User talk:Redsox04

Welcome

Hello, Redsox04, 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 your user talk 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! -- KirinX 22:01, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alberto Nisi

Greetings. Recently you created a page for the WWII fighter pilot Alberto Nisi and included his name among those on the list of WWII aces from the US. I removed his name from the list page because I have been unable to locate any records indicating Nisi got any kills at all, let alone the five commonly assumed to be needed to be an "ace" fighter pilot. His rank when he died (ensign) makes me think it was unlikely that he got so many kills. Do you have a reference to his being an ace to support his inclusion on the list page, or his description as an "ace" pilot? Thanks. Geeman 01:37, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Memo - ALL Changes Regarding MY Created Pages

I would greatly appreciate it if ANYBODY who edit's ANY of my pages contacts me by USER Talk like "Geeman" did when he edited my addition to the "List of WWII Aces" page regarding Ensign Alberto Nisi. If you want to add something or delete something, have some common courtesy to alert me before you do so. Maybe there may be some inaccuracies in your change that I can fix. My "This Year In Baseball: 2006" page was deleted w/o my knowledge or consent. With me being affiliated with CVU, I am fully aware of the deletion procedure and whoever deleted that page failed to inform me of that, which is a violation of proper procedure! Thanx!

Please read WP:OWN; you don't own pages. You just edit to them. The purpose of a wiki is that edits can be made without letting the original author know. If you want to monitor pages, you have a watchlist that you can use. Veinor ^{(talk to me)} 20:41, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting a page w/o your knowledge is not a violation, you don't own pages, and they surely don't have to have your consent to delete pages that you've created. Cool Blue^{talk to me} 22:57, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Charles McNulty

An editor has nominated Charles McNulty, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not"). Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles McNulty and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. Jayden54Bot 14:12, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, the external links you added to the page Elle Fanning do not comply with our guidelines for external links. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Veinor ^{(talk to me)} 20:30, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: External Links

My external link is perfectly fine. It is just another web site that DOES pertain to Elle Fanning.

Alberto Nisi

I decided to put Alberto Nisi up for deletion, as I believe that they don't satisfy the notability guidelines. You can view the debate and make your argument at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alberto Nisi. If you have any questions, feel free to ask them on my talk page. Thanks! Veinor ^{(talk to me)} 20:36, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seeking community input re standardizing baseball roster pages

Hi ... I'm leaving you this note because you recently made edits to one of the Major League Baseball roster pages. I've made a proposal for standardizing the format, structure and content of these pages here and would appreciate your input so that we may reach a consensus. Thanks. --Sanfranman59 06:02, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

April 2007

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent contribution removed maintenance notices from User talk:Redsox04, even though required changes haven't been made. If you are uncertain whether the page requires further work, or if you disagree with the notice, please discuss these issues on the page's talk page before removing the notice from the page. These notices and comments are needed to establish community consensus about the status of a page. Thank you. Thor Malmjursson 01:10, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Powderhorn Family Camping Resort. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam policy for further explanations. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Thank you. - May I also warn you that by persistently removing our maintainence tags from your article, you are breaching our rules. Please do not remove these tage again without discussion. If you disagree with the tagging of your work, please use {{hangon}} on the article, and explain why you want to stop the deletion on the article talk page. Thor Malmjursson 01:18, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Response to "April 2007"

Hello. Yes, the article, "Powderhorn Family Camping Resort", is blatant advertising but how about a lot of the other resort articles. Like the article about "Powder Horn Mountain" in North Carolina for instance. How about them? Why don't you go post something on their page and, until then, leave my page alone! Thank You. Redsox04 16:34, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Civility costs nothing. Thor Malmjursson 22:29, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Firstly, I will thank you for your comments. I am not prepared to leave your page alone, as it fell within the remit of my work here as a Recent Change Patroller and New Page Patroller. Your page simply showed up while I was doing a newpage patrol. I read it, considered it advertising, and tagged it.

