User talk:Dabomb87/Archive 29

Archive 25

←

Archive 27

Archive 28

Archive 29

Archive 30

Archive 31

→

Archive 35

In case it's important

I just semi-protected your public account user page for excessive vandalism. If you want the protection undone or extended, let me know. It was all over my Huggle screen so I pulled the trigger. If you don't want me butting in, I understand. See ya Tiderolls 01:58, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:16, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

I forgot you were an admin (and I supported you :^\) and that you were capable of handling this on your own. I often have cause to regret burning all those brain cells in my youth. Tiderolls 15:27, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

No problem. Congrats to your Tide, by the way. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:22, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

List of battleships of the Ottoman Empire

Well the last issue has been addressed and all who commented have now supported the nomination. I think that the FLC is now warped up. Is there is anything else that you need me to attend to just let me know.--White Shadows ^{We live in a beautiful world} 02:52, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll probably read FLC in the next couple of days. In the meantime, can you ask Sturmvogel to revisit? Dabomb87 (talk) 15:50, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

He has, and he has supported the nomination.--White Shadows ^{We live in a beautiful world}03:06, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Ah, I missed it the first time. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:07, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of 5grs

Hello! You have deleted the entry 5grs immediately, without 'speedy deletion' or any prior warning. The reason of deletion you had provided were "A7: Article about a band, singer, musician, or musical ensemble that does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject (CSDH)" Could you please provide SINGLE reason that the band isn't significant? (Not of course regarding record label while official publication of Rock music is illegal in their country)

Thank you for your time, and please either provide more specific reason of deletion, or rollback the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sx19216811 (talk • contribs) 09:45, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi Sx. I deleted the article because the article did not make a strong enough assertion of notability per Wikipedia:Notability and WP:BAND. In accordance with your request, however, I have restored the article to your userspace (User:Sx19216811/5grs) so that you can improve it. You may move it back to mainspace whenever you feel it's ready, but be aware that it could be deleted again. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:29, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I'll try to improve the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sx19216811 (talk • contribs) 09:45, 3 January 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.208.151.78 (talk)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Santana discography/archive2

Resolved

 – -- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 16:59, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

hello,

could I add another list to the FLC, without withdraw this disco? That's because User:AlastorMoody didn't address since 12th December, but he is "very willing to reconsider, I'm fair don't worry", he wrote in his comment there. I think he will come back to this FLC, but I won't wait so long until he write something back. Is this possible? Thank you.-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 10:52, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Spencer Day, review of the deletion?

‎He Dabomb87, You deleted today Talk:Spencer Day as (G10: Attack page or negative unsourced BLP that serves no purpose but to threaten or disparage its subject (CSDH)). The IP adding it however seems to be sincere (this time/this user), and (although I am not sure the sources are good enough) there is at least a basis for a discussion. Could you review your deletion -I have not seen it before it was deleted...- and see if it really qualifies as an page serving only to "threaten and to disparage"? L.tak (talk) 18:02, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

In the meantime I've done some editing of the entry and started its talk page once more. Hope it passes muster. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 21:30, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

You're absolutely right. I'm not sure what I saw there; I was quite tired (which is nevertheless no excuse for my slip-up). I've restored those two revisions. Thanks for calling me out. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:23, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

No problem!; possibly the older IP's talk page warnings in the same area contributed to the decision... L.tak (talk) 06:46, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Ergun Caner

Hey, maybe you also can have a look at the version I proposed, at User:Drmies/caner. The main 'other' editor already has agreed to it, I believe--please look at Talk:Ergun Caner for their comments. I am interested in having a more inclusive version put up quickly, to hopefully have the article go back to normal again soon. Courcelles and I both fear, however, that the article will stay contentions and subject to non-neutral edits. I am sure, however, that you will check in on it twice a day, until you retire from Wikipedia. ;) Drmies (talk) 21:40, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Good work. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:38, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Dabomb87. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (embedded lists).
Message added 11:51, 7 January 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

List or article? (part 486)

