User talk:Fabrictramp/Archive 02

Sakkara (novel) and The New Heroes

Hiya! I just noticed your tag on Sakkara (novel) that said: "This article or section needs sources or references that appear in reliable, third-party publications. Alone, primary sources and sources affiliated with the subject of this article are not sufficient for an accurate encyclopedia article. Please include more appropriate citations from reliable sources." I'm really sorry if this is the wrong place to ask you, but I'm new to this. Can I ask what aspects the article needs further citation on? Is it that ISBNs aren't sufficient for novels, or that it needs sources for the award? (While I'm here, has the article The New Heroes improved any? I spent some time cleaning it up and none of the tags have altered.) Thanks, Fabrictramp! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Unlimitedemotionsofwonder (talk • contribs) 23:48, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

This is a perfectly fine place to ask. :)

On the Sakkara (novel) article, the ISBN number just confirms the existence of the novel, but not the notability. Wikipedia:Notability (books)#Criteria has some good information on what makes a book notable enough for inclusion; sources that show the book meets these standards are what the article is currently lacking.

On The New Heroes, the article now looks pretty well wikified, so I've removed that tag. It still has the same primary sources and notability issues as Sakkara (novel). (Which isn't making a judgement on whether they are or aren't notable, just that the articles need sources showing that they are.

Hope that helps!--Fabrictramp (talk) 00:03, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks very much! I'll try to figure out how this all works as I go along... Is the link I added to the Sakkara page the kind of thing you mean by citation? Is the fact that the series is series is read by big-name authors a sign of notability if it's shown by third-party sources? Does New Heroes still read like an advertisement?

Real sorry about the questions... You know how us fangirls can be! And thanks again!

Unlimitedemotionsofwonder (talk) 01:10, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Don't be sorry for asking questions to help improve an article. That's what it's all about. :)

The link you added to the Sakkara (novel) page is a good citation, and it's a start for showing notability, but doesn't get us all the way there. (It would be enough if it had won the award because that would meet #2 in Wikipedia:Notability (books)#Criteria, but just getting nominated isn't enough). The series being read by big-name authors [1] isn't enough, but the reviews posted on that page can get you there if you can add citations to the original reviews. (See #1 in Wikipedia:Notability (books)#Criteria. Kirkus Reviews might be a place to start -- if they have a substantial review, that would be enough.

As to the advert tag on The New Heroes, you might ask the editor who placed it there. They may have had something specific in mind that I'm not seeing.--Fabrictramp (talk) 16:29, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks again. I'll track down some substantial original reviews and any awards... It did read like a an advertisement before I edited it-- http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_New_Heroes&diff=181085634&oldid=180324731 --but I figured checking with an editor rather than just removing it was the way to go. Would lead stories on FractalMatter magazine count? Just from memory... Unlimitedemotionsofwonder (talk) 18:07, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

It certainly wouldn't hurt. :) --Fabrictramp (talk) 17:38, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Question!

Hi, how are you? I came upon this article: Independent goods. I saw you had worked on it so I thought maybe you could explain this to me: Does the lead sentence make sense to you? What is "nor"? Or is it supposed to be "or" instead of "nor"? I didn't want to attempt a correction just in case I changed the meaning somehow. Any explanation would be appreciated! Thank you and my apologies if this request is time wasting. But thank you! Scarian^{Call me Pat} 10:13, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

It's never a waste of time to ask someone about improving an article. The worst that can happen is they scratch their head and say "I don't have a clue!" *grin*

The lead sentence does make sense to me, but it's pretty clunky and could stand a rewrite. I think "nor" is correct because of the "neither" earlier in the sentence, but I'm not a grammar expert by any means.--Fabrictramp (talk) 14:36, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

It confused me because I've never read "nor" like that before (Rhyme Time!). Only in this context: e.g. "It was neither one nor the other." But that sentence isn't written like that. Also the word "things" in the sentence isn't terribly encyclopaedic and could stand to be more specific. I'll take a solid look at it and try and make sense of it. Thanks for your time, friend! Scarian^{Call me Pat} 14:53, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Note - I added in commas to make it more readable. I knew it was something simple like that! Thanks for your time! Scarian^{Call me Pat} 14:56, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, those two commas help quite a bit. Thanks for helping to improve the 'pedia! --Fabrictramp (talk) 14:59, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Severna Park Mall

Just dropping you a line to let you know that I've rewritten Severna Park Mall per your AfD discussion. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 21:07, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the work! See the comment I added at the AfD about the sources.--Fabrictramp (talk) 23:25, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Adding articles to my AFD nomination

I'll go along with it this time, but in the future you should at minimum ask if your going to do that, as this was my nomination and I may not have agreed with it, so good job, but next time just start a new one :) Judgesurreal777 (talk) 21:20, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry if it annoyed you. I've had any number of people add articles to my AfD noms without asking, so I assumed it was okay. --Fabrictramp (talk) 21:23, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Angus Tók Hnífinn

Took care of it. Thanks. Best, --Shirahadasha (talk) 23:11, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. --Fabrictramp (talk) 23:12, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Dark Tranquillity demos/EPs

It looks like you want a couple individual sites (which will undoubtedly take some time) so I searched awhile and I found one webzine that talks about them a little to the point that I can verify some information. I'm not so sure if the site is ok but I'm hoping it is so that these articles will see the light of day. −₪ÇɨгcaғucɨҲ₪ ^kaiden 03:23, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 2nd and 7th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 1	2 January 2008	About the Signpost

WikiWorld comic: "John Lasseter"	News and notes: Stewards, fundraiser, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	WikiProject Report: Scouting
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 4, Issue 2	7 January 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor: Stepping in after delay
New Wikipedia discussion forum gains steam	WikiWorld comic: "Goregrind"
Wikipedia in the News	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:34, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Why did you delete Dolls Place article?

I went to update the page that I created and I see that you may have deleted it. YFTS (talk) 18:04, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Back on November 1, I deleted the article Dolls Place due to an expired prod. At that time, the article consisted of a single sentence that did not assert any notability.

On November 2, another user recreated Dolls Place as a redirect to Doll's Place. I have not edited, deleted (or, until just now) even seen that article. A request for speedy deletion was placed by User:Cumulus Clouds on December 18, and the article was deleted by User:Keilana that same day. You might ask either of them about the deletion, as it appears to me that there were some (weak) assertions of notability, and I would have declined the speedy request. --Fabrictramp (talk) 23:24, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Dead-end pages update

Good to see another batch incoming!

would you mind just for the record placing a note on the talk page saying which database dump you generated this from, and if there's anything special we should know about it? (if there's "nothing special", that's nice to know too...) --Alvestrand (talk) 04:38, 13 January 2008 (UTC)Blackbelt1959 (talk) 05:34, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Will do. --Fabrictramp (talk) 16:54, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Why have you flagged Steve Vandergriff for deletion?

We haven't quite got the hang of wikipedia yet, so the page about Steve is a work in progress. But he has written books that have sold over 1 million copies worldwide and his television work on live sports is seen worldwide too. What do we need to do to fix the entry?

The article as it stands doesn't meet Wikipedia:BIO#Basic_criteria. The links to creativecow, and mobygames are not independent sources. The link to Hawaii Ace League is only a passing mention of Steve Vandergriff, as is the link to allgame and nationmaster. Can you find some reliable, independent sources to add? If you can, that would show this subject is notable. Thanks!--Fabrictramp (talk) 16:53, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. The Mobygames link is an independent game magazine site that shows credits of the many books/games Steve is attributed as working on. The article is certainly a work in progress though. We are in the process of obtaining additional info about his network television directing and any new writing credits. We also have a couple of photos but don't know how to add them yet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blackbelt1959 (talk • contribs) 15:20, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing up what Mobygames is -- I do see now that it's an independent source, but it's also just a passing mention. --Fabrictramp (talk) 15:26, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

AWB bug

Is there a bug in the AWB? I reverted a recent edit of Physically Unclonable Function because, although that edit improved parts of the article, that edit also deleted one paragraph and replaced it with an exact duplicate of the previous paragraph. I'm sure you agree that there is no need for this encyclopedia article to have 2 consecutive identical paragraphs. --68.0.124.33 (talk) 02:43, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Keith Carlock page

Can you point me to the archived discussion that led to the deletion of the Keith Carlock article?

While he may not be very well known to the general public, he is extremely well known in the drumming community in North America and Europe -- amongst high school students and professional musicians alike -- for his approach to the instrument and the music he has made on that instrument with prominent "underground" guitarists such as New York's Wayne Krantz.

Please respond on my talk page. Unit1835 (talk) 05:01, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

I prefer to keep a discussion all on one page for clarity.

There was no discussion to delete the page; this was a prod, which is when someone proposes a deletion they believe will not be controversial. The reason given was "Non-notable session musician as per WP:MUSIC. He may have played with some notable acts, but none of it has generated any third-party coverage of the sort that would establish notability. Only source for any of this is his own website." Since no one objected in the five day time frame, I deleted the article.

If you have questions about the reason, you might want to contact the editor who proposed the deletion. Or, you could simply recreate the article, but if it was recreated exactly as it was it would be subject to deletion again, for the same reason.

I would recommend that you read WP:BIO and Wikipedia:MUSIC#Criteria_for_musicians_and_ensembles carefully, and find sources that support his notability. The music community is very good about writing volumes about people it believes are notable, even if they aren't known to the general public, so if he is notable sources should be out there. If you need some hints about where to look, the folks over at Wikipedia:WikiProject Music should be able to give you some suggestions. Hope that helps a bit. --Fabrictramp (talk) 14:36, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I have reviewed the notability page, the section in particular that states as follows:

For composers, songwriters, librettists or lyricists: Has credit for writing or co-writing either lyrics or music for a notable composition. Has written musical theatre of some sort (includes musicals, operas, etc) that was performed in a notable theatre that had a reasonable run as such things are judged in their particular situation and time. Has had a work used as the basis for a later composition by a songwriter, composer or lyricist who meets the above criteria. Has written a song or composition which has won (or in some cases been given a second or other place) in a major music competition not established expressly for newcomers. Has been listed as a major influence or teacher of a composer, songwriter or lyricist that meets the above criteria. Appears at reasonable length in standard reference books on his or her genre of music.

In the case of Keith Carlock, the following suggests that he is 'notable':

First, see Modern Drummer, which states that "Each year Modern Drummer publishes its annual reader poll of the year's best performers in a variety of categories such as jazz, funk, rock and Latin. This poll is widely regarded as the most significant form of recognition within the drumming/percussion community."

Carlock placed 3rd in the "Best All Around Drummer" category in the 2007 Modern Drummer poll and 2nd in the "Best All Around Drummer" category in 2006. This reflects the significant recognition Carlock has achieved within the drumming/percussion community.

Further sources on Keith Carlock confirm his reputation within that community:

Keith Carlock update in Modern Drummer magazine, online: http://www.moderndrummer.com/updatefull/200001158 Includes: “Since his arrival in New York City from Clinton via North Texas State University, Keith Carlock has scurried up the drumming food chain with an inventive style that is equal parts Zigaboo Modeliste fire, Jon Christensen finesse, and Bernard Purdie funk. Tried in the fusion flame of the groundbreaking Wayne Krantz Trio, Carlock has held court for six years with the trio at New York's premier jazz dump, Christopher Street's 55 Bar.”

Interview reproduced from April 2007 Clarion Ledger: http://www.keithcarlock.com/pressClarionMS2007.htm

Feature story and interview: http://www.mikedolbear.co.uk/story.asp?StoryID=1389

Review of Steely Dan concert, in the Guardian Unlimited (July 10, 2007): http://music.guardian.co.uk/live/story/0,,2122710,00.html Includes: “They are driven along by the relentless energy of drummer Keith Carlock - like Buddy Rich, Keith Moon and Clyde Stubblefield rolled into one lethal package.”

Review of Wayne Krantz show, in the Guardian Unlimited (June 4, 2002): http://arts.guardian.co.uk/reviews/story/0,,766397,00.html Includes: “It always helps to have a good band, and in bassist Tim Lefebvre and drummer Keith Carlock, Krantz is blessed with a rhythm section of devastating power and technical precision. Lefebvre played like a man who had left virtuosity back in the playground, while Carlock combined the polyrhythmic thunder of Elvin Jones with John Bonham's concrete-booted funk. The three musicians maintained a shifting interplay of ideas, the drums and bass often taking the lead while Krantz contented himself with making impressionistic smudges of noise.”

Review of a Wayne Krantz show, in the Guardian Unlimited (March 8, 2000): http://arts.guardian.co.uk/reviews/story/0,,700156,00.html Includes: “Carlock is a formidable percussionist of restless intensity who brings a jolting subversiveness of accent and timing to the rigid familiarities of funk drumming.”

Review of Donald Fagen Band show, in the New York Times (March 9, 2006): http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/09/arts/music/09fage.html?scp=9&sq=carlock Includes: “The drummer, Keith Carlock, and the bassist, Freddie Washington, provided a funky undercurrent, though Mr. Carlock's astonishing fills caused some gasps from the audience.”

All About Jazz profile of the band “Rudder” http://www.allaboutjazz.com/php/musician.php?id=15590 Includes: “Keith Carlock (drums) is quickly becoming one of the most well-known and emulated drummers on the planet. Early on, Keith and Tim formed the backbone that led to some new directions in the trio of guitarist Wayne Krantz. It wasn't long before Keith was heard by others and quickly became the drummer for the Blues Brothers. Shortly after that he was sought out to follow in the footsteps of Peter Erskine and other greats to sit at the drum chair of Steely Dan. Immediately following his first extended tour with Steely Dan, Keith was on the road for a two-year tour with Sting.”

