User talk:GirasoleDE

Welcome!

Hello, GirasoleDE, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! - Adolphus79 16:26, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Date format

Please don't change the format of dates. Most British people and many people internationally write dates in day-month-year order, e.g., 12 December 1904. Most Americans use month-day-year order, e.g., December 12, 1904. If the article is about an American topic, use month-day-year. If it is a British topic, use day-month-year. If neither, leave it as originally written. Many Americans or British people take offence if an article about their country, written in their local version of English, is changed around to a version they don't use. So please do not do that.

Dates are usually enclosed in two square brackets, as in [[12 December]] or [[December 12]]. This means that you can set your preferences (if you look around your screen you'll see the word preferences; click on it and follow the instructions) to ensure that you see all dates in the format you want, whether date-month-year, month-date-year or yyyy-mm-dd. The general rules on how Wikipedia articles are written can be seen in the Wikipedia:Manual of Style. Rules specific to dates and numbers can be seen in the Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers).

If you have any questions about this, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Enjoy your time on the web's fastest growing encyclopædia (or encyclopedia, if you write it that way!). Thank you. GregorB 19:04, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Date linking

Please don't remove the linking of full dates, as you did on Putaruru. Removing the links from individual years which don't have a day and month associated with them is fine, but the day-month-year should remain linked so people will view the date according to their preferences.-gadfium 19:58, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: your move of the David Oliver article

Hello.

The general consenus format for articles on ice hockey players, whose names are ambiguous, is "David Oliver (ice hockey)" - not "David Oliver (ice hockey player)". Please contact an admin to revert your move.

Thank you. LarRan (talk) 13:14, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

C&P move

Hi, it appears that you recently tried to give James Peters (disambiguation) a different title by copying its content and pasting it into James Peters. This is known as a "cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is needed for attribution and various other purposes.

If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself, please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other articles that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you. Tim Song (talk) 07:01, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion contested: Jim Peters (hockey)

Hello GirasoleDE, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I contested the speedy deletion of Jim Peters (hockey) - a page you tagged - because: Not a recently created redirect - consider WP:RfD. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. Tim Song (talk) 07:06, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Denialism

An article that you have been involved in editing, Denialism, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Denialism (2nd nomination). Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Unomi (talk) 06:14, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Herman te Riele

Hi. I have deleted this as requested: if you now move Herman J.J. te Riele to that title, can I leave you to fix the double redirects that will arise? You can find them by going to the redirect which will be left at the "JJ" title and clicking "What links here". Regards, JohnCD (talk) 12:56, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Arthur Sarkissian (artist)

Girasole:

I spent a lot of time in August working to improve the Arthur Sarkissian (artist) article, making sure it had a satisfactory structure, good references, appropriate categories, etc. OK, it's changed a bit since then, but not fundamentally. So I'm astonished and somewhat affronted when you dismissed the article as "spam" and proposed its speedy deletion.

Your tag says it "would require a fundamental rewrite in order to become encyclopedic". Please elaborate. I'm happy to undertake the work, but I remain mystified why a perfectly good article about an established artist should remain perfectly acceptable for the four months since my rewrite and then suddenly, out of the blue, be speedily deleted. There are plenty of articles about artists in Wikipedia which have far less in the way of references, less structure, and less underlying research.

I have removed the tag in accordance with the instruction within it, which says if I "intend to fix it, please remove this notice". I await your explanation with eager anticipation.

Assuming your good faith, -- Hebrides (talk) 20:31, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism of the Kyoto Protocol

Thank you for your contributions to the encyclopedia! In case you are not already aware, an article to which you have recently contributed, Criticism of the Kyoto Protocol, is on article probation. A detailed description of the terms of article probation may be found at Wikipedia:General sanctions/Climate change probation. Also note that the terms of some article probations extend to related articles and their associated talk pages.

The above is a templated message. Please accept it as a routine friendly notice, not as a claim that there is any problem with your edits. Thank you. --TS 13:42, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of link to James Hansen

You removed the "see also" link to James Hansen on The Environmentalist's page. A visit to the website shows that James Hansen's reports have been published by The Environmentalist. As such, it appears this is a valid link that should not have been removed. I've undone your delete and welcome your reply/explanation for a re-removal of the link. Thank you Oakbranch (talk) 06:24, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I removed this link, because there was already one internal link in Notable articles. --GirasoleDE (talk) 10:40, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

April 2010

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. When you make a change to an article, please provide an edit summary, which you forgot to do before saving your recent edit to The Wire. Doing so helps everyone to understand the intention of your edit. It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. Oneiros (talk) 23:23, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have marked you as a reviewer

I have added the "reviewers" property to your user account. This property is related to the Pending changes system that is currently being tried. This system loosens page protection by allowing anonymous users to make "pending" changes which don't become "live" until they're "reviewed". However, logged-in users always see the very latest version of each page with no delay. A good explanation of the system is given in this image. The system is only being used for pages that would otherwise be protected from editing.

