? That could well be the problem.ValenShephard 00:10, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:12, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Millennium Park FAC3

You commented at a prior discussion for this candidate. Please comment at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Millennium Park/archive3.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:11, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

RFA

I'm home, but need a few more days of R&R; if Karanacs is around, we should be able to get the ball rolling before the end of the week. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:42, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:43, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Mid-FLC move

List of cities in Utah needs moving to List of cities and towns in Utah. Not sure about how this is handled mid-FLC. (Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of cities in Utah/archive1). Jujutacular ^talk 20:53, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

 Done. Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of cities and towns in Utah/archive1 and links updated. I did this as a talk page stalker because, until Dabomb gets "the bit", someone else would have needed to delete the redirect anyway. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 21:19, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks RR. By the way Juju, congrats on your RfA. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:24, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you both :) Jujutacular ^talk 21:30, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Aberdeen Student Show

Received your brief note about this being nominated for 'did you know?' and that there might be some problem based on recent edits. Any chance of more specific pointers to what the flags might be? Many thanks Summerhill Loon (talk) 04:27, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I see that the article has now been moved to the prep queue, so other editors may not have shared my opinion. Anyway, I think that the article contains too much trivial detail. To be honest, I think your past involvement with the show may have influenced your edits to the article; that is, you've attached more importance to certain aspects of the show than I would expect to read about in an encyclopedia article. For example, I find the origins of the "Student Show titles" too "crufty" to mention in an article, and much of it comes across as unverified original research (though it's probably true). Also, why do are there so many paragraphs about notable people who have participated in or directed the show? How does that aid understanding of the topic at all? Most of the material in the notable directors section isn't even about the students' roles in the show but about their other activities. This is just one person's opinion, so feel free to ignore it. However, if you do want my advice on how to improve the article, I would suggest trimming it significantly so it looks more like it does in this version. Cheers, Dabomb87 (talk) 13:20, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll discuss with the original author Solaricon, when he returns from vacation; and with and other contributors to the evolving / underlying much larger database. I think the intent here was to be quite comprehensive, and to indicate the importance of the Student Show to the culture, not only of the University, but of NE Scotland. To that end we felt the article should feature many more of the contributors than only the directors; also to illustrate that these have never been amateur productions put on by students for fun, but serious professional productions, produced by people who were already locally renowned, or became so later - with the Show being a starting point for many careers. But your points about this and other elements are much appreciated and well taken. Summerhill Loon (talk) 13:55, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Cheers. I apologize if I came across as brusque in my previous comment. I should mention that some of your edits were very good and improved the article quite a bit, such as the inclusion of the table. Dabomb87 (talk) 13:58, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

No need to apologize: didn't come across as brusque, and your comments are in the spirit of helping to improve it. I'll pull the original research content, and have asked my fellow contributors for help to better define its scope and content. I'm a little to close to it at this point. Cheers Summerhill Loon (talk) 14:12, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Sorry

I guess I should have made it clearer that I was joking. Malleus Fatuorum 22:10, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

No, I just need a better sense of humor. The Internet is hard sometimes... Dabomb87 (talk) 22:11, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Re: Grammy Award for Best Contemporary Jazz Album

Hmm. Why was the FL nomination for Grammy Award for Best Contemporary Jazz Album closed when only one person commented on it and no one opposed it. Shouldn't more time be given for reviews? I am certainly not questioning your decision to close the nomination, as I realize how familiar you are with the process, but I am simply wondering what the policy is when there has only been one review (and one where issues were resolved, at that). --Another Believer _(Talk) 22:33, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

It was a no consensus closure (see my comment at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Closure log). Nearly three weeks had passed, and there were no supports. That's the worst way to see an FLC end, but content-review processes are chronically short of reviewers so I do have to make those closures periodically. Feel free to renominate in five or six days. In the meantime, perhaps you can review some FLCs yourself? Reviewer karma exists, I promise! Cheers, Dabomb87 (talk) 22:40, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Just trying to understand the process. I will be sure to re-nominate in the future, as I believe the list meets criteria. And you are absolutely right, for as much nominating as I do (I love generating FLs!) I need to offer more reviews or at least helpful comments. Thanks again for the reply, and thanks again generally speaking for all of the work you do at FLC and elsewhere. --Another Believer _(Talk) 22:46, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Signpost FLs

Thanks for the invite, but we're meant to be going on holiday at the weekend... if we get round to booking anywhere, that is! Tell you what, if I think I'm going to be around one weekend, I'll volunteer to be asked, if that makes sense. Yours, Bencherlite^Talk 11:19, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

• Sure, can do. Same staging area? Staxringold _talk^contribs 18:00, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
  • Great, thanks! Yes, at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2010-08-09/Features and admins there will be a "featured lists" section, and you can insert your blurb there. Dabomb87 (talk) 18:02, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Not really going to have time to look at the Rivington list before I go, alas. Ought to be packing right now, really... Bencherlite^Talk 19:42, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Halo?

Do you know anything about the Halo Series? Thanks CJISBEAST —Preceding unsigned comment added by CJISBEAST (talk • contribs) 05:39, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Not really. You may be interested in Wikipedia:WikiProject Halo. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:19, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Quick Question

Since I have withdrawn the FAC nomination (after all, I thought that was where to go to get articles critiqued, aside from the good article review), does that treat it as an unsuccessful FAC or can it still be nominated for peer review without the 14 day window? Had I realized peer review was there, I would have taken it there first before FAC or FLC - again, my first time trying to promote an article after doing little bits of editing here and there for a couple of years. =)

On a side note, I'm working with Frickative (who took a break on that one for about a month, according to the history) to get the article fixed up, so I will probably show a big interest in the peer review as well. I'll be in contact with her during and after the peer review before going to FLC. CycloneGU (talk) 15:39, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

I don't follow peer review closely; you may want to ask Ruhrfisch (talk · contribs). Dabomb87 (talk) 15:49, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Cheers. Will do. CycloneGU (talk) 15:57, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Got my answer on my talk page. If it's worked on after an FAC withdrawal, then it's all right. Just passing that on should you encounter the question again. =) CycloneGU (talk) 18:41, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Re: David N Seeloff

You absolutely called it on the CSD. I went ahead and chucked it out under A7. Thanks for letting me know! - Vianello (Talk) 23:02, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Cheers, and thanks for the quick response! Dabomb87 (talk) 23:02, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

FLC absense

FYI, I'm away for a while and have asked Chris to look after the tail end of an FLC (which I thought might have been finished by now). Anyway, sorry to do this and if anything big comes up feel free to withdraw on my behalf (hopefully it won't). Thanks, Rambo's Revenge (talk) 10:12, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Ciara discography/archive1

Hey Dabomb, hope you're well. The above FLC appears to have stagnated under the weight of opposition comments, the nominee appears to have lost interest. I won't re-visit or re-review until my remaining comments are resolved, and those of Legolas. And Werewolf is one of the supporters... The Rambling Man (talk) 16:54, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes I am still keeping up with it and the errors will be corrected soon. Candyo32 19:39, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Vis-a-vis Werewolf voting, I suggest we strike through any "votes" if the SPI proves to be valid. As for RFA, make sure you let me know when you're about to "launch".... (I'm really good at spoiling stuff....!) The Rambling Man (talk) 19:51, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

RFA?