All About Jazz review of Donald Fagen’s “Morph the Cat” http://www.allaboutjazz.com/php/review_print.php?id=22330 Includes: “Carlock, one of contemporary jazz’s most versatile drummers…”

Unit1835 (talk) 23:23, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

If you care to recreate the article using some of these sources, then by all means go for it. --Fabrictramp (talk) 23:28, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Redirect of Dafuna canoe

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Dafuna canoe, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Dafuna canoe is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Dafuna canoe, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 04:30, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Royalist (hispanoamerican wars of independence)

Thanks Fabrictramp for take a look to Royalist, spanish:"Realistas". I try to give a little explanation with numbers, links and graphics and a few words about the defenders of the king of Spain during Hispanoamerican War of Independence. Maybe could be useful categorize in South American wars of independence but I do not know how. Thanks for your help. --Resvoluci (talk) 20:58, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Sunorch

I do think this is patent nonsense -- obviously, a Greek word for "sun" doesn't start with "sun". I've deleted again -- hope you don't mind. NawlinWiki (talk) 21:37, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree that it needs to go, but I still don't think it meets the definition (I see it as falling squarely into hoax, just not a good one). However, it's a case of poTAYto - poTAHto, and I won't get my nose out of joint over it. :) --Fabrictramp (talk) 21:41, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Special:Deadendpages

Hi ! You seem to work on Wikipedia:Dead-end pages, so I contact you. I was wondering why deleted pages are not displayed with red links on Special:Deadendpages ? For example it's the case on Special:Shortpages. Have you an idea ? Please answer on my french talk page --Pok148 (talk) 11:09, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

It's too early in the morning here for me to answer in understandable French. :)

In the English wikipedia, the page Special:Dead-end pages has not been updated since December 28, 2006. I have no idea why deleted pages aren't showing up as redlinks there. Perhaps because updates to the page are disabled? I hope that helps. (if you have more questions, please let me know on my English talk page[2]) - Fabrictramp

on the french wiki the page is updated every 2 or 3 days. I have created a bug in bugzilla and actually this issue has already been raised. bugzilla:11400--Pok148 (talk) 22:29, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 14th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 3	14 January 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor: A new weekly feature
Special: 2007 in Review	Wikimania 2009 bidding ends, jury named
Controversial non-administrator rollback process added	Supposed advance draft of Jobs keynote surfaces on talk page
WikiWorld comic: "The Nocebo Effect"	News and notes: Fundraiser ends, $500,000 donation, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Tutorial: Fundamentals of editing
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:15, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

A proposal

Seeing as we're two of the more active members of WP:WPBB, I was wondering if you would like to team up with me to raise some baseball biography articles up to GA/FA status. Would you be game for such a task? Cheers, Caknuck (talk) 02:49, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

I'd be glad to help where I can. I'm a bit weak at writing prose, which is why I do a lot of wikignoming, but sure, I'm game (so to speak). *grin*--Fabrictramp (talk) 16:11, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Excellent! I'm pretty good with prose, so that won't be much of a problem. I was going to suggest that we tackle one article at a time, taking turns picking our targets. (Yes, you may go first.) If memory serves me, only three baseball bios are FA's (with another being a current FAC, likely to be promoted) and only a handful more have made it to GA level, so there's plenty of fertile ground. Let me know what you think. Caknuck (talk) 17:35, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Aack, the pressure of going first! *grin* How about Cap Anson? It's not too far from being a good article, it's rated as high importance, and I've got a couple of reference books that can improve the sources quite a bit. (Wrigleyville, for one, has some well researched stuff on Anson).--Fabrictramp (talk) 17:45, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Good choice. Naturally, we should focus on Hall of Famers, right? I'll do a copy edit on it tonight. Also, I'll check the Library of Congress Web site for more images this weekend. Once we get it up to snuff, should we send it to peer review (the Wikiproject Biography folks should be helpful here) or try it out as a GAC? Caknuck (talk) 18:00, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

HoFers are most likely to have enough readily available information to write a decent article, so they will be the easiest targets. Reading through a couple of essays on GA and FA, it seems like sending it to peer review before GAC would be a good course of action.--Fabrictramp (talk) 18:44, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Heh, see User:Caknuck/TC&FCNSCFIBBA.

Wow, my second non-secret cabal! ;-) --Fabrictramp (talk) 14:02, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

(outdent) See User talk:Caknuck/TC&FCNSCFIBBA for my first impression of what needs to be tackled prior to PR. Cheers, Caknuck (talk) 19:02, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

school deletions

For elementary and middle schools, please use PROD not speedy, if the problem is lack of notability. schools are excluded specifically from A7 by WP:CSD. (for high schools, you need to use AFD , because Prods on them are always contested--and they generally pass afd, anyway)DGG (talk) 23:08, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Mind giving me a link? I honestly can't think of one I've requested a speedy on in the last several months, and I'm quite a stickler something being in the right group for A7.--Fabrictramp (talk) 23:24, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

From the timing, I'm guessing it was Laguna Middle School. If so, that was nominated as speedy nonsense back in November -- the entire text of the article was "Help me with this page!" In retrospect, it probably should have been no context/content, but I still think a speedy was okay in that case. However, if you think otherwise, I'd love to hear your reasons, because it's the way I learn best. Thanks! :) --Fabrictramp (talk) 23:42, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, Laguna; it was certainly deletable in November, & the admin then did OK to delete it--though i would have taken that message at face value and given the new editor some help, probably saying that it would almost certainly not considered notable, so try doing something else,with a link to WP:CTW. -- I see you didn't give a notice about the speedy nomination either time. That's still permitted, though it is not considered polite--wouldn't you want to receive a notice in a similar case if you were a newbie? Even if you thought it was just nonsense, the standard notice does serve as a warning. There is a bot, but as you see it's undependable--if you were relying on it giving the notice, that's understandable--but it didn't. That's why people are better than bots.

At present, it's a minimal article, and would be a valid stub if the subject wee notable. But it isn't, & so it will never pass AfD. Since I see the earlier history, I'll try to add a little advice beyond the standard prod notice I placed. But it does not meet the criterion for no context, since one can identify the subject of the article. Nor is it no content, per WP:CSD. Those specifications are meant to be taken literally. Nor is it a test page, since it was intended in good faith as an article. So it has to be PROD. I use PROD a good deal, it solves many problems--for articles like this, the PROD almost never is challenged and they get deleted in 5 days with no fuss & no more work than a speedy. DGG (talk) 16:25, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Please take another look at the history. I only nominated it for a speedy one time, and I did give a notice to the user at that time, which you erased when you gave the user a prod notice. And I apologize if I did not make it clear, but my comment to no context/content only refered to the page when it consisted of "Help me with this page!". --Fabrictramp (talk) 16:43, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Pellistor

Hi, Fabrictramp, i added the ref on the page, can you have a look at it ? I know you're doing good work at page entrys, but i was still working on that page. Cheers. Mion (talk) 01:10, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Just a couple of comments -- first, you don't need to say who requested that you add a reference. All articles should have independent, reliable sources to show notability, so it doesn't matter that someone asked for it to be added. Second, the source you added is just a passing mention. Can you find and add some sources that meet this part of the notability guidelines? That would help the article quite a bit.

--Fabrictramp (talk) 01:16, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

HISTORY

Prior to the development of Catalytic gas sensors, combustible gases were most often measured using flame safety lamps. These lamps, although giving an indication of the gas concentration, were not capable of a high level of accuracy or being easily able to be incorporated into a detection system capable of giving visual and audible alarms. The earliest form of catalytic gas sensor used heated bare coils of platinum wire to burn the gas. The heat generated by the burning process produced a change in the resistance of the coil. This change was measured using a simple Wheatstone bridge circuit. The low catalytic activity of the bare coil necessitated having to run the coils at high temperatures (800 – 1000 °C) to be able to oxidise the target gas (methane). At these temperatures it was found that significant evaporation of the wire was taking place. This produced a reduction in the wire diameter and a subsequent change in the resistance. This produced a significant level of zero drift and a lifetime of as short as several days. Work was carried out in the early 1960s, primarily at the UK Safety in Mines Establishment, to produce a catalytic sensor, which had a much-improved lifetime and reduced zero drift. This work involved replacing the limited catalytic activity of the platinum coil by the much greater activity of a finely divided high surface area catalytic layer. This layer was laid down on a ceramic bead that contained a platinum coil acting again as the heater/calorimeter. In this design the catalytic layer only needed to be heated to ~500 °C. This vastly reduced the degree of evaporation of the platinum coil, hence improving the stability and also reducing the amount of power required to run the sensor. This allowed sensors to be fitted into portable battery-powered equipment having an acceptable battery lifetime. This type of pellistor design is still used today.

Before the pellistor they used canaries, now that is notable enough i think, and why didn't i use that link ? to prevent excessive company linking, i made an exception for the other one because it contained an list of CORRECTION FACTORS FOR PELLISTORS, and as long as i can't find something like that in an open acces journal, i'm bind to this link, until another one arises, which i hope is soon, and it matters that the question of notabilty is raised, because its mostly by people who for sure have many interest, but not in the field the subject is about. so point made, no hard feelings.Keep up the good work! Mion (talk) 01:34, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

trigeia

Trigeia (talk) 01:23, 23 January 2008 (UTC) I have made several attempts to create an article to the standards of wikipedia, I have looked at several articles as well in the same industry and the information they put in the articles, however i keep getting complaints on the articles I post can you please help me out with this information. My intention is not to self promote, it is just to put relative information about this company. thank you .

I assume that the article you need help with is Trigeia.com. First off, there are no independent, reliable sources in the article that show the company meets the requirements of Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). Secondly, your username is the same as the website, so there is a conflict of interest. Please read both of these pages carefully, and let me know if you still have questions.--Fabrictramp (talk) 01:42, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Dead-end pages

Hi Fabrictramp,

I'm a new editor, so apologies if this question is inappropriate or misdirected. I see you're an active participant in the Wikipedia:Dead-end pages project, where I've been looking for pages to improve. I've also been working from the list of pages at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Wikify, and I'm at something of a loss regarding the difference between the two projects. Is it just that dead-end pages have no internal links at all, while pages needing wikifying may have some but not enough?

The clearest difference I can spot is that pages in the WP:WPWF have the wikify template, which I can delete when I wikify an article to automatically remove them from the project page list. Am I right in thinking that if I address a page on the WP:DEAD list, I need to manually delete the article's title from the list when I'm finished? Should I then amend the article number total at the top of the relevant section?

Many thanks for your help. Gonzonoir (talk) 14:57, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Always happy to help someone in their quest to improve the 'pedia! :)

WP:DEP sees itself mainly as a triage project. Pages without internal links were chosen as the focus because it's an easy way to find a number of pages that probably need to be looked at. We try to assess what the page needs, add all appropriate maintenance tags (or proposed deletion if needed), and lastly add internal links to keep the page from reappearing on the list. We often wikify the article as part of the process, but not always. Wikipedia:WikiProject_Wikify is more concerned with getting the article wikified; adding sections, adding internal links, etc.

For a number of reasons, the Dead end pages project has both a list (that pages must be manually removed from) and a category. Removing the {{deadend}} template from the page will remove it from the category, but not the list. We always appreciate it if someone removes a completed page from the list, but it's not supercritical -- either someone else will see that it's done and remove it, or the page won't show up when the page is regenerated. There's no need to update the count at the top (in fact, please don't update the count) -- it's simply to show how many there were originally in that section, so we can see how much progress has been made.

Hope that helps -- if I didn't answer all your questions, feel free to ask.--Fabrictramp (talk) 15:10, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

That’s great – thank you. And it makes good sense. I’ll have a go! Gonzonoir (talk) 15:16, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 21st, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 4	21 January 2008	About the Signpost

Special: 2007 in Review, Part II	New parser preprocessor to be introduced
Commons Picture of the Year contest in final round	WikiWorld comic: "Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo"
News and notes: Freely-licensed music, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 23:37, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Cap Anson

The Runaway Colt as a source for "Anson's Colts", i.e. the nickname of the Cubs in the 1890s, is a well-established fact about Anson which you can find anywhere. However, pinning down the exact timing is more of a challenge. The SABR annual had a story on it a few years ago. I'll have to look for it when I have time, as it was pretty specific. Meanwhile, check out the comment at History of baseball team nicknames#Chicago, Illinois. That is a direct quote from the Sporting News Baseball Guides published during the 1940s. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 15:47, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

I just added the source for Runaway Colt from mlb.com -- the Broadway play was in 1895, while the New York Times was calling the team "Anson's Colts" in 1891. (Wrigleyville also supports this timeline). The Broadway play was probably named after the team, not the other way around.--Fabrictramp (talk) 15:52, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Additionally, the SABR bio [3] gives the Colts nickname as used by 1891, and give the play an 1895 date.--Fabrictramp (talk) 15:55, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Assuming the timing of the play is accurate, I think you're right. "Colts" was already being used because the players were young, a new crop after the 1880s successes, and especially compared with "Pop" Anson. I don't know about a semi-pro team, unless they're making fun of the Cubs. That Colts nickname actually persisted until about 1905, when Frank Selee retired. He was the one who kept "Colts" going. Once he retired, "Cubs", which was already in use, became the predominant nickname, and "Colts" was dropped. I still need to find that SABR article, though. It went on in some depth about it. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 15:58, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

I enjoyed this article[4] at mlb.com which claimed the Colts nickname came about because Anson starred in a film called The Runaway Colt. :) --Fabrictramp (talk) 16:06, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Right, a film of a stage play, in 1895. I'm sure. It's like when I see some old silent footage, portraying Jesus last days, and used in some kind of documentary, I'm inclined to comment, "Wow, actual film footage of the Crucifixion!" The SABR article dates the "Colts" nickname to 1890, when the remaining good players (except Anson) jumped to the Players' League. [5] I think if he had known how he himself would get screwed by management, maybe he wouldn't have been so down on the PL. But this all has the ring of truth, and now I can revise the nicknames article to make it more accurate. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 16:13, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

A thought on the semi-pro team -- Anson could have been trying to capitalize on the fame he had with the Cubs.--Fabrictramp (talk) 16:07, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Could be, although he was still managing the major league team at the time. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 16:13, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and so much for well-established facts. My ego is not so big as to defend something that's "well-known" and is clearly incorrect. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 16:15, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Putting you in a very small, but very intelligent, minority. ;-)--Fabrictramp (talk) 17:34, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Careful, you're putting my humility to the test. :) Basically, I'd rather get it right, above all else. That viewpoint is both a blessing and curse, as it has also fed various arguments I've had here. So it goes. :\ Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 20:16, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

The SABR annual that had the story about Anson on Broadway in 1895 was the 2005 edition. They even confirmed that the name of the play was inspired by Anson's team, not the other way around. Also, I found a book in which it was pointed out that "Colts" was already being used before 1890, but it really took hold that season, when so many major leaguers bolted for the Players' League. So if nothing else, I now have the Cubs nickname saga pretty well nailed down. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 10:09, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I probably messed up your references a bit, and if you think it's too much detail, you could alter or revert it. I wanted to make the point that "Colts" was around before 1890, as I did in the nicknames article. Maybe that's too much info for the Anson article. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 15:23, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Good work. I'll just standardize the ref a bit, and I think we're good to go. --Fabrictramp (talk) 15:37, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Excellent. I re-arranged the sequence a bit for continuity purposes. It jumps around a bit chronologically, and the stuff about the "Colts" nickname ties better with the last couple of lines, I think. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 15:47, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the help (Caknuck and I are trying to get this up to GA or FA status). I'll be working on the theatrical career section for about another half hour, (just so we don't have an edit conflict). :) --Fabrictramp (talk) 15:56, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

No hay problema, I think I'm done editing the article for now. My real goal in all this, you see, was to get the nickname info straight. That's a pet subject of mine, don'cha know. Hence the article History of baseball team nicknames, whose contents I'm always looking to improve. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 15:59, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

XFT article

I've been trying to research methods for X11 anti-aliasing -- frustratingly the XFT article is no longer there. It is of no consolation that many of the >100 articles that still link to the now-deleted XFT wiki don't themselves explain XFT; instead reliant on linking to the now-deleted article.

Why has this article been deleted? The reason cited was "lack of notability since March". If this software library became obsolete in March, I would like to know, and I would expect the XFT article to state this and name the successor. Things shouldn't be deleted simply because they lie in the past tense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.164.192.231 (talk) 14:06, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Can you give me an exact name for the deleted article? There is a deleted article called XFT, but I did not delete it or nominate it for deletion. Since you didn't log in before leaving me a message, I can't search for your contributions to deleted articles. I'm afraid I can't help you until I get a bit more information. Thanks! --Fabrictramp (talk) 14:34, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

i changed the time

i change d the time because i needed more time to create a stub article to replace the thing that there snow. Smith Jones (talk) 22:57, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Instead of changing the time in the prod template (a bit tacky), just remove it. You feel the article shouldn't be deleted, which means you are constesting the prod, so it's okay to remove the template.

