User talk:Rjd0060/Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

→

Archive 10

98.201.50.77

I was going to report him, but you beat me to the block. Excuse me for saying this, but HOLY ****!!!!!!! I've seen a LOT of vandalism in my day, but nothing else came even close to that. Wow. Thingg^⊕⊗ 00:46, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I just saw another one too... MAN I wish I could block people sometimes... Thingg^⊕⊗ 00:55, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Bot Approvals Group

That method of selection does not have community consensus, and those nominations which were approved were ran while it was clear that method lacked consensus (in seemingly direct defiance of that, in fact). Please do not encourage them by reverting it again. —Locke Cole • t • c 00:56, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

for protecting my user page. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 06:54, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi - Im still here and i hold no bitterness for the distant past

Have a nice day. . --Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 03:02, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Its ok, enjoy. --Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 03:52, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

E.O. Green School shooting

There is a dispute on the neutrality of the article on the talk page. I believe I was accurate in my reasoning as to why I do not believe the article presents POV, but I would like a second opinion from an admin who has not looked at the article previously. Would you mind reviewing the article? If you choose to do so, thankyou in advance. Bookkeeperoftheoccult (talk) 09:58, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Swoogle

Hey Rjd, on the 8th I added a prod tag to Swoogle. I noticed you removed the tag on the 14th. How come you didn't delete it? Was that actually a contest (so I should list it on Afd if I feel like it?) Thanks Jussen (talk) 00:14, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the fast response! Did the e-mail say why they thought it should be kept? Jussen (talk) 00:16, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

ANI thread regarding unblock decline

Please see this ANI thread, where I've criticised an unblock review (a decline) that you performed. Carcharoth (talk) 01:25, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Utah professional sports' frequent use of letter Z in team names

I disagree with your closing the debate because of "no consensus." The proper course of action would have been to relist in order to gain a consensus, since it had not been relisted before. Because of your action, I will now be forced to take this to deleteion review to obtain a proper outcome. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 18:15, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

I disagree with that assessment as well. I think that the preponderance of comment was to delete. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 18:17, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

So that automatically disqualifies me for some reason? Oh, please. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 18:19, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review for Utah professional sports' frequent use of letter Z in team names

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Utah professional sports' frequent use of letter Z in team names. 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. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 18:28, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

My recent RfA

Thank you for supporting my RfA, which unfortunately didn't succeed. The majority of the opposes stated that I needed more experience in the main namespace and Wikipedia namespace and talk space, so that is what I will do. I have made a list and I hope I will be able to get through it. I will go for another RfA in about three month's time and I hope you will be able to support me then as well. If you have any other comments for me or wish to be notified when I go for another RfA, please leave them on my talk page. If you wish to nominate me for my next RfA, please wait until it has been about three months. I will not be checking back to this page so if you would like to comment or reply please use my talk page. Thanks again for participating in my RfA! ·Add§hore· ^Talk/_Cont 06:40, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: Rollback

Wow, my bad on that one. I'm really sorry about that and I'll definitely be more careful in the future. Thingg^⊕⊗ 13:33, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Equalpanel

Its User:Heardhouse, aka the "ghost eats toast" vandal. I've blocked at least 40 of his sockpuppets. See the history of Beer for the latest spate, plus my user page for another recent set of them. Best, Gwernol 23:35, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

No problem, sorry I didn't add the sockpuppet tag earlier. Gwernol 01:04, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review for The Boar

An editor has asked for a deletion review of The Boar. 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. Spf7 (talk) 06:33, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Permissions for Images

Hello User:Rjd0060

I was recently given permission by a company to upload some images, also recently had some previously uploaded images put into question as possibly unfree. I just noticed that you had placed OTRS permission tags on those said images, and am wondering if you could tell me the best bay to upload the new one's I have been given permission to release, without having these also tagged?

Than you User:Ash773User talk:Ash773 09:23, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Cuthbert Blanedale Frunk

Hey Rjd, I wanted to drop you a line to protest this deletion. I think the PROD was pretty off; as a fictional character, it's tough to establish any kind of real-world notability outside the books, as you well know. However, WP:OTHERSTUFF aside, targeting that one article out of the slew of Redwall character articles that we have seems a little unnecessary and unfair. Would you consider restoring it, or at least merging it to a different article, like List of Long Patrol hares? If you choose the latter, I'll be happy to help. Thanks. GlassCobra 15:55, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

DELETION OF THE CHUCK LEONARD PAGE

Chuck Leonard was a notable disc jockey because he was the first African American (and if I'm not mistaken the only African Amercian) to work at WABC on the air and the reason for that was because back in the 60s as you probably remember ws the time of the Civil Rights Movement. Chuck Leonard did something what not a lot of people were able to do, he became one of the most popular and most remembered radio Disc Jockey's on the air at WABC and he became known across the country. Also, if I remember correctly, I never saw a notice on the Chuck Leonard page about it being deleted if noone said why Chuck Leonard should be remembered. SO I think the page should be put back up. Thank you

--Chrismaster1 (talk) 19:29, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Please do restore the page. Because the reason that Chuck Leonard should be noted is because of the same reason as above. Thank you --Chrismaster1 (talk) 19:18, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Also, please do the same to the Ron Lundy page these radio personality pages that you are deleting are legends, and just because they are not real lengthy, they still carry alot of information. Thank you --Chrismaster1 (talk) 19:20, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I'll try and help keep these 2 articles up to date and have fresh info when available. --Chrismaster1 (talk) 19:24, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Script

This should suffice:

importScript('User:Animum/urlparameters.js');
 
addOnloadHook(function() {
 if(wgNamespaceNumber == 1 && UrlParameters["action"] == "edit" && UrlParameters["oldprod"] == 1) {
  var xmlreq = new XMLHttpRequest();
  xmlreq.open("GET", "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php?action=query&list=logevents&ledir=newer&leprop=timestamp&letype=delete&letitle=" + encodeURIComponent(wgPageName) + "&format=xml", true);
  xmlreq.send("");
  xmlreq.onreadystatechange = function() {
   if(xmlreq.readyState == 4 && xmlreq.status == 200) {
    var item = xmlreq.responseXML.getElementsByTagName("item")[0];
    document.editform.wpTextbox1.value = "{{oldprod\|date=" + item.getAttribute("timestamp").split("T")[0] + "}}\n" + document.editform.wpTextbox1.value;
    document.editform.wpMinoredit.checked = false;
    document.editform.wpWatchthis.checked = false;
    document.editform.wpSummary.value = "Tagging with {{[[Template:Oldprod|oldprod]]}}";
    document.editform.submit();
   }
  };
 }
});
 
addOnloadHook(function() {
 if(wgNamespaceNumber == 1) addPortletLink("p-cactions", wgServer + wgScript + "?title=" + encodeURIComponent(wgPageName) + "&action=edit&oldprod=1", "oldprod", "ca-oldprod");
});