I been looking at your contributions closely and I'm wondering if you are interested in an RFA. You are qualified for one. Thanks Secret ^account 17:51, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the offer. I've already had two editors, SandyGeorgia and Karanacs, agree to co-nominate me (see User talk:Dabomb87/Archive 23#If I have any admin TPSers...), and as soon as they are ready I will go through with it. Cheers, Dabomb87 (talk) 19:07, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

Hey thanks for reverting my edit...I'm still trying to get all of these policies down pat ya know? So thanks for pointing me out to WP:notnews. I appreciate it. Have a good one man. WrightisRight05 (talk) 04:25, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

You too. If you have any other questions about Wikipedia, please ask ... it's a big place, and the editing process can be more complicated than it looks! Dabomb87 (talk) 04:27, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Lost under the strain of accessibility.

Hi there, You'll probably know me from the FL nomination for Kelly Rowland discography. You'll notice on that discussion that an experienced user with 'professional experience' in ICT has commented on how the discography as well as the entire MOS:DISCOG project is blatantly violating new accesibility and general usability guidelines. This discussion has opened in detail at the talk page for MOS:DISCOG but has since branched off too at User talk:Jack Merridew#Kelly Rowland discography. The said user, one Jack Merridew, is proceeding to make significant changes to the article which in his view are better for accessibility and userbility. My main issue is that the article is quickly moving away from the standards set by other FL discographies e.g. Rihanna discography, Pink discography. It is slowly moving into a new standard of its own which I understand very little and I don't know what to do. I nominated and worked on the article but it appears to have been taken over and now I don't really know what part of MOS its working towards or based on. Perhaps its time that yourself and User:The Rambling Man also become involved in this and the generally wider discussion? If not at least some advice would be helpful. --Lil-unique1 (talk) 21:21, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

More discussion at User talk:Jack Merridew#Re: MOS --Lil-unique1 (talk) 21:42, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

First thing that strikes me: why is Wikipedia:WikiProject Discographies/style still marked as a "proposed" guideline? I've seen music editors left and right cite it as long-standing consensus, but it still has not been formally categorized as a style guideline. Anyway, I rather not get too involved, as I am no expert on web accessibility, and would prefer to stay neutral as I may have to close the FLC soon. I see that WP:ACCESS has been in flux (as some parts of the MOS tend to be frequently). With regard to the discography, I would advise you to go with local editorial consensus, and worry about conforming with the constantly changing guidelines when they stabilize. This same situation occurred with alternative text a few months ago, and many editors just gave up on alt text altogether because nobody could agree on how to write it correctly. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:08, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. So should I just conform to all the changes Jack is recommending even though I'm not sure where they are stemming from? If by local editorial consensus you mean MOS:DISCOG Jack has made it clear that if I was to do so I'd be breaking ALL MOS rules on wikipedia and he's made clear already that he's not adverse to reverting any edit of mine which trumps his understanding of MOS. So I'm confused as to where that leaves me and also as to where that leaves Kelly Rowland discography as, if I understood the comments/procedure correctly, is close to being passed? --Lil-unique1 (talk) 22:18, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

No, by "local editorial consensus" I was referring to editors who have been involved with this article, Kelly Rowland discography. For example, have you asked the editors who have already supported the FLC to comment on the accessibility issue? Dabomb87 (talk) 22:40, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

FLC nomination

Dabomb87, since you contributed to the article List of awards and nominations received by Up in the Air which is a child article to Up in the Air (film), I thought that you would like to know that JuneGloom07 Talk? , Courcelles (talk) and I nominated the article for FLC, cf Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of accolades received by Up in the Air/archive1. I would appreciate your considered comments on the nomination. --Dan Dassow (talk) 13:24, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

MS signs and symptoms

Hi

I am guessing that you either did not see or did not pay any attention to the GOCE tag at the top of the page and that is why I have just had the edit conflict ?

Chaosdruid (talk) 17:47, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Yikes, I'm sorry about that! To be honest, I got to the article through a section link, so I never saw the banners at the top at all. Feel free to overwrite my edits. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:50, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

No probs - I just wanted to draw your attention to avoid any more ECs - I normally do the dashes at the end, though, if I had done them first that might not have happened ... lol Chaosdruid (talk) 17:52, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Lists

Hey dude. So, you have a couple to close which I inadvertently voted in, plus it'd be interesting to see your thoughts on two sudden issues - the AFD of a current FL and the MOS issues brought up here by User:Jack Merridew. As ever, keep up the good work, I took the liberty to extend out your (and my) tenure at Matthew's useful closure page, by the way. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:47, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Oh, and what's happening with any RFA stuff that may involve you??! The Rambling Man (talk) 18:48, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Finally, this really isn't being dealt with so perhaps you could look it over and decide if it should continue to run. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:52, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

I often think a news ticker would be useful... I have noted the FLCs where you are "involved" and am waiting for existing reviews to finish up (or for new reviewers to opine) on those, seen and watchlisted the AfD and will comment there in due course, and commented on the WP:ACCESS issue (this RfD may also be of interest). Agree on the Ciara discog; will close tomorrow unless there are major developments there. As for the other ... thing, here. You've been doing well too, partner. Cheers, Dabomb87 (talk) 18:59, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Stephens City, Virginia

Hello, the Stephens City article is up for FAC and was reviewed by User:SandyGeorgia last night, apparently I had some reference problems (mostly italicizing incorrectly) but more importantly, prose problems. So, since fresh eyes help, is there anyway you could go through the article piece by piece and check it for prose. User:SandyGeorgia said she will check it again on Saturday. I asked User:Wehwalt (who have been actively helping me on this) prior and he recommended you. Thanks...Neutralhomer • Talk • 15:14, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Taking a look. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:25, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Finished copy-editing; commented at the FLC. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:14, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

First off, thank you for taking a look. :) I have addressed your concerns at the far bottom of the FAC page. Please let me know if there are any further questions or concerns, as I will be glad to tinker or edit more as necessary. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 16:29, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

FL Choice of the week

Hey there, I was taking a look at the FL promotions, and my initial thought was to choose Listed buildings in Rivington, but I see that a picture from it has already been included. Should I pick another one? Jujutacular ^talk 15:59, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

No, that's quite all right. We'll alter the caption to mention that you picked the list. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:00, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Ciara discography

Hi, I was wondering why you closed the FL discussion for Ciara discography. I was still working on resolving the errors and was still in progress of completing and had not stopped working on the discog. Candyo32 18:49, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

See my comment at the closure log. An FLC cannot continue indefinitely; it is not peer review. You can resubmit after you have addressed the remaining comments and the opposers have verified that their concerns have been resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:30, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Re:FLC

Yes, I am watching it, but I haven't had time to fix the things. I will get to it tomorrow.--LAAFan 23:40, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

WFC

It is kind of hard to edit when people come and start accusing me of sock-puppetry, hating on certain people for being from a certain place, and copyright violations (I haven't uploaded anything). Could you help, please? Augustus Loren 1982 (talk) 18:18, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Based on your contribution history, I can't blame WFC for drawing those conclusions. What do you expect me to do? Dabomb87 (talk) 18:32, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Jesus christ, you have any idea how many people are from South America? How many of us like our competitions? We might as well eliminate those pages and get it over with because it sounds like no one can edit them now. Any why did you erase all of my commentary of the feauture list page? Everything that I mentioned perfectly disregard everything he said (which was basically accusing wildly, as well as trying to find the smallest thing to shut this down). Why is he so keen in this list not making it to become a FL? Augustus Loren 1982 (talk) 18:41, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm disappointed but understand your position Dabomb. Regardless, I'm not going to waste this charity's money, or my time, by filing an SPI when a block is clearly warranted. In the interests of assuming innocence until the man wandering through the scene of the massacre waving a blood-covered sword is proven guilty, I will refrain from making further "allegations", have no further interaction with the user, and revert any attempt he makes to interact with me on any page other than this "FLC". Regards, --WFC-- 18:55, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

I just took a look at WP:SPI, and you're right, it would probably be a waste of time. However, I'm not an admin and I haven't interacted with the editor enough so I have asked the folks at WT:FOOTY to take a look. Dabomb87 (talk) 18:57, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks (didn't realise you weren't an admin!). --WFC-- 18:58, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

So basically...I am stuck between a hard and a rough place...I can't edit because editing is now, incredibly, forbidden. Why? If I do and I give some bad vibe, I might get kicked out for nothing. If I don't, I look guilty and might get kicked out for nothing...I am asking you as a FL director...is that how wiki treates newcommers?