Let me explain my reasons for doing so, and you may understand better why it got tagged:

1: You advertised prices for practically everything

2: You provided contact details for the resort

3: You created the article to look like an advert, rather than information about the place

If you have any complaints about my behaviour, you are welcome to contact any of our Administrators who will I have no doubt, assure you that I followed the correct procedure. Also, if you notice any of these other articles which you condier to be spam/advertising, you are welcome to nominate them for deletion - see here for details of how to deal with such "articles". Thank you for your time. Thor Malmjursson 22:27, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Procedure for requesting user bans

Hello. I also participate in recent change patrol, and noticed that you placed the following tag on a user page: [1]. I see that you subsequently reverted it. While on change patrol if you see that a user is persisting in changes that you feel are inappropriate after suitable warnings have been given you can report it at Wikipedia_talk:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism. They can assist you in determining if a block is needed or if some other process should be used as part of an escalation procedure. The block log for the user you tagged does not show that any block was applied, and editing of other user pages is strongly discouraged. Thanks for being part of recent change patrol, as it is a very important function. Buddhipriya 20:03, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

similarly, I would like to thank you for doing RCP work, but I have to point out that it is not "your job" as part of that work to make threats of permanent bans for anything other than blatant vandalism. (that's quite apart from the fact that the warning you put on my talkpage was apparently misplaced, since I haven't done anything similar to what you warn me against doing). regards, dab (𒁳) 08:53, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I also noticed the warning on Dab's page [2] as his page is under my watch list. I think Redsox04 made a mistake while posting his message on Dab's page. I request Redsox04 to tender an apology at least. --Bhadani (talk) 11:48, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

no problem at all -- thank you again for doing RCP, Wikipedia wouldn't work without people doing that. dab (𒁳) 19:32, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete template - Old Orchard Beach (Amtrak station)

You placed a speedy delete template on Old Orchard Beach (Amtrak station) citing this as spam. This was inappropriate since there is a consensus here that railway stations are entitled to their own articles. I removed the template but you replaced it. This was a misjudgement. If you are still concerned then you should take it to AfD but my view is that your chances of achieving deletion are negligible. TerriersFan 22:45, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing to worry

I appreciate your kind gesture. I have also committed many mistakes during last two years and most of them have been inadvertent. I am sure that yours too was inadvertent. We all are a close community of wikipedians and you are doing really nice work. Please carry on the good works. Best regards. --Bhadani (talk) 02:15, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violation on Josh Hancock

Please do not post copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder, as you did to Josh Hancock. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:

If you have permission from the author leave a message explaining the details on the article Talk page and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Josh Hancock with a link to where we can find that note;
If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on the article Talk page. Alternatively, you may create a note on your web page releasing the work under the GFDL and then leave a note at Talk:Josh Hancock with a link to the details.

Otherwise, you are encouraged to rewrite this article in your own words to avoid any copyright infringement. After you do so, you should place a {{hangon}} tag on the article page and leave a note at Talk:Josh Hancock saying you have done so. An administrator will review the new content before taking action.

It is also important that all Wikipedia articles have an encyclopedic tone and follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Your original contributions are welcome. -- KirinX 17:33, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apology For Copyright Violation

I did not realize that the information posted was a copyright infraction. I had put it's source (website and author) so I thought it was OK. Could you clarify me on the procedure for the information. Thank you, Redsox04 21:05, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All the information you need is contained in the warning I gave you above. Essentially though, you may not copy and paste from other sites. Just like in an essay for school, or a report for work, it is not allowed, and is referred to as plagiarism. When writing about a subject, if you need to use somebody else's words, you must use a quotation or a paraphrase, but it is often best to re-write all material from scratch to better demonstrate that they are your words, even if they are influenced by another author's words. On the other hand, what you were attempting to do on Josh Hancock's article is a straight-ahead copyright violation. If you wish to direct people to another article by another author, you should link to the URL and provide a citation reference to the sentence/paragraph you are writing (in your own words) in the article.

