User talk:Redvers/Archive06

Totem signs

Hi Redvers. Just to let you know, I've removed the photos of the "British Railways totem signs" from some of the Wirral Line station articles, if there was another image. After adding the {{UK stations PTE}} templates to them, they tended to get in the way a bit, so I decided to leave them out. Hope you don't mind! --RFBailey 12:25, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks--some of the railways people can be quite territorial about their edits, so I though't I'd better explain myself!--RFBailey 12:54, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Monobook

Thank you sir for telling me about the monobook. I didn't realize that the popups would not work for me. I ask for it to be deleted. I don't edit very much but I will consider getting an account when I have more time.--71.28.243.26 21:59, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mãlina Olinescu

Are you sure you can't find where this is a repost from? I just had it speedily deleted yesterday -- it's on my watchlist from that (which is how I found it again.) It said almost exactly the same thing then. Grand master ka 20:09, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A "couple hundred million people"? Wow, all right... I've never heard of it! I'm a musician by trade, albeit in the U.S. Grand master ka 04:20, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Insert Text

I know, the big T was a typo, that's why I added the {{db| template--Minor copy edit name 20:35, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Notworking

Hi - I was working on a new entry [my first] called 'Notworking' but you deleted it. Can I have a bit more time? It's my first time here, Regards Jim Wade 20:40, 2 May 2006 (UTC) ADDED: thanks for the swift & helpful reply! More later Jim Wade 20:54, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A landslide victory for The JPS (aka RFA thanks)

Hey, Redvers/Archive06, thank you so much for your vote and comments in my RfA, which passed with an overwhelming consensus of 95/2/2. I was very surprised and flattered that the community has entrusted me with these lovely new toys. I ripped open the box and started playing with them as soon as I got them, and I've already had the pleasure of deleting random nonsense/attacks/copyvios tonight.
If I ever do anything wrong, or can help in some way, please feel free to drop me a line on my talk page, and I will do my best to correct my mistake, or whatever...
Now, to that bottle of wine waiting for me...

The JPS ^{talk to me} 22:46, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Hi Redvers: Yes, I have nothing more to add to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Notworking. Thanks! Regards, Accurizer 21:39, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: User:Lcarsdata/statuschanger.js

I listed it using the {{db-owner}} tag because it was no longer being used by me. I don't understand why it didn't have a tag, however it has been deleted now any way. Lcarsdata ^{Talk | @ | Contribs} 06:43, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Esperanza Newsletter, Issue #3

Administrator Coaching
The Administrator Coaching program is a program aimed at preparing Wikipedians for Adminship or helping them understand the intricacies of Wikipedia better. Recently, changes have been made to the requirements of coachees. Please review them before requesting this service. This would be something like the Welcoming Committee, but for people who have figured out the basics of editing articles; they're not newcomers any more, but they might want some help in learning new roles. Some might like suggestions about how to learn vandal patrol, or mentoring on taking an article to featured status, or guidance with a proposal they plan to make at the Village Pump, for example. In this way, Esperanza would help keep hope alive for Wikipedia because we would always be grooming the next generation of admins.
Stressbusters
The Stressbusters are a subset of Esperanza aiming to investigate the causes of stress. New eyes on the situation are always welcome!
Note from the editor
As always, MiszaBot handled this delivery. Thank you! Also, congratulations go to Pschemp, Titoxd and Freakofnurture for being elected in the last elections! An Esperanzial May to all of the readership!

The last AC meeting (full log)
Posting logs of the Esperanza IRC channel are explicitly banned anywhere. Violation of this rule results in deletion and a ban from the channel. A disclaimer is going to be added to the Esperanza main page. We are humans and, as such, are imperfect. Various revisions have been made to the Code of Conduct. Please see them, as the proposal is ready to be ratified by the community and enacted. All members will members to have to re-confirm their membership after accepting the Code of Conduct. Referendums are to be held on whether terms of AC members should be lengthened and whether we should abolish votes full stop. Admin Coaching reform is agreed upon.
Signed...
Celestianpower, JoanneB, Titoxd, Pschemp and Freakofnurture 20:29, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Taizé

Taizé community should help. I love that sort of music. Anyway, I can't tell you how much I appreciate your appreciation of my Taizé. It's cheered me up no end and given me hope. Thank you so, so much! --Cel es tianpower ^háblame 21:35, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bring me back some sprouts from your wikibreak!