Hey; this is for either you or a TPS you would have a definitive answer. I saw Modern Family (season 1) at GAN, and my first thought was that season articles are typically always directed to FLC. However, there is a lot written in article format about the season, with episodic content being minimal, so one could argue that it's an article rather than a list. Should I send this over to the FLC crew? Or, for that matter, maybe I should ask on the FLC talkpage, but I figure I may get a clearer answer here. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 21:02, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

In comparing this article with other GAs, the structures seem to be similar, but the GAs tend to be more fleshed out. I don't see a significant difference between Modern Family and Holby City (series 1), for example, except that the plot summaries in the latter are much longer. I think you should ask over at WT:FLC for more input. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:41, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

National Assessment Bank

Dear Dabomb87,

I ask you to stop editing the National Assessment Bank page! You may think it is nonsense, so do I but it is the truth, I am giving you your first warning. Also when you reply, I expect a reply on YOUR page! not mine, or any BAN comments! as that is what the Wikipedia guidelines state. Any failure to comply with that, shall be reported as vandalism acts. Also I am sorry that my IP address can just keep changing, it is not a proxy server, it is the fact that the router is universal. Hello, which is also vandal want to become? Thanks Again,

Sir Peter A. Bert

Timestamp. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:56, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Timeline of the 2004 Pacific hurricane season/archive1

I respectfully disagree with your closure. Hurricanehink never got back to me (AFAIK) on one of the concerns he had raised and I believe I have alleviated. If possible, I would have preferred additional opinions as well, as Hink's oppose was the only (!)vote that was not neutral and, like I said, I believe I have addressed his concerns. --Dylan620 ^{(t • c • r)} 01:57, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi Dylan. The FLC had already been open for more than 1 month and 3 weeks, and even discounting Hurricanehink's oppose, there was no consensus to promote had emerged. Old, stale FLCs like this one usually don't attract other reviewers anyway. I encourage you to work with all reviewers to ensure that their comments have been resolved, and re-nominate the FLC in five to seven days. Regards, Dabomb87 (talk) 04:00, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Very related. --94.246.150.68 (talk) 15:45, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Ka-ping

I mailed you for a favo(u)r. Hope all is well, The Rambling Man (talk) 22:58, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Replied. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:11, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Unprotection request

Hey Dabomb, as far as I'm concerned you can unprotect Cheshire Academy. One single IP vandalized it five times, but there are no other vandal edits. Tiderolls blocked the IP for two weeks, and I hope Tide sends the IP's pappa a letter that they're wasting $10,000 a year. Anyway, there is no other activity on that article, so protection really doesn't strike me as necessary. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 03:47, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Done. At first blush, 216.47.177.138 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) appeared to be another unhelpful editor, but on second look, this seems to be more a mistake than anything else. Cheers, Dabomb87 (talk) 03:51, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! Drmies (talk) 03:54, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Samueljoo

It's all his account has been used for. Please indefinitely block this user as he has never made any sort of constructive contribution to this website. All he has done is randomly link television series together and insert himself as a character into the articles.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 21:19, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure changing the duration of the block after the fact is a good idea at this time. If he/she resumes that sort of activity after the block expires, let me know and I'll reconsider. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:40, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Your recent Revision Deletion at AN/I

Just posted this to Fetchcomms page and as you've just done the exact same thing I thought I'd best post it to your talk as well. I looked up what RD5 was as I'd never seen an RD5 before when it appeared in my watchlist. In doing so I noted RD5 says "It is important that the underlying reason for deletion be made clear in the log summary." Thought I should bring this to your attention as you didn't do so. Dpmuk (talk) 00:46, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Sent you an email. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:17, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Hovid Inc