I hope this isn't too confusing. Feel free to ask more questions but please do so after reading Wikipedia's already extensive information regarding copyright violations. Thanks. -- KirinX 21:32, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apology @ User_talk:Iceflow

Redsox4, your apology is accepted. Recently, I have been marking a lot of articles, since I am trying to get back into the swing of Wikipedia, after only getting back to the net 28 days ago. I walk RCP and NPP most days, and enjoy my work. I am happy to work with you, and if you need any help tagging or prodding an article to be deleted, please let me know. I will be only too happy to help you. Thor Malmjursson 17:38, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image uploads

Here's the information you wanted about uploading images: WP:IMAGE. Please note that there are copyright restrictions to most images. If you do not own the rights to the image you are uploading, or the image is not available under a free license or is available in the public domain, you may not upload it. That's not to say you can't upload it, but it will most likely be tagged for deletion almost immediately after uploading. -- KirinX 21:40, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop.

Please stop asking me questions that are easily researched using Wikipedia itself. There are numerous guidelines and help pages to answer all your questions that are Wikipedia-related. While I am happy to answer questions that you may have regarding these guidelines and articles, I do not want to constantly answer questions that are covered extensively already. Regarding your question about becoming an admin, the single most important criterion is to know and understand Wikipedia policy to a great degree, as well as to be able to help others should they have these sort of questions you are asking me. Other important criteria include a long history of contributions to Wikipedia, input on consensus issues, input into XfD discussions, and vandal patrolling. -- KirinX 21:53, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have noticed that nobody has welcomed you officially. The welcome message (I've put it at the top of this talk page) gives you a lot of good places to start on learning about Wikipedia and what you can and cannot do, and all that good stuff. -- KirinX 21:58, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2006-07 Boston Bruins season

This page does not meet any of the Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion. You are free to attempt the Wikipedia:Proposed deletion and/or Wikipedia:Articles for deletion processes, but I suspect the attempts will meet with resistence, given the current practice of these kinds of pages (see Category:2006 in ice hockey). Andrwsc 22:21, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fantasized reasons for blocking

On this edit of yours and a whole string of edits ending in this one: Absolutely untrue, as is clear from the relevant block log.

Anyone can make mistakes, and your series of edits starting with this diff (view it, and hit "newer edit" several times) shows that you are aware that you make mistakes. You'd be well advised to take particular care not to make mistakes when alleging that others have violated this or that. -- Hoary 05:21, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Madeleine "Maddie" McCann

I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article Madeleine "Maddie" McCann, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Tamatisk 20:19, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove proposals for merge without community consensus and certainly do not remove proposals for deletion from articles which you created. Thank you. Angus Lepper^{(T, C, D)} 20:26, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have deleted this article as a CSD:A7. The content of the page is already included at Disappearance of Madeleine McCann, so nothing to merge, and no independent notability for the subject was asserted. TerriersFan 20:39, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Leicester

Regarding your recent edit summary on Disappearance of Madeleine McCann: please note that Leicester is most definitely a city in Leicestershire, England. A ecis^Brievenbus 01:22, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It certainly is! And Ireland isn't in Massachusetts either!— Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.114.226.173 (talk • contribs)

???

Would you care to explain what exactly you were doing here? There's a thread about you now on WP:ANI, you can do it there. Grand master ka 22:02, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You aren't allowed to do admin actions or say you're doing admin actions if you're not a administrator; please cease and desist. If you continue your account can be blocked for impersonating admins. Giving warnings is one thing - saying someone is blocked or banned or so forth is very different. Please stop. Georgewilliamherbert 22:30, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't the first time he did this if you go up a couple discussion on this page. Funpika 22:37, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, he has put WP:CSD tags on articles that don't meet any of the speedy criteria. As a member of the "Counter-Vandalism Unit" and a "recent changes patroller", he certainly needs some guidance on actual Wikipedia policy before he gets into too much more trouble. Andrwsc 22:41, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:75.33.29.54

You placed a {{schoolblock}} on this page; why? Paul Tracy_|\talk 21:08, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What does this mean? You aren't an admin, you cannot block anyone. IrishGuy ^talk 22:25, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That was my point too: if you aren't an admin then pretending to be one is at best misguided, at worst abuse. Don't do it. Paul Tracy_|\talk 21:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Attacking policy

You said to note it here, so I'll just restate what I said over on WP:AN. Blocks are only preventive, not punitive. We dont block people to punish them, no matter what they did. We block to prevent damage to the encyclopedia. If theres a good-faith belief the user wont do more damage, then any block, let alone an indef one, is inappropriate and flouts WP:BP. -M^ask? 02:26, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Little context in The Hooksett 4