I love them. Syrthiss 19:04, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TGI Friday's Cheddar and Bacon Potato Skins

Hi Redvers, would you be so kind as to delete this when you get a chance? In retrospect I should have speedied it, and it's been sitting out there as a copyvio for one month. Someone asked me a question about it recently, which reminded me that it really needs to go. Thanks. And enjoy your trip! Regards, Accurizer 21:33, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Ceid_family

You removed his name from WP:AIV saying his actions do not warrent a block. They most certainly due. He's recreated the same article 4-5 times now. Articles that were all tagged for db-bio, and he isn't stopping. DG X 21:53, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

schools all notable

Thanks!

That's good to know. I was confused because I've seen PROD discussions where notability came up.

I have a couple of school articles I dod not start because I thought them N N. Thanks AGAIN. :) Dlohcierekim 22:37, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Policy idea?

Hi Redvers, I wanted to bounce a potential policy idea off of you to see what you think. I do a lot of RC Patrolling and have found that the vast majority of bogus articles that are created come from new accounts that seem to be only minutes old. As you know, the existence of nonsense articles undermine the integrity of Wikipedia, and also, policing by editors and administrators to find them and to ensure that they are removed requires a large amount of time and effort that could be spent more fruitfully elsewhere in the project. I had been contemplating measures that could be taken to alleviate this burden while at the same time encourage new users to submit articles of better quality. I saw a suggestion you made to a new user here, and I am wondering if it would make sense to try to adapt this into an official policy.

At some point, moving pages was restricted from new users. Using this as precedent, creating pages could be restricted from new users. Instead of creating new pages, new users could be encouraged to create drafts of new pages in their user space while learning more about how the software works, and perhaps even take some time to read a few Wikipedia policies.(gasp!) When I came here as a new user, I did not expect that I would be allowed to create new pages immediately. I am convinced that new users who come here to contribute positively would not be put off by having to wait a few days to place their articles in the article space. However, new users who come to vandalize or post things made up in school today would likely get bored waiting for their “new user clock” to expire, and move on to other endeavors. (On a side note, I don’t see a need to restrict the editing of articles by new or anonymous editors.)

I would be interested in hearing your thoughts on this subject. Regards, Accurizer 00:41, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Redvers, thank you very much for your thoughtful feedback! I think I will chew on this for a while longer and proceed as you suggest in the near future. Thanks again, Accurizer 10:25, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

.org

Hi Stifle! I was evesdropping on this, where you say Websites in the .org TLD are generally not commercial.

Whilst I and many others with non-commercial websites in this TLD wish this was so, I'm afraid it isn't. .org is not policed; ICANN has several pages lamenting that this is not so. [1] [2] [3] [4] are but four .org TLDs being used for commercial gain (two by squatters, two by commercial companies). I can come up with a dozen more in both categories in seconds if you want.

.org is a nice idea but the lack of controls on it means one can't expect a .org to be non-commercial. ➨ ≡Я Ξ DVΞRS≡ 22:54, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message. I stand by the notion that "Websites in the .org TLD are generally not commercial" (generally being the keyword). The reasoning behind the A8 speedy deletion criterion is that if a website is engaged in directly making money off of the copied content, then a release under the GFDL is considered sufficiently unlikely that there is no point in putting the article through the WP:CP process. And indeed this would appear to be the case here. I guess what I'm trying to say is that a .org is more likely than a .com to give permission to use content. Stifle (talk) 00:56, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Birthday!

It's early but I'll be away on my birthday too :(. You're born on the same day as me, WOW!-- 陈鼎翔贡献 Chat with Tdxiang on IRC! 10:22, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

that vanity template you proposed

have you created it in Wiki proper? If not, will you be doing so? - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 18:35, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

nevermind, I see it. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 18:43, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moo!

--217.134.237.125 20:12, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the barnstar, Redvers! Much appreciated. :-) RexNL 20:24, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

happy Birthday

Happy birthday. From an esperanzian, also sharing the same birthday.Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 06:02, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Birthday!

Just a happy Birthday message to you, Redvers/Archive06, from the Wikipedia Birthday Commitee!!! Have a great day!

S t e v e o 2 10:53, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Happy birthday! One day before my partner's birthday! Syrthiss 13:47, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Military history and war graves

Interesting question; the answer really depends on what you mean by "affiliate" (which really ties into whether you're interested in simply setting up a work area or the full infrastructure of a separate WikiProject).