BTW, WFC...I am the man waving that blood-covered sword...except that it was used in self-defense from a mob. That should teach you a little about appearances. Augustus Loren 1982 (talk) 19:06, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

I must say I also considered blocking this account as a sock (based on my limited familiarity with Jamen Somasu, sockpuppetry didn't seem unlikely), but I decided to give it a little more time; we'll see what the people at the football project have to say. AL1982, it is quite unusual for a newcomer to immediately start an FLC, and bound to cause suspicion—whether that suspicion is justified or not I'm not yet prepared to say. If the suspicion is incorrect, I am sorry. Ucucha 19:10, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Please...I'm a Marine. I work with computers and I have edited pages similar to wiki. I would have to give the taxpayers their money back if I can't figure this website out in a few hours.

Based on your comments at this talk page and the now-closed FLC, and your edits elsewhere, I am almost certain that you are not a newcomer. Wikipedians can extend their assumptions of good faith only so far, and you are near the end of that leash, I'm afraid. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:12, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, just let me know when you decide to give me the ax. People have told me about wiki and I have abstain myself from using a username because of a lack of interest. Now I know why.

BTW, this is the year 2010; that means that most people in the civilized world have touched a computer, know what a forum is, know what wapedia is and all those other wikiwannabe websites...I would be more amazed if someone came in and pretended not to know. Augustus Loren 1982 (talk) 19:17, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Your knowledge of Wiki processes goes past the standard familiarity, though. Here's my advice, take it or leave it (if you truly are not SuperSonic/Jamen, which I truly doubt at this point, disregard this): take a long break from Wikipedia. Don't even try to get around your block though socking or other means. If you can show that you are willing to be patient and learn from your previous mistakes, there will be editors who will be willing to let you return. By continuing this pattern of behavior though, you are eliminating the already-small chance you have to get back into the community's good graces. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:27, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

And how long will I have to wait? Six months? A year? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.217.79.77 (talk) 16:43, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, at least six months (see Wikipedia:Standard offer). But evading your block to ask your question is probably not a good idea. Dabomb87Public (talk) 17:23, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Seeing that I was banned for nothing, there was no other way to contact or message you. Besides, you are not even an admin so you can't help. When your opponent plays dirty, you play dirty, so you best ban every IP address in the southeast of the USA because I can use them all. 68.217.79.77 (talk) 19:18, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Can an admin please take a look at 68.217.79.77 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)? He is a sock of User:SuperSonicx1986, and needs to be dealt with. Dabomb87Public (talk) 19:11, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

 Done. Jujutacular ^talk 19:25, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks ... for some reason, every time I try to load ANI, the browser crashes, or I would have posted there instead. Sundays are the worst sometimes... Dabomb87Public (talk) 19:26, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Not a problem, you've got enough admin talk page stalkers to be okay ;) Jujutacular ^talk 19:31, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Did you know it takes about 18-23 seconds to get a new IP address this days? Or better yet...use someone else's? 74.232.219.228 (talk) 19:36, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Too slow...I already had another IP address by the time your buddy blocked the old one...although he probably blocked a good number of users also. 68.215.155.98 (talk) 19:44, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

If you need more FLC's so badly...

I'm drowning in work that is ready to nominate. Just saying. Courcelles 21:06, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Feel free to add another one. Your FLCs are usually low-maintainence, and you've done more than your share of reviews. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:25, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

...though on skimming quickly through just now I see that you are the nominator or co-nom on three FLCs, so perhaps it is better if you wait until at least one is closed. Cheers, Dabomb87 (talk) 04:42, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

List of Saw media

Hey. I was just wondering as to your reason for the closing the List of Saw media FLC. I am assuming it's because it was unedited for several days, which makes sense. However, I have corrected every single one of the commentor's complaints with the exception of a few things I have given select reasons and precedents for keeping. Therefore, I was wondering if you could take a look at the article from a non review standpoint and see if I have any reason to renominate? It would be greatly appreciated. If you feel there is substantial work to be done, I will take it over to Peer Review, although I haven't had any feedback on my previous PR for other articles. GroundZ3R0 002 06:23, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Considering you've now submitted the list three times to FLC, and it's been deemed not ready by each time, I would strongly advise you to go through some kind of peer review process first. Don't just slap the PR tag on the page and hope for a lot of good suggestions though; you need to actively seek out editors who can offer subject-specific advice. WikiProject Video Games is a large and active one, and if you look around I'm sure there will be plenty of users who would be happy to take a look (especially if you return the favor). Another good technique is to look at current video game FLs (see Wikipedia:Featured lists#Video gaming) and look at their page histories to identify editors with similar interests. Good luck! Dabomb87 (talk) 14:53, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Bucky O'Connor

Courcelles 18:02, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

TFA

Did you mean to remove Night from TFA, or was that an error? SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 18:38, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Strike that, I've seen your post now on talk. I couldn't figure out what had happened. I added it, went back to clarify something, and couldn't find it. :) SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 18:48, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Yep, sorry about that. It doesn't help that I'm on an unfamiliar laptop without a mouse (I always use one), which slows me down. Dabomb87Public (talk) 18:54, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

No worries, my fault, I should have checked the history as the first thing when I couldn't find it. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 19:04, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Hey, I noticed you listed my name at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Autopatrolled. Just wanted to say thanks. :) Zagalejo^^^ 07:43, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Dabomb87 (talk) 13:43, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Finally!!

I've started the RFA here Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Dabomb87. I'll ping Sandy to work on her conomination statement. In the meantime, feel free to add your statement and begin answering the questions. Let me know if you think my statement needs to be tweaked. I questioned whether to bring up the date-delinking, but I am pretty sure it will be brought up by someone if not addressed early on. If you plan to use that as an answer to one of your questions, I may remove it from my statement. Thank you for being patient...I feel bad that it took this long for Sandy and I to be ready, even though we were the ones encouraging you! Karanacs (talk) 17:23, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Phew. I was virtually unconscious through holding my breath for the last few weeks....! The Rambling Man (talk) 17:28, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

My apologies as well ... it's been one thing or another for both of us all summer! I'll work on it tonight, as I have way too much on my plate during the business day today. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:29, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Mind you, only 74 edits at portal talk... I'm not sure you're taking any of this seriously.... The Rambling Man (talk) 17:37, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Alright, thanks again. I've answered the three questions, and yes, I did mention the date-delinking case in question 3. Dabomb87 (talk) 18:03, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Should I transclude the RfA now? Dabomb87 (talk) 18:04, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Ack -- hang on -- if you want to transclude it now, let me pound out my co-nom. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:07, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Oh, no problem then. I can wait. Dabomb87 (talk) 18:08, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

I've tweaked my nom statement for what is hopefully the last time, so whenever Sandy is ready, we can go ahead. Karanacs (talk) 18:11, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

OK, ready to go-- I didn't write enough (pout), but Karanacs already covered it well! I'll be out most of the day. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:15, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Good luck! The Rambling Man (talk) 18:18, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Have transcluded. Thanks again for all your support. Dabomb87 (talk) 18:23, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

