This is an archive of past discussions about User:Rjd0060. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
I will check the veto page, but do you know when the veto ceremoney takes place.
Last week it was about 2:30 their time...I dont know where you are but thats 5:30 EST.
Dang, I was hoping it would be at noon, and I only have the computer till 4:30 and I live in Ohio. Seth7114:54, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Well it could always be earlier. You never know. Do you check any of the Live Feed update pages? I use this one. It gets updated often.
It takes place between 1-3
User Page
You should create a user page so that people can learn a bit about you. Since you don't have a user page that is why when you put your name on a discussion page your name is in red, everyone else with a user page is in blue. You can check out my user page it's not much, but it's alright. Just click on my name, if it goes to the talk page go to the top where it says user page and click on it. Seth7115:04, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Excellent, is there anyway to get it protected until closer to the finale? - zachinthebox(User • Talk) —The preceding signed but undated comment was added at 22:42:34, August 19, 2007 (UTC).
Well, the first time I tried to request the semiprotect, I used WP:TW, and I put that I wanted it to last for 1 month. That didnt work, so I manually added the request to WP:RFP but didn't specify an amount of time. I guess we have to wait until this one expires, see if it still happens (probably will) and then ask for another semiprotect. (Cross Posted) - Rjd006022:49, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
Oh, no problem. I don't know how many time's I've reverted it to TBA. It's very frustrating to keep seeing it as Completed, when the issue has been debated and TBA is the only way that is sure to be right. But now that it's Semi-protected at least we can explain why it's TBA. Happy editing, zachinthebox(User • Talk)23:04, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
America's Player
1) I will not change the wording for "vote to evict" and "get evicted" even though it provides consistency because it is the way CBS worded it officially.
2) Even though we are 100% that "who should Eric vote to evict" will be the next AP task, you are right, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball.
3) Every Big Brother website (i.e. hamsterwatch, jokers, reality insiders) admit Eric has completed at least 13 tasks and as of his revelation last night possibly even 15 though it is ambiguous where the last two came from. Please to not revert back to TBD as that would clearly be wrong.
Umm, excuse me but you are way out of line. I never reverted anything anyone did AFTER your comment on my wall (I've made three edits to the Big Brother page, only one after you wrote on my wall). I thought providing all sides of an argument that can be backed by sources was what Wikipedia was about but apparently I was wrong. I don't see how my most recent edit to the Big Brother 8 is wrong at all except that it is against YOUR point of view. Please explain to me while I can't add to what you have (mis-)written when I have a source and while I try to explain why some including Eric believe Eric completed certain tasks. I would greatly appreciate if you removed your incorrectly placed tag on my wall after you look and see I never reverted anything you or anyone else did after you asked me once not too. Comedy24002:17, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I thought we weren't allowed to make wikipedia pages our babies where only wikipedians opinions matter, but I guess I was wrong. I'm not going to contribute to the BB8 page anymore as I don't feel like helping something that is incorrect and a complete mess. I'll keep to American politics where I can just write in data and prose and not have to deal with people who have been here less than a fortnight. I know I am not allowed to write other people's opinions besides yours, you might find these outside sources valueble, but then again probably not because you haven't in the past.
Jokersupdates (the largest BBUSA fan web site) says Eric has completed 13/19 tasks [1]
RealityInsiders (another fan web site) says Eric has completed 8/19 tasks [2]
TBA is the consensus because is an encyclopedia for factual information. CBS, the topmost source for this article, has dropped the ball with America's Player tasks by not clearly announcing the rules and/or results. All of these so-called "Big Brother websites" are all run by fans, i.e. not credible. All the editors want Wikipedia to be as reliable and accurate as possible and if it means leaving a few unknown tasks at "TBA" for a little while, so be it. Thanks. (Also posted to Comedy240's talk page) - zachinthebox(User • Talk)15:43, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Comedy240, to gloat is not nice. Anyway, CBS just put that up because of all the misunderstandings. Now that is a reliable source. But the ones you posted before where not. It was never clear which ones he did complete, or not before CBS confirmed just now. So again, don't gloat, it's disruptive. Thanks.- JeenyTalk16:16, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Veto
I am unsure about the Veto I always thought that the Veto image stayed with the winner until the end of the week. I could be wrong ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪21:35, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
1) I see your point, I think what I added deserved to be mentioned to provide a true neutral viewpoint, but it did not have to be there, I could have added a subsection about the various counts the majority of fan web sites believe counted.
2) I accept your apology, and will not bring it up again, and I admit I was more offended than I should be but when someone puts one of those on your userpage and you are 100% sure you are innocent you will get ticked a little too.
3) My third edit where I sourced video from the official CBS feeds that showed Eric saying he completed 15 out of the first 19 tasks which any one that understands addition and subtraction would see he believed he completed those 4 TBD tasks. (PS, I'm not saying you can't do math, I'm saying that when we know he completed or failed the rest for a fact and he claims to have completed more than we had listed, than it has to be that Eric believes he completed the tasks we view as TBD). I understand there was a group consensus that they should be TBD, but I thought the minority opinion could be stated on the main article in a note as long as I found a good source (Eric himself actually).
4) I didn't realize there was stuff on the talk page (it was archived because of the constant bickering on said page), and I'm sorry for not looking through the archives, and I'm sorry for making you revert me the one time I changed his tasks to completed when the group consensus was TBD.
5) I haven't done anything for the Big Brother pages besides inventing the current voting history table last season, while you revert all the negative comments about the disliked HGs like Amber, Daniele, and Dustin. Comedy240 —The preceding signed but undated comment was added at 17:25, August 22, 2007 (UTC).
reply
1) Resolved
2) Resolved
3) Actually there is one small problem, CBS.com has task 3 listed as complete while my tivo'ed episode #5(?) has CBS buzzing and infatically saying Eric failed the task to nominate Jessica. Which is more official, CBS.com or an episode of Big Brother. I would personally think the episode because the producers help edit the episodes but leave the web site to the network, but I think this should be discussed.
4) Resolved
5) I was saying good job for dealing with and reverting the non-neutral hate speech. Sorry for the bad wording. Comedy24017:43, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
You lost me
I don't what an edit summary is, you'll have to explain it to me. I've been making hundreds of Wikipedia edits and I've never done it once. So ya, you'll have to explain the problem. - Spyke107702:37, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
Ummmmm... no sarcasm intended? Anyway, you are aware of the current incarnation of the spoiler guideline? It suggests that spoiler tags are not necessary if a current fiction template (such as {{Future television episode}}) already appears at the top of the article. It also strongly opposes placing a tag at the very top of the article. Axem Titanium01:02, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Re: Big Brother citation
Oh that's creditable. Not. I just saw the talk page and I was like yea that it very creditable and I just burst out laughing. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪03:09, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Note from Chrismaster1
By the way, I undid ur revision because the talk page for Big Brother is not only to talk about ways to make the article better, but to also talk about the show that's why its called a Talk Page! So quit posting threatening messages on my talk page!!!!!!!! Chrismaster114:12, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Confusion on FCC Big Brother discussion
Sorry if I confused you, I meant the CBS message boards for Big Brother was where the "FCC statement" was posted/faked. I wasn't saying that Wikipedia is a message board. Wikipedia IS an encyclopedia. So, ya, just to clarify. - Spyke107704:33, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
I agree with everything you have said as well. That was not directed towards yourself. I was saying that that discussion needed to end, and I named you and a couple of other people personally because you had made a couple of good, smart comments. I mentioned Alucard as well. We were all just people that were contributing frequently. No disrespect, man. I feel stupid yelling at someone on the internet. I shouldn't have to argue over something to someone I don't know, so I shouldn't have fought with Wanzhen. But he was starting to go overboard. So was I. I will no longer be contributing to that section of the talk page. I hope no one else does. Don't take my comment personally, because it isn't. That was for everyone. Even though I mentioned you, I don't accuse you of any wrong doings. You have been here WAY longer than I have and you know way more about what you are doing that I am. So I apologize that you took offense. While I don't need to argue about something with someone I don't know, I feel that I should apologize to you because you have been nothing but nice to me. Where Wanzen just came out of the blue and wrote this stuff, I just got angry. I don't want anyone else getting worked up over that discussion so it's over for me, and I hope it's over for you and everyone else. I am going to be taking a break from the Big Brother talk page for a while, until someone starts up a new discussion. Thanks for reading all that, stay cool - Spyke107723:57, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
Your message
Next time, please see what edit I actually made before slapping some template message on my talk page. I am not only not a new user, but the edit was legitimate. NSR77TC23:35, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
Discussion would yield little to nothing as the said article receives little traffic; virtually none to the talk page. Four edits since October of 2005. NSR77TC23:50, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
John Buttigieg
Hello RJD, THIS IS VASCO AMARAL FROM Portugal, user nº217.129.67.28.
IN JOHN BUTTIGIEG'S (MALTA FOOTBALLER) EDIT HISTORY, YOU SAID YOU REVERTED ONE EDIT (BY ME) IDENTIFIED AS VANDALISM...WHAT??!!!? I ONLY ERASED ALL HIS INT.MATCHES, EXPLAINING I FELT THE INFO AVAILABLE WAS MORE THAN ENOUGH, AND ADDED HE WAS NOT A RELEVANT PLAYER (AND YOU KNOW IT IS TRUE!!!). I AM GETTING SERIOUSLY ANNOYED BEING CALLED A VANDAL, WHEN ALL I DO IS TRYING TO HELP!!! IF IT PLEASES YOU, NO WORRIES, I'LL LEAVE BUTTIGIEG'S PAGE ALONE...
OH BY THE WAY, I WRITE HE HAS 95 CAPS, YOU WRITE BACK 97 CAPS...JUST ADD THE TOTAL GAMES IN THE WIN-DRAW-LOSS REFERENCE, AND YOU WILL SEE HOW MUCH IS THAT...
Message received
RJD, THIS IS VASCO AGAIN...
Message received, do not know if you already read mine, it is well explained and clear, I AM NOT A VANDAL, ONLY TRYING TO HELP!!!
Saying "Welcome, and thank you for experimenting with the page Big Brother 8 (US) on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed." simply because you disagree with an edit is obnoxious. Wryspy02:02, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Does it matter whether or not you come across as condescending like you're talking down to a newbie or a vandal? Yes. Yes, it does. When you can't find script to match, just use undo and type a simple edit summary. Wryspy02:05, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Final observation: Looking over your talk page, it looks like I'm not the only one who feels you have addressed people like they were newbies or vandals. I hope you meant what you said about keeping my thoughts in mind, although the bold face on opinion (like I don't know my opinion is my opinion?) conveys a different impression. Wryspy02:13, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Re: BB AP again
The way I was doing it was based on standard English (0-9 are written as "zero" through "nine" and 10+ written with digits), but I'm thinking that we should make it all digits, just so that the amounts are easily found - zachinthebox(User • Talk)20:33, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
I posted this on the main page but I doubt that many people check it during BB8 but do you think that Big Brother (US) can get GA status? I think a peer review would be good but I am confused by the whole thing and don't understand it. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪16:17, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
I voted to keep it because if that is deleted people are just going to try to post it back to the main article and then it would ruin the slightest chance of Big Brother (US) becoming GA. I don't know what to do because if it is deleted people are going to be putting all the trivia and stuff in the main article again. I am surprised that anon users haven't already *knock on wood*. In the event it is deleted I should find a way to put mention of the silver and golden vetos. Right now in the main article the basics are only covered. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪17:27, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
I managed to add that the veto was originally silver and nominees couldn't use it on themselves and that the Golden PoV replaced the Silver PoV and is now the standard Veto. I also added that nominees could use it on themselves. This is incase the PoV page is deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alucard 16 (talk • contribs) 17:55, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Hello, I am 58.28.148.104. You recently reverted one of my edits on the Nissan Cube's talk page. I am unaware of the fact that Wikipedia allows letters of such a kind on it's discussion pages. Correct me if I am wrong, but it doesn't contribute to the discussion in any constructive form. Not to mention that the person who wrote the letter did not leave his name. I know this can be found on the history page but his letter was of no value to the discussion. Please explain your revert and why you chose to warn me, as I do not consider it to be vandalism. I am new to the community so if I am wrong please be a little more understanding. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.28.148.104 (talk) 03:09, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
Regarding POV page
Sorry if I did something wrong, I though Adria's last name was Montgomery? Or Klein, or maybe both. At least that's what it says in the Big Brother 5 article. I thought Okins was the fake name she used before the twin twist was revaled. Sorry. - 99.243.247.22722:11, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
I definetely see your point. That makes so much sense. I only did that to match the season's article, but you are right. Thanks for the clarification. - 99.243.247.22722:59, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
What did I do?
Hi there. You sent me a message that I had vandalized the Monica Gellar article, but I am very confused as to how I am supposed to have done that. All I did was change it to present tense, which is exactly what you are supposed to do with articles on fictional characters. It's really not helpful when someone makes a big, scary accusation of vandalism without explaining the reasons for the charge.
Treybien04:00, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Question
I'm new here at Wikipedia and I can't find any moderators. I added and fixed some things to the Big Brother page and someone named user:Alucard 16 keeps removing the things I add, even though they are correct. Like I added that the live feeds are provided by Real Networks and that they are blocked when houseguests discuss their Diary Rooms sessions and he took it out. I really don't appreciate it. Is there anyway to stop people from removing information that is accurate? I know I'm a newbie on Wikipedia, but I am an expert on Big Brother U.S. -- watched every single season and subscribed to the live feeds -- and I know what I'm talking about. Maybe I just don't understand how Wikipedia works? --Teehee1102:40, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Reply
I don't really think it's a good idea to add the strategies section for each season, because there would be a lot of repeats. I'd have to add backdooring, for example, to seasons five, six, seven and eight. Is there any chance of an article stub or whatever you call it? An article with its own page that links back to the main page? It wouldn't clutter the main page but it will still allow us to span the strategies of Big Brother, in general. I don't know who I need to get permission from, but to me it sounds reasonable. There are more strategies I was going to add. And in future seasons, I'm sure new strategies will arise! --Teehee1118:45, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Rjd, I like the compromise on the notes :) it really clears everything up LOL. Just thought I'd let you know that I like it - zachinthebox(User • Talk)23:14, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
I fixed it, sorry, I was trying to revert my edits. In previous seasons, the third last person didn't get an "Evicted" box, it was still "Nominated" because technically they were still in the house during that week. But now I'm leaving it alone! - Spyke107702:19, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
I know, I was just saying it would probably just get reveretd so I wouldn't bother. I don't like the warnings, and I never said it was specifically anyone's intention. - Spyke107702:32, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Brian Belo
Currently the merge discussion is still open, but I am about to close it, as it has been two weeks today. It hasn't been up for AfD as I wanted to merge rather than delete. John Hayestalk06:55, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
Good work on that article you put up for AfD. There seems to be some idea that winners of reality contestants automatically get an article. WP:BLP1E is quite clear on that, which is why I merged Brian Belo and it is good to see that someone else is doing the same thing elsewhere. John Hayestalk07:38, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
REdIRECT
I was trying to make a redirect page with dun dun dun dun du na na na na na naaaaaaaaaaa na na na na na no ne ne na new na na na new to jurassic park that's all. user: icerainbow Icerainbow03:35, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
I was bold, and redirected it. Hope it stays that way. jeezel petes! Hope you don't mind, I didn't check the delete page. Oops. Okay, Just keep reverting whenever it's changed and take the articles for deletion down. - JeenyTalk20:09, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Just a follow-up from one of my comments. I guesss he, TS (Mr. Gung Ho) is not an admin. I believe he registers in my memory because there have been many (some?) dicussions about his behavior, or maybe just activity on WP. IDK. Maybe it was on AN/I. I can't remember, but do remember the name. lol that's all. - JeenyTalk22:59, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
User:Rocktooloud
Hi. I was lurking around the new pages the other day and I noticed that "Lennon Leppert" article created and recreated numerous times under, I believe, another username. This leads me to believe this user is a sock. No need to respond on my talk page. I used to be an active editor, but I gave it up. I do pop in and tag nonsense articles on occasion. Have a good weekend. 74.62.174.10401:46, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Because it is unnecessary to delete the redirect. Having such redirects ease the navigation (well, when they are not double redirects of course, I fixed that one for you) by making it easier to search for the name. Moreover, redirects are cheap in terms of server storage, in the MediaWiki software (there used to be a page about that but I can't find it). -- lucasbfrtalk22:26, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Cleanup templates
Just to let you know that most cleanup templates, like "unreferenced", "fact", "cleanup"etc., are best not "subst"ed. See WP:SUBST for more details. Regards, RichFarmbrough, 18:14 23 September2007 (GMT).
If the Dick Donato article gets restored, whichever of you relist it for AfD would probably be more effective if you tackle the issue rather than the individual article. I recommend listing all non-notable Big Brother and Survivor winners as a single AfD. You should save yourselves a lot of trouble in the long run by dealing with them all at once instead of one at a time. You'd also establish a more clearcut precedent than a single article's deletion could achieve. That precedent can be used to make subsequent related AfDs go much more smoothly. Travislangley00:45, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
The admin relisted it. One of you ought to charge in and proceed with checking how to list all of the non-notable winners as one group AfD to make sure this really gets dealt with. An admin would then close the relisted Dick Donato AfD because of it being part of a group under more appropriate discussion elsewhere. Travislangley03:09, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Create a new one including Dick Donato and all others -- soon, before the Donato thing grows much. It's better to address the issue as a whole instead of having one deleted here but another survive there. It would be screwy to get everything except Donato's deleted. Nominate the group, and then ask the admin to close the Donato discussion because it's now part of a larger group on nominations. Like I said before, addressing the issue works better than attacking one article alone, and establishes precedent. Travislangley03:13, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
There's a ton of precedent and closing an individual AfD or CfD to open a group nomination is how I usually see it done, but I'd have to wade through a zillion old AfD and especially CfD nominations to find examples. If you'd asked the person who started the new AfD to close it so you could reopen as a group nom, that might have done it for you. Better yet, if you were already planning to do the new AfD yourself, you should have preemptively posted a notice at the deletion review stating that you needed to be the one to create the relisted nomination. Opening it yourself would have been stronger because you could have started with reasons for deletion instead of a balanced, "So, people, what do you think? Which way should it go?" kind of thing like the other guy has done. At this point, it doesn't really matter anyway. The AfDs are already in motion. Shoester18:55, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
I know this might sound biased because we voted differently, but seriously, that's not what this is about because I'm okay whichever way that AfD goes: Commenting so many times on the same AfD can come across like you're trying to shove your opinion down other people's throats instead of letting everybody else speak. If someone makes a vague comment like that one person's non-explanation, regular AfD editors and certainly the closing admin will see that. Posting so many comments can actually cause people to underestimate the number of people who also posted comments along the same lines because some readers will blend them together as if a single person said them all. Also, posting more than one comment with the same point (about Wryspy's weird crystal ball thing) can make people underestimate the variety of comments that have been made. Shoester19:01, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Re: Keep - As explained up there. BigCoop 09:06, 26 September 2007 (UTC) Comment: Sorry, but that is not really helpful. This is not a ballot and there are no "votes", so your "input" (or lack of) would have had the same effect if you hadn't even added it to the page. - Rjd0060 18:37, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Actually, comments like "keep per so-and-so's argument" or "delete per above" are common in AfD and CfD discussions. They're not votes. Rather, they assert that someone agrees with points that have already been made, thereby showing support. That matters to admins. Admins usually (though certainly not always) close based on consensus rather than by evaluating the specific points themselves. When you say, "This isn't a vote," you're right, of course, but by saying so, you've actually pointed out the amount of agreement for a position contrary to your own. New people weighing in on the AfD or CfD don't have to make brand new points any more than you do (although repeating yourself really does water down your own arguments). Arguing with each individual who disagrees with you just makes you seem argumentative, which actually weakens the arguments you have made. When you've made good, strong points (and from what I've seen, you frequently have), I really recommend against making them look like they're so weak that you must continually defend them. Travislangley06:15, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Listen, I understand you're trying to get things done quickly, however, if you had taken the four seconds it would've required to Google 'Antec,' you would've easily found they are an actual, notable company. Don't go around marking articles for deletion just because you don't know what they are. Charles03:24, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
"Before nominating an article for speedy deletion, consider whether it could be improved or reduced to a stub; if so, speedy deletion is probably inappropriate. Contributors sometimes create articles over several edits, so try to avoid deleting a page too soon after its creation if it appears incomplete." It would've been far more effective for you to consider actually contributing to a 100% relevant article rather than to mark it for deletion. In addition, you expect me to have to defend my article's "notability" before I've even spent five minutes on it? If there is an actual debatable reason for my article's relevance I would be glad to defend it's position; however, in this case you obviously marked it in error and ignorance, and in that case I refuse to have to explain my position rather than just adding to the article and moving on. Charles17:24, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Beside the fact that you completely ignored my quote of the actual deletion policy, which states that it is inappropriate to consider an article for deletion if it can be improved, I don't think there is a better way to describe you than a bureaucratic tool. If you had any knowledge at all, or any will to do research, you would know that Antec is a very well known company. The "See also" section of my page lists many case companies that are far less well known than Antec that all have their own articles. The fact that I don't have the resources to expand upon an article does not mean it should be deleted, it simply means it should be added to. What's the point of everyone being able to edit Wikipedia, if I have to write the entire article first? Charles19:44, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Personally I don't appreciate your vendetta against my article. Get off your high horse and do something useful. Charles19:52, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Made a final reply on the users talk page. As far as I am concerned, this discussion is over. Leave it up to the AFD - Rjd006019:56, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
You might want to visit this article again. When you voted for deletion, you may have been misled by the nominator, who deleted the article's source before nominating it for deletion. The article now has four sources. You may recall it was nominated on the grounds of being unreferenced. Best Regards. Anlace03:47, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Personally, I think we should delete articles on all reality TV performers who don't have any other notability, but I've lost that battle too many times in the past. I would vote delete for all, but what's the point? But I do think that Will Kirby deserves a keep. Corvus cornix23:15, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
I did not, and have not included a personal attack on my userpage nor my talk page against User:Egyegy. What I had on my user page and talk page were backed up with links to the issue of my blocks and were true statements that anyone could check out. I don't appreciate that you equate me with Egyegy who is evading a community ban and has many sockpuppets and only edits in a very hostile tone. And he has slandered me on his talk page and user page. He is a sockpuppet of the banned User:Verdict, check on that! I am so pissed off by these vandals and those who are intentionally hostile because they "don't like it", and those who create an atmosphere of hostility and lies so others quit. I will never come back again. Trust that! Also, I am by no means prejudice against different ethnicities. I embrace all, yet I am prejudiced against assholes. As assholes come in all colors, creeds and nationalities. Good luck. Jeeny00:26, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
As far as your first comment, I am looking into it so I'd rather not reply until I have my information double checked. As far as blocks, I am doing what Wikipedia provides, and that is block warnings. I see nothing wrong with that. The people who get the warnings are the ones who "make the situations worse". Jeeny, hopefully you know that I have nothing against you and appreciate all of your help since I've been here and its a shame that this had to happen but I did see comments from you that could be considered personal attacks. - Rjd006000:34, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
What complete garbage, I never had anything to do with that Verdict nonsense, which is made clear [5]. And I trust 100% that you will be back, either as this or some other user name. Egyegy00:35, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
She restored her attacks on me again on her talk page!!!! Why wasn't that removed and the small disclaimer I left on my user page was???? Egyegy02:58, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Reply from my talk
You can notify her if you want. I don't think it is mandatory. It's a polite thing to do, but if you think it would only provoke her, then don't. Use your judgment. Dean Wormer02:43, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Rjd
I'm sorry. My anger was not personally against you at all. It is frustration. Not against you. I said "this place" not you. I'm sorry you chose to report me, when you knew it only made me more upset the last time. Stay sane. Goodbye. I like you, and have nothing against you. Peace. Jeeny02:53, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
I would hope not. I am not doing anything different in your case as I would do with anybody that I didn't know, and thats try to prevent continuous and repeated vandalism / vulgarness or any edits that are disruptive. Something I learned from you. Oh the IRONY. - Rjd006002:56, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
I have not been involved at all in repeated vandalism. I may not have a good attitude at times, because I edit controversial subjects. But I am old and cranky. I have not been disruptive, at least I don't think so. At least against those who are really disruptive where my blood starts to boil. Like I said, I do not work here. I have done more good than bad. I may have a poor mouth (fingers?) at times. But, I've shown more kindness to others than I have hostility. Too bad that is not known. Again, I do not wish anything bad for you. Sorry I have put you in a bad place. :( Jeeny03:02, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Everybody knows you have done a lot more good than anything. I understand what you mean about working with the controversial subjects. That automatically makes things more challenging than normal. Maybe you can have a laugh though about the comment from ANI "She should go on a week long Caribbean cruise with ScottAHudson". You know who Scott is. We've had fun with him. Coincidentally, I reported him tonight also (and he got blocked for 7 days). Take lots of pictures on that vacation. - Rjd006003:05, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, Scott was a pain, but nothing like the ones on the racist articles. Nothing. Another lesson, you have to WP:SUBST notices on user pages, like User:El_C corrected the one you left on my talk. I do appreciate the notice, but not the report, to be honest. Also you have to distingish between WP:Vandalism and WP:Civil. I have not vandalized anything. :) Jeeny03:27, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Sorry about that. Thank you for correcting it. I read through the article (WP:SUBST) but have one question; you said it "created havoc". What did it actually do? - Rjd006003:34, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Hey, np. Basically, everytime I edited that section to add another section, it moved it to template. I've never seen an unsubstituted template have that effect. Once it was substituted, everything was normal again. How odd is that? Regards, El_C03:41, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Wierd. Well, before I read that article (WP:SUBST) I added subst to everything (including cleanup tags). When I was told not to do that, I stopped adding them to everything. Now I read the article and understand where to subst and where not to. Thanks again. - Rjd006003:43, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Regarding the holiday
Like all holidays, there is much more information to put. I feel the page needs to be there in order that we can help let it grow and show the subject needs more experts to write on it, something I cannot do. --Enzuru22:33, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Just in case I am not on your watchlist, as I know how big one can become. I wanted to say I harbor no ill will towards you. I would, though, like to suggest that you enable the email feature in your preferences. This is because once you start to give out warnings, fight vandalism, reporting other users on ANI and enforcing Wiki policies, it is a courtesy to have it enabled, you may be surpise at the support you may get. Don't worry about hate mail. I've had mine enabled since I began editing and never once have recieved hate mail. (That may change now, that I said it online. lol). If you want to keep your privacy, you can use gmail or yahoo or another provider so you don't have to use your ISP's email. Again, just a suggestion. When I was blocked, I wanted to email you rather than post on my talk page for obvious reasons. Not to attack you, but to explain a few things. Take care. Cheers! :) Jeeny00:36, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Strangely enough, I did not get a warning from Twinkle. I did, however, notice the duplicate report. On my attempt to revert that (I agree all it does is take up space), I ran into an edit conflict that it had been removed by an AIV Helper Bot. -- Tckma 02:26, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
No warning? Wierd. - Rjd006002:29, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Image Question
YOU SAID:
Just so you know, I have removed 4 {{helpme}} templates that you added to image pages. Helpme templates are for use on user talk pages only. If you have any questions, feel free to leave them on my talk page. Thank you. - Rjd006016:28, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
MY REPLY:
OK, thanks for removing them.
And thanks for the notice.
(Without it, I would have become even more frustrated,
and perhaps even suspected vandalism. Sorry for my Newbie paranoia.
I'm trying to make meaningful contributions,
but it has become very discouraging!)
PROTOCOL?
I tried to leave a question on YOUR talk page
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Rjd0060),
but it said you would reply to messages on MY talk page.
Does this mean I should ask questions on my own talk page?
(Or is it OK to ask here, on your page; if so, do I then look on mine for replies?)
QUESTION:
I still don't understand what is the proper way to put appropriate images, logos, and photos into Wiki articles when I have the owner's permission. When I attempt to do so, they get removed, regardless of what info I provide. Please advise.
Hello: I saw that you had a hand in deleting Ronald A. Carson. I was hoping that you could assist me with re-creating the page so that it will remain permanent. Ronald A. Carson is a very noteworthy political operative and wonderkid. The articles that were cited on the page from the aurora advocate were written solely about him and his accomplishments. He is a role model to hundreds of thousands of african-american youth throughout the world. These youths looked to his page as a beacon of hope that they too might one day become as succesful as him. He has been commended by president's, acotrs and athletes alike for his rapid ascension into fame and stardom. I would greatly appreciate your assistance with allowing for his page to stand. Thanks
Alinob7716:50, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks again for getting back to me. Your advice is appreciated. I have been able to contact the editor of The Aurora Advocate and have retrieved a couple of newspaper articles featuring Carson. I have also been informed that they are in the process of putting these articles online, which would give them a url that can be used on a Ronald A. Carson page. Once that is done, this would satisfy the third party source that is lacking. Also, Carson has been the point person/strategist in cities across the country for President Clinton, Vice-President Gore, Senators Lieberman, Edwards, Kerry and now Clinton. He is a political strategist in the mold of a James Carville, or a Paul Begala. This is what makes him notable, becasue he is so young, a wonderkid if you will. Also, it should not go without notice that he is African-American and let's be frank, this is an accomplishment that not many African-American's can boast of. This is why this "story needs to be told" it serves as inspiration for the throngs of African-Ameican youth who feel that if Carson can do these things, why not them. So, I will find the url's to the sources and then I hope that, after this, you will assist me in making Ronald A. Carson a permanent page on wikipedia--thanks again.
Alinob7722:57, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
RJD0060/Improbcat: The two of you are out of line and your motives are again called into question, please revert to my above post about respect and integrity, of which, not one of you is exhibiting at this current time.
"COI is a indication for scrutiny and editing, not rejection. The tone of the current article is unfortunate, but that can be changed. I'm prepared to remove some of the fluff." DGG (talk) 20:45, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
Looks good to me. But again, I've never started a report before, but have commented on some. <shrug>. Again, it looks good to me. You done good, IMO. :) Jeeny00:02, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Sorry about the late response. It was obvious that those accounts were Alinbob's sockpuppets, and they were blocked by another admin (whose name escapes me at the moment). I then blocked Alinbob himself for two weeks for sockpuppetry. There wasn't any confirmation as you say, but the probability of those accounts being different people is zero. · AndonicOTalk13:14, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
No problem on the comment deletion, what you posted essentially duplicated what I had up. She's got some bizarre obsession with this article. Improbcat18:48, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
QUESTION
you recently deleted a contribution i made to the article Kerkhoven,Minnesota calling it vandalism. I said that young people living there are moving away because its a dead end town. how can you call it vandalism when i am a young person who has left Kerkhoven, Minnesota for percicely that reason. Please explain this to me. User:Zoidberg12592
your now giving me a last warning? and not those other people i never even made a personal attack wow please re read the article about my sockpuppet and refrain your self from skimming its important info and those non admins shouldnt be able to spam the sockpupet thing on me and they dont get into trouble where is the democracy in here you claim that this is a free encyclopedia yet you restrict on free speech? TELL GRAVITAN TO STOP POSTING THE SOCKPUPPET THING ON ME IAM ONLY ALLOWING REAL ADMINS TO DO IT CUZ ITS ANNOYING AND ANOTHER ADMIN SAID THAT HE IS NOT AN ADMIN--Umm killer20:17, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
the quote "you are and uneducated buffon" was allowed by the game masters at 's world of warcraft when somone said it to me even though they have an extremely strict verbal thing. It is not a personal attack it is simply an opinion maby jet lover is a genius but she/he has never responded to my evidence and repeated again answer back about my wargames plzz Cheers!--Umm killer20:23, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply. Do you know if the previous article resurrections were all Undeletes or article recreations or combination thereof? I have a real problem how pointless exercises like this waste so much time better spent elsewhere in the project. Do you know if the article was SALTed this time? It's warranted in this case. It's a shame at one level, since Carson's notability might conceivably be adequately documented some way in the future. But this long running history of heavy-handed chicanery with the article means any such future claims of its notability deserve to be viewed very skeptically. Professor marginalia21:15, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Hopefully salting it will stop it, but I'm doubtful. The reason for the whole deletion review fiasco was that the article had been salted, and she couldn't just recreate it. Improbcat14:21, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
For helping out against the trolls and reverting vandalism. Out of the last 5 or so vandals i've been fighting, you've helped on at least 3 cases :). Enjoy the barnstar! AntiVMan22:37, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
I completely understand. If it hadn't been a copvio, I would have taken the db-bio tag off and rewritten the article myself, but it's best to get it deleted and start with a clean slate. Corvus cornix23:38, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
YOU SAID: Comment: Please refer to WP:WAX in reference to your comment. - Rjd0060 23:15, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
MY REPLY: I have used published media stories, in addition to company information provided by thier company website, to write what I feel is an objective article- including one front-page story from the New York Times; Rather than simply deleting this article, can you make suggestions as to how it should be changed? User:Phanavan
YOU SAID: It should be noted that there have been substantial (positive) edits to this article since I opened this AfD. - Rjd0060 23:51, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
As the nom, I am surprised and impressed of the number of changes and references added to this article. I believe that it may be suitable to keep now. - Rjd0060 23:57, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
MY REPLY: Thank you for your patience and understanding as I enter the world of Wiki. What's the next step here? How do I get it off the "articles for deletion" list? Thank you again for your help and my apologies. --Phanavan00:03, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, it's just that I'm tired of seeing Zelda on the top today, while before E3 2005, everybody (magazines also) said it was the greatest game of all time.--Mr.Mario 19222:22, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your nomination, which, after 10 days, I closed with the result of delete both articles and merge them. I am in the process of completing the deletions now. Bearian16:18, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
New article
Dear Sir
I want to start a new article on Dr umar Alisha (1885-1945). he is the 6th peethadhipathi or head
he is the great granfather of Dr Umar Alisha (1965). He is the 9th peethadhipathi. Both these persons have same name how i start this article. kindly suggest.
Should be merged to that or Flag Desecration Amendment; I think the original writer, whoever he was, didn't search WP throughly enough before he started the article, because there is one main article already on US flag desecration and a section at the general article on flag desecration. Regards Buckshot0614:42, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I blocked this user for an hour, because he made three edits, all to vandalize Moose, all in rapid succession, during the time you gave the user a warning. Was this proper? I tried to report it to WP:AIV, but it did not appear on the screen. Whether I messed up, or did it right, please tell me. This is my first block ever as an admin. Bearian00:41, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
I had about 4 or 5,000, but I declined it outright once, and put it off again another time. The general consensus is 3,000 edit minimum. Bearian01:07, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Levi Strauss
Did it occur to you to revert back to the correct version rather than to just revert back to the one with only mentions of his prostitution and the wrong born as name? Look carefully at the revisions before you revert. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Deansherr (talk • contribs) 01:51, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
I just wish to delete an account I have, this is the fiasco!
and please please don't pretend you want to help me and just mess with my head! I just want this to end!!!
a brief synopsis, I created an article-went to a vote to keep or delete- I stupidly added a few comments while un logged in and some while logged in , I'm dyslexic-so sue me. but I got on some guys radar (for all I know a friend of yours) he then accused me of being other users and did a checkuser on me, came up negative, still the guy wouldnt let go of it, he put crap on my user page that was rude! and took it off and then he locked my account, so sick of it, I have sent an email to wikipedia foundation to help. but I just want the dumb account deleted right away! its so embarassing to me and also reveals my personal info-please help ! Canuckchick00702:17, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
I read that, I take it you are an administrator and can help? just let me know, I don't want to go through the rig-a ma- roll of dealing with head office-they probly take forever to get back to you!, also can a user block your account because you say you will put out a wiki alert and say you made a legal threat? This was just made up to freeze up my account, I m so ticked off as the checkuser proved my innocence!Canuckchick00702:20, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
this is all so annoying! I wish he would just go away! can you do me a favor and delete the comment I put on the administration board?Canuckchick00702:35, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm the author of the above mentioned article. After all the pictures were deleted by the admins who do not think ranks and insignias are not essential to the articles regarding armies and not deserves to be use under the fairuse criteria, I really disappointed and requested to speedy delete that. So if you think that article contains some context which is also have some encyclopedic value, then I'll keep the article as it is. Thanks --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪walkie-talkie | tool box17:02, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
I have sourced the championship titles. Whether the titles are sufficient to meet notability is now the question. If you feel so inclined, please revisit the AfD and comment. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim17:46, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Navigating this thing is way confusing... I tried to post something and was in the wrong spot... can't it be easier to post?
Also I tried putting the template thing in buy the thing was deleted before I had a chance.. really you all should give more time to the noobs to figure out how to do stuff... and DUH... make it so you can't edit OTHER peoples stuff.. but thats just obvious! Manduck2k3 23:35, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Thank You
Now thats what I needed in the first place, if I had that I would have known how to do stuff, you should really make that the page everyone goes to when they sign up!
Thanks
Manduck2k3
Manduck2k323:51, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
PS: "And, even though it is your user page, it still belongs (and can be edited by) the community" Please define the community" if that means anyone then you have some warnings to remove from me as you state the above quoted.. thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Manduck2k3 (talk • contribs) 23:53, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
I read WP:OWN, and it says you shouldn't try to prevent people from editing your articals, and what not, but it does not say who the owners of what are., The problem is that you have too much stuff opened to the interpretation of someting... not to mention it shouldn't be possable to edit "home pages" or "user pages" if there not yours.... and why do i have for and not just two? sounds like all the "power" can be missused if 3 people do a warning at teh same time that gets you 3 warnings.. and the ones regarding my own artical shouldn't count because I kept tring to used the form to show I wasn't done but I couldn't get it to work! What a rip! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Manduck2k3 (talk • contribs) 00:08, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm only reading what you have written... I don't believe I have misinterpreted the meaning of anything you wrote, if you meant to say something else then please feel free to correct what you said.. but if you mean what you said then there are some issues here. Manduck2k300:18, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
"Unintentional nonsense
While intentionally adding nonsense to pages is a form of vandalism, sometimes honest editors may not have expressed themselves correctly (there may be an error in the syntax, particularly for Wikipedians who use English as a second language). Also, sometimes connection errors or edit conflict unintentionally produce the appearance of nonsense or malicious edits. In either case, assume good faith." Manduck2k300:22, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Head Shampoo
Hi! I'm surprised that there wasn't an article on this stuff before now. I remember it well. I've added a couple of cleanup notices in lieu of the speedy since I'd like to take a whack at cleaning this up later. No need to respond. Thnaks much and have fun! Best, --PMDrive106101:41, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks much. :) New pages patrolling is hard, dirty work. Anyone who does it with any regularity deserves the barnstar like the one on your user page. - PMDrive106101:46, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
LOL! Oh buddy, do I ever feel your pain. It was worse when I was an administrator under a previous username. Not no mo'. I asked to be deadminned. --PMDrive106101:51, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
That goes without saying, of course. I love adding content, but playing whack-a-mole with spammers, garage band musicians and high school students is too much fun! It's an endless task. Ah, but the fun of maintaining integrity! --PMDrive106101:56, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Re:Thanks
That was probably one of the most poorly-reasoned unblock requests I have seen. He cites "free speech", which does not apply to the WMF, and he issues a legal threat after posting the unblock request. :-P Nishkid64 (talk)01:44, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for reporting these socks early on. I suspect these socks were created to utilize in retaliation for another sockpuppet case I instituted recently. BusterD13:16, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
what is blog type?
sure, so you are a great expert on what is a blog type website? then you donot consider the story " A STUDY IN SCARLET" written by one of the most famous novelists of all time a reliable source? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Decembernoon (talk • contribs) 15:05, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
the helpme move request
FYI: I did not place that request there, even if it shows as me on the history. If you take a look at the article's history, you will see that I moved the helpme tag and the request off the article onto the talk page. I am sorry if that has mislead you. :-) Stwalkerstertalk20:29, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
It matters because some admin's will only speedy an article for the reason listed on the tag. If it does not match, they wont delete it. Also, when deleted, unless the admin specifies a more specific reason they deleted it, that tag will show up in the articles deletion log, and we should make sure it shows the correct reason it was deleted. - Rjd006002:05, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
To make it easier on the admins when deleting, ah, yes, that would make sense. I feel I have been making a lot of stupid mistakes when it comes to NP Watching lately, and as an experienced editor, I should know better! :) Thanks for the help jj137 (Talk) 02:08, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
It happens. Everybody makes a few mistakes. You have a point, it will be deleted anyways but here's an example. See this deletion log. Notice it says "content was: '{{db-attack}}Chase Oliver is born....". That admin didn't specify a specific reason for deleting it, so the system automatically inserts the first 100 (or so) characters from the page. Since that article had a proper template (attack) we now know the specific reason it was deleted. Otherwise, it would have just said "nonsense" or something. Make sense? - Rjd006002:13, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
Perfect sense. I think I should start working harder at remembering all of the CSD types, as it will come in handy. jj137 (Talk) 02:15, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
It definitely helps. I don't know if you use any scripts but I use WP:TWINKLE and it really helps with vandal reverts. Maybe something you should look into if you havent already. - Rjd006002:17, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
I have AWB and NPW. AWB is great, and I think NPW is pretty good, but it can mess up a lot, so I only occasionally use it. Now that I know it has all (or most) of the types, I think I'll give it another try. jj137 (Talk) 02:19, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
Carl Ritter ~ Help Me
Thanks for the help RJD. In the future, is there a tag like {{helpme}} for articles.
Hi there... here's ArbCom request regarding Encyclopedia Dramatica. Bullet #1 under "remedies" provides the justification for any/all links to ED to be removed. If you don't mind letting the user who puts the link back know about this information, I'd appreciate it. Thanks! --Kinut/c23:12, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
Greetings
I appear to under some attack and seek your assistance in order to build an editing contribution. The information I have entered is correct. Perhaps my problem is adding to sites in a way I should'nt have. My apologies. However all statements are correct and should be given life on Wikipedia.
Cheers Christopher Wingate —Preceding unsigned comment added by WingateChristopher (talk • contribs) 23:42, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
I am not a vandal. Vandals are people who blank pages, add nonsense, etc. that you dont like the ED website doesnt mean that my intent is to harm wikipedia. AGNPH00:48, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
This is the version that needs to be sourced. If you look at it, it may change your mind on the AFD. What has happened here is that Merle (and/or someone sympathetic to him) is trying to cover up some of the dumber things he has done in the past. --Mista-X05:25, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Transcend T.sonic
Hey mate, can you tell me what I need to do about the "notabilty", and how to "wikify" my artcle? Transcend T.sonic? --Rsrikanth05 14:41, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Justification?
Did the article about the iPod, or Zen, or Zune ever need any justification?
--Rsrikanth05 08:32, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Yes, but as I requested, please give me a few more days and I will do my best to make this article notable, I have found a lot of links on Engadget, CNET, and other review sites for this page. Also, I will add more info on all of Transcend's Products on its main page.
--Rsrikanth0514:11, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Barnstar Alert!!
The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
I, AngelOfSadness, hereby award Rjd0060 with this RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar in recognition of his anti-vandalism efforts and for beating me to a revert/ vandal report twice today. Keep up the great work AngelOfSadness talk 17:19, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
It was either that or nominate it for deletion. There was no context on that page. And FYI, per policy, all edits that you make while you are blocked can be undone without question. - Rjd006020:30, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Just being pedantic here, but it isn't while he's blocked, but banned. Besides, it's better to leave the good edits, for obvious reasons... · AndonicOTalk13:58, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
Don't be down-hearted. All the best admins fail at least one:). Seriously all the neutrals and opposers believe you will be admin material in the future - give it two / three months with some article work to prove your knwoledge of policy, and I look forward to a support next time round!! Pedro : Chat 14:04, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
I also wanted to chim in that I would support your next RFA in a couple months. Just get some more article writing experience, and I'd be satisfied. Don't get discouraged about failing your first RFA, I've failedtwo. Useight18:33, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
To expand upon my statement of "more article writing experience", I'd like to first to call your attention to your wannabe_kate edit count. At the moment of this writing, you have 904 mainspace edits out of a total edit count of 4028. It may be the epitome of editcountitis, but I prefer a ratio of around 50%, yours is only 22.4%. I'm biased, since mine is 59.9%, but let's just say that 22% is too low for my taste. In order to improve (at least my definition of improve) this, you'd have to work on articles, instead of spending time placing warnings on user talk pages and commenting on AFDs. While those are both good things, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and I think we should spend about half our time on the frontend (the actual encyclopedia) and the other half cleaning up the backend. I recommend joining some WikiProjects, a list of them can be found here. I am a member of four WikiProjects, such as WikiProject and WikiProject NFL. Just find some stuff you're really interested in, join those WikiProjects and help improve articles. Fix spelling, grammar, add sources and wikilinks. That's a lot of rambling, but that's the kind of editing I think you need to become a more effective editor. I do believe you'd make a great admin, but being a great editor comes first. Useight21:09, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
P.S. -- That kind of editing will slow down your edit rate, but racking up a high score isn't the only thing that makes a great editor. Useight21:11, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
Redirects
Thanks for letting me know. I think I've done it right this time. I'm redirecting large numbers of the nearly empty tour and season reviews into consolidated articles and I must have gone through that Zimbabwe batch without using paste! All the best. BlackJack | talk page15:08, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, I've been trying to help her with her edits - she seems to have hit the ground running, referencing her articles (which took me ages to get the hang of!). I nearly left Wikipedia yesterday because of the way some admins behave, so Irishguy's actions here really got my goat! DuncanHill00:45, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
I made the heinous mistake of using a level 1 warning template on an experienced user who made a personal attack, and was shot down in flames for 1) using a template on an experienced editor (there's an obscure essay that says it's a bad thing), and 2) asking at WP:ANI if I had done the right thing. Apparently when an admin calls accuses me of "mindless policy wonkery" for trying to stop personal attacks it's OK. So, I don't bother with ANI anymore, as obviously ordinary editors aren't welcome there. DuncanHill00:56, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
The admin who accused me of mindless policy wonkery hasn't made any edits since I told him I couldn't see any point in continuing the conversation. I must say that there are some very good admins, and some said kind things to me after the incident, but I don't really have much confidence in the system. The lack of an effective recall or review system for existing admins, and the apparent unwillingness of admins to police each other, are real weaknesses. I just looked at your RfA - do try again sometime, you seem to have your head screwed on and your heart in the right place. DuncanHill01:08, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the help on the article. However, it's become increasingly clear that no matter how many legitimate arguments I bring up showing why the material does not merit inclusion, there will always be others there to bring up touching stories about how the material reconnected them to their material. This has reminded me why I stopped helping with the material in the first place. Because of that, I'm going to just go back to vandalism patrol. It's easier, and I don't have to worry about dealing with people who are arguing with foregone conclusions in mind. However, none of this is your fault, so I'd like to again thank you for taking the time to help me. Dlong03:13, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
1985 (disambiguation)
I reverted your edit because the Manual of Style says each item in a disambiguation should have exactly one live link. The link to Dyalos will have to go as soon as there's an article about the novel. --Orange Mike20:57, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
I have taken a stab at re-writing the article that under AfD now. I have added references & re-written... It does seem to be a notable local church and somewhat of a regional shrine, but I was getting a headache trying to read through the Indian church sources. Please take a gander and if you think it's salvageable, jot a note here. SkierRMH05:40, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
Regarding your comment on this AfD: In cases where specific notability guidelines are lacking, the general guidelines apply. They read "A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." [7] All of the article's current sources are affiliated with the church in some way, so they are not independent of the subject. Nick Graves18:27, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
Hey there, I completely understand the 3RR & am well aware of my edit war. I am wondering if you could assist me or guide me in this matter.
I feel that the main issue at stake in this instance is Loopla's attitude towards my edits. I simply made a cosmetic adjustment to an article. I am completely open to the fact that maybe alot of people disagree with me about the images size, in which case I will take on board others' opinions happily.
What hurt me, is that thes user Loopla could have easily said "i think it should be smaller than that", but instead crticized me of blatant vandalism! I am as much as you completely opposed to vandalsim, and I think that is completely inappropriate to make such judjements or suggest that I was making "test edits".