Hope you like it. —Animum (talk) 22:39, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Y Fixed —Animum (talk) 23:14, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Robert M. Hirsch

You deleted this as an expired prod, but I had previously deprodded it. Please undelete it: & if you really must send it to afd -- but I think Associate director of Geological Survey & author of a std textbook is probably notable enough for passing AfD, I know I can simply undelete it myself, but I'm more comfortable asking you first. DGG (talk) 23:51, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

203.20.245.254

Hi, I see you had dealings with this IP. Well, I've just reverted another vandal edit - to Indonesia - and I'm not sure what message to leave on the talkpage. Any thoughts? Regards Davidelit (talk) 00:13, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Derek Conway deleted

Why was this article deleted instead of merged with another article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.80.32.8 (talk) 09:39, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

It wasn't deleted. See Derek Conway. - Rjd0060 (talk) 14:06, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Userrights for AngelOfSadness

See my message there: I hope it explains everything. Acalamari 15:37, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Pyrolisk

Hello! :) A few weeks ago, Pyrolisk was apparently proposed for deletion. The deletion was uncontested, so you deleted the article. I would like to request that you restore the original article, so that I can merge and/or redirect the article to List of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 1st edition monsters#TSR 2016 - Monster Manual II (1983). Thanks!  :) BOZ (talk) 21:32, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, sir.  :) BOZ (talk) 21:49, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

What a Whopper

I wish to question the deletion of this article. This was deleted as an uncontested PROD, I only became aware a short time ago that it was up for PROD, if I had been aware of this I would certainly have questioned this proposed deletion and possibly addressed the concerns some people might have had with the article. PatGallacher (talk) 01:09, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you so much

Thanks a lot for the help. -- Grant.Alpaugh 16:17, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Midnight Cabaret

Did you see my comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Midnight Cabaret? I'm thinking of taking this to DRV (or perhaps I don't need to, maybe I can just nominate for deletion again??). My concern is that clearly the solution the original nominator and his supporter were aiming for hasn't actually been achieved. The article is back in the state it was. Further, if this theatre company are notable, then the users writing about it are doing the right thing in putting their article where a redirect used to be (although they should add a hatnote). Yet if they're not notable, allowing the AfD to run its term would establish a consensus to that effect - thereby enabling any further recreation to be speedied, or the redirect to be protected, or whatever other action then becomes necessary. Do you agree? AndyJones (talk) 12:29, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

• Thank you. AndyJones (talk) 17:06, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

• My initial response was only on the basis that I did not think it was a deletion matter. Also, the only reason that the solution myself and Lugnuts agreed on didn't appear to be implimented is because the apparent single purpose editor insists on reverting it. I look forward to a more binding outcome being formed and I welcome the gathering of consensus to allow this. Regards, WilliamH (talk) 17:38, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Darren White

Hi--I noticed that you deleted Darren White, who is running for a competitive seat in the US House of Representatives, which I think satisfies the notability requirement. Should I check with you to get the article reinstated or should I follow the review process? (Note that I am not a supporter of Darren White, nor do I live in his state.] Thanks for being diligent in keeping Wikipedia encyclopedic! Shadowfax37 (talk) 16:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks so much for restoring it! Shadowfax37 (talk) 23:24, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Fracas

The article about the strategy game Fracas was deleted, with the claim that is was not notable. I wish to question this deletion, as I believe that the game is notable. I would appreciate it if you could reinstate the article, and place any criticisms on the discussion page instead, so that I can try and improve on the article. --CrushinatorX (talk) 02:05, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

RE: Request for unblock-auto

Hey Rjd0060, just wanted to say thanks for unblocking me. I'm not sure what went wrong with Daniel's attempt. Anyway, thanks again.--Sunny910910 ^{(talk|Contributions|Guest)} 04:40, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Script (Mark II)

//Script by [[User:Animum]] that helps with adding permission templates to Image: and Talk: pages.
 
importScript('User:Animum/urlparameters.js');
 
addOnloadHook(function() {
 if((wgCanonicalNamespace == "Talk" || wgCanonicalNamespace == "Image") && UrlParameters["action"] == "edit" && UrlParameters["otrspermission"] == 1) {
  var ticket = prompt("Ticket number:");
  document.editform.wpTextbox1.value = "{{PermissionOTRS\|id\=" + ticket + "}}\n" + document.editform.wpTextbox1.value;
  document.editform.wpMinoredit.checked = false;
  document.editform.wpWatchthis.checked = false;
  document.editform.wpSummary.value = "Adding [[WP:OTRS|OTRS]] permission information";
  document.editform.submit();
 }
});
 
addOnloadHook(function() {
 if(wgCanonicalNamespace == "Image" || wgCanonicalNamespace == "Talk") {
  addPortletLink("p-cactions", wgServer + wgScript + "?title=" + encodeURIComponent(wgPageName) + "&action=edit&otrspermission=1", "otrs", "ca-permissions");
 }
});

I think this script will perform better on the first test run than the other one I authored for you. —Animum (talk) 01:56, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

AI effect

Hello Rjd0060

I have seen that the article about the AI effect was deleted as being not notable enough. I would like to ask whether this deletion was justified, because I think the perception of AI has played a big role in its development since its earliest concepts. I would be very thankful if you could restore it in order to improve any problems. In this case, I would also be very appreciative if you could place your view on the article on its talk page in order to start a discussion about how to improve it.

best regards - Columnist (talk) 09:14, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Toy

The article on the Album Toy was deleated. I think this article should be brought back as it has important information to David Bowie's career inbetween the albums "...Hours" and "Heathen." I am not the only one who feels this way and I felt that somebody should make a request to bring this page back. There wasn't anything in the article not confirmed by David Bowie or his manegment and the album was fully written, produced, and released in pieces. I'd appreciate if this article were brought back and if not who do I need to talk to, other than yourself, to bring it back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.37.12.182 (talk) 21:54, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Whittlesea Fire Brigade

I am interested as to why you thought this article did not fulfill the notoriety requirements. The brigade winning this years state championships marked a major achievement in the brigades 60 year history. It was also a milestone for the township and surrounding areas. This topic was widely covered by local media as well as CFA (Country Fire Authority), VUFBA (Victorian Urban Fire Brigades Association) and affiliated media. I am not asking for the page to be put back on only to see your reasoning for it's discontinuation when there is a article on the Narre Warren Fire Brigade as well as many other local branches of the various state fire services of Australia (See Category:Fire departments of Australia). Hduckman (talk) 01:01, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

re: User:Jeeny

Sorry for not getting back to you for a decade, I lost track of what I was doing and just forgot! My edit to Jeeny's page was a mistake, apologies. I was writing a bunch of Welcomes and managed not only to welcome a long-banned account, but also to do so in the wrong place. /facepalm

Sorry about that and for the mis-edit, if you check my contributions you'll see I usually catch my stupid errors. em zilch (talk) 13:38, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Unprotection of my userpage