Hi Dabomb87, you had delete Hovid Inc too fast till I had no time to answer the 2nd speedy deletion tagged. I beg your kind consideration to undo the deletion and let me finish the explanation. Just like COKE, Hovid Inc is the founder of Ho Yan Hor which is famous in Malaysia & South East Asia. The page I wrote is totally NPOV and with all the references and even Hovid were in the historical books of Malaysia since post World War II. My intention is totally no promotional nor advertising. Thanks! Felixlhk (talk) 03:25, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi Felixlhk, I've restored this article; my deletion was in error due to a procedural matter. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:04, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks a lot of the assistance, I will make sure the page info is always NPOV. Best Regards! Felixlhk (talk) 06:07, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Good Heart Barnstar

see barnstar page 04:49, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Queens International Film Festival

Hello Dabomb. Together with the content, you have removed this citation (Queens Chronicle). Your edit. Is this newspaper an unreliable source? Thanks for your response. Best regards. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 16:06, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

It was sourced, yes, but the content dedicated to the actions of one person violated WP:BLP and WP:NPOV. Much of the material was only tangentially relevant to the article, and the undue weight given to it made the article decidedly slanted against the named festival director. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:24, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

OK, but the link wasn't harmful. Btw, the "hi dude!" addition in my previous comment was added by another editor, not by me. Sorry for that. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 22:32, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Well, is the link referencing anything in the pared-back version of the article? Dabomb87 (talk) 22:37, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

I'll look at it tomorrow, it is too late here. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 22:59, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't think there was any BLP violation in our article, it was rather a brief description of the situation explained in detail in the Queens Chronicle. I've restored the source. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 10:00, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Happy Decade :)

see barnstar page 23:18, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

New to this

Thank you for your comment, I appreciate your concerns but I checked the subject and can find no evidence that she will ever pass WP:PERSON and thus added the SD tag. Your creation of the article in the author's space is a good idea however, let's see what develops. Regards Paste _{Let’s have a chat.} 22:36, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

I agree that the chances the article will develop into something we can include are slim, but it is disheartening for a newbie to put something down only to see it deleted before they had even finished or had a chance to explain why it should be kept. My rule of thumb is to refrain from tagging an article for deletion until at least an hour has past since creation (except for obviously unsuitable articles, such as attack pages or copyvios). Thanks for your understanding. Regards, Dabomb87 (talk) 22:40, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Kylie Minogue discography

Thank you so much. I disambiguated the main discography page. If possible, can you delete the older revisions and the talk page of main discography too? Novice7 | Talk 15:45, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

I'd rather not, so that the edit history is preserved. In fact, you should probably note the splits using {{Splitfrom}} and {{Split-to}} per WP:SPLIT. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:51, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Done. Added that. But, do dab pages need Talk? I saw the talk page was deleted in case of Mariah Carey discography. Sorry if I'm saying something wrong. Thank you again. Novice7 | Talk 16:03, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

I think the circumstances under those deletions were a little different. I'll look into it though. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:33, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Verification of lists

User:SandyGeorgia suggested asking you about Wikipedia_talk:Verifiability#Verification_of_lists. I see you're busy IRL, but if you can find the time, any input would be great. cheers, Rd232 ^talk 16:55, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Commented there. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:28, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

She's Got Nothing On (But the Radio)

Could you reprotect She's Got Nothing On (But the Radio)? Nothing has been added to address notability issues. Thanks. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars (talk) 00:35, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

I've protected it indefinitely. Leave a request at WP:RFUP when you want it to be unprotected. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:59, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Gripple

Thanks, I wasn't sure where exactly the line is to be drawn. - 71.75.35.33 (talk) 00:36, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

FLRCs

Hey, hope you're well. I'm not sure if you've noticed (but I bet you have), we have a bit of a backlog of FLRCs, some of which are now knocking on for two months old. Would suggest (since I'm involved in many of them) you could cast your eyes over some of them and "judge" them. At the current rate, we'll have more FLRCs than FLCs.... Best to you. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:06, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Global Agenda

Hey there. You recently protected this article due to "excessive spamming". Well, the anonymous editor is back, with a slightly different IP. Eik Corell (talk) 14:35, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank for locking Little Bighorn River