Yes, I am aware of all that you said on my talk page, but i think that you are failing to understand that i was to no extent attempting to "vandalise" wikipedia in any way or form, i merely had an opinion on how something should look, but others disagreed with me and i am more than prepared to acept that. I just feel that numerous established wikipedians hold an unjustified prejudice against other users that they assume to be completely inexperienced. - Designdonkey08:15, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
The bot I was talking about was Siebot, and its owner Siebrand. I caught them at the Rangpur District page; it had been vandalized by the bot. Seeing as this had been the third or fourth time this had happened, I'm wondering if the admins should step in. I don't think vandalism is funny either. Crad001022:24, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I seem to have made a mistake in identifying the vandal. I thought the bot was the one adding the Decpticon/random talk thing. An anonymous IP seems to have done it. Perhaps blocking the IP 210.50.234.88/210.50.234.88 will spare us some headaches. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crad0010 (talk • contribs) 22:36, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
As much as I appreciate your other comments on this AfD, there is no reason not to link to relevant policies, even repeatedly. A discussion isn't a mainspace article, and "redundant" linking helps editors discuss their points and refer to policies succinctly and precisely. The fact that you don't like that is your personal preference, but to call me a dick because of that is completely out of line. Since you assert that you're well aware of policies, I won't bother to link you to WP:CIVIL, WP:NPA, but you yourself linked to WP:DICK, which states: Telling someone "Don't be a dick" is something of a dick-move in itself, so don't bandy the criticism about lightly. Linking to policy succinctly and appropriately is no reason to resort to what is essentially an unfounded personal attack. --Cheeser105:11, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
For Reference: The conversation pertaining to this comment, which was conducted at ANI
I have moved a copy this discussion here due to the fact that the above comment left by User:Cheeser1 is taken out of context, and could be misleading. The original can be found in Archive #315 of ANI. I have not made any modifications to this copy. - Rjd0060
Recently, User:Rjd0060called me a dick because I'm linking to policy, and went on to say "Most of us are as familiar (if not more familiar) with these policies/guidelines as you are." When I asked him not to jump to conclusions and make such strong accusations, he went on to say that I was "show[ing] everybody how smart [I am]." (See here for the conversation, which I won't rehash here.) Can someone please jump in here and diffuse the situation before it gets any more out-of-line? I'm extremely busy, and don't want to have to waste Wiki-time (or real-life-time) dealing with an issue that could be diffused by an admin or third party stepping in and asking this user to respect policy and other users. Thanks. --Cheeser105:34, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
I have explained to the user that it was not intended as a personal attack. If you (admin) think it was, then I guess you can warn/block me. Please go and read the conversations though, as the whole context is not explained here. - Rjd006005:36, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Good grief. This is all about whether or not one should link to policies in an AFD debate? Get a grip. Then get a life. You both have wasted too much time on this. It doesn't matter who's right and who's wrong. Just go do something else on Wikipedia. Or, failing that, leave your computers and go do something else in the "real world". Then maybe you'll get some perspective and get over this little squabble.
Excuse me? This is a complaint about a personal attack and abusive comments, not about the issue of linking (yes, it is extraordinarily petty, which is exactly why Rjd0060 was so far out of line for hurling an accusation/attack at me for it). --Cheeser107:22, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
He said he didn't intend a personal attack. What do you want? Rjd0060 please apologise for causing offence. Matter diffused. 08:49, 24 October 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.11.90.193 (talk)
WP:NPA clearly states that the intent (or inability to articulate himself in a way that is not construed as a personal attack) is not relevant: Wikipedia discussions are in a text-only medium that conveys nuances and emotions poorly; this can easily lead to misunderstanding...personal attacks are not excused because of these factors (not to mention the more broad Comment on content, not on the contributor.). And then there's WP:DICK, clearly stating: don't bandy the criticism about lightly. Calling someone a dick because they link to policy "too much" is definitely bandying things about pretty lightly (especially when it's all a product of his bad faith assumption that doing so is an attempt to make myself feel smart). Such a flagrant and inappropriate personal attack / accusation may be worth letting go, but not when the editor in question insists that he has done nothing wrong. --Cheeser110:42, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
I do apologize that the user interpreted this as a personal attack, as I've said a couple times, that is not how it was intended, at all. I have respected the users wishes and not pursed this anymore (on his talk page) because as he said above, he's to busy to waste his time with this? I will repeat myself one las time and after this, I will not leave any more comments about this, because Ido have other things to do: I sincerely apologize for the fact that Cheeser1 misconstrued a comment as a personal attack, but it was a big stretch on his part...IMO anyways. I also believe that this discussion needs to come to an end, so that we don't waste anybody else's time, like this user's. - Rjd006014:46, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Oh, come on this is a waste of everyone's time. Did you read the part about copeing with being labeled a dick? And this part: "Are you here to contribute and make the project good? Or is your goal really to find fault, get your views across, or be the one in control? Perhaps secretly inside you even enjoy the thrill of a little confrontation. This may not make you a bad person, but to everyone who is busily trying to build something great, you become an impediment. People get frustrated, rancor ensues, the atmosphere changes, and the whole project suffers. Are you here to give, or to take?". By bringing this here, it looks like maybe you may be. Jeeny(talk)15:03, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for assuming good faith. Let's open the door for people to hurl about dick accusations left and right because it's not like anyone respects civility - it's too much of a hassle. --Cheeser115:36, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
I've been thinking about this thread since I saw it. I think the dick essay is useful for self reflection but should never be used to refer to another editor. It's like placing {{User warning-mentalhealth}} on another editor's user page. But we have an apology, and everybody reading this is now on notice that dicking somebody may be taken as offensive. So don't do it again! --But|seriously|folks18:00, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Mostly agree with BSf above, however the "apology" seems disingenuous. If I call someone a dick for no reason, and then say, "I'm sorry. . .that you perceive that as an insult" when it is in fact clearly meant to be an insult, well, that's a non-apology. Better to just remove the link and say "I shouldn't have done that" with no apology at all. Overall, I'm pretty disappointed with the general community response here. And also, I think links are helpful, but they are especially appropriate in the AfD which started all of this link because there appears to be more than a couple of single purpose new accounts weighing in there. R. Baley19:03, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
The apology that I have given, is the only one I am going to give on this matter. It isn't my fault that people cannot take some constructive criticism on things that I have opinions about. Because that is all this is, difference in opinions. I didn't intend it as a personal attack, I think I would know what my intentions were better than anybody else would. So I am not going to apologize for saying it, as some people could benefit from reading that essay. I've apologized for the fact that people misinterpret comments that I've added, but thats it. I will say that had I known the comment would this much nonsense and a trip to ANI, I probably would not have said it. I don't know what this continuous conversation is going to help. - Rjd006019:15, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Calling someone a dick is not constructive criticism. If you're suggesting that it's not reasonable and foreseeable that someone might interpret that as a personal attack, I think that's rather insensitive. Whatever your intention, you should have realized that it could very well and very reasonably be interpreted as an attack. So an unqualified apology would have been (and still would be) appropriate. --But|seriously|folks05:38, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
You just don't seem to get it. I have apologized (and I do feel bad about it) for the fact that this comment I made was received as a personal attack, as that was clearly not my intention. Thats it! End of discussion (at least on my end). You people can dwell on this until hell freezes over, but what is that going to achieve? What do you want to come out of all this? I gave a proper apology as per censorship, I shouldn't need to worry about how comments are received by others, unless I am blatantly making a personal attack (which obviously people don't seem to think I have) or making a legal threat. I think WP:GETOVERIT needs to be entered into policy because this is, ridiculous. - Rjd006014:43, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Also, I woulnd't receive this as a personal attack. As the essay suggests, I would examine my motivations,and try to figure out what behavior would cause this reception by other people. Apparently, for linking that article, I am was being a dick too, and I understand that now. I don't think know I will not refer anybody else to this essay. - Rjd006014:55, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
LOL, I'm sorry for laughing but only morons call others morons. lmao! I'm reliving my junior high-school years, and it's kinda fun. I was very shy and polite back then, and it wasn't very fun. Although I did get along with everyone. ;p ~Jeeny(talk)00:19, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
LOL. Exactly what I was thinking by that comment. That user doesn't even have any contributions, so it must be somebody that I reported to AIV, and got blocked. - Rjd006000:21, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
I've never called you a name, believe it or not...even silently. Well... I did call you a name in that one email. lol. ~Jeeny(talk)02:04, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
Yes Big Brother (US) has been reviewed but it failed. You can read more about the review on the talk page of the article but the person who reviewed it said "good start needs several fixes". I think between me and you we can correct the article and fix it and then we can get it up to GA status. But it has finally been reviewed. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪21:09, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
I think the hardest thing will be finding sources for the Live Internet Feeds and the Live Show. Especially about the information on when they blackout things from the feeds. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪21:23, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
Could you please explain how Pulling a pickles is not an attack page? If somebody wrote a page called "Pulling a Rjd0060" and talked about how it means doing or saying something stupid, wouldn't you consider that an attack page? Corvus cornix23:34, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
OK. First, I wasn't talking about your edits as vandalism. I was talking about the IP edits. Secondly, It isn't an attack page. Not that it matters, as it is going to be deleted anyways, but who is the subject that that page is disparaging? Pickles? Does the article have a controversial tone? No. - Rjd006023:38, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
I did not call YOU a vandal. I reverted the IP edits, along with yours, and stated I reverted vandalism and I stated that it wasnt an attack page. We all have opinions, however before you accuse people of calling you a vandal, get the facts straight please. - Rjd006023:46, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
You are incorrect. I restored the page to a version that was 3 edits back. So doing that, reverted your edit, and two edits prior to yours which were from an IP. That IP is the user who added the link to Derek Pickles and that is what I was referring to as vandalism. - Rjd006023:50, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
"Vandalism is any addition, removal, or change of content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. The most common types of vandalism include the addition of obscenities or crude humor, page blanking, or the insertion of nonsense into articles.
Any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism. Even harmful edits that are not explicitly made in bad faith are not considered vandalism. For example, adding a personal opinion to an article once is not vandalism — it's just not helpful, and should be removed or restated. Not all vandalism is obvious, nor are all massive or controversial changes vandalism; careful attention needs to be given to whether changes made are beneficial, detrimental but well intended, or outright vandalism.
Committing blatant vandalism violates Wikipedia policy. If you find that another user has vandalized Wikipedia, you should revert the changes and warn the user (see below for specific instructions). Users who vandalize Wikipedia repeatedly, despite warnings to stop, should be reported to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism, and administrators may block them."
Read the rules next time, I am not vandalizing anything.
I changed that wiki page for a reason, and it was irrelevant. All that is true of what I posted. I am changing it back to what it truly is. By hindering that your vandalizing the pager yourself. That is not my Point of View, thats the truth. All that I changed was truth, and stop reverting it. I am not vandalizing anything, when you change a page back like that your technically vandalizing the the page yourself. If you think that editing wikipedia is that big of a deal, then please, get out of your moms house and get a real life. I am editing that to fix the false information on that page. Stop hindering me for trying to fix a legitimate problem. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cerciosmd (talk • contribs) 23:49, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
If you feel so stronly that you aren't doing anything wrong, even though I've warned you 3 times, than go ahead and do it again, but you can be blocked if you continue to vandalize. - Rjd006023:58, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
Oh, sure, you do not need to be a "party involved", you can simply comment in the discussion section at the bottom of the page. Thank you! Tiptoety05:02, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Hello Rjd0060. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue that you may be involved with. You are free to comment at the discussion, but please remember to keep your comments within the bounds of the civility and "no personal attack" policies. Thank you.
Yes, that part is not good, but the conflict has stopped instead of getting larger. Not all party's can have the outcome they want (un-fortnightly). I think that Jeeny will ultimately come back to the pedia. Tiptoety06:16, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Will you please take a look at my comment on this AfD and consider striking your !vote (and then perhaps adding your comment to the proper AfD)? Thanks, PabloTalk | Contributions01:52, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
If you do hear from Jeeny, please let me know. This edit has concerned me. We had been emailing, but I haven't heard anything since shortly after that post. Email me if you'd like to discuss this further. I'd rather not post here about it. Thanks. Jeffpw20:07, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Hello Rjd0060. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue that you may be involved with. You are free to comment at the discussion, but please remember to keep your comments within the bounds of the civility and "no personal attack" policies. Thank you.
While I did leave a message on Jeeny talk page referring to him as an "annoying Vandel" I did realize my mistake as I reviewed what I had just put on his page. I did edit it out, so I believe you looked through the edit history. After I finish, I am heading to his page to leave an apology. Regards, Javascap21:01, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
In addition, I read you reason for the revert and it is labeled "Jeeny has bene blocked and could not have made any edits" A quick revision of the edit history on my page would show that he did 2 edits. Just letting you know ;) Javascap21:07, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
[[Image:Michigan State Police Logo.jpg]]
Rjd0060, Thanks for adding the Fair-Use rationale to the image. Without your help that Image would be toast, keep up the good work. Max ╦╩14:45, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
lol, yea, you must be cause i just cant seem to revert anything! i may have to put you up for deletion as a bot! lol, keep up the good work! Tiptoety05:09, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
lol, then maybe i can get some vandal reverting in! At this rate though if you call it a night all the vandals will win....lol Tiptoety05:13, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
Hey I just want to let you know that I fixed the images for Big Brother (US) and Big Brother (UK) so the image isn't on the main sidebar but the proper image is displayed in the proper article in the right spot on the template. Since other editors keep removing the images from the sidebars due to WP:NFCC#9 this should solve the problem. And congrats on you many barnstars! What are barnstars for by the way if you don't mind me asking? ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪03:12, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
I agree, however how is it considered a "personal attack" which you gave the warning for. I understand, per BLP why you removed it, but to warn the user for making a "personal attack"? Wasn't that a bit excessive? - Rjd0060 23:41, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
You sure you restored it? It looks absolutely the same and it should have a very, very big history. Thank you.--Mbz100:12, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
I want my user page back the way it was. I wanted to restore my talk page only (not archive, just bring everything back). Thank you.--Mbz100:17, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
I know it could be done without archiving the current page because I would not like to archive this page now. If you cannot do it without archiving my current page, I guess I'll go without restoring my talk page. Thank you.--Mbz100:44, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
I just believed that all my messages could be added back without archiving or changig contest of my current page. I meant just to add my old messages at the beginning of my current page, but it looks like it is getting more complicated than I believed it would. That's why I'll leave it as is for now and will not delete any more messages from my talk page in the future. Thank you for your time and help.--Mbz101:04, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
External links/See also vs See also/External links
I think she's just ignoring her e-mail's. Only from us from wikipedia. I just got this feeling that she is. Do you have that feeling too? Seth7117:03, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
It said it wasn't jeeny. It was some friend. Or maybe it was her. Why would someone give a "friend" there e-mail password. hmmmmm. What do you think. Same thing as me? Seth7117:32, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Hey just to let you know that my old username was "Zerorules677" and changed it to "ThinkBlue" and I was trying to softredirect it. Sorry if I caused a fuzz. -- ThinkBlue (HitBLUE)02:36, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
I took another look at the time stamps. you're right: he had gotten a final warning—and an answer to his question at the help desk—before his last deletion. I've blocked him, but in such a way as to invite him to discuss the issue rather than push him away from Wikipedia. —C.Fred (talk) 03:21, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
I guess the difference is that I don't ascribe malice as a motive. I concede that there may be a conflict of interest at some level, but I think it's a severely misguided but reasonably-good-faith editor. That said, if he refuses to discuss the matter in good faith, then his edits cease to be good faith, and an indefinite block makes sense. —C.Fred (talk) 04:40, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
User:jaob70
Calm down buddy it isn't vandalism. I wasn't restoring vandalism. Those were two reverts I made to myself. I thought I accidentally revrted something that was a legitimate edit and then I tried to undo my mistake. I have been checking the recent changes page and yes I accidentally undid edits on two user talk pages. I didn't mean to. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaob70 (talk • contribs) 05:05, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
I deleted your message from the page because you were wrong. My edit summary said "pop" because I was updating the population figure. - The Immaculate06:06, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
What are you talking about? Did you actually read the section I removed from Talk:Race debate? I suspect not, it was a rambling essay soapboxing the personal theories of an editor why has consistently made personal attacks against other editors and racist comments on talk pages. I was merely following the rule that wikipedia is not a soapbox. For doing this I get warned by you? I'm just really angry now, possibly your warn was not a mistake and you knew exactly what you were doing? You think personal attacks and soapboxing on talk pages are OK? Alun06:39, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Alun, Wikipedia is supposed to be non-ideological. For instance, a crime is a crime, hate or no hate. A rule violation is simply, a rule violation. To approach it otherwise, would create a cabal of friends in high places (admins) and lobbyists in low places (editors). Besides, you are a hypocrite for attacking this neutral person. WP:Assume good faith. Savignac06:45, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
But it does you no good, when the vast majority of edit disputes you yourself commit to, involve your own attitude expressions, such as getting in Rjd0060's face. He's disinterested and you come off like a fanatic. Savignac06:45, 6 November 2007 (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.
Thanks for the help
Thank you for reverting the vandalism of my user page done in retaliation for enforcing Wikipedia policies. Your efforts resulted in the permanent ban of the offender. I appreciate it. Bsherr18:40, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Look at this
"All tourists should be wary that a well-respected and time-weathered stereotype of malodorous Gringos and Europeans has its trappings in reality. Hygiene is a vital part of social integration and manners in Costa Rica, and uncouth, unclean persons will be treated with some trepidation by Costa Ricans"[10] lol ~Jeeny(talk)23:53, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Sockpuppet
Hi again. Judging by your user page, it looks like the vandal is on a dynamic IP (or at least have access to more than one static IP), so the indef blocking discussion is moot anyway. I will keep an eye on your user page too. Cheers TigerShark00:32, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Yep, I just noticed that. So what happens now? How can that happen? It was still the username, not an IP that made that last vandalism on Rjd's user page, during a block? ~Jeeny(talk)00:36, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Oh, nevermind it wasn't the "same" username, but a variation of the last one (yet the same person). So, indef blocks don't work? That pretty much sucks in this case. Oh well. And people like me, who is an angel has to sit out a block for the whole time. lol ~Jeeny(talk)00:40, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Well the underlying IP is only auto-blocked for 24 hours. The auto-block will be refreshed every time the blocked account try to edit, but if a new account is created the auto-block will not be refreshed. In this case the user must have a dynamic IP, as they were able to edit within the first 24 hours. Cheers TigerShark00:47, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the fix - I will study it since I have tried in vain to make sense out of the Wiki instructions 9for this and for other procedures). Sensei4805:24, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Thank you
Thanks very much for the barnstar. It always feels nice to get some encouragement. I tend to think we don't do it enough as a community. All the best. Alun07:20, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Skull Valley Elementary School District
Thanks for your note, your suggestion on the above makes perfect sense. I'll follow that line in furture. RegardsPaste09:51, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Working Man's Barnstar
For all your hard work following BetacommandBot around and fixing image rationales, helping others, your work on AfDs, and reverting vandalism, I award you the Working Man's Barnstar. Thank you for all your hard work! See your user page ~Jeeny(talk)22:04, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for supporting me in my recent RFA which did not pass at (18/27/10). I will be sure to improve my editing skills and wait until someone nominates me next time. Thank you for you comments! Tiptoety00:09, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
You may be right that it does assert notability, and maybe i was to quick to tag it, but i almost think it would have been deleted. I am pretty sure it is a hoax as there is no sources on google, and i can not find much about him. Tiptoety23:56, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Oh no, i know that CSD A7 does not apply to hoaxes, but i do think it is speedy delete criteria, and if not like you said AfD, or PROD. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tiptoety (talk • contribs) 00:01, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
Ha, we are confusing each other, i am agreeing with you that i should not have tagged it for CSD A7, and was agreeing with your tagging. Tiptoety00:05, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
No worries, i should have read the article more, it was just written so badly that only after the 3rd time reading it did i get that it says he created some internet thing. Anyways, thanks for your help. Tiptoety00:08, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
Also if you look at the user page of the user that created the article, it states that he/she is Jon Muncaster, which makes me think it is even more of a hoax. Tiptoety00:18, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
Strange, i just had the most odd edit conflict with you, i tagged this article for A7, and it said i had tagged it, then after it said i had tagged it wikipedia said that i had an edit conflict. Usually TW stops tagging before WP can say theres an edit conflict, we seem to be the tagging team, i keep getting in edit conflicts with you! Tiptoety01:03, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
Work permit
Oh, I get it, so any edits which you don't agree with can't be modified? Take a look back at the original material and then what is being posted. The US embassy references contain NOTHING relevant to what is being footnoted. If people are so sensitive about links, then they should come up with their own material instead of modifying material which was placed there by someone else (even with commercial intent). So, take out the commercial reference and the resulting material and come up with something else. Would seem to me that the other content would be copyrighted. VivaBelgivaBE 10 November 2007 (UTC)
Actually, you are a little misguided here. You cannot just delete legitimate content from pages. You need to discuss these changes on the articles' talk page, before doing it. - Rjd006002:11, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
No, you are misguided. This was already done on the discussion pages and no one responded. Hence, my original question remains, and I will be in touch with the copyright owner about removal of said content. Life is not about cutting and pasting. If you don't like it, then come up with something on your own. Alas, for some folks it is much easier to comment and hide behind lists of rules than it is to come up with something original. VivaBelgicaBE 10 November 2007 (UTC)
Look, the supplied links have nothing in relation to the original information. Ergo, unless someone can find info to substitute for the original citation (i.e. the commercial link), then the entire thing should be removed. Leaving someone else's info (whatever the source) and lazily substituting a non-related site that doesn't contain remotely relevant (i.e. special work permits for highly talented people) is intelectually lazy and dishonest. So, remove it all. Otherwise, leave the footnote. Furthermore, the site does give away some info on spouse work permits and for Poland and Slovakia (I looked), so the claim by the person who substituted the US embassy pages is just plain wrong. VivaBelgicaBE 10 November 2007 (UTC)
...then I will put the original footnote back in and not blank the info. VivaBelgicaBE 10 November 2007 (UTC)
... well, what can I say, I'm Belgian. We're always quite earnest and serious... VivaBelgicaBE 10 November 2007 (UTC)
I just wanted to let you know that I was careful in my search. There were plenty of names that matched but none that matched the description in our Wiki article. Thanks for making sure though, its always good to be clear on these things. Good luck editing! Gonzo fan2007talk ♦ contribs04:35, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
multiple AFDs
Hey, I actually did find the group AFD section and have been setting up a bulk afd for all the really obvious deletes (I'll post seperate ones for the articles that at least try to establish notability), but thanks for the heads-up... it's a daunting task for my fingers Epthorn06:09, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
Hey, yes I plan to. I am not finished tagging them all quite yet- as soon as I do, I will create the page, which will be so that people don't start before I actually have everything collated there. Some seem to have been tagged by other people, and some seem to still be prod...ed(?) but I should be done with the rest soon. Epthorn06:47, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
Okay, I think I correctly posted everything on the AFD page. Hopefully I won't have to deal with all of them again soon...Epthorn07:38, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for cleaning up my mess. I guess after the 20th afd I started twitching. Glad I didn't manage to accidentally delete any of your pages.Epthorn15:27, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
Hmm... next time I guess I'll make sure to create smaller clusters of deletions, to avoid controversy and the secondary/primary split which I was not aware of. I guess people are more protective of their high schools than elementary schools. Live and learn... Epthorn19:42, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
I think you might be mistaken about 74.244.11.122 being involved as a sockpuppet/puppeteer in this instance of Legacy7. 74.244.11.122 has only made one edit, which was reverted, and it seems that they haven't been involved since. However Legacy7/70.46.67.98 (note the different IP address) started out trying to add information about the Wreck Parade that wasn't appropriate for the article and got into an edit war with the article's main contributors using those two accounts. He hasn't tried to obfuscate that he's the same person editing from two different accounts. I think that 74.244.11.122 just was so unfortunate to have made a good faith, but unsourced edit that was also reverted within the span of this edit war, and now Legacy7/70.46.67.98 is using it as another means of disruption by reverting back to it to make some kind of point (as evidenced by his edit summary on the edit that you reverted). Does that make sense? LaMenta318:43, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
:74.244.11.122 added this, which was removed. It was then re-added by 70.46.67.98 here which was removed and re-added again by Legacy7 here. All accounts became active within a couple days of eachother, and all edits on all 3 are to related subjects. I think they are all the same. - Rjd006018:49, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
Yes, but 74.244.11.122, if you look at his contribs, all of his edits pertained to Lyman Hall. He actually put the same content on that article, which was reverted, and no one has put it back since. I would think that if he were the same as Legacy7/70.46.67.98 an edit war would be going on there, as well. Particularly since 74.244.11.122 seemed to be more focused on Lyman Hall than the traditions aspect of things. If nothing else, though, if you are right, I think you've got the puppeteer/puppet order mixed up anyway. 70.46.67.98 was the first to make any contentious edits, but generally, the registered account is considered to be the puppeteer of any suspicious IPs, which would be Legacy7. LaMenta319:00, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
You're explaining yourself just fine, I just have a different take on things. However, if you run a WHOIS on each IP, it's physically unlikely that they're related. 70.46.67.98 is an IP owned by Florida Digital, located in Maitland, FL. 74.244.11.122 is owned by Bellsouth, located in Atlanta, GA. There is the off-chance that one is a meatpuppet, though generally those don't crop up in simple cases like this. LaMenta319:13, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
I think since you're the person who made the report, you can change it up as you see necessary given the new information you now have. Just make a comment to that effect on the suspected socks page. I'm pretty sure there's no problem with that. LaMenta305:02, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
Hmm...Well, still make a comment about that, then try to flag down a currently active admin, preferably one who usually deals with the sock page. Barring that, try flagging down any admin. They should be able to help. LaMenta305:09, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
I suppose so, but as you're the one who had the "initial" suspicions, it might be good to clarify that you see what I mean and that the suspicion should be -X-. Now that I think about it, I think that you could probably move the page to the correct sockpuppeteer name, unless only admins can move pages in Wikipedia space. I forget. LaMenta305:14, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
I didn't mean to offend you just give you a friendly heads up. Sorry for anything that might of offended you. See ya soon. --J-doggerz04:18, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
Uh...
I wasn't trying to indirectly comment on your point, or imply that being confused as an admin is not a legitimate concern. Looking at this from their (J-doggerz) perspective; they may have just been trying to be funny by making obviously false claims. Since there are people who may have actually made that many, it's not a stretch to imagine J-doggerz getting flak from other editors or regarding other user boxes. Anynobody05:02, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
This page has been speedily deleted earlier today, after a number of warning to about 4 anon editors. It's now back and the article creator is being tenacious in blanking warning from his/her user page and in removing all tags from the article page. Are you an admin? Can you get this under control? Regards—G716 <T·C> 06:35, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback. At the time I added the PROD, it wasn't a template, just an article 2007-2008 NBA Western Conference Pacific Division standings. According to the history page User:Sonoran dweller moved it to a template shortly after I added the PROD, probably in response to the message I left on the user talk page. My justification for the PROD, which was on the article's discussion page, apparently got lost in the move. My basic reasoning remains: the information in the template is duplicated in 2007-08 NBA season#NBA standings, and I was trying to eliminate the duplicity and the need to maintain two articles for what will be daily changes. It's also interesting that there's a template for the NBA Pacific Division but not for the other divisions. Should I just drop this or do you think it is worth pursuing? Truthanado14:07, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
Following is FYI. Feel free to comment and weigh in on the discussion.
A big brother 9 page has been started. IT says that the show will premiere in February. I found a webpage supporting this, but I don't know how reliable it is.[11]Seth7121:54, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
I hope that nobody named Brett Roberge actually does anything worth mentioning. Hey, why don't you become an admin so you can salt things, too. the_undertowtalk07:13, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
One bad comment can be explained. I would refrain from using the Dick essay altogether though. AfDs can get heated, and your comment isn't really a red flag - just the sign of a lapse in judgment. Keep me apprised of the salts and the vandals. the_undertowtalk07:28, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
I've semi-protected your talk page for one hour due to the amount of vandalism. If you dis-agree let me know and I'll lift it. Happy editing. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk07:22, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. I actually requested protection via RFPP but wasn't familiar with the policy on user talk pages and asked for a log protection period, so it was denied. Anyhow, an hour should do it, hopefully. Thanks again, Rjd006007:24, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Hey I just want to drop by and say that I went ahead and did the think User:Howard the Duck suggested for Infobox colors and swapped HoH and "three". HoH is now the green color and "three" is now yellow. And I switched all Nominations/Voting tables over to the same colors. I just wanted to tell you so you didn't think it was vandalism plus only you commented on the situation and this may attract more people to the discussion. I think I left something in all the edit summaries. Also have you talked to Jeeny? I haven't heard anything about her since BB8 US ended. ♪♫Alucard16♫♪02:39, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
I can't wait for an early season. That's one thing good coming out of this writer's strike. I will have to check out her page. ♪♫Alucard16♫♪04:59, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Barnstar
Thank you for the recognition. While the article was a mere stub, material offered in the AfD, on the school's website and in some internet searches found claims of notability that allowed expansion, as is possible for most high schools. I greatly appreciate your reconsideration based on the material added. Thanks again! Alansohn16:10, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
JO
My friend in the Navy told me thats what him and his friends say for jerking off. He's been in the Navy for over 5 years I think he knows what he's talking about —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nutmegardee (talk • contribs) 17:55, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Note about hodgepodge
Hello, I noticed that you like to fight vandalism and I thought that I might be able to help. I have complied the best vandalism fighting tools into a single javascript file that I call "Hodgepodge" and I thought you might be interested in it. The file, once added to your monobook, can help you fight vandalism much much easier and quicker than without the scripts. The tool can be found here: User:Wikidudeman/Hodgepodge. Read the page for information on how to install as well as compatibility issues. If you have any questions then please leave me a note on my talkpage. Thanks.Wikidudeman(talk)18:06, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Re: Quick tags for speedy deletion
I'll take your advice. I do try to use discretion in making quick tags, but if something strikes me as obviously improper, I'll go ahead and do it. I have no problem with you removing the tag, and although the article ultimately was deleted, I don't think I was the one who re-tagged it (it's been a couple of weeks, I don't remember for certain). Xymmax22:33, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for reverting my userpage vandalism!
Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Your nom sparked a feeding frenzy per WP:HEY. Sometimes a nom at Afd forces bystanders to intervene and fix a rotten article. Now, move on, folks, there's nothing to see here. Bearian01:21, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Macedonia is recognized as Repubic of Macedonia by 121 countries ,including United states ,Japan ,russia ,China ,Canada etc..Fyromizing us is ugly ,pejorative and is not acceptible. Our language is macedonian ,not macedonian slav?!? If i edit Fyrom to Republic of Macedonia or Macedonia that is not vandalism!That is name of state ,not name of pet.It seems that just our neibours Greece have problem with that and nobody else...Mo1981 (talk) 00:28, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
If the "appropriate response" was to file a report, then part of the "appropriate response" is to file it on all of the involved parties, not singling one out. As far as I'm concerned, removing sourced material from Wikipedia is vandalism and that's exactly what the other editor did. So in the face of an editor engaged in active vandalism and one whose response to a lecture you didn't care for, you choose to try to bust the latter and remain silent on the vandal.
As for trivia sections, I will point out once again that WP:TRIVIA is concerned with content, not the name. If you had any idea how much trivia I've integrated into articles and how many unencyclopedic "in popular culture" articles I've AFDed you would understand that the idea that I'm some sort of trivia-fiend is laughable. This information is not trivial, it is encyclopedic and this day and a half of sturm und drang about it is ridiculous. Otto4711 (talk) 01:52, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi. I am trying to put together a checkuser request in relation to the "Pee Wee Herman" vandal, with a view to getting the underlying IPs blocked (I have range blocked some IPs used by the vandal(s) with limited success). I am putting together a list of sockpuppets and their edits here. As I see that you have been involved in dealing with this vandalism, I am letting you know and please feel free to contribute to the list. Cheers TigerShark (talk) 23:34, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks!
Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Thanks, I know that the square brackets are not neccessary, they were something that I mistakenly added during my first few edits on Wikipedia. I decided to continue adding them partially as a reminder for when dealing with new users that they won't always be familiar with the way that Wikipedia works and that I was once (still am in many ways) in the same position - and partially just out of habit. Having said that, if there is a technical reason why it's not a good idea I have no objections to stopping. [[Guest9999 (talk) 01:43, 20 November 2007 (UTC)]]
(Created section for comment)
How can a user without ONE EDIT be a sock? HUH?!
Question about sourcing
Good to talk to you, Rjd0060. Perhaps you can provide some advice, leadership on a question I haven't been able to get answered. The Jackson Free Press site has run into, essentially, two sourcing issues. One is over circulation/readership numbers. Allstarecho (who doesn't like the paper for personal reasons, but I digress) is insisting that the entry cannot point back to the papers's wiki, where contact info is provided to confirm those numbers. Those numbers are verified in numerous materials, but not published in a "publication" online. Is it Wikipedia's policy, then, that the numbers aren't valid here because they don't have a URL? And does this policy apply to all publications with a Wikipedia page evenly?
Secondly, he does not want the JFP referencing its own site in which its founders say that they named the newspaper after a civil rights-era paper. Clearly, that is the most primary source one could get on why the owners chose the name. Thus, do the owners have to be quoted saying that to a third publication in order for the information to be included in Wikipedia?
Oh, and finally, allstarecho, said that blogs, apparently even for newspapers, can never be used to source anything in Wikipedia. Is that a correct policy?
There has been a warning box added to the top of the site about using sourcing, even though the only questions seem to be the ones resolved above. Could you check all this out and give guidance? People at the paper do not wish to do anything wrong, but do wish accurate information to be stated about it, without negative bias behind it. Thank you for your help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jfpwebguy (talk • contribs) 15:06, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
Did you read what you re-reverted? The edits had destroyed and duplicated content and tried to promote "Loss Prevention Foundation", which is not useful to the article. Oh well, someone else re-re-reverted it.
--82.182.37.3 (talk) 22:03, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
Thank you so much for your prompt removal of the unpleasantness on my talk page last night, much appreciated. Cheers, nancy 11:10, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
Really? Oh, well I just went from experience. I have seen vandals delete the warnings on their page and it was not only reverted, but another warning was added. Sorry for any trouble. -Yancyfry (talk) 05:29, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay in getting back to you; you actually messaged me while I was writing you a message, which meant I had to rewrite my message, which I didn't have time to do because I had to run, and on and on and on >.<
At any rate, thank you for your message. Regarding your concerns, I actually caught your change when I was going back re-checking my tags. I understand your concern about tagging pages too soon and see where you are coming from, but I have to respectfully disagree for a few reasons.
The first reason is the effect a tagging produces. Since I use Twinkle to tag, as you know the original creators of pages I mark for CSD are notified with templates specific to the type of tag--in this case, a template with a link to WP:BAND was dropped on the user's page. As it's not uncommon for users to post a line or two in their article and then move on or log off, I find that speed actually is of the essence if you want to catch them while they're still online, as doing so produces one or a combination of three effects:
The user does nothing and an administrator deals with the page as is
The user adds a {{hangon}} tag and either tries to explain why their topic is all right or works to bring it up to speed
The user asks on your talk page why you tagged their article for deletion
The first case does not happen every time the page is tagged while the user is online, but it happens 100% of the time when the user is offline. The second two cases, meanwhile, can only happen when the user is online, and I think they both produce a desirable effect. The second effect means that the user edits the article with a goal--they understand what is lacking in their article, and they have an opportunity to do something about keeping it. And since I always respond to users who ask why I tagged their pages, the third effect means that the user learns more about Wikipedia policy and gets some one-on-one advice on how to write a successful article. In short, the effect of rapid tagging is a net positive effect.
The second reason for the fast tagging is the content of the article in question. A new article about a band (especially one formed in the past year or two) that doesn't mention a label, album, or effect of the band on a local music scene in the first version is going to be about a non-notable band. After all, if the author is a member of the band in question their first instinct is going to be to mention their success--if they're a fan, they're going to mention either how cool the band is or where they heard them. In those cases I'll take the time to check it out, but when no such claims are made in the first go-around you can basically guarantee that the article is unsalvageable.
And finally, there's the guidelines. The section you're referring to in WP:CSD reads as follows:
"Before nominating an article for speedy deletion, consider whether it could be improved or reduced to a stub; if so, speedy deletion is probably inappropriate. Contributors sometimes create articles over several edits, so try to avoid deleting a page too soon after its creation if it appears incomplete. Users nominating a page for speedy deletion should specify which criteria the page meets and consider notifying the page's creator."
I do my fair share of stub and notability tagging during newpage patrol and top it off with return visits to pages I've tagged for CSD. Sometimes these return trips involve me retagging articles and warning the authors for deleting them, occasionally they find me removing a tag from an improved article, and every now and then something a little less expected happens. While I am keen to make sure that what needs to stay on Wikipedia stays on Wikipedia, given what it takes to actually delete content I consider the high potential return to be gained through prompt sorting to more than balance out the low risk of an inappropriate tag, and I think this philosophy adheres to the spirit of the guidelines.
I know I'm probably just preaching to the choir and that you may very well come back with irrefutable proof that my fast tagging is inappropriate, but I wanted you to know that while I appreciate your concern and the time you took to leave me a note, there is indeed a method behind my madness :) Take care! --jonny-mt(t)(c)Tell me what you think!13:55, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
Hey, I was looking at the RFA and noticed that you voted twice on the RFA for support at #12 and #27. Just thought you might like to correct that before anyone hassles you! Happy editing! Icestorm815 (talk) 03:10, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
FYI, I have struck out your duplicate vote with a note stating that you had already voted above. ♠PMC♠ 03:29, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Nah, no worries. Most people who try to duplicate votes don't do it so blatantly, heh, so I figured it had to be an honest mistake. Happy editing =) ♠PMC♠ 16:35, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
I happened upon Neptunekh's request and found it very strange. So here's my own strange thought: Is there a reason that person asked you that? Because it looks awfully random (yes, even more random than my question).Wryspy (talk) 18:34, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
You are incorrect it was not a personal point of view. It was put under the heading controversy and is echoed by many—Preceding unsigned comment added by Davey c20071987 (talk • contribs) 22:06, 23 November 2007
The blog cited was part of the article before DaveyC's vandalism, and I believe WP:RS is inapplicable because the blog referenced is not being used as authority for facts, but rather to show that certain fans, including the person who writes that blog, have reservations about MyFC's takeover of Ebbsfleet. I don't think we should need to wait until a newspaper article, or the like, reports that differences exist and itself cites to blogs, like the one here. The blog cited is a reliable source for showing the opinion of its author. (BTW, I am not that author, and disagree strongly with his views, but I thought it was important for NPOV for it to be in there.) Friejose (talk) 17:55, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
You said on my talk page, "The blog is not reliable per our guidelines. The blog is a POV piece, and statements souced by it have been removed." Okay, but that misses the point. The blog was not cited for a factual proposition, i.e. MyFootballClub will do this or that tomorrow, and has done this or that yesterday. Rather, the blog was cited to show that opinions on a certain issue are divergent. Obviously, a blog is non-reliable and secondhand for facts, but when it is being cited to show the opinion that is being propunded in that blog, it is a perfectly good source. And that's how the citation referencing a blog was being used here. Friejose (talk) 18:11, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
Hey I want to thank you for editing the URLs of the STIDS page.
If the definition does not get deleted on me, I'll work more on building the page and its inside meaning.
Any NON Tech Support person (would) want it removed as seeing the term VIRUS only. But it's not. We as TECH ( guru's ) use this term and use it often. If you are able to LINK definitions from TERM to TERM that will help in the Definition DETAILS.
Thanks Again,
Outboundglitch (talk) 07:37, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
Please tell me you understand what Im talking about?
The average pc user does NOT understand this kind of talk. Thats why Im having such a hard time pushing the issue. The users flagging the definition for deletion are not understanding the terminology used here.
Outboundglitch (talk) 07:44, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
Bit of confusion on my request at AFD - was looking for you to denominate AFD as i didn't intend to have it deleted - but leavethe deletion template on AFD as an example. Both were removed. 72.197.162.140 (talk) 01:45, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Hello Rjd0060
You left me an automated message after my edits to Bruno Maddox's page - please see my full explanation of my reasons and methodology on his Talk page. And also the message I left after the last time my edits were reverted. This is not vandalism and I'd appreciate it if you could look at my edits Pokrovka (talk) 07:26, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
I wrote an article about Margareta Svensson. It upsets me that it is deleted, but even more so that there are harassments from so called administers that apparently can say whatever they like, with no knowledge at all and no interest in finding out either. THOSE FALSE ALLEGATIONS will be what people will read about Margareta Svensson, not her extraordinary international career as a singer-pianist. There was NOTHING in that article that wasn't true, and if you administers were half-way professional you would find that out.
I had written I think three sentences when I had a message that she was not notable. And yes I did delete that message, and I only deleted that ONE, because it was not relevant. The article was not up. I couldn't imagine that someone who could write such a rude false remark after me having written almost nothing at all, could be favored. Is Wikipedia a game to see who can stand unfair beatings and just turn the other cheek?
I may have made the mistakes of creating an account with the name Margareta Svensson, because I thought that was how it was supposed to be done. And I also uploaded much before it was the final article, because I wanted to see that it worked. I didn't think anyone was that interested in my work that I got a comment long before I was done. Another lengthy rude comment, complained how I had worded a sentence, and I made changes to accommodate.
One comment that it couldn't be valid because references were in Swedish - I must say that arrogance does not even begin to describe such a comment. English is the language that is used by the world, but most people in the world does NOT have English as their first language.
It seems that administers are people with too much time on their hands who have nothing better to do than to quickly, within minutes of first activity, beat a new person down with rude, false remarks. Shouldn't you be interested instead?
But being mean may be how you get your satisfaction? You are no better than bullying kids on the playground.
I am new to Wikipedia, and thought the best way to learn would be to write an article from scratch about a subject that I am uniquely qualified to address. I have not yet reached the phase where I explore the pages looking to make edits, or involve myself in back and forth with admins and users. I appreciate the work that you and others like you do, but it's frustrating for new people like me when at the very beginning I get tagged for speedy deletion, and I'm fighting my way out of a corner from the outset. If I knew more about the process, for example, how long it takes and how many votes before a page is deemed unworthy and deleted, I'd be less prone to dramatic monologues like the most recent one on the discussion page for StudioBard. I want to be a productive, respected member of the Wikipedia Family, and I know that doesn't happen overnight... so please, help me reduce my stress level... offer some personal insight, and don't consider me to be a suffocating fish on the deck of the ship, frantic for breath, even if that's how I'm starting to feel... don't toss me... give me a bucket of water and let me breathe for a bit. Wikipedia can be quite overwhelming for someone new, especially when the most experienced folks around are circling for a deletion.
Studiomanager (talk) 19:44, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my page!
-Goodshoped has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Thanks, glad you like it. It makes things clearer. I was thinking about going ahead and applying it after a few more people have their say. I was thinking about applying it to the US article so we can list Marcellas as a former host before someone adds him in the same manner as the UK sidebar. Plus we can put After Dark in the list of shows since it is not currently listed in the sidebar due to it having no host. ♪♫Alucard16♫♪06:43, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Well I guess your right, were not in a hurry its very unlikely CBS is going to do anything special with Big Brother. I will leave it alone but the Australian one I will change due to Gretel Killeen leaving the show. I was just going to do the US so all three would look uniform but its fine for now. ♪♫Alucard16♫♪06:51, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
I have a suggestion for a new bot, this is a bot that automatically welcomes new users by adding the simple welcome template on their talk page, how would I put this suggestion up to the Wikipedia Administrators or High People on the Wikipedia Board?
Yeah, I've been looking out for anything that confirms that it will be on early this year. I just chat with Jeeny when I have nothing else to do. I usually edit music pages and when I don't have anything to edit I talk to her. Seth71 (talk) 22:38, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Margareta Svensson
I have only a vague recollection of this article and will have to refresh my memory before considering whether to reply, I think. Thanks for letting me know. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 23:15, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks again. I'm going to eat, do some stuff offline, and go to the store. How's this for a new sig? It's not original, I just saw someone with a similar idea, and thought it funny. Testing. - Oh no, it's Jeeny(talk)23:52, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Scott5114's RFA
Thank you for supporting me in my recent RFA nomination. Unfortunately, I have withdrawn the nom early at 17/13/3. I am presently going to undergo admin coaching in preparation for a second candidacy somewhere down the line. I hope to see your continued support in the future. Regards, —Scott5114↗07:36, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
My real name is Charlie Mannsun. "Charles Manson" is the nickname given to me by cruel juniour high mates that grew on me. So A big middle finger to them!--THIS IS CHARLES MANSON00:11, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
chatting....again
The only reason that I chat to jeeny most of the time I'm on here is that the music pages I watch are always updated before I have a chance to edit them. There's only one computer in my house and I don't get on the computer that much. If and when I do get my own computer I'm going to try and edit more. Seth71 (talk) 20:13, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Didn't notice your reply amongst the "chit chat" surrounding it. Poster keeps adding a new section every reply! Anyway, thanks for the info about the image. Good to know. Hammer1980·talk22:22, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your strong support in my recent RfA. Words nor pictures can express my heartfelt appreciation at the confidence the community has shown me. I am both heartened and humbled by this confidence. I will carry the lessons learned from the constructive criticism I have received with me as I edit Wikipedia, and heed those lessons. Special thanks to Pedro and Henrik as nominators. Special thanks to Rudget who wanted to. A very special thanks to Moonriddengirl for her eloquence and perceptiveness.
I noticed you had left a note for one of the editors who have been disrupting things at this page. Would you look at the Talk:Karyn Kupcinet page and weigh in on the problem with the anonymous IP 66.77.102.10? Thanks. Wildhartlivie00:08, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. Personally, I believe they are the same person, and I think they are anonymous accounts connected to the other regular editor to the page. We made a sock puppet request earlier in the month, but apparently the editor was gone over Thanksgiving week (first break he's taken in months), and we didn't do a good enough job in outlining the evidence. However, I've done a search on all the anon IPs listed there, plus the new one from today, and they are all in the Los Angeles area, including LAX, UCLA library, LA County Library and two from the exact same provider (socal.rr.com). It's a little creepy. I'm not really sure where to go with all of this from here. Wildhartlivie00:45, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
Personal Attacks
Hi. You warned me today about making a personal attack on another user which, granted, in the heat of the moment and after months of frustration, I finally did on another user's talk page. For that, I apologize. However, I am now being personally attacked by an anon IP on the Karyn Kupcinet talk page. As you can see from my initial response, I did not verbally attack them nor did I respond to them. In fact, I haven't engaged in any debate with them seeing as it is an anonymous IP user and I'm guessing it's the first time they've edited the page. Me and another editor have had nothing but trouble with an editor on that page for the past month or so. Last night, a new one took it upon themselves to remove sourced info because they don't agree with it. After reverting their changes, they called me an "obsessed fan" (which for the record, I'm not) and then proceeded to talk down to me on the article's talk page. Today, I get attacked and accused of things I've never done by an anonymous user. As I said, calling someone a name isn't right, but this is an ongoing battle and it's getting beyond irritating and l snapped. Me and the other editor have tried all methods to get the page protected and even have some sort of administrative help and so far, nothing has worked. Now it seems to be getting personal and slanderous. I like editing on Wikipedia and a quick check of my history will show that I contribute regularly and have had no problems with other editors in the past, but this has gone too far. I don't want to stop editing here because of a few bad apples, but I find it a bit unfair that these personal attacks and constant edit wars are allowed when basically, me and another editor are trying hard to be civil with people who are constantly rude and growing more disrespectful as the days go by. The more they're allowed to do, the bolder they are becoming. I am not attacking you personally as I know you have certain procedures to follow, but I try not to get into trouble or cause problems and I wanted you to know exactly where I'm coming from. Pinkadelica06:37, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick response. I kinda lost it for a second last night and felt that I should explain myself. Thanks for looking into the personal attacks too. Pinkadelica06:49, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
Japanese red army vid link - why did you remove it?
The video is actual news footage of the 1974 bombings the Japanese Red army carried out against Mitsubishi Heavy Industry headquarter building in 1974. Please watch the video and I am sure you will agree it is pertinent to the article. Parliamentary Funk (talk) 05:40, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
I saw this on my watchlist. Per WP:EXT I do not think it is allowed. In the first place, it would seem to violate copyright. In the second, as a ref it would be considered original research. Jeffpw (talk) 05:54, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Stop trying to teach me with your links. You probably didn't even consult another editor, you dick.
I know it can be a useful tool, but when you tag every single station in the entire state of Pennsylvania, that is just weird and puts a TON of work on editors to either revert those tags or admins to update them (if they stick). I have no problem with someone working on those articles, hell I encourage it! I just don't want to see 200 some odd stations tagged unnecessarily.
Also, the entire time (except for my last post) I have been nice, even encouraging at one point (which is rare for me). I liked the "poem" quote though. :) - NeutralHomerT:C05:41, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Like I said "except for my last post"...I lost my patience with the guy. When all you get is nonsense and a person isn't listening (and I am trying...honestly trying...to help) you lose your patience. Should have I? No, but I can only try so much. - NeutralHomerT:C05:43, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
I understand that people work off that category, but I have never seen someone tag page after page. A year and a half here (and I have seen alot) and that one...well, ya really can't be sure how to handle that. How do you handle that? I will be honest, I don't have much patience, but with newbies I try and give them as much of it as I can and benefit of the doubt (we were all newbies once). But when I seen that...I wasn't sure what to do and when the editor continued to not get what I was trying to say and throw his brand of "insult" at me (which made me laugh) I began to lose all patience.
