User talk:Lid/Archive 4

Second Sun removal

You have recently deleted the article on the band "Second Sun". I'm wondering how is this different from Infusion_(band) or should that article be deleted. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.32.138.20 (talk) 09:33, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

eTrafficJams.com

You have companies on your website that are worth a quarter of this company and you are deleting this page as advertising. Wny? I am trying to understand why you are deleting the eTrafficjams.com webpage. eTrafficjams.com/getupdated.com is an internationally traded company worth hundreds of millions of dollars.

2009 Australian Open

I think you can stop deleting it now. There's information about the dates, the defending champions and what certain players will be bidding to do i.e. Sharapova becoming the first woman since Capriati to retain the Australian Open title. Yohan euan o4 (talk) 12:36, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Re:EC match

Argh, I'm sorry. It's late and I honestly didn't see the observer cited in the text. I'll self revert now. Thanks for calling me on that. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 04:43, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Heh, I know you're an admin, and a I know all about your work on Punk's article, lol. But my sense of humor isn't the best. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 04:46, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply. Yeah, it gets annoying and the same damn conversation happens every month. New IPs and editors that leave after a day or so every month come and start using dirtsheets as sources and removing them per spoilers, which isn't right. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 17:38, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

NWO Match

Yes I know it is not, but we don't have a reliable source that says there is an Elimination Chamber match for SmackDown!. A source will not be released until after tonight's United States airing of SmackDown!, so can we just wait until after tonight to add it to avoid any edit wars =)--TrUCo⁹31¹ 13:55, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh ok I read the discussion, Im sorry. I forgot that agreement was reached. But either way, your edits might be reverted by newer users who are unaware of what we do with spoilers.--TrUCo⁹31¹ 14:03, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I've been arguing with that person about that. Thank you for stepping in =)--TrUCo⁹31¹ 01:12, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Elimination Chamber

Alright, I'll take your feedback on it. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:13, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

re:FTP

No, They kinda gave me the run-a-round with no answers, guess by the correction they realized his page was in error, this is the last message i received from them on Jan 19th.▪◦▪≡SiREX≡^Talk 08:21, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
"Thank you for contacting Full Tilt Poker Support.

We are still looking into the issue at hand as we haven't gotten 100% confirmation. We will respond back to you shortly with the correct information. Thanks again, and if there's anything else we can help you with, please let us know. Regards, Amaan Poker Specialist Full Tilt Poker Support"

Re:CM Punk moveset

Looks great. It's much easier to read and makes a lot more sense now. I've gone ahead and cleaned up the move links, fixing the ones that linked only to the top of the move articles themselves. :) Gavyn Sykes (talk) 04:42, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

December to Dismember (2006) - Aftermath

I've read the Heyman interview, and have added the reference to the Aftermath part of the article. I'e also added a bit more content to the aftermath. I was wondering if you could possibly pop over to the Aftermath section and check to see whether there are any minor errors since my adjustments to the article. Cheers, D.M.N. (talk) 11:30, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

RE: PCE

I've been following this user's edits for awhile now. At the very least, PCE is guilty of disruptive editing, ignoring community input, failing to cite sources when making changes, and edit warring. I'll block for edit warring for now, but I think we both should keep an eye out. Maybe if he/she knows there are tangible consequences, he/she will shape up....or is that just hopeful thinking? Nikki311 05:16, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

A question regarding image use

Hi,

In this edit, you removed 4 fair use images and replaced it with a box. Not understanding image use (seriously, there needs to be an idiot's guide somewhere!) I was wondering if I could get your informed opinion on placing one image (this one) in the info box. Would the cover image still work for fair use even though it is for the series summary rather than the book specifically?

Could we replace more than one image in the infobox? Is it still fair use if we get the four extant, and ultimately all seven books in the series, up on the page?

And if all of this fails, do you know of any way we can get any of the images on the page, to fill out the infobox if nothing else? Thanks, WLU (talk) 19:00, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Haha! Victory! So if I throw together a collage of the current four titles in paint, and mimic the fair use rationale in LOTR and/or Harry Potter, I can use it on the ASOIAF page without the image getting deleted? WLU (talk) 11:27, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Images are all redlinks now, so I guess they got deleted shortly afterwards.