However, you might want to wait a couple of days before removing the template on Global Community One World Unity Army. Unless you have already shown as per WP:FICTION how this has real world notability, I'll take it to AfD if the prod is removed since my searches haven't turned up a lick of real world notability. You might want to take a few minutes to read through WP:FICTION to make sure you understand what standards the article needs to meet to be kept. --Fabrictramp (talk) 23:08, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

FGL Copyvio

It actually is a copyright violation. If you go to http://www.open5g.com/index.html, and click on About Us/What is Open5G you will see the sentences verbatim. Unfortunately the URL doesn't change from http://www.open5g.com/index.html as you click through. Toddst1 (talk) 00:55, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks -- I did check that page, but I was only visually scanning for the first sentence in each of the FGL paragraphs, which are the only original sentences in the article. I'll ax it now.--Fabrictramp (talk) 00:57, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

AWB edits

Yes, your right I may have made some white space edits, but not as many.--Kumioko (talk) 15:37, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

The goal should be zero. Cheers! :) --Fabrictramp (talk) 16:07, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

prod-2 at TfD

I have put a comment/question under your recent 'keep' opinion, in case you would be interested in commenting in turn. (TfD link) Regards --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 23:18, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I do have that page watched, but I don't always watch every page I comment on. :)--Fabrictramp (talk) 23:40, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Closing AfDs

I have fixed your closing of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stochastic electrodynamics bibliography. When closing AfDs, the {{afdt}} template goes above the header, not below. Just a friendly notice. —Kurykh 03:22, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! --Fabrictramp (talk) 13:54, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Werkplaats Typografie

I've now sent this to AfD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Werkplaats Typografie. Regards, Espresso Addict (talk) 13:43, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Fine with me. I was on the fence about whether to do that myself. --Fabrictramp (talk) 18:27, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Adam Hutchison

No issue with removing the speedy and adding a prod. Thanks.--ukexpat (talk) 19:41, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Adopt A User

Would you be interested in adopting me? Dustihowe  Talk  19:51, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Certainly. I think your heart's in the right place, and you have a lot of potential. --Fabrictramp (talk) 19:57, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

So, what do I do now? Can you post your next message on my talk page please? Makes things easier for me. Dustihowe  Talk  20:06, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Florida Marlins all-time Roster

Stovall's name was already there. I found that his name didn't link to an active page, so I thought changing his name from Da Rond to DaRond would make the link work. It didn't, so I changed it back. According to http://www.baseball-reference.com/s/stovada01.shtml, he was signed as a free agent by the Marlins, but never played a game in the majors for them.

Suterb42 (talk) 03:00, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. --Fabrictramp (talk) 14:51, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Notability of Gamma Beta Chi

A tag has been placed on Gamma Beta Chi requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Justinm1978 (talk) 05:39, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 28th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 5	28 January 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor: New feature
Special: 2007 in Review, Part III	Signpost interview: John Broughton
New parser preprocessor introduced	Best of WikiWorld: "Truthiness"
News and notes: Estonian Wikipedia, Picture of the Year, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Tutorial: Reporting and dealing with vandals	WikiProject Report: Molecular and Cellular Biology
Wikipedia Dispatches: Banner year for Featured articles	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 03:33, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks from Happy-melon

I just wanted to say thanks for your support for my RfA, which closed (74/2/0) this morning. Your comment and support was very much appreciated. Happy‑melon 15:35, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Galactic Dominance

Well... how could I improve the page?KI114 (talk) 00:53, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Read WP:Notability, specifically Wikipedia:Notability#General_notability_guideline. The article needs to show that it meets that guideline. --Fabrictramp (talk) 00:55, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

So basicly I need to explain more about the actual game and how and why it was made in more detail? KI114 (talk) 00:58, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Notability#General_notability_guideline says "A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." You need to add reliable sources that are independent of the game, the people who designed it, or anyone else connected with it. These sources need to have substantial coverage (not just a news item saying "the game will be released"). The sources need to be reliable, so forums, myspace, and many blogs are out. And more than one such source would help. I do suggest you read Wikipedia:Notability#General_notability_guideline carefully and make sure you understand it.--Fabrictramp (talk) 01:03, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

I've added some links for the actual game and forums. I tried to add myspace links but a bot removed them. I also added more information in the first paragraph. Is this better? KI114 (talk) 01:24, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Please reread what I wrote. Forums, sites connected to the game, and myspace are not reliable, independent sources.--Fabrictramp (talk) 15:59, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Lawnbott

Hi Fabrictramp, and I hope you're feeling okay. You may have just tagged Lawnbott because it's the right thing to do, given that I haven't added any links supporting notability yet, but now that you're involved, I'd appreciate your help in figuring out which robotics articles are notable, how best to support notability with links, and how to open lines of communication between roboticist and non-roboticist editors. Regarding Lawnbott, I created the article because there was a broken link to the non-existent article from Autonomous robots. I had already written a short article on the Lawnbott over at Wikia, because I considered it to be one of many "useful robots".

For a discussion about the needs of robotics editors, you might be interested in today's conversation here.

As an appliance, I suppose a Lawnbott might be no more notable than, say, a brand of washing machine. I note that Kenmore easily makes the notability requirement, so the question would involve sales figures and how well-known Lawnbotts are...and this is a very hard question to answer. There are several users groups for Lawnbotts, which I suppose makes them more notable in a way than Kenmore washing machines, but sales figures for Lawnbotts are not available, the best I can tell. But there's a different lens to view Lawnbotts through, as a representative of domestic robots. Are they a notable step from where we are now to what's coming next, or are they unimportant? That's probably a question best debated by roboticists, although of course the usual rules about doing it with the proper links apply. (copied at my userpage) - Dan Dank55 (talk) 01:46, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Finding independent, reliable sources is the best (and probably the only) way to determine which robotics articles are notable. (Remember that notable can be totally different from important. Something may be important, but if it's not notable, it shouldn't be on wikipedia). Wikipedia:WikiProject Robotics can probably guide you to places to look for sources. --Fabrictramp (talk) 16:04, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

I see you're active in recent changes

Mind deleting a page for me and restoring with a phone number removed, came across it on RC patrol. Dureo (talk) 16:15, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

What page? --Fabrictramp (talk) 16:16, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

this diff Dureo (talk) 16:21, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

I'd like to help, but I can see this is going to take more brain power than I have right now. (Been very sick all week). Might be best to find another admin, as I'm going back to bed. :( --Fabrictramp (talk) 16:35, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Adoption

I see that you have offered to adopt me. I was just making sure that your offer was still open, since it has been over a week since you made the offer. Crazed by Penguins (talk) 04:35, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes it is, but I am having some health issues right now which will severely limit my time on wikipedia for the next week or so. If you're okay with that, the offer stands.--Fabrictramp (talk) 15:53, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

It's fine with me. It's only a week, and it would take a lot longer to find another adoptor/mentor anyway. Crazed by Penguins (talk) 20:33, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

And I am popping in to answer questions from time to time. I'm just not capable of heavy duty thinking at the moment. :)--Fabrictramp (talk) 20:44, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Allison Hatcher

Hi! I'm not sure what state it was in but I noticed that you deleted the article Allison Hatcher (removal of links to this article turned up in my watchlist). I had nothing to do with the article but I do know that if the article was about the Allison Hatcher who was Miss Indiana, she is notable. Could you possibly restore the article and I'll fix it up & reference it? You can move it to my userspace in the interim, if you like. Thanks PageantUpdater talk • contribs 02:02, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the automatic link removal -- the Allison Hatcher article that was deleted was most definitely not about Miss Indiana. (It was a bit of teenage vandalism, probably about a school mate. Restoration wouldn't be appropriate.) --Fabrictramp (talk) 15:02, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

TC&FCNSCFIBBA

Just dropping a quick note to let you know that I haven't forgotten our little project. I rewrote the 3000 hit section and added a "To do list" to our project page.

I saw above that you're on the DL. I hope it's nothing too serious and that you're back to 100% soon. Take care, Caknuck (talk) 09:00, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Finally getting up and around, thanks. I took advantage of my down time to make copious notes on the Cap Anson book in the library, and I should have time on Thursday to write some prose. --Fabrictramp (talk) 14:59, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for February 4th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 6	4 February 2008	About the Signpost

Special: 2007 in Review, Part IV	Tensions in journalistic use of Wikipedia explored
Best of WikiWorld: "Calvin and Hobbes"	News and notes: Milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Tutorial: Adding citations
Dispatches: New methods to find Featured Article candidates	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:55, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

GroundWorks_Theatre entry

I set up a pretty vanilla page about GroundWorks Theatre company in Nashville, TN. I based the outline on others for similar theatre companies I found elsewhere here.

I've added history and news coverage about the company, with links from multiple papers in Nashville. I also added links for the Awards section, as those are (I think) supporting news coverage here. Those should take care of notability and/or 3rd party sources/references issues. I don't think there's anything particularly advertorial in the company description, but any specifics would be much appreciated. thanks, jack —Preceding Jackechambers (talk) 17:21, 4 February 2008 (UTC) (talk • contribs) 19:28, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Please read WP:COI very carefully. Since you are an actor at the theater[6], you have a conflict of interest, and editing the GroundWorks Theatre article is strongly discouraged.--Fabrictramp (talk) 17:46, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I offer that there is value in establishing new articles and maintaining neutrality of tone and content. Unlike other theatre companies found here, I offered no opinions in the piece and added no promotional naming of staff, myself included. There were multiple verifiable sources linked. Wouldn't it make sense to make COI judgements based on actual content as opposed to a general concept that no one linked with an entry's subject should ever edit said entry? Should I not provide information or corrections to entries for my hometown (Brunswick,_Georgia), high school, university (University_of_the_South), or place of employment (Vanderbilt_University)? Even if I have basic, appropriate, and verifiable information? Jackechambers (talk) 21:43, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I would counter that the fact that you feel including show times and ticket prices isn't advertising shows that you may not be aware when you are adding unintentional bias. This is why such edits are strongly discouraged, and this content is why I recommended you read WP:COI carefully.--Fabrictramp (talk) 22:13, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I have removed those items from the article. I still dispute the bias idea; I was going by the outline of another theatre company's entry (never disputed), as I said. As that article listed times/prices and even gave the operating hours of its side business, that all seemed to be publicly available and relevant information, hence my inclusion. Maybe I'm confused; maybe it's because I was born in the most polluted ZIP Code in the country (thanks, Wiki!) -- Jackechambers (talk) 13:24, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Recent Deleton

i was notified that you have deleted a page i wrote about Travis Hendrix. i was rushed while writing it and i had to post it before i had completed it or put proper references. i was just wondering if you could either undelete it or send me the text so i can make the proper revisions.

thanks in advance --T.hendrix (talk) 06:15, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

After looking at the page again, I'm definitely not going to restore it, and I don't think it's worthwhile sending you a copy. First off, as you know from the warning on your talk page, you should not be writing an article about yourself. (See WP:COI.) Secondly, I really doubt that the article as it stood could be the basis for a quality, encyclopedic article. (You were "tormented by the wild bison known to swim close to the rocky shorelines of Lethbridge"? You lived "alone in the deep tropical jungles of Medecine Hat"? And of course, if you really did win the "International Bocce Ball Championships", I can't for the life of me figure out why a gsearch isn't confirming this.)

When you decide that you'd like to write a serious article, please take a moment to check out WP:FIRST. I hope you will decide that you want to make some positive contributions to wikipedia.--Fabrictramp (talk) 14:39, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

i agree you have some fine arguments, but i would really appreciate if you cound send me the text from the article that i could keep for future reference. i would not repost it but i would appreciate it if you sent it back to me

T.hendrix (talk) 20:13, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Spalding

No problem. I've been following your progress on the Anson page and think you're doing a great job. We need more baseball GAs and FAs. Kinston eagle (talk) 00:34, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Redirect of Dan Dimancescu - c.v.

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Dan Dimancescu - c.v., by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Dan Dimancescu - c.v. is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Dan Dimancescu - c.v., please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 16:30, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Notice of temporary injunction

Hi Fabrictramp, I noticed you added a {{notability}} tag to an article about a television character[7], and I am letting you know that there is currently a temporary injunction that applies to all editors[8] while this arbitration case is open. The injunction was enacted on February 3, 2008 and it reads:

"For the duration of this case, no editor shall redirect or delete any currently existing article regarding a television series episode or character; nor un-redirect or un-delete any currently redirected or deleted article on such a topic, nor apply or remove a tag related to notability to such an article. Administrators are authorized to revert such changes on sight, and to block any editors that persist in making them after being warned of this injunction."

The arbitration committee would like all editors to hold off on such actions while the case is open. Thank you. --Pixelface (talk) 10:03, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. It's too bad there isn't a good way of letting all editors know when there's such a sweeping request.--Fabrictramp (talk) 16:42, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

RE:

Thanks for catching that! I could've sworn that template existed... hmm. Anyway, cheers! Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 20:26, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I know that feeling! :) --Fabrictramp (talk) 20:29, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Start topic

I figured that it was talking about some sort of attraction, but couldn't figure out what; I should've probably checked up on that. However, part of my reasoning was also the page's title, as it wasn't related to any of the content. Thanks for the tip though! Cheers, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 20:56, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

My userpage

Kind of funny, but thanks for catching that. // Chris ^{(complaints)•(contribs)} 01:03, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

No problem. I was cleaning up after a serial vandal. Cheers!--Fabrictramp (talk) 01:04, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Radia

Hi, you put the 'additional citations' mark on my article about Radia. Could you please be more explicit and suggest me some improvements? Notice that i'm a beginner on wikipedia. Thanks. Etiennen 10:54, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

None of the "references" listed in the article are independent of the subject. The wikipedia notability guideline says that "A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." So to show that this subject is notable (and I believe it probably is), independent sources need to be added.--Fabrictramp (talk) 15:32, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Recover Keys

Hi

I am new in wiki and I spend time to learn how to write articles correctly. I tried to change my article but you put this message again. Now I really don't understand what changes I need to do to make this article looks correctly. So I ask you to help me with it. Can you provide me what exactly I must change and how? Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Choka (talk • contribs) 16:12, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

First, on talk pages it's polite to sign your comments. You can do that by typing --~~~~ at the end, or clicking on the little button at the top of the top of the edit box that looks like handwriting.

The maintenance boxes in the article have some very helpful links to understand what needs to be done, so definitely take a minute to read through those. In a nutshell, the problem with the article right now is it does not show that Recover Keys is a notable piece of software. (Please note that on wikipedia, notable is not the same as important.) The notability guideline says the subject needs to have "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject."

Take a minute to read the guideline very carefully and be sure you understand it. A common newbie mistake is to assume they already know what notability means, but here on wikipedia it has a very specific meaning. Once you make the changes / improvements in the article, I'd suggest you have an experienced editor look it over before removing the maintenance templates. The easiest way to do that is to put {{helpme}} on your talk page, followed by your request.

Hope that helps!--Fabrictramp (talk) 16:38, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Aaron Simon

Ummm, I trumped your prod with a db-vandalism on the Aaron Simon article. In this case, it clearly is a version of the Slash (musician) article with name changes. (Well, I got away with a db last night on it. :O) Normally I wouldn't go for a speedy delete on a hoax myself, but sometimes...) FlowerpotmaN·(t) 00:21, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

No problem -- I was just blocking the little... well civility prevents me from saying it, but you get the drift. :) --Fabrictramp (talk) 00:22, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Cut'n'paste this section from a message I just sent:Yup. I came across the page when I was doing something else. I have to admit that it looked (ummm....) fishy anyway; I think the David Beckham flatulence section might have caught my attention :O). But the details of Simon's mother being the costume designer on The Man Who Fell to Earth seemed a bit tooooo specific for the average run-of-the-mill hoax, so a quick Google sorted out the source. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 00:18, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Gregory M. Jones

Thanks for your diligence, but I had already started tagging the article, giving it context in Wikipedia. However, I may need help with sources, as the creator of the article is a newbie. Thanks! - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 17:38, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for February 11th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 7	11 February 2008	About the Signpost

Petition seeks to remove images of Muhammad	Foundation's FY2007 audit released
Vatican claims out-of-context Wikipedia quote was used to attack Pope	Best of WikiWorld: "W"
News and notes: Working group, Wik-iPhone, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Tutorial: Basic dispute resolution	Dispatches: Great saves at Featured article review
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:29, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Farsi-language subpage of my userpage.