If people can update those pages without erasing 3/4 of them, great...I'm all for it. But someone has to tell me what I should do the next time this happens (cause I have no clue...and I obviously didn't do it right this time around....again). - NeutralHomerT:C05:51, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
My reason for going to ANI was I just wasn't sure what to do. I figure an admin would know better than I, so I asked for advice :) Anywho...many thanks and I will work on keeping my cool. Take Care....NeutralHomerT:C05:59, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Okie Dokie, not a problem. Sorry about the August/January goof :) I have been here since May of 06, but that was on a different username (had to switch because of an annoying user bothering me). I should have said..."we been here a loooong time"...yeah, that would have worked. :) Oh well....I will leave the "keeping an eye" up to you. If you need any help, please feel free to leave a message on my talk page. Take Care and Enjoy Your Sunday...NeutralHomerT:C06:10, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
...and then blocked. Sheesh. The stuff that happens when you walk away from the computer for about 45mins. Oh well. Take Care....NeutralHomerT:C07:20, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
I just noticed that the user from last night was a sockpuppet. Do we revert all the edits made or leave them as is? I know on some occasions we revert everything and some we don't. Not sure what to do here. Many thanks for your input...NeutralHomerT:C01:58, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
My mistake ... it looks like you renamed it just as I was slapping an AFD tag on it with Twinkle. It's a pig in a poke anyway--apparently he's blanked it. Blueboy9615:57, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi there, I added The Fools (band) because the band is a Boston legend. I do not realy know how to add citations nor is keeping the article important to me in anyway. The article should be and is important to Wikipedia as the band is significant and notable, particulalry for people from the Northeastern USA. If you give it some time and I suspect others will add citations and sources. Otherwise, go ahead and delete it as you are apparently driven to do. Regards, --Agrofe16:27, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the advice, and I have a question to ask to you: what is the correct form to mark an article like that? If you may send me a link to a page which explain the "speedy deletions Tags" I can make a good job (because I don't wanto to make mistakes here).
For your helpfulness, for your kindness, for answering questions that others would just ignore, for being there for users, and for doing what you can where you can to make Wikipedia a better place...I present to you the Sparky Barnstar. Congrats! - NeutralHomerT:C02:32, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
how was my edit unconstructive?
Why are you people so dense? People who look for the Behemoth (band) article have to click on the disambiguation page? Where is the logic in that? Light that on fire06:58, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
I see that you are very experienced.
Do you think a website like vois.com could have a
wikipedia article? The guys want me to create an article
but I don't know if the article will have a chance.
Could you point me to wikipedia guidness to website articles?
Thanks
CBS has released their dates for Big Brother 9. The premier dates are Tuesday, February 12, 2008 at 9/8c with additional airings beginning on Wednesday, February 13, 2008 at 8/7c and Sunday, Feburary 17, 2008 at 8/7c. Here is the source [15]. I guess now that we have the dates and such we can create the article for the ninth season. ♪♫Alucard16♫♪23:27, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
There should be more sites announcing CBS's winter schedule in the upcoming weeks. The Futon Critic is a very reliable source. From my experience they are correct most of the time. ♪♫Alucard16♫♪23:37, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Here is another source for CBS's winter schedule [16] that includes Big Brother. Also CBS's main site confirms the winter edition on their homepage along with Jericho, Power of 10, and Survivor 16. ♪♫Alucard16♫♪01:38, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
I wish there was something direct from CBS too but the only thing from them is their homepage that can't be sourced. So since it is confirmed do you think we should create the page because now that it is confirmed I suspect that it won't be long before someone who can't spell properly will create the page. ♪♫Alucard16♫♪02:00, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
About BB: After Dark, I think we will hear something like maybe in January or February like closer to the premiere. Showtime released schedules on their website so in January we can view their February schedule to see if After Dark is present or not. ♪♫Alucard16♫♪18:12, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
I blocked that IP address because I interpreted its edits as made by someone with a grudge, likely circumventing a block. As I've said already it was a mistake and I should not have done it. --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 04:50, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
I've been trying to nominate an article for deletion that was previously deleted (the speedy was denied by an admin) and I'm not sure how to correctly format the AFD page. Since you've helped me before [[18]] I was wondering if you might be able to point me in the right direction. The article in question is Halogen_Software and the AFD page I created is here. I'm having trouble listing it on the deletion debate page. Thanks, and sorry for the formatting question... my days of programming and software are long behind me. Epthorn (talk) 08:09, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Gee, sorry, thanks for pointing that out. I am keen to fix the problem but as I'm not entirely familiar with archived talk pages, I was wondering whether it would be better to move the archives or to just redirect the links on the current talk page? Thanks, •97198talk10:29, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Help, I'm trapped! lol. I don't know how to get back on line. Although there were some hints on the wikibreak enforcer page that let's one know how to bypass it. But, I'm stupid and so lost. I have to search for my username to find you. lol. Oh well, I guess this must be a "sign" from the higher power. lol. Meaning I should stay the heck away from this place. Thanks for the welcome. :p Jeeny04:57, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
I reverted the edits on her user and talk page to the last edits known to be done by her or someone she trusts. I see no evidence on any of her contributions that she actually would have made those edits. One summary said "See User:Picaroon for confirmation", but there is nothing on his page from anyone who made any edits to her pages. Unless you have an email from her stating that she made personal attacks in her edit summaries, I think it is better to treat this as vandalism from that Haydan person again. Jeffpw (talk) 09:04, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Wishing you and yours the very best of the holiday season. May the coming year bring you peace, joy, health and happiness. God bless us, every one!Jeffpw (talk) 20:02, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
sorry
Sorry again. I would e-mail him, but he doesn't specify his e-mail. I'm trying to work on it. Again sorry. I'll stop cause I feel like I'm getting on your bad side. Seth71 (talk) 00:30, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
I would contrbute to wiki more, but there is only 1 computer in the house and my mom's on it during the day. I try to contribute the best I can. I check t osee if there are any edits to make and everything seems to be okay. I'm trying to put up a picture for a page I've created right now. Sony Urban Music The Hayden thing is complicated I know it. I've just been trying to get stuff out of him to find out why he does the things he does. I've e-mailed jeeny about it to see what she thinks, but I don't know when she'll answer back. <rm PI> Seth71 (talk) 00:43, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Since this IP apparently does not meet the criteria for abuse reports, how can the warning stating "This IP address, 144.226.173.68, is registered to Sprint. In the event of vandalism from this address, efforts should be made to contact Sprint to report abuse, which can be done here. Contact information can be viewed in the WHOIS report." on the user's talk page be removed? That message must have been put on there by a prankster. GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 15:10, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
With all due respect, Rjd0060, I think you are letting your loyalty to Jeeny get in the way of your objectivity. Yes, I went to ANI when I realized Jeeny was using an alternate account. I was her mentor, and the terms of the mentorship (which I brokered to get her unblocked) clearly stated that I would call for an administrator if she was disrupting the project. Using profane edit summaries while editing under an alternate identity is clearly disruptive. And now Jeeny is disrupting it again by changing an image that is on over 100 user pages. I'm sorry if you think I am disloyal to a friend, but my loyalty lies with this project. Jeffpw (talk) 06:28, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
False and hurtful allegations
Please stop and think before criticising other user's contributions. I am doing this because at the moment the way the date formats work in Wikipedia is U.S. centric, in breach of the long standing policy that all variants of English have equality in Wikipedia. The redirects will allow people to use British English dates in auto-generated footnotes without creating red links. If you check you will note that such red links exist for most days in 2007, and for some dates in other years. They will proliferate in the future. I have asked the user who has made a false and hurtful attack on me for this constructive contribution to Wikipedia to make an unreserved apology to me. LukeHoC (talk) 17:08, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
What are you in favour of, red links, or U.S. centrism
The short answer is that I don't know. It's usually fast. I'd take care of it, but I'm on vacation with my laptop and don't have the list moderation password with me, and I can't remember it. Phil Sandifer (talk) 00:25, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
thanks for helping me with the archieve thing.Would have done it myself, but this is the first I've been on this week. Seth71 (talk) 00:30, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Hello! Thank you very much for the revert of the vandalism on the Iranian peoples article. This IP has been all over several articles removing sourced content. I keep reverting, but I do not want to be banned for 3RR and also this IP keeps changing so I can't get him blocked. He is also vandalizing the following articles (removing referenced content):
Actually, there is a Wikipedia page which says that one isn't to refer to user's past blocks to try to gain the upper hand. Since you like to stick to the rules so much, please stop trying to use rather unoriginal tactics to goad me into an argument. If you wish to lecture on "civility", then feel free to refrain from making comments like "You should try it sometime". This is the pot calling the kettle black, but if you don't like the truth then you're talking to the wrong person. This specific user has been causing nothing but hassle on Wikipedia, and more to the point been giving me hassle. Then, I have to put up with you accusing me of being the one causing hassle. LuciferMorgan (talk) 00:52, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
For the record here, the user has removed a message I put here. They can refer to the edit history to see that message. In response to "I am not going to argue with you", I feel these are the words of someone who tried being argumentative but is now backing down. If you wish to be civil to people in future, do not leave short comments on their page. Even though to you your message was civil, to me it was extremely uncivil and the use of the word "please" rather patronising. As far as I am concerned, Rock Soldier is a sockpuppet. I even reported his disruptive edits to ANI, only to have administrators accuse me of actually being disruptive. My experience of admins is that most of them aren't that good in their job, and that's why I refrain from such places as the ones you named. I do not even know how to use them, or how they work. LuciferMorgan (talk) 01:03, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Mika Edwards
Looks like I was wrong about Mika Edwards; she apparently does exist. The claim that she worked for the TV station was removed by an IP address, so that info might have been false. But the rest of the article might be legit. I kept and updated the prod tag because, in my opinion, she still isn't notable. --brewcrewer(yada, yada)02:01, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Well I am from Afghanistan myself and very familiar with the community in America. I know that Fariba Nawa is barely known, she is notable, but not known. If anyone disagrees, they would complain, but so far have not. If anyone disagrees, I will discuss it further with them on the talk page. KabuliTajik (talk) 04:48, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Yes, and wrongfully so. I know what I'm doing and I am more familiar with these people and how famous they are than you are, with all due respect. KabuliTajik (talk) 04:53, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
I am aware of concensus. There are only a few editors involved in this article and they will understand the reasoning of my edit. If not, they will object, I'll put it back then discuss. KabuliTajik (talk) 04:56, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
You are already aware that the image is up for deletion, so you should understand that it might as well be removed. Again, I was right about the image and you can read on up on her, do a Google search and you'll realize she is not famous. I was once a senior editor, so please have more faith in me. KabuliTajik (talk) 04:58, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
I assume you have noticed the above account is being used to disparage me, and has a redirect on their userpage to go to mine? Just that you left civility warnings on my page, not their one! Whitstable (talk) 15:57, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Not a problem at all - though whoever is behind the impersonators shows no sign of slowing down at the moment. Have a good one Whitstable (talk) 16:43, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
List of U.S. towns with foreign country names
I don't understand why I need multiple citations... isn't it easy to see that the names of these towns are also names of countries? Do I need a source that backs up the fact that names such as "Mexico" and "Peru" are indeed countries? All of them have Wikipedia articles about them... Thank you for your help! ~ Triberocker (talk) 05:23, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
RfA thanks
Dear Rjd0060, here is a little note to say thank you for your kind support on my request for adminship which succeeded with a final result of (72/19/6).
Now that I am a sysop, do not hesitate to contact me with any queries you have. I would be glad to help you along with the other group of kind and helpful administrators.
I see... How does that work though? Does it just detect that those users are all using the same IP? Or is there some way to create new accounts while logged in that I'm unaware of? Equazcion•✗/C •05:44, 3 Jan 2008 (UTC)
Waddaya know. I've been here for over a year and never knew that. Thanks :) Equazcion•✗/C •05:48, 3 Jan 2008 (UTC)
Sure, but if you are going to make some "secret sockpuppets" for later use, it may be best to log out first...LOL, I needed that laugh. - Rjd0060 (talk) 05:48, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Ha yeah... well no one ever accused vandals of being college-educated. Equazcion•✗/C •05:51, 3 Jan 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know about the image thing in my sandbox. I'll get rid of them asap and put them in the actual article when it's done. Reb (talk) 17:05, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks again. I've used that example gif now. If you don't mind my asking, what do you think of what I've done with the article in general? I'm using Sports in Minnesota as a format. Reb (talk) 17:25, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
RfA thanks
Thank you for voting in my RfA, which passed nearly unanimously with 46 support, 1 oppose, and 0 neutral. Thanks for supporting me!
Thanks for the reminder! The vandal was indeed actioned, and I've now closed out the case. Not sure what else to do besides removing it from the main report page list and updating the case notes. Let me know if I closed it out ok... Dreadstar†16:23, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
The (HANGON) was left on the page, and, per directions, a positive defense of the validity and importance of the band was left on the talkpage for the SECOND iteration of the band's page.
It is the presumptuousness of certain Admins which rankles, we all have fields of ignorance (lack of knowledge), and if one's lack of knowledge about, say, the Garage-rock scene in the Pacific Northwest in the 1980s,
happens to be wide and deep, then why in acts of counterintuition, delete contribs which reduce such topical ignorance?
"Admin X" professes an interest to the point of self-declared expertise about, say, "True Crime novels" down to the point of, possibly, having a framed lock of Ann Rule's hair (complete with a notarized C.O.A.).
"Admin X" however, knows NOTHING about the Garage rock scene in the 1980s (inclusive of being ignorant about what model of Vox guitar Danny Demiankow played on "Inside Out".)
YET, said "Admin X", being ignorant about the field of Garage rock, counterintuitively deletes a page contributing to the knowledge about Garage rock.
Begging the question: "Is wikipedia about knowledge or random pissing matches?"
Oooo.....looks like fun, and why, what a nice user they are, not :). Well, if you ever feel up to it, i would be willing to co-nom or nom you. Just let me know. Tiptoetytalk05:19, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
My goodness, I was doing Recent Changes patrol and saw all those edits to your talk page by one person that looks very much like a troll. Did you report it? →GeeAlice♥05:19, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for the barnstar. I generally stay out of such discussions, but with the RfA talk full of it recently and with some comments to newer users not being as helpful as possible, I figure I can do my part to ensure that users who want to help aren't scared off. At any rate, thanks again for the recognition. Cheers, SorryGuy Talk 04:56, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
I am sorry, I must have missed that requirement. I apologize for the inconvenience. The problem is that the user switch IP over and over, which would make it nearly impossible to post enough warnings to get even one of the addresses blocked. But thanks anyway, I will try my best! Do you have any suggestions on how to go about this? It is clearly the same user as I have seen the same changes being made from different addresses. --τις (talk) 21:26, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your help. I have to apologize again, because I thought my abuse report could result in a range block. I guess I will have to read ahead a bit before starting to file reports. :) I just got so frustrated when the pages were vandalized much faster than I could revert them, especially when taking all the IP addresses into account. However, as the vandalism is not active at the moment, I now had the time to add warnings on nine of the user pages. Hopefully, this will speed up the blocking process the next time. Thanks again! --τις (talk) 23:28, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Re: Your username
Heh, well I never really liked Osgood. He only showed up this year but Hasek has gotten better and better.. two straight shutouts. He was also third in the Western Conference (NHL) voting. Besides, he's almost 43 and can play at a top level. Don't expect Luongo calibre, he's out of his prime. Hasek was always a good goalie since 1994. ;) --Hasek is the best (talk) 23:22, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, it's tricky getting it right! Any how I'm leaving everyone else to beat each other up on the discussion and I'm going to do something more useful now. Sorry about plonking it on your user sub page before I realise people were transcluding it BTW. Eeek! Best Wishes. Pedro : Chat 16:48, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Wannabe Kate
It's extremely slow when you get into tens of thousands of edits, and was only implemented to combat the (now mostly non-existemt) replication lag. Will(talk)18:15, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
It's late at night and I'm ADHD. Those don't mix. I try and find humor and found it absurd how he didn't get the message. I'm so sorry. I never have read the rules that regard stuff like calling someone a dumbass. Sorry.
Who are you to say that my changes constitute vandalism? I had Wiki words in there that pointed directly to the topics being discussed. While I was unable to provide online references, I have multiple print media references in my private library. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Washingtonlover (talk • contribs) 06:08, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Reply
I just realized the proposal has a problem; should it be 30 days after the account has been blocked, or 30 days after the last comment was posted? If it's the former, the criterion can be followed easily, but if it's the latter, we'll have categories that would be hard to clear out completely. —Kurykh02:43, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
From the Powercorp website. The image I used was on a page that has changed its contents, but a smaller (appears to be exactly the same) image can still be found on a different page within the website. [19]Renewable Research (talk) 05:24, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, I am still learning how to use wiki (if it isn't already obvious)!! I am currently editing / working on a page that the image will accompany. Not sure if you can see my personal page but if you can you will see the proposed article/page. I hope to have it approved and posted within the next day or two. Renewable Research (talk) 05:40, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
I already have TW and I have no complaints about that. I just want to see what the new one is like. If it isn't special I may just ask them to take it back. lol. - Rjd0060 (talk) 01:09, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Yea, i use Twinkle as well, and over all i really like it, the downside to this program is it does not redirect you to the vandalizers talk page, and does not auto insert the name of the article they vandalized, it must all be done by hand. Though it is much faster. Tiptoetytalk01:11, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
lol, when are things ever that simple. I will not be removing my vote like you (though i thought about it) just because i personally like having the rollback feature. Tiptoetytalk05:30, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
I agree with you, no-organization, and there has been none this whole time! I think its a good thin ab-com is getting involved. Tiptoetytalk05:37, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
I could not help myself! :) I almost feel like putting it up on the talk page, but know all that would do would create anoher discussion about me violating some policy, hopefully it will all be over soon. Tiptoetytalk07:14, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
You've been very helpful for me before, so I come to you to ask --- Do you know where I can find this on Wikipedia. I had come across it a few days ago, and didn't save to my bookmarks, (didn't think I had to) but I can't find it now. It's either called "image lab" or "graphics lab", I forget which, even if I use both in a search, nothing useful comes up. :-/
Also, why is it so difficult to find anything using the search box? There are so many rules/policies and hidden (not intentional) help pages that do not appear when using the search function (so unlike Google). Why is that? And why does Wikipedia not have them all in one place where it is easy for people to find these useful pages, portals and policies? Is there a special prefix or special term one needs to use to find these pages? Thanks in advance. :-) ←Gee♥Alice22:39, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your response, and sorry for not being more clear. As far as the "Image/Graphic lab" I'm referring to, it is similar to the Help Desk or Reference Desk, I think. I'm not quite certain that is the correct name though. It's a "place" where there are users who volunteer time by working on requests creating and cleaning up images/graphics. Does that help clarify? As far as the rest, I was just venting...kinda. lol. ←Gee♥Alice00:15, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
YES! That's it. "Maybe you are looking for Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Images to improve? - Rjd0060...". I guess I was using the plural while searching, as in GraphicS Lab, rather than "Graphic Lab". Although I didn't try that search term. See what I mean about the search function? Anyway, thank you so much for your help. You're awesome! It was driving me crazy. I spend more time looking for "things" and never finding them, than I do editing articles! Thanks again...gracias mucho! :-) ←Gee♥Alice00:34, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
Re:revert
This] is probably the most comprehensive debate on the topic, though there have been several more. In short, the compromise solution over the debate is a project-specific variant of WP:ENGVAR. The NHL, and North American sources, do not use diacritics at all in player names. They aren't English characters. It was agreed that for NHL related articles, the NHL's/North American format would be used - no diacritics. Exactly as the names are spelled on the back of their jerseys. For European and international articles, diacritics can be used. Resolute18:34, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
Not a problem. Personally, I am glad I stayed mostly out of that debate. As far as "Go Wings" goes, you could have not let Vancouver get a point last night, eh? Resolute20:45, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
How do you, or where, should one report an editor who refuses to comply with the wishes of one's own comments on talk pages? I am very frustrated right now. As this user on the Talk:Ayn Rand page continues to revert and refactor my entry to the talk page. TIA. ←Gee♥Alice03:33, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Re: Huggle
When you make updates, fix bugs, add features, etc.. are you going to automatically send out the new file to everybody? - Rjd0060 (talk) 17:10, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Everyone who has so far requested to test the software via email will recieve a new version periodically. This does not mean that they will always have the very latest version, as I am constantly making changes – Gurch17:11, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
My edit to the Myanmar article constituted a vital factual correction, not vandalism. Encyclopedias are based on facts, not "consensus." I am not aware of a single sourcebook or encyclopedia that has an entry on Burma as opposed to Myanmar. Myanmar is the name recognized by the UN and the majority of world states. Maglev Power (talk) 04:29, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Well, indeed, but for an article of this importance, listing at WP:RM is de facto compulsory. Otherwise we'd certainly get ourselves a move/edit war, then we'd have to fix the mess, and protect the article, then lots of drama would follow, and in the end we'd still have a proposal listed at WP:RM anyway. Best regards, Húsönd06:01, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Heh, no, of course not. :-) Same indent as your comment, thus responding to the same comment it did. Best regards, Húsönd06:42, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Well, I might just give it a little push. ;-) I'll get back to this tomorrow, it's really late where I live and I should've gone to bed hours ago. Going now. Best regards, Húsönd06:50, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Just wondering
Are you aware of this Hayden5650 account. It's got the Phral thing he uses in it. He hasn't caused any trouble since Jeeny left, so I was wondering if you think it should be blocked. OK [22]Seth71 (talk) 15:59, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
After thinking about it I really don't care about him anymore. If he does still have accounts out there I just hope he ain't harrasing anyone. Seth71 (talk) 17:45, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Greetings! FYI, this edit to WP:AIV caused the HBC AIV helperbots to cease functioning on that page. As is noted in a comment immediately above the part that you edited, the {{adminbacklog}} and {{noadminbacklog}} tags are automatically controlled by the bots, and should not be manually removed. I've replaced the tag now, but wanted to let you know for your own information and future reference. Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia, and feel free to let me know if you have any questions about this. —Krellis (Talk) 18:26, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
How do you do it?
Please don't mind my asking, but how do you get other users to notice your efforts for Wikipedia's development and give you barnstars and other awards like that? I've been trying all my account-life!
Unfortunately I don't maintain the script anymore - I'm way too busy. On the face of it I don't think it's a very easy problem to solve. Master of Puppets' suggestion on my talk page may be workable, but I can't implement it at the moment. Sorry! Johnleemk | Talk01:39, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Ryan Postlethwaite would like to nominate you to become an administrator. Please visit Wikipedia:Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact Ryan Postlethwaite to accept or decline the nomination. A page will be or has been created for your nomination at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Rjd0060 2. If you accept the nomination, you must formally state and sign your acceptance and answer the questions on that page. Once you have answered the questions, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.
(spoiler alert: read my RfA comment before this one...). I'm not sure why your name stands out to me either (see sarcasticidealist below), but it's a positive impression. A Postlethwaite nom sure doesn't hurt either :)...When I say that I have a "few editors in mind" to watch for in RfAs, most of them are negative, diffs in hand. Glad you're not one of them, happy to support! Best of luck to you, it's a fun ride - enjoy it for what it is and ignore it for what it isn't. You know what I mean, I'm sure. Cheers and good luck! Keeper | 7619:06, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Do you happen to know when/where we've interacted? Your name is certainly familiar to me, and I have your talk page watched for some reason, but neither one of us appears to have posted on the other's talk page at any point. I ask because I'd like some context on your RfA. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 18:55, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Oh well; I guess I'll have to actually do research before commenting on your RfA. So tragic when that happens (on the surface, you look like a very likely support). Sarcasticidealist (talk) 19:02, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
So happy you asked. There was a totally nn version deleted April 12, 2007 by WKnight. User:04anichols created the article about the parapsychologist on May 17. User:Hurly101 vandailzed it beyond all recognition on January 11 this year. This is the version you tagged and that was deleted by AliveFreeHappy the next day. User:04anichols recreated the parapsychologist version yesterday. Not sure it would pass an AfD, but there it is. . (You're gonna love being able to see the deleted versions.) :) Hope that helps. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 20:31, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Really, I agree with "backwards Mike Reichold" here, you are gonna love being able to see the deleted contribs. I put the onus on AliveFreeHappy to check a db tagged article's history before simply deleting. Articles get tagged all the time that do not qualify for speedy deletion, trust me. He/she should not have deleted the article, but instead should have reverted back to the most current correct article, and given you a talk page message. But, bygones are bygones. Happy editing, Keeper | 7620:36, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Rjd0060/Archives, I wish to tender my sincere thanks for your support in my successful request for adminship, which ended with 37 supports, 2 opposes, and 2 neutral. The results of the RfA are extremely bittersweet because of the recent departure of my nominator, Rudget. Hopefully I can live up to his and your expectations. I would especially like to thank Epbr123 and TomStar81 for mentioning that they were preparing to offer me a nomination. The past week has been one of the most stressful weeks in my life, and I appreciate your vote of confidence in me. If you ever need anything, just get in touch. -MBK00421:04, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your answer to my question. I do think that your contributions are impressive, and show that you have spent a great deal of effort improving the encyclopedia. I should have mentioned that in my question. I'm not interested in article writing per se, as some other people may be. — Carl (CBM · talk) 02:40, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Good luck with your nomination! Although somebody made a valid point that more article writing experience would be useful, the actual oppose votes are based on some wonky reasoning and ridiculously strict criteria. -- Wryspy (talk) 20:53, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
WWWQ
Please see my response to you on the WWWQ discussion page. The listing of that many individuals on the article of a station that has only existed for about seven years sets a dangerous precedent for the expansion of MANY other articles on Wikipedia about stations that have existed for MUCH longer. The main editor of the article is very likely the radio station's current night personality, whose ego is the driving force behind everything he does. I have no problem listing the members of the Bert Show and doing a very basic list of the other FULL-TIME personalities. But to list all of the part-timers, the traffic reporters, and all of the former personalities (making an exception for those who may have gone on to achieve things that justify them having their own Wiki pages) is a little overboard.--InDeBiz1 (talk) 03:07, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you to all who supported me in my recent Request for Adminship, which succeeded on January 31, 2008, by vote of 67/5/5. I'm not one to thankspam everybody, but please know that I appreciate all of the comments, whether they were left in support, opposition, or from a neutral standpoint. I have certainly taken all comments into thought, and have taken any suggestions into consideration.
Well, now that you have a mop the baseball project people left ... umm ... a pretty big mess in the mens room. Can you take care of that? ;o) Good luck... its a glamorous job, as you will soon discover. Resolute19:22, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
I am not one for sending round pretty pictures, but after my recent RfA, which passed 68/1/7, I am now relaxed and this is to thank you for your support. I will take on board all the comments made and look forward to wielding the mop with alacrity. Or two lacrities. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 21:04, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
RfA thanks from Happy-melon
I just wanted to say thanks for your support for my RfA, which closed (74/2/0) this morning. Your comment and support was very much appreciated. Happy‑melon09:34, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
comment from 81.107.16.100
You also are evil leave my comments Scientologist should not exist—Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.107.16.100 (talk • contribs)
you're right of course. my apologies. frustrated by seeing defamatory info added to a BLP, and having no way to stop it. jimbo says to be aggressive in removing this stuff, but 3RR rears its ugly head. initially the edits did appear to be vandalism, as editor added no source. now he's adding a source - that doesn't corroborate the claim. oh well. Anastrophe (talk) 19:53, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Please see my talk page for what the user has been doing to my edits at Wikipedia. And you said that it wasn't vandalism which i did at User:UzEE page, then is there someone who should ask User:UzEE that why he is giving those warnings to me? --SMSTalk21:22, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Thank You:)
Thanks for semi-protecting my page
Smart Guy (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Thank you very much, Rjd0060, for your support in my RfA which I really appreciate. It closed at 83/0/0. I was surprised by the unanimity and will do my best to live up to the new role. All the best, --ROGER DAVIEStalk16:49, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
The patio at the Partal Palace in the Alhambra, Andalucia.
Congrats!
I wanted to say congratulations about being an admin! I just found out today. You deserve it for all you do. I just came here today to see if you could give me any advice about the article Paradise Hotel 2 and I read your user page and noticed you were an admin. So do you think you can help me any? It is a Copyright issue. ♪♫Alucard16♫♪00:22, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Thats ok. The person posted the issue on January 23, 2008 here. The guy says the text was from here and the text disappeared when the show aired on MyNetworkTV last night. Thanks for looking into it, I'll wait :) ♪♫Alucard16♫♪00:35, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
I'm afraid i fail to see how it will be useful in any way. It was originally moved because it was deemed that the new name was better. Search terms... all the words are also in the other title. I really cba with RfD, and surely it should be a contested tag rather than removed.
I am prepared to get into all sorts of trouble with this page, 3RR etc. If YOU feel so strongly, then please get a 3O. And, please don't insult my intelligence by brandishing pages about how WP works. I am not stupid. Of course redirects don't have incoming links (then theyd be double-redirects). if you really want a redirect, a better one would be NTM tramcars.
And finally, why would people be looking for a list, when there's a page that outlines individual tramcars?
I open multiple CAT:TEMP pages using tabs in my browser, spend some time reviewing all the pages I've opened; then with the pages that should be deleted, I go into the delete screen in all the tabs I've opened, set the reason for deletion in each tab, and when it's all done, go into all my open tabs and press the "delete page" button. It might look as though I'm using a script (or a bot) and deleting pages rapidly, but in reality, it's just tabbed browsing. Acalamari00:07, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
You're welcome, and if you ever do come across a tool for aiding in deleting pages in that category, please let me know. Acalamari00:12, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I have a quick question about the Texas Department of Criminal Justice article. I stumbled upon it and found there's loads of issues with it. I consulted another editor (who just tagged it for said issues) who agreed that what is written is basically original research and from the POV of someone who has been incarcerated. On the talk page, a user who admitted to being an ex-offender added the present content which seems like a COI in my opinion. Would I be completely out of line if I rolled back the article to its original version (February 17, 2007)? I would rewrite it, but most of the content that is currently presented cannot be referenced as it is not avaliable to the public and I just don't think what is presented is encyclopedic. Before I made any huge rollbacks, I just wanted to check with an admin first. Thanks! Pinkadelica (talk) 05:31, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick reply. I'm an ex-employee of TDCJ so when I read this, I realized how much this is actually someone's opinion and was written as such. I know that having an interest or going through an experience doesn't automatically mean it's a COI but, in my opinion, quite a bit of the article isn't neutral, factual or verifiable. Every prison is different so certain examples are not the norm and can't be proved. I won't rollback the article, but I will be restoring most of the original content if that's ok. Pinkadelica (talk) 05:48, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
I was wandering what we would do about the voting history table. Since there is this pesky "soulmates" thing and everyone will be in pairs what should we do? I posted a couple of ideas on the Big Brother 9 talk page so what do you think? ♪♫Alucard16♫♪05:40, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Nat.utoronto
Please ask him to refrain from playing edit wars under this thread:
He is letting his political views (pro-KMT) influence his editing and has resorted to playing edit games with me. For example, when I tried to balance his one-side article in support of Ma Ying-jeuo, he cited the "no copying rule". However, while I can understand this rule would allow him to erase long quotations in my edits, he went further to modify other parts of the article not subject to this rule. As a result, I think he is trying to hide under this rule. What I did was to clearly state that Ma Ying-jeuo's proclamation of innocence is under Ma's own beliefs, and therefore it is justified to say "Ma believes" XYZ. Thanks. ShihRyanJ (talk) 15:42, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
RFA thanks
.: RFA thanks :.
Thanks for supporting me!My RfA passed with a final tally of 5 neutrals, 1 oppose and 148 supports, a turnout I couldn't have dreamed of. I'm going to do everything I can to help out the community, help with sysop tasks, and of course, contribute to the encyclopedia. If you ever need a hand with something, feel free to give a shout! Cheers! Master of PuppetsCall me MoP!☺17:24, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for stopping the revert war between myself and Wikitom. 00:42, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
MattMan24 concerns
You, RJ. I'm having a bit of trouble getting the report on the SSP page to show up. I've notified the guy and sure enough, no answer. Typical of Mascot Guy. So's his choice of subject matter. What am I doing wrong with the report? --PMDrive1061 (talk) 02:17, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, but it looks as if I'm doing something wrong. My bad. I'm at work and I'm a bit distracted. Can you run a checkuser instead? --PMDrive1061 (talk) 02:20, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Beautiful. Works for me. Please do. :) I hope I'm wrong about this because if it is Mascot Guy, he's the most prolific vandal in the history of this site. One of his old usernames a few years ago was his actual e-mail address, so I tried writing to it back in my "Lucky 6.9" days. Believe it or not, I heard back from his mom. He's an autistic teenager out of San Diego and while his mom tries to limit his online time, he just keeps coming back to Wikipedia. I don't think he's malicious, but oh boy, is he a pain. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 02:27, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
HI
If I deserve a warning (I don't think I do), then i am CERTAINLY not the only one who does. Please do not single me out. My edits for the page in question are merely reverting vandalism and hate speech, not that I owe you any explanation. VeritasAequitasWikiTony (talk) 02:30, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, i swear i looked before i typed that and didn't see it. I still don't think I did anything to deserve a warning. I consider what I did removing vandalism. I update the portal and revert vandalism (see for yourself in my history) on that page on an almost daily basis. Also keep in mind the name of the portal is "current events," so sometimes multiple edits are required in a short period of time, because after all, the information is current. Also, the other editor has recently been warned for typing almost the exact same hateful speech on other pages. Every one of his edits under the IP he uses is an edit bashing Scientology. I really do not care about them or their beliefs but they do not deserve to be badmouthed in a place reserved for contemporary global affairs. I know I owe you no explanation, but it cannot hurt to have my thoughts on the matter in words. There is a time and a place for everything. Current events is not the place for intolerance. Like I said, I add and edit the portal almost daily. this is by no means a claim of ownership, only meaning that I think I know what I am talking about and my opinion on the subject should have some merit over somene whose sole purpose for adding the item is intolerance. See you on the flip side WikiTony (talk) 02:46, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
We have problems with 68.34.109.154
This IP address 68.34.109.154 made this edit to Big Brother 9 (U.S.). I was going to post a vandalism warning on his talk page when I noticed you have already given this same IP a warning. So since this is another disruptive edit made by this IP address how do you go about getting him blocked? ♪♫Alucard16♫♪21:43, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Happy Valentine's Day!
User:Wilhelmina Will has wished you a happy Valentine's day, and good luck in love and friendship!
I honestly can't remember. I am not 100% sure but I think we leave the Veto sign with the winner. If it is used we just change the nom status around. ♪♫Alucard16♫♪22:47, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for participating in my RfA! It was closed as successful with 58 supporting, 0 opposing, and 2 neutral. I hope to demonstrate that your trust in me is rightly placed and am always open to critiques and suggestions. Cheers. MBisanztalk04:03, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for !voting in my RfA which resulted in the collapse of civilization with 92 (94?) support, 1 oppose, and 1 neutral. Blame jc37 and Hiding for nominating me, everyone who had questions or comments, everyone who !voted, everyone who tallied the numbers correctly, and WJBScribe who closed without shouting, "No mop for you!"
Seriously, your response has overwhelmed me. I am deeply grateful.
thank you for the reminder. but just so that you know, my previous attempts to open a dialog [24] have gone completely unanswered. i feel my actions were completely within guidelines given how uncooperative SeNeKa (talk·contribs) has been. --emerson718:54, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
Carnatic Music article that needs extensive corrections
Please post on the discussion of ‘Carnatic Music’ why the 'Carnatic Music' article is locked from editing directly by editors. I am not contesting your decision. Just trying to understand the reasoning. Many editors are making badly needed changes to this article that currently contains distorted information. Detailed discussions are already posted. If it is still decided to lock this article a separate article on ‘Karnataka Classical Music’ needs to be started to state the real facts to Wikipedia readers. Both can be merged later based on fully validated facts and judgment of Admns who are also proven experts (need to disclose their qualifications about the topic on user’s page) on the topic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Naadapriya (talk • contribs) 19:30, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your response on my talk page. Your judgment is understandable. However the incorrect information in the article which at the most one editor is defending against 3 to 4 other editors that too without giving justification, is a major concern to leave the article as is even for a few daysNaadapriya (talk) 21:05, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
IZAK
Hi, Rjd. I'd like to thank you for trying to mediation and step in between IZAK and I. I must say that his recent personal attacks (referring to my actions as Kristallnacht), calling my exactly two AfDs a "rampage of deletions" and now his threats to stop or "stronger action" are leaving me in a very difficult position. I want to be a party to the discussion but it's growing near impossible with IZAK's increasingly threating and uncivil statements. At this point I want to respond to the questions and concerns Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Judaism#Deletion_of_synagogue_articles but I genuinely fear to. What might you suggest? Bstone (talk) 01:10, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
You know, Bstone, for someone who was so tough and unrelenting with your nomination at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beyt Tikkun and your stubborn renomination and defeat at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2008 February 14#Beyt Tikkun (closed) and the strong criticism that is being directed at you for your lack of good faith with your subsequent nominations of other synagogue articles for deletion in spite of all the arguments against that that are being posted against it, it is hard to believe that you must now run to an admin who has no real knowldege of Judaic subjects and who is only getting one side of the picture from you. May I respectfully suggest that just as you had no fear with doing what you did earlier, you continue with that attitude and be part of the serious debate about all this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Judaism#Deletion of synagogue articles with the Judaic editors who have become increasingly concerned about your moves and aims with regards to syngagogue articles at this time. Please note some of my more in-depth reasons for my opposition to what you have been doing lately. I thank you for your kind consideration. IZAK (talk) 05:37, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
V-day
Tiptoetytalk is wishing you a Happy Valentine's Day, Rjd0060! This greeting promotes WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy Valentine's Day, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
Follow-up with creator of Minnesota synagogues stubs
Hi Rjd0060: You may be interested to know that I have contacted User Grika (talk·contribs) who was the editor who originally created all the stub articles about synagogues in Minnesota that have now become the focal point of much debate, and he, as creator of the stubs has neither responded, participated nor defended himself in any discussions AFAIK. Please see User talk:Grika#Requesting your attention. Feel free to add your comments. Thanks, IZAK (talk) 09:40, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
You're right, of course, and my apologies - was in a bit of a hurry and my eyes must have skipped over (and my brain forgotten) the bits you're quoting. Great time to shoot myself in the foot on the practical implications of the very tools I'm asking for in my RfA! Thanks for your message. GBT/C15:40, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Tiger Shark pic not yet deleted?...
I'm wondering why my tiger shark pic (Image:Scarface-tigershark2.jpg) is still here, when it was tagged for "speedy deletion" some time ago.... As mentioned then, this image may be used for publication soon, and I don't want it here any longer since I'm rescinding the copyleft coverage. Thx much for any info.... Pterantula (talk) 02:57, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanx for the reply - jeez this gets complicated! I'll have to go through those hoops later, when I get the time; I don't recall ever uploading to Commons, I believe that was done on my behalf when I was getting the white shark pics uploaded there...? Cheers Pterantula (talk) 09:41, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
I noticed you deleted the user page as blatant advertising. I was trying to find the guideline that supports the deletion. I checked Wikipedia:User page. There is some discussion on the talk page but I can not see a deffinitive answer to the deletion of user pages that advertise. I am not disagreeing with the decision I am just looking for clearification for future reference. Thanks in advance. GtstrickyTalk or C16:20, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks... It does seem that it could use some clarification somewhere. Again, not disagreeing, but I seem to remember users being told to place content on their user pages (especially in WP:OR or WP:COI situations). It seems that the message has been "this is not appropriate as an article but feel free to put it on your talk page". I think we would let people violate the other speedie criteria (nonsense, test page, blanked page etc). The WP:NOT is a good rational and should possibly be added to the WP:User Page criteria. Anyway... thanks for the info. Have a good one. GtstrickyTalk or C16:36, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. It's not just that it is that mainly those two everywhere I look I keep getting blamed for Article Ownership. Plus I get put down by pete and to an extent RMThompson it just makes everything frustrating. And who uses an excuse that you can't cite premium cable channels? That is just urrg, they are carried on DirecTV and Dish Network plus the top ten cable providers and various smaller cable companies. Just because you have to pay $12-$15 extra for Showtime doesn't mean you can't use it. I will be fine after I calm down. I am just going to edit my little userpage for a while. It is getting too crowded. Thanks for the comment. ♪♫Alucard16♫♪00:14, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
There's an ongoing controversy over whether those additional navboxes at the bottom of Family Guy episode articles are desirable. I think they have all been removed once or twice. Would you care to join the discussion? / edg☺☭04:10, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
I'd be happy to take a look at it. Can you be more specific as to which navboxes you're talking about? Give me an example. - Rjd0060 (talk) 04:16, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
I'm sorry. I hit the wrong Talk page. The editor I wanted to communicate with is Cyberhawk241 (talk·contribs). The edit in question was this one. :Thanks for getting back to me on this. I will bring this up on Cyberhawk241's Talk page. / edg☺☭04:28, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Response
Hello, I'm not really going to edit, but however, I do have an account. I am not telling you my username. I am not using my account. Thanks! --75.60.247.92 (talk) 17:14, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Hi, a few days ago, I appealed a block I had been wrongly issued, and you replied and said reasonably that if I created a new account, there shouldn't be a problem. I have now done this, so therefore, I'm assuming you believe it is appropriate for me to go ahead with my constructive edits to the Maria Sharapova page (bearing in mind the edit logs show I did not reverse 64 edits, the offence I was blocked for), without fear of harrassment from the user BanRay? Thanks Masha4ever (talk) 23:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
You' were blocked for trolling, vandalism and disruption and not for directly reverting 64 edits. Again, you can propose your edits on the talk page and wait for green light there, but seeing that there is a clear consensus against your version, you should probably just move on and leave the page as it is. BanRay23:47, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
No, BanRay, you issued me a warning for reverting 64 edits (Which is not the case - and in fact, are non-admins actually authorised to issue warnings?), then I was blocked for "failing to adhere to the warning", even though it wasn't legit in the first place. If I did not revert 64 edits, please tell me how I trolled or vandalised? I merely put through constructive edits. Masha4ever (talk) 23:51, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
I didn't read your full comment before responding, so just to add to your other comments: is it Wikipedia policy to wait for the green-light? Because I believe Tennis expert didn't several weeks ago when he rewrote the Career section (the action that began this edit dispute). You say concensus is against me - actually, by my count, there's me, Musiclover565, that user who edited earlier today (please don't tell me you're going to accuse him/her of being me/ML565?). In addition, Escape Orbit has seen acknowledged the edits, and presumably saw no problem with them, seeing as he did not revert them. So that actually just leaves you and Tennis expert wanting the other version, doesn't it? Meaning concensus seems to be against you. Masha4ever (talk) 23:58, 25 February 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.
Urgent admin intervention needed at the Hummus article
Just thought i would say thanks for the help you gave me with my sig.
·Add§hore·Talk/Cont has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
I just wanted to let you know that the Big Brother 10 (U.S.) page is back. But this time I am not going to put it up for deletion due to the simple fact that Big Brother 10 will be our summer season and the UK already has their page Big Brother 2008 (UK) up for their ninth summer series. There was a discussion about it and it was keep so I feel we should just leave BB10 alone for now plus Survivor has their 17th and 18th season pages up. What do you think? ♪♫Alucard16♫♪21:39, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Well for now I put a source to the House Calls episode that had Robyn Kass. I do think it is early for both Big Brother 2008 (UK) and Big Brother 10 (U.S.) but my stance is if one is acceptable to keep then the other is too. Plus the UK article doesn't have any sources while ours does. And I personally don't think we should make a fuss right now it is usually one of us that puts it up for deletion anyway. We have Big Brother 9 right now and that is a handful. Plus like I said with Survivor we should just let it say unless someone else slaps it for AfD. ♪♫Alucard16♫♪22:09, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Thats good. I remembered today that the Friday episode of House Calls had Gretchen & Robyn that day so I watched that episode again today when I seen that the BB10 article came back to life. ♪♫Alucard16♫♪22:15, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Apologies for inadvertently removing the unblock decline, while I was restoring my post, which she had deleted but which was relevant to the unblock request. Tyrenius (talk) 01:20, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
RE: Big Brother 10
Alrighty but that will be next year. Their upcoming season is their ninth Big Brother. Their tenth Big Brother will be in 2009. ♪♫Alucard16♫♪01:30, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Soverign Grace Ministries
Thanks for stepping in. I offered to act as a third party, as they both quite obviously have very different views, and I can offer a neutral point of view. I also tagged the article, it seems to contain mostly original research. Would you agree? Steve Crossin (talk) 16:51, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Magic Kingdom
Looks like we got our wires crossed. I had already protected it when you issued the decline. I'm new to this (admined last month), so will defer to your judgment. —EncMstr20:05, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Given that you seem happy to have the article unprotected, I've gone ahead and done so - I've warned all parties to the content dispute as well. Ryan Postlethwaite20:14, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Are you aware that these edits are being made by someone who has been blocked several times from at least 12 different accounts or IPs for disruption and personal attacks? Please see the sock puppet log before dismissing this as an edit war. The person's edits are also being discussed at WP:ANI. Whether you think the geography dispute is vandalism or not, this is a persistent pattern of abuse from a combative contributor who rejects the community's consensus and repeatedly insults people. 72.37.171.164 (talk) 20:46, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Re: post on my talk page
Well, I have been battling this guy for quite some time. He apparently has access to a dynamic IP assigner, because every so often, a different IP address comes on and starts changing all these different articles' categories from "in Orlando, Florida" to "in Orange County, Florida", as well as saying they are southwest, northwest, etc. of Orlando instead of saying they are near Orlando. I am not the only one who reverts this guy. Someone else does it with an edit summary that says something like "rv per consensus on talk page". I am using huggle, so I don't usually use a custom edit summary. In any case, the guy who is changing articles does so slightly faster than I can revert with huggle, so there is no way he is just doing it with his hands and a keyboard. He is using some sort of a web program to change article en masse.I have no idea what his point is. Saying that Seaworld is in Orlando is the same as saying that Cedar Point is in Sandusky. Neither are technically in those cities, as there is not enough room, but they are near those cities, and thus they are associated with them. Also, I am not an admin, so I do not know why you are telling me you disagree with the page protection. J.delanoygabsadds20:20, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
What's wrong with correctly categorizing Magic Kindom as being in Orange County?
It is not in the city of Orlando; it is southwest of Orlando in another city called Bay Lake, Florida.
I need semi protection on my Userpage for a while to stop miamiboyzinhere's sockpuppet IP's from wikistalking me, thanks. Momusufan (talk) 22:22, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
I was hoping that you would add back in at least the POV tags added by Xiutwel to the September 11, 2001 Attacks page. If you check the last edit on there, you'll see that it undid two edits which I made. If you feel that they were justified, I'd appreciate revert. If not, can you help me understand why they aren't? Thanks, Dscotese (talk) 01:09, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:NewWJBKlogo.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:NewWJBKlogo.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.
Dear Rjd0060, thank you for taking part in my RfB. As you may know, it was not passed by bureaucrats. I would, however, like to thank you for taking the time to voice your support, despite concerns cited by the opposition. Although RfA/B isn't really about a person, but more about the community, I was deeply touched and honoured by the outpouring of support and interest in the discussion. I can only hope that you don't feel your opinion was not considered enough - bureaucrats have to give everyone's thoughts weight. I also hope that the results of this RfB lead to some change in the way we approach RfBs, and some thought about whether long-entrenched standards are a good thing in our growing and increasingly heterogenous community. I was a little miserable after the results came out, so I'm going to spread the love via dancing hippos. As you do. :) I remain eager to serve you as an administrator and as an editor. If at any point you see something problematic in my actions, please do not hesitate to call me out. ~ Riana ⁂04:44, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Dear Rjd0060/Archives! You are receiving as you are a member of WikiProject Ice Hockey There's been many more new things going on at WP:HOCKEY; this newsletter will be sent every two weeks/months.
If you wish to not receive the newsletter, please remove your name from the newsletter mailing list. Thanks!
By The Pancake of Heaven!
There has been numerous new recognized content, so much that it's too time-consuming to sift through the "trophy cases" on WP:HOCKEY. Some interesting achievements:
2016 NHL Draft has been newly created and has immediately become a GA status article.
We are working to create a new task force within the WikiProject to deal with topics related to the Pittsburgh Penguins. It hasn't been created yet; but it aims to expand articles based on former and current Pittsburgh Penguins players and articles. Good luck!
The original featured topic drive, initiated by Scorpion0422, has concluded succesfully. National Hockey League awards is now a featured topic, with 24 articles in total. Of them, 20 are featured lists, one is a featuredarticle, and the other three are trophy articles that were too short to become featured lists. Eight users signed up to help out, shown here. The next Featured Topic hasn't been decided upon, and the ideas and organization for it fell apart. If you have any ideas, don't hesitate to share them at WT:HOCKEY.
More editors are needed to help out with the newsletter. The newsletter creator doesn't have an infinite nor perfect supply of ideas, and thus he might omit some interesting news.