What are your thoughts on having two sets of cover images? There are two very different sets of images for the series, a very elaborate standard fantasy guys in armor for the first release, and a much more minimalist set released in the states (or second edition, not sure). Is that doable? WLU (talk) 11:49, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

I dunno man, that's a lot of work. But that cover looked pretty freakin' cool. I'm torn.

Thanks for your help, much obliged. Incidentally, is there an idiot's guide to image fair use? I've yet to find an editor who unequivocally understands fair use. WLU (talk) 12:14, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

But we can't run around the restrictions by, say, taking a picture of the book cover ourselves and uploading them, right? I tried that, read the FU guidelines, and got confused. WLU (talk) 12:25, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Bugger, so much for gaming the system. I'll put together some sort of collage and have thrown up a straw poll on ASOIAF to see what the preference is. Ultimately, I don't really care so long as there is an image so if someone else beats me to it, it saves me some work. Thanks for your help on this, it's much appreciated. WLU (talk) 14:55, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Random act of kindness

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		For patient and helpful guidance on the issue of image use, I award this, one "The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar" to yon helpful one, User:Lid. This may be displayed prominently, discretly tucked in a subpage, or printed out and worn as a hat, at the discretion of one User:Lid. WLU (talk) 14:55, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Shaggy McDaniel

Why is it that you feel "Shaggy McDaniel" should be deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shaggy1988 (talk • contribs) 00:50, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

DJ Perry

I'm replying on the article's talk page, as that seems the most appropriate place. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:15, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

RE: Heh

They always forget about User:Caribbean H.Q. being an admin, as well. Being under the radar is a good thing though...you can be more stealthy and less favors are asked of you. Here's something you might like:

		The Invisible Barnstar
		For being a fantastic contributor, and even though you are under the radar, I know about and appreciate your awesomeness. :) Nikki311 17:48, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

whats your problem

is all you do go around and ruin peoples fun, what a job —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paul Fletcher (talk • contribs) 10:36, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Feedback

From the number of your deletions, and the comparatively small number of people complaining on your talkpage, I think you must be doing an excellent job! Have you come across anybody that you think would also make a good admin? Tim Vickers (talk) 18:34, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject The Wire

Hello, Lid/Archive 4 and thank you for your contributions on articles related to The Wire. I'd like to invite you to become a part of Wikipedia: WikiProject The Wire, a WikiProject aiming to improve coverage of The Wire and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to help out and participate, please visit the project page for more information. Thanks! Creamy3 (talk) 19:48, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

D2D 2006

The diff made by you strongly confuses me. D.M.N. (talk) 11:23, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review for Agavi

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Agavi. 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. I'm asking for a temporary copy at this stage. Andjam (talk) 00:29, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

I saw something mentioning it, and wanted to see what wikipedia had on it. The French wikipedia has an article on it, and it's mentioned in a few other articles in a couple of languages. Andjam (talk) 12:48, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Stigmater identical to earlier deleted Nemesis SL?

Hi Lid,

I saw you removed the wave of Nemesis SL band related articles i tagged for removal. The creator of those articles just created a new article, Stigmater. From the looks of it its the same kind of article he created earlier, but somehow i got a feeling the content is almost identical to the previously created article (Same year formed, band member name seem similar, same rock label). I was wondering if you could check if this article is simply the same article posted under a new name, or if this is a completely new article.

