User talk:PhilKnight/Archive42

Hank Freid

"hangon"?? So the contest speedy deletion option is just a sham? --Imagemonth (talk) 12:58, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi Imagemonth, your comment on the talk page effectively admitted the article was original research.--PhilKnight (talk) 13:02, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

There are a number of independently researched articles regarding Hank Freid which I would have cited had you not deleted the article so swiftly. Articles such as this one. --Imagemonth (talk) 17:41, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Electrics shop proposed deletion

I noticed that you proposed deletion of Electrics shop but did not add the notification template to any of the author's talk pages as the template says to do. I do not think this is the best practice. -JWGreen (talk) 23:47, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi JWGreen, the original author no longer edits Wikipedia, and the other editors were either reverting vandalism or adding tags. Hopefully, you'll find time to add references in the next week, otherwise I'll open a discussion at AfD.--PhilKnight (talk) 12:28, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Rock Witchu Tour

User talk:Seemsto as well as a few IP users have vandalized this page again. I can't undo all of the edits, is there anyway to rollback the article to my last version which was on Aug 1 2008? The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 02:39, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi Bookkeeper, have a look at WP:REVERT.--PhilKnight (talk) 13:48, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Regarding Agama Yoga Article

In accordance with the decision to Merge the Article of Swami Vivekananda Saraswati & Agama Yoga (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Swami_Vivekananda_Saraswati) I have Merged the two articles. The Resulting article has been now nominated for deletion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Agama_Yoga), which seems contrary to the result of the discussion about the article of Swami Vivekanada Saraswati. The Reasoning of the discussion's originator Being "Non notable religious organization. Also, no reliable sources". I have offered for all to view the 3rd party sources i have used but have not received any requests of such things by the people participating in the discussion. I would be happy to have your involvment in this discussion. Tomeryogi (talk) 06:41, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi Tomeryogi, thanks for informing me. PhilKnight (talk) 13:48, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Leona Lewis on The X Factor - nominated for deletion (again)

The article Leona Lewis on The X Factor has been nominated for deletion again. I noticed that you were a contributor on the discussion for the first nomination, and your opinions on this topic would be valuable once again. Please feel free to offer your comments to the discussion. Thanks — Wiki edit Jonny (talk) 11:43, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi Wiki edit Jonny, thanks for informing me. PhilKnight (talk) 13:48, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Subdevil

Hi there. As the closing editor of the Hasslevania article, I thought I'd bring to your attention a redirect to that page, namely Subdevil. I've tagged it for speedy deletion, so it may already be gone, but I thought you might like to know! -- JediLofty ^User_Talk 14:49, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! PhilKnight (talk) 14:51, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Jack Wilshere

Hello, I was wondering if Jack Wilshere could become unprotected. I have created an outline of an article here: User:VincentValentine29/Sandbox. He was an unused substitute at the match against FC Twente today, so I'm not sure if that qualifies him under notability guidelines. Thanks for your time. Best, Vincent Valentine 02:31, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at WP:DRV#Jack Wilshere about this. PhilKnight (talk) 12:04, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Cam Brainard

I was wondering if you could restore the article on Cam "Buzz" Brainard. He's notable for being a voice actor, host of Maximum Exposure, AND of Breed All About It. RingtailedFox • Talk • Contribs 18:18, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi RingtailedFox, I've restored the article. PhilKnight (talk) 18:20, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Wow! Thanks! RingtailedFox • Talk • Contribs 18:22, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Creek Mary's Blood‎ afd

Thank you for closing the Creek Mary's Blood‎ afd, however Ghost Love Score was also part of the nomination, but that hasn't let been deleted. Just letting you know. Rehevkor ✉ 00:19, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi Rehevkor, thanks for letting me know. PhilKnight (talk) 00:24, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Rollback

Thank you so much :) Kristen Eriksen (talk) 00:46, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Um - wow :)

Hunh - I didn't know about {{symbol rationale}}! Thanks for that - I'll try to use that for future town seals :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 05:34, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Please explain your actions

Where does it say that an administrator who participates in and AfD discussion who does not agree with the closing by another administrator can revert the closing without discussion or review? I do not think you are allowed to do that. Jerry talk ¤ count/logs 22:25, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Jerry, if you are joking, then you have a weird sense of humor. If you aren't joking, then what you said in this close was factually incorrect, because the article hadn't been redirected. PhilKnight (talk) 07:10, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

No humor intended Phil. Apparently I was confused by the comments left by TerriersFan here and here. In such a case, I would appreciate if you inform me so I can correct it myself. Unless there is some really urgent matter, an admin should not undo another admin's closing, particularly without telling them, and particularly if you were involved in the discussion and opined other than how the closing was made. You made no notification to me whatsoever, and you did not explain the edit in the edit summary. Please do not do that in the future. Thanks. Jerry talk ¤ count/logs 16:59, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Sure, I agree - it wasn't an emergency or anything, so I should have just left you a note. PhilKnight (talk) 17:03, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review for Jack Wilshire

I have asked for a deletion review of Jack Wilshire. 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. as fully expected he started today for Arsenal F.C.. Could an Admin please restore the article ASAP so as to not waste someone who knows no better's time starting to write a new article from scratch. Nfitz (talk) 18:42, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: Administrative block on 211.29.171.149

Hi PhilKnight.