Hi, long time no talk :) I have a question, I thought sandboxes or user sub-pages were for the sole purpose of helping/bettering a Wikipedia article? Remember User:ScottAHudson well I noticed he has a lot of subpages related to various reality shows. The Big Brother test pages he has looks like copies/replicas of Big Brother 3 (U.S.), Big Brother 4 (U.S.), Big Brother 7 (U.S.) and Big Brother 9 (U.S.) with the voting history table he suggested during Big Brother 8 (U.S.) but a consensus was reached to continue using the current one? Does these test pages violate Wikipedia rules. ♪♫Alucard16♫♪00:11, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
I have an alternate logo taken from recent episodes on my computer that doesn't have the "'Till Death Do You Part" subtitle. Do you want me to upload it seperate or just have it replace the current image? I think that is good idea since other projects do it. What do you think about a starting a newsletter? I have been thinking about doing it since other projects have one. ♪♫Alucard16♫♪21:03, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Update: I have went through all the articles relating to Big Brother and I have tagged all images. I think a newsletter is necessary after seeing some of the other countries articles. I mean the US, UK, Australia, Philippines, and somewhat Africa looks presentable. For the rest eck! Most of the articles have duplicate information from the fan site worldofbigbrother.com and a lot of the tables don't follow the guidelines for a nominations/voting history table. ♪♫Alucard16♫♪22:45, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Here is the newsletter I created. It's part of our new Outreach department. Other projects with a newsletter had Outreach departments so I thought why not us. I just need to get a bot to distribute it now. ♪♫Alucard16♫♪04:40, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Nomination/Voting History Tables - Many articles do not follow the guidelines of Nominations table and Voting history table section. All nomination/voting history tables should follow the basic guideline on the main project page (Colors, terms, etc.) but should be adjusted for each country/region.
Country-specific
Please help us improve the country-specific articles by providing references, reception details, and production details. Please don't add trivia, quotes, or original research to these articles. Aside from Big Brother (U.S.), Big Brother (UK), Big Brother Australia, and Pinoy Big Brother most Big Brother articles do not follow the standard outline set out by the project. Most articles list statistic information from worldofbigbrother.com and trivia.
Assessment Scale
You will see Assessment scale information on each of the Big Brother article talk pages. The article will be rated according to the Assessment scale. Please consider looking at the status of the article to improve it. If the article has changed and the rating is outdated, you can change it or bring it up on the WikiProject talkpage.
We are trying to improve these articles, hopefully bring some to good or featured status. We would like your help reaching this goal. We hope to bring main articles, Big Brother (TV series), Big Brother (UK), Big Brother (US), etc. to featured status. Please help us improve these article, based on the peer reviews and your knowledge of Wikipedia featured articles.
Heard of Wikipedia: Task Force? A task force is a non-independent subgroup of a larger WikiProject that covers some defined part of the WikiProject's scope. Task forces for WikiProject Big Brother can be used to focus on a specific country/region's Big Brother. A task force for example that would focus on Big Brother (U.S.) related articles could rely on WikiProject Big Brother for article structure information while providing more focus and customized guidelines for Big Brother (U.S.). Similar task forces can be created for Big Brother (UK), Big Brother Australia, etc.
I would like to also recommend the deletion of Amazing Race 12 Test. Others will be requested for deletion two months after they are finished. ScottAHudson (talk) 21:44, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
I see you've previously dealt w/ the abovementioned user for his vandalism. I recently reverted a highly offensive edit he made to the Yeshivish Jews article. Please check it out and take the necessary steps. Thank you. Keyed In (talk) 05:06, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
WHAT!!?!?!?
I haven't attacked ANYONE.
My gosh, I have reminder HTML-commented stuff on my USER PAGE. Why are you editing my user page? Where is the attack? Your comments are unwarranted and ridiculous. Timneu22 (talk) 22:54, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
What's the deal? It is ridiculous that I'm accused of anything when I haven't done anything on anyone's talk page, and I'm being accused of incivility. What did I do to deserve this treatment? Timneu22 (talk) 23:01, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Happy easter you guys! Sorry if the picture looked crappy, but it's the best I could do on such short notice. Sincerely, BoL (Talk) 04:45, 23 March 2008 (UTC) Credits: This card was inspired by BoL, an administrator/bureaucrat and head designer of Codesnippets. Join the community today!
Is it wrong for a user (registered or not) to change the replies that one person lives on their own talk page? 91.105.221.196 did that after I left a kind reply. The change here [26] and his reply to me after he changed my reply [27]. I feel really offended by this it is like he/she put words in my mouth. ♪♫Alucard16♫♪04:59, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
I just wanted to let you know that 91.105.221.196 has vandalized Big Brother 9 (U.S.) again. I have given this user a only warning for their edits. I also reverted some of his comments on your talk page as they were acts of vandalism. (ie. changing my signature and calling me swear-paints) ♪♫Alucard16♫♪20:45, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
Question 2
Why was I indefinitely blocked? Was it because of username? And when will new account be activated and old account expire after a requested name change? —Preceding unsigned comment added by NW Film Center (talk • contribs) 22:00, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
Hello!
Cream (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
16:59, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
Descent 2 - semi protection of D2X-XL chapter rejected
The D2X-XL chapter of the Descent 2 article has been a target for plain vandalism or malevolent changes of its content for over a year. The issue has just started to get heated today, when a few people involved with the Descent community had decided to take this to a new level and mark the chapter as advertisement, restoring the mark whenever I remove it. You may want to take a look at that chapter. If you decide it's an advertisement, I will accept the decision. The people currently at work are however acting out of a deep personal resentment against me, and the Wikipedia entry is only a vehicle for their destructivity. FYI: Here is a link to a thread of the biggest English speaking Descent community forum, where the issue is discussed: http://www.descentbb.net/viewforum.php?f=37
Regarding Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-03-19 National Federation of Republican Assemblies
Regarding the NFRA dispute in the mediation cabal, do I need to be doing anything else to facilitate the dialogue? CorpITGuy (talk) 23:08, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
I know the policy is to only accept complaints about IPs blocked at least 5 times, but I'm seeing quite a few complaints about IPs with three and four blocks. Should I decline those, or would it be okay to accept them? GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 20:28, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
Comment from some guy
Do you see.... I have now got my own account... haha! And I have not vandalised anything.... just shows you that it wasn't me who was doing it!!!!! and I am a member of the Big Brother thing!!! Mikey-is-Lost 13:39, 30 March 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikey-is-lost (talk • contribs)
Some GUY!!!!!! I am that person who you kept blocking for no reason what so ever............ remember !!! it wasnt even me who was deleting things.... have you got memory loss or somthin????? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikey-is-lost (talk • contribs) 17:32, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
I just had an ip address..... how can you not remember me...... my friend like changed that alucard persons comment he left on my talk page.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikey-is-lost (talk • contribs) 18:58, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Cream (talk) has put a trout your back! The Trout promotes playfulness and hopefully this one has made your day worse. You have no choice but to spread it to other editors! Happy April Fools' Day! Add this {{subst:AprilFoools}} to their talk page with a friendly fish. 14:06, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Nomination/Voting History Tables - Many articles do not follow the guidelines of Nominations table and Voting history table section. All nomination/voting history tables should follow the basic guideline on the main project page (Colors, terms, etc.) but should be adjusted for each country/region.
Country-specific
Please help us improve the country-specific articles by providing references, reception details, and production details. Please don't add trivia, quotes, or original research to these articles. Aside from Big Brother (U.S.), Big Brother (UK), Big Brother Australia, and Pinoy Big Brother most Big Brother articles do not follow the standard outline set out by the project. Most articles list statistic information from worldofbigbrother.com and trivia.
Assessment Scale
You will see Assessment scale information on each of the Big Brother article talk pages. The article will be rated according to the Assessment scale. Please consider looking at the status of the article to improve it. If the article has changed and the rating is outdated, you can change it or bring it up on the WikiProject talkpage.
We are trying to improve these articles, hopefully bring some to good or featured status. We would like your help reaching this goal. We hope to bring main articles, Big Brother (TV series), Big Brother (UK), Big Brother (US), etc. to featured status. Please help us improve these article, based on the peer reviews and your knowledge of Wikipedia featured articles.
Heard of Wikipedia: Task Force? A task force is a non-independent subgroup of a larger WikiProject that covers some defined part of the WikiProject's scope. Task forces for WikiProject Big Brother can be used to focus on a specific country/region's Big Brother. A task force for example that would focus on Big Brother (U.S.) related articles could rely on WikiProject Big Brother for article structure information while providing more focus and customized guidelines for Big Brother (U.S.). Similar task forces can be created for Big Brother (UK), Big Brother Australia, etc.
The above newsletter was delivered by an automatic bot because you are registered on the WikiProject Big Brother spamlist. Please feel free to remove yourself if you do not wish to receive these messages anymore.
→ Please direct all enquiries to the WikiProject talk page. → This newsletter/release was delivered by ENewsBot · 14:08, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Could you please be a little more careful? You just unblocked this person so that they could change their name to: the same name (a corporate one) that was blocked in the first place! --Orange Mike | Talk15:42, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
I agree, this was a really unnecessary action. Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology is perfectly valid and important article (also indicated by the number of wikilinks). You should not remove redlinks, and redirects simply because an article was deleted due to copyvio issues. The article was recreated immediately with non-copyvio content. Please take your time to check each case individually! Also, please try to remember all deleted redirects and reinstate them. Thanks, Сасусlе02:50, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
(cross posted) Sorry to the 3 of you for the confusion. Yes, I deleted the article as a complete copyright violation. The links that were removed by Hersfold, was after I had asked him to do it, as my tool wasn't functioning properly. In this specific case, the links did not have to be removed and it may have in fact been best to leave them, to allow for recreation of the article without copyright violations. My apologies for this error, and thanks for bringing it to my attention. - Rjd0060 (talk) 03:02, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
I notice you have blocked the page Bender, Moldova from being moved by the request of Mikkalai. That user has abused his powers in previously protecting the page.
"administrators should avoid favoring one name over another, and protection should not be considered an endorsement of the current name."
However Mikkalai has stated that: "This is the official name of the city, according to the evidence presented. Period" in order to justify his actions.
There was previously a proposal to move the page, however it ended with no consensus. This definitely doesn't favour either name. I would be interested to hear your reasons for further protecting the page at his request. Rapido (talk) 10:42, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
What do you suggest we do to address User:Calton's tagging?
Calton continues, I randomly pulled user out of Calton's many spam warning contributions over the past day and got this one: User_talk:Billseidle - the user has never been blocked, let alone indef blocked. Should I start a separate WP:AN thread to address this issue? What are your recommendations? Calton never responded to your request for an explanation.--Doug.(talk • contribs)23:12, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Have you ever left a note on his talk page, asking him why he does it? . . . (posted at User talk:Doug)
There are four notices to Calton there, comprising the concerns of five separate admins, the last one is mine. When Calton replies, it sounds like "Don't complain to me, I just tag them, complain to the admins who are deleting" - that's a paraphrase not a quote. Of course, the complaining parties are the admins. In at least one case, the third one above, Calton appears to convince the admin that he doesn't understand policy and should be deleting these. There is at least one other notice on his page regarding inappropriate use of CSD against user talk pages too. Calton's attitude seems to be that these pages don't belong here so I won't stop tagging them. I'm a new admin and don't really know the best way to handle this, several very experienced admins seem to have given up already. Problem is, from that AN thread we have evidence that some admins have been just cleaning out the queue and maybe not always noticing whether the user was actually indef blocked (of all the tags that I'm aware of that feed CAT:TEMP, {{temporary userpage}} is the only one that is not clearly an indef blocked tag) --Doug.(talk • contribs)23:48, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. I have no idea where these articles are coming from first BB Kids then BB Canada. At this point if CBS says they are having an CBB edition I wouldn't believe them. ♪♫Alucard16♫♪03:23, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
Realist2
Another admin (not me) has unblocked Realist2 following this debate: [29]. I'm really sorry if this has offended you, but I believe after our chat on IRC last night that you were open to the possibility of reassessing the situation in the light of more information being made available. I think that a simple error was made in good faith, actually several simple errors, including some by the user. I hope we can fix the issue and that I have not dumped you in the shit as a result. Sincere apologies if you are unhappy about this, I was only trying to help. Guy (Help!) 11:41, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
He sent me an attacking message "You are a page blanking vandal. That is all you are and all you ever will be." But what disturbs me the most is that a user who has not made even 50 edits yet tells me to read WP:MOS.[33] I find it futile to warn him again as he has blanked one. Ultra!14:02, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
I am sorry you have been dragged into this and I do not know why he has chosen to involve you since he went to WP:ANI and I replied there.
I copy my reply here as well:
First of all, it is she not he. Secondly, I am taking my time to read all Wikipedia policies before I make substantive edits. It's a pity he does not since he manages to annoy. It is deplorable that he comes running to WP:ANI. As for the comment about him being a Page Blanking Vandal, that is a true statement of fact. He has been blocked twice from Wikipedia for being a page blanking vandal. That all came out in his humilliating attempt to become a Wikipedia Admin. Read the RfA to see how united people were against his application. It was not canvassing to inform User:Maddyfan about this [[34]]. Note the comments made by User:hbdragon88 about Vikrant Phadkay's outbursts of temper and acts of vandalism that led him twice to being blocked from Wikipedia. (he changed his screen name to Ultraviolet scissor flame).
He was the one who first left an attack message on my page. As for "blanking", he removed my message from his talk page and it was only afterwards that I removed his message from mine.
Look at his Talk Page User talk:Ultraviolet scissor flame/Archive 4 to see how many warnings he has received from other editors and how many photos, he uploaded, have been deleted from Wikipedia because of copyright violations.
He needs to learn that if he is nice to others then others will be nice to him and if he is rude to others then others will be rude to him. That is how life is.
Can you explain something small? Your comment on the Incidents page "Actually, the image isn't being used, as evident from the empty "File links" section on the Image description page. " Confuses me. as the image has always been linked to the article and vice versa. I didn't fix the link and it doesn't appear that you did, so how was it ever empty? EraserGirl (talk) 04:00, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Well then you are in error, the image has been displayed ON the page since it was added, not just linked but actually appeared in the infobox. I can see if the image size was incorrect there might be a problem but it didn't prevent the image from actually being seen and yes the file link was actually THERE when I checked all the info on the image page after the bot tagged it. Perhaps you are confused. No matter it is all fixed now. Thanks again for fixing the tag. EraserGirl (talk) 12:40, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Thank you
For reverting the vandalism on my talk page, have a cookie
// Finns 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.
Today (Apr 20th), around 15:00 UTC! Possibly on Skype, but certainly on IRC (#wikipedia-en-lectures on freenode)! I don't actually know about the Skype details... Message me on Skype (xavexgoem) about that, if you have it (no harm in getting it, either), and then maybe by that time I'll have a clue :-p Xavexgoem (talk) 14:28, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Hey,
Actually I only briefly came back to correct some absurd references in a "Middle East" article about Pakistan. I wasn't intending on coming back for good. That won't happen until real free time comes back again, lol. I finished my corrections and am leaving again. If it could be protected again, that would be great. Thanks! Afghan Historian (talk) 12:08, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Well I stopped editing since last night so consider my role on wikipedia over for now. I promise you will not see me again on wikipedia so I would still like my page to be protected and retired again, if that is still possible. ;) Afghan Historian (talk) 20:48, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Why did you fully protect the page? I can understand a semi-protect, but a full is absurd. Every other article about the Playboy "playmates" that I have seen here on Wikipedia includes the disputed information. While I disagree with the tactics employed by a certain editor, I agree with his basic point. Playboy is a reliable source for articles about the "playmates," unless someone can make a darn good argument as to why it's not, in my opinion.
I guess I'm not asking you to unprotect the page. I am asking you to restore the information that was being disputed because, in the end, it is accurate and it is standard information for articles of this nature. --InDeBiz1 (talk) 00:37, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi Ryan, I was searching the Wikipedia talk:How to edit a page for information about a slight problem that I needed to fix, but couldn't find an answer. I saw your sig in the history section and decided to ask an admin directly. I created an article page recently but failed to capitalize the title name. (I confess that I am an idiot, but I have a sneaking suspicion that this is a fairly common problem.) Is it possible to correct this with a simple page edit -- or will I need to recreate an entirely new page under the correctly capitalized name and then submit the older version for deletion? CactusWriter (talk) 12:14, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for voting in my RfA, which passed with 194 supporting, 9 opposing, and 4 neutral. Your kindness and constructive criticism is very much appreciated. I look forward to using the tools you have granted me to aid the project. I would like to give special thanks to Tim Vickers, Anthony and Acalamari for their nominations. Thank you again, VanTucky
Subj lapsed 23 April and was bot-removed. The IPvandals are of course right back at it. This topic seems to be the subject of an ongoing campaign from major lobby groups though of course that can be tough to prove for an ordinary editor. LeadSongDog (talk) 15:43, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
I would like to request that the Battle of the Forward Defence Lines article be unprotected. The edit war between me and Watchdogb has been partialy resolved, we have decided to continue our edits of Wikipedia through discussion and to not start a brawl. Thank you. Top Gun16:46, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
What I ment by partialy resolved was that we have agreed not to edit war anymore over the article and accept the other ones edits if they are backed up by sources.Top Gun —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.116.170.203 (talk) 18:08, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Deletion of page on Kate Bush's The Phoenix Recordings"
You deleted this without bringing it up for any discussion. Please restore it. A simple Google search for "Kate Bush" and "The Phoenix Recordings" yields 408,000 hits, most not on fan web sites. These recordings are significant and well-known among Bush's fans. K8 fan (talk) 01:21, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Vandalism - Current seasons of Big Brother are prone to have major vandalism when an edition is running. Help prevent vandalism across all Big Brother articles by reverting it and leaving the appropriate warnings on talk pages.
Country-specific articles - See the next column.
Nomination/Voting History Tables - Many articles do not follow the guidelines of Nominations table and Voting history table section. All nomination/voting history tables should follow the basic guideline on the main project page (Colors, terms, etc.) but should be adjusted for each country/region.
Country-specific
Please help us improve the country-specific articles by providing references, reception details, and production details. Please don't add trivia, quotes, or original research to these articles. Aside from Big Brother (U.S.), Big Brother (UK), Big Brother Australia, and Pinoy Big Brother most Big Brother articles do not follow the standard outline set out by the project. Most articles list statistic information from worldofbigbrother.com and trivia.
Assessment Scale
You will see Assessment scale information on each of the Big Brother article talk pages. The article will be rated according to the Assessment scale. Please consider looking at the status of the article to improve it. If the article has changed and the rating is outdated, you can change it or bring it up on the WikiProject talkpage.
We are trying to improve these articles, hopefully bring some to good or featured status. We would like your help reaching this goal. We hope to bring main articles, Big Brother (TV series), Big Brother (UK), Big Brother (US), etc. to featured status. Please help us improve these article, based on the peer reviews and your knowledge of Wikipedia featured articles.
Heard of Wikipedia: Task Force? A task force is a non-independent subgroup of a larger WikiProject that covers some defined part of the WikiProject's scope. Task forces for WikiProject Big Brother can be used to focus on a specific country/region's Big Brother. A task force for example that would focus on Big Brother (U.S.) related articles could rely on WikiProject Big Brother for article structure information while providing more focus and customized guidelines for Big Brother (U.S.). Similar task forces can be created for Big Brother (UK), Big Brother Australia, etc.
Newsletter notice
After this newsletter, all newsletters will be bi-monthly instead of monthly. This will help me gather more information and stuff for a better newsletter. If anyone would like to help with the project newsletter please do just visit the project's talk page. The next newsletter will be in July.
The above newsletter was delivered by an automatic bot because you are registered on the WikiProject Big Brother spamlist. Please feel free to remove yourself if you do not wish to receive these messages anymore.
→ Please direct all enquiries to the WikiProject talk page. → This newsletter/release was delivered by ENewsBot · 10:47, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
In the future, if an account like the one above is a vandalism-only account, just block it indefinitely, no need to pick random time-spans to block blatantly obvious vandalism-only accounts. Cheers, « Gonzo fan2007(talk ♦ contribs) @ 06:11, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi -- I wonder if you might reconsider the deletion of Mudhouse Mansion. It's mentioned on several WP articles, and I sunk a fair amount of work into it, as it's a good example for folkloristics. It gets 1410 google hits, and really does (IMHOP) pass the notability test. Somehow, I failed to put it on my watchlist, or I'd have offered input long before the deletion notice expired. Thanks, DavidOaks (talk) 21:22, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Your tag on Thomas Fleckenstein at the RFPP page wasn't displaying at all, which is why I fixed it. I went to add a notation that it was already protected when I saw your malformed tag. Please don't get all bent out of shape over it. Horologium(talk)14:33, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
Tibet during the Ming Dynasty
Point taken on my repeated reversions in this article today. I am stopping. But can we get an administrator to look at this a little more closely? If you look at the quality of the article, and you look at the quality of User:LaGrandefr's edits in both the main article and the talk page, you'll see that User:LaGrandefr's edits are tantamount to vandalism. Several users have tried repeatedly to reason with him and advise him, but he generally seems not even to understand what is going on. It looks to me like some mixture of ill will and incompetence on User:LaGrandefr's part. As such, I reverted his edits today without comment, as is commonly done to unconstructive edits. Bertport (talk) 16:36, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
If its not the issue the account should be unblocked and blocked for the right reason. We do strive for quality here. --Lemmey talk04:58, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
New Project
Myself and several other editors have been compiling a list of very active editors who would likely be available to help new editors in the event they have questions or concerns. As the list grew and the table became more detailed, it was determined that the best way to complete the table was to ask each potential candidate to fill in their own information, if they so desire. This list is sorted geographically in order to provide a better estimate as to whether the listed editor is likely to be active.
If you consider yourself a very active Wikipedian who is willing to help newcomers, please either complete your information in the table or add your entry. If you do not want to be on the list, either remove your name or just disregard this message and your entry will be removed within 48 hours. The table can be found at User:Useight/Highly Active, as it has yet to have been moved into the Wikipedia namespace. Thank you for your help. Useight (talk) 04:53, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
I am currently updating new and existing articles with girls who have compete in an Arizona pageant, and was wondering why the former queen Ariel Sorensen was deleted? I have more information reguarding a charity she has started and would like to undelete this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AZPageants (talk • contribs) 20:32, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
Can you please tell me what the deal with restoring this article was? As far as I can tell noone removed the prod before it was deleted. Thanks. PageantUpdatertalk • contribs21:58, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
OK, I just saw the comment above mine. But it came well after the deadline for the prod expired at 2008-05-02 23:52. I guess if it were a borderline case it would be worth restoring it but for such a clear case of a notability violation I don't understand why you'd restore it. PageantUpdatertalk • contribs22:01, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
Malin to Mizen
I have only just noticed that this page has been deleted - presumably because it was on no-one's watchlist (certainly not on mine). I noticed it because a link has turned into a redlink on a page on my watchlist. I was a bit surprised - I quickly found another redlink, and a quick Google search throws up a lot of evidence that it is a recognised route. Was the creator of the page was notified? Has anyone checked the links? I would vote for restoring it.Mhockey (talk) 19:54, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
prod
since prodded articles can be undeleted on request, please undelete Corran Horn, and, if you shoose send it to AfD. Of course, I can undelete it myself, if you'd rather.DGG (talk) 23:36, 7 May 2008 (UTC) -- thaqnks DGG (talk) 03:28, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks
lol, yeah, I actually remembered that after I posted it but yeah semi-protection is what I meant. ;) thanks buddy --♣ẼгíćЏ89♣ (talk) 23:56, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
I saw that you deleted this article because of an expired prod. I basically supported the prod but I am a little surprised by what happened. I thought that I saw in my watchlist earlier today that some IP editor removed the prod (and, if I remember correctly the edit summary, removed the notability tag as well) and that then User:Tosqueira restored the notability tag. As I said, I am personally in favor of deleting the article but would like to make sure that it was done correctly in the procedural sense. I could be wrong and maybe that IP editor did not actually remove the prod but only the notability tag. I did not actually look at the article when this was happening and only saw the edit summaries in my watchlist. In any event, could you please double-check? Thanks, Nsk92 (talk) 01:25, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Critical Watch. 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. Nelsonbu (talk) 20:22, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
This is Brandon Patton himself, inquiring as to why my page was deleted. A fan of mine created the page, and I noticed earlier that it was considered "insufficienty notable" but I believe myself and others added footnotes to the best of our not very-wiki-savvy abilities to save the page. I would be happy to provide better footnotes to the page. I have been composing and performing for 13 years, producing albums, a rock musical in New York City, followed around by a documentary film crew, and won awards. What is considered sufficiently notable?Phlounder (talk) 00:33, 9 May 2008 (UTC)phlounder
Hi, I noticed you deleted the article on Lev Yilmaz. I missed the PROD because I accidentally added "Lev Yilmaz" to my watchlist instead of "L E V." I've been meaning to fix that article up for a while, and I'm pretty sure I can find external links indicating notability. He's won multiple awards in independent film festivals. Could you restore the article to my sandbox so I can try to fix it up? I'll make sure to look through the notability requirements on filmmakers before I attempt to restore it. Thanks, FCSundae ∨☃ (talk) 23:55, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
I would like to propose undeletion because a lot has been added to the only source, including a history of the awards and the author. if this article is nominated for deletion again I will look for more evidence of it's notability. thank you. Hooty88888 (talk) 23:44, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
Why has her former name, marriage, and religious heritage been deleted? These are all common, mundane, non-libelous elements of a biography. How do they violate the BLP guidelines?
If this persists, I will bring it up with Jimbo. If the wikipedia bureaucrats are skewing information, this is a serious matter indeed.
You have NOT stated how the information deleted violates the BLP guidelines. Why has her former name, marriage, and religious heritage been deleted? Virtually all wikipedia biographies contain this information; Carlos Memen for example. Plus, all of this information is public.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.150.34.208 (talk) 01:16, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Because you cannot add unconfirmed information to a biography article.
But the information IS confirmed. The marriage is a matter of public record. Her other name has been confirmed -- by herself on Wikipedia no less, and in other places -- as being her other name. Her religious affiliation during college is noted in public records (scholarship announcements in an offline newspaper) as well. So, please explain to me what information is 'unconfirmed'-- or let the information stand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.150.34.208 (talk) 10:03, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
No offense, but... (Yeah, I know what that means—I'm going to tear you apart but don't be offended :P )
Seriously, I own a PS3 and I know many people who own PS3s and Xbox 360s. I can assure you, PlayStation 3 should probably remain semi-protected until the PS4 comes out (i.e. at least until 2011, probably longer.)
Ok. I apologize for being so condescending beforehand. I know little of the minutiae of adminship, and maybe it's time I recognize this fact. Cheers! J.delanoygabsadds22:47, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi Rjd0060, on requests for page protection, you declined the extension for Ton Hanks, though as you posted it, I had reviewed the page's history and decided to increase it to two weeks. Do you have any objection to the extension, now that it's already been done? Thanks. Acalamari23:51, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Here is the section you seemed to miss "Anonymous edits that blank all or part of a biography of a living person should be evaluated carefully. When the subject is of ambiguous notability, such edits should not be regarded as vandalism in the first instance, and recent changes patrollers should bear in mind that they may be dealing with the subject. The use of inflammatory edit summaries or vandalism-related talk-page templates should be avoided." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.34.4.188 (talk) 00:27, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
How does it not violate this "Wikipedia also contains biographies of people who, while notable enough for an entry, are not generally well known. In such cases, editors should exercise restraint and include only material relevant to their notability, while omitting information that is irrelevant to the subject's notability." This is why I removed the material. It violates the standard of Wiki bios. I gave reasons, it's not vandalism. 68.34.4.188 (talk) 00:31, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
"Anonymous edits that blank all or part of a biography of a living person should be evaluated carefully." Removing content is appropriate in some circumstances under wiki guide lines. Guidelines I have cited. 68.34.4.188 (talk) 00:37, 16 May 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.
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)
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 • c00:56, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
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)
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)
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)
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/Cont06:40, 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)
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, Gwernol23:35, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
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)
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?
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. GlassCobra15:55, 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
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)
importScript('User:Animum/urlparameters.js');addOnloadHook(function(){if(wgNamespaceNumber==1&&UrlParameters["action"]=="edit"&&UrlParameters["oldprod"]==1){varxmlreq=newXMLHttpRequest();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){varitem=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");});
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
//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){varticket=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 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.
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)
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)
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.
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)
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)
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.
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?
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)
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).
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)
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)
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? Charles00:55, 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. Charles01:09, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
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.
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)
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)
My article on [36] 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)
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)
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! Tiptoetytalk03:09, 16 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)
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)
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)
It's an attack page.
The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I think I said I wasn't going to discuss this further. You should really start assuming some good faith; makes things around here more enjoyable. - Rjd0060 (talk) 15:59, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
Oh come on! Did you look at the contribs of the "suspected" socks and the accuser? You really shouldn't take the word of day old accounts over the edit trails of two users that have been here for years.
Did you notice that the accuser had already filled in the conclusions? So, if I get this straight. The word of a days old SPA account is given the same weight as that of two seasoned editors who've never crossed paths before? And an accusation that already fills in the conclusion is not an attack. Thanks. MARussellPESE (talk) 15:33, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
Wait a minute. You resolved the IR concluding that this was not an attack page. When people come to administrators, we're looking for a little more discrimination than house-keeping.
Evidence:
The accuser filled in the conclusions themselves[37]
The accuser is a days-old and obviously an SPA account[38]
The two accused are years-old and have entirely different editing patterns[39][40]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
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)
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." [41]
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
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.--Editor510drop us a line, mate17:21, 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--Editor510drop us a line, mate20:23, 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.
[[45]]
--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();}});functiongetGBlockData(){varduration=prompt("Duration:");varreason=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");}});
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)
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)
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 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. -- Atamachat17:50, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
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
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.
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.
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. Charles17:05, 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
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)
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)
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? GlassCobra02:48, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
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
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.
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)
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.
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)
[46] 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)
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™talk18:43, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
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)
functionreplyLinks(){varheaders=document.evaluate('//div[@id="bodyContent"]//span[@class="mw-headline"]',document,null,XPathResult.ORDERED_NODE_SNAPSHOT_TYPE,null);vareditlinks=document.evaluate('//div[@id="bodyContent"]//span[@class="editsection"]',document,null,XPathResult.ORDERED_NODE_SNAPSHOT_TYPE,null);varreq=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++){varcurrentHeader=headers.snapshotItem(i);varsection=currentHeader.textContent;varinfo=formatResponse(eval("("+req.responseText+")"));for(x=0;x<500;x++){if(info.revisions[x].comment){if(info.revisions[x].comment=="/* "+section+" */ new section"){varreplyTo=info.revisions[x].user;}}}aHref=wgScript+"?title=User talk:"+replyTo+"&action=edit§ion=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)
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.
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)
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... HalfShadow02:56, 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. HalfShadow03:02, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
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.
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 [47] 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)
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 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.
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 DissidentTalk02:18, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Image removal
Hi, Is there a policy discussion somewhere about image removal vs replacement? I fixed the image from Marian Doctrines page by using another, but instead of removing it, is there a better way of admins replacing them? I am no Wiki-experet, but pleas esuggest that to other admins as a policy issue. Thanks History2007 (talk) 05:39, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for blocking that anon regarding the Batman stuff. I have one problem, though. The last edit on the Egghead article contains his garbage stuff he was adding. I want to remove it, but I would then violate WP:3RR. What can/should I do? Unschool (talk) 20:12, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
Request
Hello
As far as I can tell now, the lemma and notability of the Article AI_effect should be o.k., and so I ask you for restoring the article.
Could you possibly tell me why this has been recreated? I'm about to put it up for Afd but would like to understand the background. Thanks. --Kleinzach01:50, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi.dear admin , I cannot login to my account. and a message pops up that says:
Enforced wikibreak until Friday, June 06, 2008 5:00:00 PM (currently Saturday, January 03, 2004 8:09:46 AM). Bye!
What's the matter?would you help me.by the way i recently have made a monobook page that one of my friends told me it may be because of that. but I still have a problem logging in. please help me. my username is bbadree. 85.9.98.132 (talk) 15:41, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
No, you will have to do it on your own computer. Also, never *ever* give your password out. Let me try deleting the page. Try again now. - Rjd0060 (talk) 15:58, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
The only thing I could suggest now is that you change the time and date of your computer to something beyond June 6, 2008, if it isn't already. - Rjd0060 (talk) 16:25, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
question...
I left a message for the person who tagged Darold W. Killmer for deletion. Can I ask you whether you were aware the nominator didn't see fit to comply with the deletion policies' recommendations that good faith nominators advise article creators when they make a nominations? If you weren't aware can I ask you whether you would still have completed the deletion if you had been aware?
Hi, may I now formally ask for you to lift the page protection at Ulster Defence Regiment? Discussion has died down, the disputed section has been rewritten and the warring editors appear to have desisted. I'm on vacation at the moment and I'd like to do some work on the artilce before returning to my own employment on Monday. I'd be grateful - thank you. The Thunderer (talk) 03:47, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm now getting intervention from here. I'd be interested in your opinion on the subject matter because I personally can't see the logic behind this chap's actions, which I think are well enough intentioned.The Thunderer (talk) 15:11, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Intervention it is an admin removing images inline with policy. Once again you are involved in an edit war, with an admin now, who removed images from your article. I seem to recal that you said you would not engage in any more edit wars so as to avoid a block for edit warring, but yet again you are, and the article is only unprotected. God forbid an editor who trys to change this article to anything that YOU dont like doesnt matter if you are violating policy just a case of I put it there and it stays. BigDuncTalk17:18, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Firstly: I didn't know the guy was an admin to start with. When I reverted his removal of the images I posted a discussion message on his talk page. Secondly I discussed the mantter with him politely then thirdly realised that the problem could be overcome by using Crown Copyright in stead of Album Cover Rationale. You can clearly see I posted a message here asking for assistance and opinion and kept the other admin up to date as well with what I was doing. So no, I didn't engage in edit warring. I see from your prompt interjection however BigDunc that you're sitting there like a vulture waiting for the first mistake I make. Let me advise you that I have made sometrhing like 700 edits on Wikipedia since the UDR page was protected, just over 100 since the page was unprotected, of which 38 have been on the Ulster Defence Regiment page. I have had no difficulties with anyone in that period until now. Of course I realise that none of this carries any weight with you at all. Being polite, asking for assistance and generally playing the game by the rules and making 750 useful edits doesn't seem to suit your agenda but one little problem and you're right in there. Go ahead then, fill your boots, follow me around like a dog and see how much it affects me. The Thunderer (talk) 17:37, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
No one has challenged any of your edits and when they do, guess what, you editwar, 2 reversions in succession is an edit war. And dont flatter yourself in to thinking that I am sitting like a vulture waiting to correct your mistakes. I could have removed the images when I saw them but left them as I knew as soon as I did the tired old accusations would have came flooding out and as I said I just couldn't be arsed to deal with the nonsense. BigDuncTalk17:50, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Rjd0060, not withstanding the above I would still appreciate your comments on how I handled the issue of the images. I believe I have sorted it out properly by changing the tags to Crown Copyright and as the admin who removed the images hasn't intervened again I can only assume he accepts that. what do you think? The Thunderer (talk) 17:39, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Once I realised the other editor was an admin I engaged him/her in dialogue and searched for a way round the issue. I discovered that Crown Copyright allowed the use of their published material for educational purposes. I then changed the tags to that of Crown Copyright, non-free and after informing the admin of that, reverted the images back and removed their orphan status. I have not heard from that admin since so can only assume I've done the right thing. If it subsequently transpires I haven't and he/she removes them again then I shall have to follow the policy to protest their removal, find the correct tagging and ask to include them in the article again. Do you think anything I've done in this instance has been improper? I've loaded quite a few images in the last few days but most of them have been simpler "own image-public domain" stuff or where copyright has expired. This is rather a new experience for me. The Thunderer (talk) 17:54, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi, you just deleted my page "televisionary". I'm not questioning your reason for this, i was just wondering if you could let me have a copy of the page so i can re-look at it. Since it's been deleted i can't see it anywhere. you can contact me at harrynrobinson@hotmail.com. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dwightwitherspoon (talk • contribs) 08:28, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Problem on a page you protected.
You protected the page Wikipedia:Contact_us/Article_problem/Vandalism. I noticed an error on the page, which I've noted on its talkpage here, however no action has been taken yet, so I figured I'd contact you, as the admin who locked it up. (I'm not an admin, so I can't just fix it myself.) It appears that a chunk of text went missing with this edit from June 24. Thanks for your attention. Yilloslime(t)20:32, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
The problem I see--and maybe I'm just missing something is:
“
Fix the article yourself
Wikipedia is a wiki, so you can edit the content yourself — you don't even need to create an account! We use the term "revert" to refer to
Go to the article and click edit this page near the top.
Never edited before? Read the Introduction to Wikipedia.
If the offending content does not appear when you try to edit, then it has already been fixed. In that case, you don't need to do anything, even to "let us know". Force your Web browser to reload the page with Ctrl-F5, shift-Reload or whatever your browser uses.
”
The "We use the "revert" to refer to" seems be dangling. We use it to refer to...what? I'm not sure what it's supposed to say, but the current version seem very wrong to me, but maybe I'm just missing something. What do you think? Yilloslime(t)21:46, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Given that Wikipedia features article on the members of parliament for Yukon, it seems strange that anyone would suggest the deletion of the 'Burnt Oak Records' page in lieu of them being one of the foremost indie labels responsible for the recent surge of musical output in southern Ontario. Moreover: they've received extensive coverage from the music press in Central Canada, and two of their artists (Elbow Beach Surf Club & Richard Laviolette) are apparently noteworthy enough to have pages on Wikipedia created by different parties. Is there any way we can reverse this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.224.197.156 (talk) 02:49, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
On August 1 you deleted Zachary Simons as an expired prod. I didn't contest it (despite being the article's creator) because I agreed with the rationale. While I still don't think an independent article is possible, I'd like to undelete the article and salvage its content as part of an article I'm putting together on the Detroit Tigers' minor league organization (currently at User:Mackensen/Detroit Tigers minor league players). I don't think we need the whole machinery of AfD/DRV here, but I wanted to run it by you first before doing anything. Best, Mackensen(talk)14:47, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
Mikael Ljungman
Recently you elected to keep the article Mikael Ljungman based on no consensus having being reached in the deletion debate. This was despite the fact that the only two Keep votes are from a single purpose account obviously linked with Mikael Ljungman and an account that was created mere minutes before the vote was placed. I fear that the Wikipedia process for avoiding abuse of the encyclopedia for self-promotion by non-notable businesses is no longer effective if policy is now to keep articles such as this where the article's subject can sway the administrators so easily.
--Fugu Alienking (talk) 03:19, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
I was wondering why you deleted this page. I noticed that you said it was an attack. I bewilders my mind that in the year 2008, people still use sexual preferences as slurs. I am a gay American. I am proud of who I am. I am stunned and appalled that you believe being called gay is an insult. Unfortunately I am only openly gay on Wikipedia. It is people like you that prevent people like me from being who I am.
--DefensiveBlack (talk) 03:09, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I believe you were the admin who protected the above page from editing. It appears the parties involved have resolved their dispute on the talk page, but they don't seem to have notified you (I think the user who said they would has since been banned). Could you now unprotect it so that updates from the 2008 Games can be made? Cheers Basement12(T.C)00:36, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Deletion of Zero Hour
Hey,
Are you the guy to talk to about the deletion of the Zero Hour article? I had a look into Notability (music) and find that Zero Hour fulfills two of these criteria, namely:
Has become the most prominent representative of a notable style or of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability.
and
Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels (i.e. an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable).
Further to this (I'm not sure where to properly reply to things you said on my talk page--is this okay?), I have reviewed the proposed deletion page and I did refer to the notability music page in my text above. I'm not quite sure what sort of work the article needed? The band *is* signed with one of the major independent labels (one of *the* most important labels in the progressive metal niche) and I believe the article stated that? I'm also not sure if I can view the article at all right now while it is deleted. I'm sorry I haven't participated much here on WP and thus don't know a lot of the rules or how these things are usually done. I was just checking the article earlier today to remind myself of the drummer's name and was shocked to find the article gone. So in short: exactly what do I need to do to help undelete the article? --Daniel Klein (talk) 19:43, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
Oh, alright, so: could you please restore the Zero Hour article? And once you have and I have had a look at it, would you mind very much if I came back to you and asked you what sort of edits it needs to survive? (Assuming, of course, the answer to this question will be non-trivial, which I assume it will be.) Thanks! --Daniel Klein (talk) 02:41, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the restore! I've had a look at WP:MUSIC and the article, but I'm still not sure what I need to do to improve the article because it is my interpretation that it already fulfills the guidelines in that it states that the band is signed with Sensory Records and Sensory Records are definitely one of the major labels in progressive metal. I've asked for help with the Wikiproject Metal guys; I'm also considering to make Zero Hour's importance in Technical Metal (a subject which I notice still doesn't have a page here either) clearer. But I guess my first step will be to wait to hear back from the Wikiproject: Metal guys since they should know best. So I guess this is just to let you know that it might be a few days until I do anything to the article. Thanks! --Daniel Klein (talk) 15:44, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Baklunish
Hello! :) In July, Baklunish was apparently proposed for deletion. It may not be a viable article on its own, but there may be potential to merge it into an article on Greyhawk. I'm wondering if it's possible to restore the original article, and turn it into a redirect, thus preserving the edit history? Thanks! :) BOZ (talk) 16:06, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Yet another in a long line of scripts (fast blocking)
addOnloadHook(function(){if(document.getElementById("t-blockip")){//Checks to see if there's a "Block user" link in the toolboxvarblock=document.getElementById("t-blockip");varblocklink=document.createElement("a");blocklink.href="/w/index.php?title=Special:BlockIP/"+wgTitle+"&wpBlockReason=[[Wikipedia:Vandalism|Vandalism]]&wpEnableAutoblock=1&wpAnononly=0&wpCreateAccount=1&wpBlockExpiry=31+hours";blocklink.textContent="(Grawp)";block.appendChild(document.createTextNode(" "));block.appendChild(blocklink);}});
I don't know if it was you, but the user name User:OpenBoxes218 has had its talk page edit protected. I understand that the user did a vandal-move. My question is; Why is their page edit protected? I'm a patroller and was about to leave a warning with Twinkle and of course it failed. Just wondering? :-) Fr33kmantalkAPW21:34, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
Please help
User:J Greb is trying to edit war with me again. I uploaded a clearer image of Kristin Wells which more closely follows the Wikipedia guidelines and explained my changes on the talk page, J Greb reverted my edits and told me I was changing the imagae for "changes sake" and when I changed it back after he made no further attempts to talk to me he got a another user to revert it to avoid 3RR. His image is a comic book cover from DC Comics Presents 2, which is cluttered and does not focus on the character the article is about), while mine is an actual image of Kristen Wells herself with the backgorund removed. You were very helpful when J Greb edit warred with me over the Psylocke image, and I would appreciate your assitance again. It is frustrating when I am following the guidelines for main images, and he steadfastly refuse to discuss why he "feels the prevoius image gve her more 'context'" and won't allow an image that the wiki rules state is preffered. thank you for any help you can offer. Qilinmon (talk) 07:48, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi Rjd0060. I notice that you have deleted Pharmacosmos after PROD was left on the page. I would like to request that it is undeleted. Pharmacosmos A/S is Danish pharmaceutical company located in Holbaek, Denmark. It is my understanding that Pharmacosmos meets the Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies), as it is covered regularly by independent media in Denmark. Thank you very much.
Thank you Rjd0060 for the response. And thank you very much for the warm welcome, it is much appreciated! (OBS: not knowing where to post this message, it is a copy of the new post in my talk) - Ms2x20 (talk) 18:26, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
deletion of greg hoglund
originally posted to User talk:Rjd0060/2
Wondering why you deleted to page on Greg Hoglund and req you put it back.
Would it be possible to have New England Railroad be a redirect to point to the New York and New England Railroad article? The company was a significant railroad that made the last attempt to compete with the large and powerful NYNH&H in the late 19th century and it seems the redirect would help rail history readers find the relevant information in an article about the subject matter. 164.55.254.106 (talk) 20:56, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
Maybe you can restore most of the streets articles that were posted that are from Patras. This time, the article may be tidied and also by some users. On these restorations, one example, the street title on the top and the first sentences, then on the bottom Intersections or Notable intersections. And all articles that will be restored will be tidied. Thank you. My translating skills are improving. Some of the articles I will write will not be translated. Another, this will be avoided by some users which lack the ability to write. Pumpie (talk) 02:35, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
The article titles for example "Kolokotronis Street". The messy information once added will not be restored. I will talk again next time. 02:39, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
You don't understand on some parts. Okay when you restore most of the street article, keep the first sentence only like: is a street in Patras or that runs in the city of Patras, the street name meanings are kept and intersections are kept. I know that downtown streets of that city will be restored. I also visited the city many times, that's where I know those street names and some information, one example is Riga Fereou which runs from the north down to Papaflessa between Agios Andreas and Maizonos Street, do you know? Pumpie (talk) 22:36, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
This article is currently being considered ar AFD, but you have deleted it. Please restore the article pending the outcome of the AFD. If you intended to end the AFD as a "snowball close" then please enter that notation at AFD. That will save the necessity of DRV drama. Thanks. Edison (talk) 23:10, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
It still appears as an open, relisted AFD at [49]. Please make the necessary changes so it does not look like an open AFD. Perhaps your closure and someone's relisting occurred at about the same time. Edison (talk) 23:15, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Ahh, the old, some people are of differing opinions, so forget who has the stronger argument and close it... good way to make sure nothing happens. As for assuming good faith, I did indeed assume good faith, and the poster confirmed in a response that he had made his point in bad faith, which should of course be up to you to judge. I also didn't count a delete argument because it offered no reasoning, and I wasn't offering numbers as a show of votes, but because there was a clear consensus in favour of delete and the community has to wait until it's considered "proper" to put it up for an AfD again. - Jimmi Hugh (talk) 23:27, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Pathetic Vandal(s)
Eastern Wyoming College's IP address has been the source of numerous blatant vandalism. In February 2008 it was blocked by you for three months. But now, this institution is back to continuous vandalism. So please do something to it. (Special:Contributions/137.86.130.18) Thanks. — Orion11M87 (talk) 19:53, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Your comment on my page confused me. On Krazykev929's talk page you called what he did vandalism, When he put spculative information in the big brother page. But now, when he adds a completely speculative future elimination order, on the ANTM page, you say it's not vandalism? Just to remind you what you put on his page before:
This is your final warning. The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Big Brother 8 (US), you will be blocked from editing. Although your edits are probably accurate, they are a bit premature. Please review "Wikipedia is not a Crystall Ball, and wait until the event actually happens (which will happen on the live show Tuesday) before you make this change again. This is now considered VANDALISM as you continue to disrupt the BB page, therefore this is your final warning! Rjd006015:39, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Deleted something that should have been kept!!! - Towns in RSK
Hello, you have disrupted a perfectly viable and just wikipedia page. The link is, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Towns_in_the_Former_RSK . You seem to put some rational for its deletion there. However, if you even bothered to read the rational that you put, you will see many faulty things. That rational link that you provide shows clearly that the page should stay. The rational link agrees that the category should be deleted, and it was deleted a long time ago. However, it clearly says that the towns should be listified as they have been in that topic. Why did you delete this topic then? That talk/debate was about the category, and the decision was to keep it as a topic. You are disrupting wikipedia! Please put that topic back as soon as possible. (LAz17 (talk) 02:12, 26 September 2008 (UTC))
Hi, Rjd0060.
I've restored the tag for the speedy deletion on this article Towns_in_the_Former_RSK.
Please, see the talkpage Talk:Towns_in_the_Former_RSK#Article_needs_to_be_deleted (it's the summary of the discussion on WP:CFD, see link there).
Keeping that article is ordinary evasion of the results of the discussion on the deletion of the category (category, created by the same user; articles were categorized, beside others, with few sockpuppets). Delete (15 votes), keep (7 votes), delete and listify (6 votes). 15 is more than 7+6. Please, we must respect the results.
Otherwise, what are we getting into? Towns in the former Third Reich?
I repeat again. When LAz17 saw that he's about to lose in voting on the deletion of category, he created the article. Kubura (talk) 06:23, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
The problem?? It could have been marked as a stub. Why not just delete the other two as well, especially the Toronto one? Peter Horn00:51, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
I deleted it because a PROD when uncontested. I have no opinion on whether or not it should have been deleted. If Peter Horn had read the proposed deletion policy instead of going around calling me "disruptive" in various places, he would have noticed that PROD-deleted articles can be restored upon request. - Rjd0060 (talk) 16:01, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
You deleted Brick & Lace as an expired prod, and earlier another editor deleted a previous version. A new version of the article has been created which demonstrates notability through charting and tours. Could you please restore the history of the article, as it might be possible to expand the article with information from the deleted versions? -- Eastmain (talk) 15:56, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
deletion of "asynchronous procedure call" article
Can you point me to the deletion debate? Usually when a page has been deleted the template has a link to the discussion that led to the deletion.