We're about to create a World War I task force within the project, and we already have a British military history one; if you're willing to forgo some of the separate internal infrastructure that an independent WikiProject would have, you could do all your work in one of those and take advantage of the highly active advertising efforts we have going. Conversely, if you're not willing to give up the project's independence, you could just list it as a related project on those task forces (similarly to WikiProject Aircraft and the Military aviation task force). It's really up to you whether being able to make better use of our extensive internal structure is worth having to deal with the rest of us ;-) Kirill Lokshin 00:40, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A merger would be great. As far as the practical aspects of it: I don't think that the CWGC would be popular enough of a topic by itself to sustain its own task force; but, as you mentioned, it seems to cut across a number of existing ones, so I'm not sure what a good place to merge the material would be. Maybe we could have some sort of general military memorials & cemeteries task force that would be built up from the material you have now, and could expand to include those of other countries? Kirill Lokshin 12:32, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, great! Merging it in shouldn't take too long; I can probably get the major moving & template changes done by the end of today, if that's all right with you? Kirill Lokshin 13:21, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally, what should the name of the task force be? "Cemeteries and memorials"? Is there some particular wording that would be most appropriate? Kirill Lokshin 13:28, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, here it is: Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Memorials and cemeteries task force. I think I merged all of the useful material over, but you should probably check to make sure I haven't missed anything important. Kirill Lokshin 17:10, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. And thanks you for the barnstar! Kirill Lokshin 20:28, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Military history WikiProject Newsletter - Issue III - May 2006

The May 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Kirill Lokshin 05:34, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:TVTimesAvengers1961.jpg

I have expanded the summary for this disputed image. I contend that it qualifies as fair use as the copyright holder of the magazine in question is the same company that holds the copyright of the TV series being illustrated. By rights there should be a "promotional magazine" license tag for this, but none currently exists. This is different than the TV Guide image which was produced by and held in copyright by a third party. 23skidoo 11:28, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any way around this? I would like to keep this image if at all possible because there are very few images extant showing not only Ian Hendry but also Ingrid Hafner. What "source" can be provided here? Unfortunately the original uploader was so upset (and IMO rightly so) over the who magazine fair use business that he quit Wikipedia in disgust and attempted to remove all his contributions in the process, so I'm afraid I'm stuck as a third party here. I still say Wikipedia is well on its way to banning magazine covers altogether at the rate it's going. 23skidoo 19:43, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was aware that King took things a little too far (though I wasn't aware he'd gone so far as to get himself permabanned). It's a shame as that rather damages the argument myself and others are trying to make on this issue (his actions, that is, not the deserved permabanning). 23skidoo 20:19, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reversion!

Thanks for your reversion of vandalism on my user page back in April! I hadn't looked at my userpage history until now. (Must keep closer tabs on that!) Panchitavill e^talk 17:34, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK (that "larch" title is a mouthful!)

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Larch Wood (Railway Cutting) cemetery, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for your efforts! ++Lar: t/c 20:37, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Band page"

Hi JChap2007! An article being about a band is not a criterion for speedy deletion. However, {{db-band}} does allow for the deletion of articles about bands that don't assert notability for the band. You may want to use that (or the older {{db-bio}}) instead in future. Happy editing! ➨ ≡Я Ξ DVΞRS≡ 20:13, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the tip. --JChap 20:15, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

In your message it says my article was delete due to notability, umm, all I can say is if 50 magazines and 200,000 persian people is not enough of a notability factor for a famous artist as my father, I don't know how to go about making it more notable, the article, is straight from his website, not created by me, but by LA. Times, and was listed in an article of the LA times, could you please tell me how to verify and fix it, I don't get it.