Hi, Ryan. I think my userpage has been protected long enough from vandalism. I'll request this unprotection on the WP:RFPP page. Thanks! -- SchfiftyThree 19:01, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Derivative works

FYI, [1] may be of interest to you when handling OTRS permissions tickets. howcheng {chat} 22:04, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review for Flight Training Europe

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Flight Training Europe. 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. 82.5.46.104 (talk) 23:45, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Just to let you know, this was an expired PROD and will most likely be overturned automatically. Feel free to pursue an AfD if you feel it should still be deleted. Cheers. --lifebaka (Talk - Contribs) 01:16, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I got a bit lazy there

Still, I figured someone else would get to it with a source pretty quickly. Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 02:08, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Spike O' Neill Page

Hello, you recently deleted and protected this page, citing the reason of 'A7 Nothing noteworthy about person'. Spike is a Pacific Northwest radio personality, with a fairly sizeable listener base. I created the page as a placeholder to be filled in. He had expressed on air an opinion that wikipedia was an unreliable source of information, and I contacted the show with a challenge, proposing that they announce the pages existance to the listeners. The point was to test the speed and accuracy that the page could be created once it was announced. PLEASE undelete and protect this pave ASAP, as continuing this blockage is going to produce negative publicity for wikipedia. If in another week or so there is still no worthwile content, his point will have been validated, and you can delete it again.

"I'm aware of the original purpose of the page, that being to have people vandalize it, just to see if it gets reverted. This is Disrupting wikipedia to make a point, and isn't acceptable. - Rjd0060 (talk) 16:31, 23 June 2008 (UTC)"

Actually, that isnt the point at all. Quite the opposite. There is no encouragement to vandalize the page or wikipedia in general in any way, shape, or form. The point was to prove how quickly a accurate and factual article could be produced, and demonstrate that wikipedia's methodology is solid. Please revert this page's status.

Thanks. User:MadTigger (talk) 09:18, 23 June 2008

DJ Green Lantern Presents Fort Minor: We Major

Why was this article deleted? It is a real album Made my Mike Shinoda and DJ Green Lantern. If you need physical proof do a Google Image search, or simply look at MS's myspace page. Although the album did not chart, because it was a "Mixtape", it still released singles and the songs on the Mixtape are Sung in live concert by Mike Shinoda at Linkin Park Concerts. Neil 121.210.211.15 (talk) 09:36, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review for Cary_Herrman

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Cary_Herrman. 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.BHOrchid (talk) 23:22, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Request

Awwe! Cute dog!! =)

I'm working to fix a dispute that happened between an admin and the creator of an article. Apparently, the creator was blocked by the admin after the creator offended the admin, thus the creator, LDCortez, was unable to defend the article properly. I personally noticed the "war" going on between the two and felt the need to step in. I need your help to overturn the deletion, reinstate the article and to protect the page- please.BHOrchid (talk) 23:24, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review for Dark Horizons: Lore

You chose to delete the article for this game that I and a thousand other players participate in because you subjectively claimed it was a "non-notable game without sources" and I wish to counter the deletion.

I take offense to your reasons for deletion, unfortunately by your criteria, almost every "indie" game or game related product or service made that is listed on Wikipedia should be deleted because it is non-notable. As for your "lack of sources" just how many sources do you need? Do you want every link listed where a person can buy this game electronicly and retail? What about all the fan sites? You tube vidoes? etc. I listed a decent amount to begin with which I felt was adiquate, but if you would like more I can go forth and deposit more if you feel that this is enough to qualify it as "sources" to proove it actually exists and that people play it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LoganCDN (talk • contribs) 15:49, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Small question

I can understand why you closed the 3RR request as you did, but I have to wonder: Who's responsibility is it to start a discussion on the talk page, the editor who made the initial bold edit or the editor has said, or is going to say, "No, that's wrong"?

In this case, I've got a bad feeling that if it were me (2nd editor) I would have been the only one posting to the talk. No, that isn't assuming bad faith, I can see that the ball started with an edit that, in that editor's opinion, improved the article. It the sinking feeling that the editor was disinclined to discuss it. And yes, by extension that means it's a dead issue since that version has "won", that image is up and the other is in a likelihood going to be deleted. I could start the conversation, but why would the other editor want to even bother?

I've also run into situations that make me wonder how long an edit has to be in place before it stops being the "bold initial edit". Worst case (not this situation) was a removal of stuff that had been in an article for over a year. The editor removing it took the position that the inclusion, not the removal, was the bold edit that had to be justified. Now I'm second guessing, was the image change or my reversal of it the bold edit that needs to be justified.

- J Greb (talk) 23:11, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry that read as a request to rehash this specific dispute, but that's the one that has left me very, very confused.

Looking at where your decision left it, I'm not sure if I'm even supposed to initiate edits, much less respond to them with out posting to the talk page.

That's what I was asking. Where in the generic cycle should I be thinking "Talk page, I'll start the thread"? In general, is it different when I initial a bold edit and when I respond to one? And, regarding the last paragraph above, in general when is an edit an initial bold one instead of a response to one?

I though I knew those things. I'm no longer sure.

- J Greb (talk) 23:40, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Question

Is this site (removed at 17:44, 20 August 2008 (UTC) because its blacklisted - Rjd0060 (talk)) acceptable for "External Links" section? I find it falls under WP:LINKSTOAVOID #2, #4, #11, WP:EL#ADV and WP:EL#Restrictions on linking. The site links to copyrighted material that infringes on Channel 4's copyrights. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 00:05, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Temporarily userfy Dominion of British West Florida

Please temporarily userfy all versions of Dominion of British West Florida which had references, or just all versions. I need to incorporate the references into List of micronations. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 00:28, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Done. That was fast. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 00:54, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review for Porkchop Cash

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Porkchop Cash. 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. GaryColemanFan (talk) 05:43, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for restoring the article. Obviously, it needs a lot of work, but I'll give it my best shot and bring it up to Wikipedia standards. Best wishes, GaryColemanFan (talk) 06:20, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Critical Mass

I'm not sure why the page that had been created by fans of my game Critical Mass (computer game) was deleted with CSD R1. Maybe that page just happened to be down that day? sean@windowsgames.co.uk —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.172.138.4 (talk) 14:42, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Vatican twins

I noticed that you speedily deleted the Vatican twins redirect I created. The term is a synonym for Irish twins. I read the term in "The Antelope Wife" by Louise Erdrich, had no idea what it meant, and spent a considerable amount of time trying to find out the definition. Eventually, a friend of mine found the definition of the term in a book, and I determined to place the information on Wikipedia so that no one would have to go through all that effort to find out the meaning of that term again. Why was it speedily deleted? Neelix (talk) 12:19, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I was not notified about the deletion suggestion before the PROD expired, so I didn't find out about the deletion until now. I do not see how either of the two guidelines you quoted are applicable in this case. The article to which Vatican twins redirected was merged into the sibling article, not deleted. For this reason, it would make sense for Vatican twins to now redirect to the "Irish twins" section of sibling. As for WP:WINAD, that guideline was written in order to keep unencyclopedic stubs from being created. If a concept has two different names, either name should direct a user to the appropriate article when it is typed into the search bar. That is the purpose of redirects. Would you object if I recreated Vatican twins as a redirect to Sibling#Irish_twins? Neelix (talk) 16:58, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Whittlesea Fire Brigade

I am interested as to why you thought this article did not fulfill the notoriety requirements. The brigade winning this years state championships marked a major achievement in the brigades 60 year history. It was also a milestone for the township and surrounding areas. This topic was widely covered by local media as well as CFA (Country Fire Authority), VUFBA (Victorian Urban Fire Brigades Association) and affiliated media. I am not asking for the page to be put back on only to see your reasoning for it's discontinuation when there is a article on the Narre Warren Fire Brigade as well as many other local branches of the various state fire services of Australia (See Category:Fire departments of Australia).