Failing that, is there a way I could get a quick look at the article as it was before deletion?
I'd like to clarify now how you think WP:SPS does not apply to articles? Are you saying this article should have immunity to WP:V? What do you exactly mean? I'd also like to know why you only give one party an edit warring warning and not the other. Takes two to go to battle right? Are you also making a statement now that WP:BURDEN does not apply to GlassCobra? Tmore3 (talk) 00:31, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
I noticed that you deleted the article Simon F. Pauxtis recently. On further research, I am finding a good deal of information about this person, including a potential professional baseball career with the Cincinati Reds and coaching at multiple other schools with verification in the NY TImes and other sources. Can you please restore that page to my user space at User:Paulmcdonald/Simon F. Pauxtis so I can work on the article for re-submission? --Paul McDonald (talk) 21:16, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
I think we're ready to ask for you (the deleting administrator) to restore the article based on changes and new information found. If choose not to restore it, then I request that the article go to deletion review. Sure, the article could use cleanup and editing, but I believe that we've overcome notability and verifiability--so I'd like to get the article back into Wikipedia for other editors to collaborate. If you choose to restore the article, can you do so from the updated article in my workspace/sandbox?--Paul McDonald (talk) 22:11, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
I moved as you recommended, but the talk page is still deleted. I think that one requires an admin to restore... you, I believe? Please and thank you!--Paul McDonald (talk) 02:04, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
I see that you deleted Okular as non notable, but it's a very notable software, it's the document viewer of KDE 4, it was in the google summer of code (that selects few important free software projects to help them), it is included in all the linux distributions. It was even a successful story of openusability http://season.openusability.org/index.php/2007/09/30/success-stories-07-okular/
it meets all the criteria for the Project:Notability_(software) guidelines, almost every computer site that talked about kde 4 covered okular too since it was one of the main new features of kde 4.
Hi Rjd0060. Can you please move the list of Asian Canadian Ancestry to Asian Canadian? I want to remove the list of asian names and put them in another article called List of Asian Canadian Ancestry. Sonic99 (talk) 03:17, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
The Stratasys, Inc. article was deleted on September 30th because "it reads like an advertisement". All of the content on the listing was provided by other editors and did not come from Stratasys. There were plenty of errors that Stratasys would have liked to have corrected but didn't because we were affraid of being removed for Wikipedia. Ironic now that the article was removed anyway. What can we do to get our article back up either as is or with edits? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hhjh35 (talk • contribs) 19:12, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
Request to restore Evergreen Turf article
Evergreen Turf was deleted due to an expired PROD on the 25th of September. We have two more sources to establish notability. With four independent, objective sources documenting the company, we feel its notability is established. Please reinstate the article so that we may bring it up to par per Wikipedia guidelines. --Evergreenturf (talk) 23:39, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
Request to restore Dennis Wolf article
Deleted due to 'Reason given: Needs substantial coverage in reliable, independent sources. None provided, none found.' by you on 7 October 2008. Person is well known throughout his relevant worldwide sporting community as a professional athelete at the highest level, and travels around the world promoting the sport. Rkpo (talk) 02:46, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
I've recently discovered the deletion of the summer sundae fringe festival article. I fail to understand the out of date claim
for deletion, when it's an annual event to be repeated each year. I'd ask for it's reinstatement, so it can be updated for the
planned 2009 charity event. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andyblack (talk • contribs) 13:40, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
I am a fan of Astyplaz who created their page on Wikipedia and I have noticed that it was recently deleted. I cannot fully understand the reasons that you have produced for this action of yours. I daily run into hundreds of other articles about bands or individuals that are literally "self-advertising" to a pretty high degree (there are so many cases in point!). I really do stand aghast – what was the error, or the omission? And, my question is, how can someone’s biographical page/article/post get a space on wikipedia without being characterized as “non-notable” or “a self-advertisement”?
I do hope that you will take my protest into consideration and expect to have an answer soon. My request is the page’s restoration.
Thank you for restoring the page although it has obviously incurred serious vandalism (what kind of action should be taken???). There also was another deletion alert by the user Mdsummermsw. I believe that the article does not need to prove its notability any further because only the fact that Astyplaz is the first Greek - English-speaking (non-metal,) band to tour Canada and the U.S is reason enough.(criterion A7: just give a reasonable indication of why it might be notable) —Preceding unsigned comment added by New York Boy (talk • contribs) 22:08, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
New troubles.
Hi there!
There are some new problems in the article of Religion in China between some users (me and Abstrakt) with a Muslim user, Editingman about the private template of Islam in China which should not added to the main article of Religion in China because this article is only a shortened summary of many different religions in China, not only Islam. Read the current discussion here for more details. As I can see that you've added a warning to Editingman for his edit war in the same article before [52]. I hope you could help to justify for NPOV. Thank you and best of luck to you.
Angelo De La Paz (talk) 04:07, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
Re:Deleting article to remove a couple of revisions
I was about to ask if we should move portect New Jersye, but I see you beat me to it. Should we also protect the FAQ on the talk page? TomStar81 (Talk) 16:00, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
I was responding to an unblock request for this user, who you identified as a Grawp sock. Could you please elaborate on the evidence of that. I noticed that you have now removed his unblock request and protected his talk page. I looked over his edit history, and have found no obvious grawpy behavior. What was the actions that caused you to block him? --Jayron32.talk.contribs18:15, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
Thankyou for unblocking me, please next time run it by WP:AN and do a extensive research and have solid proof of it. An can you undelete the following pages because they where deleted due to me being blocked.
I think its OK I wasn't aware though if somebody was trying to sneak in and restore deleted content thats all. It could probably be filled out and become remotely encyclopedic or rather "wikipedic" the collection of just about anything these days!Blofeld of SPECTRE (talk) 15:20, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi, Rjd0060.
This discussion took event two weeks ago, on September 29 and 30. I've stayed away from this discussion, ignoring the provocations and inflammatory messages, trying not to make things worse.
How would you describe this kind of language [54]?
Opponent in the discussion, that defends "its" article, draws this kind of language ("Ustashe (croat nazi fascists)", "The Croats want to complete the genocide on the serbs by deleting all our Krajina pages", "the start of a bigger project aimed at the erradication of anything to do with Krajina. "...)
Instead of staying inside the topic, user LAz17 uses the talkpage for propagandism, general discussion, etiquetting, personal attacks. He ignored several rules here, WP:CIVIL, WP:NPA, WP:ETIQ.
User SWik78 warned him about his behaviour [55]. Instead of improving, user LAz17 made things worse.
In his reply [56] he said "is well known that Croatia's president was a fascist, " , "they are the most fascist country in Europe in various ways" (???) ...
After etiquetting the users, he continued with throwing the mud on whole country and its inhabitants, using the etiquette like "fascist". This is not "who spilled the milk". Of course, he never bothered for giving references for so heavy accusations. All his argumentation is contained in words "it's well known". So encyclopedic, isn't it.
LAz17's message [[57]. "they're just a bunch of extremist nationalists". He obviously thought that we'd applaude to territorial conquest of our own country. Since we weren't happy with that, he immediately declared us (Croatians) as extreme nationalists.
SWik78 warned him about that on the talkpage. Since LAz17 reacted, it's obvious that he saw the message and that he's informed about warning. LAz17 is long enough here, since Jan 31 2007, he's supposed to know the rules. However, LAz17 remained unpunished [58]. Kubura (talk) 07:47, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
the Jason Anderson page was deleted but he meets the guidelines
I know meeting the guidelines doesn't guarantee that an artist will not be deleted but Jason Anderson(a.k.a. wolf colonel) is way popular so I don't know why he was deleted except for the reason listed on the deleted page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jason_Anderson. Since you listed he fails WP:Music I figured I would object.
guidelines he meets
A musician or ensemble (note that this includes a band, singer, rapper, orchestra, DJ, musical theatre group, etc.) is notable if it meets any one of the following criteria:
5)Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels (i.e. an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable).
Jason is signed on K records and has released 2 or more albums on K Records. K records is/has been home to people like Beck, Modest Mouse, Mirah, and Bikini Kill. In fact Jason is the only artist listed on wikipedia's K Records page who doesn't have an article!
1)It has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician/ensemble itself and reliable.
Jason has been artist of the day on Spin.com
http://www.spin.com/articles/jason-anderson
He has been written up by plenty of magazines/papers but I guess this one is the most "national." I would mention more but I don't know exactly what you would call non trivial. Would a large regional paper count? Cause he has that.
10)Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, e.g. a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, inclusion on a compilation album, etc. (But if this is the only claim, it is probably more appropriate to have a mention in the main article and redirect to that article.)
As Spin.com notes "He has drummed with several bands, including Yume Bitsu, the Microphones, and Son, Ambulance."
Thanks, I may need it when I run a Wikipedia workshop at a conference in December, since the number of people registering would probably hit the cap at a single IP address. I've registerd early so I can have a practice beforehand, but I don't think I'll be using it much in the long-term. Tim Vickers (talk) 23:01, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
18XX games
I think the deletion of List of 18XX games was a mistake. Unlike other game articles or Wikipedia lists, the separate 18XX game articles had been combined into this list because of their similarities, and the base articles had been deleted. Without the list there is no record of these games at all on Wikipedia. Maybe the mistake was calling it a "list" and not an 18XX game article, which is what it was. --Jcbutler (talk) 06:06, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
Request to Restore Chris Rosica page
I think that the article on Chris Rosica meets the guidelines for notability- I had included examples of secondary sources like his appearances on WABC-TV and News 12 NJ. I understand what you are saying, but what would you suggest I include to display his notability? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jg1676 (talk • contribs) 14:35, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
Woe to the bandwidth-challenged
This is a personal lament. Although I understand the need to clean articles up (for space and other reasons), it is still regrettable that articles that were written but not maintained for lack of Internet access fall prey to accusations (notability or original research) which cannot be rebutted in time to prevent quasi-automatic deletion. That's Type II error. The more I live the less I trust the Wikicracy. 212.188.108.207 (talk) 20:45, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Re: abcnews thing
Sorry about that; I suck at sending notices, plus I'm staying up very late past my (current) point of exhaustion for this election crap. :P --slakr\ talk /00:37, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
RfA thanks
Thank you for participating in my RfA, which recently passed with 126 in support, 22 in opposition and 6 neutral votes.
Thanks for your support in my RFA and also thanks for all of your help when I needed it :)
• If you want to reply to this message please use my talk page as watch listing about 150 pages is a bit messy • ·Add§hore·Talk/Cont21:50, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
Deletion of processing delay
Hey,
Back in may you deleted Processing delay. Why? And why was I not notified about the PROD? Let me know. It bothers me you archived my question without responding
Thanks for responding. Do you think you could restore the page? It obviously is a stub and not meant as a dictionary definition. The other three components of network delay all have their own pages. Fresheneesz (talk) 03:10, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
I have recently discovered that the Vari-Lite article was deleted..
00:07, 14 September 2008 Rjd0060 (Talk | contribs) deleted "Vari-Lite" (Deleted because expired WP:PROD; Reason given: wikipedia is not a product guide..)
I thought the listing of lighting fixtures was a useful reference about Vari-Lite fixtures past and present. Several of the units are discontinued and information about them is getting hard to find. I had compiled a lot of the information about the fixtures for people who wanted to know what the units capabilities were/are. Would you please consider reinstating the article and suggest how you would like it changed.
AVLD11:52, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
I have recently discovered that the Mihran artical was deleted
01:29, 8 November 2008 Rjd0060 (Talk | contribs) deleted "Mihran" (Deleted because expired WP:PROD; Reason given: Not notable, no references.)
I had given sources from books including Sassian empire(224-651) late anquity empire.Would you please consider reinstating the article and suggest how you would like it changed.thanks,please relpy on my talk,
Secthayrabe Ø20:19, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Okay, I'm just that kind of person who feels compelled too most of the time. I would rather reply than act like a dick by not. No offense incase you took any. I wasn't trying too it just the way I wrote that sentence I didn't want anyone to think I was being a smart ass.--WillC03:18, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Bob Lonsberry article
Hi, Rjd0060. Could I convince you to restore the Bob Lonsberry article? I'm confident I can find some sources to alleviate the concern under which it was PRODded. Thanks! PowersT18:50, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Ay, quick question. I think you were already asked, but I will go into detail. I could not find out who created this account, I was wondering if you knew how to track it down. It was requested through ACC, but was already created when I looked at the case. The ACC Log tells me Nja247 (talk·contribs) created the account, but when I look at wiki logs I do not see that.
Calvinthekillerthai created 00:56, 13 November 2008[59]
Nja247's latest account creation 08:21, 12 November 2008[60]
I can confirm I had intended to create the account, but was unable to as the server told me it was already in use. I meant to go into ACC and change it from created to taken, but had some minor ISP issues until now. That user is definitely an issue. Sorry, though of course I didn't know :/ Nja247 (talk • contribs) 01:40, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
You Tube links
Commented out , not removed. I was planning on rolling those back anyway, following a disscussion in the IRC channel.
Thanks :)
Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:30, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Media linkage (policy) outside of Main space
Ok following your comments, Can I thusly safely assume that except in the case of blindlingly obvious copyvio,
that WP:EL, and WP:ELNEVER onyl apply to article namespace?
Ok, first off, how are you going to use evidence, which to your acknowlegement, doesn't even exist? Oh, ok it just "happens" to be deleted but you provide it anyways as proof of something I supposedly did, according to you and several moderators who I've never heard of before.
Second of all, am I not entitled to defend myself? Isn't that the whole point of the Unblock request? But nobody wants to hear anything I say, my requests have been tossed aside and I've been quickly muzzled by each and everyone of you, I'm trying to explain to you people that I DID NOT DO WHAT YOU'RE ACUSSING ME OF. Yet every attempt I make at explaining this, you guys extend my block, in an attempt to silence me. What kind of 3-ring Facist Show are you running here? Well just so you know, I won't be silent. I'm going right up the ladder with this, I'm going to find out who's in charge, and I'm going to let him know what you people are doing to innocent Wikipedia members. Good day. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.134.109.84 (talk) 03:41, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Question about my handling of suspicious multiple account requests. (WP:ACC)
Dear Rjd0060: I wanted to ask you about my handling of a situation involving multiple account requests in a suspicious way. I am unsure as to whether how I handled the requests was proper and was hoping you could advise me and tell me if my reasoning was sound. I am referring to requests 16537, created by me, and 16536, created by another accountcreator. I noticed both of these requests came in right in a row, from the same IP, but from email addresses that were different but only slightly so. It had the feel of an abusive attempt to create multiple accounts, whether as sockpuppets or to later vandalize with I could not say, but it also could have been nothing. I, of course, also wanted to assume good faith. One of the accounts had already been created. I realized that, if the effort was abusive I could create the account but still short circuit the abuse by linking the accounts with a template or talk page message, and figured if the user was legit such a thing would do no harm. So, I created the second account and left a message on both talk pages linking the accounts. The note said nothing more than that the accounts were closely related. (Diffs [61], [62].) While I gave out no privileged information, I find myself concerned that I may have gone too far with even what I did do. Did I? If so, what do you think I should have done? ⇔ ∫ÆSdt @ 11:55, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Hallo Ryan,
I'd like to request to restore this article. It is quite unfaire that someone can delete an article without giving a reason. You wrote "The cited sources don't use this term." - THIS IS NONSENSE. Do you what to say that professor Jean Baudrillard does not use the word "shamanism"? Ryan, did you ever read anything of Jean Baudrillard? No, you did not. Do you want to say that professor Rodell does not use term "high-class mumbo-jumbo"? Yes, he does. Do you want to say that professor Pierre Legendre does not use term of "shamanism" in the book "Le desir politique de Dieu"? Ryan, did you ever hold this book in your hands before writing this? No, you did not. Concerning professor Duncan Kennedy from Harvard - of course he uses this term. I do not think that you would ever read anything of professor Duncan Kennedy.
For more information visit the British Library http://direct.bl.uk/bld/PlaceOrder.do?UIN=211909788&ETOC=RN&from=searchengine , read the paper of professor Rolandas Pavilionis http://www.paksas.lt/ci.admin/Editor/assets/Tauta_03.pdf , take a look at the abstracts of the World Congress of Philosophy of Law http://www.law.uj.edu.pl/ivr2007/Abstracts_SW.pdf
Do not administrate topics that you are not able to understand.
Do you speak French? Do you have a law degree and did you ever heard anything about "legal realism"?
Yours,
LegalRealism —Preceding unsigned comment added by LegalRealism (talk • contribs) 22:23, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Zoot
You have placed a warning on my talk page. Why?
Have you placed a warning on the other users talk page?
Why not? Pdfpdf (talk) 03:58, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
I placed a warning on your page because you are disruptively edit warring. And yes, I placed one on the other users page also. - Rjd0060 (talk) 04:00, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your reply.
I have repeatedly tried to engage the other person in discussion, on talk:Zoot, but they refuse to AGF, refuse to discuss the matter, refuse to answer any questions, and refuse to address the issues I raise. Further, there history seems to suggest they enjoy making points and editwarring. His edits are unpredictable and inconsistent, and he chops and changes in his decisions on which parts of the MoS he is going to follow or ignore, and when, and contradicts himself. I am attempting to discuss the matter and address the issues he raises,but don't seem to be having any success. Further, I have made a number of compromises, but he refuses to entertain the idea of compromise. (Or even the idea of discussion, for that matter.)
You have blackened Tony1's block log, quite unjustifiably, but yet you now walk away smelling of roses. You have behaved disgracefully, and I hope that you will now consider whether you are really cut out to be an administrator. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 19:34, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
Really? Rjd did nothing but act in good faith and undid his own block when asked to do so by the community. Asking him to resign is a far cry from what needs to happen here. Tiptoetytalk20:29, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
I notice the water's getting a bit hot here, but I do see the logic behind your block. The resulting discussion shows that the community is not quite on board with blocking for edit-warring that doesn't surpass 3RR, when the person blocked is a long-time good contributor. It's my impression that MBisanz was careful to give symmetrical warnings to all the participants in the war. If blocks are ruled out as a possible remedy, it's not clear how WP:Edit war is going to be enforced in non-3RR situations. To be continued, probably :-) EdJohnston (talk) 21:23, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
Tiptoety, acting in "good faith" means to give people warnings first. There is a rule called WP:AGF, which this block violates. There was no warning. There was no assuming of Good Faith. This is an aggregious error that cannot simply be swept under a rug. Rjd0060 should seriously consider giving up his access to admin tools. Ottava Rima (talk) 21:46, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
I do something that you disagree with and I should resign the adminship bit? Quite frankly, that seems overly excessive and I won't be doing that. Thanks for the advice though. If you feel so strongly that I've abused the administrator privileges, please visit WP:RFAR. Otherwise, I think I've had just about enough of this needless banter here and I kindly ask that you all resume whatever productive thing you usually do. Continuing discussion here really only takes time away from improving the project. I've written to another user a reply containing my summary of events. Feel free to review it here. Thanks. Rjd0060 (talk) 22:04, 18 November 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.
Melrose Golf Club
You seem to have deleted this page for no apparent reason, could you please explain yourself. If you cannot provide good reason I will have to report you to an administrator as someone who is abusing their powers. I have reas some of the postings below and it seems this is not the first time you have behaved inappropriately.
You are heading towards having your account blocked. (unsigned comment by 78.86.212.2)
Normally I would be more than happy to help you, and restore the deleted article as the proposed deletion policy allows, but since you have come here and left this uncivil comment, along with threats, you will have to find another administrator because I don't have the motivation to help you. Regards, - Rjd0060 (talk) 15:08, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Aimé. M.. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedy-deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. -- IRP☎18:47, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Dear sir, I have seen that you deleted this page because it was advertising of a non-notable product. I respect your judgement but I kindly disagree. I wanted to provide an interesting link for people who look for simulation programs. The program described in this page is open source and hence completely free. It is been used as the development program (among other places) in the (USA) NSF digital library comPADRE for hundreds of simulations there, and the number of (free) users worldwide is large and growing. Easy Java Simulations is also mentioned in another page of Wikipedia, and I thought it a good reason to add an extended entry for it. Finally, it is easy to find entries in Wikipedia of products of similar scope and importance, which was the reason why I felt encouraged to create this page. (Please, excuse if I do not cite examples here.) For all these reasons, I dare to ask you to reconsider the deletion. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.121.78.163 (talk) 09:14, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
From WOCHRISTIAN:
Disclosure: I am an EJS collaborator and have worked with the EJS author for many years to enhance EJS to meet physics curriculum modeling and authoring needs.
Although EJS is not yet as well known as older modeling tools, such as Matlab and Mathematica, it is GNU GPL and has a respectable international user base. See for example, the National Taiwan Normal University website <http://www.phy.ntnu.edu.tw/ntnujava/> and the comPADRE National Digital Library < http://www.compadre.org/osp/ >. In addition, there is a Spanish language EJS book and there are plans for an English Language EJS book. There are have been a number of research papers that use EJS. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wochristian (talk • contribs) 14:30, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Would you re-consider your decision as regards the autoblock?
What I am asking for is edit rights but only when logged in using my "Manchester Warrior" non-de-plume on IP 194.203.201.92.
I seem to have been caught up in the cross-fire caused by some other person (or persons) using IP 194.203.201.92 being involved in an edit war.
Have therefore set up my "Manchester Warrior" user name (N.B. Whilst I have used this "nom-de-plume" elsewhere, it's "new" to Wikipedia) as a possible work-around solution to the problem of anonymous postings under IP 194.203.201.92 having been blocked.
Yes i understand but this is the same article you deleted on october 15. the article that you are saying was violated came from the article you deleted that we created. on october 15 why did you delete this article and how can we fix the problem? and again how does it differ with our other article that has not been deleted [[Christopher
stweart (music producer)]]? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Babiboy (talk • contribs) 23:16, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
00:43, 15 October 2008 Rjd0060 (Talk | contribs) deleted "Nealante'" (Deleted because expired WP:PROD; Reason given: non-notable musician, fails WP:MUSIC.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Babiboy (talk • contribs)
Rjd0060, I would like to thank you for your participation in my recent Request for Adminship, which passed with 112 supports, 4 opposes and 5 neutrals. A special mention goes out to Stwalkerster and Pedro for nominating me, thanks a lot for having trust in me! In response to the neutrals, I will try to double check articles that have been tagged for speedy deletion before I CSD them and will start off slowly with the drama boards of ANI and AN to ensure that I get used to them. In response to the oppose !votes on my RfA, I will check that any images I use meet the non-free content criteria and will attempt to handle any disputes or queries as well as I can. If you need my help at all, feel free to simply ask at my talk page and I'll see if I can help. Once again, thank you for your participation, and have a great day! :) TheHelpfulOne22:28, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
design by neurolysis | to add this barnstar to your awards page, simply copy and paste {{subst:User:Neurolysis/THOBS}} and remove this bottom text | if you don't like thankspam, please accept my sincere apologies
Account creation
Thanks very much for the pointer and also for creating that account - I realised after I'd closed it that I'd forgotten to check the account creation date. Then I did and groaned :) Should one of us drop request #17158? Same IP but different email and two previous accounts created. Cheers, Paxse (talk) 15:21, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Have a very merry Christmas, and a great new year! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Regards (and Season's Greetings!) from Stwalkerster [ talk ]21:06, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
Happy Holidays!
TheHelpfulOne is wishing you a MerryChristmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
I wasn't even notified that a PROD was added to the List of Romanian supercentenerians. Maybe I could have saved the article. Mario198721:55, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
ACC
Hi, this is just a request that you please review my access request to the ACC interface. Its been quite a while since I created an account there, just a couple of weeks after joining Wikipedia so it (rightly) got rejected.
Not a problem if this gets declined again - I understand the concerns about granting the tool to only trusted and established users to prevent intentional or unintentional abuse.
details
user_id: 331
user_name: Unpopular Opinion
user_onwikiname: Unpopular Opinion
user_email: ----------@gmail.com
log_id: 21054
log_pend: 331
log_user: Rjd0060
log_time: 2008-11-15 16:17:25
log_cmt: Your first edit was only a few weeks ago (October 25, 2008). You are welcome to help out once you've been around for a while longer.
I'm not sure how much time it really takes to gain the necessary trust, maybe 6 months or 1 year? If so, I'm here quite early as its only been around three months.. Thanks Unpopular Opinion (talk) 18:07, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
No particular issue with the deletion but, for what it's worth, that redirect was put in place per the instructions at WP:DOC:
"You may wish to redirect the talk page of the /doc subpage to the talk page of the template itself. Then all talk relating to the template and its documentation will end up on the same talkpage. For example, redirect Template talk:X/doc to Template talk:X."
You may have noticed this phenomenon -- some of the wikipedia's quality control volunteers are impatient, overzealous, or unwilling to comply with the spirit of the wikipedia's civility policies. They do not comply with the deletion policies' recommendations that those nominating articles for deletion leave an advisory heads-up on the talk page of the contributors who started the article, or made major contributions to it.
The result is "stealth deletions" -- the deletion of perfectly satisfactory articles where those interested in the article didn't defend the article because they were unaware that it had been nominated for deletion.
I write on controversial topics. And I am afraid I have encountered vandals who count on this weakness in the wikipedia's policies in order to push their private, personal agendas.
Personally, I would lobby for a change in policy where the advisory heads-up was no longer an optional courtesy, but was required, and policy stated administrators should decline to conclude nominations where the article creator didn't inform the interested parties.
Sure, lots of article that are {{prod}}ed or nominated for speedy-deletion merit deletion. But I believe that skipping the step of informing the uploader or creator is a mistake in those cases too. When contributors add material that does not comply with policy and merits deletion I think the policy on assuming good faith implies they should be told that someone thought they made a mistake that serious. Informing the contributor who the nominator thinks is making serious mistakes is the best way to try to make sure that contributor doesn't keep making the same mistake. And, of course, there are going to be cases where the nominator is the one who was mistaken. Hopefully that is going to be a small minority of cases. But I have experienced this many times -- instances where someone nominated an article I started for provisional deletion, didn't offer me the courtesy advisory, and, when I found out about the deletion, long afterwards, and got it restored, it was clear the nominator erred.
I think I must have gone through this at least a dozen times. It is a lot of work, and in my opinion it highlights a serious flaw in the existing policy.
Thanks. I started an article, over a year ago, about the firefighter who lead a team that made the highest known advance in the first building to collapse. I spent some time writing it, and finding references. Some time afterwards it was realized that his time had made it much higher that had previously been realized, and that they had been unaware that the building was about to collapse until practically the last moment.
I can't find it now. I believe it was subjected to a stealth deletion.
Dear Rjd0060, thanks for blocking Sci Willy Wonka. The account was trying to harass Raul654. It is probably a sock of someone. It is making disruptive comments on its talkpage. I think you should protect its talkpage. Have a nice day. AdjustShift (talk) 17:54, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick reply. I have added importScript('User:AzaToth/twinkleprod.js');
importScript('User:AzaToth/twinkledeprod.js'); to my monobook.js, however that seems to be not enough. Is there anything else I have to add? — Aitias//discussion00:17, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
"List of XMPP library software" deletion : disagreement
It was proposed to delete the "List of XMPP library software" with following arguments :
"This is a list article with only two entries which have articles.
Everything else is either a red link or an external link."
That's not an argument at all for deletion : please let to the community
time to make the article grow, we are not in hurry.
"As such, it seems to be a list of probably non-notable software."
Please, your deletion is based on assumption. After checking myself, this libraries are
notable software, since they allow to build jabber software on top of them. There is
already a "List of XMPP Server Software", and "List of XMPP Client Software" : it makes
sense to have a "List of XMPP Library Software". I checked the C section and php section : they
are ok. Again, as computer engineer, I say that this content is valuable and must stay there.
"Maybe some of these are notable but there are no references to help determine which ones."
You didn't let us time to put notes on them : you let us only 5 days before deletion, and during
christmas. It really does not make sense under this condition... It seems that you was determined
to delete this article without further discussion.
"Not verifiable. For all we know some of these entries could be hoaxes."
Based on assumption again, and easily verifiable since I do it for the C and php section.
This user (Yikai123 (talk·contribs)) is requesting unblock. It seems he was collateral damage from a rangeblock you recently imposed. He doesn't edit much, and his edits look OK to me. Should we lift the autoblock? Daniel Case (talk) 17:25, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
NonvocalScream (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend, Go on smile! Cheers, and Happy editing!=) Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Mr.Z-man has passed you the WikiJoint! WikiJoints promote... uh... promote... help with... do... wiki... something... yeah... uh, what was I saying? WikiJoints help promote, uh, wiki stuff... and help with... {{subst:User:Krimpet/WikiJoint}}... huh?
21:59, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
Moar WikiLove
Jake WartenbergTalk has given you a pie! Pies promote the kind of hearty eating that puts a smile on your face and a sustaining meal in your stomach. Hopefully this pie has made your day better. Spread the goodness by giving someone else a pie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy eating!
Spread the goodness of pie by adding {{subst:Wikipie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
I left a note at the template's talk page but the page didn't seem to be much-watched. Perhaps you can help? Here's the question:
Is this template supposed to be placed by the users granting permission via email or by OTRS reviewers? If the former is the case, shouldn't there be a confirmation process proving the legality of the template placement?
I wanted to let you know, Betacommand's discussion on AN/I has been closed. The indef tag is now, unfortunate as it is, appropriate. Hopefully roux's off-wiki discussion will come of something. I just wanted to let you know, as you were the last to revert on it. Thanks!
The entry under the description of Nir Rosen reads "he is an Iranian-American journalist and a chronicler of the Iraq War". Mr. Rosen in his own writing calls himself an Israeli and has discussed some of his heritage in this article:
Could you please activate my account, MattieTK, on the ACI. On logging in it says that it's "suspended", but I haven't ever logged in, so I'm not sure as to what this refers to. Please get back to me if there are any issues :) MattieTK17:32, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Please restore these articles
Hi, can I ask you to restore the following articles most of which you deleted? There are discussions in progress to turn all of these character bios into a list, and it would be useful not to loose the content. --Deadly∀ssassin20:39, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Jean sutton. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedy-deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Ezra Wax (talk) 04:48, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks - I forgot that before the band article there was just a redirect, so I have gone back to that. The hatnote was only needed when the band article was there. Johnbod (talk) 02:17, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
Could you explain why you deleted the page The Killer Inside Me (Film)? The page was deleted because of a tag that said that the page was not notable because production had not started. But if you had read the page it was clearly stated that production had started. Hda3ku (talk) 03:28, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
I noticed you voted oppose in the flag revs straw pole and would like to ask if you would mind adding User:Promethean/No to your user or talk page to make your position clear to people who visit your page :) - Thanks to Neurolysis for the template «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l» (talk)07:22, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
Deletion of Dennis O'Rear
Perhaps you are right about notability...Don't wait then for 5 days just remove it now.
I didn't see a review of this deletion or another way to take action to stop deletion and add third party ref's (the reason you deleted) which in the very least are that she appeared in Guinness Book of World Records at least a few times including in 2009. The page in question (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dorothy_Kloss&action=edit&redlink=1). Please advise how I may proceed to get back the article and add third party ref's. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.62.8.98 (talk) 17:47, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Thank you Rjd0060 for voting in my successfully closed RfA! I'm glad that you trust me. Ping me if you need anything (I'm sure it's going to be me asking you!) Best regards, --Kanonkas : Talk 18:17, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Personal attacks
may i ask why i would get blocked for calling someone an idiot and also why did he/she delete the medic droid page theres no reason to. (im not trying to be rude btw) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.11.48.166 (talk) 18:15, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Dude!
The holy crap! What did you do to my watchlist? Barnstar
I hereby award you this award for completely ruining my watchlist by adding the year parameter to all hockey team season articles. Your dedication to such a mind-numbingly boring task, and the hundred-and-some entries it generated on my watchlist are noted. ;) Cheers! Resolute02:06, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
I see that, well done! When I actually had to do a text search to find WP:HOCKEY on my watchlist, I knew I had to award you with something, lol. Resolute02:13, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Year parameter
Awesome job, but there's a glitch: it suffers the Y2K bug! The season articles are written 1999-2000... and the parameter seems to want to write 1999-00, so it makes red links for all of the 1998-99 article templates. A solution would be to make redirects, want me to get on top of that? Andrew64703:28, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Done, except there's an issue with the St. Louis Blues: it seems to be a disambiguation problem where the team article is labeled "St. Louis Blues (ice hockey)", and I think that has an effect on the year parameter. Just check out 1998–99 St. Louis Blues season. I'm not sure what to recommend to fix this. Andrew64705:02, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Well, I tried to discuss it with him, but I his response was especially unhelpful. At this point, I'm pretty sure his obfuscation is deliberate, and he's exhausted whatever slack I'm willing to give him. Put simply, he's trolling us, and rewarding him for it isn't going to serve us well. Nandesuka (talk) 13:13, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
Eric Tangradi
You shouldn't have deleted that article. As per wikipedia's athlete guidelines "People who have competed at the highest amateur level of a sport, usually considered to mean the Olympic Games or World Championships" are allowed to have articles. Eric just competed at the World Junior Championship, in Ottawa, Ontario, Dec. 26, 2008-Jan. 5, 2009. You need to restore it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blizzboy283 (talk • contribs) 06:02, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
UserCompare tool
Hello there, just noted your evidence provided at the Administrator's noticeboard for the John254/Kristen fiasco. Is the UserCompare tool open source? It may come in handy for an Arbitration case I'm connected with. Thanks. ←Spidern→13:20, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
[65] Ok, I won't. Sorry, I did not know it automatically puts the page in speedy deletion category. OIC, I think I see: the original deletion request is normal, not speedy. Is that it?Dc76\talk16:40, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
You may want to take a look at this - you previously deleted it as an expired PROD, it's back, but I don't know what the previous content was or if the reason for deletion still applies, or if it can be speedily deleted as a re-creation. pablohablo.18:10, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
On 1 August 2008 you deleted the Wikipedia entry for Polish band Indukti, claiming that it failed to meet the notability guidelines for music. However, it would appear that you don't know the slightest bit of information about this band, considering they clearly meet the very first criteria listed!
"1. It has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician/ensemble itself and reliable.
This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, books, magazine articles, online versions of print media, and television documentaries"
Did you even bother doing a Google search? If you had, it would have become apparent that there is a plethora of online information from reliable sources not at all linked to the band.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.253.200.7 (talk) 07:53, January 20, 2009 (UTC)
On 00:22, 27 January 2009 you deleted CacheFly because expired WP:PROD even though you declined speedy deletion. It does not appear there was any discussion (or I cannot find the discussion). I ask that you please restore the article and we do a proper AfD review. I believe that a good deal of sourced content was removed from the page, causing the article to be a stub and causing the reason for deletion. There is a good deal of material that can be referenced for this article and I can compare to several similar companies that are just as notable that are retaining articles: Bitgravity, Limelight_Networks and a list including companies like this: Content_Delivery_Network#Commercial_CDNs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mattarata (talk • contribs) 17:54, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Reinstate visiting card
Hi,
Could you reinstate blue-tooth visiting card. The usefulness of the article is to bring convenience to the world. It is a simple example of how technology can be used to serve humanity and how technology can be used to transfer information using simple tools
like mobile phones. Please kindly read articles properly before deleting. As far as I know you can edit artilcles in wikipedia, so kindly learn to edit articles and not "delete" them. Because it is very very difficult to contribute and very easy to just say "delete".
Deletion of Information visualization reference model
Hi,
You've deleted the above articel with the reason "Deleted because expired WP:PROD; Reason given: There seems hardly any reliabe sources here, just the original work by E.H. Chi. There is serious doubt this subject is notable. See talk page.".
I think this happened in error as the version from google cache shows 6 references from 2 distinct groups of authors including contributions published with Morgan Kaufmann Publishers and CHI_(conference). These should coun't as reliable sources.
Regarding the notability the Article seems a little bit thin but it's not just an idea but it's used in the real world as you can see with Prefuse plus it is linked in from some Articels that discuss visualization in general. This design pattern is usefull to understand the way visualization software is built and used and is not specific to an implementation. Software design patterns are well documented in wikipedia with a less reference material (although these patterns are not so specific).
I wasn't able to take a look at the talk page to this articel so I can't see any arguments there.
Al Kapone is a well-known and well-respected rapper. Quit deleting his albums saying they fail WP:MUS because they don't. People like you piss me off. You know nothing. Get a hobby. 71.10.88.69 (talk) 02:07, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
I noticed that last month you deleted the page of "The Reincarnation", a browser-based computer game. While i do have a vested interest in the topic, i'm more curious about the reason given than the actual deletion. This is a game with thousands of players that has existed in one version or another since 1998(ish?). That no one has "published" any "sources" hardly seems a good reason to delete a page, neither does low enough readership that no one noticed the deletion tag within 5 days. There are towns with smaller populations than this page that are far less well developed than The Reincarnation page was before it was deleted, yet they remain because they are more "verifiable" per wikipedia's "encyclopedic contents" policy? There has to be a better way to determine legitimacy of this type of article...
Sorry, i guess you don't really make these rules, but i wanted to vent.
We've had a few encounters in the past, so sometimes if I need admin help I come to you because I know I can get a quick response. Anyway, we are having some trouble over at United States men's national soccer team. Now, I don't know if you follow soccer at all, so I'll try to explain this well in case you aren't familiar with any of the subjects. One of the players on the US team (Bocanegra) plays for a French team called Stade Rennais Football Club. This club is located in the French town of Rennes, and since "Stade Rennais" is sort of long, more often than not the team is referred to as Rennes. Ligue 1 is the French league, and if you look at the 2008-09 league standings right here on Wikipedia you'll see that the team is listed as Rennes. It is the same on websites such as Yahoo Eurosport and the BBC; basically, this is the accepted common name for the team. So, we had a discussion and determined it would be most accurate to use the name Rennes to refer to that team. Everyone agreed except for one editor: User:Grant.Alpaugh. Usually when an editor loses a discussion, they just let it go. Grant refuses to do that and has taken a "everybody is wrong except for me" approach to the problem. If you look on the talk page for the US national team article, a vote has taken place and everyone except for Grant is in agreement. Also, if you read the section "Club names," you will get an understanding of the immense frustration that grows when one editor ignores the decision making process and unilaterally makes changes (I had a problem with doing this in my early editing days, so I know firsthand how annoying it can be).
Basically, Grant needs to be blocked from editing this article for the time being. If you read my talk page you'll see that he started a 3RR report against me. I readily admit I broke the 3RR, but only because, in my view, Grant was repeatedly vandalizing the article by making edits against established consensus. If you choose to block me as well I fully understand. However, Grant not only broke the 3RR himself, but has continually shown a vast disregard for the opinions of other editors and conclusions we have come to after extensive discussion. Basically, he thinks he runs the article and refuses to accept other opinions - even when he is vastly out numbered. If you could take a look at our horribly messed up discussion and get back to me, that would be awesome. Eightball (talk) 19:58, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
You may not remember me but I briefly returned to do some correcting several months back. I've since returned and would like to restore my wikipedia page.
Is that possible?
Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Afghan Historian (talk • contribs) 04:50, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
You deleted this under WP:PROD but I challenge the deletion. Because a bunch of similar articles exist (see Template:Oz(HBO)) they should all be deleted or none at all. So in accordince with WP:PROD can you undelete? --Movingday29 (talk) 19:00, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
I have created a Neutral section for those who agree with the premise but not the method, or some other aspect, which may be altered following talkpage discussion. Perhaps you would wish to review your !vote under the changed circumstances? LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:55, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Lithuania
Thanks for the response to my request for page protection. As usual, I'm certain you got it wrong at a bad version, etc., etc., --KP Botany (talk) 01:47, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Rani Babu is an upcoming Malayalam movie star. I created a page about her but couldn't improve it for some time. I would like to make it a complete bio if I can get the deleted page back. How do I get it back? I can't collect all that information again. I have been working on other pages that's also deleted. Gad! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bchandran (talk • contribs) 05:51, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Please help
I am trying to get the content from a page I made that has been deleted - Benjamin Harnwell.
Can you send it to me or tell me how to retrieve it.
Ahhh... Thank you RJD ;). I'll make sure I'm quite familiar with the guide before I do anything. I was surprised, I expected a huge backlog (like new page patrol), but see it's kept up with very well. I've bookmarked your talk page, as I'm sure I'll have a question or 10 somewhere down the line. Thank you again, and a pleasure to meet you - have a good one. — Ched (talk) 18:49, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Please Restore the page for the Egyptian Singer Tony Kaldas , as he is well known and famous in the Arabic world and i don't know why you deleted it —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.205.135.149 (talk) 06:02, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
I feel you deleted the page on Ciarán Ó Con Cheanainn in error. Past Winers of Corn Uí Riada and this one also, should be mentioned- just because there isn't a lot of info on him or the others doesnt mean that he shouldnt be included- its more just the fact that pepole havent gotten around to writing about them yet./ In realtion to this particular person many of the main media outlets/ newspapers in Ireland carried obituaries of him- Irish Times is one example. One of the past winners Máirtín Tom Sheáiní- a radio presenter on Radio na Gaeltachta- extant- if someopne were to start an article on him would it be deleted because of lack of information on him? In general I think one can't realy delete a page on a particular subject (however small) especially if they are not an expert in that subject (I imagine you are not) - imagine someone writes a topic on a rare scientific subject- you can;'t just delete it if you feel taht its not "big" enough- not to say that the article you deleted was off small interest- it isnt- And the competition he won and his winnign of it was covered on state broadcasters in ireland. I really think you should reconsider your own guidelines - you can answer me at eoinomurchu@hotmail if you wish. (for example- I myself entered this persons name to find outmore about them- this/ verifiable info should be availale) thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.1.172.104 (talk) 20:18, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Once again the ioquake3 wikipedia entry has been deleted for being without notability when, in fact, this is wholly inaccurate. ioquake3 is the de-facto standard in quake 3 engine technology with many games and other projects being based on it. Some of those games include Urban Terror, World of Padman, and tremulous. I created ioquake3 in 2005 and it has continued since then with the help of many contributors. To say that it is irrelevant does the project and those that use it a severe disservice and I think contributes to the overall discouragement of smaller open source and free software projects, as if they and the contributions made to them are without merit. id software created the original code base and released it onto the internet. To say that projects based on the original source release are not notable is like saying that it wouldn't be notable if Ray Bradbury released a book under a creative commons license solely to the net and someone took that and made an entirely new and interesting work of fiction based on it.
Of course, having created ioquake3 you can take my words with a grain of salt. Please don't let that stop you from researching the notability of the project yourself. Perhaps starting with these links:
ioquake3 is indeed the best updated version of id Software Inc.'s GPL release of the Quake III Arena engine source code. Over the years the project stayed true to it's objectives to make the original code base easier to work with, available on a wider variety of platforms, and to provide a solid base for several projects that wanted to build upon the technology.
I was the maintainer of Quake III Arena for several years until the company released it as GPL, and I am pretty happy there are people like Zachary who stepped up to the plate afterwards.
It seems very odd to me that content would be removed based on an individual's personal appreciation of relevance. If the article provides useful information and references, it should at least be valued for the efforts of the contributing individuals.
Timothee Besset,
Software Engineer
id Software, inc.
How can ioq3 not be relevent when some of the maintainers have, as part of the project, provided fixes that have made it into id's official Q3 codebase? From the Quake 3 1.32c readme:
1.32c (5-8-06)
- Ludwig Nussel and Thilo Shulz discovered a vulnerability letting a malicious client download files from a server if auto download is enabled ( sv_allowDownload 1 ).
- A second issue fixed in this release (R_RemapShaders buffer overflow) would let a malicious server exploit a buffer overflow to execute a shellcode on connecting clients.
I would like to point out that both Ludwig Nussel and Thilo Shulz are active participants in the ioq3 project. If id, the producer of the original game that ioq3 is based on, recognizes ioq3's work as being relevent, what more is needed? Isn't that both verification and validation of ioq3's contribution to software? I mean, heck, you can cite actual publications (not blogs or other sissy webpages) as references to show that ioq3 is recognized time and again as one of the premier OSS games released.
ioq3 is especially notable for its wide range of platform support and write-once-run-anywhere Quake Virtual Machine ability which lets ioq3 run on Windows (x86 and x64), Linux (x86 and x64), Linux PPC (32 and 64 bit), FreeBSD, Solaris (SPARC and x86), Irix (MIPS), Mac OS X (x86 and PPC), and was recently the initial basis for a port of Quake 3 to the iPhone, an ARM-based device. Just google for "quake 3 iphone" to see all the press and buzz THAT generated. If that's not notable, I don't know what is! There are many modern commercial game engines that don't support what ioq3 supports such as in-engine VoIP and IPv6. Heck, the VoIP stuff is from someone recognized both in the professional game programming arena and also by Wikipedia itself: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryan_C._Gordon
-Monk
Shame you thought this article had to be deleted; this could have been a discussion on improving the article to wikipedia's standard. But you might have too much work to do in the foreseeable future as probably so many articles, about softwares/video games, are failing to meet those same requirements and therefore need to be "cut off" (weird principle for a participative online encyclopaedia).
Please undelete our wireless's community page (Wireless Thessaloniki, WThess in short). It was deleted by you on 18 of September under WP:COR.
I beg you to reconsider. We are the oldest wireless community in Thessaloniki. In Thessaloniki there are 4 communities and all of them existed
before our deletion in wikipedia. Take a note on TWMN's page, which refers to us (Wireless Thessaloniki, WThess). We have participated
with TWMN in Helexpo's Infosystem (Information Technology Exhibition) and we were noted in local press. It would be an omission to exclude
as from wikipedia since the other 3 wireless communities are present.
I was surprised to be informed by a fellow WThess node owner that the wikipedia entry for the Wireless Thessaloniki network that I had posted to the site does not exist anymore. I am not a frequent wikipedia author, so I wasn't aware that the article was candidate to be deleted. I also see that a picture that I have included in the article, which was actually taken with my photo camera, was deleted for copyright reasons! It is obvious that the problem arise due to the fact that I am not well informed on some aspects and conditions of keeping an article in Wikipedia, and I would like to apologize for that.
I would like to re-establish the page. WThess is actually one of the last wireless communities left in Thessaloniki, as most of them decayed after aDSL subscriptions became cheaper and affordable. It is a part of the wireless communities' history of the city, if not of the country.
Thank you for your time.
ThanaSakis
Hello, you deleted the article for AbleNET without any form of due process or notification and I'd wish for you to first, reconsider as well as explain your position. Notability arguments seem questionable. Notability is no greater or less than other articles of comparable content.
Article was up for AfD on 2/12/2006 through 2/14/2006 and successfully passed.
"As a shortcut around AfD for uncontroversial deletions, an article can be proposed for deletion, though once only. If no one contests the proposal within five days, the article may be deleted by an administrator."
It appears that your deletion may be contrary to the ToS regarding deletions.
Would like to request a discussion to review and reverse this decision.
Hi, I noticed that the article about Next Limit Technologies was deleted - stating "proposed deletion". Could you please put the page back up? It states that one of the contributors has a name that indicated a conflict of interest - I'm not sure who that contributor was? I went over the page a while ago and it was not being used for promotion of products, advertising, or anything of the kind - it was used solely as a source of information, based on facts. Thanks for your help.
I had a request to recreate this as a redirect to Mormon sex in chains case, and did so. I only noticed now (on checking the protection log) that there was an OTRS ticket involved, Ticket:2008070210015435. I don't have access to the queue that ticket's in, but if it seems from the context of the ticket that the page should not even exist as a redirect, please redelete it. Stifle (talk) 09:23, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
You recently deleted the page "Mordor (Athens)" citing the reason "such a "neighborhood" simply doesn't exist.." Such a neighborhood does in fact exist. It is larger and older than Boulevard, Newtown, and Cobbham, each of which are listed under the "Neighborhoods" section of the Athens, GA article. I have more explicitly detailed the borders of this neighborhood in the updated version of the article. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wmw0122 (talk • contribs) 17:56, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
I would like to ask you to restore the page on model Simona McIntyre as the grounds on which the page was deleted are questionable. Reasons for deletion included a statement saying that no external links showed magazine covers when in fact a link to McIntyre's New York Magazine profile clearly states her work with Japanese Vogue (she was on the beauty cover) in January 2009, work with notable fashion magazines such as i-D, Numero, Nylon, Flair, Elle and Amica as well as her work with prestigious photographers such as Ellen von Unwerth and Chadwick Tyler. McIntyre has also made notable runway appearances such as her continual placement at both Marc Jacobs and Marc by Marc Jacobs shows, Luella, Rodarte, Temperley London, Vera Wang, Zac Posen, Alexander McQueen, Jean Paul Gaultier, Yohji Yamamoto, Gianfranco Ferre among many, many others.