Thanks for your help on that issue. Turns out the article was a copy-paste from fa:Wikipedia, so the speedy delete was appropriate. I blanked the subpage on my userpage, but I'd appreciate it if you would delete the page entirely. Thanks. Cbdorsett (talk) 13:14, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Will do. Glad to help. --Fabrictramp (talk) 16:48, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I can has thankspam?

Quick, let's delete the front page!

No seriously, thanks for contributing at my RfA which ended 68/0/0. I'm amazed and humbled by the result, and the warm and supportive comments that went with it. I've put the pic of Tiger here because although I know not everyone appreciates lolcats, to me it illustrates the possibility of taking things seriously with a light heart. I will try to do so, and remain open to the being slapped down if I do start being impossibly pompous. Thanks Pedro :  Chat  for your generous nomination, and also to Master of Puppets for ripping off his thankspam without so much as a by-your-leave. To all who contributed - especially the eventually withdrawn (but very interesting) neutral and oppose - thank you! Now it's off to new admin school for me, before I dare do anything for real... Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 09:46, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Avanti issues

Hi Fabrictramp, many thanks for your comments about the page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avanti_Construction. I have addressed all those issues and I hope that now it is OK. I am quite new in Wikipedia, and hence why there can be occasions on which I need to enhance standards. Please have a look at my improvements and at the discussion page of Avanti Construction and let me know whether all os OK. Most sincere thanks.

Machiavelli2008 --Machiavelli2008 (talk) 08:44, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I've readded tags for the items that haven't been taken care of yet. Each tag has links that will help you determine what's needed -- you might want to read each of those links carefully, and see what is needed before removing them. After you've read through the links, if you still have questions feel free to ask.--Fabrictramp (talk) 14:48, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Rapist (card game)

Thanks for taking this to AfD -- as you may have gathered from the author's talk page, I would have done it myself if I'd been online when the prod tag was removed, but I'm grateful that you got it there quickly. Accounting4Taste:talk 05:41, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

No problem! --Fabrictramp (talk) 14:49, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Please review Fouad Mourtada

Please review your added tags (notability, npov and uncategorized) to Fouad Mourtada article. See also the discussion page. It would be nice if you could help categorize the article. User:uiteoi 2/21/08. —Preceding comment was added at 19:14, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

RFA

Thanks for participating in my RFA, which closed successfully with 40 supports, 13 opposes, and 4 neutrals. For those of you who supported my RFA, I greatly appreciate it. For those who did not, I'm also thankful for your constructive criticism. If you need some advice or have some pointers for me, you know where to reach me! A special thank you to Majorly for all his time and effort he has placed in my nomination. Once again, thank you all for your helpful comments. Now off to new admin school! Cheers, Icestorm815 • Talk 01:15, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of K. S. Balachandran

An article that you have been involved in editing, K. S. Balachandran, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/K. S. Balachandran. Thank you. Bearian (talk) 15:46, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

The deadbot replacement is finished

I'm done with the bot. See my post on the bot requests page for more info.--Dycedarg ж 19:14, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks and good work. Other than a possible duplication of comments (noted at the bot requests page), it looks great.--Fabrictramp (talk) 19:57, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

First run complete

The bot finished it's first run through the DEP pages. I looked through the diffs and everything looks fine, but you should probably check through them too. I ran it twice on the first page because it missed one due to a slight bug in the regex which has now been fixed. I was planning on running it from here on out once a day at some time in the middle of the night.--Dycedarg ж 00:38, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Looks great. You're my new hero. :) --Fabrictramp (talk) 01:48, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm happy I was able to help. Should you desire any alterations to the bot in the future, just leave a note on my talk page.--Dycedarg ж 03:55, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Cap Anson

Sorry, I had guests from OOT recently, so I haven't been able to devote much time to WP recently. (I also blame the dismal failure that is Freelancer (computer game), but that's a different story.) But they're gone now, so I'll have a look at your draft late tonight. Sorry for falling off the map there... Caknuck (talk) 17:47, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

No problem - BTDT! Especially the computer game part. :) --Fabrictramp (talk) 19:33, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

I've put together a first draft of an expanded lead section at User talk:Caknuck/TC&FCNSCFIBBA. Let me know what you think. Caknuck (talk) 21:57, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Crispus Attucks

Sadly, the Crispus Attucks article is a huge vandal magnet and always has been! --House of Scandal (talk) 21:04, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Looked like it to me, too. I'll keep an eye on it after the week is up and see if stronger measures are warranted. I was kind of surprised it hadn't been protected before. --Fabrictramp (talk) 21:21, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I remember trying to get it protected about a year ago but can't exactly recall the results of my efforts. I think it was protected but only temporarily. --House of Scandal (talk) 21:33, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

The log didn't show any previous protection. I'm not sure if there's a time limit on what shows up, but no matter. If and when it gets attacked again, I'll give it a month, then move to permanent.--Fabrictramp (talk) 21:39, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

A Message from your Adoptee

Hi! Could you please check out my work? I Created a page called ISSCH and was wanting to know what you think of it. Thanks a lot!! Dustihowe  Talk  18:08, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Definitely a very good stub. :) I agree with TEB728's decision to move the article -- you might check out WP:NAME for more info on the naming conventions, as well as Wikipedia:Naming conventions (abbreviations). There's also a little bit of copy editing that could be done (a sentence fragment here and there), it needs categories, and you might expand on what a "core 40 system" is (or provide a link). Otherwise, excellent work.--Fabrictramp (talk) 18:18, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Could you comment on my editor review....?Dustihowe  Talk  18:28, 29 January 2008 (UTC)Hope I'm not asking too much

No problem, but give me a day or two. I've got the cold from hell right now so I have the attention span of a gnat. I'd like to give it the thought it deserves. --Fabrictramp (talk) 18:34, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I could kick you in the ass and make you forget about the cold if you want...Dustihowe  Talk  18:37, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

It's now walking pneumonia. I'll pretty limited in my online time for a few days. :(--Fabrictramp (talk) 23:53, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi, just wanted to check in, I have a new signature now. Dusti^talk 17:17, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for the review, I took it to heart and am working on fixing that now!!! Once again, thanks. Hows the illness? Happy Editing, Dusti^talk 18:42, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for asking. I'm only at about 60%, but my brain has started to come back and I'm not stuck in bed all day. Big improvement. :)

As I said, if you have question on anything, drop me a note. --Fabrictramp (talk) 19:57, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Just checking in to let you know that I am alive and well. I am doing recent changes and new pages patrol. How is life going with you? Happy Editing, Dusti^talk 18:16, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for checking in -- I had a note to myself to check with you tomorrow. :) Things are good on this end. I see you've gotten a lot of good advice in your editor review. Any questions? Need any help?--Fabrictramp (talk) 18:48, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

I do have a question. On the page that I have created ISSCH I placed an info box on the page, however, some of the information that I have placed in the box is not showing up, like the Asst. Principal, Shelly Thomas. Is there a specific reason why this won't show up? Happy Editing, Dusti^talk 18:50, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Try taking out the space between vice and principal in the infobox.--Fabrictramp (talk) 19:04, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Good golly molly, your so smart!!!! Other than that stupid mistake, how am I looking? Happy Editing, Dusti^talk 19:23, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

The article is coming along very nicely. Just a couple of quick things you could change would be to remove the bold on the second instance of "Indiana Soldiers' and Sailors' Children's Home" (only the first instance in the first paragraph should be bold), and you could fix the capitalization of [[Category:High schools in Indiana]] which would change the redlinked category to bluelinked. Otherwise, you're making great progress on it.--Fabrictramp (talk) 19:32, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Done and done. Now, what can I do to ensure the next time I get the balls to go for RFA, I will most likely get it? That is something that I have been looking forward to for some time, and I honestly think that I have the potential to do it. Hope that doesn't sound too cocky . What do you think? Also, I have cut back on my rollback tool. Some people, as you can see on my ER, were upset over some of the things that I was doing with it. OOPS! Happy Editing, Dusti^talk 19:54, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Probably the main things would be the passage of time (give it about three months or so), rack up some quality main space edits (lots of people like to see work on bringing one or more articles to GA or FA status -- I didn't have that, but I did have 19,000 main space edits over a period of more than a year), get involved with XFD, and make sure you show that you've mastered the CSD issues brought up in the last RFA. Once you get those things, admin coaching would be the next step. Wikipedia:Guide_to_requests_for_adminship#What_RfA_contributors_look_for has some good pointers for things to work on. HTH! --Fabrictramp (talk) 22:28, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi there! How are you? Just wanting to check in and see how things are going. I was wondering if you could clean up my page a little bit, I'm a little confused on what's happened.....I just don't know. Please let me know on my talk page if you can assist. Happy Editing, Dusti^{talk to me} 18:05, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you'd like help with -- your user page looks fine to me. Can you give me a specific?--Fabrictramp (talk) 18:22, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Specifically, on the userboxes "tab", dots show up, on my screen, after the userboxes, on the vandalism in ofrmation tab" my "award" isnt showing up, and also I can't find the stray bracket under my helpful stuff tab. Happy Editing, Dusti^{talk to me} 18:30, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't see dots on my browser, but I do see an empty white box. I took a quick look at the code and I couldn't find a problem, but you're using a template I'm not familiar with. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Userboxes would probably be a good place to ask for help.

Other than that, how are things going? Feeling comfortable with editing? Any questions?--Fabrictramp (talk) 19:01, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Things are going great. Could you check out the conversation between me and the person talking about Music of Your Life on my talkpage. Happy Editing, Dusti^{talk to me} 19:04, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

So if I've understood it correctly, you left a message for KarlSouthcott saying that his edits to Music of Your Life were original research, and he replied saying it's not because he has contracts that confirm the information. All well and good (except that the contracts probably aren't public information, so they aren't a valid source for Wikipedia, but the information about stations canceling their affiliation probably isn't controversial and could be sourced elsewhere). Then you went on to say "I am granting you permission to use the original research in this article." Unfortunately, you don't have that power -- no one at Wikipedia does, because it violates Wikipedia:No original research, which is an official policy. Perhaps a better way to express it would have been "In this case, the change in the article is fine", in order not to confuse a new editor into thinking that anyone here has the power to grant that permission. Not a big deal, just something that could be brought up at an admin nom. :)

My first thought in reading KarlSouthcott's reply to you was "uh, oh, COI". But in looking at his edit, I don't see a conflict there (he stuck to facts, and didn't introduce any bias), so there's no issue there.

Did you have any other concerns with the article / conversation, or did I cover it all?--Fabrictramp (talk) 19:24, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, see, I thought of COI, but then like you said, looking at the edits, I didn't think that COI would have fell here. As far as the granting permission, I liked saying it :). No actually, I wanted him to thinkthat he had permission from an editor who would go to bat for him about the edit, so if anyone had something to say to hinm, he could refer them to me. ?? Happy Editing, Dusti^{talk to me} 19:28, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

If you want to let someone know you're willing to go to bat for them, it's perfectly okay to say just that. :) Again, no biggie, but it is something that could come up at an admin nom. --Fabrictramp (talk) 20:23, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I see what you mean. Dusti^{talk to me} 18:26, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

BTW- TAG! Your it!Dusti^{talk to me} 18:33, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Hey, you suck at playing tag :)....I have a question. For some reason, my talk page is screwed up (archives anyway. Can you take a look and see if you can fix it? Thanks!! Dusti^{talk to me} 17:18, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

HEY!!! Your good!!! Wow, now (if you have time) check out my Admin Coaching stuff at User:Dustihowe/AC and tell me what you think. Dusti^{talk to me} 17:26, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I've been accused of worse. :). The problem was in the Miszabot config -- the config said you were archiving to User talk:Dustihowe/Archive2 1 (User talk:Dustihowe/Archive2 + counter), but the box on your userpage said it was User talk:Dustihowe/Archive 2, which didn't exist. I took the liberty of moving the archive page and fixing the config file. It should work now, but keep an eye on it. I think this may fix the index, too.

I'll look at the admin coaching in a short while -- right now I've got a section tied up at WP:DEP and I need to finish that up before a bot comes in and gives me an edit conflict. :) --Fabrictramp (talk) 17:30, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Again, thanks, your awesome Dusti^{talk to me} 17:33, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Looks like your coach is giving you good, solid advice. One good way to build up quality mainspace edits is in a wikiproject like Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikify. Get you feet wet in some of the more recent backlogs (the older stuff is usually the hardest, because a number of people have looked at it and said "ugh"), and concentrate improving a few articles as much as you can (fully wikified, categorized, refs where possible, copyediting). That kind of thing is looked on favorably in RfAs. People like to see that a potential admin has a good grasp of what editors go through to write articles. --Fabrictramp (talk) 17:50, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I have faith this will work out. Dusti^{talk to me} 18:35, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

So do I. :) --Fabrictramp (talk) 19:18, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for February 18th and 25th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 8	18 February 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor
Michael Snow, Domas Mituzas appointed to Board of Trustees	WikiWorld: "Thinking about the immortality of the crab"
News and notes: Administrator desysopped, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Tutorial: Getting an article to featured article status	Dispatches: FA promotion despite adversity
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 4, Issue 9	25 February 2008	About the Signpost

Signpost interview: Michael Snow	Controversial RfA results in resysopping of ^demon
Sockpuppeting administrator desysopped, community banned	Two major print encyclopedias cease production
WikiWorld: "Hyperthymesia"	News and notes: Wikimania Call for Participation, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	WikiProject Report: Family Guy
Dispatches: A snapshot of featured article categories	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:59, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Award

SILVER LOCK AWARD Thanks for locking the Crispus Attucks article. It apparently came in handy as some user was forced to leave their vandalistic comments on the talk page instead! Good work. --House of Scandal (talk) 08:20, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I was majorly tired of reverting vandalism every hour on that one. I needed a break. :)--Fabrictramp (talk) 15:55, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

RE. Supavadee Phangkaew

Sorry for deleting the tag. I'm new to Wikipedia. I've since commented on the deletion page. Would appreciate some support in the article remaining undeleted until I can complete and add references. Thanks 84.64.255.190 (talk) 23:13, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Advice Needed

A while ago I had a discussion with you about a page that I was trying to write, but have since then given up on it, and I have turned to attempting to actually help out on the site, by keeping tabs on articles that interest me and and trying to keep vandals comments off them. I am writing mainly because you are the only user I have talked to that has a long history of editing on this site. What happened was one of the pages #REDIRECT Lil Wayne was edited and the alias's were deleted. This user is more experienced than I am, and is an editor, and since I have one warning already against me (for immatureness I once had but have since lost) I didn't want to argue against him without some kind of proof that he is wrong. Basically I am asking you if you could point me in the direction of a place that I can find an exact definition of Wikipedia's policy on Alias's. If you could help, I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks Zad27 (talk) 23:02, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

AFAIK, there isn't an official wikipedia policy on aliases (which is probably why you couldn't find it.) But since that alias field is used in {{Template:Infobox Musical artist}} , I went to that page. Scrolling further down to Template:Infobox_Musical_artist#Alias, there is a little bit of documentation on how the field is to be used. In reading the edit summary left by User:Cloudz679 ("alias is for names the artist has released with"), it looks like he/she is trying to say that the aliases you added aren't names the artist released work under. (I don't know a thing about this artist, so I have no idea what's right). If you disagree, and think the artist did release work under one or more of those aliases, I'd suggest finding references, and presenting the info (politely!) to User:Cloudz679 on his/her talk page. There would be no reason for anyone to give you any kind of warning if you approach it that way.