It's about time you filed an RFA! — Rlevse • Talk • 22:53, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Damn my laziness... like I said in my !vote, you've been on my radar since we interacted last year. I thought then that you would have made a great admin, but the ArbCOM case prevented me from noming ya. (I thought we had talked about it, but looking at yours and my talk pages I don't see any evidence that we had.) But I recall spending a fair amount of time reviewing your edits and some how missing the ArbCOM case until I was all but ready to ask you if you wanted to run.---Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 02:27, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

You did, see User talk:Dabomb87/Archive 9#I hope you are dumb enough. I miss seeing you around! Dabomb87 (talk) 02:30, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I have been planning on working on some of the newer poker articles and trying to bring them up to FLC calibre. I want to get the WSOPE Feature Topic back... but that means getting 2009's article to pass FLC and by the time that was done I might as well do the 2010 one which is just around the corner. Unfortunately, I have a sick wife and 3 kids under the age of 6 that keep me busy.---Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 03:02, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Holy Toledo, you made 100 in less than 24 hours! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:27, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

That must be a new record for speed. Now I'm just wondering if this will be a WP:200 event. —fetch·comms 21:48, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, but that "oppose", pretty convincing, dontchathink? I'm thinking about changing my opinion....... The Rambling Man (talk) 22:02, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Re: Your RfA question

I wasn't looking for a particular answer to the question, I was just curious to discover another editor's view on the subject. To be honest, if I had answered the question, my reply would have been pretty similar to yours. Perhaps Wikipedia should clarify its goal - to collate the sum of all useful human knowledge? Anyway, good luck in your RfA. Cheers, BigDom 19:13, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

And thanks again

For the unprompted cleanup of School for Creative and Performing Arts. I plan to take it to FAC this week and I appreciate having your expert help in advance. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 13:53, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

No problem, I just happened upon it and decided to make the tweaks now to save you from SandyGeorgia's wrath :) Dabomb87 (talk) 13:55, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Hey

I wrote on your Request for Admin page. Seems like your really popular on Wikipedia. Holy crap dude, you have 70 likes and nobody wrote anything against you. Good luck on the becoming an Admin man. CJISBEAST (talk) 15:36, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:37, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Welcome. Anytime man. CJISBEAST (talk) 15:47, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I just got your message and one from somebody else saying the same thing. CJISBEAST (talk) 15:50, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Higgs

Please help improve William G. Higgs. Tks. — Rlevse • Talk • 16:20, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Looks pretty good. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:25, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

List of Digimon video games

Hey, just wanted to apologize for not having replied on Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Digimon video games/archive1. I didn't revisit as I was on vacation :) I'm glad this didn't prevent the article from being promoted though. Jonathan Hardin' (talk) 11:50, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Input

Any input here: User_talk:Gadget850#List_of_Eagle_Scouts_.28Boy_Scouts_of_America.29.E2.80.8E_size ? — Rlevse • Talk • 13:39, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Dabomb87. You have new messages at Killervogel5's talk page.
Message added 16:43, 18 August 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/2009–10 Michigan Wolverines men's basketball team/archive1

Given your participation in Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/2008–09 Michigan Wolverines men's basketball team, I thought you might want to comment at Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/2009–10 Michigan Wolverines men's basketball team/archive1.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:26, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Hey

Getting away from the RfA (it's looking successful BTW, 170-2-1, so I offer a premature congrats!)...

Previously, when I nominated Glee (season 1) as an FA, we had a discussion on that page eventually delisting the nom. Frickative and I have both worked on the article since then through a peer review, and it's now under FLC following. A comment by Matthewedwards says the article might now qualify for FA with the recent changes. Frickative and I are currently considering whether to change the nomination back to FA, or proceed with FL first. While I won't ask you to do a full copy-edit (if you do, though, it's appreciated as well), would you mind taking a quick look and provide an opinion?

We've looked at a similar article that is already FA, which is Parks and Recreation (season 1) and the prose is a little smaller, but I am not entirely certain if it qualifies and wanted to ask someone more experienced. I've also asked a couple of the supporters from that review for opinions as well.

Your feedback is appreciated! CycloneGU (talk) 20:57, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi! First, thanks for the early congrats. Second, the article is looking a lot better than when I first saw it at FAC. The line separating a season "list" from a season "article" is extremely fuzzy, and I won't pretend to know the exact difference. That said, compared to most TV season FLs, Glee (season 1) definitely looks more like an article at this point. I think the length of the production section, the inclusion of information about the music, and the depth of the reception section is enough to make it an article at this point. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:06, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

First, saw the reply before seeing the Talkback template. *LOL*

Second, thanks for the encouraging comments. I will wait for feedback from the others I've asked before we make any determinations, but if we decide to move it to FAC instead, can we move the nomination as it is or do we have to delist and start over again? Also, should we let it finish FLC before moving to FAC? CycloneGU (talk) 21:12, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

If you to go to FAC now, that's quite alright. I wouldn't change the current FLC into an FAC; it's always better to start with a clean page. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:14, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Doppelganger account request

Hi, please confirm that you requested a doppelganger on ACC just a few minutes ago. Thanks, —fetch·comms 02:03, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Confirmed. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:04, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Created. Thanks, —fetch·comms 02:08, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Jerry West

I saw your recent note about West not being inducted as a contributor. Do you know which list he should be on? Thanks for you help. Cmcginni (talk) 17:28, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

West is listed at List of players in the Basketball Hall of Fame (see 1980). Dabomb87 (talk) 17:35, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Signpost choice

I made my choice and put it up there. I wasn't sure if you wanted me to do anything else. If you do, let me know. Thanks for the opportunity!! Makeemlighter (talk) 23:59, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Perfect, thanks. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:45, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Decided to be Funny

There have been no real serious opposes (other than the so-called "badge of honor" troll), so I put up a Fake Oppose while having already supported (youreplied to that one, #169). You're welcome to comment. =) CycloneGU (talk) 22:06, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Funny is good (RfA can be such an uptight environment, no?). You'll have to share the "fake oppose" honor with another editor, however :) Dabomb87 (talk) 22:10, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

RE: Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of awards and nominations received by Drake/archive1

I'm guessing that rule came up when I was having my wikibreak. If it wasn't, then I must have never heard of this rule for some unexplained reason. I usually wait 10 days until my next FLC nomination, and supports usually come within those 10 days, so I thought nominating this list now would be a good idea. If I violated a rule, then it should be reserved, so I'm guessing holding off the nomination would be a good idea. Thanks for the notice! --K. Annoyomous (talk) 22:33, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Replied on your talk. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:38, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Again, thanks for the notice. I still remember when I had ten FLC nominations some two years ago. Still laugh about it. Hope I'll be the first to congratulate you on your future adminship! --K. Annoyomous (talk) 22:46, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Nope, I got in a couple of days ago. =) CycloneGU (talk) 22:49, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

I saw this...

edit and wondered whether I would finally receive the support of dabomb? (since TRM always(?) takes care of footy stuff). More importantly, would a cap on GA nominations be something to consider, or do you only do in FACs? Sandman888 (talk) ^{Latest PR} 22:44, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

I actually used to review all sorts of FLCs (including football lists) back in the day. I'll try to take a closer look later. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:45, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean by "a cap on GA nomination". Dabomb87 (talk) 22:47, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I mean GA nominations. I understand the merits of a wikicup, I really do, but the effect of a sudden flood could be quite chilling on reviewers. Sandman888 (talk) ^{Latest PR} 22:51, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

I don't do much with GA, but the folk over there tend to like more freedom in the way the process is conducted; here's one such discussion, and I'm sure there's more. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:57, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