Thank you very much for your time,
ValiumKnight (talk) 03:54, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Hello, Rjd0060. I have a question regarding the pie article (list). Yesterday I just came across List of breads and List of cakes, so as a member of WP:FOOD, I want to develop those lists with images. So I created List of cookies and tried to List of pies, but the latter once existed but you requested for deletion. After the discussion, admin The undertow (talk·contribs) deleted it. However I got to know that the admin was banned for whatever reason, so I come here instead. If I re-create the list about pie, do you terribly mind it? You can peek the intended article on my user page and List of cookies. I think this list can be interesting to foodies and readers. I look forward to your opinion. Thanks.--Caspian blue20:34, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Hey there RJd0060 -- I created the Dustin Yellin article about a year ago and let it slip into a precarious state. Since I want this page to be part of wikipedia, I am willing to provide better citations about said. Unfortunately, I do not have access to the deleted pages and would prefer to work from the original. Are you an admin? Please help me by either reinstating the page or sending me a copy of the original page. There are plenty of references in widely distributed publications and even more web references to Dustin Yellin and his artwork. Mdomino (talk) 21:26, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I see you deleted this article per an OTRS request. Given that the individual in question appears to meet WP:BIO, it makes more sense to send this through a normal AfD with a note that the individual has requested deletion. JoshuaZ (talk) 01:56, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Would it be helpful to continue this over email? Because right now, I'm having a lot of trouble seeing what could possibly justify not having an article on this guy other than that. JoshuaZ (talk) 02:21, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Ok. If it is ok with you I'll email you a draft version before posting a recreating version so you can let me know if there's any terribly OTRSy issues about that draft. JoshuaZ (talk) 02:36, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Daniel said I should address my questions to you. They're at his talk page, but I can rewrite them here if you want. NJGW (talk) 15:59, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for restoring the above-mentioned photographs. It seems that for some reason "Amir_Nezam_House-Interior_2.jpg " has not been restored. --BF 10:57, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for your prompt response. In believe that Ms Sosan Jafari has simply mistakenly not referred to "Amir_Nezam_House-Interior_2.jpg" in her e-mail; if you consider all the images, there is no logical explanation why she should not have donated this particular image to Wikipedia. May I therefore hereby request you that you kindly remind her of this issue? Kind regards, --BF 14:12, 14 March 2009 (UTC).
Hello, I am the artist Charles Nissen and I noticed That an acticle about me was resently deleted. I understand why, but I was wondering if there is a back up copy or something that you could email to me. I would like to know what people are writing about me and if possible the username of the author of the article.
Hi, I've reduced it to what hopefully is a compromise. I suppose the reason it was 48 hours was because it appeared that he almost directly ignored my warning to him to not edit war. As for the 24/31 hour difference, it is my general experience that 31 hours has become the norm for most edit warring blocks based on my observations over the years. Khoikhoi02:22, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Newcastle United F.C.
Thanks for semi-protecting Newcastle United F.C.. It has been semi-protected before and IPs have been banned but vandalism is still common. What level of vandalism would be required to get it extended to the end of the season if it comes up again?Cptnono (talk) 07:04, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
very well, i will go visit the library of congress copyright office. since the renewals are paper records, i take it you will accept my witness, of what the records say. preliminary: Negro Poets probably PD; American poetry since 1900 probably PD; The New Negro probably PD; Caroling Dusk probably copyright; Poetry of the Negro, probably copyright. Crisis, probably PD. pohick (talk) 01:43, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Frank Duff (writer)
Hi, just noticed that the Frank Duff (writer) page has been deleted with the given reason that all of the author's work is self-published and the reviews self-submitted. I've met Mr. Duff and I know that his work has been published in print magazines including Wired (magazine) and his novella Lysergically Yours was not self-published, it was published by now defunct Insurgent Productions (Toronto) with which I used to be involved when it was still solvent. And though I don't know for a fact, I'm pretty sure that those reviews were independent. Anyway, I know this qualifies as original research, but nonetheless, just thought you know that the given reason for deletion is inaccurate and, if nothing else, the delete notice should probably be changed so as not to misrepresent his professional work to anyone who might find their way to the page.
Addendum: Noticed that the Lysergically Yours article was also deleted on the basis that it was a "self-published internet story with no reliable independent coverage." Just to be clear, Lysergically Yours was published comercially by brick and mortar imprint Insurgent Productions (Toronto) in two print editions, with the first print run having ISBN: 0-9734807-0-X. Again, whether or not the book is notable enough for Wikipedia is one thing, but the current page with the delete notice shows patently false information.
Hi I noticed you deleted the FAMA article earlier. I don't know who edited this or what the article looked like. But can you as an administrator try and restore the page. The group is definitely notable. I maybe able to contribute to continue where that user left off. Benjwong (talk) 04:11, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
We gotta watch each other's backs. (But I must admit, I'm a little concerned: I've only been vandalized once since Feb. 25; I must not be doing my job.) --Orange Mike | Talk15:27, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
orsc should not have been deleted. please put it back.
It's "notable", check google. It came in second right behind ICANN and contributed significantly to the evolution of the DNS. See also "Ruling the root" the book by Prof. Dr. Milton Mueller (Google books has excerpts). ORSC has been around for a decade and the DNS is still live. The current website, while small is fairly meaningles; archive.org has the historical data. ORSC was recognized by the US government and ICANN was told to consult with them; see their submissions on ntia.gov. If you put it back I'll fill in this historical gaps. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.246.2.10 (talk) 03:09, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Semi-protect on Lesley Visser
I noticed you handled the semi-protect on Lesley Visser. I haven't seen the page protection updated in the log though. Did the protection not go through, or will it update shortly? Thanks. Shadowjams (talk) 23:15, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
Last month, you were persuaded to restore the deleted history of a newly-recreated article on a putative neighborhood of Athens, Georgia - an article which had been deleted on the grounds that no such neighborhood existed.
The guy who created the article both times supplied many external references to the neighborhood.
However, none of these references actually mention the alleged neighborhood. If you're presented with something so ridiculous as a neighborhood named Mordor, it's a good idea to actually check the alleged references. I've killed the article again; let it stay dead. DS (talk) 14:55, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Help
Hi there, i saw u were an admin and i would like to know if u could delete my account. Just message me back on my talk page before u actually do it. Im asking you cuz u seem like you know what ur doing the most, seeing as u are an admin. I do not want the account anymore and would like it removed. Also if u can't remove my account entirely, can u delete my user page? I want it when i edit a page and in history, for my name to appear red, as in no page. Thanks.
As a Toho Co. Ltd. shareholder, you couldn't block me even if you tried. Go ahead, delete it again. I hope you understand this well and I recommend you keep yourself as an anonymous user. Wikipedia is not recognized by academia or by me. And quite frankly, in life, your non-profit nonsense that hogs Google search will be dismissed. Now get a life and go block me again, loser. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.237.70.240 (talk) 23:46, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
blocked user
User:Fangoriously has requested me to return the subpages of blocked user:PrincessKirlia. I really don't know what this means, but since you were involved with PrincessKirlia, can you figure out if Fangoriously is related to PrincessKirlia, and what the user wants. Jay (talk) 08:20, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
Re:English Wikipedia Internal Account Creation Interface
I noticed that you declined my request for access. In your reason you said, "We must know that you are familiar with Wikipedia policies and one way of showing this is spending a few months working on the project." Is there another way that I can show that I am familiar with Wikipedia policies. Thanks. GT5162(我的对话页)12:36, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
Blocking IP addresses
Although I disagree about the length of blocking single IP addresses, you're absolutely correct, that the rangeblock is potentially affecting too many people. I've unblocked it. Jauerbackdude?/dude.02:00, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
Contesting Prod
I want to contest this prod. WP:PROD says I should complain to you, then go to DRV if you don't restore it. I've never seen a contested PROD not speedily restored at DRV, so that policy may be out of date. WilyD15:10, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks kindly. It'll no doubt end up at AFD, but almost every bilateral relations articles turns out to be notable. WilyD15:16, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
Is the large obnoxious talk header really necessary? I guess you could argue it had a place when the bot was editing, but it is blocked not not editing, so it just serves as a BITEy notice with no apparent purpose. Enigmamsg19:01, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
It doesn't really matter to me, but if you look at the talk page history and several other places, the language clearly bothers people. It's not a polite helpful message. It's written in a very rude tone. I'm sure you would agree that it could be written in a better way (removing the obnoxious oversized image, not referring to anyone who edits the page as a "whiner", etc.). Perhaps it should be replaced with a general notice about image questions? I don't care about the banned notice. I just think that it's better not to bite newbies. Enigmamsg19:07, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
If we were collaboratively editing the notice, my suggestions would be:
Remove 14 and 15, which are unnecessarily obnoxious and rude. Try reading it from the perspective of an inexperienced user. They could easily be rewritten.
Remove 11 as deliberately BITEy.
Remove the stop hand, or at least make it smaller.
Remove Betacommand's personal statements. "# I will not add rationales for you. As the uploader it is your responsibility NOT mine.# I do not want to see images deleted"
I will not add the banned notice. I will attempt to edit the notice to make it more neutral if you will back me up when MZMcBride reverts me. Enigmamsg19:35, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
The amount of vandalism in the prospect rankings section is starting to get annoying. What do you think about semi-protection until the Final Rankings have been released (which should be next week or so)? --Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head...11:43, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
Why would you revert the edits? The article has been listed for copyright infringement, and the tag clearly states that it is not to be removed until an administrator has dealt with it.--gordonrox24 (talk) 22:29, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
When I read his appeals to people to donate to the cause these days, I feel a sense of pity towards Jimmy Wales. The reason why is because I get the feeling that on an individual basis, he is a positive and altruistically minded individual, who genuinely wanted to create something which would be of value to the world.
Unfortunately, however, his site has become infested by an army of pedantic, pseudo-empiricist douchebags, to put it bluntly; and they are in danger of wrecking it more or less entirely. They largely already have; a number of said people don't exist here for any reason other than to revert material which others try to add. The line about this site being something which anybody can edit has become, in practice, a complete lie. If what you add to an article isn't approved of by one of the usual pedants, who can twist policy any way they like in order to justify their actions, it will be wordlessly deleted every time.
The most cowardly among such people never offer any concrete justification for their actions, either. Why bother to be accountable when you can simply cause any complaints which anyone levels at you to disappear?
Jimmy Wales, as much as I pity him, will also never receive a cent from me in response to any of his donation appeals. The only time I would remotely consider donating to the maintenance of this site, would be after someone seriously cleaned house; and I'm talking bans, and in large quantities. Most of the current administrative staff would be a good thing, and the deletion of the site's current policy would also be a fairly large step in the right direction, as well. Neutral Point of View, is to put it simply, a complete lie; as are most of the other elements of entirely subjective horse manure ("weasel words," things, "not sounding encyclopedic," things, "sounding like a magazine article." What on earth do any of these phrases mean? The answer is largely nothing, other than conveniently twistable, subjective justification for the earlier mentioned pedants to entirely arbitrarily delete something which they decide they don't like) that passes for this site's policy.
Your policy, and a very large part of the way you do things, is broken, Wikipedia; as is your inexcusable atheistic bias, and even worse, your attempts to pretend that said bias does not exist. In time, you will be replaced.
Revert this addition to your talk page, if you wish, or ban me for having made it. The one thing which I do not expect from anyone associated with this site, is any form of integrity.
EDIT:- I just discovered yet another example of material being arbitrarily removed from an article's talk page, simply because it expressed a statement which someone else decided they did not like.
I am going to continue to fight the continuing abuses of this site's stated policies until I am banned. I cannot tell you how overjoyed I also am at finding the talk page of one of this site's administrators, because it means that I finally have a relevant place to vent my frustrations. You are going to be hearing a lot more from me.
I am desperately looking for information about this man. If you can tell what was written in the article - I maybe can find more clues about where to find more information.
Your powerful reasoning and sensibility has given me reason to smile to that end this day can I only say "Thank You!". Peace be with you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.91.204.240 (talk) 22:35, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
Please Revert Deletion of Wilmington Drama League
The Wilmington Drama League is a non-profit community theater in Wilmington Delaware. I noticed that the reason given was "spam"
I assure you this is a beloved institution in Wilmington Delaware since 1933. Their Website, which was http://WDL.ORG was recently changed to http://wilmingtondramaleague.org, due to a larger organization with a lot more money pushing them around.
I was going to update the article and noticed that is was missing.
Hi, thanks for protecting the template. The template is relatively new --- the community may still wish to edit it. Can we have semi-protection instead of full protection? I think that's enough: we can still fully protect it in case of vandalism. Thanks! —hike395 (talk) 14:58, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Only one other editor than myself has even edited the meta-template: I don't want to be perceived as hacking up a template and then fully protecting it to avoid community input.
In any event, I'm not an admin: could you add a red (or silver) lock to the template article itself, to warn editors of the protected status? Thanks! —hike395 (talk) 15:14, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Please revert a deletion of a Aleksandar Sørensen-Marković article
Aleksandar Sørensen-Marković is a licenced Danish PRO Ironman triathlete and has placed consistently in top 15 in highly competitive races. He is sponsored by Yakkay and Adidas. His personal sites are at www.pulsslag.dk and www.pulsslag.com. He was a member of Danish national team and is a member of several other competitive teams.
Danish article was deleted by mistake. I disagree with that deletion as well. He certainly needs to be documented in Wikipedia in both English and Danish. Why Danish admin decided to delete his page I am not sure, however I disagree and he ranks much higher than most triathletes and professional athletes who are already featured in Wikipedia.
You can also check my record on how many triathlon biographies and articles I published.
The song definitely exists: it's on YouTube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOvzUH46nWM (though could be removed at any time since I don't think the user who posted it on YouTube has permission from copyright owners). Axl Rose's lead vocal is unmistakable, so it's reasonable to assume that the information that it is a Guns N' Roses song is correct, though any doubts about that part could be mentioned if the article is reinstated.Contains Mild Peril (talk) 11:12, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Josh Perry
I appreciate that you are trying to make Wikipedia a better place, but why did you delete the Josh Perry article. He is a very famous Youtube celebrity and actor whose name comes up multiple times on this site. I figured that an article about him would explain who he is and what he does for the Wikipedia reader.
Sincerly:
Zobango (talk) 00:18, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Happy {{subst:PAGENAME}}'s Day!
[[User:{{subst:PAGENAME}}]] has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian,
and therefore, I've officially declared today as {{subst:PAGENAME}}'s day!
For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian,
enjoy being the Star of the day, dear {{subst:PAGENAME}}!
The only reason I am removing the information is because the person says they can hear it in their car from such-and-such a point to such-and-such a point. That is original research.....if they had something to cite, it would be different. I live in Virginia and I can hear WCBS (AM) from my house, but I don't put in there that it can be heard in Virginia...cause that is OR. If they had something to cite, it would be different. - NeutralHomer • Talk • April 23, 2009 @ 00:19
OK....that is a little steep. Asking for my opinion and then threatening me with removing my rollbacker status. If they can cite it, then it should be allowed, but we can't and don't allow WP:OR unless there has been a change in policy that I missed. - NeutralHomer • Talk • April 23, 2009 @ 00:23
They provided what to OTRS? Can I see the OTRS ticket? - NeutralHomer • Talk • April 23, 2009 @ 00:26
So, you want me to follow something on OTRS that I don't know what it is. Can you give me some idea of what is in the ticket? Because if it is he can hear it in his car, it is still WP:OR. Also, we can stop with the threats of taking me to ANI, that is not WP:AGF. - NeutralHomer • Talk • April 23, 2009 @ 00:30
What is the OTRS ticket number, I am going to see if I can't get someone to look it up for me and give me a half version of it. - NeutralHomer • Talk • April 23, 2009 @ 00:35
This isn't bite-y or anything, it is actually me being nice (if you can believe that)...but I want to know...are you happy? You did what Metros (Either Way) couldn't do...you got my TWINKLE and Rollback. You stood up for an article full of OR and punished someone for standing up to them. You told me about an OTRS not while things were going on, but after. You have also got me to seriously consider whether my time here is done or not. I personally have been bitter being around this place and today with this whole thing that was started by you, made that bitterness all that more evident. I hope you are happy....nicely done. - NeutralHomer • Talk • April 23, 2009 @ 01:33 01:33, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for carrying out the deletion. I just noticed Various Artists, a redirect from another capitalization, that should probably also be deleted (sorry I didn't notice it while the RfD was still open). Can that be deleted along with this, as housekeeping, or should I open another RfD? rʨanaɢtalk/contribs17:24, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. There are still a lot of incoming links to those (I think Ten Pound Hammer took care of the mainspace incoming links to the first Various artists redirect), so I'll try to deal with them sometime in the next couple days. rʨanaɢtalk/contribs17:34, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Miss Edgar's and Miss Cramp's School
I noticed that the "Miss Edgar's and Miss Cramp's School" entry was deleted by you back in June of 2008.
I am the current archivist of the school and would like to add an entry for it to Wikipedia. I was wondering if there is an archived copy of the entry that was deleted, so I could at least see what was posted here previously that did not meet the Wiki standards.
If there is none, it's no skin off my back, as I'll just create a new one, but it would be nice to see what was up here previously.
Thanks.
Wow, that's a pitiful entry. No wonder you deleted it. Thanks for forwarding me that info - I think I'll just create a new entry. Esheinfeld (talk) 16:27, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
If you write Bjarte L in google or in Cuil you will see that his full name is one of the first that comes up. There are over a thousand direct hits on his name. I think it is kind of silly that a huge resource like Wiki will delete information about a person that is in the Norwegian Musical Encyclopedia. Is it possible to put it up again? - —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluemusic (talk • contribs) 11:38, April 13, 2009 (UTC)
IRC cloak and admin channel
I think that I have received my wikipedia affiliated cloak. Could you re-add my permission for the admin channel? Thanks. Icestorm815 • Talk23:52, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Heya, I've applied for a cloak today. Will I need to do anything once it goes through? Cheers, Nja24714:49, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Re:Southside Playaz
Southside Playaz
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This page has been deleted. The deletion log for the page is provided below for reference.
00:07, 11 February 2009 Rjd0060 (talk | contribs) deleted "Southside Playaz" (Deleted because expired WP:PROD; Reason given: fails WP:MUS.)
Why was the page deleted.It was right for the most part.
I'd Like to undo the deletion if possible.Hard to get info on underground rap associations like SSP.So we need it to be on Wiki. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JOBE (talk • contribs) 18:19, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
Re: Alan Hirsch
00:12, 23 October 2008 Rjd0060 (talk | contribs) deleted "Alan Hirsch" (Deleted because expired WP:PROD; Reason given: Non-notable speaker.)
Where can I find the deletion discussion for the Nisha Kataria article? I would like to read it and have not been able to locate it despite searching for it. Thanks. Diderot'sdreams(talk)05:36, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
Why did you delete the Firefox AK page? I don't understand how this band could not be notable enough given all the worthless crap on wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.218.200.107 (talk) 14:55, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Given that you looked at the deletion log (in order to find out who deleted it) you should have seen a reason right there next to my username. Feel free to check again, and if you're going to leave comments like this, please don't call other users work "worthless crap" or anything like that. Also, sign your posts with four tildes ("~~~~"). Thanks. - Rjd0060 (talk) 14:58, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
I noticed that you reprimanded Campbellgirl for vandalism in 2007. I just wanted to point out that 1) she appears to me to be an employee of PRI (look at her talk page, she has been posting press releases verbatim as Wikipedia articles), 2) The Takeaway is a PRI program, and 3) she has been undoing my edits on The Takeaway page for the entire year that the program has been broadcast. I have addressed her on her talk page and I discussed her edits on The Takeaway's talk page but to no avail. I want more than dueling edits her, I can undo hers and she can undo mine but I really would like some kind of reprimand if she is promoting her economic interests with POV edits here. I have no axe to grind except that I live in the New York area and I listen to WNYC-FM a lot, and I think the program is kind of unworthy of WNYC's schedule.
Hi, I noticed that you deleted Food Jammers for being non-notable, spammy, and violating WP:CRYSTAL. I started the original page and I don't think it was spammy. I certainly can't think of why it would be WP:CRYSTAL. Perhaps it changed, but I'd like to get it added again and clean it up. I believe that it is a notable show: http://www.tv-eh.com/2008/04/29/food-jammers-wins-gold/
I see that you deleted this article when a WP:PROD expired. The reason for deletion was "Chronic lack of reliable independent sources to establish notability and provide the foundation for a credible article" - though I cannot see whether that was _your_ reason or from the user that nominated for deletion.
As for notability, just do a google search. As for reliable sources, well, there may be problems with some of the material, but I'm sure that the most basic facts can be safely established from e.g. Library of Congress. In my opinion, it would be better to restore the article and then let people remove just the material that they find to be unreliable.
In any case, I find that the RfD procedure is better suited than PROD, for articles such as this one that a lot of work have gone into writing. Rune Kock (talk) 03:29, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
All info found on Sasthamangalam's page has been from proper channels and as told to this reporter by local folks. If you cannot digest it , I cannot help it. Remember - truth is always bitter and painful'". Think of the pain that the victim mentioned on that page is going through and then speak non sense. Only the person whose finger has been cut knows the pain, rest of the people surrounding hime can always say ooh and ouch easily. coloner nair —Preceding unsigned comment added by Coloner.nair (talk • contribs) 12:50, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
List of Monster Trucks
I recently removed from Blue Thunder a redlink to List of monster trucks as the list had been deleted. Today, I was cleaning up my watchlist and noticed that a link has been re-inserted to List of Monster Trucks. I have no experience of deletions, but it seems to me inappropriate that the latter should exist, owing to the capitalisation of the title and for the reasons given in the former's deletion. As you deleted the original list, can you give me any advice on whether I should take any action? I have connection or experience with monster trucks and only came across the Blue Thunder article by accident. --RexxS (talk) 17:46, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
I'm User:Dominus Noster. You probably don't remember me but you blocked me from editing my talkpage. Evidently you've been talking to IllaZilla. I don't know what that guy's problem is but he's convinced that I'm the sockpuppet of a blocked user and he's had me blocked. I was using my talkpage to point out the obvious ridiculousness of this action. It is after all my talkpage, I can do what I want with it. Granted Wikipedia is getting more like a George Orwell novel every day but I'm not aware of any rules against freedom of speech on it so if you'd be so kind as to undo whatever you've done to prevent me from editing my talkpage I'd be very greatful. Good day. --86.130.137.175 (talk) 20:58, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Next Generation Mobile Networks Alliance
Hi I;d like some help with starting an article for this independent organisation, but everytime I put something up it gets marked for deletion. i have also submitted a request for an article to be started but haven't heard anything back from wikipedia. Can you help? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sbedwell (talk • contribs) 09:15, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
I suggest that when he turns back up again with a new IP to spam a Chamber of Commerce link you just let the link stand and ignore him.
I blacklisted every Edgewater-related domain that I could find but I suspect our spammer owns more; I'll be happy to blacklist new ones as they reappear. Just list them at MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist with a link to the June archive section above. If you're unsure as to the domain's ownership, let me know and I'll check them. I spent several hours researching the various domains and business relationships associated with our earlier Put-in-Bay spam and I kept those notes. User:A. B. (talk) 21:05, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi there, The article about Oliver Cleary was recently deleted. I saw that the reason was because of lack of notability and "other concerns" which were attached to a link that I couldn't view. I believe Cleary is notable enough for wikipedia and supplied plenty of sources. Is there someway the page could be restored? If so I will happily add more information and sources. I'm new to wikipedia but I believe I can bring the article up to proper standards if given a chance.
Thanks Jude22 (talk) 17:34, 9 June 2009 (UTC) 17:33, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I saw that you deleted this article, because it was 'lacking third-party sources establishing notability' and WP:PROD expired. I think Thomas Kyte is notable and I would like to add the required third-party sources to the article. Could you recreate the article in my user namespace so I can work on it and bring it up to standard for main namespace? That would be great. Thank you. --Berny68 (talk) 06:32, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Spider-man 4
Hey dude, I was wondering if you could remove that block you put on the Spider-man 4 page. I looked at the history and realized that the edit war that occurred on that article was pointless and caused by careless mistakes and arrogant users.
I am going to repair the article by adding citations and removing all information that hasn't been proven yet. If you could please remove that block you put on, I promise you these changes in at least a weeks time.
So please, I ask of you, remove that editing block. I know that there was so much bickering, and I am sad to say, I was a main contender in it to. I see that it ends next Monday, but if you could, remove it so I can improve the article and end the editing war that has been going on for quite some time. --Red Slayer 01:01, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I recently created a new stub for Tararam. I notice from the logs, a previous version existed, and was PROD'd, and deleted by you. If the deleted version is on the same topic (a music/dance group) and it's not an apparent copyvio, please consider undeleting it to history, so I can see if there's anything of value. Thank you. --Rob (talk) 15:35, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
Can you point me to the policy that outlaws this please. Thanks!
As to your comment about my comment regarding stalking and user Collect, you are not aware of the history. The comment was completely accurate. ► RATEL ◄01:15, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Disturbing comment
Given the growing creepiness of the conversations on other pages, I'm having a hard time seeing Emely1219's comment as anything other than a veiled warning or a threat whether or not it was actually intended for me. Flowanda | Talk03:24, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi,
I just read the deletion description for my La Conecta page.
I fully agree with the terms of this deletion, since I wasn't even aware of the rule by the time I wrote this page.
Fact is, I didn't save my text.
Is there a way for me to get it back, so I can modify it, in accord to the Rules of wikipedia?
Along with my shameless self-promotion in this page, I wrote some useful information about my band that I actually don't have anymore since the deletion.
Is there any reason to leave {{NOINDEX}} on Talk:David S. Rohde? You added it in March. Now that the story has broken I can't think of any reason to keep it. Could you remove it please, or at least say you won't object if someone else does? davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 23:54, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
non free images
i was under the impression that all photos used in wikipedia were free to use anywhere. i thought that was a precondition to their use? plz explain to me how non free images are used. also, is it ok to upload personally taken photos? EL HOMBRE.. EL MITO...LA LEYENDA (talk) 04:23, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
More On Non-Free Images; Clarification/Assistance?
Hello RJD -
Two years ago you helped me in my work on an article regarding Bob Shane, one of the founding members of the Kingston Trio, by adding a correctly-formatted template for WP:NFCC for a picture of Shane [73].
As you can see from the page, User:Aspects is disputing the claim of fair use and has slated the image for deletion tomorrow, 7/1/09.
User:Aspects maintains that a personal snapshot of Shane decades past the period of his notability - which is, however, non-copyrighted and free - uploaded and placed on the page by me is sufficient to serve the needs of the article. I have responded both here [74] and on the Talk page with examples here[75].
I have read thoroughly and pondered the ten criteria on WP:NFCC and the fair use section on images here [76].
The regulations surrounding fair use on the pages cited are substantially subjective - e.g., and operatively here, #9 from WP:NFCC - "Significance. Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding."
Essentially, I maintain that the use of Image:Shane62.jpg meets that criterion; User:Aspects does not. I have considered going here [77] for review. However, before I do so, I would appreciate any input/reaction you might be able to give me, however brief, since image use does in fact seem to be an area in which you have substantial experience. Thanks, Sensei48 (talk) 16:41, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the prompt response here. Que sera, sera. I think though that the "wiggle room" occurs in the interpretation - and it is just that - of the passage quoted above. The non-free image was intended by me as an addendum, and I'll likely remove it - it serves no central educational purpose to the article.I may be able to upload legitimately a non-copyrighted image that fits the bill. Sensei48 (talk) 17:22, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Question per your offer
"So if you have any questions, feel free to ask me."
Please post the OTRS ticket to the extent it does not compromise anyones privacy or put their life at risk. Thanks! Hipocrite (talk) 19:43, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but I cannot do that. OTRS tickets are confidential and it would be extremely inappropriate for me to release the content of one. - Rjd0060 (talk) 20:17, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Could you request that whoever submitted it permit its distribution?
Either way, in the interim, could you describe the relationship of the ticket submitter to the individual kidnapped, and give a brief summary of the rationale used by the submitter for the removal of information? Were you, or other OTRS individuals aware that the individual was, in fact, kidnapped at the time, were you left in the dark, or were you actively misinformed? Hipocrite (talk) 20:27, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Hipocrite, as Rjd0060 has explained, the OTRS ticket is confidential so questions of the sort that you are asking are inappropriate. FloNight♥♥♥20:39, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Hipocrite, as a matter of policy, it is not a good idea for us to republish OTRS tickets. It is especially not a good idea to do so if the purpose is to find fuel to retrospectively debate a policy decision of this sort. MikeGodwin (talk) 20:46, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
It is especially not a good idea to facilitate retrospective debate over a policy decision that was made by a small cabal of Wiki elites in contravention of Wiki policy? Why not, exactly?
Mike, I am not asking this as a result of the policy discussion on Wikipedia. This is a national news story of interest to millions of Americans who are only now finding out that they were misled by the press such that the press could protect one of their own.
Fred, he offered to answer questions. If he wants to retract that offer, I'll certainly stop asking him and go back to pestering the NYTimes Public Editor, who will hopefully come clean about how many people they lied to in perpetuating this cover-up. I'm not pestering any of the other admins, who I suspect are quite blamless in this self-serving media self-dealing. So, now that that's over...
Flo, I don't see how my questions are inapropriate. Firstly, the word "confidential" from the OTRS info page on en.wp links to the meta privacy policy. Specifically, that says "The ticket system team may discuss the contents of received mail with other contributors in order to respond effectively." Secondly, it does not guarantee the privacy of the identity of the sender of the mail. Further, putting all of that aside, asking the question is not inapropriate, while answering it might be, because I'm not bound by the privacy policy. Let me try a different question, as this might solve all of the problems.
Was the OTRS mail sent by Jimmy Donal Wales? Were you misled by Jimmy Donal Wales at any time? I hope we can all agree that the WMF has no duty to keep his coorespondence private. Hipocrite (talk) 20:50, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Hipocrite, you are way out of line here, as already alluded to by another arb and the wiki lawyer. Knock it off. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:02, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Again, I am not out of line. Difficult questions are difficult, and if the owner of this talk page wants me to stop, I will, but it's not against any rules or policies or procedures for me to ask embarassing questions, and it's certainly not going to get anyone killed, anymore. Hipocrite (talk) 21:04, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Hipocrite, playing 20 questions to figure out the content of the ticket content seems like it violates the spirit of the OTRS policy that allows people to send anonymous comments and request to the WMF volunteers for processing. The on site actions are present in the article history and speak to the way that the situation was handled with the article. I don't think that the other details are as relevant as you make them appear since the contributors voluntarily made the actions of their own accord. FloNight♥♥♥21:09, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
As the author of the email to OTRS in question, I have no problem publishing the full text of it here. I have no idea what Hipocrite is going on about, there was nothing misleading about it, it was the immediate emergency request that I made upon learning of the situation, and it is precisely as has already been explained in the press and elsewhere. I believe Hipocrite is trying to make something out of nothing here and I find his line of questioning, and manner of questioning, extremely rude.
"Due to an extremely sensitive BLP issue involving grave personal danger, please protect the biography of David Rohde for 3 days. I would do it myself, but having this be done quietly is important, and me doing it would likely raise special notice which would be counter-productive."
Within a short time after my making the request, Rjd0060 did the protection requested, and either soon after or just before, he and I also had an IRC (I think it was IRC, but I am not sure at the moment) conversation in which I gave him more information, so that he could - on his own - determine what course of action to take.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 21:47, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Speaking as a journalist, I'd like to publicly thank Hipocrite for going through the aggravation necessary to obtain that information. Running the gauntlet seen above is unpleasant. Jimmy, note as a logical matter, the event does involve, well, let us say, many statements which make it completely reasonable to be skeptical of other associated statements (I'm trying to put it as politely as possible, but it is a simple fact which shouldn't be denied). -- Seth Finkelstein (talk) 00:30, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Undelete request
Hi there, as per IRC conversation could you please undelete 'File:BobbyTaylor and the Vancouvers-01.jpg'? I'll provide a fair use rationale within 7 days or whatever is necessary. Latest version, please.
Hey Rjd. I asked on #wikipedia-en about the admin channel, got pointed to Wikipedia:IRC#Pending_requests_for_access_to_channels, and told I had to be cloaked. Where can I read up on that stuff? I don't know if it makes a difference or not, but I'm now using Chatzilla since my mIRC timed out. I'm not hugely knowledgeable on the IRC stuff, just want to be able to ask a question here and there at times. Any help would be appreciated ... thx, and Cheers. — Ched : ? 04:17, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Thank You
The Helping Hand Barnstar
Just wanted to say thanks for all the time you spent helping a n00b (that would be me) Rjd. It's greatly appreciated! — Ched : ? 07:54, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks
Thank you for protecting the article Xenu. However, I fear that a longer period of semi-protection may be required, in light of the prior protection logs on the article and the propensity for vandalism to it. Cirt (talk) 13:37, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Question regarding clarifying David Rohde article actions
Hi, speaking as a journalist, could I please ask you for clarification of something you wrote?
"I wish people would stop complaining about Jimmy who really didn't do anything in this situation, contrary to the NYT article who made him out as a "leader" of sorts. I heavily reviewed a request that was received via our email ticket system and I acted on it in a way that I felt was appropriate."
But Jimmy made that request per above, right? Isn't that being a "_leader_ of sorts"?
"We (as in OTRS agents) respond to sensitive queries on a daily basis (though I'll admit none are quite like this one)."
Right, but when it comes from The Co-Founder, isn't that a little different from the day-to-day request? I mean, are you really ever going to act against his directives, much less ever roundfile him with something like Wikipedia-is-not-censored?
General Disclaimer, addressed to all: I know, good intentions, etc., and Jimmy thinks I'm a (insert-personal-attack-here) - I KNOW. Can we all just focus on the material, thank you? -- Seth Finkelstein (talk) 05:46, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
I really don't believe it matters who the original request came from. Whoever sent us the request, I would have reviewed it the same and acted as I felt appropriate and/or necessary. - Rjd0060 (talk) 14:27, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply. Now, I cannot argue with your belief _qua_ belief, but I'll note that such belief is not objectively convincing. That is, I'll accept you "really don't believe it matters who the original request came from". But that's not evidence that it doesn't matter who the original request came from. Anyway, do you see how your original statement conveys a very strong impression that Jimmy did not send the initial ticket, and so the _Times_ has misreported the events? If I understand you correctly, you're basing your objection on an interpretation of the word "leader", where a request (ticket) from The Co-Founder does not qualify as "leader of sorts" and means he "really didn't do anything"?
I'm not interested in pounding you over this relatively minor aspect. That's not why I do journalistic work. But I urge you to look over your comments and see how it could happen that you'd get accused of trying a cover-up (note, I'm NOT accusing you of being part of a cover-up here, I'm saying to be sensitive to a way you could easily be misunderstood in a very negative manner).
A word of advice - if you're ever asked to do something, well, let's say "controversial", by someone in authority (and let's not pretend Jimmy is some sort of aw-shucks peer), for your own protection, make it very clear who is leading. Because documents get leaked, others talk, and if it comes down to a crunch, those authorities aren't going to take a fall for you. Wikipedia's mythology about being community-run is particularly pernicious here (there are legal reasons for it), and I suspect eventually some naive acolyte will get badly hurt one day. -- Seth Finkelstein (talk) 20:07, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello! I hope I don't come across as silly, but I wanted to commend you for the manner in which you disengaged from Juliancolton's RfB. I am certain this was a difficult and sensitive matter, and I wanted to state that I am impressed with the grace you displayed in closing your participation in the discussion. Thank you and be well. Pastor Theo (talk) 04:31, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Final vandalism warning?
Why did you leave a final vandalism warning on my talk page? I've committed no vandalism that I'm aware of, nor have I received any previous lower level warnings from your or anyone, so I'm wondering if this was an error. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:50, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Greetings, if I can find third-party references, can I bring that back? Mr Roberts was in fact famous on the martial-arts tournament circuit, I should be able to dig up some third-party references, such as Black Belt Magazine, etc.
Mail if necessary for speedy response to thardman at thomashardman.com
Ya know Rjd. There's at least 3 such editors are know of, who are limited to corresponding with others. 2 of them frequent NHL articles: 1 is the Sniyer guy & the other (I won't say his name) is a big fan of & concentrates mainly on the Philadelphia Flyers & ralated articles. GoodDay (talk) 23:15, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Hudler
When Hudler signed had signed the contract with Dynamo, he had previously filled for salary arbitration, therefore making him still a property of the Red Wings. He is obliged to play in the NHL next season. NHL has approached the IIHF to intervene. So until the whole case is solved, please do not change the information. Norum (talk) 08:37, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Detroit Red Wings 2009-10 Season
I noticed you changed the format of the table I had placed with the preseason schedule and placed the edit note as consistency with the table. If you look at the other NHL season pages, that is the format on all the pages. If I missed the consensus in WP:Hockey I apologize, but I was following the format set on the other pages. Shootmaster 44 (talk) 08:21, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
Restore on article on James Roberts, Jr
Thanks for the speedy restoration.
Much of the information comes from personal memory, but there are also online sources which aren't directly linked to downstream from Mr Roberts. I should be able to dig up some references from Black Belt Magazine as they are starting to bring some of their history pages online. Many thanks again, Thardman22 (talk) 06:29, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I was wondering if you could undelete The Cult of Sincerity. I'm not sure how complete the article was before it was WP:PRODed but I'd like to take a stab at filling in notability issues.
At User talk:0kmck4gmja, you have just deleted 678(!) edits. I object to this. The talkpage history is indeed relevant to reconstruct article histories, and the talkpage contributions are not owned by the user in question but by whoever made them. I also object to the obscurantist practice of hiding pages under titles like "0kmck4gmja", this isn't above-the-board. I see no reason for this deletion, as any edits made by any editor are irrevocably released under the GFDL. User talk histories are often relevant in reconstructing the history of content debates. --dab(𒁳)14:10, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
I am aware of WP:RTV, which explicitly states it's best to not delete user talk pages on request.
I apologize for implying you moved the user to 0kmck4gmja. This was apparently the user's own attempt at obfuscation, not yours. I still object to the deletion, and talking down to me isn't going to change anything. Judging from the talkpage history, this is a case of IRC-admining, to the effect that administrative decisions have been made that cannot be traced on-wiki. It is also not a big deal and I am not going to go on a crusade over it. I have simply told you, as my fellow-admin, that I object to a decision of yours. I don't expect you to jump to attention but I do expect you to take due notice. --dab(𒁳)16:02, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
"The Network"
You can block an individual, but as you know, you can't block "The Network"! When a block is initiated, we just simply change chapter responsibility! Look for us later this week at another ISP!--TheKnightExemplar (talk) 22:32, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
I noticed that you are one of the IRC Group Contacts. I just started using IRC tonight, and my nickname is King_of_Hearts. Could you give me the IRC Cloak wikipedia/King_of_Hearts? Thanks. -- King of♥♦♣ ♠ 05:11, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed your name on King of Heart's userpage. I'm interested in obtaining an IRC cloak as well. Will you be able to help me with this? Best, →javértstargaze06:40, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
Sonia Sotomayor Supreme Court nomination
Hello, I was wondering if you could temporarily semi-protect the article Sonia Sotomayor Supreme Court nomination over the next twenty-four hours. There is likely to be random IP vandalism, and is expected to be a high visibilty article as the event progresses in just a short time from now. I didn't want to add this to the Requests for protection page as I've been declined once before for something like this, and it ends up being vandalised to hell and back until hours after the event is already over, and a lock is finally added. (Shaheen Jafargholi's article was a prime example during the MJ funeral.) Anyway, sorry if it seems random that I contacted you, you were the first administrator I saw on the Requests page. Any help will be extremely helpful in managing the article, when the time comes. Gage (talk) 15:41, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
I am extremely familiar with the policy, thanks though. But, seeing as you seemed to be more accesible than the delayed response on the part of the RFPP volunteers as a whole, contacting you here would probably be better if it gets out of hand, which is almost certain. I hope you don't mind, as it would, again, be extremely helpful. Gage (talk) 15:48, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
IRC Cloak
Hello Rjd. Tried reaching you on IRC earlier but to no avail... I noticed you were one of the group contacts for IRC. Since the cloaking request is down, do you know how I would be able to obtain one? Thank you! -Pax85 (talk) 21:14, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks
Rjd0060, Kingpin13 (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing! Kingpin13 (talk) 22:55, 6 August 2009 (UTC) Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
I am "Steven Pederson" the subject of an article you deleted. (Yes, I realize *I* was not deleted, an article on me was deleted. However it does feel a bit like being srubbed into non-existence.)
The article wasn't a vanity article--I didn't create it, it was reasonably sourced, and I made it a point to leave it alone (resisting the temptation to update it and make it a vanity piece--my subsequent ventures have not been the source of independent coverage.)
I'm not any sort of member of the wikipedia community--have done no more than correct an few inaccuracies (unrelated to this), never before even needed an account. From what I can divine, the reason for deletion was so obvious that it didn't need to be explained. Well maybe to insiders. As a mere mortal who simply uses wikipedia as an information source... breaking all the links stands out as a red flag.
As I write this I realize that coherence to outsiders is a general issue, and you're just probably just one editor, not a spokesperson for the organization. But you DID delete the article so you're the touch point for wondering why....
Interestingly, the deletion didn't even make it into deletionpedia. Talk about ground into insignificance. ;)
The protection runs out tonight, the last two years it has been usual to let the protection run out after the last day, as you were the last to protect it, could you extend it to midnight 4th September (or one minute into the 5th). Darrenhusted (talk) 13:56, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
ARBCOM
You are involved in a recently-filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Javert, Rjd0060, and Jimbo and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
My account has been compromised (my fault really, I had a very simple password), and used maliciously in my absence. I apologize for any trouble caused under my name, and would like this arbcom case closed. I am available for questions, and would like to help clean up the crap that has gone on in my absence.DrewSmithWhat I've done11:00, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
Strange that you removed the network protocol uFDEX as it's a real system used in many applications. Because it's also an internal network between MCU and other electronics, companies using this does not really tell they use uFDEX but if you think it does not belong to Wikipedia then let it be that way... 58.147.28.186 (58.147.28.186) 06:32, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi could you userfy this to me? It was deleted as a not notable politician but she is a quite accomplished playwright and performer and her run for congress was a part of her performance peices "Baum for Congress". -- Banjeboi13:31, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
You recently left a message on the talk page of User:Southbankmolineux about ignoring the consensus about the article but he has simply re-added the information again and stated that he will keep re-adding it. I've never had a problem with an edit war before so I hoped I could leave it up to you to take the appropriate action. Thanks. Kosack (talk) 21:35, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
Centereach, New York
You once acted to defend a page I had worked on from vandals, so I am dropping by to see what can be done about an IP address that has now messed with the census data on Centereach,_New_York three times in the last 10 days. From their User_talk:69.113.203.59 talk page, it looks like all their edits are vandal edits. Thanks for any help you might lend. --Neighborhoodpalmreader (talk) 05:23, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
Ahmad Jamal
Greetings Rjd0060 - I see you have just edited the Ahmad Jamal article and left an edit summary referring to the discussion on the talk page. However, as you have not left any rationale on said talk page and the consensus reached is that his birth name is to be included - as per Wikipedia guidelines - I'm confused as to what criteria you are applying. As you are an admin. I take for granted you know something I don't, but please explain. Thank you. --Technopat (talk) 23:38, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
Greetings again Rjd0060 - have just seen your edit to the talk page. Message received, but I have a sneaking feeling the OTRS will be contested. Regards, --Technopat (talk) 23:44, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
Sorry to drag this one out, but thought the following gem from the French article might be of interest: [[78]]. It's a well-known "fact" that he changed his name (as did many other musicians on converting to Islam in the '50s, 60s and 70s) and I'm sincerely worried that the Wikipedia Foundation is being hoodwinked over this matter - not by Jamal himself, but by his close collaborators. Do you know if the evidence submitted via OTRS been taken at face value or has the Foundation itself accessed the public records? Obviously if the Foundation were being threatened with legal action as part of this polemic the perspective changes, but verifiability is where Wikipedia is at! Cheers! --Technopat (talk) 00:24, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for latest clarification - please don't think I'm doubting your personal good faith in this - it's precisely the authenticity of the copies you have received that I harbour doubts about. But it's too late at night over here to worry 'bout it now. Thanks for your admining. G'night! --Technopat (talk) 00:37, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
Images?
Hey, I saw you deleted Images i uploaded from flickr on wiki commons. Can you please explain my why as it said I can upload if it says "Some rights reserved".
That's strange considering the fact that the New York Times told you to remove my David Rohde edits. I must say that you being a part of that cover up surprised me greatly. Pahjwok Afghan News was really unreliable, eh? HA, whatever. At least you gave Darrenhusted a warning too. Thank you for doing that. 72.186.97.162 (talk) 01:10, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for pointing out that I made an edit on AN/I that removed other people's text. I would never have noticed. I don't understand why there was no edit conflict notice. I double-checked everything to make sure I wasn't somehow deleting more text as I was putting the other text back, and I'm pretty sure it's OK now (this diff stream shows no deletions). -- SoapTalk/Contributions02:04, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
Knee-jerk reversion
Please exercise care when performing a blind revert, as you did here. Not doing so will undo not only changes you find problematic, but also the valid changes made during that same edit. It's an easy mistake to make; one that will happen less frequently with experience. You can find more information at WP:Revert. With regards to your comment on my talk page, thank you for the link to the WP:BLP section on relatively unknown people. I do not see how that applies to the 3 sources listed in the Lewy article; perhaps you could elaborate? If you choose to do so, it would probably be advantageous to respond on the article talk page in case other editors are interested. Regards, Xenophrenic (talk) 19:50, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Rjd0060 -
You came to my talk page to advise me on the fundamentals of BLP, a category of articles I have specialized in since I began editing Wikipedia. Bad form. You then reverted content you considered negative, while claiming you didn't see the 3 high quality sources to which it was cited. Possibly an oversight on your part; possibly willful negligence. During that revert, you also deleted other content without any explanation at all. Bad form. When I asked you to elaborate on your reasoning for the deletion of sourced content, you responded not with your reasons, but with further incivility: your blatant disregard to the BLP policy is appalling; I see that you're not interested in logical discussion; [you are] ignoring one of the most important policies that we have. On top of all that, you inform me you are OTRS, and therefore I "clearly don't know the full story". Wait, is this the same OTRS described in the opening paragraph as comprised of "Volunteers trusted to give courteous and helpful responses?"
Here's the full story, Rjd0060. I hate drama, but you have pushed too many buttons here. I am one step away from taking this situation to the noticeboards for review. I am requesting that you strike your comments from my talk page, and I am re-requesting that you elaborate on your objections to the 3 (now 4) sources cited for the content in the Lewy BLP. Please take this opportunity to return this to a cooperative effort, instead of an adversarial one. Regards, Xenophrenic (talk) 20:51, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
You are correct your assessment that my edit summaries could have been a little more ... let's say, constructive. Let's see if we can resolve this to everyone's satisfaction. Xenophrenic (talk) 21:09, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
It is an USA official document but as you can see, it dates back over 100 years. So is this picture public domain since it copyright status expired? Or should I upload it under US government copyright? Rave92(talk)12:02, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
Just check its max trends, it remained in Alexa's top 100,000 for the portion of its lifespan while it did update.
Now admittedly, the comic has been in remission, but it seems like the proposed deletion was right before it started up with new updates, and so no one was paying attention to the article, but lacking in updates is not uncommon to web comics. It seems at the very least that the grounds for deletion are erroneous, as the comic had quite a large reader base and some significance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.2.228.8 (talk) 22:41, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
This article is one you salted a little over a year ago -- would you consider removing the protection? (The subject is the guy who plays the pirate in the FreeCreditReport.com commercials.) I'm not sure about notability -- it's a singing pirate, after all -- but since the article was salted (and since the last deletion review) there have been reliable sources reporting on the subject. (See [79]). It may be worth opening it up to see if anyone writes a usable article.
My primary concern is that if we leave something salted that long, a subject that was not notable under the guidelines can become notable -- but we won't get an article about it because rank and file editors won't be interested in navigating deletion review or unprotection. Unless we really need to leave this salted to avoid disruption, I think we should try to open it up to see whether the subject has become notable. Thoughts? --TheOtherBob16:30, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
I noticed you deleted this along with Hash'ak'gik which redirected there. I am not sure what these originally looked like, but while it probably did not deserve an individual article since it was not the main character of these games, they could both redirect too List of Legacy of Kain characters#Hash'ak'gik which describes the guy. Would it be okay to restore these and change them to redirect there? Also I am wondering, whatever content was originally at this article, would it be possible to find an archive to see if any could be incorporated and merged into his description on the LoK character list page? Sarafan Lord, Hylden General & Dark Entity are other terms for the same character which I hope can also be directed there, since they were not previously deleted I figure they might be recent additions. Tyciol (talk) 00:38, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
.
