User talk:Granite thump

Welcome

Hello, Granite thump, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} and your question on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

We hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! --A Nobody^{My talk} 19:07, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the welcome. Granite thump (talk) 19:25, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Article Rescue Squadron

Articles tagged for deletion and rescue
Category Articles tagged for deletion and rescue not found

Hi, Granite thump, welcome to the Article Rescue Squadron! We are a growing community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to identifying and rescuing articles that have been tagged for deletion. Every day hundreds of articles are deleted, many rightfully so. But many concern notable subjects and are poorly written, ergo fixable and should not be deleted. We try to help these articles quickly improve and address the concerns of why they are proposed for deletion. This covers a lot of ground and your help is appreciated!

Some points that may be helpful:
Our main aim is to help improve articles, so if someone seeks help, please try to assist if you are able. Likewise feel free to ask for help, advice and clarification. Many times we are asked to help rescue articles by people new to our notability and sourcing policies. If the article is not fixable we can help explain why and offer alternatives. Many of these editors are also new to Wikipedia so may see deleting "their" article as "bitey". Encourage civility and maybe even {{welcome}} them if they have only been templated with deletion messages. The Articles for deletion (AfD) discussion is where the concerns regarding each article are brought up and addressed. To be an effective member of the project you need to know how AfD works as well as how to improve articles. Introduction to deletion process gives a good overview and some good advice for newcomers to deletion. Our primary work is improving articles tagged for rescue. On this template you can see a drop-down list of current articles tagged. You can install it on your own page by putting {{ARS/Tagged}}. A more dynamic list with article links and description is on our current articles page. It is highly recommended you watchlist it. If you have another language besides English, please consider adding yourself to the list of translators available. Articles and sources that use non-English languages often need translation for those of us who cannot translate for ourselves. Many important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is recommended that you watchlist it.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask on the talk page, and we will be happy to help you.

And once again - Welcome! Ikip (talk)

Great to see new editors join the squadron! I only learned about the squadron after I was here 2 years, so you are very lucky! Ikip (talk) 20:19, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the welcome. Granite thump (talk) 21:17, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for joining. We need more intellegent dedicated editors. Ikip (talk) 15:04, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Horror film genre-specifc reliable sources

If you have time, I'd appreciate your looking in at Horror film genre-specifc reliable sources and either advising or contributing. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 21:26, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really like horror films, but I'll take a look. Granite thump (talk) 18:01, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

May 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your comments. Please note that on Wikipedia, consensus is determined by discussion, not voting, and it is the quality of arguments that counts, not the number of people supporting a position. Consider reading about the deletion policy for a brief overview for the deletion process, and how we decide what to keep and what to delete. We hope you decide to stay and contribute even more. Thank you! This is in response to your recent votes at AfD, in which you simply "voted" without explaining your reasoning. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:51, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to second that notice. I agree with rescuing articles, but that is done by argument and sourcing, not voting "Keep". Fences and windows (talk) 01:23, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes I will write a short keep, but I always try to write a reason, a generic example:

keep article is notable and well sourced

As you continue to edit here, you will learn reasons why an article should be kept, and why it should not. The most convincing reason to keep an article is there are sources which mention this article. Type: {{findsources3|NAME OF ARTICLE}} (replacing name of article with the name of the article) and a list of source links will be given to you. You can then menion this links in the Article for Deletion discussion, or add the sources to the article itself, and then write in the AFD:

Comment to closing admin please note that this article has gone through signifigant improvements since it was nomiated for deletion

I hope this helps. Ikip (talk) 22:23, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy notice: You are being discussed at ARS

Wikipedia_talk:Article_Rescue_Squadron#Simple_rebuttal Ikip (talk) 15:55, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't see my name there. Granite thump (talk) 18:49, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

your name is linked but not specifically mentioned. It basically says the same thing I said above, that AfD is a discussion and the way you have been "drive by" voting is not helpful to Wikipedia or the ARS. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:35, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here is where your edits are mentioned.[1]

User:FeydHuxtable responds that you have "made a number of good edits to several of the articles being [deleted]." [2]

I am not sure what happened here, but you may be interested in the two cases discussed at AFD, which may be relevant to your case.

If you need any help at all, in anyway, please let me know. I have helped a lot of new editors with tough situations. I know how hard it can be to be a new editor. In my experience, veteran editors are often not kind to new editors. Your contributions are appreciated, as User:FeydHuxtable said. Ikip (talk) 22:01, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I noticed you made some quality improvements on several articles we were both rescuing. They dont seem to like bare votes round here, but they're out of order if they complain at comments like "keep per Schidmt" , there's no need for every comment to be paragraphs long. I hope we see more of you! FeydHuxtable (talk) 07:15, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FeydHuxtable (talk) has given you a kitten! Kittens promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Kittens must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a kitten, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the goodness of kittens by adding {{subst:Kitten}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

Thank you for the kitten... I will take a break and just read for now. Granite thump (talk) 19:43, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your contributions is AfD's is welcomed and encouraged

Your participation in AfD's is welcome, and please feel free to express your thoughts as you wish. DreamGuy's comments to you are way out of line in his final comments here. For his past acts he has been placed on Wikipedia:Editing restrictions and if he makes any edits which are judged by an administrator to be uncivil, personal attacks, or assumptions of bad faith, he may be blocked. I personally think he has made a huge assumption of bad faith against you, but I am not an administrator. You may be interested in knowing that many users have been the victim of his uncivil behaviour which is being discussed right now at WP:ANI#User:DreamGuy and User:174.0.39.30. I wish you my best in your dealing with him. Varbas (talk) 03:51, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Granite thump (talk) 19:10, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GreamGuy has accused you (and me) of being sockpuppets

I wasn't notified either, so I thought I would send you this note so you would be aware or what is going on here. DreamGuy's accusations, the CheckUser, and no notification to the parties is completely against wikipolicy (as I understand it). You might want to make a comment in your defense. Varbas (talk) 00:08, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand any of that. Granite thump (talk) 18:41, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can explain. A user called DreamGuy believes that your account is being used by an editor who has been previously blocked, Azviz. Using another account to edit is known as "sockpuppetry", thus they think your account is a "sockpuppet". They have formally accused you of this. You can see the accusation and reply to it by following this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Azviz. Fences and windows (talk) 22:36, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Checkuser case against Varbas is closed

The checkuser investigation brought against User:Varbas is closed. He was found to be a "likely puppet" and has been blocked. However, checkuser determined that you are "unlikely" to a puppet of User:Azviz and has thus closed the case. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 21:43, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sources for Types of gesture

Hello. I hope we can count on your assistance in adding reliable sources to Types of gestures. I have located a few sources, but many hands make light work. Cnilep (talk) 20:11, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Article Rescue Squadron Newsletter (September 2009)

Article Rescue Squadron Newsletter

	The Article Rescue Squadron Newsletter
	Issue 2 (January 2010) Previous issue \| Next issue

Content

The community is currently

deciding whether

60,000

articles should be deleted.

background