A recurring issue I see. just FYI, I proposed a cap when a topic is backlogged. I think the reasoning of FAC and FLC is equally applicable in GAN. Sandman888 (talk) ^{Latest PR} 23:06, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Your note

Yes, it was accidental. Damn iPhone; that's one of the few things I don't like about them -- it's easy to do that and that's probably the fourth or fifth time. Thanks for cleaning it up and letting me know. Mike Christie (talk) 22:59, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:59, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

User:67.136.117.132

Thanks for trying to clean up at Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship, but your fix to User:67.136.117.132's sig ironically obscures who wrote the comment, rather than clarifies. Anyone using popups who hovers over the original sig (as here) sees the information on his static (67. at work) user page that explains all, while after the fix all that the popups show is the blank user page for his dynamic (174. home) address. I guess that's why he arranges his sigs in that way. Hope that helps --RexxS (talk) 00:19, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

OK, sorry about that. Feel free to revert me. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:16, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Nah, it was just a heads-up on the unusual circumstances. Leaving it alone might avoid any friction with Jeff G. Premptive congrats on your RfA & best regards --RexxS (talk) 02:20, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Dabomb87 (talk) 02:21, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Wow

Thank you! Can't believe I did not know about it. He should have told me about it! I was helping him with the article beforehand. ResMar 02:55, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

I don't think the current article title is appropriate, but I'm unsure as to whether changing it to List of large volcanic eruptions or List of volcanic eruptions is more appropriate. What do you think? ResMar 03:05, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

To me, "List of volcanic eruptions" tells the reader it's a list of all notable volcanoes, whereas "List of large volcanic eruptions" seems to fit the scope of the list more (but shouldn't it be "List of largest volcanic eruptions", a la the tallest building lists?) Dabomb87 (talk) 03:10, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. The article needs some work to meet criteria, but it's somewhere close. FYI: I like getting requests, it makes me feel more important :) ResMar 03:17, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Ah, the redirect already exists. Once you get your mop tommorow, can you make your first admin action break the redirect and move the article? Page history needs preservation. Much appreciated, ResMar 03:19, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

I don't mind doing that (once I figure out how... doesn't look too hard), but would prefer that you seek consensus for it beforehand (at the FLC, if necessary). Dabomb87 (talk) 03:22, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I've posted it on the FLC. I'm pretty sure everyone whould agree that the current name is silly :) I have a question though, what is the standing on using "Table of" in article titles? Ae. Table of the ultra-prominent summits of the United States. ResMar 03:33, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Decided to be Funny (Follow-up)

Now they want to rip that badge of honor away. That troll apparently doesn't count as a !vote. =D

Sorry, I just like amusing things in serious discussions like this. =) And I'm observing with two four hours to go before you're officially an admin. CycloneGU (talk) 14:41, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Grrrats!

OK, I'm a bit early, but allow me to be the first on your talk page to wish you a big ol' congrats on your Rfa, which is the most lopsided vote in favor I can recall in the past year! Best wishes always, Jusdafax 15:06, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

You weren't first. XD CycloneGU (talk) 15:55, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I beat you both. I was requesting his first admin action above :) ResMar 16:57, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

My post was at 20:57, 20 August 2010, and I asked his opinion on something myself, so I still disagree. But why are we arguing over this? =) CycloneGU (talk) 20:15, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Watchlisted?

I don't like using a talkback template, and I don't know if you happened to have watchlisted my other IP's talkpage, so just letting you know that I replied there. 67.136.117.132^{Also 174.52.141.138}15:48, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Dabomb87. You have new messages at Imagine Wizard's talk page.
Message added 23:12, 23 August 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Thanks! Imagine Wizard (talk • contribs • count) Iway amway Imagineway Izardway. 23:12, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Supernatural

Hi Dabomb87 sorry for not siting my recent editing work I did on Supernatural Season 6 I got all my information from IMDB but just so you realize some of the current information you have on the Supernatural Season 6 that you reverted back to isn't right for one Jensen Ackles is currently only confirmed to have directed Episode 4 of Season 6 not Episode 5, an Robert Singer has only been confirmed to have directed Episode 3 of Season 6 not Episode 1 because Episode 1 will be directed by Phil Scigrcia, Episode 3 is also written by Ben Edlund. Also the Live Free Twi Hard Episode thats currently a working title for one of the episodes this season we just don't know which one yet.

From Supernatural Fan Editor —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.165.193.102 (talk) 03:42, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

I didn't actually revert your edits. You may wish to discuss the issue with User:Ophois. Regards, Dabomb87 (talk) 03:44, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the Help.

From Supernatural Fan Editor —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.165.193.102 (talk) 03:42, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Liz West

Thank you for the kind offer to start the AFD - I'll take you up on it. 69.181.249.92 (talk) 03:46, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for granting me the rollback tool, just tried it and it will certainly be useful to revert vandalism. Also, congratulations on becoming an admin. Cheers! — Martin tamb (talk) 12:15, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, and no problem. Dabomb87 (talk) 12:16, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Congrats

Congratulations!

It is my great pleasure to inform you that your Request for Adminship has closed successfully and you are now an administrator! Useful Links: • Administrators' reading list • Administrators' how-to guide • • Administrator's Noticeboard • Administrator's Noticeboard for Incidents • Administrator's Noticeboard for 3RR • IRC admin channel (#wikipedia-en-admins connect) Your admin logs: • blocks • deletions • moves • protects • uploads •

Congrats! Very impressive! — Rlevse • Talk • 18:19, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Fantastic! Enjoy, but not too much... Bencherlite^Talk 18:23, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Milk, two sugars. Or tea with lemon. (Didn't you know, junior admin buys caffeine!) Enjoy the new buttons, you'll be fine. Courcelles 18:28, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Congrats! I'm sure you'll do well. Hope you're enjoying your shiny new mop! Dana boomer (talk) 18:32, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Congrats! Here's a cookie for you:

King of Hearts has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can Spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:42, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Now that it's official...git to werk! And all that stuff. Um...well, I said congrats three days ago, I now say it officially! CycloneGU (talk) 20:22, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Grats. Connormah 20:29, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

188-0? Blimey, that's impressive! Anyway, congrats, and if you need any mopping help, feel free to give me a shout. GedUK  20:38, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations. :) - JuneGloom07 Talk? 20:51, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks all! Dabomb87 (talk) 20:57, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations from me as well on an incredibly successful RFA. Best of luck, Tyrol5 [Talk] 21:08, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Damn it! I'm the eleventh! Congrats on your adminship! --K. Annoyomous (talk) 21:24, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

• Congratulations. That makes you the most supported RfA in almost a year, the most supported of 2010 so far and the 12th most successful RfA ever. :) Very impressive. If you need anything, just shout! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:53, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
• Congrats, and you managed to avoid that one damn pesky oppose! I would wish you luck, but seeing as you managed to pull off a unanimous RfA, I'm not sure why you would possibly need it. Regards, Swarm^Talk 02:51, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
• Well done YellowMonkey (new photo poll) 04:02, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Here's your free T-shirt!

• Congrats! Try on this t-shirt and see if it fits. ~NSD (✉ • ✐) 13:21, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
• Random factoid - You have the highest support tally for any unopposed RfA. Master&Expert (Talk) 09:19, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank semi-spam

Thanks for your support in my successful RfA, and belated congrats on your own! Cheers, Nikkimaria (talk) 14:24, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Congrats, and thanks! Dabomb87 (talk) 14:26, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

JTSL - Eliminated

I would like to know why did you eliminated the site JTSL from the wiki?