I am thinking I may have got my wires crossed with you! I just warned this IP a second time, cause I posted it to AIV and the admin told me the IP had been incorrectly warned, so I added another (custom) warning. If you want to remove it since you have blocked them, that's fine! Sorry for the cockup. Thor Malmjursson (talk) 20:20, 16 August 2008 (UTC) (Counter Vandalism Unit)

My RfA

PhilKnight, thank you for your contribution to the discussion at my recent RfA. If ever you have any concerns about my actions, adminly or otherwise, don't hesitate to let me know. Best wishes, Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 20:47, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Anti-vandal tool

Hello, PhilKnight. Sorry to bother you, but after trying out a new style for Lupin's Anti-vandal tool (yeah, I know it's a little out-dated, but it's still useful) on my monobook.css page, it acted all weird. If deleting it sets everything back to normal, can you please do so? Thanks, ~ Troy (talk) 00:16, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi Troy, I don't think deleting the page makes any difference - I suggest either clearing your cache, by holding down Ctrl and clicking refresh, or rebooting the computer. PhilKnight (talk) 00:20, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh oh. It didn't work. It still says:

Filter recent changes

All recent changes

Recent IP edits

Monitor my watchlist

Live spellcheck

_____________________

Filter recent changes

All recent changes

Recent IP edits

Monitor my watchlist

Live spellcheck

...the first half doesn't work and when I click on the second half, it doubles everything up (you have to see it to understand).

I think it's because I originally used my monobook.js and created a duplicate monobook.css. Do you have any other suggestions? ~ Troy (talk) 00:29, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Yep, I would suggest clearing the content of your monobook.js, and then clear your cache. PhilKnight (talk) 00:32, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

I am terribly sorry for wasting your time ...I guess this was all I needed all along. Thanks for being so helpful, though!

Kind regards,

~ Troy (talk) 00:35, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Silivrenion thanks you!

Thanks for deleting those talk pages for those radio stations. I didn't know about that rule! I forwarded all those pages and figured that was how it should be done! Thanks though! Silivrenion (talk) 03:24, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Warning

And of course and you will not warn him, not just leave a work on his talk page...
And If I would beahve thwi you the samhe has he behaves with me, what lliw you doo ? :-)
Ceedjee (talk) 12:20, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

• FYI.

Firearm pages being mass spammed

We need your help urgently. Glock pistol is getting hit hard, as are others. Koalorka (talk) 14:17, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Jeddah FAM

ey man that was my crew article u just deleted .. i know its real people coz it me and my team :S anyways sorry for wasting your time tc peace Balla skillz (talk) 15:29, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Shabazz is deletig my ref of "self hating jew" from New Historians and Post-Zionism

Please help!

--Shevashalosh (talk) 18:46, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

More details:

New Historians articles ==

1) I've added to Post Zionism after the sentance : The term is also used by right-wing Jews to refer to the left-wing of Israeli politics in light of the Oslo Accords.

+ and is attributed from the term Auto-Anti-Semitism, and Self-hating Jew[1]

+ your ref of "Holocust denial in Israel"

(this is a very important part of the Israeli political dialouge),

+ at "see also" section - link to "self hating Jew" (there is a link to "Neo-Zionism", I don't see any reason why).

2) in New Historians - to "see also" - self hating Jew (also an important part of the Israeli political dilouge).

• Shabazz keepts deleting the this all the time, for this WP and the other WP, for spelling and whatever have you.

I'm sorry, handle crticism for those who crticize Zionism. This is an important part of the Israeli political dialouge.

Those are articles, dealing with Israeli political dialouge - and this is part of the Israeli poilitical dialouge, Take a look at my complaint on admin notice board Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Shabazz is deletig my ref of "self hating jew" from New Historians and Post-Zionism --Shevashalosh (talk) 05:12, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia: Editorial Council

Hello! I noticed your oppose in the poll was based on the issue of binding content decisions. I have addressed this issue here, with the hope that it can resolve what otherwise would be quite problematic. Thanks for you input and happy editing! --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 04:01, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

John Michell Talk page

Hi - I have now added a source for the fact that John Michell wrote a booklet called The Hip-Pocket Hitler. If you remove the section from the Talk page in which I ask for publication details for this booklet, so they can be added to the long bibliography on the main page, please can you explain why. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.84.204.125 (talk) 17:27, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks PhilKnight for cautioning 91.84.237.105. Please keep an eye on this article as I have good reason to suspect this user is either a sock puppet or a puppet master who has the intent of slandering a living author. SageMab (talk) 19:11, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