If there are "pending" (unreviewed) edits for a page, they will be apparent in a page's history screen; you do not have to go looking for them. There is, however, a list of all articles with changes awaiting review at Special:OldReviewedPages. Because there are so few pages in the trial so far, the latter list is almost always empty. The list of all pages in the pending review system is at Special:StablePages.

To use the system, you can simply edit the page as you normally would, but you should also mark the latest revision as "reviewed" if you have looked at it to ensure it isn't problematic. Edits should generally be accepted if you wouldn't undo them in normal editing: they don't have obvious vandalism, personal attacks, etc. If an edit is problematic, you can fix it by editing or undoing it, just like normal. You are permitted to mark your own changes as reviewed.

The "reviewers" property does not obligate you to do any additional work, and if you like you can simply ignore it. The expectation is that many users will have this property, so that they can review pending revisions in the course of normal editing. However, if you explicitly want to decline the "reviewer" property, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. — Carl (CBM · talk) 12:33, 18 June 2010 (UTC) — Carl (CBM · talk) 13:19, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

IAAF Cross Country Championships

Thanks for adding the top eight finishers for each of the men's and women's races on these articles. All the clean up is much appreciated too! I tried to show the extent of what these articles can be this year with the 2010 IAAF World Cross Country Championships. I very much doubt that every article of this type will reach that level of detail, but I tried to show that there's more to this than just listing results! I suppose only time will tell whether I was wasting my time or if people will still read these things beyond the next few years... Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits)^{Join WikiProject Athletics!} 11:51, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

May 2011

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an edit summary for your edits. Doing so helps everyone understand the intention of your edit (and prevents legitimate edits from being mistaken for vandalism). It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. Courcelles 19:43, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I see a lot of your edits on articles I'm watching, and I a simple edit summary would save others a lot of time chasing down what you're doing and why. Courcelles 19:44, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bobby Morrow

I have watched your reworking of Olympian names for a while. Obviously I'm watching many of those articles. I have agreed with your re-naming most of them. However, in my association with track and field history, just as I have always seen the name Bud Houser, I have always seen the name listed as Bobby Joe Morrow. In this case, I think you have deviated from the norm. Perhaps we should check some history books, or possibly you already have a source to credit for your re-name. Trackinfo (talk) 02:01, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My sources for the re-naming were: the Hall of Fame of USATF and the IAAF which uses consistently Bobby Morrow (compare [1]). --GirasoleDE (talk) 09:05, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List of sportspeople cleared of doping charges

Hi. If you remove someone from List of doping cases in athletics because they were exonorated, you can add their name to List of sportspeople cleared of doping charges. Geschichte (talk) 22:34, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jason Morgan

This move is unnecessary. Jason Morgan (disambiguation) already exists. There's no need to redirect Jason Morgan, because there is a link to the disambiguation page already at the top of the Jason Morgan article. However, if for some silly reason you're really offend that one of these Jason Morgans is more prominent than the others, after you move the Jason Morgan article, you need to go to WP:Requested moves and have them. Move Jason Morgan (disambiguation) to Jason Morgan. Otherwise the move you've done is pointless, If you don't want to moventhe disambiguation page, move Jason Morgan back, because there's reall nom point in havingthe target page of Jason Morgan only exist as a redirect. AniMate 19:20, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"However, if for some silly reason you're really offend that one of these Jason Morgans is more prominent than the others..." - Assuming that my reasons for the move are silly is a violation of Wikipedia:No personal attacks. There are a lot of wrong internal links because people without extensive kwowledge of TV soap operas have no reason to think that a fictional person is so much more important than a real person. --GirasoleDE (talk) 19:28, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Moves