(Anoosh 20:58, 28 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]

"Tie me kangeroo down support "

That is one of the funniest things I've ever seen on an RFA. I'm sorry, but if I'm ahead of you in any Aussie RFAs in the future I shall have to use it! Anyway, lol, thanks for that bit of cheer. --kingboyk 10:59, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Groan. :) The JPS ^{talk to me} 11:01, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ann Furedi

G'day Redvers,

please see WP:ANI about this article. I discussed the issue with User:InShaneee before I undeleted it, and he agreed. This does not look to be remotely A7 material; why did you re-delete the article? Cheers, fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 21:15, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, not something deeper going on, no worries there. It's just that the article's author makes a decent claim for notability on ANI, and I'm not convinced the article won't be kept by AfD, so I definitely wasn't comfortable seeing it speedied away. You might like to talk to the article's author, User:Ros Power, about what the aim of having the article is, and how it can be improved. fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 21:40, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, as I said at Mark's talk page, I'm not certain I would support keeping the article at AfD, only that the text surely asserts notability. In any event, with respect to your WP:AGF comment, I take it that you meant that I assumed good faith and thought you to have been ignorant of Mark's post when, in reality, you were cognizant of it and believed the article nevertheless speediable as {{nn-bio}} ; if, instead, you meant to suggest that I ought to have assumed good faith and that I acted untowardly (either by intimating that you hadn't seen the ANI thread or by writing to Mark instead of to you), I'd submit that you misunderstood my comment (I merely said that you were ostensibly unaware of the ANI discussion and thus speedied the article as G4, thinking the article to have been recreated [cf., undeleted]). I'm eminently confident that you intended the former sense, but if you did mean to impugn my assumption of good faith, I'd advise that you might reread my original note to Mark, which can't be construed to imply any malignance of your part. Cordially, Joe 22:20, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I'm now certain that you intended the former (i.e., good) sense, and so you needn't to bother replying; I'm sorry to have bothered you [and, of course, for having failed to assume the assumption of the assumption of good faith :) ]... Joe 02:56, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Just thanking you for the warm welcome and the advice re reposts. I wish I could believe the repost was an accident, but the lady's past 'contributions' don't show much good faith. Ah, well, good to see that the vast majority of editors seem to be positive and friendly.

Again, thanks for greeting me so nicely! Deep 13 21:50, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for May 29th.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 2, Issue 22	29 May 2006	About the Signpost

Semi-protection tweaks prompt debate over ideals	Wikipedia administrator investigated after on-wiki dispute
Meetups And Newsworthy International Assemblages	News and Notes: Wikimedia board resolutions, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report On Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.

Removal of Robbie Bray

You removed my article as a vanity page. Robbie Bray is a notable personality in the automotive industry in the United States, and is also a top 40 Christian recording artist with Columbia Records. He has been chosen to speak at schools on the subject of school violence as well as a guest speaker with the US Marine Corps. There have been many published articles on the man. I read the guidelines, and I do not think that the article fits within the guidelines of NN (not notable). The guidelines state that it is, in the end, subjective.

I humbly request that you reconsider, and perhaps offer some constructive comments on how to write a better article worthy of inclusion. I visited this site after seeing that there is a vanity page on Gisele Bündchen, while definitely a hottie, is of questionable fame and notability.

Multimedium 16:47, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blnguyen's RfA

File:Atlanticpuffin4.jpg

Hello REDVERS, my dear wikitwin. Thank you for your full support and humourous comment at my request for adminship which ended at the overwhelming and flattering result of (160/1/0), and leaves me in a position of having to live up to a high standard of community expectation. You can see me in action and observe what then happened as a result. Naturally, if I make any procedural mistakes, feel free to point them out. I look forward to working with you in the future, and will probably have to plagiarize that FAQ sometime. Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 02:50, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I still don't understand how notability can be verified when I cannot quote public news or info about him from different sources and statements and or about his life. Even though I could just rewrite it in my own words and state the source of something similar they said, Is that what you or Wikipedia wants? I have other info and writings from The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Marie Lukens Swietochowski, Columbia University of New York, Dr. William R. Royce - Voice of America, Washington D. C. and the LA times article, but I don't understand how I can post it or state anything about him if you are telling me I am violating public knowledge and or copyright about words that were spoken of about my father, please explain.

P.S. I don't like the assumption of you stating that I am just doing a flowery advertisement, it was never meant to be that, but I do believe and I think about 300,000 other persian/iranian americans believe he would be or should be in the encyclopedia, but maybe I went about it the wrong way, and didnt site it correctly.

Either way if you cannot or do not know how to explain it to me or help me please refer me to a moderator that may actually be able to help.

with kind regards, (Anoosh 06:10, 31 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]

:-(

Aw, why the BBC revert? The BBC distributed propaganda during World War II... To be honest, I think it was valid. I can add it to other World War news networks if that'd make it more justifiable. Thanks, 86.137.101.151 20:01, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No dinner for you. ➨ Я Є DVERS 20:03, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]