Hduckman (talk) 03:05, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

P.S. Thanks for your reply I was quite interested because I have had articles in the past removed for the same reason and I was interested to what it takes to fulfill the notoriety requirements. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hduckman (talk • contribs) 03:28, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Happy Independence Day!

As you are a nice Wikipedian, I just wanted to wish you a happy Independence Day! And if you are not an American, then have a happy day and a wonderful weekend anyway!  :) Your friend and colleague, --Happy Independence Day! Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 01:07, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Re:Jonny Moseley

I have already expressed myself in the matter and I am no longer interested in making a big deal over the issue, but it seems to me that not only Phil has come over with his damn atititude, but that now he needs some backup. Look, thank you for explaining policy, now let's knock this off and continue with our constructive editing. Thank You. Tony the Marine (talk) 23:46, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

An IP requests restoration of Court of Flags Resort

An IP posted a message at Talk:Court of Flags Resort requesting that the article Court of Flags Resort be restored. I searched at Google News and found the following article, which might help to demonstrate notability: http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-27267744_ITM --Eastmain (talk) 23:39, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Ofori Sarkodie

You recently deleted the Ofori Sarkodie article because he is not yet notable enough according to WikiProject Football guidelines. I have no problem with this, however, I find it highly likely that he will play either in the upcoming Olympics or some time soon for the senior US national team, which would make him notable enough. Were this to happen, would it be possible to restore the old page? Charles 00:55, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I feel no need to contest the deletion, it pretty obviously doesn't meet WikiProject Football guidelines. I just spent quite a while tracking down all his caps and goals and didn't want to be all for naught. Thanks man. Charles 01:09, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Dawn Yang article

Hi you should not have deleted the Dawn Yang article. I think notable people can both be famous or infamous and Dawn Yang is extremely infamous in Singapore and Malaysia.

Have a look at google search http://www.google.com.sg/search?hl=en&q=%22dawn+yang%22&meta=

I think people were just too lazy to write a proper article. Maybe you should undelete the article and wait for someone to compile an article based on the sources and citations so easily found on google. It's not my area of interest so I prob won't do it. Just wanted to add a fair comment.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Aricialam (talk • contribs) 05:03, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Copyright images

I had no idea The Citizen or Canwest Global Media contacted Wikipedia to remove the 31 year old images with no commercial value in them. It hard to believe their sole reason is self-centered selfish possessiveness. I believe it is more an attempt at subterfuge which I have also detected on this site in relation to my 1981, 4000 mile hike to Whitehorse, Yukon to draw attention to Revelation 19.11. Having recused myself from editing the article, rightly so, I have been pleading with other editors to correct the obvious gap in the article vis a vis the 1986 trip east to complete the Canada wide mission. Maclean's Magazine provided written permission to use their script in the article but it is orphaned because the reference to it is removed. There has been no speedy action on this either. I will have the one who sent me deal with Canwest. I will have that written permission. DoDaCanaDa (talk) 12:08, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know about this issue- I have been working to get the images removed for a while. I wondered what the number was, I'm amazed that didn't occur to me... I agree with DoDaCanaDa that it's a shame that the images have not been released, but I feel this is good evidence that the images should have been deleted since the beginning. J Milburn (talk) 21:04, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Allegations of apartheid deletion notification

Some time ago, you participated in a deletion discussion concerning Allegations of apartheid in Slovakia and the Czech Republic. I thought you might like to know that the parent article, Allegations of apartheid, was recently nominated for deletion. Given that many of the issues that have been raised are essentially the same as those on the article on which you commented earlier, you may have a view on whether Allegations of apartheid should be kept or deleted. If you wish to contribute to the discussion, please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Allegations of apartheid (fifth nomination). -- ChrisO (talk) 17:36, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Erich Violette

Why are you trying to censor discussion? Homotlfqa83 (talk) 04:32, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review for Image:Wikimediafoundationheadquarters.jpg

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Image:Wikimediafoundationheadquarters.jpg. 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. Davewild (talk) 11:07, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Citation needed?

Whats this non-sense about citation needed for open source games? what the wikipedia need? all we have is links to webpages, the proyect on a open source forge, screenshots and a zillion comments in forums.. :( What the wikipedia has become! :( —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tei (talk • contribs) 13:54, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Mediox

My article on [2] was deleted for not meeting the notability requirements. There have been several articles in the QSR Magazine, the top independent publication in the fast food industry, discussing Mediox's concept. The company is the first one one the market to bring digital signate into fast food outlets and holds several seminal patents in the field. Its software is open source with several independent open source programmers developing applications. Please check www.mediox.com for latest news. If possible, please re-instate the article. I no longer have the source for it. Dnamo (talk) 13:38, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Transcend T.sonic

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Rsrikanth05#Transcend_T.sonic Why is the iPod so notable? --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 14:15, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Addict to the Wiki

I note you reverted his automatic addition to my talk page -- is he a vandal, going around Wikipedia nominating random articles for deletion? Not that I'm a cynic or anything ;-) Dave-ros (talk) 16:43, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Shiny thing!