If I wish to re-create a page, I'm told to contact the admin who deleted it. I would like to re-create the Veracity (album) page. I have made a user-subpage that you can look at. [80] and I plan to expand it a bit with the information at the following two urls: [81] and [82] most likely tomorrow or Saturday. Please let me know what you think, I'd be happy to have any feedback. FallenWings47 (talk) 18:24, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
Nice one - I can do something else with my time now rather than being on constant vigil! So what do I have to do when I want to make a legit edit to Marc's page? Johnalexwood (talk) 03:04, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
I am responsible for creating a wiki page for the well known and respected music producer Jon Drew and have noticed that you have already deleted a previous entry under that title. Was it not sourced or referenced properly? I would like to know more about why so I don't make the same mistake. (Maybealex (talk) 21:19, 30 November 2009 (UTC))
Semi-protect
In May you semi-pp-ed my user page, as I am going to be unable to log on for about a month could you fully-protect the user page and my talk page, and semi-protect all my talk archive pages, if you have the time. I would rather not return in a few weeks to a bunch of vandalism. Cheers in advance. Darrenhusted (talk) 22:43, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi! You deleted the page stating that: 00:18, 19 December 2008 Rjd0060 (talk | contribs) deleted "EpesiBIM" (Deleted because expired WP:PROD; Reason given: Non notable software.)
Well - the software was downloaded more than 10,000 times from SourceForge.net and we have visitors from 135 countries. Can you restore it please? (jtylek22:11, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
northwest migration
i just want to ask why u deleted "northwest migration". I see you deleted it because it doesn't have any sources to back it up. while it is just mentioning neo-nazis. who are moving whites to the northwest coast of the u.s. it would be nice if it was still up there. honestly people need to know what they are planning. while it may be nothing, wikipedia is about sharing knowledge and i believe that article was important. —Nightslayer78 (talk • contribs) 10:34, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
Phi Delta Sigma Fraternity, Inc.
This was the reasoning for deleting the page:
23:32, 29 April 2008 Rjd0060 (talk | contribs) deleted "Phi Delta Sigma Fraternity, Inc." (Deleted because expired WP:PROD; Clearly autobiographical and no secondary sources showing notability..)
I just read up on the 'prod' tag and don't believe the page creator realized what it was, so I'd like to have the page restored. How do I go about making this request? Also, if you wouldn't mind giving me some feedback on improvements for the page, that'd be great! :) --X3tinaa (talk) 14:49, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Macaco
Hello. Hey, how would I be able to recreate the Jorge Patino page? What would I need? He is notable by my definition, and I'm sure that I can find tons of media sources about him, both printed and online. He's a well known name in MMA and Jiu Jitsu, especially here in Brazil. Macaco fought in the UFC, Pride, he defeated Ronaldo Souza (Jacaré), among other stuff. How can I get started? Thank you. Moro-no-lixo (talk) 14:27, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Ok, thank you for the feedback. I'll start gathering info, checking sources, and doing some of the easier stuff as soon as the weekend kicks in. My life is boring. Moro-no-lixo (talk) 16:01, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Hey there. Looks like we walked over each other on the page while trying to tidy it up. :) Sorry for removing the template, I didn't realize it was there. ArcAngel (talk) 19:33, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Hello, you likely will not remember me, but I was formerly a member of Wikipedia called Junsuiene. In July of 2008 I started an article with my friend called "Ryujin Hachisu", an article, which regretable, was deleted in September of the same year. My searches have resulted in my finding that you were the one who happened to delete it. No, I do not suggest that you somehow return it to Wikipedia, merely that if you can, find the article in your archives and email it to me at <removed Rjd0060 (talk) 23:49, 21 January 2010 (UTC)>. If you can do this, I would be most grateful.
Sincerely,
Riseofryujin Riseofryujin (talk • contribs) 23:43, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for adding the protection on that page. It's getting hit pretty hard. Another one that's really getting hit is Pocahontas. Sometimes there seems no rhyme or reason to the crazy vandalism here. lol MarmadukePercy (talk) 22:55, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi. I noticed that the article for this band had been deleted by you. You may have been unaware of their collaboration with artiste Damo Suzuki, and their subsequent entry in Damo Suzuki's article discography section. Although I am unsure whether this itself constitutes notability (although perhaps it should), do you happen to still have the original article as it stood anyway, for me to see please? Caspar (talk) 12:45, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
SlimBrowser
You deleted the SlimBrowser article in 2008 after an expired prod.[83] Could you undelete it so I can make an edit similar to [84] refering to [85], which to me makes it notable enough, in that some people will want to know what it is.--Rumping (talk) 10:25, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
I don't use the rollback button liberally, except on my own talkpage, which is allowed. If you don't mind, please keep all of our conversations centered here. Scottaka UnitAnode02:05, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
thanks (seaworld item)
appreciate your noticing (and hopefully noticed that I had asked the other party, numerous times, to join the conversation (which they apparently refused to do, and instead chose to attack an editor instead). SpikeJones (talk) 13:44, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
I can't figure out why a two-month old PROD tag was removed from a page rather than having the article deleted.[86] I know it's ancient history, but do you recall any of the details? Will Bebacktalk23:11, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi Ryan. I've recently prepared the "List of psychedelic rock artists" which is fully referenced. And, I am so willing to create the page, all is ready. But Wikipedia suggests me to talk to you before recreating the page since it was deleted by you earlier. Can I get what your opinion? I have references listed in the article for each artist, over 120, I don't see any reason not to create the list page since it's fully referenced. I am aware some bands don't fall in a specific genre, and if there are such bands in the list that I've already prepared we could put them under discussion. If necessary, the artist could get deleted. Thanks in advance. Elitropia (talk) 14:52, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello, you'd blocked this an an open proxie. The block has expired, and I've just vandal warned. Don't know what if anything is to be done. Dlohcierekim 15:45, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
IRC Cloak Request
Hi. Wanted to leave a cloak request.
1. My project username is Wifione
2. Desired cloak format is wikimedia/wifione (as I wanted to contribute not only to wikipedia, but also to the wikimedia strategy task force). In case that's not possible, then wikipedia/wifione
Hi I cannot find out how to post spreadsheet-looking information. When I try copy and pasting an ex; spreassheet, the columns do not work? —Preceding unsigned comment added by ThomasLH (talk • contribs) 14:23, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
predicting the future
Hello. Regarding this edit that you made back in March, I believe that this specific 3RR possibility will pop up again. The topic has previously been settled per the Sea World incident via RFC, and this appears to be a continued riff on the same. Aside from continuing to go to RFC, talk pages, etc in order to continually explain previous consensus, history thereof, and what WP policies do/don't apply, what other suggestions would you have to minimize unconstructive conflict in the future? (discussion links available, if you need them) SpikeJones (talk) 14:00, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
Hey Rjd, can I ask you to have a look at the talk page of this article and the (old) conversation about the birth name issue? Is it correct that the real birth name (for which there are ample sources--see the history, or Google Books) is not to be used? Please answer on the talk page, for future reference. Thanks, Dr Aaij (talk) 02:05, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Permission to make a Final Destination 5 Page
Hello, with the recent news of a director on board for the sequel, is it possible for me to create a page for the film? You can read the news here: [[87]] Tell me what you think. Thanks. Cigammagicwizard (talk) 04:21, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
This notification was sent to all users listed in the IRC channel as an operator or above, and group contacts. Chzz ► 01:26, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi, this is about you deleting the Lance Bouma page. I understand that he is not yet a professional player, but he is the Vancouver Giants captain, and has served the team for 5 years. I think he still deserves a page! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Batgrenade1 (talk • contribs) 18:00, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Heemraad
Hi, I am recreating the Heemraad page which you previously deleted. Since the Dutch have a peculiar form of government with a separate shadow government for their struggle against water, I think it is important to have pages for these low government positions. It may seem silly, but it is necessary to distinguish them from the regular government officials. To sum it up, the government bodies today in order of rank are 1) National, 2) Provincial, 3) Municipal, and 4) Water boards. In medieval times and earlier however, the water boards were the same as municipal, and since it was a country of duchies, this was also the highest form of government. Jane (talk) 07:41, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
Came to Rjd0060's page in pursuit of another deletion of his. Upon reflection, I thought the deletion (that I wanted reversed) was technically "correct" but improperly implemented. So too with Heemraad: the material should be rolled into Water board (The Netherlands), and "Heemraad" should redirect there (likely with an anchor). 24.130.67.253 (talk) 05:11, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
MIA?
Hi Rjd0060! Long time, no see, hear or spot :) I was just wondering how you are, since some of the crew on freenode including myself have started to notice you're missing in action as it were. Don't worry if you can't spend much time around, I understand "busy" very well, but as long as you're ok, that's good. Come back soon, dude :) BarkingFish23:43, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crossroads Mall (Florida) (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Sadads (talk) 16:36, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
IRC chat
Hello, there is an upcoming, very informal discussion on IRC on the freenode channel ##chzzalphaconnect (quick webchat link) on the 6th March 2011 at 17:00 UTC concerning ways to improve help over IRC, and other matters relating to Wiki?edia channels in general, but mostly about #wikipedia-en-help.
This is just a friendly, informal chat. Nothing official, no fixed agenda. There is nothing 'secretive' about it - anyone is quite welcome. Some of you had a chat there, the other day. We wanted to invite them to carry on discussions, at a prearranged time - and thought it courteous to ask group contacts and channel founders too. Or if you signed up manually.
If you aren't at all interested, feel free to remove yourself from the names we've spammed this to, which is in User:123Hedgehog456/IRC informal chat users. If you didn't sign up, well, people have been adding loads of names to the list, so someone might have accidentally added your name.
Hi, I hit a link:
http://www.metafilter.com/70493/Monsanto-Milk
which, in mentioning "Pentex" linked to the Wikipedia entry for that topic. I see you deleted it. As I mentioned above (RE "Heemraad") it seems to me that although the subject doesn't merit its own entry, the content of the old Pentex entry, if still available, would more-properly be rolled into Technocracy_(Mage:_The_Ascension) (which also relied upon a link to "Pentex" for completeness) than simply erased. 24.130.67.253 (talk) 23:44, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi - I see you deleted this page because of an expired prod. This musician is a member of multiple notable bands - I'm not sure if they were in 2008 or not, but can you possibly restore the article that was deleted, if there was anything meaningful there? Thanks. PermanentVacay (talk) 05:56, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I note you had a role in deleting this page. I'm currently trying to put together a picture of the claims made by Anthony which may be fraudulent. If you can help in any way, please respond on my talk page, thanks!EutychusFr (talk) 18:52, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
Jurickson Profar (deleted)
I see you deleted Jurickson Profar. You obviously know nothing about baseball, because he is one of the top prospects in all of baseball for the Texas Rangers. He is rank the 12 best prospect in baseball by Baseball America. He is not a "non notable Little League player." He was a notable Little League player who won the first Little League World Series for the island of Curacao with a home run. Now he is ranked the second best shortstop prospect in all of professional baseball only behind Manny Machado by Baseball America. But I look him up on Wiki and I see he was deleted as "non notable." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.23.95.120 (talk) 23:37, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
i noticed in 2008 u deleted the page of Potti the legendary and probably best counter-strike player of all time. you sir, are an idiot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gotham12 (talk • contribs) 13:33, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
DELETED
You also deleted on 00:02, 26 October 2008 a page dedicated to Nelson Montes-Bradley, historian, producer. There are enough references to justify his inclusion in Wikipedia. I would like you to reconsider. Thank You. Sabonarola (talk) 06:49, 20 December 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sabonarola (talk • contribs)
Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts.
Notification of imminent suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next several days. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts.
Suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions have been removed pending your return. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. –xenotalk12:39, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
You deleted on 00:02, 26 October 2008 a page dedicated to Nelson Montes-Bradley, historian, producer. There are enough references to justify his inclusion in Wikipedia. I would like you to reconsider. Thank You. Sabonarola (talk) 06:49, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
Deleted MU/FO section in 2008 - Why?
I see you removed the section on the MU/FO 4GL back in 2008. MU/FO was an important development in the early 80's in systems design, and should be recorded here. I was a major contributor and mentioned in the articles, and yet I was not contacted regarding this entry and it's removal. Please re-instate the article. The original link was ../wiki/MU/FO. Warwickp (talk) 04:17, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi Rjd0060. I am interested in what was prodded on this subject. Would you be willing to move it to my userspace? I am interested in the subject and a proposal to build them and float them over hot stadiums in the Middle East. Thanks. Candleabracadabra (talk) 22:48, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
Don't know if it's just me or not - but the whole place seem a little wacko lately, more so than normal even. Just skim through the last couple AC cases (civ, and TimidGuy ban appeal) for a sample ... and of course the ever popular daily soap opera of AN and ANI. well, I'm just glad to see another rational reasonable adult around the place. cheers. — Ched : ? 17:03, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for Protecting the Daily Mail article. But for the record I am not "edit warring", I am removing disruptive edits from a very determined editor who has resorted to writing childish personal insults on my talk page. Thank you for your assistance. Christian1985 (talk) 23:23, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
Rjd0060, first let me thank you for your assistance and I believe you might have been the admin from my previous request, In any case hopefully things can back to normalcy with a temporary block. If they continue after the block ends I'll make a Vandal report and go from there. Again many thanks for your assistance. TheGoofyGolfer (talk) 23:41, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
Objection to decision
I object to your labelling me an edit warrior by upholding the complaint at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#Dmcq_at_Wikipedia:Fringe_theories.2FNoticeboard.2FHeader_.28result:_Page_protected.29. The person who brought that does not allow me to notify them of problems on their talk page and did not contribute to the discussion or give reasons for their revert. The wording removed by him was that proposed by another person in the discussion. I have seen that person using records of blocks etc against people before in discussion to blacken them and I don't wish that against me. I had not been on the page for a day and a half so why else did they suddenly go and file a complaint on that evidence. So could you please revert your protection with a note saying it was a mistake. Otherwise could you please explain how I was edit warring as described in Wikipedia:Edit warring. Dmcq (talk) 11:32, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
Yes I would have preferred you look at it with a view to blocks rather than upholding that other persons complaint when there were only two attempts to put two lots of different stuff up with people reverting without discussion and the one complaining not providing any other means of communication. Plus it was stale and there was a discussion going on, what was the point of that person asking for a block then except to try and blacken me in anyway they can? I am sorry that you have chosen to uphold this decision and hope in future you will check what's happening a bit more closely rather than bolstering up people who just block without discussion. Dmcq (talk) 17:36, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
Their baaaaack!
Hi, just wanted to let you know our friendly neighborhood IP editors are back on Robot Chicken and again removing referenced material and not leaving a proper edit summary. Any suggestions? TheGoofyGolfer (talk) 05:52, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
Deletition
Listeners of The Ron & Fez Show on SiriusXM have been purposely asking Mark Zito questions to update his Wikipedia but now it has been deleted because it was deemed autobiographical. Since he hasn't been writing it himself and it had been edited by multiple people, this doesn't make sense to me. Is there anyway to get it reinstated? The show has listeners all around the world and it makes sense for it to be there.
We want to bring 100-150 people together, including lots of people who have not attended such events before. User scripts, gadgets, API use, Toolserver, Wikimedia Labs, mobile, structured data, templates -- if you are into any of these things, we want you to come!
I also thought you might want to know about other upcoming events where you can learn more about MediaWiki customization and development, how to best use the web API for bots, and various upcoming features and changes. We'd love to have power users, bot maintainers and writers, and template makers at these events so we can all learn from each other and chat about what needs doing.
Hey :). You're being contacted because you are involved in the ACC process, or participated in the original discussion in '08 about the ConfirmAccount extension. This is a note to let you know that we are seeking opinions on switching this extension on, effectively making the ACC process via the Toolserver redundant. You can read all the details here; I would be very grateful if people would indicate how they feel about the idea :). Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 13:17, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
recreating a speedily deleted article
Hello. I think I am to inform you that I am attempting to recreate the article on Nick Courtright, which you had deleted. I have the sources to support the relevance of the article. I'm not terribly experienced at making wikipedia pages; therefore, the error was on my part and not due to any lack of important to the poet's wikipedia page. Obviously, if you have any hints that could improve the page it will be greatly appreciated. Now that I choose to reembark? How do I go about recreating the page? Do I begin again as I began before? Thank you.
Vcczar (talk) 17:11, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
Failure of protection
After you protected General relativity, two different IP-users edited it. In other words, your protection failed. What gives? Is this a bug in the software? Or did these IP-users somehow get privileges which they should not have? JRSpriggs (talk) 05:51, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
RFPP Predator Award
Slakr's RFPP Predator Award
For your work in helping to tear apart backlogs at requests for page protection by pouncing on requests, I hereby award you this deluxe, camouflaged, tiger-like padlock. Not sure why you'd necessarily need a deluxe, camouflaged, tiger-like padlock, but at least it's a nice conversation piece. :P
Hi, I'm writing because the page I created on Travis Marsh was deleted. I understood I had until today to respond, and it is 9:38pm pst on April 23rd. I would appreciate the opportunity to respond, and for the article to be put back up please. Travis Marsh is a legitimate singer, and in the article I cited references, including one from The Price Is Right. I would appreciate your help in guiding me with this article to prevent it from being put up for deletion. At the very least, given its still April 23rd (for me), would you consider putting the article back up so I can write a more thought-out response? Thank you very much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TannaKhaldi (talk • contribs) 04:44, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
OTRS volunteer?
You have the template at the top of your talk page but I'm just wondering, are you actually an OTRS volunteer? Rjd0060 (talk) 01:26, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
I only asked because I didn't recognize your username. But it would appear your OTRS account was closed. Please consider removing the tag, to avoid confusing others. Rjd0060 (talk) 20:14, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi Rjd0060. When you delete a file with an equivalent on Commons, please make sure that the Commons version is of the same or higher resolution, and if there is more than one version in the history, that all versions have been transferred over (this can be done quickly with tools:~magog/oldver.php). The relevant image this time is File:MaastrichtStreet.JPG (you'll notice I moved over the higher resolution version, but unfortunately I wasn't able to move over the first of the two versions of the file because after your deletion, Mediawiki had a bug and lost the content). Thanks for your help in clearing the backlog. Magog the Ogre (talk) 23:36, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
I'm concerned about full protection at Dartmouth College. The problem on that article is IPs and newbies deleting material they don't like, even to the point of edit-warring. If there's no sanction for that behavior, there's no incentive for them to discuss and work towards consensus. After all, we're talking about people who don't know how Wikipedia works (and in some instances manifestly don't care, as continued reverting even after a 3RR warning shows). Nomoskedasticity (talk) 15:45, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
Page protection
Hello. Regarding your recent protection of spirulina (dietary supplement)... the page is being targeted by IP socks of KBlott (talk·contribs) - 173.206.228.220 (talk) and 173.206.240.200 (talk). Beyond those IP socks of a banned user - which were properly reverted - I don't think there's any serious edit-war taking place. I was wondering if you'd consider reducing it to semi-protection, with the understanding that it would be re-escalated if there was an edit-war involving non-banned users. Thanks. MastCellTalk19:13, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
I'm contacting you because this is my first article and I need help to understand how Wikipedia works. I'm the Author of "Wikipedia:Articles for Deletion/SpiderGraph chart", that I started 7 months ago and have rewritten 4 or 5 times and on 3/24 you deleted. We were in the middle of an AfD discussion proposed on 3/27 by Glrx and I was in the middle of addressing all their comments and objections and when I went back to paste in another discussion response, the article was gone! I don't see how a decision to delete could be carried out, after I have proven all of their objections wrong and no decision has been made, that I know of?? Did you even read the discussions?
Previously, I had sent the following message to a friendly Reviewing Editor for her advice, but as yet, have not received any reply:
Shearonink, 4/22/12, A Plea for Help and a FAVOR regarding: Articles for Deletion/SpiderGraph chart
Dear Shearonink,
During January & February, you were friendly and very helpful while my article was in AfCreation!
I forget the date, but at some point, I wrote you about someone seemingly wanting to put notches on their belt & trying to establish a Kingdom?? I forget the exact way I phrased it??
Mabdul, declined my article on 1/22, I made his changes and tried to clear up his incorrect assumptions with a 2 page response on 1/23. Mabdul replied on 1/24 and also asked his friend CharlieEchoTango to join in. My 1/31 response to them, mentioned the "Six (6) Comments" section of the article using other user sources (which I believe Mabdul later deleted) and also the "impartial comparisons" from other sources to address their COI comment and to answer Charlie's WP:NOT comment, I found WP:NOT#DICT (#2), that proves this article to be Very Notable per a Wikipedia Policy, which is also mentioned in this discussion.
Around Feb. 23rd, my article went public!
On Feb. 24th, Chap, the Ripper did a Major Overhaul & Removal of most of my article. It was almost unrecognizable. I almost gave-in to his intimidation, but I didn't want it to reflect bad on WP, so I rewrote the article for the 4th or 5th time, around 3/12.
No new tags were placed on the article for almost 2 months, but the old Tags from early Feb. remained on top of the article. I thought someone had just forgotten to remove them. I thought all the hurdles had passed!
On 3/27/12, I received a notice that my article had been Proposed for Deletion by Nominator Glrx, which I answered on 3/31/12, with a 6 page Objection to Deletion reply, because all the accusations sounded like he hadn't even read the article or didn't understand it! Glrx, a PhD in Philosophy, hit me again on 4/3/12 with more of the same:WP:N, DUE, NOR, NPOV, & COI, and again on 4/9, with 11 more items. However, I proved all of his assumptions incorrect in my 4/10/12, 8 page reply!
Also on 4/3/12, Gene93k Added a Note Stating that "this debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions."
So Far, everyone that has come forth to vote for deletion, sounds like they never read the SG or Radar chart articles and maybe not the discussion either. I feel like I'm being Sandbagged for a Speedy Deletion by a tag team of kids! I try to spell everything out for them to clarify or correct their incorrect assumptions or accusations, but I guess their vote still stands?? Today, I spent all day writing a reply to Jorgath (a 26 yr old, non-technical, college student) & Livitup.
IF YOU HAVE THE TIME, please do me a favor and read over the deletion discussions and see what you think They all seem in a big hurry to hang the article & me out to dry and I don't know why. I just want to get on with my life! When you read my answers, you will see that this article is very Notable! It looks to me like, no matter what I say or do, they intend to go ahead with the Deletion.. As you read the discussions, I believe you'll see that there is definitely no COI.
End of message to Shearonink
PS - Rjd0060: I was going to file a Grievance, stating Admin Abuse to Glrx and request an undo, but didn't because I noticed that he didn't delete the article, even though he has been extremely prejudice and unwavering. Have you ever performed any informal mediations? Is there anything you can do to help me?
Respectfully submitted,
Gregory L. Chester Gregory L. Chester 22:34, 27 April 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by GregLChest (talk • contribs)
Persistent vandalism by China Unicom Beijing province network 114.xxx.xxx.xxx IP user(EngineFlux vandal)
Can't the Wikipedia admins give him a long 1 year ban for persistent vandalism of the GeForce 600 series and the Talk:GeForce 600 series articles? It's really annoying having to revert his vandalism all the time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.51.58.102 (talk) 05:15, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
You recently deleted the page Shazzie which I believe to be in error. Your comments were that "it was self promotional and that you can't call yourself a TV presenter if all you've done is record an 8 min clip for an obscure…" This information is incorrect.
Shazzie is a writer, TV presenter and recording artist. She has contracts with publishers both in the UK as well as the USA. Her TV show is in the final editing stages and is due to be aired soon throughout Europe. If you take issue with the TV show not being live yet, then of course remove that and it can be added again once aired, and even query anything that you find "self promotional". But it's not on to remove the whole page of a recognised published author, and I am requesting that you undelete it immediately. I look forward to your reply. Thanks for your time. Scribble64 (talk) 15:08, 6 May 2012 (UTC) Scribble64
I create 2 article name Nadia Samdani and Dhaka Art Summit but it not showing on google search result please advice what I need to do to showing it on google search.
I see that you have made a full protection of this article. Even though I understand the background of this, with the many editing conflicts, I am worried that it will not be updates as well as before. Right now I see that the subarticle are already updated with the info on the Netherland versus Germany match. But since the article is now protected the editors normally doing this work can not do so. Have you considered how this article will be updated after every match? Are you going to do that twice a day, or have you asked other adminstrators for help. This article depend on fast updates for internet trafic, if it are not updated the trafic will stop. And I am sure we all agree that Wikipedia being popular is a good thing.Before the full protection it was updated during the games, that I guess is not necesary. But it should be updated straight after each match, and preferly at halftime too.
I will put this notice on the talkpage of the article, maybe you would like to explain the actions you have taken to keep the article updated there too? To put everybodys mind at ease.
I'd like to echo these concerns. Euro 2012 is an extremely high-profile topic right now, so I understand your decision to institute full protection. But it seems in doing so that you've locked a great many good-faith editors from ensuring accurate coverage of the event. As Jack has pointed out, there's an awkward inconsistency with the latest match. The way I see it, these inaccuracies and incompletion will reflect more poorly on Wikipedia than anything that's being prevented. I hope you'll consider dealing with individual troublemakers, if that was your concern, and a return to semi-protection. Thanks for your time.
Jack, you were one of the ones involved in the edit war so you're not quite neutral on the issue. Putting that aside, yes it is a highly watched article. More the reason to prevent edit warring. I don't believe this is a valid reason for unprotection. If some sort of conclusion is reached on the talk page (I see that there is ongoing active discussion) the page can be unprotected. And of course, if you disagree with my action you may request unprotection on the relevant noticeboard (but please link this discussion to it as well). Rjd0060 (talk) 01:44, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
RJD I hope you won't consider my unprotection of the page wheel-warring. I can see why you protected, but I believe in this case blocking warring editors is a better solution--Jac16888Talk13:52, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
I'm looking for my "Objection to Deletion" response to Glrx that I believe you deleted on 24 April, can you help me? Gregory L. Chester 19:11, 14 June 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by GregLChest (talk • contribs)
As the talk page of this particular article contains discussion relevant to the deletion of the article, I've restored it (as the deletion policy allows. You can view the discussion there. Rjd0060 (talk) 00:37, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
GregLChest has left long message on my talk page where he clearly wants a WP:DRV of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SpiderGraph chart. My sense is that he believes he's started the DRV by leaving the message on my talk page (he's tagged my talk page as the subject of a deletion review). I believe such a review is doomed and I don't want to bother other editors with it, but I also think it is his right to request it. Consequently, I think the right thing to do is submit the DRV for him rather than let him struggle with the procedural mechanics. The first DRV step, however, is a discussion with the reviewing admin. Do you want to discuss the AfD result with him first, or should I just submit the DRV? Or adopt some other course? Glrx (talk) 17:42, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
ATTN. Rjd0060:
I WOULD LIKE TO ASK YOUR ADVICE BEFORE I FILE A GRIEVANCE OF "ADMINISTRATIVE ABUSE AND LACK OF ACTION" TOWARD Glrx REGARDING THE DELETION DISCUSSION FOR THE WP:SPIDERGRAPH CHART ARTICLE YOU DELETED ON 24 APRIL 2012!
PLEASE UNDERSTAND, I DON'T BLAME YOU! THE ARTICLE WAS NOT IN THE PROPER CONDITION DUE TO 3 REVIEWING EDITORS AND CORRECTIONS SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE BEFORE THE ARTICLE WENT PUBLIC, UNFORTUNATELY, THE ERRORS WERE NOT DISCOVERED UNTIL DURING THE DELETION DISCUSSION.
THE FOLLOWING IS A COPY OF THE DRV I POSTED ON Glrx's USER TALK PAGE, BEFORE I WAS TOLD THAT IT WAS THE WRONG PLACE FOR THAT ACTION. I HAD DONE SO BECAUSE I THOUGHT THE NOMINATOR WAS ALSO THE MODERATOR OF THE DISCUSSION. THEREFORE, A LOT OF THE DISCUSSION ON Glrx's TALK PAGE PROBABLY DIDN'T MAKE IT INTO THE DISCUSSION! SORRY, BUT THIS WAS MY FIRST ARTICLE AND I'M STILL NOT AWARE OF ALL THE WP POLICIES AND PROPER ACTIONS TO TAKE!
I HAVE LEFT THE FOLLOWING, AS IT WAS POSTED TO Glrx's TALK PAGE, TO SAVE TIME AND AVOID ADDITIONAL ERRORS:
ATTN.: Glrx,
In your 27 March & 2 April 2012 "Proposal for Deletion," you stated that: "This article has many faults. It fails WP:N. It appears to be based on a single 1985 journal article by G. L. Chester. Secondary sources endorsing this particular chart are absent." You additionally questioned compliance with WP:N, DUE, NOR, NPOV, COI, and ADVERT. [88][89] Then, in the 2 April 2012 revised Proposal, you muddy the waters by adding comments about my trademark, that had been removed long ago and has absolutely nothing to do with this discussion!
In my 31 March 2012 "Objection to Deletion" and Response to your concerns, I answered you're WP policy concerns and included a copy of my15 January 2012 reply to WP:N/N:
Complying to your comments regarding Notability, I have copied my 1/15/2012 response to WP:N/N:
This suggestion doesn't sufficiently explain the importance or significance of the subject. See the speedy deletion criteria (A7) and/or guidelines on notability. Please provide more information on why the subject is worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. Thank you.
THE IMPORTANCE & NOTABILITY FOR INCLUSION IN THE FOLLOWING SUBJECT MATTER: "Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/SpiderGraph chart"[90]
In the above Notability Response, in the 7th paragraph, beginning with: "Fortunately ... " the (1985 primary source) trade magazine article (Ref. #4) and the (Very Notable 1986 Secondary Source), The Standard Handbook of Industrial (a/k/a Factory) Automation, that is found in the Library of Congress (Ref. #5), were mentioned! Those facts were mentioned again twice in the body of my response. (re WP:N & V) (NOTE: I think 3/31 was the 1st time that Glrx saw these references and I don't believe any attempt has been made to inform the Reviewing Editors!)
(THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT NOTE REGARDING THE ABOVE TWO REFERENCES,
that was not discovered until after the article went public and was Proposed for Deletion: a Reviewing Editor, Chiswick Chap, performed a "Major work over & removals" on 24 February 2012 to the whole SpiderGraph chart article, cutting it in half and incorrectly blending the above two (2) references into one (1) called "SpiderGraph paper by G.L. Chester" in the "A Charting Style Timeline," that was also reduced to just "Timeline" section.[91] Unfortunately, at that time, all mention of a secondary source was scrubbed from the article, which wasn't discovered until later, which biased the voting Reviewing Editors against the article!) (Most Reviewing Editors, including Glrx, stated that they thought the "SpiderGraph chart was just another Radar spider chart!" This is definitely contrary to the purpose of the article!)
On 2 April 2012, Glrx added his "Delete as nominator." comments.[92] Chester's claims ... are not persuasive, and they fail to understand the axis-order and linear/sqrt scaling problems of the radar chart (and how those faults directly carry over to a SpiderGraph). (A FACT THAT'S ABSOLUTELY FALSE!) The computer software used to create the radar charts causes the problems and the SpiderGraph charting method uses no computer! (In my 4/9 reply to Glrx, I asked him to clarify his statement, which he ignored and has never complied with!)
On 21 May 2012, I reminded Glrx again about the drastic revision that had removed any mention of a secondary source for the article[93], which had caused his "incorrect assumptions" and all of the "Delete votes" from the Reviewing Editors. Still no message went out to the REs about the omission that could have informed them and hopefully cause them to change their votes!
Glrx's 21 May 2012 reply was "I am not the route for an appeal on the AfD decision. (And yet, I thought he was in charge of the Discussion. Unfortunately, he never stated that the Discussion was over??) In his 3rd paragraph, he states: "I don't see any new statements in your comments above." (Which seems to be one of his "pat answers" for not answering and doing nothing!) I had previously mentioned the Industry Handbook as the missing secondary source 3 times in the discussions, but never received one comment whatsoever back from any of the REs, so I thought it must mean more if it comes directly from Glrx, the Nominator.[94] Consequently, I replied back stating: "You should have known, that w/o all the facts, no RE could be expected to make a sound judgment!" Also, I tried to clarify my reasoning for not citing the obvious facts when comparing the two charts and the necessity for a jury of technical peers![95]
I waited about 10 days to see if you would comment on my reply to your 21 May statements, but nothing! I had to assume you were trying to run the clock out, without commenting on my suggestions to Recuse yourself or obtain informal mediation, so I asked you if you needed more time to do the right thing. (which was, Respond to my answers to your accusations and do something!)[96]
Your 8 June 2012 reply was more of the same: Discussion going nowhere; You haven't stated anything new; Repetition won't make them true; I've understood your position for a long time (but you haven't taken any action on!); You haven't "proven" anything; My position is you don't understand the substantive content issues (please describe what you're talking about here??) or WP's requirements for articles; and oh yes, "this one takes the cake": You clearly do not understand the axis order, area, or manual vs. computer arguments above. (You have never answered my question about "how," in your statement that "Radar chart faults carry over to SpiderGraph charts, because they don't, they both have different charting methods!).
HERE ARE SOME OF WHAT I THINK SHOULD BE DESIRED TRAITS FOR A GOOD REVIEWING EDITOR OR ADMIN:
a) I believe they must know more than just WP policies, they must also DISPLAY GOOD COMMON SENSE.
b) They must do more than debate, THEY MUST MAKE HELPFUL SUGGESTIONS, BE NEUTRAL & TAKE ACTION, WHEN NECESSARY!
c) They must have A WELL-ROUNDED EDUCATION (just having a degree doesn't mean much!).
d) They must DEMONSTRATE MATURITY, to help keep one's Ego in check!
e) They must know that Maturity breeds INTEGRITY!
f) They must BE SELECTIVE TO WORK ON PROJECTS THEY HAVE SOME KNOWLEDGE OF!
g) They must AVOID FROM BUILDING POWER-BASES!
HERE ARE SOME OF THE REASONS I HAVE, FOR FILING A "GRIEVANCE OF ABUSE OF ADMIN POWERS":
1) Glrx has not demonstrated "any" of the above desired traits in our dealings!
2) Your PfD stated: Secondary Sources are absent! My Reply mentioned the Industry Standard Handbook in the WP:N statement and twice in the body of my reply! You did not ACT to find the reason for the Difference in Statements??
3) When I mentioned the Secondary Source Handbook 3 times in the Discussion, again you did not ACT to look for it in the article nor to acknowledge my comments about it in the discussion!
4) When I told you that RE Chiswick Chap had rearranged & shortened the article and omitted any mention of an Industrial Standard Handbook, as well as goofed-up the Reference citations, which helped create this whole SNAFU, I was surprised that you ignored it and didn't try to verify my comments & inform the voting REs! I further believe that the REs were not informed in order for you to retain your advantage of "100% Consensus for Deletion," mainly because you could not see the difference nor explain your "carry over comments" regarding the two charting methods! Which has now been exemplified by your "You clearly do not understand ... " intimidation comments in this, your very last response![97]It would have definitely changed the outcome! (Two & a half months and never receiving your explanation is to long a time to wait??) (I think nine months is also a very long time to write any article for WP!) (It was never fun! I lost a lot of sleep!!) (To many non-technical, egotistical Bullys, making haphazard deletions, about something they know nothing about!)
5) When I told you I had noticed that Mabdul had lied in his RfA/Question #5, you ignored that and told me "to learn about colons & diffs!" You also didn't comment when I told you Mabdul had previously deleted 3 sections of the article! Mabdul has proven himself to be an Egotistical Bully and when you told me that you came to this article through Mabdul, you became suspect to me, which later proved to me, the old adage: "Birds of a feather, ...".
6) You could have treated my WP:NOT#DICT comments with Common Sense, guide me to a location or even made an exception when you knew I was looking for a rule of thumb for writing encyclopedic articles & learn about their acceptance and that I was not planning to use it for a Dictionary! The same is true about using Common Sense, when "not citing, when the facts are obvious !"
7) You could have used "Due Diligence" and better discretion in the selection or elimination of educated(?) REs when their first comments were: "I...wow. I just have no idea, but I'll give this a shot." or if they were a 26 year old college student! You should have known that at least the RE's Education and Maturity were very important for them to be fair & impartial for this article! (That's where an information sheet about each RE (at least sex, age, & education) would have been very helpful to know who you're corresponding with!) (Having a PhD in Philosophy really doesn't tell me anything about who Glrx is??)
In addition, like I previously mentioned, a Wiki Foundation survey for new authors to make comments about REs would have been a good Checks & Balance idea, to help eliminate Egotistical Bullys! With that, maybe this SNAFU would never have happened!
Needless to say, I would appreciate the SpiderGraph chart article being reinstated (undeleted) and having Chiswick Chap correct his self-inflicted errors!
PLEASE NOTE: If your lack of action is not corrected, I will be submitting this Grievance to the Admin Noticeboard, of which, I'm sure you are well aware!
Respectfully submitted,
Rjd0060: IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE DON'T HESITATE TO ASK! Gregory L. Chester 22:58, 22 June 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by GregLChest (talk • contribs)
Gregory L. Chester 21:09, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
Sorry to disappoint you but I really couldn't care less what happens to this particular article. I have nothing to do with whatever you're talking about here ... all I did was undelete the talk page, per a request. You'll have to pursue this elsewhere. Rjd0060 (talk) 13:09, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
ATTN: Rjd0060,
Ryan, I realize that you had nothing to do with my plight, that's why I started out with a Disclaimer and then filled you in! I didn't expect you to care about the article, but I did think you'd care about the WP Process of being helpful & impartial, especially when a Reviewing Editor makes a mistake, but doesn't care enough to correct it?? I'm only asking you for helpful advice about the proper action to take, because you are neutral?? Unfortunately, "pursue this elsewhere" doesn't help me very much??
Sincerely, Gregory L. Chester 19:21, 25 June 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by GregLChest (talk • contribs)
Ryan,
I just happen to think, since the SpiderGraph chart article was deleted because the very notable secondary source reference in the article was removed by a non-technical Reviewing Editor just after it went public and then the article was deleted before the error was discovered, is it possible to undelete the article into the AfCreation area, so I could make the necessary corrections and then have it Relisted with an "expert-subject" tag, so comments from a more knowledgeable group of peers could be obtained?
Thanx in advance for your consideration, Gregory L. Chester 00:40, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
Gregory L. Chester
Deleted Article "Kevin Deters"
Dear Rjd0060,
I am writing you this message because I want to receive a copy of the deleted article "Kevin Deters". Can you please send it to me on my talk page?
Hi Rjd0060, I would like to hear your opinion on the deletion process for the above article. I tagged it for deletion under A7 (club). The tag was later removed and removed with the {{newpage}} which asserts that the user is aware of the notability criteria. However, it is relatively clear that the new user is not familiar with the notability criteria. In this situation would it be appropriate to restore the speedy deletion template? -CTStalk04:38, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
Except for obvious cases for deletion, speedy tags (once removed) shouldn't be re-added. Not a rule, but general practice. You might want to go to AFD for this one though. Rjd0060 (talk) 05:10, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
But keeping in mind that it was removed by the creator, I think that it should be appropriate to send it through the normal CSD process. -CTStalk05:27, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
Hey Rjd,
I don't have a conflict of interest regarding this topic and I don't mention myself or any businesses I'm involved in. However I do think the content is helpful and that wikipedia is very light on good video content so I wanted to share this video. I'm new to making contributions to wikipeida though so I could use some help. Do you think the video is helpful? If so, what is the best way to add it? Any help is greatly appreciated as I really do care about the topic and spent a lot of time creating a video that I thought was helpful.
I noticed that you proposed for deletion as the unreferenced biography of a living person someone who his biography described as president of the IRB from 1907 to 1910. PatGallacher (talk) 09:09, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
It was no mistake. It was deleted for the reason listed in the deletion log. In this case, the reason for deletion was "Effectively unsourced since creation. No improvement since tagged in Sept, and no sources of significant depth found in search." There were also references in the deletion to a Wikipedia inclusion guideline, WP:NCORP. In accordance with the proposed deletion policy, the article may be restored upon any reasonable request however I would be hesitant to restore this one without knowing somebody was going to work on improving the content so it is more suitable with Wikipedia guidelines. Rjd0060 (talk) 05:01, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
MetricStream is covered vastly by reliable and independent secondary sources like Gartner, Forrester and other research agencies.3
Let me know if you need any supporting articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.251.15.178 (talk) 05:56, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
If you search with the keywords "shellye archambeau new york times" it will show our CEO's interview in the media. Also, we will continue to improve the content in the page adhering to wiki guidelines - Jude, MetricStream
1 edit edit war. Amazing.
Erm.
I made 1 edit.
Started a discussion on the talk page after the one (1... singular) wp:BRD edit was reverted.
Noticed that this was pointless.
Dropped the article from my watch list.
Did you actually review that before you posted to my talk page? If you did, study more on the reading thing. If not, please do before posterizing up. God I despise this community. But the only way to work in this very important project is to put up with this nonsense.
Toodles.
I have removed your pointless and incorrect statement from my talk page.
I noticed your edits to the Twinkle gadget file. I agree that the grammar there was poor and needed fixing, and thank you for making the change.
However, please take heed of the notice at the top of the gadget file: any manual edits will be overwritten by our update script when it next runs. Luckily I noticed this change and have incorporated it into our master repository at https://github.com/azatoth/twinkle. However, in future, to avoid losing any future modifications to the Twinkle code, please either notify us by posting at WT:TW or filing an issue at the above-mentioned GitHub site. Thanks, — This, that, and the other (talk)09:59, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for granting me rollback right. I will keep your directions in mind and use it only where vandalism can be clearly identified.--Vyom25 (talk) 13:08, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Hello,
You recently deleted an uncontested PROD of the article Joseph Kearns Goodwin. My friend, the creator, complained that the article had been deleted, and I, a mostly-retired Wikipedian, decided to help her out. I found references to confirm that the subject meets the general notability guideline (it is true that they do not (yet) meet the WP:POLITICIAN guideline, but that's irrelevant), and I added those references, in addition to making some edits. While Goodwin does not necessarily meet WP:POLITICIAN, he clearly meets WP:GNG. I understand the desire to delete poorly formatted pages, but I believe that wikipedia as a community should work to avoid deleting pages where a simple Google News search would have proved that the subject meets the guideline. This would be extremely helpful to the public image of the site. I have created the article at Joe Kearns Goodwin, and I will create a redirect from the other page. Please feel free to reply on my talk page with any questions or concerns. Regards, ~Gosox(55)(55)05:04, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Oh, I agree that it's an old argument, it's just a pet peeve of mine. It's one of the many reasons that I left. ~Gosox(55)(55)05:15, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
I think I understand correctly why my article on Rev. Cieminski was deleted. As written, it did not sufficiently explain his significance. Hopefully it was just a matter of my article's not being fully ready for publication to Wikipedia. If you wouldn't mind taking a quick look at the first part of my blog article on Rev. Cieminski, I would be very appreciative of your opinion on whether I should reattempt the article or not.
Hi, I am just making some small edits to the controversy section on the page protected (not removing any info) - some of the wording is truely terrible. I know it was the subject of a revert/blanking war, but the people involved should have taken the five minutes to look at it. If you have any issues with my changes let me know. Only in death does duty end (talk) 11:23, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
Possible OR violation from user
GreatLifeInService may have recently posted OR. The citation the user provided was the same as the one in the following sentence. The source did not state what the user posted. I have left comments on the user's talk page. Zepppep (talk) 02:40, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
Could you please move the Mysticum article to my sandbox? The band’s notability can be shown through several notable labels (album released through Full Moon Productions, contributions to a Necropolis Records compilation, contract with Peaceville Records) and the list from Rock Hard no. 269. And since you once deleted the article, I would be grateful for your feedback once I have re-written it. --217/8312:26, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Hello Rjd0060. Today, I searched for TechCrunch Disrupt on Wikipedia and I was surprised not to find it here, given the media attention. I've re-created the redirect to TechCrunch, but I'd like to restore and improve the article that you deleted in July. Do you have any objections? Thanks. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 12:48, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
282 MEP
You deleted the above article that I created, and now I am unable to see my original contribution. Ref:
17:58, 6 March 2012 Rjd0060 (Talk | contribs) deleted page 282 MEP (Deleted because expired WP:PROD; Reason given: . )
I understand that there was a request for more references and I uncovered both old and new DIN data, per:
old DIN: 00108316 (Frosst > Merck Canada)
new DIN: 02238646 (Pendopharm)
The license to manufacture this drug was transferred to Pendopharm, Montreal, Quebec 2006-10-20 or 1998-08-14 (discontinued by Merck). However, the 282 MEP links on the Pendopharm website were deleted a few days after I posted it. This prescription drug is still available, although it is presently unclear if Pendopharm is still the current licensee.
If it is possible to recover my original contribution, I can try to find current references. Otherwise, I may not bother since it is discouraging to have to repeat an earlier effort. Enquire (talk) 23:55, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for getting that OTRS ticket
Thanks for unblocking that jpmanoux account. I felt kinda bad for the guy. I'm glad it got cleared up. --Jayron3203:33, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
Here is the notice that was on the page prior to it being deleted:
"This submission appears to be taken from http://modagraphik.com/?cat=11. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. We cannot accept copyrighted content taken from websites or printed sources. Note that copyright protection is granted to all works automatically, whether it is asserted or not. Unless stated otherwise, assume that most content on the internet is copyrighted and not suitable for publishing on Wikipedia. Copyrighted content can be cited as a reliable source if it meets Wikipedia's guidelines; however, your submission must be written in your own words, and in continuous prose."
Hello, I'd like to create a new article about theatre director Nicolas Kent. As the artistic director of London's Tricycle Theatre for nearly 30 years, he merits an article. He has done important work in political theatre. Any objection to my starting and working on a properly reference article? --Agarpp (talk) 13:59, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Why did you delete the entry for Risa Ferman? She is the district attorney for Montgomery County PA, one of the largest communities in PA? Please let me know hat we can do to get this reinstated ASAP. I can be reached at <removed>. Thank you. 173.12.17.21 (talk) 01:06, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
Please respond. Its been a few days since I posted this request with no reply and I need to try and resolve this issue quickly. Thank you
Chehelsotoon, Qazvin
Why was this deleted? The resources provided are not enough? Instead, you could clean up the article requested resource.You're asking for deletion. The call for papers wiki violates the rules, not articles with less resources.Do Municipal Website Qazvin, Iran is not a good source?Omid hendupur (talk) 11:47, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
I saw you deleted this for regular maintenance? But it was in the queue for review, with significant updates and numerous external citations. Please reinstate, or provide suggestions for improving the page. Thanks. Xena77 (talk) 16:30, 6 January 2013 (UTC)Xena77
Hi I worked several days figuring out how wikipedia works to develop the article for my film Udhao. I am the director Amit Ashraf, and all the content belongs to me. I am very curious to way it was deleted. I am a little sad because I worked hard, and I am new to the formatting. Is it still saved somewhere? Can you please assist me? I am used Udhao Movie. unsigned 07:37, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Ok I think I know why. I copied our story from our facebook page. Its not infringement, because it is both my writing. I will write a new story in new words. Can you please reinstate so i can change. I spent a lot of time working on it, and I really would be frustrated if I had to do it again. Everything else is new content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.247.162.26 (talk) 05:44, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I was looking at WP:OTRS, and had a question. What kind of backlog do we usually have (or currently have) in it?