Thanks in advance, and with kind regards, Excirial ^{(Talk,Contribs)} 12:11, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Dan cardi

That's the third time it's been deleted in the past ten mins. or so. I suggest a salt. Could you do this? STORMTRACKER 94 ^{Go Irish!} 22:42, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Re:John Morrison

I wasn't working on it specifically, just my usual random clean-ups of my watchlist articles. I know it's a Jim Morrison reference (especially with the Corkscrew Neckbreaker now being called "Moonlight Drive") but there's really no source to state that as such, is there? Gavyn Sykes (talk) 19:11, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Doesn't read articles

Deleted articles without reading them, and then claims the articles state facts which they do not. Ignorance takes precedence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Weston sagle (talk • contribs) 05:39, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Commons

Just a suggestion, you may want to consider opening a Commons account if you don't already have one and uploading all free-use images there, that way the images can but used by multiple wiki-projects and not limited to just the English version of Wikipedia, for example the Italian version of the World Series of Poker German etc all can pull from the same source on commons. thank you▪◦▪≡SiREX≡^Talk 12:58, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Canvass

Hi Lid, When you nominate something for deletion it is considered canvassing to notify others---UNLESS you meet a few criteria. One of those criteria is that you do so in the open. Eg when you notify the Wikiproject Poker, you need to post a note on the XfD that you are doing so, otherwise it may be seen as canvassing. It expected that you notify pertinent wikiprojects, but just note that you are doing so.Balloonman (talk) 00:31, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Rodovid

For what you've deleted this article? I think it's a notable web project, it has more then 100 000 genealogies and the article has 4 interwikis in other languages. How about to restore the article? Don't be destructive. Denis Tarasov (talk) 10:41, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Editing

Ok im srry for the editing and thanks for the warning ill keep myself away from the edit button. Unless i see something wrong on the page or if i can add anything.... Thats fine isn't it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.105.52.85 (talk) 11:39, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Speedy tag

Hi,

When you flag an article for speedy, please could you also mark it as 'patrolled' to save duplicated efforts? Thanks. --  Chzz  ►  00:42, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Hoaxes

If they're obvious hoaxes, just delete them. I've never had any backlash for doing so. If someone tries to wikilawyer over it, point them towards WP:CSD#G3 (blatant and obvious misinformation). Neıl 龱 10:56, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

KACHE Productions

Hi all. Just wondering why my article on KACHE Productions was deleted? Its a band thats just starting out and wanted to know how to publish an article about us with out it being deleted.? thanks Trcxsa (talk) 14:05, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

KACHE Productions

Ok i understand thanks for the help! Trcxsa (talk) 14:14, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Nicknames

why do you keep removing nicknames from articles, see examples

• Bill Clinton William Jefferson "Bill" Clinton...
• Jimmy Carter James Earl "Jimmy" Carter, Jr....

It is proper to use the commonname that the person goes by in quotes, like Andy Bloch this is his commonname which is why the article is called Andy Bloch rather then Andrew Bloch, the Quotes "Andy" lets the reader know this is his nickname, although it's widely known Andy is a nickname for Andrew then are other nicknames not so commonly known.▪◦▪≡SiREX≡^Talk 12:18, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Theodor Pröpper

Excuse me but how is Theodor Pröpper evidently notable ? By writing one non-notable cantanta ??? --Triwbe (talk) 14:49, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

CM Punk

Done. -- Oakster  Talk  11:53, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

discussion

regarding volkan turgut: everything seems to be notable mate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluebellll (talk • contribs) 02:45, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

My Place (book)

Please help improve the article. Enigma ^message 05:53, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: I insist on nothing

Really? I can see it in both versions, that's why I figured you wanted it to be more prominent. I didn't want to sound harsh though, "insist" was probably too strong a word, sorry.
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 13:39, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Splitting up discussion between two talk pages (Barack Obama Sr. and Barack Obama)

Hi Lid,

I understand your desire to have more input on the article naming, and I don't disagree that with more traffic on the Barack Obama talk page, you're likely to get more informed comment, but usually we simply put a note on one page that there's a discussion going on on another page and ask people to follow a link there. Here's what the guideline about talk pages says about it (WP:MULTI): it may be desirable to move all posts to one of the locations, removing them from the other locations and adding a link.) so why don't you choose one spot and at the bottom of the discussion on the other spot just leave a note saying "discussion continues at _____"? That way you'll have fewer redundant comments. Cheers, Noroton (talk) 15:35, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Removing warnings on blocked user talk pages

I read here that when a user is indef blocked the warnings should be removed and only the blocking notice left. Is this true? The Llama! (talk) 12:46, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

False warnings

Had you read the TNA World Championship talk page, you would have seen that that information was inaccurate. However, you reinstated it, then warned me? Please be aware of what you are doing before threatening blocking, as that is a violation of WP:civil. 41.245.182.70 (talk) 12:57, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism on my user page

Thanks for catching that! TN‑X-Man 13:16, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

This FAC, which you commented on, has been restarted.