		What a Brilliant Idea Barnstar
		Great work on WP:PERM, you created a hair salon! Something us Wikipedian's much need. Tiptoety talk 03:05, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

I think it will make thins run far more smoothly, and hopefully reduce the amount of emails I recieve asking for acct. creator... thats always a bonus! Tiptoety ^talk 03:09, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Willamette Falls Community Hospital Heliport

Any particular reason why you decided to single out the above article an not any of the others: List of private-use airports in Oregon & List of airports in Oregon? --Trashbag (talk) 19:30, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

just visiting, but it does seem that we need a general policy discussion on this. Not sure which way I'd go. DGG (talk) 23:33, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I examined the list of articles mentioned above, and it seems that we do include every possible private airport on official lists, including that of other hospitals. I'm not sure whether individual articles on them are a good idea or not--I think that a list usually s enough for all the information available. But it does seem a little problematic to delete a particular individual article from that list because someone has happened to notice it. Not my main interest of course, and probably not your's, but it should get some attention from those who do care. Anyhow,should you tell the user than a prodded article can be restored as a matter of course on request? DGG (talk) 23:43, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

"Yes, because as evident from the articles deletion log, this is the only article that was proposed for deletion. - Rjd0060 (talk) 20:49, 15 July 2008 (UTC)" --What? That makes absolutly no sense. Please restore the article if you have no other basis then "because I saw only this one." --Trashbag (talk) 12:57, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Note that Rjd0060 only deleted the article, s/he is not the user who placed the Prod tag, so you might want to look at the page history and check in with that user as well... Katr67 (talk) 21:10, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Just for the record, I'm the one who proposed this action. I acknowledge that DGG is right that a general discussion need to occur rather than a bit by bit deletion. Pdbailey (talk) 00:28, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

That is not how WP:PROD works. If you're proposing deletion, perhaps you should familiarize yourself with the process. - Rjd0060 (talk) 01:38, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean when you say, "That" in "That is not how WP:PROD works." Maybe the confusion is that "acknowledge" is present tense, not past tense. Pdbailey (talk) 03:23, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I was just referring to your comment ("DGG is right that a general discussion need to occur rather than a bit by bit deletion"). Perhaps I misunderstood you. I deleted this article solely because it was Proposed for deletion, nobody contested within 5 days. I did not delete any related articles because they were not proposed for deletion. - Rjd0060 (talk) 03:28, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that's exactly the section that I now (00:28, 17 July 2008 and forward) acknowledge is correct. Glad we cleared that up. Pdbailey (talk) 03:32, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Easily Embarrassed

Hey, I'm a little new to Wikipedia and it's still a bit overwhelming. I had trouble with my first article's casing (Easily embarrassed) and I probably went wrong about trying to rename it myself, as I had moved content to new article Easily Embarrassed and made redirect from old article Easily embarrassed to Easily Embarrassed. I suppose I should have read more into wiki policy, but there is just so much :) Now I went to the deletion log and altough I don't understand what TW is, I do understand Easily embarrassed was deleted and in follow up I understand you or somebody then proposed deletion for the real article Easily Embarrassed. I just haven't been around to see it and respond within 5 days I suppose and now it is gone :( Are you able to restore this one or something? I'd like to continue on it. Also any pointers to wiki pages I should read are appreciated. Thanks Ayane1985 (talk) 15:29, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Grazie

I think the measure of a person's integrity is whether, in the face of contradictory evidence, they're willing to reconsider issues they think are closed. That's even harder to do in a public forum. Nicely done. MARussellPESE (talk) 16:10, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

AN/I thread

I made this change to a "resolved" statement you placed on an AN/I thread here. Please revert it or let me know if that change was in error. It seemed a little odd. Protonk (talk) 21:56, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks. Protonk (talk) 22:06, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review for J. Dean McClain

An editor has asked for a deletion review of J. Dean McClain. 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. Tim Rhymeless (Er...let's shimmy) 02:06, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Thankyou!

Thankyou for helping me with the un-protection of the Ben Alekzsander Williams page; we'll see what happens! CrackersTeam User talk:CrackersTeam 00:36, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Ben Alekzsander Williams

This one was also created as Ben Alekzsander Williams (Singer) and as Ben Williams (Singer) by CrackersTeam, who seems to be attempting to publicize this guy and his group The Comics (band). --Orange Mike | Talk 13:02, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Removing evidence of new 3RR violation

Hello Rjd0060, yesterday you mentioned on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR that if the anonymous user with IP address 86.83.155.44 would continue with edit warring it would result in a block. You wrote there:

"If the user resumes edit warring, he'll be blocked." [7]

Well, he did continue as several users mentioned on that page. My evidence of a new 3RR violation was removed for 3 times by him

• 1st time [8]
• 2nd time [9]
• 3rd time [10]

By doing so 3 times within 30 minutes this resulted in yet yet another edit war. I cannot undo that anymore since that would mean I also was violating the 3RR. Please take some action. - Robotje (talk) 14:41, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Ok...

I hope you take the protection off soon. I just wanted some fun. Ah well. Rules are rules, so be it. I want to regain control again soon. I'm kinda sad :'-(. I think I'll take a wikibreak. By the time I'm back, I hope I get my rights back. A little fun. All I wanted. <sniffs> My God.--Editor510 ^{drop us a line, mate} 17:21, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I was fighting for my fun. I understand what I did was wrong, slap me on the wrist, smack on the bum. It will never return. I'm still going on Wikibreak tho, I'm off to Bulgaria. PEACE OUT Y'ALL! :P--Editor510 ^{drop us a line, mate} 20:23, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Restore Article

I would like to contest a deletion and ask for the article to be restored. The page is "Mountain Hardwear", and it appears to have been deleted on May 28, 2008. This is a legitimate clothing and outdoor equipment brand/maufacturer, and should be available on Wikipedia. Thank you very much. [[11]] --Antares48 (talk) 18:53, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

GBlock Script

The next in a long line of developments:

addOnloadHook(function() {
    if(UrlParameters["addtemplate"] == "gblock" && UrlParameters["duration"] > "" && UrlParameters["reason"] > "" && UrlParameters["action"] == "edit") {
        document.editform.wpTextbox1.value += "\{\{subst:GBlock\|" + decodeURIComponent(UrlParameters["reason"]) + "\|" + decodeURIComponent(UrlParameters["duration"]) + "\}\}";
        document.editform.wpSummary.value = "You have been blocked for " + decodeURIComponent(UrlParameters["duration"]) + ".";
        document.editform.wpMinoredit.checked = true;
        document.editform.submit();
    }
});

function getGBlockData() {
    var duration = prompt("Duration:");
    var reason = prompt("Reason:");
    location.href = wgServer + wgScript + "?title=" + wgPageName + "&action=edit&addtemplate=gblock&duration=" + encodeURIComponent(duration) + "&reason=" + encodeURIComponent(reason);
}

addOnloadHook(function() {
    if(wgNamespaceNumber == 3 && !UrlParameters["addtemplate"]) {
        addPortletLink("p-cactions", "javascript:getGBlockData()", "gblock", "ca-gblock");
    }
});

Enjoy. —Animum (talk) 02:48, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Jason O'Toole Deletion Contested

I respectfully contest your deletion of the article "Jason O'Toole" which you deleted on May 18th. (Note: the page has since been recreated but refers to a different individual, in un-wikified format). The statements in the article you deleted can be verified online. SONORAMA (talk) 05:20, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Re:Friendly note

Thanks for letting me know. ... discospinster _talk 20:42, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

FORCED PAGE PROTECTION ACHEIVED

67.40.211.121 forces page protection of user talk:67.40.211.121. The win goes to 67.40.211.121. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.42.82.43 (talk) 21:44, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Min Chen