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on The Hooksett 4, by SatyrTN, another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because The Hooksett 4 is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting The Hooksett 4, 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. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate The Hooksett 4 itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 17:34, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While I couldn't delete the article as the context is now established, I have marked it for proposed deletion. The article has limited scope, I don't think it's notable enough for an encyclopaedia to cover, and I think it unlikely that this incident will be of note in the future. Malla nox 12:31, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your Mediation Committee nomination

Per two oppose rule, your nomination to the Mediation Committee has been declined. Your nomination has been delisted and archived here. Please note that a new policy was recently enacted in which a user cannot reapply within 3 months of their last declined nomination. However, we recommend that you take this opportunity to use the comments made at your nomination to improve yourself not only as a potential mediator, but as an editor of Wikipedia in general. Thanks again for your interest.

On behalf of the Mediation Committee, Daniel 00:33, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Firefighter's_Combat_Challenge

I've removed a large section from this. It was copyright material. See here for policy. Paul Tracy_|\talk 15:47, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blanking your talk page

Hi, blanking your talk page is a real bad idea. It makes it harder for editors to follow discussions with you and some might consider it an attempt to conceal guidance you have received. To shorten the page the way forward is to archive it as here. TerriersFan 22:19, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Student Awareness of Fire Education

A "{{prod}}" template has been added to the article Student Awareness of Fire Education, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but yours may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Metros 20:34, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the prod tag with an explanation left in the article source in comments. The SAFE program may not warrant an article unto itself but the subject of fire education is encyclopedic. Perhaps the article content can be put in the context of a larger article. --Richard 19:21, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mentoring

Hi Redsox04,

I have some concerns about our starting a "mentoring" relationship. I will present them and then let's discuss whether we mutually agree that such a relationship would be worthwhile.

My concern is that your first question to me, right off the bat, was "Can you help me become an admin?". The answer to that is "yes but...". I have participated in RFA discussions for over a year and I think I have a good idea of what it takes to become an admin. HOWEVER, you should be aware that many regular voters on RFA consider an unseemly desire to become an admin to be a disqualification for becoming an admin. In other words, the more you show that you want to be an admin, the more likely people will vote against your request for adminship. I think the rationale for this is that people who really want very badly to become admins often have poor reasons to for wanting to become admins.

I have to admit that, while I don't generally oppose RFA candidates on this ground, I found it troubling that this was the first question that you asked me. The fact that you've been trying to do admin-type stuff like blocking users without fully learning how Wikipedia works also worries me because it suggests that, once given the sysop bit, you might go off half-cocked with your own interpretations of policy and get yourself into trouble. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. A little knowledge and a gun are a very dangerous thing.

That said, I am willing to help you become an admin provided that you show an genuine interest in learning how Wikipedia works and a willingness to change your philosophy to match.

Here are some initial pointers...

There does seem to be a tendency among some RFA voters to look for a minimum of 3000 edits and 3-6 months experience before supporting a candidate for adminship. Other RFA voters reject this kind of "edit-countitis" and emphasize quality over quantity. While, you would do well to wait until you have 3000 edits and 3-6 months experience before submitting an RFA, do not assume that this is all that you need to do.

First, read all the links in the welcome message. This will give you a good overview of how Wikipedia works from the editor's perspective. Fully understand WP:NPOV, WP:CIVIL, WP:NPA , WP:NOR and WP:3RR. Let me repeat that. Fully understand WP:NPOV, WP:CIVIL, WP:NPA , WP:NOR and WP:3RR.

Next, read the following excerpt from WP:RFA

Requests for adminship (RfA) is the process by which the Wikipedia community decides who will become administrators (also known as admins or sysops), who are users with access to additional technical features that aid in maintenance. A user either submits his/her own request for adminship (a self-nomination) or is nominated by another user. Please be familiar with the administrators' reading list, how-to guide, and guide to requests for adminship before submitting your request.]]

Read all of the following administrators' reading list, how-to guide, and guide to requests for adminship.

You don't have to memorize it all but you should read and understand it all.