Hope that helps -- if you have more questions, feel free to ask!--Fabrictramp (talk) 00:26, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing discography!

Thanks for fixing the discography. I assumed that it should follow the "band"_discography convention but as you say, if it's not large enough to warrant "breaking out" that makes sense to me. I accidently overwrote the redirect you put in - I seem to have the worst luck with Wikipedia but I'm limiting editing to just one PC now, so hopefully I'll avoiding shooting myself, and helping folks like you, in the foot! Thanks! Cheers, Wink WinkJunior (talk) 01:16, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

New Messages

I decided to make a new section, as the old one is pretty long. I think I've made another boo-boo. On my talk page, i changed the font to comic sans. Doing this, I somehow changed my archive box location. Can you take a look? Also, on my computer screen, when I click on edit and type, the text goes off the screen some. Any ideas? Hit me up !!! Dusti^{talk to me} 19:25, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I just did a quick test, and when the first line is <font face="comic sans ms"> your archive box shows up in the right place. When it's <div style="font-family: comic sans ms;">'' it disappears. I've never messed with the font on my talk page, so I can't help much beyond that, but it's definitely the first line that's causing you grief.--Fabrictramp (talk) 19:34, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, how about the computer screen issue? Dusti^{talk to me} 19:39, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

TAG!!!

Duh, sorry about that. I just tested it and it's not happening for me in Firefox or Safari (both on Mac OSX). If you go back to the old first line is it still happening for you? How about if you clear your browser cache?--Fabrictramp (talk) 19:47, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Not working for me....this is odd. Dusti^{talk to me} 19:55, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

This is happening on every computer I go to, could it be something in my preferences? Dusti^{talk to me} 17:35, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm at work today so I have access to Windoze. I just tried it with Firefox and IE. In IE, the text wraps completely normally. In Firefox, it will scroll the screen sideways if I type one hellaciously long word, but as soon as I put a space in it it wraps normally. (Same behavior whether it's your talk page or mine.) FWIW, in the editing tab in my wikipedia prefs, I only have "Enable section editing via [edit] links", "Show edit toolbar (JavaScript)", "Show preview before edit box", and "Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" checked. In my monobook.js file (I use the monobook skin exclusively), I have Twinkle, Formatter, Defaultsort, Friendly, Lupin's antivandal tool, and Persondata.--Fabrictramp (talk) 18:30, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I went in and changed my skin from modern to default for now and it seems to have fixed the issue for now. Maybe its the skin? I dont know. I created a new account to see what the basic defaults were and checked them against mine. Nothing really seemed to have changed much, except for my edit count (which is now 2,000+ :) ). What's up? Any more challenges for me? Dusti^{talk to me} 18:37, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

see above Dusti^{talk to me} 17:45, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Call me dense, but I'm not sure what you mean by "see above".--Fabrictramp (talk) 17:50, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

See what was written above (I went in and changed my skin.....). :) LOL Dusti^{talk to me} 17:52, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm still not getting it. Unless "Any more challenges for me?" wasn't a rhetorical question, as I assumed it was...--Fabrictramp (talk) 17:56, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

No, that really was the only thing that I was refering too, and no, it wasnt a rhetorical question, do you really have any challenges for me? I like 'em. Challening and fun, gives me some more stuff to do. Dusti^{talk to me} 18:11, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

(outdent so this isn't an inch wide)Well, then! Now I get it. :)

How about an article writing and/or improving challenge? What subjects are you interested in? --Fabrictramp (talk) 18:18, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Your the coach! Dusti^{talk to me} 18:22, 4 March 2008 (UTC) ( is this too outdented lol just kidding} Dusti^{talk to me} 18:22, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

But part of being a good coach is finding out how best to use each player on the team. :) So what subjects are you interested in? Hobbies? Life-stuff? Popular culture? Biography? History? Science? Give me a clue! *grin*--Fabrictramp (talk) 18:27, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Pop. Culture, hobbies, life-stuff, LGBT issues, normal stuff teens today are interested in. Not that I am normal lol. 12.186.80.1 (talk) 18:41, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay, that helps. Work is crazy this afternoon, so it might not be until tomorrow morning, but I'll find a challenge for you. :)--Fabrictramp (talk) 19:00, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

I Will be looking forward to it ;) Dusti^{talk to me} 19:10, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Please check out my editor review. An attack has been made and I want to know if you feel I have replied correctly. Dusti^{talk to me} 19:55, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

New user

Do you know how long I remain a "new user', i.e. how long before I can upload photos, edit protected articles, etc.? Thanks. --SpockMonkey (talk) 20:45, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Most functions are turned on automatically after 4 days (looks like you're just about there). Some articles are protected so that only admins can edit them, but those are few and far between.--Fabrictramp (talk) 22:33, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 3rd, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 10	3 March 2008	About the Signpost

Wales' relationship, breakup with journalist Rachel Marsden raises questions about possible improprieties	Eleven users apply for bureaucratship
Signpost interview: Domas Mituzas	Role of hidden categories under discussion
Book review: Wikipedia: The Missing Manual	Military history WikiProject elections conclude, nine elected
Best of WikiWorld: "Extreme ironing"	News and notes: Encyclopedia of Life, Wikipedian dies, milestones
Dispatches: April Fools mainpage featured article	WikiProject Report: Football
Tutorial: How to use an ImageMap	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:39, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Your Challenge

(mission impossible music) Thank you for the challenge Coach!! I will immediatley begin the task and will check back in soon! :)Dusti^{talk to me} 17:09, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Gosh, I hope your computer doesn't self-destruct in five seconds... :) --Fabrictramp (talk) 17:19, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Yea, the State of Indiana would not be too happy about that, or ISSCH. Dusti^{talk to me} 17:36, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Question from your other adoptee

I was looking at my watchlist and, for example, I see (without links, the newest edit on my watchlist):

09:36 User talk:Fabrictramp (diff; hist) . . (+363) . . Dustihowe (Talk | contribs) (Maybe just a small bang!)

Could you tell me what the "(+363)" means? I can't seem to find any help page that explains this. --Crazed by Penguins (talk) 00:55, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

It means that my change to this page was a net addition of 363 characters.--Fabrictramp (talk) 02:06, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thank you. That makes sense now! --Crazed by Penguins (talk) 23:54, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Mission Impossible Status

I am a long way from being done, but can you give a status check on the article. I have done some Wikification and sectioned off the article. Beacuse I am here at ISSCH, I am not able to access too many websites, making it really difficult for me to add more info to the infobox. Let me know what you think!! Dusti^{talk to me} 19:17, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I removed a lot of the blue light specials :) in the article and also took a second to read through WP:Lead Section. I removed that and, well, you can see the result. No, I do not have access to that. What I have done to confirm some info and to add to the box is to just google some stuff and see what happens. I can't do this with pictures, so can you help me out in that aspect? Thanks and let me know what you think. Dusti^{talk to me} 20:11, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Still a bit of overlinking left to clean up (AIDS, years, etc.), but the article is much improved. Good job! You might check out Wikipedia:IMAGE#Obtaining_images for hints on how to get an image. If the sites mentioned aren't accessible to you, it also has instructions on how to post a request for someone else to get the image.--Fabrictramp (talk) 23:03, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Removed some more blue light specials and added the page to requests for images. What else should I do? Dusti^{talk to me} 18:11, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I'd take off the {{underconstruction}} tag (use those very sparingly -- probably didn't need at all on this article, because it's not likely you'd have an edit conflict.) Also you have the article linking to itself at the beginning of the second section -- no need for that. Otherwise, not much else you can do without access to sources.--Fabrictramp (talk) 22:48, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

And I see you've doubled up on the {{WPBiography}} template on the talk page. Might want to combine the info on both templates.--Fabrictramp (talk) 22:50, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

So, what do I do now? Dusti^{talk to me} 17:11, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Let's see if you can apply what you've learned to another article. Pick one from the list at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_LGBT_studies/to_do_full_list#Articles_needing_Wikification (let me know which one), and have at it. Remember not to let your computer blow up in five seconds. :) --Fabrictramp (talk) 22:17, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Um.....I'm not sure about what just happened. I thought, wrongly, when you "close" and AFD, all you do is put the template on the discussion and it closes. I was told otherwise, and told not to "close" any more AFD's. I was also told, in my opinion wrongly, they were not clear cut. What do you think? Dusti^{talk to me} 15:56, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Note, from what I can see, all but one were closed (out of several) soon after reopened (some weren't reopened) and closed with a keep. Dusti^{talk to me} 16:00, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Take a deep breath. I'm working on an answer on your talk page -- because I'm at work and actually need to do work as well, it may take a few minutes. There's no fire.--Fabrictramp (talk) 16:03, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

'Deep Breath'. Ok, I explained the situation to my admin coach. What do you think I should do now? Hide, Run, Die lol :). You know and I know it wasn't intentional for me not to put the template on the talk page of the closed discussion, but why was I bitten? I thought I understood what to do, but I messed up. So am I banned from closing AFD's or can I attempt to remedy the situation later on? Honestly, I looked at the debates and saw what I thought was a clear cut consensus. They all were closed with a keep anyway, with the exception of one that was relisted and deleted. I'm just lost. Dusti^{talk to me} 16:45, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

You absolutely were not bitten. Both of these editors were simply shouting "stop!" to get your attention. The best thing to do is take another deep breath, read through what they said, and think about it, rather than just react. (Good practice for adminship!)

If you ever run into a case where a comment on a talk page (or edit summary) upsets you, the best thing to do is take a break. It might be five minutes or it might be a good night's sleep. Get a fresh perspective, and try to put yourself in the other person's shoes. You might see that you didn't read it right, or maybe they didn't express themselves well, or maybe they're just a jerk. (In which case, why let it bother you?) Try to evaluate unemotionally whether they have a valid complaint or not. If you aren't sure, ask them in a neutral way. (Something along the lines of "I'm not sure I understand you correctly. Did you mean xyz?" often works well for me.)

Definitely give closing AfDs a break until your admin coach gives you the go-ahead. That will avoid ruffling feathers. :)--Fabrictramp (talk) 17:03, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for running to my rescue. I definatley feel a little better and less lost now. Thanks! Your a great coach ;) Dusti^{talk to me} 17:06, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

End of the temporary injunction

The arbitration committee have reached a decision in this arbitration case and the temporary injunction related to television episode articles and television character articles has now ended. Thank you. --Pixelface (talk) 02:36, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Flood v. Kuhn

Yeah, I found different things in the sources I was looking at. It seems Imperfect Diamond is correct ... while many people believed he had heard it from a reporter, he actually was informed by a low-level team official. Daniel Case (talk) 16:41, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Glad to hear I'm not completely crazy! :)--Fabrictramp (talk) 16:42, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikibreak, not so short after all

I woke up this morning feeling great, and I had to come back. I'm just going to slow down for now. Dusti^{talk to me} 18:14, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like a good plan. Amazing what a good night's sleep can do to clear your head! :)--Fabrictramp (talk) 15:23, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Yea, can I suggest my next exercise? Dusti^{talk to me} 17:09, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Sure, what would you like to suggest?--Fabrictramp (talk) 17:41, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, got busy with Keeper. Compile me a list of AFD's that are old and let me suggest how they should be closed and why. Dusti^{talk to me} 18:39, 14 March 2008 (UTC) This message will self destruct in 3 seconds....so why are you still here reading this? Get out now!!!! Sorry about the computer

I'd prefer that you work with your admin coach on the AfD issue. I still think it would be a better idea for you to get your feet wet by contributing to the discussion on AfDs first.--Fabrictramp (talk) 19:18, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

How are things going today? Good I hope. How am I doing as far as AFD's are going? Also, check out the question on my talk page about one AFD I closed. What is your opinion? This user seems to have an issue with AFD's and closing them....see their talk page. Dusti^{talk to me} 17:23, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Keeper76 said it well. I heartily agree with the only problem is that you should not have closed the discussion early. As to how you're doing on AFD's in general, I still prefer that you work with your admin coach on that.--Fabrictramp (talk) 18:33, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Sweet. Ummm.....not much left to say.....any projects? Dusti^{talk to me} 18:48, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Copied from above: "::::::Let's see if you can apply what you've learned to another article. Pick one from the list at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_LGBT_studies/to_do_full_list#Articles_needing_Wikification (let me know which one), and have at it. Remember not to let your computer blow up in five seconds. :) " --Fabrictramp (talk) 21:24, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

The Last Battle

Thanks for your comments concerning The Last Battle. I had a question on referencing and sourcing. My knowledge of this book is based upon my own reading of it. How do I reflect that in the reference section?--Stetsonharry (talk) 16:00, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Any time you encounter a maintenance tag, such as the {{unref}} tag on The Last Battle (nonfiction book), following the links on the tag can give you quite a bit of information. Of of the links on the tag will take you to Wikipedia:Reliable sources. In general, wikipedia articles about books will need sources in addition to the book itself (or your interpretation of the book), and there's usually no need to list the book as its own reference. Did that answer your question?--Fabrictramp (talk) 16:24, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that's very helpful. Thanks.--Stetsonharry (talk) 03:44, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey

Hey how are you today? :) 123.255.20.197 (talk) 05:30, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Just fine - how are things in New Zealand, my anonymous questioner?--Fabrictramp (talk) 14:51, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry my friend

I am using a new script and it must have sent the message to you, not the right person. Sorry. Dusti^{talk to me} 16:43, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

How are things going? Dusti^{talk to me} 17:20, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Just fine, thanks. And you?--Fabrictramp (talk) 17:27, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, trying to figure out one of these stupid scripts (just getting used to it). I have improved Violence against LGBT people‎ as part of my challenge. It really didn't need wikified, just unwikified. Dusti^{talk to me} 17:32, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Good work! Only a couple of comments. I'd unlink the word "violence" in the bolded area in the first paragraph. (See Wikipedia:LEAD#Bold_title). Also, when you have a full date, such as March 19, 2008, that should be wikilinked because that way the date will format correctly for users who are signed in. March 19 and 19 March will both format correctly on screen -- March 19 for us in the US, 19 March for UK, NZ, and other users. (See Wikipedia:DATE#Autoformatting_and_linking for more.) --Fabrictramp (talk) 17:55, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

So all dates need to be wikilinked? Dusti^{talk to me} 18:43, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Read Wikipedia:DATE#Autoformatting_and_linking. Just a month or year by itself shouldn't be wikilinked, unless the reader might need to go to that article for better understanding of what they're reading (pretty rare). Buy a month+day or month+day+year usually should be, if only for display purposes.--Fabrictramp (talk) 19:25, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Alan Chavez & The Crayons TBA AfD

Thanks. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 22:27, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem.--Fabrictramp (talk) 22:36, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 13th and 17th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 11	13 March 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor
Accusations of financial impropriety receive more coverage	Best of WikiWorld: "Five-second rule"
News and notes: New bureaucrat, Wikimania bids narrowed, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Vintage image restoration	WikiProject Report: Professional wrestling
Tutorial: Summary of policies	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 4, Issue 12	17 March 2008	About the Signpost

Best of WikiWorld: "The Rutles"	News and notes: Single-user login, election commission, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Dispatches: Changes at peer review
WikiProject Report: Tropical cyclones	Tutorial: Editing Monobook, installing scripts
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 22:46, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Perth Royal Infirmary

right just to let you know, i wish to add more references and to put in new sections too. so thanks for putting the tag on the article for just now, until i can get this finished Kilnburn (talk) 01:16, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Why did you delete Acute (medical)?