Hi. Ok, I know the article was deleted due to a PROD, but since I have no idea who put up the PROD, I will ask here. Compare the murder of Alicia Ross, an incident of similar media coverage in Canada, with a similar outcome (murderer convicted of second-degree), and thus, in theory, have similar notability. "Single incident coverage", how is that different from the Alicia Ross case, other than the fact that the victim in this case was a minor? Also, what specific BLP concerns were raised? Apparently we must get the article right, but a search for "Cecilia Zhang" finds thousands of potential news sources. If an article is not warranted, should there not be a brief mention in a particular related article? Thanks. ~AH1^(TCU) 15:07, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

RfB Thank You spam

Thank you for participating in my RfB! I am very grateful for the confidence of the community shown at my RfB, which passed by a count of 154/7/2 (95.65%). I have read every word of the RfB and taken it all to heart. I truly appreciate everyone's input: supports, opposes, neutrals, and comments. Of course, I plan to conduct my cratship in service of the community. If you have any advice, questions, concerns, or need help, please let me know. Again, Thanks! — Rlevse • Talk • 08:48, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Deletion

Could you restore Seven Harmonies of Unknown Truths. I was never notified of the prod tag and never got the chance to source it. Undeath (talk) 05:26, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Inhabitants

I only just noticed thatInhabitants was deleted "This is a game that was never developed, as part of the GOAT game line. The article was a violation of WP:CRYSTAL, and now it turns out it never was published for the Dreamcast. Totally non-notable." This is incorrect, the game was published (I bought it myself) and was on sale at (the defunct) lik-sang and still is for sale at http://www.goatstore.com/info.php?id=372010, Thanks Darksaviour69 (talk) 14:36, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm a little surprised as well, since its easily verifiable that it was released and is for sale. There's also review pages for the game, such as this one here, a Moby games entry here, here's another 3rd party source. A simple google search would turn all this up. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 16:51, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

I prodded it, and perhaps I missed that it was published in a very limited venue (one online-only homebrew retailer). Still doesn't even come close to satisfying WP:N. -- Atama^chat 17:50, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Actually, it was available on Lik-Sang as well. And the "hombrew retailer" was/is a licensed Sega publisher. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 17:56, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for semi-protecting User:CadenS and User talk:CadenS

See headline ↑ -kotra (talk) 02:43, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

AI effect (2)

Hello

I have asked you around a month ago about the rightfulness of your decision to speedy-delete the article about the AI effect, however, since I did not receive any answer until now, I wanted to notify you once again, in case it got overlooked. You wrote a short explanation in the deletion log, saying that the article lacked a good reference, but I think this could have been fixed easily in this specific case. I couldn't also understand why the article was lacking of notability, when it is a much debated phenomena within the field of A.I. and there were at least five pages on wikipedia that linked directly to the article, such as

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligence

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Applications_of_artificial_intelligence

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_winter

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loebner_prize

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Artificial_intelligence

I have never been really affectionated to such radical methods like deletion reviews, so I'm asking you again to restore the article or respectively giving further explanations about the reasons for deleting it.

Thank you and best regards -- Columnist (talk) 13:17, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

RE2: AI effect

Hello Rjd0060

Thank you for the response. The correct adress of the article is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_effect

It had since been restored and deleted again; Although I do not understand what the reason for restoring/deleting was, I suppose (regarding the comments in the deletion log) that the article page had been redirected to a user page, and that this redirect had been removed again later.

Please contact me if you have any more questions.

best regards -- Columnist (talk) 10:43, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Can you specify which parts of the article need to be changed in order to perform a restoring? (In my opinion, the article is short enough to meet the criteria for being a stub, but I don't think that it would in any way meet the criteria for a PROD, which would mean that it was an uncontroversial deletion candidate) -- Columnist (talk) 17:59, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Jack Wilshere

Hey, I was wondering if you could help me out with this. There is a soccer player named Jack Wilshere who was just recently made a starting player. Before he was only on reserve squads so whenever people tried to make a page for him it was quickly deleted. I guess this happened so often that now the page is blocked from being created. Since he is a now a first team player I assume he is notable enough for his own article. Could you unblock this page, or show me how I would go about doing that? Thanks. Charles 17:05, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

KAL2003

Hello, I am a representative of Kappa Alpha Lambda Sorority, Inc. We recently reviewed this site & found that the wiki about our Sorority was deleted (by you) for the following reason: expired WP:PROD "non-notable Sorority." We will be adding additional information, links, & sources to the page to comply with wikipedia's content guidelines. Could you please restore it, with any notes you might have in order for us to make our entry its best? Thank you. kal2003 (talk) KAL2003 (talk) 05:32, 5 August 2008 (UTC)KAL2003

Jonathan Agnew

Hi. I don't want to wheel war, so won't unprotect without your permission, but I think we can probably unprotect this now. --Dweller (talk) 13:13, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll unprotect. It's not like the article has a long history of vandalism - it was just prompted by an on-air comment by the subject... Let's both keep an eye out for it? --Dweller (talk) 14:50, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

SOCOM II: U.S. Navy SEALs protection

Hi,

We've ironed out our differences on this one; can we have it unprotected? Cheers. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 17:18, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Cached Entity has exited his block and resumed his insistence on adding controvesial information from an unrealiable source. Despite efforts to enlighten him on what constitutes a reliable source (on his talk page and on the article's discussion page), he remains insistent without explanation on his source. I am wary on getting into an edit war and inadvertently violating WP:3RR. Any recommendations? Jappalang (talk) 10:32, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

He needs to be dealt with. He will not be swayed from putting that information in again and again. The stuff I really cared about is gone, so I'm more or less fine. However, the insistence of him to keep up this laughable debate and his unwillingness to even have a reasonable debate about the subject...it's very bad. He doesn't need to be blocked for 24-48 hours, he needs to be on indefinite block IMHO. Either that or the article needs to be protected from now until the end of time. - Shane —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.131.214.171 (talk) 13:51, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Since you are all buddy buddy with this guy, I wonder, did you ban or block him for the 3 revert rule? A copy of the history of the Socom site is going to home office in San Fransisco. Either you did the right thing, or you didn't. If you didn't, then have fun. Cached Entity (talk) 04:48, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jay Bezel

No problems with your close of the AfD; however, I believe this guy is actually notable. Would you be amenable to me re-creating the article if I can find some decent sources? GlassCobra 02:48, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Joyce McKinney

Can you unprotect this article? She is notable and a blp-compliant article could easily be created. Thanks! --TrustTruth (talk) 18:01, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Big Ten Conference

Thank-you for protecting Big Ten Conference. It is amazing how far people will go on sports articles. Bcspro (talk) 03:49, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Hello!