Hi. While I really like the work you're doing on sport articles, I will have to ask you to refrain from moves like the ones on Maria Grozdeva, Nikolay Peshalov and Jordan Jovtchev. The first one is plain wrong, while the others are questionable. Please, drop a note on talkpages and wait at least a couple of days before moving pages. Now, I cannot even move the second one back. Thanks. --Laveol ^T 12:30, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A few months later... but article moving is still a bit of an issue here. Regarding Atelaw Yeshetela: I assume you moved this from Atelaw Bekele solely on the grounds that the IAAF biography does not contain that name. However, in virtually all sources used in the article (and beyond) he is known by the Bekele surname. Even a quick google of "Atelaw Yeshetela" reveals that he is almost never referred to as "Yeshetela" without the following "Bekele". This even applies to articles written at the IAAF website. If you are going to move articles then please check that the new name is actually the most widely used one. SFB 19:02, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

- Google doesn't prove if a name is correct. "Yeshetela" is the father's name, "Bekele" the grandfather's name. This means that the full name is "Atelaw Yeshetela Bekele". Because the grandfather's name is usually left away "Atelaw Yeshetela" is the correct lemma.--GirasoleDE (talk) 20:47, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - The correct name is irrelevant. Articles should take the common name used in English language sources. I have found no articles written in English which use "Atelaw Yeshetela", hence I have requested that the article be moved to "Atelaw Yeshetela Bekele" (which is used frequently be English sources). SFB 21:55, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - WP:COMMONNAME refers to *reliable* sources - and the IAAF database is certainly more reliable than google results, especially if it can be shown how the name found in these is erroneously derived from the correct name.--GirasoleDE (talk) 22:29, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      - So by extension Athletics Weekly, European Athletics and the IAAF are all non-reliable sources? The IAAF database file on the athlete is the only place I have found to use "Atelaw Yeshetela" without the additional "Bekele". Can you provide me with just one link which calls him "Atelaw Yeshetela" in a sentence? I have struggled to find one and that says it all. SFB 17:57, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        I think there is a misunderstanding. "Atelaw Yeshetela" and "Atelaw Yeshetela Bekele" (the lemma suggested by you) are both correct names - but "Atelaw Bekele" (which was the lemma before my move) is not correct. WP:COMMONNAME says that "it is useful to observe the usage of major international organizations" - in this case the relevant international organization is the IAAF. The articles that you have cited are certainly not as reliable as the entry in the IAAf database because sport journalists (with rare exceptions) don't care about correct name forms (I won't be surprised if they blindly follow Wikipedia).--GirasoleDE (talk) 18:36, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That quote is preceded by the following: "The term most typically used in reliable sources is preferred to technically correct but rarer forms, whether the official name, the scientific name, the birth name, the original name or the trademarked name". Journalists writing for the IAAF, European Federation and Athletics Weekly are reliable enough for the rest of our article base, and they should be here too. Otherwise, you are making an argument that all the sources for that article are not reliable. If so, then we have a few thousand articles to delete. Moving the article to an official, correct name that is rarely used (i.e. in articles read by the respective reader-base) does not serve our readers well. SFB 18:52, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What are you arguing about? I didn't say that your move was unreasonable. I just tried to make clear that "Atelaw Bekele" is plainly wrong - and this can't be refuted by journalist sources whose sloppiness concerning names is obvious.--GirasoleDE (talk) 19:22, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I can certainly agree with that. I just wasn't sure that you understood the reason for moving the page again. Take care! SFB 21:21, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

High school record holders

Category:American high school record holders is being considered for deletion. Please share your thoughts on the matter at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Trackinfo (talk) 05:43, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral notice of an RfC

A Request for Comment has been posted for an article on which you have been an editor. If you wish to comment, go to Talk:List of African-American firsts# Request for Comment: Pro wrestling. --Tenebrae (talk) 11:54, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

September 2012

Your recent editing history at Paul Ryan shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Toa Nidhiki05 14:26, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Songs written by Gary Valentine

For your information, I have nominated the above category for speedy renaming. Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 19:27, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Georgina Bülowius

Greetings! I reverted that move you did and started a discussion section on the article talk page if needed. Cheers!--Milowent • ^hasspoken 00:27, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Move of Bremen (state) to Free Hanseatic City of Bremen

You may wish to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Germany#Move of Bremen (state) to Free Hanseatic City of Bremen. --Bermicourt (talk) 21:14, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Since there was no consensus for the move of the article, may I ask you to revert your changes to links pointing to this page? Thank you. --RJFF (talk) 18:04, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your cooperativeness and your diligence. Kind regards. --RJFF (talk) 19:54, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:38, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Christopher Brown listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Christopher Brown. Since you had some involvement with the Christopher Brown redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. sst✈^discuss 15:59, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Krzysztof Krawczyk (disambiguation)

The article Krzysztof Krawczyk (disambiguation) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Per WP:2DABS

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Boleyn (talk) 14:21, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]