Hi! You might be interested in the discussion at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/SummerSlam (2003).S_RX 18:08, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Miss Tarah Lee ' The Empress '

why has it been deleted in a second , under what circumstance could that of been looked at, even half checked, I welcome edit and or help but deletion ? hangon is that the correct one ? well apparently not please reconsider I don't know how 90 percent of this works but I have looked at loads of these and what was written was above the standard that others had it says reason for deletion "A7 (bio): Doesn't indicate importance or significance of a real person) that real person I co admin a fan club with if you want alterations point them out so I can do them but give me the chance to don't just delete I spent 24 hours checking and writing that with Miss Tarah Lee DavePowell21 (talk) 07:45, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't know why I am arguing , you are so sure that this page should not exist that you can not possibly of clicked the links given to find there are sites without any connection to myself where she is listed http://www.modelmayhem.com/empress , http://www.linkedin.com/in/misstarahlee , http://www.zazzle.com/miss_tarah_lee_t_shirt-235059020854278770 . I could go on pasting those all day but then I would ber wasting another 24 hours if you are not going to check them.DavePowell21 (talk) 08:30, 30 August 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by DavePowell21 (talk • contribs) 08:27, 30 August 2008 (UTC) However much I search for an answer to this I am unable to find one ,If you could inform me of how / if I can appeal it would be appreciated. DavePowell21 (talk) 09:58, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Walter Sedlmayr edit history required

Hi Lid. I don't think that I have to give you anything more on the background of the discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents/Deletion of Walter Sedlmayr edit history required. I've spent so much time there that I was reluctant to do anything more on Wikipedia. But I am thinking that we are approaching a solution there, either way, and I would like to ask you whether you could comment one more time there. But before that there is on other think I'd like to tell you about. I've studied most of the classic social contract theory, too (Hobbes, Locke, Kant and a little Rousseau), but what decisively influenced my personal views in this debate were Hannah Arendt's considerations about the importance of forgiveness in politics (Vita activa, ch. 5, 33). Of course, the question is not how I personally view this issue, but what Wikipedia should do about this. I think your argument for an inclusion of the full names of the perpetrators rested on wp:N, and I have written a longer reply to this on the discussion page. But, as you know, there is at least one editor there who is completely immune to arguments. If you take a look at the discussion, you will see, that I proposed a solution, which, taken my initial viewpoint into account, is a huge compromise. We would simply remove the names from the article and its discussion page, but we wouldn't purge the edit history. But I can*t just go ahead with this, because I surely would be reverted and I don't have the backup on the discussion page. So, regardless of what you think of this after my arguments, could you just state your view with a few words there? ... I wan to finish the issue now, but I can't just retreat from the discussion. Zara1709 (talk) 16:27, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Sockpuppet?

Hey. A user with a new account removed the Speedy Deletion template from Kush kalash or possibly Kush Kalash (which has since been deleted). The user who created the article is suspected to be a sockpuppet. It looks like the account that removed the Speedy Deletion template could be one too? Matt (Talk) 08:25, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Roger Ebert Creationism Edit

Good call on the Ebert revert. I was just adding my views to the discussion page to say the same thing.BaldySlaphead (talk) 23:37, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Lolo