There are several companies with sites in the Wikipedia. Even smaller ones like hotels and hostals like: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostal_de_los_Reyes_Catolicos

This company isn't different. I posted public information, there was no publicity, only stating that exists —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pedro Tarrinho (talk • contribs) 14:58, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi Pedro. I deleted your article because it did not demonstrate how the company is important or significant, as per our notability guidelines. Articles are considered "notable" if they receive significant mention in reliable third-party sources (such as major newspapers or peer-reviewed journals). If you would like to improve the article to meet Wikipedia standards for inclusion, I would be happy to restore the article to a page in your userspace (User:Pedro Tarrinho/JTSL), where you can improve the article to Wikipedia standards. Once you have done so, feel free to ask me or any other administrator to look at the article and decide whether the article can be moved back to the article space. Regards, Dabomb87 (talk) 21:32, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Congrats!

Congratulations on becoming an Admin!! CJISBEAST (talk) 23:45, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! Dabomb87 (talk) 23:46, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Stale?

I don't understand why you reached the consensus of stale regarding IP 86.7.134.158 . He has repetitively added unsourced material to the pages. I've made personal comments about it on his page on WHY he should add sources, gave him warning, reverted his edits with an edit summary stating that you need sources, and maybe more. Yet he has yet to talk about it to me or debate to why his edits are OK. He just keeps on adding more and more unsourced material to these articles and ignores every single thing I say to him. So please explain to me why the consensus was stale. Thank you. Heavydata (talk) 03:29, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

By the time I looked at the request, the IP had not edited for about three hours, which suggests he/she may have given up, thus making any block useless (and certainly not preventative) at that time. If you think I was in error (or if the IP pops up again), feel free to re-request at WP:AIV or WP:ANI. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:52, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

User:Cook.gj/Sandbox/Distress radiobeacon

Thanks for you note. I was trying to keep that page private, using my sandbox to draft all the rework this article needs. Just so we're clear, was my error was leaving the off the "User:" at the start of the link?

Also, if I give another user (who is helping me out) this link, will they be able to see and edit it or is it private?

Thanks again for your help. (Cook.gj (talk) 05:32, 25 August 2010 (UTC))

Yep, it was just the "User:". As to your second question, anyone can see your second link and be able to edit that page. Cheers, Dabomb87 (talk) 12:36, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Ad aware.

[1]

The 1 line I added was compliant !

Keeping finding new excuses to remove what I added does not make it less true.

The ends justify the means eh ? First it was seen as an opinion from me ? It is not. It not being ironic... the one that said that needs a dictionary. Then they said my sources were created by me? Not true in the least..

I have added enough material to prove without a doubt the veracity of that 1 line. If the party in question admits it being there , why would i need a third party source , which there are ! Even testemony from numerous people.

I even started a discussion about the whole thing , people didn't takle the time to coontribute and just kept blanking.

Is the one that complains the quickest the one that is right?

This is nothing more than harassment and ganing up on me from a couple of regulars who know eachother. Sad Sad Sad

--

If you know something is true , have enough facts and date about it , proof and sources , how would you go about adding it?

I kindly ask you to just do it for me.. add 1 fact to the ad-aware article.. read up about it from the links I gave .. Add it in your own words , really i don't care ... Ad-Aware pops up popup messages advertising lavasoft products and more , even flowers on mother's day.

Tell me , show me , how to add that to wikipedia in a way that is acceptable.. and i dont mean to add it in a way that will please everyone that reads it.. A majority will not make truth ! Enough people denying the fact the earth is a splere will not flatten it !

Show me how it's done. Show me how to get an unpopular truth into wikipedia..

[2] [3]

Kind regards.

83.101.79.86 (talk) 21:34, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi. The threshold for inclusion of material on Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. In addition, when multiple users disagree with your edits, the normal course of action is to discuss them on the talk page and gain consensus first instead of "edit-warring" to push your version through. As for getting involved in the actual dispute, that would be inappropriate, as I am the protecting admin. Regards, Dabomb87 (talk) 21:39, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

A link to the ad-aware forum , where an employee explains to why they added popup ads is not enough ? 83.101.79.86 (talk) 21:44, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

As I said before, I would rather not be involved in the dispute. Even if the claim is referenced to a reliable source (and not all editors believe that forum posts are reliable), you still need to gain consensus for its mention. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:46, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

How can you wash your hands of this ..

I add a part to the article which i think is relevat , someone blanks it out , saying it is merely my opinion. I start a discussion , by the book , stating why it is not . It gets blanked again with the reason that it's not ironic , which then i explained the meaning of ironic in the discussion , etc etc.. Where in the end , you revert it to what it was befor i contributed and lock it. That last action involved you .

As i said , the ends justoify the means , where this article is suposed to be an advert for the "lavasoft ad aware" product and not an article with multiple points of view.

This fact is not emportant enough for people to write a book about , a discussion forum thread stating the thing , and multiple people commenting about it will be the most that will ever gets written about it. I am currently looking all over to find anything else that can be seen as a source , and discussions on forums is all I can find .

I kindly ask that the article be returned to it's state before they started blanking that line out , and they be asked to contribute to the dizscussion as to why I should be seen as the vandal here and not them.

I will do my best to find extra sources , every time i find one that i think would be acceptabele i will add it to the discussion part and ask you to review it and revert my addition to the article with the added source.

Kind regards 83.101.79.86 (talk) 22:06, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

I did not revert your edit, check the history. If you cannot find any mention of the fact in a reliable source (reputable news site, magazine etc.), then perhaps it is not worthy of inclusion. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:11, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

FAC and travel

Dabomb, Karanacs is still out, and I am unlikely to have much time online between now and Sunday (29 August); if you see any withdrawals or obvious drivebys, pls feel free to close or archive them yourself, or let me know on my talk if anything needs my urgent attention, as I will be checking in as I'm able. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:26, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Will do. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:03, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Dabomb87. You have new messages at Giftiger wunsch's talk page.
Message added 21:48, 26 August 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Time Machine (software)

Thanks for moving the article. Its talk page at Talk:Time Machine (Apple software) also needs to be moved, though (and any subpages that it has, which in this case I don't think it has any). Thanks again! Gary King (talk · scripts) 02:44, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Done. If you need anything else moved in the future (assuming it's uncontroversial), just ask me. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:46, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Not urgent - cleanup listings

bonjour, i don't suppose you know anyone who could help out getting this revived: User:WolterBot? Tom B (talk) 03:42, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't. Perhaps someone at Wikipedia:Bot requests or WP:VPT can help out? Dabomb87 (talk) 03:52, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

righto, i'll ask at some point. someone asked at bot requests before and they said they'd need the source code. maybe we could get the code of the original bot operator though i don't know if he's contactable. bit of a shame as it's a pretty useful tool. Tom B (talk) 03:57, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

"Elnec" deletion

Hello,

I can see you deleted a wiky page I created /wiki/Elnec - 21:48, 25 August 2010 Dabomb87 (talk | contribs) deleted "Elnec". I can understand partly your concerns and this action. However, the page was online nearly a year and I believe it is appropriate for inclusion. Longer time I was not online, that is why I did not react to deletion messages. Elnec is really known worldwide and I believe after my improvements page will satisfy notability guidelines. Please give me chance to improve the page and make it undeleted.