Can you restore the userpage of User talk:Infraud so i may add it to evidence at his checkuser case at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/RRaunak in wich i am currently working on? Thanks! --ɔɹǝɐɯʎ!^Talk 10:52, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

KAL2003

Hello Rjd0060. Thank you for re-instating the wiki page of Kappa Alpha Lambda Sorority. Per your suggestion, we have reviewed the conflict of interest in formation and other guidelines, and are making the necessary changes. Should we have specific questions regarding your advice, can a contributor contact you directly, ot would you prefer we post our questions to the general community? My thought was that, since we are addressing a previous deletion, it would be best to seek your direction. Please let us know. Thanks again.kal2003 (talk) 05:32, 8 August 2008 (UTC)KAL2003

Dow Chemical

Do you feel I have edited the Dow Chemical in such a way to make it more neutral? May the neutrality you added in 2007 be removed? Plhofmei (talk) 22:44, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

As noted in my comments, the Bhopal incident and those associated with it (including Dow Chemical) are more than adequately documented in this article on the Bhopal disaster. This article is also linked within Dow Chemical. Given that I do not see the need to duplicate the article. Do you? Plhofmei (talk) 00:02, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Improper

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

This isn't Burger King - you can't pick and chose which admins can, or cannot delete pages. - Rjd0060 (talk) 05:24, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

---

My comment is toward Beta, not you. If some uninvolved admin delete it, i would have not minded. However, you delete it on behalf of Beta as a simple retaliation. You have been pushing your opinion to me at the pages with no good reason. This is very disappointing. I want to restore the page because I "want to" the page not being sneakily deleted by the involved party. I would nominate it by myself after the MfD is end. Restore it.--Caspian blue (talk) 05:07, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Who said such irrelevant thing? Your friend. So I replied to his childish attack. I DO mind you deleting it as a sudden raid.--Caspian blue (talk) 05:09, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

I was very surprised and disappointed at your quick sudden raid.--Caspian blue (talk) 05:13, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

So, you would not repeat such behavior? --Caspian blue (talk) 05:16, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

The point is I only have not requested you to delete it, but you deleted. (surely, I granted Beta to delete it if he has a admin tool) That is different.--Caspian blue (talk) 05:21, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Image:Imbox deletion.png

Please stop deleting protected images like Image:Imbox deletion.png. They are locally uploaded and protected here since they are high-use and thus high-risk.

--David Göthberg (talk) 17:03, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

My apologies for deleting it. I can honestly say I'm not sure how I did that. - Rjd0060 (talk) 17:20, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

No problem, I was just a bit cranky since this happens pretty often lately.

--David Göthberg (talk) 18:05, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Joyce McKinney (2)

Hi, I noticed this was deleted by you citing BLP. What was the problem with the article as it existed? I just noticed all the stories on her, and she appears to be notable for a variety of events and factors, all dating back to the 1970s. rootology (T) 06:23, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Were there any good sources in the deleted versions? I wouldn't mind taking a poke at the article if the other person won't since the... subject seemed rather colorful. What was the OTRS # as well? I'd want to put that on the talk page of the draft for reference. Thanks! rootology (T) 15:17, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks much! rootology (T) 15:21, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Deletion

Could you restore Mike Browning. I didn't know about the prod tag so never got the chance to improve it. Thanks. Tirpes (talk) 16:53, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

RfA Quote

[12] Thought you might like to know that I've added your comment to Kurt to my Quotes list on my Userpage. The truth of that statement brings out so much iorny, it's astounding. :-) --KojiDude ^(C) 18:39, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

User:Thinkservices

I'd really rather not have a user name like this. It is definitely capable of giving others the (false) impression that it is an SPA or other business-type account prohibited here, thus giving passersby the idea that such accounts are acceptable. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 18:43, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Humane Society

No, an employee of the organization was editing the article, see the comments on my talk page and the editors talk page as an admin spoke to them. Green Squares (talk) 00:32, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

and the editor wasn't, lack of NPOV, no point in arguing they seem to have left. Green Squares (talk) 00:37, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Reply links Script

function replyLinks() {
    var headers = document.evaluate('//div[@id="bodyContent"]//span[@class="mw-headline"]', document, null, XPathResult.ORDERED_NODE_SNAPSHOT_TYPE, null);
    var editlinks = document.evaluate('//div[@id="bodyContent"]//span[@class="editsection"]', document, null, XPathResult.ORDERED_NODE_SNAPSHOT_TYPE, null);
    var req = sajax_init_object();
    req.open("GET", "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php?format=json&action=query&prop=revisions&rvprop=user|comment&rvlimit=500&titles=User+talk:" + wgTitle, false); //500 is the maximum amount allotted by the API to non-bots.
    req.send(null);
    for(i=0;i<headers.snapshotLength;i++) {
        var currentHeader = headers.snapshotItem(i);
        var section = currentHeader.textContent;
        var info = formatResponse(eval("(" + req.responseText + ")"));
        for(x=0;x<500;x++) {
            if(info.revisions[x].comment) {
                if(info.revisions[x].comment == "/* " + section + " */ new section") { 
                    var replyTo = info.revisions[x].user;
                }
            }
        }
        aHref = wgScript + "?title=User talk:" + replyTo + "&action=edit&section=new&autosummary=RE:%20" + encodeURIComponent(section);
        if(replyTo != undefined) { //If there was an error, don't append the link.
            editlinks.snapshotItem(i).innerHTML += " [<a href=\"" + aHref + "\">reply</a>]";
        }
    }
}
 
if(wgPageName == "User_talk:" + wgUserName.replace(/ /g, "_")) {
    addOnloadHook(replyLinks);
}

It's me again! This will add a "[reply]" link to the right of the "[edit]" link on all the threads on this page, provided there was no error in gathering the username of the user who added it, which happens only but a very few times. —Animum (talk) 23:56, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review for Thomas Wm. Hamilton

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Thomas Wm. Hamilton. 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. lifebaka++ 11:02, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Trevor Carson

I noticed how you deleted this article because he hadn't "played a professional league game" or competition, however just yesterday the keeper was sent to Chesterfield F.C. on a season long loan, where he will obviously feature for therefore become notable. Can you recreate the article as he will be making his professional debut for them very soon. Mackemfixer (talk) 11:34, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

PP on UDR

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Would you guys mind not bringing the dispute to my talk page? Thanks. - Rjd0060 (talk) 15:06, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

---

Hi Rjd0060 could you please explain to me how you came to the conclusion that User:The Thunderer was tag teamed on the UDR page. So you feel that User:Jdorney here, User:Valenciano here, User:Blueputtnam here, User:Maxburgoyne here and myself here all teamed up together got consensus on the talk page which also included User:Traditional unionist here just to lure The Thunderer into breaching 3RR. This is a ludicrous claim, so what you mean is five editors who disagree with an addition to an article and all get consensus and remove it are all part of a tag team. BigDunc^Talk 22:54, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