I see you just deleted the "Acute" article, which is a definition I was planning to reference in a medical history article (it is linked to from 'Chronic').

• Is "Acute" deprecated or was there another reason for killing that page? Would appreciate more info about this as acute vs chronic would be a useful distinction for my purpose. Pointillist (talk) 00:59, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Acute (medical) was deleted by another admin because it was a redirect to another deleted page, Acute (medicine). I deleted Acute (medicine) because it was an expired prod -- the article was simply a dictionary definition, had already been moved to wiktionary, and so another user requested the deletion.

You can always link to the wiktionary article in your medical history article. Use [[wikt:acute|acute]] as your link.

Hope that helps!--Fabrictramp (talk) 13:35, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks for your feedback, much appreciated - Pointillist (talk) 23:32, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

kelly something

• sigh* they'll accept anything these days... :p cheers. ninety:one 21:25, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 24th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 13	24 March 2008	About the Signpost

Single User Login enabled for administrators	Best of WikiWorld: "Clabbers"
News and notes: $3,000,000 grant, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Banner shells tame talk page clutter	WikiProject Report: Video games
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:16, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Apologies!

Re: edits to John Taylor (hymn writer)

It's no biggie. I intended to get back to that page this evening. I will add refs for what I have entered thus far, but I'm still trying to find more info on this guy. Marchije (talk) 10:58, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Former Fat Boys speedy deletion

Re: 20:29, 26 March 2008 Fabrictramp (Talk | contribs) deleted "Former Fat Boys" ‎ (Speedy deleted per (CSD G4), was a copy of material previously deleted per XfD. using TW)

I'm a little confused. I rewrote the article from the bottom up and it bears little resemblance to what was once there (I only contributed to the old article). It meets the notability requirements set forth in WPMusic and I believe I cited everything appropriately.

What can I do from here? Thanks! Sorry if I posted in the wrong place.

~Jeff / mcchrisfan

This is exactly the right place to post this kind of question.

Yes, Former Fat Boys was completely rewritten, but the issue was notability, and I don't see that the new article shows this any better than the old article. You said that the article meets WP:MUSIC -- which part of Wikipedia:MUSIC#Criteria_for_musicians_and_ensembles do you think it meets? Please enlighten me, and then I can tell you what the next step is. Hope that helps! --Fabrictramp (talk) 22:00, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

I think it certainly meets 1, 4, 9, and 7 in that list in WPMusic. It doesn't necessarily meet all of the qualifications in WPMusic, but as probably one of the most notable bands in the Nerdcore hip hop genre the certainly deserve inclusion. I especially think they're notable in general and in relation to that article with the release of the documentary film that heavily features them and several other artists in the [[Nerdcore hip hop}} genre. The documentary is another page I'm working on, as it has yet to have one, but has received national press in Newsweek and the New York Times recently. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcchrisfan (talk • contribs) 22:13, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm not convinced it meets number 1, but that's probably in a gray area. There isn't a hint of a claim in the article of meeting 4 or 7, and unless you think a TurboTax music contest is a major competition, 9 is out also.

If the Newsweek and NY Times articles have better info on the group (more than passing mentions), the article may be able to be salvaged. I'll be happy to restore the article to a subpage of your userspace where you can work on it until it's ready for prime time. When you think it's ready to move back to mainspace, it would be a good idea to have an admin give it a onceover first; just put {{helpme}} on your talk page with the request, and someone will be along shortly to help.

Ok, sounds good. Thanks. I'll try and see what I can do. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcchrisfan (talk • contribs) 23:53, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Reply

If it dosent meet the speedy criteria, then restore it ;) Fallen Angel 00:40, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Definitely speediable. I'll close the AfD then. :)--Fabrictramp (talk) 00:43, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Goblin Chronicles (proposed deletion)

• I believe this entry is note worthy as it is a published piece of work which has been positively reveiwed on serveral comic book news sites. I've added links to third-party reviews of The Goblin Chronicles by popular and reputable comic book news sites to the article. The Goblin Chronicles is also the first "all-ages" fantasy genre comic published by Ape Entertainment, which has been publishing comic book for over 5 years. If there is anything else you would suggest to make the article note worthy, please let me know. Thanks! Trollx (talk) 05:51, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Comment on User:BirgitteSB RfA

I'm sorry, I forgot to add the stats for her alternate account User:BirgitteSB-prod, which has quite a lot of her prod and AfD contributions to the nomination. Tim Vickers (talk) 20:06, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this to my attention. :) --Fabrictramp (talk) 20:55, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

A little AWB help

Hello! Can you please tell me how can I add articles present here on my article work list? Thanks! --SMS ^Talk 03:49, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Sure! Launch AWB, and over on the left side you'll see "Make from", and it probably says "Category" as the default. In the text box below that, type in "Disambiguation" (without the quotes), press the "Make List" button, and prepare to wait a while, as this will load a LOT of pages. FWIW, this is timing out on my old, slow computer, so the category may be too large. (I see it has over 95,000 pages in it.) Choosing a smaller category, such as "Airport disambiguation" is working just fine.

If you also want every page in every subcategory (like Airport disambiguation, etc), change Category in the dropdown box to Category (recursive). Be forewarned that this can load a LOT of pages, because it will load all the subcategories of the subcategories, etc.

Hope that helped -- let me know if you have more questions.--Fabrictramp (talk) 13:44, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Jay Bezel

Sorry about that - looked in the history and must have looked straight through the PROD tag. Thanks for the heads up Fritzpoll (talk) 00:12, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem -- I've missed it once or twice myself. :)--Fabrictramp (talk) 00:13, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

From Your Righteousness

Another editor has added the {{prod}} template to the article From Your Righteousness, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 15:01, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Works for me -- all I did is slap maintenance tags on it. The real question is "why am I talking to a bot?" :) --Fabrictramp (talk) 15:19, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Enfeebled Earth

Thanks for letting me know- AfD it is. J Milburn (talk) 20:06, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem!--Fabrictramp (talk) 20:06, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm Back

I'm back from my spring break. Whats going on? Dusti^{talk to me} 16:19, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Just fine here, if a bit hectic this week. Hope you had a good break.--Fabrictramp (talk) 17:09, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I had a great break, that is until I got back and saw this. Does it ever end? Dusti^{talk to me} 17:20, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Checking in....how's today going for you? Dusti^{talk to me} 16:47, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Still crazy, as it will be all week. I've got two people out taking care of personal stuff, so the workload is piling on me. Work does get in the way of so much fun stuff. ;-) --Fabrictramp (talk) 21:10, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Hopefully today can be a productive day. What do you think of my recent edits? Dusti^{talk to me} 17:34, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

(outdent) I'm a little confused by this one. --Fabrictramp (talk) 17:42, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

When I made this edit, I didnt see the {{db-blanked}} , I just thought the page was blanked by a vandal (notice I didn't even send a warning). The tag says the author blanked the page, however after I did rollback, he went back and edited again. We can't retag it for {{db-blanked}} because he edited after I reverted the blanking he did. I almost want to say tag it for spam, but it's not exactly advertising. What do you think? I know, I went a different route here than you expected.....Dusti^{talk to me} 17:50, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Definitely doesn't meet G11. You might want to tag the article for wikifying and categories, and it could probably use a rewrite. (And it might be a good idea to always double check before hitting "save page". *grin*)--Fabrictramp (talk) 17:59, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

 Done....double check before save?  Done. :)

Sign? ((notdone)) lol Dusti^{talk to me} 18:10, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Do you agree with this one? Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Piedras Blancas Motel? Dusti^{talk to me} 18:10, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

You keep trying to get me to comment on deletions, and I keep saying that's a matter for your admin coach. Nice try at sucking me in, though! :) --Fabrictramp (talk) 19:45, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Can't blame me for trying. :) Dusti^{talk to me} 20:55, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Awarding Barnstar

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		Aprils fools day was a blast. Loads of users lightened up to have good old fashion fun. I want to thank you for taking part in editing this page in particular and even though I may not know you, embrace the same talk pages, or even edit with you in the near future, I'd like to award you this Barnstar for making Wikipedia a fun environment in which to contribute. Until next year. :) SynergeticMaggot (talk) 13:30, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Search

I don't know. I think I just searched for the name and the word "review". That's at least where I normally start. Search engines tend to like me :-) Hobit (talk) 18:04, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll try adding "review" next time, and think Hobit-like thoughts. Maybe the search engine will like me, too. :) Thanks! --Fabrictramp (talk) 23:32, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 31st, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 14	31 March 2008	About the Signpost

Wikimania 2009 to be held in Buenos Aires	Sister Projects Interview: Wikisource
WikiWorld: "Hammerspace"	News and notes: 10M articles, $500k donation, milestones
Dispatches: Featured content overview	WikiProject Report: Australia
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 20:57, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

John Elkington‎

Serves you right! You beat me to closing the comment. :) SWik78 (talk) 15:23, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Simon Bruce

Hi! I had the hangon tag on there, i have made all the corrections, can you please reinstate my page?--Sarahmckem (talk) 04:35, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

The page was deleted by another admin as a blatant copyright infringement of http://www.simonbruce.com/bio.html, so no, I can't reinstate it. (nor can any other admin) The page has been protected against recreation because it's been deleted as a copyvio twice. If you want to recreate it, I'd suggest making a version at a subpage of your user page. When you think it's ready to go to mainspace, put {{helpme}} on your talk page and have an admin review it and move it for you. --Fabrictramp (talk) 15:12, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I am aware of that, and contacted the admin that it was not a copywrite infringe because I am the owner and author of the http://www.simonbruce.com/bio.html in the first place. I rewrote the bio so it would be different. I will do the helpme now I guess. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarahmckem (talk • contribs) 15:22, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

oh, and i did create a subpage on my userpage, but i cant seem to get anyone to come check it.--Sarahmckem (talk) 15:31, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

It's only been a couple of minutes, and you need to add what your question is below the "helpme" template.--Fabrictramp (talk) 15:37, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

No I created the subpage yesterday, not just this minute. sorry I'm new at this. --Sarahmckem (talk) 15:45, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry I wasn't clear -- it had only been a couple of minutes since you put up the "helpme" template. I see someone has already been by to help you, but because you still haven't said below the helpme template what your question is, they can't help you. Add your question to your talk page and you'll get some help. (Be sure to include a link to your subpage).--Fabrictramp (talk) 16:02, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

And also, pay close attention to what Orangemike has written on your talk page. People take conflict of interest very seriously around here.--Fabrictramp (talk) 16:05, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Pixelh8

I have noticed you have nominated the Pixelh8 article for deletion, the article has been edited and now contains links to both his CNN interview and his BBC as well as links so several other UK and International Magazine articles about Pixelh8. It also contains a link to Nerdapalooza and Huw Stephens BBC Radio 1 DJ who play Pixelh8's Music. We hope you will have a look? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hiddenyouth (talk • contribs) 23:53, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I did not nominate it for deletion, I simply listed the category for the debate. In fact, I had no comment on the deletion one way or the other, which you'll see if you read the debate. The correct place to make comments on the deletion is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pixelh8. Hope that helps!--Fabrictramp (talk) 00:01, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Sub Aqua Association

I hope you don't mind, but I've removed the maintenance tags you placed on Sub-Aqua Association on 7 August 2007. I've added some context and a reference (and noted it in the Talk page) but as a relative newcomer, I'd be happy to be guided if further revision was felt necessary --RexxS (talk) 03:01, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Since Sub-Aqua Association is "the UK affiliate to CMAS", CMAS is still a primary source. (So I've replaced the {{primarysources}} tag.) Take a look at WP:PSTS (which is also linked in the {{primarysources}} tag) for more info on the type of sources needed to show the article meets WP:Notability. Hope that helps.--Fabrictramp (talk) 14:19, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks very much for taking the time to help as I do know you are busy. If I may trouble you once more, I still think I need to sort out in my mind what is needed for the article to meet Wikipedia standards. I've carefully read WP:PSTS and looking at the statement "The SAA is the UK affiliate to CMAS..." I would have thought that supplying the CMAS reference showing the statement to be true meets Wikipedia's requirement for Verifiability. Even if CMAS is not a third-party in this context, does this statement not meet Wikipedia's policy on use of Primary sources? - as it is easily verifiable and makes no analytic, etc. claims. Put in a nutshell, saying "A has this relationship to B" surely cannot demand more proof that demonstrating that B acknowledges the relationship to A - or am I missing something here? On the subject of Notability, I've now included a reference from Intute - is that a good example of a Secondary source? --RexxS (talk) 16:43, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

New editors frequently confuse verifiability with notability. Both are important concepts on Wikipedia, but they are very different. As you said, verifiability has to do with "is this true?". Notability has to do with "is this subject worth enough of notice that it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." An example might be that my pet cockatiel is verifiable because I can post a picture of him that shows he exists. But he's not notable, because (as far as I know), he hasn't received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of him and me.

Articles need to be both verifiable and demonstrate notability. You've done a great job with verifiability, but notability still isn't there, because the references are either directory listings or not independent of the subject. Can you find newspaper or magazine stories about this group? A book written about them? Other significant, independent sources? Any or all of those would go a long way towards showing notability.

Did that explain it? If not, feel free to ask me more. --Fabrictramp (talk) 17:09, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: AfD (NA List of Wii games)

What do you mean about your comment? (Reply to my talk page if possible) Versus22 (talk) 00:03, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Since you didn't include a link, I have to guess which page you mean. Is it Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Wii games (North America)? If so, my "comment" was simply that this discussion has now been included at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Lists, so that people who are particularly interested in that type of discussion (and are probably knowledgeable about the issues involved) can take a look.--Fabrictramp (talk) 00:09, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that's the one. Versus22 (talk) 00:12, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Your adoptee

Hello, I'm back from the weekend and want your opinion on this discussion. Dusti^{talk to me} 17:50, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, since I supported the candidate, I'm sure you've guessed that I disagree with you. :)

I look up policy all the time. I'd rather be look it up before I act than act first and have to clean up a mess and soothe hurt feelings. I have no problem with people reading instructions; in fact, I wish more admins would read the instructions before acting, especially on speedy deletions. *grin*--Fabrictramp (talk) 22:41, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Note the change in discussion now....Dusti^{talk to me} 15:48, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm a bit busy today - can you point me to exactly what you'd like me to read, and exactly what your question is? It would help me out a lot. Thanks!--Fabrictramp (talk) 15:51, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I just changed my oppose to a weak support and commented below keeper76 Dusti^{talk to me} 17:19, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Have anything that you want me to do? Its been a slow day....Dusti^{talk to me} 18:33, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

WP:HOAX

Reverting the note I added to WP:HOAX solves nothing. I got more or less beaten up at Afd for not speedying Timer Virus, and it surely deserves speedy deletion. It is wrong for WP:SPEEDY to give the green light for obvious hoaxes or misleading info while WP:HOAX gives the red light. Do you have an idea for resolving these opposing instructions? Chris the speller (talk) 15:49, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

I feel your pain -- I get annoyed myself when someone beats up on me for not speedying something that in my opinion wasn't clearly speediable. And you're absolutely right that G1 and G3 contradict each other. What makes it worse is that if you click on the link in G3 (which goes to Wikipedia:Vandalism), it doesn't offer any clarification.