Pssstpssst —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pssstpssst (talk • contribs) 07:25, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

OK, I have restored it to a userspace page at User:Pssstpssst/Elnec. When you have edited the article to meet Wikipedia's guidelines for inclusion, please let me or another administrator know and we'll be happy to reconsider moving the article back into namespace. Please note that all Wikipedia articles must be neutral in tone and be referenced mainly to reliable secondary sources (reputable news sites, magazines, academic journals, etc.). Dabomb87 (talk) 13:37, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I have updated the text and added several references. Please have a look.. Pssstpssst 14:34, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

May be worth half an eye

User:1930fwc (c). As of this post there's every reason to assume good faith, but look at the content of the first 10 edits, and the timing. ("Augustus Loren" a.k.a. Jamen was banned that same day). No grounds to wade in based on the meaningful edits he's made, but definitely worth a quiet eye. Regards, --WFC-- 23:56, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Quite. The first edit after the initial ten (almost certainly an attempt to gain "autoconfirmed" rights) is very telling. Will keep an eye. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:58, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

That's why I'm leaning towards pending changes on these lists. Reasons are fourfold:

1. 1. IPs are extremely useful over there, and a string of Eastern European and South American leagues are about to finish.
2. 2. Reviewers and admins generally know how to get someone disruptive blocked extremely quickly.
3. 3. It would be extremely naive to think that the user has enough of a life not to have created dozens of these accounts, rendering semi-protection useless.
4. 4. Since last week, progress on the UEFA list has practically stalled, primarily on the "why ******g bother" grounds (I'm simply making enough token progress to ensure it doesn't get delisted/to piss him off, I openly admit to having no motivation right now). If I knew there was a watertight way of not needing to interact with Jamen on those lists, it would return. --WFC-- 00:11, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm willing to try pending changes, once the semi-protection ends in a couple days. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:20, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Good call. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:01, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Any way to help

I'm starting to feel like a leech on FLC. Is there any way I can help out? I would be an extremely horrible reviewer. Trying to think of things.... work with Ucucha on checking dab and external links? Run AWB on an article? Anything else?

Also congrats (condolences?) on being made an admin. I'm paying Jujutacular $50 to his/her swiss account for every support. I guest you will be doing it too. Egads, FLC is getting expensive :) Bgwhite (talk) 07:33, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Why not try doing some reviews anyway? You might either find a new area you'd like to write/research, or just learn things that will make your own FLCs go smoother. By the way, I paid for my RFA supports in Third Zimbabwean Dollars; everyone got to be billionaires while I didn't have to skip lunch ;) Courcelles 07:38, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

I don't have expensive tastes, but a week-long vacation to Europe (all expenses paid) would be fine :) In all seriousness, doing reviews is probably the best thing you can do to help out; not only does it help to bring other lists to featured status, it helps you to become more critical and observant of your own mistakes in creating lists. If reviewing not your thing, we always need more FLRCs. Plenty of FLs don't meet the current standards, and a good number of them are listed at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Task force. Find one that stands out to you as especially deficient, and nominate it at FLRC. Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 14:01, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you both for your response. You really don't want me doing reviews... There is a reason I went into math and computers. Also, in my responses to people, I can come across as hostile. I will take a deeper look at FLRCs and the task force page after the weekend. Maybe trying to bring a page on the task force page upto standards would be good... several articles look interesting and something I could do. Bgwhite (talk) 16:22, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, the best FLRC is the one we never have to have. Choose judiciously, though, there are a decent number on the list that won't survive FLRC for reasons totally unrelated to their present condition. 3B is especially hard to fix by editing; for those it can almost be just waiting for someone to bother opening an FLRC. Courcelles 16:29, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Featured sounds

Just FYI, I promoted a slew of featured sounds today (which doesn't happen often). Thought there might be a place in the Signpost for them. Jujutacular ^talk 22:06, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the update. I'll let Tony know; he can probably do better job than I of writing up blurbs. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:08, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Would that be an N&N item or a Dispatch :) ResMar 22:10, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Young Jonii

Im recreating the page Young Jonii in my user page.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sunhawken (talk • contribs) 04:52, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Dabomb87. You have new messages at Endofskull's talk page.
Message added 16:53, 28 August 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

LOL

I hope you are ready to stay up all night, you fucking neanderthal. That UEFA list page is getting vandalized for the whole night when that protection expires in two hours. I'm bored with nothing to do and you are my perfect form of enterntainment. Get ready, bitch! I have enough IP addresses to last for weeks lol —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.145.92.124 (talk) 20:55, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Good to go! September 11 it is! I have a few dozen accounts now; I can probably squeeze in a few more in the next few hours. Meanwhile, I will have fun with some other pages...ones you seem to like. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.219.249.7 (talk) 21:18, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Justin Bieber awards

Thanks for contributing to the merge discussion at Talk:List of awards and nominations received by Justin Bieber. If you have the chance, please comment on how the information should be merged to the Justin Bieber article. Regards, –Chase (talk) 21:57, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Time to update Project Discography/Style

With regards to all the recent developments for discographies your comment at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Discographies/style#Time to update would be appreciated. -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 (talk2me) 22:08, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion request declined

OK, will do, thanks for letting me know Kneale (talk) 01:20, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Combo Guard

Can you move this to Combo guard? The second word should be in lower case. Thanks—Chris!_c/t 02:18, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Done. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:41, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Category removed

Why was the category removed in this revision? -- Wavelength (talk) 16:11, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedia is used only for actual articles about Wikipedia, whereas this page is used for its administration. Try a subcategory in Category:Wikipedia administration instead. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:12, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. I added two other categories. Does the same reason apply to Category:Lists of popular pages by WikiProject also?

—Wavelength (talk) 17:42, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Not wanting to burden you with this question, I have gone ahead and edited Category:Lists of popular pages by WikiProject, to match the two latest changes to Wikipedia:Lists of popular pages by WikiProject.—Wavelength (talk) 14:41, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Looks good (sorry for forgetting to reply). Dabomb87 (talk) 14:42, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you.—Wavelength (talk) 14:47, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist

Dabomb, I’ve got a white-list request (#examiner.com / Frank Sherosky that has languished for three days with no attention at MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist. That is a page where wikipedians can request that a particular page on a blacklisted site be un-blocked (whitelisted). The site currently has a hat statement that reads “This page has a backlog that requires the attention of one or more administrators. Please remove this notice when the backlog is cleared.” Can you look into this? Greg L (talk) 17:18, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi Greg, unfortunately I know next to nothing about the spam pages, but I have asked another administrator to help out. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:30, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Dabomb87. You have new messages at Stifle's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

What is the

length of days between two nominations by a same user? Because this seems totally premature, seeing that the nominater already has another list up for FLC, which is failing anyways. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 08:46, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm going to archive the albums discography today, anyway. As to whether the singles discography FLC is premature, that's a different question. I'll take a look in the evening. Dabomb87 (talk) 12:53, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

There's no mandatory "gap" required between two unsuccessful nominations, however. Dabomb87 (talk) 12:54, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Ahh ok Dabomb. Just checking since a similar rule is there at FAC, where a mandatory 14 days gap is needed. Thanks. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 03:52, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations and apology

I'm so happy that you passed RFA! I suspected from the beginning that the result would be pretty close to what it turned out to be. I do apologize for essentially abandoning you halfway through, but I knew Sandy could take care of anything that came up. Anyway, you're one of the good guys, and I think the tools will prove to be a help in your delegate work - I'm glad you finally got them. Karanacs (talk) 16:43, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Rollback

I think you made a mistake using rollback of 68.219.42.148 post to Wizardman talk page, I was fooled by the IP revert of you. Thanks Secret ^account 23:24, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

OK. He is a sockpuppet of SuperSonicx1986 (talk · contribs), but on balance there are better ways to deal with the disruption than continual reverts. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:27, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Ok I didn't know Secret ^account 23:36, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

On that note, I'm unfamiliar with the procedure, but I presume that File:Flamengo-Libertadores 1981.PNG is a copyvio? --WFC-- 23:40, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Yep, Courcelles (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) deleted it per CSD criterion F3. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:48, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Is there a "heads-Up" process?