Hi Lid - I'll have to give this some thought - but quite honestly, I was not and am still not convinced that this article should stand alone at all. I think Lolo Soetoro has no independent notability, and I have believed all along that the article was (or could be) pushed at least in part by some as a vehicle for associating Barack Obama with a Muslim background. I'm not pointing fingers, nor am I suggesting that's your motivation in including this category - I would rather stay away from motivation at this point altogether. But I truly think that Lolo is adequately handled in the section of Ann Dunham that talks about their marriage, and that this is the appropriate place for him. So as far as I'm concerned, the article should be a merge/redirect to Dunham, and this discussion wouldn't be necessary. As for the specifics - my understanding about Lolo is that he was not a practicing Muslim, so what is the reason for including him in that category? I'll give this some more thought, but that's where I am on first look. I don't suppose this is helpful to your position, but I did want to give you my honest reaction. (By the way - I didn't archive most of the page, actually - I just finished what Elonka started earlier in archiving a bit more material from June and July that she missed. I'm not sure why she stopped where she did, but the threads I archived were just as old and had not been added to since, so I see no reason for them to remain on the talk page.) Nice to meet you. Tvoz/talk 08:26, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi Lid - see my response on my talk. Tvoz/talk 15:54, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Edge Gamers Organization

Why was this deleted? Did you even read anything on the page? It was posted and deleted so quickly that I doubt so. The reason I added it was because it is one of, if not THE largest gaming community on the internet. This community is so big it has a trademarked name. Over 10,000 registered users. If that isn't important enough to be added then so be it. I'm not sure I understand what is insignificant though... Oh well. Dewdrinker19 (talk) 22:18, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

World Stars Of Wrestling

Why you have that message at the start of every page of World Stars Of Wrestling which I created?

I entered all the data, I inserted quotes, I put all the results, the roster, and everything else, without the slightest mistake.

I would like an explanation of that your message through. Reggino DOC (talk) 16:59, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of World Stars Of Wrestling

The federation is still existing, informed before deleting a page, at least. Reggino DOC (talk) 16:59, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

WP:INHERITED

Yes, actually, I do think that it's a variation on this theme. It's tricky, in my view - I believe that the encyclopedia needs to talk about Lolo, but in fact my position earlier was that all we needed for Lolo was a section in Ann Dunham, which is still pretty much how I feel. It's tricky because although Ann too was not notable solely on her own, it seems to me that enough third-party sources exist - enough has been written about her - that a separate piece on her was warranted. The problem with Lolo (and even Barack Sr) is that their influence on his life was minimal by all accounts, and they had no independent notability to boot, so I don't see the need for separate articles. Plus, much of the material that was added to Lolo is in my view very marginal and not notable: the color of his hair and his height? And I just don't see any evidence of his having such a great influence - it was a handful of years in Barack's childhood, and it's quite apparent that his mother had the great influence on him. And yes, his grandparents who raised him. I've been accused of being on Obama's campaign staff (I'm not) more than I've been accused of being out to get him (also not true), but I really think this is non-partisan and purely a procedural matter: the redirect to Family of Barack Obama#Lolo Soetoro brings a person directly to where the identical material was until a few days ago, and would be again if the merge/redirect is done. If you want my opinion of why some people argue so strenuously for a separate article to "debunk" the false rumors about Obama's religious past - it has long seemed to me that they protest just a bit too much and in fact want to associate the word "Muslim" with Obama any way they can while accusing everyone else of exactly what they're really about. Just my opinion. AGF and all that.Tvoz/talk 01:58, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Re; Swallow airplane Company

I think you were a bit hasty in deketing it under notability guidelines. i saved in error b efore adding references. Please re-instated the page so I can finish the job. Petebutt (talk) 10:01, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Vortex Psytrance & Psychedelic Chillout Festival

Hi, can you please explain to me why you deleted this article? It's relevant & of interest to people in the electronic music scene. Or at least I thought so. If you could tell me why you don't or what I can do to alter the text to be more suitable for your requirements that would be great. Many thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mike Indidginus (talk • contribs) 10:36, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Obama template

Yo Lid, since you reverted my change, I've started a discussion at Template talk:Barack Obama on the scope of the template to which you might like to contribute. Regards, the skomorokh 18:29, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Courtesy notification - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of bow tie wearers (4th nomination)

An article in which you have had an interest, List of bow tie wearers, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of bow tie wearers (4th nomination). Thank you. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 21:57, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Bow ties