Probably the best thing to do is to bring up the issue at Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion, which I'll be more than glad to do, because I agree that this needs a resolution. I'll check the archives first to see what's been discussed before, so it will take me a little bit to start a thread. Feel free to beat me to the punch if you're so inclined.--Fabrictramp (talk) 18:11, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Before I start a thread, here's a few things from the archive you might want to read:

• Wikipedia_talk:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion/Archive_16#Hoaxes_-_CSD_G3_or_AfD.3F
• Wikipedia_talk:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion/Archive_10#Hoaxes

Any thoughts?--Fabrictramp (talk) 18:21, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, I read those and understand completely. The hoax that gor me into this was clearly a hoax to me, but it had hung around for 11 months before I tagged it, so it wasn't obvious to very many people. I can see where others might need convincing, so AFD is OK with me. But when I flatly stated that it was malicious, then it got shoved into speedy deletion. You can probably try to define an obvious hoax, but obvious to whom? Since we probably can't nail this down, your plan to change WP:SPEEDY is sound. Let me know if you need any support. Chris the speller (talk) 20:56, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Work got in the way today, and I'm out of town tomorrow. I'll start on it Friday, and post a link for you.--Fabrictramp (talk) 00:17, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 7th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 15	7 April 2008	About the Signpost

April Fools' pranks result in temporary blocks for six admins	WikiWorld: "Apples and oranges"
News and notes: 100 x 5,000, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Reviewers achieving excellence	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 15:55, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Recent Events

I just logged in and see that quite a stir up has been made by myself. Where do I proceed from here? Dusti^{talk to me} 16:10, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Looks like you and Keeper have that figured out.--Fabrictramp (talk) 23:34, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Any new projects or would you like to work in AFD discussions :) for awhile? Dusti^{talk to me} 18:17, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm still swamped, so you'll have to amuse yourself for a while. Looks like you've found plenty of AfDs to comment on. :) --Fabrictramp (talk) 18:10, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

SciFi Sorting

Thanks for that, F. I wouild have sorted that, but couldn't find it. Appreciate the assist. :) Have a splendid Sunday. Though it is cold as crap here, it is deceptively purty-lookin' outside. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 16:20, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

No clue which AfD you're talking about, but you are most welcome anyway. You can have some of our heat -- every weed and tree is blooming, so everyone with allergies or a lawn to be mowed is mighty cranky. :) --Fabrictramp (talk) 16:23, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

RFA Thanks

Thank you for your comments on my RFA. Even though it failed with 28 supports, 42 opposes, and 15 neutrals, I am grateful for the suggestions and advice I have received and I do hope to improve as a Wikipedian. If you ever need my help in any endeavor, feel free to drop me a line. --Sharkface217 19:58, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 14th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 16	14 April 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor
Interview with the team behind one of the 2,000th featured articles	Image placeholders debated
WikiWorld: "Pet skunk"	News and notes: Board meeting, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Dispatches: Featured article milestone
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:02, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Now your input

comments?Dusti^{speak and be heard!} 18:40, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

You do have a knack for getting yourself in trouble, don't you. :)--Fabrictramp (talk) 20:04, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

If you read this, it shows that other users (non admins) have tried and failed in working with these users. I was just up for the challenge so to say. Dusti^{speak and be heard!} 20:27, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Adoption

Please adopt me. Nothing444 01:34, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Real life is intruding on wikipedia right now, and my time is a bit too limited to take on an adoptee. I'll be glad to answer questions from time to time, but you'll need to find someone else. Sorry!--Fabrictramp (talk) 15:08, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

And it looks like you'd already been adopted before you posted this request.--Fabrictramp (talk) 15:09, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

AfD listings

FYI, re Dianetics Today AfD, you may want to also list Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Have You Lived Before This Life under those same two listings, Rel and Lit. Cirt (talk) 19:19, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

I hadn't gotten that far yet, but will do.--Fabrictramp (talk) 19:22, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Cool, thanks. Cirt (talk) 19:36, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion

Hello, it is Hurricane06. I understand the reason why the deletion is going to be made; however, I will fight for my team. The one and only reason that I believe that it should stay on there is because you have other teams on Wikipedia that are expanded here. Sure, they are in the Professional leagues; therefore, they get more respect and endorsements than other high school sports; however, how can it only apply to just professional teams? If I can't have a team from my high school on there without a problem, why do we need them on there if we can just visit their home website. I know that I may lose this battle, just because the professional teams are more important and I am not saying they are not. If they can be on here and take up about 30 pages of Wikipedia, why can't a 2 page info on the teams that I have created have to be deleted? If this message is supposed to be sent to someone else in order for this matter to be settled with, please send this to them ASAP. Thanks, Hurricane06 (talk) 20:40, 22 April 2008 (UTC).

I need a clue what article you're talking about. Link please?--Fabrictramp (talk) 21:39, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

From reading your talk page, I'm guessing that the articles in question are Mattawan Men's Tennis and Mattawan Women's Tennis. Please take just a minute to read the deletion concerns on the article pages, the deletion notices on your talk page (which have instructions on how you can contest the proposed deletion), and WP:OTHERSTUFF, which addresses your questions about why other articles are on wikipedia. If, after you've read those items, you still have questions, feel free to ask here, or put {{help}} along with your question on your talkpage, and someone will be along shortly to answer.--Fabrictramp (talk) 21:45, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Peaknik

How do you figure that the consensus was to redirect? There were 4 votes for transwiki, 3 for keep, and one for a redirect. NJGW (talk) 01:38, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

First, I don't look strictly at vote counts, but also at the arguments themselves. I took the transwiki and redirect !votes to be variations of the same thing -- saying, in effect, this term might be a valid search, but there's not enough for an encyclopedia article.

If you feel strongly that transwiki would be far better than redirect, I'd be very glad to hear your reasoning. --Fabrictramp (talk) 13:30, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

And here's the link to the discussion so I don't have to ferret it out again.--Fabrictramp (talk) 13:31, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't think there was any concensus. There were differeing opinions and no clear majority. Both sides said the other didn't explain themselves fully. Redirect is problematic because it doesn't address the fact that the information doesn't belong in the Peak oil article, which has already had several spin-off articles because it got so big, an issue which wasn't fully discussed. NJGW (talk) 15:36, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I do understand your frustration that I didn't decide the AfD the same way that you !voted. I've been there myself. However, I've reread the discussion several times now, and I still feel that redirecting or transwiki are appropriate closes. --Fabrictramp (talk) 15:58, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm not frustrated because I don't think it's that important of an article (merely gives context to a growing cultural phenomenon). I don't see the consensus you mention though. NJGW (talk) 16:11, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I've had two other experienced AfD closers review the discussion, and both have agreed with the closure. Each suggested a different path you might want to take if you want to pursue this further. You can read their ideas here.--Fabrictramp (talk) 20:13, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Like I said, it's not that important of an article, so I was just trying to understand the whole reasoning you used more than anything else (this was the first AFD I followed all the way through... I usually only edit more important pages where AFD doesn't come up). Someone had directed me to the deletion review page, but I didn't think it was that important of an issue (and nothing got deleted anyway). Thanks for taking the time to follow up on this. NJGW (talk) 03:54, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

With your permission, I would like to comment on this Fabrictramp. Dusti^{complain/compliment} 16:04, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Feel free.--Fabrictramp (talk) 16:06, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, here we go. I took a loot at the dicussion above and have to say that I agree with Fabrictramp and NJGW. I agree with NJGW that there wasn't enough of a consensus for the discussion to close yet, but Fabrictramp closed it appropriatley becuase the discussion was close to coming to the consensus for a Redirect. So its a tough call on this one, but the closure was premature but correct (in my little opinion). Dusti^{complain/compliment} 16:11, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Unsure what you mean

Hey, I recently created the Bug Sessions Volume Two page on here and I got a message saying something about it being deleted. I didn't understand ANYTHING in that message and from what I saw (which I didn't understand), there was no specific reason for it being deleted. Please get back to me so I know how to resolve this situation without having it deleted. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Reallyocean (talk • contribs) 07:31, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Another editor has removed the deletion request. However, it may get nominated for deletion again; the article does not make any claim of meeting the requirements of WP:Notability or WP:MUSIC. You might want to read those two pages and see what improvements you can make to the article if you want it to stay. Hope that helps!--Fabrictramp (talk) 22:53, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Also, new comments or questions generally go at the bottom of someone's talk page. Makes things easier. Thanks!--Fabrictramp (talk) 22:54, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 21st, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 17	21 April 2008	About the Signpost

BLP deletion rules discussed amidst controversial AFD	Threat made against high school on Wikipedia, student arrested
Global login, blocking features developed	WikiWorld: "Disruptive technology"
News and notes: Wikimania security, German print Wikipedia, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Monthly updates of styleguide and policy changes	WikiProject Report: The Simpsons
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 16:39, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

KatJonBand

Hi. Was deleted. Can you please post this on my user page so that I can flesh it out? Thanks.PMonaghan (talk) 01:00, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

I was just about to post it to a subpage of your user page when I realized that you need to read WP:COI and WP:SPAM first. You're going to have a hard time showing that you can write an unbiased article about a group signed to a record label that you own.--Fabrictramp (talk) 14:11, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Please do post it. I completely understand the conflict of interest here. I have declared by affiliation and would only post factual articles that should meet peer scrutiny. I realize that I have a lot of work to do on them, but please let me give it a shot. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PMonaghan (talk • contribs) 21:45, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

I've posted it here, on the condition that you get an admin to review it before moving it into article space. You can do that by adding {{helpme}} on your talk page, along with your request.--Fabrictramp (talk) 22:33, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Geaster

Yeah no worries - at least this article deserves a place! Good work. Booglamay (talk) 22:23, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

And thanks for reverting vandalism on my user page! Booglamay (talk) 13:39, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Backlog at Category:Wikipedians seeking to be adopted in Adopt-a-user

It will be a few weeks before my personal schedule will let me adopt someone. Sorry.--Fabrictramp (talk) 21:22, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

New Project

Myself and several other editors have been compiling a list of very active editors who would likely be available to help new editors in the event they have questions or concerns. As the list grew and the table became more detailed, it was determined that the best way to complete the table was to ask each potential candidate to fill in their own information, if they so desire. This list is sorted geographically in order to provide a better estimate as to whether the listed editor is likely to be active.

If you consider yourself a very active Wikipedian who is willing to help newcomers, please either complete your information in the table or add your entry. If you do not want to be on the list, either remove your name or just disregard this message and your entry will be removed within 48 hours. The table can be found at User:Useight/Highly Active, as it has yet to have been moved into the Wikipedia namespace. Thank you for your help. Useight (talk) 02:25, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

 Done--Fabrictramp (talk) 15:30, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Wilgenhof

Hi, I notice you closed the AFD of this page as merge and added {{merge}}. As this template is often used for suggesting a merge, lease consider using {{Afd-mergeto}} or {{Afd-mergefrom}} in the future. These templates make a merge obligatory, which fit better since the matter has been decided formally by a delete discussion. Best, --PeaceNT (talk) 14:00, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder. There was something nagging at me about that close, and now I know what it was. :) --Fabrictramp (talk) 15:02, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 2nd and 9th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 18	2 May 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor
Wikimedia Board to expand, restructure	Arbitrator leaves Wikipedia
Bot approvals group, checkuser nominations briefly held on RfA	WikiWorld: "World domination"
News and notes: Board elections, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Did You Know ...	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 4, Issue 19	9 May 2008	About the Signpost

Sister Projects Interview: Wikiversity	WikiWorld: "They Might Be Giants"
News and notes: Board elections, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Featured content from schools and universities	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:41, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Phase One(Motorcycle Team)

Thank you for your comment. I must diagree with your assertion overall, however. In a quite-lengthy period of new-page patrol, I have found that most of the time a no-context tag is applied, the article remains as it is and should be speedy-deleted. Cases such as this one, where a user comes back to post a full-fledged article, are surprisingly infrequent. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 17:44, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Absolutely. But I'd still rather have an article without context hang around for an hour than to bite a newbie. :) --Fabrictramp (talk) 17:47, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Hey, i'm the newb writing about Phase One and i've tried to make it up to standard, any help would be appreciated.

I've tried to wikify it. The main problem is lack of many sources to reference to because not many sites cover endurance racing. I was going to try and use Wikipedia to make a good page of information and maybe develop the endurance side of wikipedia, if i can. A lot of my sources are from me being there and knowing it at races and reporting it directly onto wikipedia instead of onto another site first.Shredder46 (talk) 18:20, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review for Maltese Rugby League Association

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Maltese Rugby League Association. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Gnevin (talk) 10:41, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

My RfA

Hi Fabrictramp; I wanted to say thank you for supporting my request for adminship, which passed with 100 supports, 0 opposes and 1 neutral. I wanted to get round everybody individually, even though it's considered by some to be spam (which... I suppose it is! but anyway. :)). It means a lot to me that the community has placed its trust in my ability to use the extra buttons, and I only hope I can live up to its expectations. If you need anything, or notice something that bothers you, don't hesitate to let me know. Thanks again, PeterSymonds | talk 22:10, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

StatusBot question

Hopefully you saw the text at the top of my talk page. If not, please take a look. Useight (talk) 14:59, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Again, I'm sorry for any inconvienence this may have caused you. My edit summary was mediocre, and kind of got the point across, but it could've been better. Please bear in mind, though, that it was the middle of the night and my mind was kind of shot from trying to figure out how to use a bot to keep WP:HAU updated. I would also like to point out that, according to WP:USERPAGE, "Other users may edit pages in your user space, although by convention your user page will usually not be edited by others", so it's not traditional to edit another individual's userpage, but it's not against policy. Again, please forgive me for any disruption, I'm going to use a different tactic for updating the remaining members of HAU. Useight (talk) 15:47, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

No problem (now that I understand what you were doing). Just shows why edit summaries are so important, along with having enough sleep. :)--Fabrictramp (talk) 16:57, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 12th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 20	12 May 2008	About the Signpost

Explicit sexual content draws fire	Sighted revisions introduced on the German Wikipedia
Foundation receives copyright claim from church	Board to update privacy policy, adopts data retention policy
Update on Citizendium	Board candidacies open through May 22
Two wiki events held in San Francisco Bay Area	New feature enables users to bypass IP blocks
WikiWorld: "Tony Clifton"	News and notes: Autoconfirmed level, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Dispatches: Changes at Featured lists
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:47, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Banshee Song

I think you closed it incorrectly. it should have been kept because it was GOb's Most recent single. I think all of the AfD's for the GOB-related articles should be closed as keep and LegoTech should have his editing privledges suspended for nominating like 20 articles for Afd in an apperant Anti-GOB tyrade. If not kept, then at least, for the singles, merged into the article, so the information can stay the same. I'm also calling for the Undeletion of the article for Fuck Them (GOB song) because all of GOB's singles and albums were unfairly nominated for AfD's . I also call for the un-deletion or at least the undeletion to be merged of You're Too Cool. Just because one person doesn't like a band and nominates all of there articles for AfD's doesn't mean that wikipedia should suffer. The majority of bands that have articles on wikipedia have articles for all there albums and the singles. I think GOB should be no exception because they are a very notable band signed to a notable label (Aquarius). [The Spooky One] | ^{[t c r]} 01:17, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I certainly hope no one is thinking of nominating the article on Gob for deletion -- I would argue strongly against that myself, because they clearly meet WP:N and WP:MUSIC, as do several of their albums (and no, not all of their albums were nominated for AfD). As to the songs, however, WP:MUSIC says it well: "Most songs do not merit an article and should redirect to another relevant article, such as for a prominent album or for the artist who wrote or prominently performed the song. Songs that have been ranked on national or significant music charts, that have won significant awards or honors or that have been performed independently by several notable artists, bands or groups are probably notable. A separate article is only appropriate when there is enough verifiable material to warrant a reasonably detailed article; articles unlikely ever to grow beyond stubs should be merged to articles about an artist or album." No one showed how those articles met the requirements of WP:N -- simply asserting that the song is important isn't enough.