I'm not familiar enough with RPP processes to know what to do if there's a possible need, not yet manifested. I took a quick look and didn't see any such requests.

this announcement by Lomborg may be viewed as a bombshell, so it would be wise to keep an eye out at Bjørn Lomborg. I've made one edit to include the material in the lead, but it ought to be properly added to the body. It is very possible that um, strong opinions about how to include it will occur.

Seems to me that we don't do protective protection, and that's fine, but if there's a better way to urge some to keep an eye on it, please let me know.--SPhilbrickT 23:35, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately, there is not. However, a note at relevant WikiProject would not go amiss. Also, I'm sure these articles receive a higher-than-usual level of scrutiny due to the ongoing climate-change dispute. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:43, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the answer.--SPhilbrickT 09:37, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Upcoming TFAs

I assume it's just an oversight, but I've already done them and they should be move=sysop. You might want to go back and fix them. :) Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts?

Done, thanks and sorry :) Dabomb87 (talk) 00:47, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Hey, if I had a penny for every time I've cocked up, I'd be a rich man! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:51, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Mariah Carey albums discography FLC

Hello. I do not understand why you failed the nomination. I corrected all of the concerns the other editors had. At least let me notify them to leave their final response. I mean, every issue that was mentioned was dealt with, so why is it failed.?--PeterGriffin • Talk 01:10, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

There were multiple opposes, many of which were legitimate concerns about issues (such as 3b) that need wider attention outside FLC. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:47, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

I don't agree, I addressed all the issues that each editor had. They just never had the decency to comment back like I asked. There were no such issues as you mentioned. At least let me ask the editors to express their final opinions.--PeterGriffin • Talk 02:01, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Reviewers are often busy people, and it's your responsibility as nominator to ask them to revisit the nomination. The consensus among reviewers was that 3b was a problem; even if the split was agreed to a few months ago, consensus can change, so perhaps you should revisit the split vs. merge debate. If you feel that my closure was a grave mistake, feel free to ask the community for wider input at WT:FLC. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:12, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Firstly, the only reason I did not ask reviewers to comment back on the page is because thought it was against the rules, and feared it would possibly disqualify the nomination. Please, at least give the nomiation another 24 hours to get straightened up. Ill make sure to have it sorted out by then. All I ask is for 1 more day.--PeterGriffin • Talk 02:26, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

The FLC is not likely to be "straightened up" and ready to be promoted in 1 day (and it probably would not be for at least a week). Please try to resolve the concerns outside FLC. In addition, you just submitted another FLC, Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Mariah Carey singles discography/archive1, so I think you should tend to that one for now instead of trying to juggle multiple noms at a time. The FLC instructions clearly say editors "should not add a second FL nomination until the first has gained support and reviewers' concerns have been substantially addressed" (emphasis mine). Dabomb87 (talk) 02:31, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Logical question (for Peter, not Dabomb)... if reviewers, including myself, opposed the albums discog on 3B, what makes you think the singles one won't meet the same reception? This is why I like to prepare different kinds of lists for FLC in sequence, so that by the time the next of one type is ready, I've had time to incorporate feedback from the last one into the next list, and hopefully only have to clean up things that are there because I suck at copy-editing my own prose. I'll monitor the situation instead of rushing to oppose the singles list, but the a better course of action would have been to go back to the talk page and rediscuss a merge, instead of opening another FLC. Courcelles 02:45, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Now this goes for Courcelles. You and Dan Dassow are the only 2 edtiors that have expressed an interest in "a merge," 6 editors (now including Lakeshade as he expressed) do not agree. What more is there to discuss about it? You would like to fail the FLC simply because you disagree over a merge. The article meets the given criteria, thats a fact, and if you had any other concerns I would have dealt with them up front. Now to Dabomb, I was told by Legolas the rule was to have a "14-day interval in between nominations", which I had 14 days and 2 hours, so I didn't break any rule whatsoever. Now I disagree, and feel there is no fair reason to not promote the article. I'm here being told that the article will not be promoted (nor the new one) because 2 editos do not agree with a 8 month old "merging consensus." Forgive my language, but thats Bull-shit.--PeterGriffin • Talk 03:14, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

There is no such interval; Legolas has mistakenly applied the FAC instructions to FLC. As I said before, if you believe my closure was in error you are welcome to make your case to User:The Rambling Man (the other FLC director) or the general FL community at WT:FLC. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:18, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, I trusted an experienced editor, so yes my fault, won't happen again. Honestly Dabomb, I really am pissed and disgusted at the lack of support and everything else here on Wikipedia and FLC. Someone presents one hell of an article, and editors just write Oppose because of a grammar problem, and then once it's fixed, just leave it hanging. I'll tell you why, because the whole system is unfair, people shoot down great opportunities, because so many have no decency. I'm now being told the FLC failed because of a merge that was discussed with a consensus months ago, with no proof of any other issues. I'm sorry, but its BS and I don't support, its a shame, and I as an editor would never treat someones work or nomination in such a fashion.--PeterGriffin • Talk 03:25, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

unRollbacker

Would you mind removing my rollback rights? You probably recall the last time you posted on my talk page, but if not, see the most recent post there for the reason why. Thanks. Mike Christie (talk) 01:12, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Done. Let me know (or just re-request at WP:RFP/R) if you want them back. Cheers, Dabomb87 (talk) 01:44, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Mike Christie (talk) 01:55, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Re:Second look?

Hello, Dabomb87. You have new messages at Fastily's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-FASTILY ^(TALK) 04:40, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Image issue

Hi -- sorry to bug you again but I'm guessing you'll know the answer to this quickly. File:Fakhria.jpg is taken from this NYT page; it was posted by User:Timothymarskell (whose talk page is a sad story, if you haven't seen it; this copyright issue is further evidence that that's an impostor). I don't deal much with copyrighted images; does one simply post a speedy notice in a situation like this, or is there a way to tag it for review and later deletion? I won't be back on WP till tonight so I won't respond for a while. Thanks for any help. Mike Christie (talk) 12:27, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I've deleted it as a copyvio. Dabomb87 (talk) 13:29, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Kesha discography

Hi, I'm just wondering something. This is in no way an accusation or bad-faith, I'm really just wondering. I've noticed you've left editors messages, telling them to "please comment back on the nomination page, and express support, neutral or oppose." Well I was wondering why you couldn't do that to my FLC, as that was the problem? would it have killed you to give me the same courtesy, to help sort the page out? It seems that page has more of your support than mine had, unfortunately.--PeterGriffin • Talk 16:30, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

I try to leave messages for reviewers whenever I get the time, but that is certainly not my obligation. My apologies if it seems I'm favoring one FLC or the other, because that is not the case. Also, not all reviewers need to "revisit" the nominations because there's not much that could change their opinion (e.g. 3b opposes). Dabomb87 (talk) 21:10, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

That's fine. Although I find it ridiculous that the articles are being shot down because of a merge that was decided through consensus months ago. I mean, take a look at Madonna's discographies, they are both FL and the same length. Why aren't they or didn't they fair the same issues?--PeterGriffin • Talk 22:40, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

RFA congrats

Congratulations on your new position! I absolutely would've supported, I've just been out of commission between moving and no internet at home as the account gets set up! Staxringold _talk^contribs 17:37, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Dabomb87 (talk) 21:12, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for cleaning up the mess I made trying to fix a copy-paste move on Jake Taylor. I'm going to review and figure out the correct way to do that in the future. –Grondemar 01:59, 1 September 2010 (UTC)