I am neither a sockpuppet nor a puppetmaster. I am simply anonymous. Please do keep an eye on the John Michell talk page. One of SageMab's latest acts of vandalism was to remove my posting of a source for the statement that John Michell wrote a booklet and called The Hip-Pocket Hitler. Since SageMab admits that Michell did write such a pamphlet, to call my source 'dubious' is indicative of bad faith on his part. Indeed I might as well quote him himself as a source, albeit not as verifiable as the source I did quote, which is written by a German writer (and friend of Michell's) under his real name. Indeed, no-one has ever denied that Michell wrote the pamphlet - so why shouldn't it be listed in the bibliographical section of his Wikipedia entry? I have also posted more evidence of John Michell's close involvement with Evolist ideology and its contemporary scene. Doubtless SageMab will try again to vandalise it. Please could you intervene. I am trying to defend a case for the changes I am proposing to the John Michell page. If my edits on the talk page, which is meant for discussion, keep getting misleadingly altered (as SageMab has previously done on a number of occasions) or removed, then it is impossible for me to do this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.84.204.125 (talk) 20:12, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

91.84.237.105 is just plain crazy. First he was admonished by other editors for calling names to other editors (this was before I got into it) for correct Wikification. 91.84.237.105 is printing lies and slander and reversing edits and even warnings by other editors on his own talk page and trying to slander a living author. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SageMab (talk • contribs) 20:22, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

I have issued a Request for Comments (rfc-pol), focusing on the issue of what to say about John Michell's booklet The Hip-Pocket Hitler on the Discussion page; and on the issue of how to deal - also initially on that page - with his relationship with the fascist philosophy of the Radical Traditionalist author Julius Evola. SageMab's alterations and removals of contributions by myself initiated a revert war in which we have both been participating. Review and discussion by other parties would be most welcome, and perhaps at the end of the day some administrative intervention will also be required. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.84.204.125 (talk) 22:20, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

I wish to add that my internet use does not bestow a unique IP number on my contributions, and for what it is worth, my contributions have been made from both 91.84.204.125 and 91.84.237.105 and (I haven't checked) perhaps also from other IP numbers beginning "91". Which of the contributions to the Talk:John Michell page have been mine, should be obvious. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.84.204.125 (talk) 22:27, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

This fellow is printing outright slander. And trying to add misdirection about about his edits. The author in question is far from a fascist. User 91...etc. is drawing wrong conclusions and using those wrong conclusions to vandalize. His links prove nothing. Nothing. He has been warned by administrators on his talk page qay before I got into it and yet he persists,SageMab (talk) 23:46, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Phil, this user is just plain wrong and is trying to muddy the name of a well-regarded author. John Michell did NOT ever praise Hitler nor does he admire him, Evola (his essay was about Platonic ideals) nor Michael Moynahan. That's the truth. Please help stop this vandal who has been admonished by at least 5 other editors. 216.240.101.40 (talk) 20:21, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Page Deletion - Jose Munoz Morales-Borges Ph.D

Hi Phil,

I am confused why you have deleted my page a second time. The page is not about myself - I prepared the page for another person who I consider is notable. This is the 4th time this page has been deleted for various reasons in less than two weeks. How is it possible to maintain a factual page on wikipedia when any number of administrators are able to delete the page for whatever reason they consider (in their own opinion) contravene wikipedia rules. The page I created was completely factual and about a person, who, in my opinion, is notable and has made a significant contribution to society.

Regards

Kevin Kevsherr (talk) 21:49, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi Kevin, I've restored the article, and moved it to User:Kevsherr/Jose Munoz Morales-Borges. Please understand that if you move it back into article space it will be quickly deleted. At the moment, the main problems are neutrality - it reads like a resume - and lack of citations to reliable sources independent of the subject. PhilKnight (talk) 23:53, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Tata Communications

Hey, I noticed that you deleted Tata Communications claiming the content of the article was a copyright infringement. It may be possible that some user may have added copyrighted material to the article, but you should have reverted those edits instead of deleting the article. Please restore the article and revert it to previous version which did not include copyvio material. Hoping for a swift action from your side --Enigma Blues (talk) 14:02, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi Enigma Blues, sorry, but the whole article was a copyright infringement. PhilKnight (talk) 16:56, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Malik shabazz is deleting my RS on Post-Zionism and New Historians despite my addtional ref on talk page

I told him this was RS, I replaced my initial RS by Nudve's and have provided addtional RS on talk page.

I told him he can not delte an RS because he doewsn't like it, but if he has any complaints go to talk page. Since he has any, he keeps deleting it eveytime for newlly invented reason.

help! --Shevashalosh (talk) 15:51, 19 August 2008 (UTC)