I hope you didn't think this was an attack on you or anything like that - you were the most recent editor to comment using pretty much the same arguments and I'm wondering how many times each of us can rephrase the same positions. You're right that I've been rather posty there; a lot of posts for "delete" seem to be ignoring various guidelines and policies or just interpreting them differently than I do, and I've been trying to understand why. I'm fairly new at these discussions and, believe it or not, I'm trying to figure out if there's information I don't know that I should that could get me to rethink my own position. At this point, though, it seems that for the most part it's just more of the same, from the same editors, and so I no longer see the point of dragging it out.--otherlleft (talk) 14:59, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

deleting FTMA?

Im just wondering why you deleted FTMA as I had not even had the chance to add the link to the website into it yet. Id only been working on it less than 5 minutes. I am a member of FTMA and can link every source to this if required. What makes, in your opinion, our organization not interesting enough for Wiki? Big dave 69 (talk) 09:01, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Talk page still exists

You deleted Cricket Boards but the talk page still exists. Can you please delete that too? TIA ww2censor (talk) 23:40, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

RE:Dropping by

I don't think you've missed anything too terribly important. :/ Nikki♥311 20:42, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

I was thinking that was OR, too, but I try and stay out of those types of discussions these days. I can't take the stress of trying to argue it out. Nikki♥311 04:36, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Doctations

I noticed you declined the A7 speedy request on this article, which I stumbled across by accident. Looking at the history it seems that the editor of the article is Louis Cornacchia, the CEO of the business in question. Given the overall tone of the article as an advertisement, and some bizarre references to Barack Obama's website health careplans broadly, I am tempted to delete the whole thing as an advertisement violation. Although there is a reference link to CNBC the CNBC listing is, literally, another advertisement only for Doctations. Would you agree with this or should I stay my hand? –– Lid^(Talk) 14:12, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

It's not a blatant ad and I wouldn't speedy it, but it could certainly be AFDed/PRODded. Stifle (talk) 17:31, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

CM Punk

I wanted to run this by you before I did, since you did most of the work getting Punk's article to FA. About a year ago, the move list was expanded to have separate sections for the indy circuit and WWE> since then, Punk has begun using most of his indy moves in his WWE moveset, making the list sort of redundant. Would you have any objection to collapsing the list back and adding "- WWE" or "- Independent circuit" after the few moves that he's only used in one of those places? Gavyn Sykes (talk) 02:42, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

I see what you mean. But I personally think it's necessary to list promotions that way, simply so someone reading the article won't expect Punk to start finishing matches with a Shining Wizard on Raw. If there was a better way to list them, I'd be all for it. Maybe we should bring it up at WT:PW. I agree about Sydal. It should just be moved to his real name already.Gavyn Sykes (talk) 15:52, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

What if instead of specifying the promotion, we used years instead. This would indicate a clear timeframe when the move was used. Not sure if it's any better than listing promotions, but it's something. Let me know what you think. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 16:12, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost — 2 March 2009

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 9, which includes these articles:

• Books extension enabled
• News and notes: Stewards, Wikimania bids, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia's role in journalism, Smarter Wikipedia, Skittles
• Dispatches: WikiProject Ships Featured topic and Good topics
• Wikiproject report: WikiProject Norse History and Culture
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 20:02, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost — 9 March 2009

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 10, which includes these articles:

• News and notes: Commons, conferences, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Politics, more politics, and more
• Dispatches: 100 Featured sounds milestone
• Wikiproject report: WikiProject Christianity
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 00:01, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost — 16 March 2009

Unsubscribe · Single-page · Full edition »

  — 16 March 2009

• News and notes: License update, Commons cartoons, films milestone, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Manufactured scandal, Wikipedia assignments, and more
• Dispatches: New FAC and FAR appointments
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 23:10, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 23 March 2009

• From the editor: Reviewing books for the Signpost
• Special report: Abuse Filter is enabled
• News and notes: Flaggedrevs, copyright project, fundraising reports, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Alternatives, IWF threats, and more
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 04:53, 24 March 2009 (UTC)