No Dunc, no-one thinks Max and TU were involved and there is friendly dialogue to support that, plus Max made a number of edits which were absolutely fine. As for Jdorney, Blueputtnam. and Valenciano - who knows. Why did they suddenly start deleting the same item you've been tring to delete for a week? Why did you not make them aware of the situation as I did with Max? You've been spotted tag teaming before and it looks as if you're doing it now but that can all be cured if the disruptive edits stop. I keep repeating my words - play fair and you and I will get along fine on this article. As I said on your own page; the olive branch is extended.The Thunderer (talk) 00:02, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi, just to say, I had no knowledge of controversey on the UDR page, though I suppose I could have predicted it, nor have I had any contact with BigDunc before. i just edited it as I saw it. If my edits are disputed I'll discuss them, but I'm not involved in some sort of conspiracy against the Thunderer, who, likwise, I had no previous knowledge of. Jdorney (talk) 15:42, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

I accept you acted in good faith. Please do join in the editing and discussion of the article at User:The Thunderer/Ulster Defence Regiment whilst the main article is under protection. Your input would be much appreciated.The Thunderer (talk) 15:59, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

As above. I've had no contact with BigDunc and such unfounded allegations are not only unproductive, they're also a breach of WP:AGF. I would suggest that even when the article is unprotected you would discuss controversial additions like that rather than blindly reverting. I won't be about here much for the rest of the month but I'll have a look at the article in September and hopefully we can come up with agreement then. Valenciano (talk) 10:08, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

I can only apologise that you were wrongly implicated. I have to confess that I don't think it was entirely my fault but I have to accept my part in it and for that I am very sorry. It has been rather emotive on that article.The Thunderer (talk) 15:04, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

UDR Proposals

I have started a work page at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:The_Thunderer/Ulster_Defence_Regiment and also posted a set of objectives on the talk page. I've invited BigDunc and others to participate in an editing and discussion session to see if we can agree something which might resolve the issues which seem to exist. I would very much appreciate your examining the objectives and perhaps commenting or correcting anything which you think is inappropriate.The Thunderer (talk) 14:00, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

I think the dust has settled on that particular edit war now and it may be appropriate to open the article for editing again as fresh, interesting and friendly dialogue is going on at the workpage. Would you mind examining the evidence and considering an unblock? Obviously, and if it is possible, I would appreciate you monitoring the situation for a few days.The Thunderer (talk) 19:38, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

If you don't feel it's time yet then I will respect your judgement. My main reason for the request was to let the new editors in to have a go at reshaping the article. Their logic is sound and reasonable in my opinion. I realise there is the danger of further skirmishes however and am content to wait.The Thunderer (talk) 19:42, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Edit War

Wow. Three admins (now four, it seems) gang up on me and I'm the one who is engaged in an "edit war." If you'd like me to initiate an admin-abuse claim against all four of you, just keep doing what you're doing. -- Skaraoke (talk) 18:10, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

It must be great to be an admin. You can act as each others' sock puppets to avoid the three-revert rule. -- Skaraoke (talk) 18:24, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your repeated threats and dismissive arrogance. You're a model admin, you are. -- Skaraoke (talk) 18:37, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

He'll keep that up for days if you give him an inch.

Keep it protected for a good amount of time and don't mention a time at all, or he'll be back within five minutes... HalfShadow 02:56, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

As I understand it, techniclly he's not even doing it. Apparently, he makes a link that creates the page, posts is on 4chan, someone clicks it and they do his dirty work for him. HalfShadow 03:02, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Holywell, Swords

The article relating to the community where I and 2000 other people live was deleted as a non-notable housing estate on 23 April. I disagree with this interpretation of the Holywell community and if I had been aware of the proposal for deletion I would have made my views known and discuses with the proposers. I would be very grateful if you could please reinstate the article so that I can view the comments and address any issues or concerns people have. Dvdgraham (talk) 14:51, 4 June 2008

Hello

DougsTech (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by DougsTech (talk • contribs) 21:08, August 13, 2008

Dismissiveness

Would you please restore the Dismissiveness article to my user space, as it was deleted without notifying me as the creator on my talk page. Dhaluza (talk) 09:32, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I've seen the discussion. Restoring an article to user space is a courtesy that any admin can do for someone who wants to work on the article, but it is also a courtesy to ask the admin who deleted the article first. Your response on my talk page indicates that you are either unfamiliar with this process, or unnecessarily defensive. Either way, if you decline to restore it, I can always ask another admin. Dhaluza (talk) 15:32, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

I did not say this was a requirement, just a courtesy that most admins would do for an editor who wants to work on a deleted article. BTW, WP:DICDEF is one of the easist concerns to address, and should be handled with care at AfD, since all articles start out with a definition. For a specific example in this case, see [13] as a source of content that could be added to expand this article. I prefer to work on it in my user space, so please restore it there with the history as requested. Thanks. Dhaluza (talk) 15:54, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I can now see that it was in fact edited down to a dicdef by User:Cumulus Clouds who then nominated it for deletion on this basis (and without seeking my input as creator). Rather dirty pool IMHO. Dhaluza (talk) 16:06, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

• Here's your one and only warning to refrain from any personal attacks and if you continue I will seek sanctions. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 02:03, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Have a look now, and see if the subject really couldn't be more than a WP:DICDEF.

Would you consider overturning your close of the AfD, since the point of the discussion is now moot. Dhaluza (talk) 12:28, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Oversight question

Hi. :) I note that you cleared the article Paul Doktor after receiving verification of permission. I'm so glad it came through! I'm dropping you a line to see if you are also handling clearing Yaltah Menuhin. The articles were created by the same user and sourced to the same website, and the copy of the permissions letter he cc'ed to me addressed both articles. I don't know, of course, if he sent another letter to the Communications Committee that only covered the one. However, I thought I would check, since the second article covered in the same letter may have been overlooked. Please let me know if I should forward that letter to Permissions again. I had such trouble contacting the gentleman in the first place, thanks to e-mail wonkishness, that I'd hope not to have to ask him to send the letter again himself.

I'll be watching your talk page, so feel free to answer here. On the other hand, I'm comfortable with an answer at my own page, too. I like to keep complex conversations together for continuity, but this one shouldn't be that complex, I shouldn't think. :D

Thanks for any enlightenment you can offer. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 16:40, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks so much! I'm so glad to mark that one off the "to do" list. Certainly one of the most complex copyright clearance situation I've ever gotten involved in! (Except, perhaps, Neural correlates of consciousness, which required bouncing from person to person like a superball. :)) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 16:49, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Afterburn(Carowinds)

Hi there, I'm a little confused as to why the article on the roller coaster Afterburn was deleted. The deletion log says it was proposed because of lack of notability, but I don't see how Afterburn is any less notable than many of the other rides in the same park.

Basically I'm wondering why this article was singled out.

Thanks, Abowers87 (talk) 04:07, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Template:Editabuselinks

Yes, okay, it isn't called "Administrator reports", but this is more informative to a new person finding their way around. If they want to report something to the administrators, they'll click on "Administrator reports", but there is a higher chance they'll be confused with "Administrators'", because the latter could almost be construed as a place where admins exclusively posted. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 02:18, 23 August 2008 (UTC)