Thank you for locking the article Little Bighorn River. I had planned to contact an admin regarding the article since it was repeatedly vandalized last night during the time frame David Letterman mentioned the "factual error" on his show. According to a whois query for 67.244.137.215, one of the editors that repeatly introduced the error, the "Allocations for this OrgID serve Road Runner residential customers out of the New York City, NY and Syracuse, NY RDCs." --Dan Dassow (talk) 17:59, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Notification

Did you read this before you posted your message at the talk page. The person behind that IP is attacking Pashtuns and Pashtun editors in the Afghanistan related articles, he told one Pashtun editor (Ketabtoon):"You can be lucky I don´t get you and if I get you I guess me and some other people would cut you first in pieces than would your family become a lesson, just because of your Gulbuddini-Taliban behave. But don´t worry, sooner or later, we will catch you".[1] Someone like that should be banned on spot but I think you didn't notice what he wrote.--210.2.177.245 (talk) 22:49, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Hey just wanted to say thanks for the reviewer permissions. Drewerd (talk) 15:19, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Online Ambassadors

I saw you have been really active lately and I clicked on over to your user page and was pretty impressed. Would you be interested in helping with the WP:Online_Ambassadors program? It's really a great opportunity to help university students become Wikipedia contributers. I hope you apply to become an ambassador, Sadads (talk) 00:28, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Diaspora article

I have been removing gameguide, gamecruft, and specifically a "Clones" section on this video-game article per WP:VG/EL's section on remakes/homebrews. I have explained my actions and how they relate to policies in edit summaries and on the article talk page, however the IP user has stopped responding. I have them to include sources that underscore how these clones are notable, and they seem to have stopped responding, but still they keep on reverting my edits. Since debate isn't going anywhere and this individual is convinced that I'm trying to destroy the game's community(see their entry on my talk page), I was wondering if you would consider protecting the page. Eik Corell (talk) 19:44, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi Eik. I'm pretty busy at the moment, so WP:RFPP might be a better place to go first if you want a prompt response. Anyway, it looks like activity at the article has died down a bit (and another admin, Spartaz (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) is monitoring it, so I don't see a need to protect it just yet. Cheers, Dabomb87 (talk) 19:00, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Led Zeppelin discography

hello,

please withdraw this FLC. The peak chart positions are not right, which were not added by me; possibly because the websites were updated and some information was deleted. Thank you.-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 14:15, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Done. Dabomb87 (talk) 18:51, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi! :)

Hello, Dabomb87. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Just reguarding your last message :) Thankyou :) MelbourneStar1 (talk) 08:05, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Task force

Hopefully List of Maryland state symbols has been updated to get removed off the task force list. As I write like crap, a quick copy edit would be helpful. Bgwhite (talk) 06:49, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

I was cleaning up the other FL symbol lists... same format, fix external links, add new symbols, etc. The person who did the Oregon and Washington symbol lists reverted the changes because, "Single, sortable table preferred (see FLC)". Is the separate lists of symbols of Maryland and Indiana preferred or are list like Oregon and Washington preferred? I'll change the lists to whatever is best. The other person is Another Believer... egads, I think they have submitted over have all music FL lists... very impressive. Bgwhite (talk) 21:20, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

The Maryland and Indiana lists were promoted quite some time ago, while the Oregon and Washington lists were promoted relatively recently. I would probably follow the format of the latter two, unless consensus has changed on how to structure these lists. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:15, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi, Just wanted to say Thanks for reviewer flag. Theo10011 (talk) 23:16, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

RuneScape full protection

Hi there. Since you applied full-protection to RuneScape, can it be returned to indefinite semi-protection now that the user causing all the trouble has been blocked temporarily? There's a pretty big event taking place in a couple of days that requires a change to the article, and with full-protection nobody can make it.

If trouble flares up again (and I suspect it will), we can always request full-protection again. 1ForTheMoney (talk) 18:56, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Done. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:33, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

I wish to thank you providing me the Reviewer flag. I would be able to contribute to wikipedia much better than before. Thanks a lot. --Suraj T 10:44, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Archive 25

←

Archive 27

Archive 28

Archive 29

Archive 30

Archive 31

→

Archive 35