Next, make it a regular habit to read requests for adminship submitted to WP:RFA. Pay special attention to the questions asked and the answers provided. Evaluate the answers and determine which ones you like and dislike. Develop for yourself what you think the answers you would have written if asked those questions.

Especially focus on your answer to the question: "What tasks would you work on if you were given the sysop bit?"

Read the support/oppose discussion and understand why people support or oppose candidates. Decide for yourself if you would support or oppose the candidates. When you feel ready, go ahead and express your opinion.

Also, find another area of what is called "project space" (i.e. the WIKIPEDIA name space) to work on. This can range from proposing and discussing articles for deletion or other deletion categories (these are often referred to as xFD). I like to work at WP:AFD. Others like to work at WP:IFD, WP:CFD or WP:TFD. Working in Wikipedia space lets other editors get to know you on a "behind the scenes" basis (i.e. working on administrative issues rather than article content issues). You get to understand policy and they get to see how well you understand policy.

Alternatively, you might prefer to report vandals to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism noticeboard or other policy violations to administrator's noticeboard/incidents. Become a regular reader of these notice boards in order to develop an understanding of what policy is regarding vandals and other incidents.

If you do all of the above, you should be well-qualified to become an admin. I would advise against nominating yourself for adminship. Some RFA voters consider that to be a negative. When you are ready, find someone to nominate you. If I feel you are ready, I will be glad to nominate you.

If you have any questions about what I have written above or any other aspect of Wikipedia, please feel free to ask. I will answer as best as I am able or help you find someone who can answer your question if I can't.

Best regards, good luck and happy editing, --Richard 19:16, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here are some additional resources for becoming an admin. Some of the content repeats other material that I have provided links to in the above text. I did not write any of these documents but I made copies of them for my own personal reference.

The Admin school was started by User:The Transhumanist but was shut down as the result of a MFD discussion. Since the MFD, the admin school has since evolved into the Virtual Classroom. The Virtual Classroom does not focus soley on how to become an admin but there is lots of useful information about Wikipedia there.

--Richard 19:32, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Smoke

Can you please provide WP:SOURCE for your edit on Smoke, "Revision as of 06:40, 10 June 2007". Thanks, Fireproeng 02:51, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits to Paramedic

Hi there,

i'm afraid i've had to revert your edits to move Paramedic to EMT-Paramedic. This was not a reasonable move as EMT-P is a term used only in the US, and this is an international encyclopaedia. If you wish to make edits like this, i would suggest making them in Paramedics in the United States, however i would advise against changing the title of this article, as it is inkeeping with the general naming policy on the site for other countries.

Regards Owain.davies 17:44, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Escherichia coli page move

While I understand why you made this move, I suggest that you reconsider: not only does a move to "E. coli" go against what's been the norm for most bacteria-related articles, even the talk page discussion is in favor of leaving the full genus-species title alone. While most folks may type "E. coli" into the search box, I think a redirect is the best in this case. Thanks much. -- MarcoTolo 20:18, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Fireman's Prayer (song)

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article The Fireman's Prayer (song), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. Eliz81 ^(talk)^(contribs) 05:12, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect of Anderson Luis da Sousa

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

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Anderson Luis da Sousa, 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. --Android Mouse Bot 2 08:09, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation

Please accept this invite to join the Red Sox WikiProject, a WikiProject dedicated to improving all articles associated with the Boston Red Sox. Simply click here to accept!

2009 Oakland Police Shootings

Just wanted to thank you for making it clear that the title refers to the shooting of the police officers by a criminal, NOT the self-defense shooting of Lovelle Mixon by the police. I wish there were an easy way to convey this in the title itself, since someone unaware of the incident might get the impression that the article is about the police shooting someone. We'll see if your edit sticks, since there are those who might wish to include details of Mixon's death in the lead.

If you can think of an alternate title, it might be good to mention that on the "Talk" page under that heading; so far we're stumped. Apostle12 (talk) 19:45, 5 April 2009 (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) 16:35, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"List of current Worcester Tornadoes players" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect List of current Worcester Tornadoes players and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 20#List of current Worcester Tornadoes players until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Fram (talk) 08:59, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]