As to the "majority of bands that have articles on wikipedia have articles for all there albums and the singles", you might take a moment and read WP:OTHERSTUFF. There are over 2,000,000 articles in the English wikipedia -- not every one has been reviewed to see if it meets the community guidelines.

Also take a minute to read WP:AGF. Accusing LegoTech of a vendetta against Gob and asking for his/her editing privileges to be suspended is certainly not assuming good faith. I understand that you are frustrated because you think this band, of which you are obviously a fan, is being picked on. I assure you while I really have no clue what LegoTech's motives are (although I assume they are good), I recognized many of the AfD commentors, and like myself, they are only seeking to apply to existing community consensus to articles coming up at AfD.

As I said on your talk page, since you feel my closure was incorrect, you are also welcome to bring the matter up at Wikipedia:Deletion review. --Fabrictramp (talk) 01:37, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

WP:HAU

Hello again. The Highly Active Users project has gone through a complete revamping per popular demand. We believe this new format will make it easier for new editors to find assistance. However, with the new format, I must again ask you to verify your information on this page. I attempted to translate the data from the old version to the new, but with the extensive changes, I may have made some errors. Thanks again. Useight (talk) 03:52, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

RFA Thanks

Thanks for your support at my recent Request for adminship. I hope you find I live up to your expectations. Best, Risker (talk) 15:49, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Comment re: AfD close

I left a comment regarding a recent AfD close you made at Talk:List of Strawberry Shortcake fillies. Everyking (talk) 10:23, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I've replied there.--Fabrictramp (talk) 15:56, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks so much for your support in myRfA, which closed successfully this morning. _{TravellingCari}^{the Busy Bee} 19:09, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

For identifying the Indonesian project for recent Afd issues - sometimes people forget the project exists in Xfd debates SatuSuro 00:36, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Glad to know the deletion sorting is helping someone!--Fabrictramp (talk) 14:04, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Ludvikus

Do you really think it's a good idea to suggest that Ludvikus, who was blocked for really disruptive behavior and tendentious argumentation on talk and policy pages, be allowed to do the same thing by proxy? --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 18:14, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I was assuming that some the actual message would be read and that moving would be at the discretion of the admin. If you have a better idea to let him post a reasonable reply on the AfD (assuming he has one), that doesn't involve the scary thought of unblocking him, I'd love to hear it.--Fabrictramp (talk) 19:27, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't see any reason at all to encourage him to participate. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 19:44, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I usually AGF. And yes, sometimes I get bitten for it, both on-wiki and in real life, but still, I do it. Don't worry, though, I have no intention of unblocking him.--Fabrictramp (talk) 21:33, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!

WikiZorro^sign has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thank you for joining WP:CUBS! WikiZorro^sign 19:34, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome! --Fabrictramp | talk to me 20:01, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks from me too

Thanks for the advice re multiple AfDs. It was my first time with a multiple, so I was uncertain what to do. WWGB (talk) 23:32, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, the directions aren't the clearest. I still hold my breath a bit each time I do one. :)--Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:19, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Can you see deleted articles?

Hi Fabrictramp, you have been chosen as a random administrator because I need someone neutral with administrator rights.

Can you see deleted articles because I had the Three Tour on my watchlist and I never discovered any deletion nomination. According to wikipolicy there should be a "AfD: Nominated for deletion; see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName" in the edit summary and {{subst:afd1}} on the page. As it's deleted I can only see Google's cached version (it has no deletion nominations) so can you see if it was done properly or was hidden behind a robot edit shortly after?? Thank you --Regards, Necessary Evil (talk) 07:19, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, there was a proper AfD header placed on May 20 by User:Tenacious D Fan, who didn't use an edit summary.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 14:08, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

What did you say was written in the edit summary when the template was inserted? Regards, Necessary Evil (talk) 14:33, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

As I said, there was no edit summary used. This is what is on the line for that edit: (diff) 04:05, May 20, 2008 . . Tenacious D Fan (Talk | contribs | block) (1,892 bytes). You might want to drop Tenacious D Fan a note reminding him/her how important edit summaries are.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:39, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your help. I've already followed you advice and informed him. An edition with an empty edit summary from a bluetexted editor is not alarming people. And one week after they suddenly read "(Deletion log); 05:27:26 . . AdministratorX (Talk | contribs) deleted "Pagename" (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pagename)" - too late; that's bad!

Thanks again --Regards, Necessary Evil (talk) 20:35, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Glad I could help.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:07, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Deletion Sorting Category

I did not realize that there was yet another page to change. I changed the List (by ABC) page, but did not realize there was the List (by topic) page. Sorry. MrKIA11 (talk) 22:58, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

No problem -- as you see, I fixed it. Just giving you a heads up so you'd know. :)--Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:10, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 19th and 26th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 21	19 May 2008	About the Signpost

Pro-Israeli group's lobbying gets press, arbitration case	Board elections: Voting information, new candidates
Sister Projects Interview: Wikibooks	WikiWorld: "Hodag"
News and notes: Russian passes Swedish, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Good article milestone	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 4, Issue 22	26 May 2008	About the Signpost

Board elections: Candidate questions	Single User Login opt-in for all users
Community-related news sources grow	WikiWorld: "Tomcat and Bobcat"
News and notes: Wikimedia DE lawsuit, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Featured sounds	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:34, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

First Article

Hello! I'm working on creating my first article and I was wondering if you wouldn't mind taking a look before I post it. I've got the whole thing up on my user page at the moment. I'd really appreciate any suggestions or advice you can provide. Thanks! Skiguy330 (talk) 23:10, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

First off, great job on your first article -- I'm impressed!

One small thing is that references #3 and #5 go to the same article. You can name the first reference and reuse it. See Wikipedia:Footnotes#Naming_a_ref_tag_so_it_can_be_used_more_than_once for how to do this.

Some other random thoughts. Obviously, you'll want to have categories in the article when you go live. Also, when you go live, use the {{lowercase}} tag at the start of the article, which will let everyone know it's intentionally lower case. Also, you might want to take a last look at copyediting the article -- it is almost, but not quite, reading like an ad or a press release. I'd call it good, but some other editors would have a problem with it. If you can use just a tad more encyclopedic tone, it would be wonderful. (That's the part I do not shine at. *grin*)

Hope that helps!--Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:21, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

That helps a lot, thanks! Fuhghettaboutit helped me clean up the ad-speak a bit and helped me with my sources. I've added some categories and the {{lowercase}} tag (it took me forever to figure out what it did!). Thanks again! I really appreciate the help. Skiguy330 (talk) 03:11, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Glad to be of help!--Fabrictramp | talk to me 18:00, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

WP:HAU

Hello yet again. I regretfully inform you that the bot we were using to update the user status at Wikipedia:Highly Active Users, SoxBot V, was blocked for its constant updating. With this bot out of operation, a patch is in the works. Until that patch is reviewed and accepted by the developers, some options have been presented to use as workarounds: 1) Qui monobook (not available in Internet Explorer); 2) User:Hersfold/StatusTemplate; 3) Manually updating User:StatusBot/Status/USERNAME; or 4) Not worry about it and wait for the patch to go through, which hopefully won't take long. If you have another method, you can use that, too. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Useight (talk) 17:38, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

On Mahmud Dowlatabadi

Dear Fabrictramp, please see: [9], the Remarks in [10] and [11], as well as the Note [12]. Perhaps you wish to take some appropriate action. Two further points: Firstly, I did not attempt to merge the entries myself (but instead left the task to User:Nadim2008, as evidenced by [13]), as by doing so I would have somehow taken credit for what was/is written by User:Nadim2008 — this merging would have required moving Nadi2008's text to the older entry. Secondly, I believe that Mahmoud Dowlatabadi is the best transliteration of the original names (this is why Nadim2008's text would have to be moved). Kind regards, --BF 17:13, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

The best way to handle this type of thing if you don't want to do the merge yourself is with a {{merge}} tag. Template:Merge has some good documentation on how to use this. Put a {{Mergeto | Article 1 | Talk:Article 1#Merge proposal |date=June 2008 }} on the article you think has the wrong name, where "Article 1" is the correctly named article. Then put {{Mergefrom | Article 2 | Talk:Article 1#Merge proposal |date=June 2008 }} on the article with the correct name, and "Article 2" is the incorrectly named article. On the talk page linked in the templates, you can put the reasons why you think the merge should be done. Hope that helps!--Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:22, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! --BF 18:07, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

help!?

Hello, I'm trying to figure out how to add a category to an AfD and for the life of me I cannot get it to work. Here is the page, Etoo. Can you please tell me how to do it? I'd appreciate it. Thanks!Renee (talk) 22:41, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I had to look up the codes for the categories, because I use Twinkle to do AfD nominations. :) You can find the list of codes here. Hope that helps!--Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:48, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks(!) for the quick response. I've seen people mention Twinkle. I looked at the site and it's still Greek to me. How exactly does it work? Thanks again. Renee (talk) 22:53, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Twinkle is a set of scripts you can install that add tabs that do a lot of repetitive things very quickly, such as prod, tagging for speedy deletion, AfD, etc. A related set of scripts, Friendly, lets you tag articles for improvement and warn vandals. I, too, thought it was all Greek at first, but I followed the installation instructions word for word, and was amazed when it worked. :) --Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:57, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll give it a try. Renee (talk) 23:17, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for sending me a copy of the article. I'll work on it in my spare time and see if we can get it reposted.. Thanks again. ShoesssS ^Talk 10:15, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dee Luong relisted?

I have to concur with 2005 why did you choose to relist this rather than close it as no-consensus? While I think it should be deleted (as does 2005) 10 !votes is enough community involvement that *I* don't think relisting was necessary.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 23:25, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I did strongly consider closing it as no consensus, but what seems to happen is that the same article comes up for AfD again quickly. I hope that some sort of consensus can be reached now, instead of rehashing it from scratch in a month. If no consensus is reached in another 5 days, I'm fine with closing it as no consensus (either by myself or another admin). So yes, I agree that relisting wasn't necessary; but I do think that it may save some bother in the long run.

Just as an aside, I disagree a bit with your logic in "I think if he doesn't like the idea of closing with no consensus, he should then !vote." (besides the fact that I'm not a he.) I really don't have any opinion on whether the article should stay or go, despite having read the article multiple times and all the arguments at least twice. How would you propose that I !vote? AFAIK, "I have no idea" isn't generally recognized as a helpful AfD !vote.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 00:20, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Can you provide policy for "I have no idea" ;-) But thanks for the response ;-) ---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 01:27, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I bet there's a policy on it somewhere. There is on everything else. ;-)--Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:11, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Just as a heads-up

Your PROD template was removed from History of Computers and Communications in Newfoundland and Labrador. Just letting you know so you can toss up an AfD template or leave it be. Whatever you wanna do. - Vianello (talk) 01:04, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up, and AfD is started.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:14, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

History of Communications in Newfoundland and Labrador

You're very fast with that delete button, Fab. Self-publishing is the new form of printing books. Whomever complained about this article has a vindictive streak and is staulking my publication making slanderous remarks. Do you alllow such people to influence your decisions?

In the debate about deleting this people vote to KEEP the article. If you are not included, that makes it a 100% unanimous YES.

Could you please put it back as it was.

Best Regards

Paul Hussey phussey@yahoo.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Phussey (talk • contribs) 20:05, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

You clearly did not read WP:COI and WP:SPAM as I asked. You might note that no one in the AfD said to keep the article as it was, only that the subject itself was important. I concur with that, which is why when another editor rewrote the article to comply with Wikipedia's guidelines, I withdrew the deletion nomination.

You might also read WP:AGF before accusing anyone of having "a vindictive streak" or "staulking (sic) my publication making slanderous remarks".--Fabrictramp | talk to me 20:16, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I OWN the copyright of "History of Computers and Communications in Newfoundland and Labrador."

You deleted the article for reasons that are beyond me. Since this whole topic is new, and I compiled, categorized, registered and maintain the information related to it, Wikipedia is denying other people a chance to asses and improve it as more information is collected. This history, nor it's story, have ever been told.

I have lived in the Newfoundland and Labrador area most of my life, I know it's history. I also know many of the people who were involved in the stories. Who could the early historians such as Herodotus and Xenophon, have cited?

Please put the article back where it belongs. I shall add more to it as I collect and sort out the remainder of the information.

If I can be of any further help, please feel free to contact me.

By the way, the "delete debate" showed two people in favour of keeping the article. Please read their comments.

Regards,

Paul Hussey

phussey@yahoo.com

I apologize, as it seems I did not make myself clear above. Again, I strongly encourage you to spend some time reading the links I cited, because they are core policies of Wikipedia and have the consensus of the community.

While you may own the copyright to the book you wrote, you do not own the copyright to the article History of Computers and Communications in Newfoundland and Labrador. All contributions to Wikipedia (yours, mine, and any editor's) are submitted under the GFDL license.

The article History of Computers and Communications in Newfoundland and Labrador was not deleted. I proposed it for deletion because in its prior form, it violated Wikipedia's policies. When another editor rewrote the article to comply with the policies, I withdrew the deletion nomination. One of the two people who were in favor of keeping the article was the one who rewrote it, so I think we can safely assume s/he was not in favor it the previous version. The other editor's comments do not indicate to me that they were in favor of an advertising version, but I will be happy to contact them and ask them to comment.

Your book is clearly not the only source of infomation on this subject, because the editor who rewrote the article was easily able to find another source. Certainly other editors can, and are encouraged, to also use your book as a reference for the article, providing your book meets Wikipedia's standards for sources. However, because you are the author of the book, Wikipedia strongly discourages you from writing about the book yourself. However, you are welcome to improve the article by citing other sources, such as the ones you may have used in writing your book, so long as you are not promoting or mentioning your book.

To sum up, there are a lot of policy reasons for not reverting the article to your version. I again encourage you to read those policies. If, after thoroughly reading the policies, you still disagree, you are certainly welcome to take this matter to Wikipedia:Third opinion. If you do so, I ask that you do me the courtesy of letting me know.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:11, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

I quote "If you decide to delete the article, provide an informative deletion reason, such as that given by the nominator, not just "expired prod". This is because once the article is deleted, the reason for the {{prod}} is no longer visible to non-admins. If you are using an automated script, check that it does not leave an inadequate message."

Could you tell me who nominated my article - as opposed to editing - for deletion? That person did not afford me the courtesy of telling me.

Regards, Paul

You were notified of the proposed deletion here. --Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:36, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 2, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 23	2 June 2008	About the Signpost

Board elections open	WikiWorld: "Facial Hair"
Wikipedia in the News	Dispatches: Style guide and policy changes
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:54, 8 June 2008 (UTC)