I was reviewing Shannon T. Boodram (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), and noticed that the image in it was uploaded on January 1st with a comment "The license agreement will be forwarded to OTRS shortly." However, the user that uploaded the image is now blocked as a sockpuppet, which forced me to question the legitimacy of such a ticket ever having been submitted. Is the backlog sufficient that this could still be in the queue; or if no such ticket exists, should the image be sent the way of the copyvio disposal system? --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 18:24, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
I'm sympathetic to the need to recruit new users to OTRS but I wondered if you guys have considered the impact of poor communication from the OTRS admins on existing OTRS volunteers. If you are not sure what I'm about, look at ticket 2011120510017359. I resigned from OTRS because you (the OTRS admins) wouldn't engage with what turned out to be well founded concerns about a particular user. Just a thought for you to ponder on. I'd send you an email but obviously my experience with you taking them seriously is pretty limited. At least this way I'll know you got the message. SpartazHumbug!16:45, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi. I'll first say that this ticket was the first I've seen of the whole "situation" that it refers to. I was inactive for a while, and just came back to OTRS mid-late 2012. On the general subject of communication, however, yes ... this is something we're working to improve. Not sure if you're familiar with some recent discussion on Meta, but it yielded a number of changes both internally and on the 'public' side of things. And we're constantly working to continue this move towards appropriate communication and transparency. If you have any specific suggestions we're always open to hearing them. Thanks. Rjd0060 (talk) 17:04, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, simple suggestion, don't ignore your hard working and reliable users when they have genuine issues of concern. Bit late for me, but with falling admin numbers and few good candidates coming through you can't afford to lose any more good volunteers with this kind of stonewalling. I raised the lack of communication with the foundation as well but they couldn't even be bothered to acknowledge the email. Any wonder people don't want to be associated with this place? SpartazHumbug!20:00, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but you're referring to an issue that happened in December, 2011 - so it's not quite right if you're insinuating that nothing has changed in the year since then. But as I've said, our "doors" are always open, and we've been working (and showing progress) on a number of related issues. Rjd0060 (talk) 20:08, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
I'm not insinuating anything Rjd, I'm providing feedback. You asked for my suggestions and I commented on the issue that made me give up OTRS activity so I don't understand why you need to be so snarky back. It does rather belie your statements that you are open to hearing suggestions, which doesn't exactly auger well for being more communicative and listening does it? SpartazHumbug!02:37, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
Snarky? Well, I'd disagree. Anyhow, as I've pointed out, your concerns pointed out are related to issues from over a year ago so I assure you that such issue has been resolved. Thank you for your feedback. Rjd0060 (talk) 04:48, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Hi Spartaz. What you said about poor communication from OTRS admins may have been true in the past, and indeed there were some public complaints from agents themselves about some of the recent actions of admins (see m:Talk:OTRS/Volunteering#"Comments" on prospective OTRS helpers for the discussion). To that end, the admins made a statement about increasing transparency and accountability. I know actions speak louder than words and whilst I'm not an OTRS admin myself, I've been working on a complete overhaul of the pages on Meta-Wiki (and to some extent OTRS wiki). You can see what I've been working on at with a couple of the OTRS admins at m:OTRS/Cleanup - a small step to increasing this communication is the addition of extra details at m:OTRS#OTRS administrators. There's also been a rewording of all of the pages that a prospective volunteer or interested user would see to clarify what OTRS does and who to contact if you have any problems. I'd appreciate any input you have on how to improve any of the pages that are being worked on here, on my Meta talk page or feel free to just boldly edit m:OTRS/Cleanup too. Thanks! Thehelpfulone21:56, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
I don't mean to be unhelpful but since you don't have access to the emails/issue underlaying this I'm not entirely sure how helpful your intervention is because it doesn't in anyway touch on the issue that upset me. SpartazHumbug!02:37, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
Is there a minimum OTRS activity level required?
Hi, I saw your plea for more OTRS volunteers at WP:BLPN, and thought I'd volunteer, but I wonder if there is a minimum level of activity needed?
I've been a Wikipedian for many years now, but I have inactive periods, I can't guarantee being available every day. If I would be able to take the occasional ticket when I'm available (and follow it through to the end) I'd love to help. --GRuban (talk) 14:54, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
While there are no activity requirements per se, accounts that are long inactive are closed as we don't just want open access if it isn't being used. :-) You're not required to do any amount of work though. One email or a hundred emails ... every reply is helpful! Rjd0060 (talk) 19:12, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
"long" means a month or a year? I don't think I've ever gone a year without wiki work, but I might have missed a month once or twice... All right, will volunteer. --GRuban (talk) 19:35, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
Thanks! So, what's the next step? Should I get email, talk on En, or talk on Meta? Or is there some other page of instructions I should be reading and following? --GRuban (talk) 20:45, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
I think you might have made a minor mistake in the code when you put the protection template on the page for the Spanish Civil War. The infobox is appearing in the wrong place on the page. I have no idea what that mistake might be, however. LoveWaffle (talk) 05:40, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
Phildel
The article for Phildel has previously been deleted, but since she has now released a full album, and is thus a notable musician, I would like to recreate the article or start a new one. Quacksecho (talk) 10:49, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
Restore request
As an administrator, you can move articles without creating a redirect. Could you do that with the Mysticum article? You moved that one to User:H. 217.83/MysticumMysticum by mistake (see my talk page), and although it could still be improved, it is more or less ready. And I would like you to move the deleted Hell Militia article to User:H. 217.83/sandbox so I can show their notability. --217/83 15:15, 22 March 2013 (UTC) I asked you one month ago. --217/8308:12, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
Can you please direct me to where I should report references abuse. The warning I placed on the IPs page said they could be blocked if they continued to add unsourced information (which they did), but it seems the appropriate noticeboard is simply for questions relating to sources. Can you assist? Grammarxxx(What'd I do this time?)03:15, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
I believe you may have users "investigated" at the RS/N as well. If it continues to be a persistent problem after else fails, WP:AN? I'm limited in activity on en.wiki, presently. Rjd0060 (talk) 23:57, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
Deletion of Eva Pierrakos article
I am wondering why you decided to delete the article on Eva Pierrakos, considering her "not notable."
I object to this determination. Eva Pierrakos was the founder of the Pathwork, an internationally known spiritual path, with some 10,000 adherents worldwide. She was the daughter of a famous Austrian novelist, Jakob Wasserman, and the husband of the son of another famed German novelist, Hermann Broch. The Pathwork itself is remarkable for being a marriage of Eastern philosophy and Western psychology. I note that there are very many wikipedia pages on people who have had much less influence on people and society. How can wikipedia create a page on, say, Daft Punk, which is just a couple of guys who have cut some records? Hmmm
I deleted it, as it says in the deletion log right next to the part you copied here, in accordance with WP:PROD. I have, nor ever had, any opinion on the article. Also, another admin has deleted article twice since, so you'd need to discuss with them. Rjd0060 (talk) 23:31, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (File:Malaysia Airlines logo.png)
Thanks for uploading File:Malaysia Airlines logo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Werieth (talk) 00:40, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
I intend to restore the article on the eponymous band. They're considered one of the seminal surf bands of the 1960s, scoring a number of national and local hits. If you have any objections as far as their notability is concerned, please let me know; I'd like to address them. -The Gnome (talk) 05:02, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
Some five years ago you deleted this article, saying it wasn't "notable" enough. Is there any way of restoring or otherwise reading the text of the deleted article? I'm writing an article about text based games from the 80s and the information on that page would have been very valuable to me right now. I feel a certain sense of irony here, that I'm trying to make a record of something to ensure it's preserved for future generations, while people in charge of maintaining such an archive, are actively deleting it. We may not know the names of those who burnt down the Library of Alexandria, we'll never even know the extent of what it once contained, but preserved for eternity will be the name Rjd0060. They deleted the article you needed. 174.0.70.87 (talk) 17:25, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted Article Dennis Grant
This article was deleted in March. The subject of the article was the first Canadian to win an SCCA ProSolo National Championship, and was a professional race car driver. Sure, ProSolo may not seem like much next to Formula 1, but it is still a nation-wide, international race series run by one of the major American racing organizations. The article will be restored. If you have objections, please make them known on the Talk page rather than deleting the article summarily. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.251.221.21 (talk) 09:42, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
I was just coming over here to let you know that the article, which you performed the administrative deletion of in march, had resurfaced, and to inform you of the AfD discussion when I saw the comment above. You may wish to weigh the comment above against the previous PROD reason and contribute to the discussion. I have no intention of seeking to influence your input. FiddleFaddle10:12, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
where a consensus of editors will weigh in. I think it is likely there will be an agreement to remove it If that doesn't occur, we can discuss next steps.
However, the ticket is locked. Would you be willing to either send a note indicating the discussion I opened, or unlock it so I can? Sorry for intruding, I don't like to step on someone else's toes, and I don't unless the prior responses are quite old, I simply saw the email, and went to the article in question and started responding before realizing you were the owner.--S Philbrick(Talk)17:03, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
Was there a discussion over whether this individual merited a stand-alone article? If so could you direct me to that discussion?
McKinney is the subject of several books, and a feature length documentary. It could be argued that the extensive press coverage, these books, the documentary, would be enough to establish her wikipedia notability. I'd like to see whether that argument was made in the deletion discussion, and I would like to read whatever counter-arguments were offered, to see if I found them convincing.
A year later another administrator made Joyce McKinney a redirect, and protected it from editing -- presumably out of respect for the original reasoning that you relied on when you deleted the original article.
If there was no discussion, if you deleted the article in response to a speedy tag, or on your sole judgment, what steps do you think would be in order to unprotect it? Geo Swan (talk) 12:31, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
It was deleted in accordance with the Proposed Deletion policy, after an editor believed the article did not meet Wikipedia's guidelines on notability, specifically stating "Has only one major acting role, no evidence of WP:NACTOR or WP:ANYBIO". I simply acted on the request after it remained un-disputed for a 5 day period. I have no personal opinion on the matter. Rjd0060 (talk) 11:33, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
There is no "log" other than the deletion log, which you must have saw, as that's how you found out it was me who deleted the article. Rjd0060 (talk) 23:33, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
I understand I just want to see the page where this editor specifically stated "Has only one major acting role″ for example the page that I showed you above. It must have one. — SoapFan12 (talk, contribs) 02:46, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
No, it does not have one. That is not how the proposed deletion procedure works. Please review WP:PROD. That should answer the questions. Proposed Deletions do not require a "discussion". Rjd0060 (talk) 11:47, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
I am curious why it was deleted? The page Eddie Alderson. If the conflict has been resolved, or happened too long ago, then it is good to disregard this comment. Speling12345 (talk) 5:34, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
Sorry about that, I usually remember to ask but it slipped my mind the other day for some reason. Feel free to revert me if it needs to be changed. Mark Arsten (talk) 23:18, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
Replied
Wasn't sure to reply here too, but just doing it here. I wanted to chat with some people on here about sociology, but also about fun stuff. Im going to eat breakfast now, but I'll be back in the afternoon probably, but its nice to meet you! 174.19.163.225 (talk) 18:17, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
I'm updating some pages (environmental virtue ethics) as well as creating some new ones (environmental hermeneutics, martin drenthen, and others to come) in order to flesh out wikipedia's content on these developing fields. In the course of doing so I was going to update/revive the page on "Brian Treanor," which you deleted some time ago due to notability issues. The person in question currently holds a named chair at a university (the Taylor Chair of Philosophy) and, in addition, has work cited in a number of third party books and articles, which seems to meet the criteria at this point. Comparing to a number of other pages, this seems sufficient, but I'm interested in your thoughts. Other pages I hope to develop or flesh out include links for organizations (International Association for Environmental Philosophy, International Society for Environmental Ethics), and scholars (David Wood, Ted Toadvine, and others). Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wordsmyth123 (talk • contribs) 05:01, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:HIFK hockey.PNG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
It was citied as being deleted for lack of 3rd party sources when in reality it has just as many sources as many other college marching bands. In fact a quick look at the "Highty-Tighties" page (Cadet band at VT) reveals they have fewer independent citations. The Marching Virginians (MVs) are highly active in the Blacksburg community and a large part of the sports traditions at Virginia Tech. Many of the traditions that were in the article are passed down within the group and thus have no citation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skanetic (talk • contribs) 00:08, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Request to undelete "Pandey Narmedeshwor Sahay, Renowned Bhojpuri Poet"
It has been deleted because of no reference provided. I now have references which I can link to this article to make it credible. However, I need to know how to add those and also these references are screen shot taken from published magazines and Newspaper cutout. Kindly suggest as how to progress and reinstate this article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mmirch38 (talk • contribs) 04:55, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
I've restored the article and re-proposed its deletion as it is an unsourced biography. There is now a 1-week period that sources must be added to avoid the re-deletion of the article. Rjd0060 (talk) 19:07, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
I was about to remove the Prod for Moon Seon-min as he appears to meet WP:GNG with a lot of media coverage, but you deleted it while I was still researching it.
I removed the BLPPROD from Pandey Narmedeshwor Sahay, Renowned Bhojpuri Poet, since the article says he is dead. The WP:BLPPROD policy says that it is intended only to apply to "actual biographies of living people", and that in cases where there is any doubt of its applicability, another deletion policy should be used. I've always taken that to mean that if the article says the person is dead, BLPPROD should not be used. Since a prod was also previously contested, please take the article to AFD if you think it should be deleted. I agree that the article has problems since it is unsourced and the main contributor might have a conflict of interest, but it still needs to go to AFD to be deleted since that is the only deletion policy that is applicable. Also, it looks like you previously restored the article but forgot to restore the talk page. Since the article currently exists, the talk page should also probably be restored. Thanks. Calathan (talk) 15:48, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
I am aware of the BLPPROD policy. I overlooked the fact that the person was no longer living and just saw an article that is definitely not up to our standards. I don't care if the article stays or goes. At all. I was only carrying out the maintenance task of deletion per the request of whoever added the PROD and trying to ensure all biographies are sourced. I've restored the talk page as well. Rjd0060 (talk) 01:03, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
Ah ... hold on. I've goofed, and I've mistaken Campeonato Gaúcho Série A1 for Campeonato Brasileiro Série A. (the top state league vs the top federal league). So please leave they way they are. Thanks, Nfitz (talk) 15:07, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
Let me know. And if you reviewed the articles prior to deletion (which I don't know if you did or not) is there a reason you left the PROD tags on? Rjd0060 (talk) 20:42, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. It's my mistake. I thought they'd played in the top national league, not the top state league, so the prods make sense. I didn't review the prods before deletion. I only tend to pop in every week or so, and there were a whole pile of articles that were deleted just as I started looking through the recent prods. Nfitz (talk) 03:08, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
Ralph Sarchie
Hello Rjd0060, I would like to dispute the PROD that was placed on Ralph Sarchie. I believe from what I saw from the article that if it was to be deleted, it should have been via AfD as he seemed to meet the WP:GNG.STATicmessage me!18:33, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
Restored per policy. Next time you see a PROD'ed article that does not meet PROD deletion guidelines, remove the tag. If nobody disputes deletion it will be deleted otherwise. Rjd0060 (talk) 18:35, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
Hey Ryan, I noticed you took my name off the volunteer list, I was just wondering where my application stands at this point. I haven't seen an email or a message anywhere about the status. Thank you cliffsteinman--Discuss17:51, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi Cliffsteinman. I did reply to you yesterday. I've resent the email. If you still have not received it let me know (as that would be very strange!). Thanks for the note. Rjd0060 (talk) 20:54, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
You recently deleted the UBC Fisheries Centre, which someone unfortunately prodded. This centre is one of the most influential fisheries research centres in the world. It is the parent organisation for a number of research tools and units, some of which (Ecopath, Sea Around Us Project and Project Seahorse) already have Wikipedia articles, and is part of the FishBase Consortium. Would you please place a copy of the deleted article in my user space so I can expand it and return it to article space. Thanks. --Epipelagic (talk) 02:13, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
You recently deleted the UBC Fisheries Centre, which someone unfortunately prodded. This centre is one of the most influential fisheries research centres in the world. It is the parent organisation for a number of research tools and units, some of which (Ecopath, Sea Around Us Project and Project Seahorse) already have Wikipedia articles, and is part of the FishBase Consortium. Would you please place a copy of the deleted article in my user space so I can expand it and return it to article space. Thanks. --Epipelagic (talk) 02:13, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
You recently deleted the article on CAMBRA, an acronym describing an alternative form of preventative dentistry that has peer reviewed research supporting it's effectiveness. The article was created to proved a jumping off point for people to contribute to the topic. It should be reinstated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drewfer5 (talk • contribs) 01:34, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi Drewfer5. I've restored the article however I strongly encourage you to improve it if you can. It does not appear to meet Wikipedia's quality standards at the present moment. I would not be surprised if somebody begins a deletion discussion on this. Rjd0060 (talk) 02:01, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
Gene Abel
I would be grateful if you would at least review your recent deletion of Gene Abel - so far as I can judge (for reasons explained at more length at WP:Articles for deletion/Abel Assessment), the WP:PRODder had ulterior motives, and a GScholar search fairly clearly shows the subject as meeting WP:PROF#C1. Having not seen the article, though, I accept that the WP:BLP reasons given for the WP:PROD may, whatever the motive for them, have been sufficiently justified to outweigh the subject's notability - if, on review, you think this to be the case, then feel free either not to restore the article or to take it straight to AfD. Thanks. PWilkinson (talk) 10:34, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
Deleted artist page
Abductive said I should send this message to you:
I just got back from a trip and saw that you deleted an article I was working on about an artist. Please restore it so I can continue to improve it. I don't understand what the problem was. I cited a number of reliable sources. Now all the material is gone as I did not save a copy.--Artzi (talk) 08:33, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
The page was about Sari Srulovich, a well-known Israeli artist who teaches at the country's leading school of art and whose work is in the Israel Museum.--Artzi (talk) 08:33, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello. We did not have an article titled Sari Srulovich. If you know the exact title of the former article I can probably undelete it. However, please note if it was deleted via the "PROD" policy, it could be re-deleted if improvements are not made. Rjd0060 (talk) 20:50, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello Britcher. I've restored it in accordance with policy however if the article is not improved to meet Wikipedia's inclusion guidelines it could be deleted again via other means. Rjd0060 (talk) 06:13, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi. I think I should explain about the edit warring in the Swedish general election, 2014 article. It was all started by an user who kept pushing forward his own view of things in the article without consensus, constantly reverting others' edits and even adding an OR tag in order to be able to defend an "there is an OR tag and you can't remove it"-like argument. We brought the issue to the talk page, but in the meantime the user refused to undo his editions until consensus could be reached whether for the tag to be added or not. Furthermore, user Number 57 and myself posted links explaining how there were no violations of wikipedia policy for translating party names, and in case of doubt, even posted links where those party names where shown in English (yet that user kept maintaining the OR tag). The user in question did none of those, only defending what was a personal opinion. Respectable as it was, of course, but still merely a personal opinion.
While I understand the rationale of sending me a warning, since this is how Wikipedia works, I don't believe it is fair to ask me to stop, seeing from the article talk page that I had already expressed my intention (and I did it twice) not to further engage in that edit warring, precisely because of the 3RR, not making any edit since I first expressed my will to do so. I hope this brings some light to the issue. Cheers. Impru20 (talk) 08:45, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi Impru20. Edit warring is disruptive to the editing atmosphere and the page history. Edit warring over content is one thing but once it started to reverting a maintenance template, that was about all I needed to see. I stand by my warnings to all of you and suggest the use of discussion or pursuit of dispute resolution methods. Rjd0060 (talk) 16:50, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
The maintenance template was added by the user in question in the middle of the edit warring, without either consensus or strong argumentation behind it, with the sole purpose of preventing others from discussing the issue because of such a template's sole presence. I mean, should not the addition of such a tag in such a disputed situation require, at least, a previous consultation with the involved parties or some kind of consensus? I don't think it is fair that an user keeps reverting others' edits without consensus, turns the article into an edit warring because of users trying to revert his doings, then adds a maintenance tag on his own right to prevent others from intervening and then, when an administrator intervenes and orders the warring to stop, the tag is left there; without discussion ever taking place about the opportunity of the template being added or not.
I do recognize, however, my fault on entering that edit warring, something I should have refrained from doing earlier than I did. Cheers. Impru20 (talk) 17:06, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi Neel Motwani Here..
How Are You , Hope You Are Doing Well
... Wel I was Just Going Through The google Yesterday And Saw That You Have Created A Wiki For Me .. But , Then Today Morning Isaw Yu ve Deleted ...
May I know Why .. And If I want To Make One , How To ... Thank you ..
Look, I think all or most of us would be quite happy to leave the situation if OTRS administrators were dealing with it. But so far, all you've actually said is:
That you are aware of it
[In response to proposed restrictions on OTRS volunteers] That this was an isolated incident.
You haven't actually given any indication that, for instance, the OTRS admins have procedures in place for dealing with it, and will do so, or even - and I do think this would be enough - that you have talked to Mdann, and are sure the situation won't arise again.
It's giving the impression that the OTRS admins either have no means in place to deal with volunteer problems, or don't see this sort of behaviour as an issue. Adam Cuerden(talk)20:05, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
It seems the same OTRS team member has made assertions of "super editor" status on other articles. See Suzannah Lipscomb and the related discussion on BLPN. I think this is further reason for emphasis and clarity at VTR. Just informing you, I reasonably assume the situations with the individual editor are being addressed through OTRS admin. As this involves the same editor I am also going to assume it is not a widespread issue within OTRS, but I believe close scrutiny should be applied in reviewing OTRS team agents edits by appropriate admins, with particular attention to claims of authority and lack disclosure of COI driven edits. I understand the outreach value of OTRS and the volume involved but quantity is not an excuse for policy violation etc. My desire is not to cause extra drama, but to ensure policy is adhered to. - - MrBill3 (talk) 04:56, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
That edit is over a month old. As I already stated, the issue with this editor has been addressed and policies/protocols, internal and external, have been clarified. Rjd0060 (talk) 05:03, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
Is there a clear and explicit policy that state ANY edit driven/inspired/suggested by a party with a COI made by an OTRS team member MUST disclose such COI nature on the talk page of the article edited? I think this is absolutely and urgently needed. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter and for your contributions to the project. Sorry for bringing old stuff up, it just came to my attention. - - MrBill3 (talk) 05:08, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
Again, as far as OTRS goes, we're done with this issue. If the WP community wants to continue to discuss things, go right ahead. But we've done everything that we need to do to ensure our agents are aware of policies. You may wish to continue talking with the other two admins who have stepped in if you still have questions. Cheers. Rjd0060 (talk) 05:49, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
Yes, please do. The discussions have shown that this type of stonewalling is creating a Streisand effect and not meeting concerns. We believe you when you say that you have been discussing these problems internally, but the community needs to see written measures which satisfy us that future problems will be prevented. We need more than assurances that "we are taking care of this", because they don't cut it. -- Brangifer (talk) 16:25, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
Resolved
As I stated very, very clearly: I have supplied more than what was requested. If you wish to continue to beat this horse, you can do so with the assistance of some other OTRS admin. Both Keegan and Pajz have been commenting throughout. I am not prepared to continue the back-and-forth circular arguments about the same thing over and over again. I am not the only OTRS administrator and I have taken steps back from this situation several days ago. Good luck. Rjd0060 (talk) 18:15, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
Kingdom of Araucanía and Patagonia
Hello,
Would you please restore the original version of this page before vandalism. The page online is not the original one but a vandalised one.
Thanks a lot.
Vulson (talk) 12:53, 4 October 2014 (UTC)Vulson
Hi, I'm not the author of vandalism. And the original page is a translation of the original French page, both vandalisez by two anonymous contibutors.Vulson (talk) 18:40, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
Again, I cannot help you. You must file a note on the article talk page (click "talk" at the top of the article). Rjd0060 (talk) 18:45, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello, quick question
You answered a post I had on another page so I thought maybe you'd answer one on your own. :-)
I have a problem with an editor. I'm working on talking it out, although they are currently dismissive and not at all assuming good faith ("useless edits" and accusations of NPOV against me for no apparent reason) and I have had no response from them yet. They've even warned me about edit warring, although I could equally do the same to them... Anyway, my question is: how do I escalate a conflict? If I find a person is being protectionist/possessive of a page or otherwise intransigent in a way that isn't related to appropriate Wikipedia behavior, what is the next step? I'm a long-term user, since 2004, but my edits are normally not very confrontational: I fix wikilinks and spelling and grammar and formatting (cites, etc.) so honestly I don't know what I do next. Ogresssmash!21:36, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Ogress, I happened to see this and left them a note of my own. A lot of their recent behavior is contrary to a few policies so if they continue, we'll be having more discussions. WP:ANI would likely be a good place (if it escalates) given that there is more than one issue so a separate noticeboard would be inappropriate.
Oh! Thank you. I'm just hoping they are simply tired of pro/anti-Dorje Shugden trolls and were having a bad day, we've all been there. I had posted on their own page a hopefully polite laurel branch. Ogresssmash!21:54, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Rjd0060, I've been watching these articles and trying to be a neutral there, but I am seeing an ongoing pattern of WP:BAITING of VG by a bunch of people who appear to have single use accounts or even sockpuppet accounts (Notably Audrey37 for the latter) and are dogpling her with POV pushing all linked to the Western Shugden Society perspective. Ogress appears to be new to the party and may not realize the environment she has waded into. VG is probably feeling a little besieged and needs some support; she's up against some people who aren't playing fair. Montanabw(talk)22:01, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Montanabw, unfortunately that does not matter when it comes to the civility, potential ownership and/or other issues I saw. As I said, I was not commenting on the content - but anybody would agree by looking at the history that things are not right. Ogress is surely not the only one at fault as it typically takes two to tango, but I still stand my my comment on their page. Ogress has the same dispute resolution options as everybody else. Rjd0060 (talk) 22:05, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Just saying that in this case, we have about five tangoing, and some are trolls... FWIW. ;-) I'm trying to watch out there, but I have other drahmahz elsewhere too. Sometimes "ownership" is quality control. But I do think there was a point about piped links and I commented on it at VG's page. I think she trusts that I am not one of the trolls attempting to sanitize the article. (If you want some background, note the pointy RM request by yet another user at 14th Dalai Lama) Montanabw(talk)22:11, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Sure. :-) I briefly skimmed the situation prior but I realized the content issue itself was a bit too much for me to opine on. My only intention is to encourage more discussion and less banter. Thanks for the help. Rjd0060 (talk) 22:15, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Postano
Hi Ryan,
I work for TigerLogic and the product Postano which was marked as 'deleted / spam'. We're an actual product (www.postano.com) actively selling and we use best white hat only practices (nor am I aware of any grey or black hat in the past). We'd like to reopen the page. Would you please suggest what materials you would need to undelete us? thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scotthuber (talk • contribs) 23:22, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi Ryan,
I'd appreciate your help on this, or if I'm requesting in the wrong way, I'd appreciate the feedback. Thank you.
Articles can only be kept on Wikipedia if they meet certain inclusion guidelines. They are quite specific to the topic area so you should probably start at WP:N. Rjd0060 (talk) 23:24, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
Sofia Kenin page removal
You did removed "Sofia Kenin" page.
The reason ; "this player is not notable by project standards; she has no Fed Cup or WTA main draw appearances, has not won any ITF tournaments above the $25,000 category, had no remarkable junior career (neither...)"
It show how little , if nothing you know about tennis(Junior tennis) ... She is 15 years old !!! What are you talking about ??, "no Fed Cup or WTA main draw appearances"??
No remarkable junior career (neither...)????! . All information is on internet ! She is one of the best players in USA and in the world at her age ..
Please, do your research before removing an article and leaving completely incompetent comments ..
If it was done by applying criteria that is not related to 15 y.o. player, I would understand and am open to discuss it and defend my point of view....
Please, do respond to my message.. Thank you.
You're right - I know absolutely nothing about tennis. Please read the entire deletion reason and click the link that says "PROD". It will explain why the article was deleted and how it can be restored. Rjd0060 (talk) 03:17, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
The IP range for 158.59.0.0
The IP range from 158.59.0.0/16 belongs to Arlington Public Schools, and these IPs are often used to vandalize pages, just look at the user page for this IP. I recommend blocking all IPs in this range, but allowing constructive edits if they sign in with a user account.
158.59.128.11 (talk) 15:08, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
Day Translations, Inc. Removal
Hello, this is my first time working with Wikipedia, so please forgive my potential mistakes. I'm currently working for Day Translations, Inc., and have been asked to alter the wikipedia page to save it from being deleted. What will I have to do to make sure the page is suitable for Wikipedia's purposes?
Thank you very much,
Hi Ryan, Please review our deletion of page on Will St Leger [[102]] citing 'not notable'. I believe Wiki's notability criteria had been met and as I've worked on this page and intended to update page with recent independent articles and reviews' [[103]]
If notoabily was in doubt, discussion on talk page should be started before deletion.
Hi Diagear. Note that in accordance with the Proposed Deletion policy which was cited in the deletion log, an article is deleted without reason (other than nomination in the proposed deletion process) after a PROD tag remains in place after a week. I have no personal opinion on the article. I see that it was already restored. In accordance with the same policy, that is permitted upon simple request. Rjd0060 (talk) 19:32, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Hello and thanks for your post on my talk page, happy to oblige. Alas the same comments have been continued by the other party.Pawac (talk) 21:19, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
I'd like to take a shot at cleaning up the old, deleted article on the M/Oslo programming language for the Microsoft WikiProject. Would it be possible to get the article restored and moved into my user space so I can review its state and history, and hopefully get a decent article written (or at least a decent section on it in another appropriate page)? Thanks. // coldacid (talk|contrib) 20:15, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
The justification is that I am an admin, you are an admin; if I tell you it's up to you, it's up to you. I thought that was being friendly enough. Shame you had to make an issue out of it. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:25, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for protecting the page. But the mammoth edits still remain. They were never discussed and most of them are part of an ongoing RFC. Rather than discuss the edits and come to consensus its been a revert them back in problem. Per WP:CAUTIOUS major edits should be discussed, they never were even after removal. Letting them stay allows those that want to bypass consensus building just ignore any discussion. AlbinoFerret22:37, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
AlbinoFerret is continuing to delete reliable sources from position statements from reputable organisations. AlbinoFerret also deleted a number of sources including reviews without a specific objection on the talk page. See Talk:Safety of electronic cigarettes#Positions. Most editors disagree with AlbinoFerret at the RfC. See WP:SNOW. User:Bbb23 blocked AlbinoFerret for violating the three-revert rule at the Safety of electronic cigarettes page.[104]
Hi,
Can i get deleted copy of this article? This article got deleted as per "Proposed Deletion", I did work on this article last year and I was away from Wikipedia for sometime. I believe I could have saved this article. So please help me with it.
I just noticed that you blocked them the other day because of their username. It's not really a problem because they have got a new name, User:Rosiecornwall, but according to Wikipedia:Username policy#Usernames implying shared use that particular style of username is permitted: "However, usernames are acceptable if they contain a company or group name but are clearly intended to denote an individual person, such as "Mark at WidgetsUSA", "Jack Smith at the XY Foundation", "WidgetFan87", etc." Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq11:37, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
01:23, 9 August 2014 Rjd0060 (talk | contribs) deleted page Alpha Sigma Rho (Expired PROD, concern was: Can't find that this meets WP:NOTABILITY. Deleted at AfD in 2011.) In regards to this deletion, I am trying to get this deletion removed. The other page created beforehand lacked sources. I would like to recreate the page with valid and credible sources. ChoklatGeisha (talk) 03:36, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi ChoklatGeisha. I'm not sure if you have reviewed the "proposed deletion policy" that this article was deleted in accordance with but it does allow for undeletion of the article upon request. Would you like me to place the page in your userspace so you can work on improving it prior to moving it back to the mainspace? Rjd0060 (talk) 21:35, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
N00b question- Just to eliminate all categories, I deleted the current content on the page. I have been working on all of the information to list in my user sandbox. Could I actually publish that page under this new article name , or do I need to actually add the information from my sandbox onto the restored draft page? If so, do i follow the same procedure to publish this article as I would if this was in a sandbox? ChoklatGeisha (talk) 21:55, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
23:53, 4 April 2015 Rjd0060 (talk | contribs) deleted page Stellar Information Technology Pvt. Ltd. (Expired PROD, concern was: No indication or assertion of notability) I'm handling this page since 2009 and suddenly, it's deleted. I would want to get this page undeleted as we've added everything legitimate. If you find anything illegitimate in particular, feel free to suggest and I'd happy to address the same.
I'd truly appreciate if you can get this deletion removed and restore the page as it was before. Thank you so much in advance.
Newbie confused
I am new to Wikipedia and just edited my first article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wantage_Hall. I know that there have been a lot of edits in the past so I read the comments and tried to reference things properly, which seemes to be the main issue. My edit was then removed. I have tried to find out why using the talk page of the editor who undid my edit, but now I am unable to edit the post at all. I was just wondering why? I am confused by the 'vandalism' comment that you made- as far as I could tell, I was acting within the Wikipedia guidelines? Could you please let me know where I went wrong? (Also sorry if I'm not using this chat properly too-I'm a bit confused by it :/ ) Aperrett (talk) 00:04, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
Aperrett, a simple look at the history should be an indicator that something is not right. Wikipedia does not tolerate such behavior, as outlined here. Once the page protection expires please do not engage in the same activity and engage in discussion with your fellow editors instead of edit warring. The notes left in the edit summaries in the history to you will likely also be of help. Rjd0060 (talk) 00:11, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
Rjd0060 Please explain to me what I have done wrong- I made my edit, which contained far fewer words than previous edits, so should have avoided the 'too much detail issue' and also used reliable sources, such as the University of Reading to enforce my edit, which was the other historical issue. This was then undone. I disagreed with this, so I reinstated my edit, and then wrote on the other editor's talk page hoping to resolve the issue. I only undid someone else's edit once, so I did not break the 3 revert rule. As this was my first ever edit, I am really not sure what I have done wrong and am regretting entering the Wikipedia minefield in the first place. As far as I am aware I acted as I should, so could you please explain to me why this is classed as 'edit warring'? Aperrett (talk) 00:25, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
Review the page history. Aperrett was not the only account involved but there are way too many disruptive edits, thus page protection or blocking was warranted. Most people do not complain when I do not block them and protect the page instead but I could have went that route. You need to discuss things with the people you were arguing with, not me. I am completely neutral on the topic. Rjd0060 (talk) 00:28, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted Page
"19:53, 9 April 2015 Rjd0060 (talk | contribs) deleted page Akoisexual (Expired PROD, concern was: A neologism that apparently came out of tumblr. No reliable sources available, fails basic notability.)"
Thank you for the most literal example of asexual erasure ever. I will be sure to post a screenshot of this on Tumblr, where many of my akoisexual friends are. I was busy getting suggestions and collecting sources<ref>http://www.lithromantic.org/frequently-asked-questions.html</ref><ref>http://aromantics.wikia.com/wiki/Lithromantic</ref><ref>http://www.asexuality.org/wiki/index.php?title=Lithromantic</ref> and testomonials from people (many of whom from Tumblr, as it is a place where we don't get literally erased). Please restore the page immediately so that I may make these changes, bringing the page up to Wikipedia's referencing standards, as I was well aware the draft failed to do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johncaveishere (talk • contribs) 22:04, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi Ryan,
Even after consistent request to undelete our company page (Target: Stellar_Information_Technology_Pvt._Ltd.), there is no action has been taken to undelete the same. I'd request you once again to kindly look into the matter more seriously as we really want to restore our company page.
Any suggestions/ guidance to restore the same would be truly appreciated.
Thanks,
Amit Pandey
Stellar Information Technology Pvt. LTD.
Des Titres, the page was deleted almost a year ago. Are you sure this is the correct one? If so I am happy to restore it. However, if the article is not brought up to the quality standards that Wikipedia has, it could be deleted again. Rjd0060 (talk) 20:19, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
Greetings Rjd0060, I noticed you recently semi-protected Wantage Hall with the reason given as "Persistent vandalism". As far as I can tell, before your intervention that article had only been edited 4 times in the last year, and none of those edits could justifiably be classed as vandalism. Could you double-check your action please, and consider unprotecting it. Thank you. Des Titres (talk) 20:11, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
Des Titres, if you don't see a significant amount of edit warring and other disruption in the history then I am surprised. It would appear (though I cannot be certain, of course) that one of the users engaging in the reverting was originally using an IP and then created an account to continue the same behavior. Apologies that the reason I selected was incorrect. I've fixed it. As you know, the alternative to page protection (during edit warring or other situations) is blocking accounts. We could unprotect it and go that route if the dispute continues to interfere with the article history - and I fear it would as I see no discussion on the talk page regarding the disputed items.
Hello and thank you for your time. I am a bit new to Wikipedia, admittedly, and I believe I need your assistance on clearing up a few things. Back in August, you seemed to have disapproved something for my sorority's wiki page. I am attempting to re-create a page for our organization and per Wiki's instructions, I needed to reach out to you. This should be lifted, correct? 01:23, 9 August 2014 Rjd0060 (talk | contribs) deleted page Alpha Sigma Rho (Expired PROD, concern was: Can't find that this meets WP:NOTABILITY. Deleted at AfD in 2011.) Please let me know the next steps to take to have the page re-instated. I believe there were not a lot of verifiable sources within the page, but I will find sources to contribute to our authenticity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alpha Sigma Rho Sorority (talk • contribs)
And a final note, please sign your talk page messages by typing ~~~~ after your comment. It will add your username and a date, like this: Rjd0060 (talk) 17:04, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Noteswork, given the lengthy protection history, the long protection was completely justified. You are free to get a third opinion via WP:RFUP, linking to this thread. If another admin would like to remove the protection or switch to PC and monitor the page, they're welcome to. Rjd0060 (talk) 16:58, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi, MichaelQSchmidt. To be brutally honest, I have no opinion on either the deleted article nor your proposed one. I deleted it solely as a procedural action. If you'd like me to restore the old article once you move your draft to the mainspace, I can do that - it is especially important if you used parts of the old article. Rjd0060 (talk) 20:03, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed that you deleted the article for WebAIM and was wondering what needed to happen to get that restored? I work for WebAIM and I was wondering what the reason was for deletion? I saw in the delete log that it was a proposed deletion, but I don't understand the reasoning, which states "no indication of notability". What do I need to do to get this page back up? Thanks for your help. AceHyzer (talk) 17:41, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
AceHyzer, in accordance with the proposed deletion policy, I have restored the article per your request. However, note that the article could be deleted again via another process if it is not brought up to the content standards set by the editing community. Please review this notability guideline that you saw before and I encourage you to make any necessary improvements to the article to avoid another deletion. Rjd0060 (talk) 15:40, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Hello
I notice that 'Advanced Business Solutions' has been deleted and that'Advanced 365' has a notice to be deleted.
Please would you be able to place the pages in my userspace so I can work on improving them for resubmission? Lsofiano (talk) 15:00, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi I noticed you deleted my page as well "Gabe Barcia-Colombo." I am a TED speaker but my name was listed as Gabriel Barcia-Colombo instead. I saw in the delete log that it was a proposed deletion, but I don't understand the reasoning, which states "no indication of notability". What do I need to do to get this page back up? Thanks for your help.You can find me linked under the official ted wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gabebc (talk • contribs) 06:55, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
Gabebc, in accordance with the proposed deletion policy, I have restored the article per your request. However, note that the article could be deleted again via another process if it is not brought up to the content standards set by the editing community. Please review this notability guideline that you saw before and I encourage you to make any necessary improvements to the article to avoid another deletion. Rjd0060 (talk) 18:23, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Image of Richard III's tomb
Leicester Cathedral's New Media Officer is now advised of the need of a free licence, see separate email. Please give them time to provide it before removing the image, they have been most helpful with me and should not have problems extending the permission for free use. I am not sure I would have taken on this initiative if I had known it'd be such a headache though... Isananni (talk) 21:01, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi there. I see that you deleted the page for AWeber. I represent AWeber and was wondering what I need to do to get this page back up. Please advise. narolsonsd (talk) 17:15, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
narolsonsd, in accordance with the proposed deletion policy, I have restored the article per your request. However, note that the article could be deleted again via another process if it is not brought up to the content standards set by the editing community. Please review this notability guideline that you saw before and I encourage you to make any necessary improvements to the article to avoid another deletion. Rjd0060 (talk) 18:23, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
In future, please do a google book search before deleting an article. It should never have been deleted. A lot of very notable articles are unsourced, even ones like Sunset Strip. We don't delete them. Unsourced doesn't necessarily mean non notable. If you've been given tools on here, I expect you to use them with caution. As the person who deleted this, it was your duty to check in google books to assess notability rather than taking the word of the person who wrongfully prodded it. Thanks.♦ Dr. Blofeld08:01, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi, Dr. Blofeld. I will have to respectfully disagree. In accordance with the proposed deletion policy, it is not up to the deleting administrator to work on improving the tagged articles. Somebody else should have removed the tag in the allotted period. As you'll see above, a lot of people have issue with the policy. Unfortunately, I'm just the messenger in this case - and if you'd like to change the PROD policy, you'd have to take other steps to do that. Otherwise, I would have happily restored the article per your request, in accordance with the aforementioned policy. While I do more extisive reviews on some of the PROD deletions, all that is required is a 4-point check prior to deletion. Apologies for the inconvenience. Good day. Rjd0060 (talk) 20:16, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
I didn't say it was up to you to work on the articles. But I do think before you delete anything here you should do a quick check yourself as people frequently tag notable articles because they're short/undeveloped. If you do a check and it seems they;re right, delete it, if it seems actually there's a fair few hits, remove the tag and alert the article creator. How much is it to ask you to do a 10 second google search in books and assess whether there's hits or not?♦ Dr. Blofeld20:21, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Well, if I was going to put the effort into finding sources I might as well add them to the article while removing the PROD tag since we wouldn't want an article around without sources. Especially a BLP. Every editor has access to PROD'd articles a whole week before they are ultimately deleted (or not). That's the time for article improvement. If a PROD tag is removed, by an admin who denies it for example, chances of the article getting updates and brought up to standards? Slim to none, considering it was up for deletion for a week and nobody noticed that, either. So again I don't think we have an issue here but more so with the process of proposed deletions. Thank you. Rjd0060 (talk) 20:28, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
I'd delete it again if I ran across the same situation. So again, take your argument to the PROD talk page and change the policy if you do not like it, rather than complaining to me for carrying out the community-elected protocol. I have nothing else to say on this, Dr. Blofeld. Rjd0060 (talk) 18:45, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
People who can't admit fault are a real problem on here. You can't be trusted with the tools. Do this again and I'll have you desysopped. It's pure laziness.♦ Dr. Blofeld18:48, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
restore deleted page Marco Marchi & the mojo workers
Hello I notice that 'Marco Marchi & the mojo workers' has been deleted. Please would you be able to place the pages in my userspace so I can work on improving them for resubmission? Perhaps you can give me some help. What do I need to do to get this page back up? Bloezen (talk) 12:23, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I notice that you deleted the page for Uplike.
Uplike was just named as France’s fastest-growing tech startup by The Newt Web (TNW) and won the Tech5 startup contest.
There is also official a video on Youtube posted by TNW.
Uplike is also mentioned in the The Next Web wikipedia page.
Please would you be able to place the page in my userspace so I can work on improving it, maybe with your help, for resubmission. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fatkarl27 (talk • contribs) 09:24, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
Question about article deletion
Hi there! I noticed that your username was listed as having deleted List of programmes broadcast by Cartoon Network UK & Ireland since it was apparently a redirect to deleted page Cartoon Network (Middle East & Africa). Do you know if that had been the case for long? A UK & Ireland article wouldn't have existed as a redirect for a different version of the channel in a different country, so I'm wondering if the redirect was a result of some temporary vandalism, and possibly one sockpuppet editor in particular who has affected a number of similar articles in the past. I can't see the article history as the article has been deleted, but I'd be surprised if the redirect had been in place for very long, and it wouldn't have been a legitimate edit if it was. Do you happen to have any more information? Thanks. Bonusballs (talk) 18:20, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Bonusballs, it was a redirect to that target page since the page was originally created and moved in 2011. The target title changed a couple of times since then but it always led to the same article. Rjd0060 (talk) 21:49, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I hope you are well, I would like to know the factors that will prevent deleting Doctors Worldwide, because it is International non-governmental organization registered in UK and in turkey, and we are working in 30 countries around the world,& this is our English website http://www.doctorsworldwide.org/
& our Turkish website https://www.yyd.org.tr/tr
of course I would like to see my INGO in the Wikipedia if it has the indication of notability,Best.--Drmustaffa (talk) 15:25, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
LPL1940
Hi. You might wonder if my username might not comply with the rules. Actually I am board member of the LPL named in this article, and responsible for media-relations. Therefore I do not mislead by using "wrong" names, that could be mistaken. If you still think the Username is not good, I can change, as my name is Lex.
Edit : Ok asked for name change to LPL_Lex to comply.
OK. You also should sign your name after messagrees on a talk page by adding ~~~~ after your messages. It identifies your name and the time of the message. Thank you. Rjd0060 (talk) 00:37, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Help?
Hello. We corresponded a while ago when you helped me understand an issue I was having. As an admin, I was hoping you could help me out with this this... Tried to go through the right procedures but the user has taken to simply vandalizing the page in an effort to get his/her way. --Zackmann08 (talk) 22:59, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Zackmann08, there are several admins who patrol the 3RR/EW noticeboard. Please be patient until an admin gets to your issue and they will take care of it in accordance with current practices. From what I can tell, your requests looks good. Rjd0060 (talk) 23:44, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Anyone can claim their website is a "tea party" website. There really isn't any evidence to support the claim that the Koch Brothers made the first tea party website in 2002. I recommend a review of this claim because it's in the main introduction and i can find ZERO evidence. Catsmeow8989 (talk) 08:45, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Here is the section that I feel should be examined:
In 2002, the first Tea Party movement website was designed and published by Citizens for a Sound Economy and stated "our US Tea Party is a national event, hosted continuously online and open to all Americans who feel our taxes are too high and the tax code is too complicated."[22][23][24] According to Fox News Channel commentator Juan Williams, the Tea Party movement emerged from the "ashes" of Ron Paul's 2008 presidential primary campaign.[25]Catsmeow8989 (talk) 08:47, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I notice that you deleted the page for Uplike.
Uplike was just named as France’s fastest-growing tech startup by The Newt Web (TNW) and won the Tech5 startup contest.
There is also official a video on Youtube posted by TNW.
Uplike is also mentioned in the The Next Web wikipedia page.
I see you had deleted the page for Jack Harris (broadcaster) for notability being in question and non-encyclopedia standards, as this is a local sports and news broadcast personality. In this day and age Wikipedia has grown to have more content than any print encyclopedia ever could, including content relevant to certain specific audiences (such as local history). You'll notice most major local journalists and media personalities now have entries. Refer to [staff of WPVI in Philadelphia] where every personality has a page. In the case of the Tampa Bay market, figures such as Keith Cate, Dick Crippen and Paul Dellegatto all have pages, though only of significance to one or two media markets. In fact, on the WTVT page, Jack Harris is now the only Notable former on-air staff not to have a Wikipedia entry.
The previous Jack Harris page was rather long and included a good deal of information that wasn't necessary in its level of detail and failed to provide enough references to back its notability. With restoring this page, I (or another contributor) could create a considerably trimmed down version (a paragraph or two), explaining his significance as a 50+ year sports, radio and television broadcaster, with ample references and citations.
Xb2u7Zjzc32 - as the PROD policy explains they may be undeleted in most cases simply by request. So I don't see any issue in your comment. But you'll need to pull it out of the userspace as I see it was usefied in order to do so. Regards. Rjd0060 (talk) 12:22, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
Not sure what else is being asked here. The article was deleted in accordance with the proposed deletion policy (which means a tag was in place for a certain number of days) and can be undeleted in accordance with the same policy. Rjd0060 (talk) 00:38, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
You had deleted this page after WP:PROD expired. This person is actually the best known cartoonist from the Indian state of Kerala and notability can be easily established. I can improve the article if it is possible for you to undelete it. I failed to notice the earlier deletion notice. Thank you. Malayala Sahityam (talk) 05:03, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
You blocked Saviodesigns for an improper (company) username. The user has now stated thas he is the sole user of the account, apologized, and requested a new name. I would like to unblock, but wanted to make sure that you had no ojections first. DES(talk)02:57, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
I noticed you deleted the page for Ben Kirshner because of the concern that he is CEO of non-notable company. I just want to confirm you took into consideration that he is the CEO of Elite SEM and Coffeeforless.com. He is a well known business man and part of a few company boards, organizations etc. The article page I believe was flagged for deletion because the company page (Elite SEM) on Wikipedia page had issues. There was a large discussion taking place on the Talk section for both pages with many other users discussing this. I would ask that you please reconsider and undelete the page. I can help improve the article as well.
Hey, is here any sort of way we can have a consensus or a discussion on getting the Nakia Burrise and Karan Ashley articles back? They were deleted as they didn't fall under Wikipedia guidelines, but I disagree. They are both very notable actresses. Boaxy (talk) 23:35, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
Boaxy, if you provide the specific titles of the article(s) they may be undeleted in accordance with the PROD policy. Of course if the articles are not brought up to standards they still could be deleted via another process so I encourage improvement if you do want the article(s) restored. Regards, Rjd0060 (talk) 12:48, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Some topics are best hived off to 'a suitably themed wiki' as too obscure for WP - and it was just in case there was an easy way of finding the material. Jackiespeel (talk) 21:48, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
Information and articles on Michael Turner were hard to find but he was consistently in British Film and Television. As he wasn't generally a principal actor, I think jobbing actor is the term, he would probably remain one of those actors whom you had seen but couldn't always name. A reliable source IMDb was used and listed his appearances over 47 years. It does seem a shame to have deleted his entry, but as there seems to be little information on his personal life it may not have made for an informative article. Similar actors appear in a BlogSpot named familiar-unknown. Stedbeat (talk) 10:15, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
Thank you Rjd0060 I tend to suggest what I feel are neglected articles from time to time, I like to put them to the test to see if anyone else has any information. It was particularly time consuming for me, even to get it to the stub stage, so I'm glad to see you have restored it. Stedbeat (talk) 12:31, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
Monte Carlo Machine Learning Library Page
The page was deleted in May for some reason which is unclear to me. I am the creator of the page as well as the library, which is hosted still on Sourceforge. Can you please
restore it? And also, maybe even tell me why you deleted it in the first place? Maybe someone changed the links? Thx (i dont remember my username, i will add it later...) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.91.233.85 (talk) 22:05, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
Oni73 (talk) 05:51, 20 July 2015 (UTC)The former comment was added by me, now i have an account :)
Please re-read the entire log entry message at this location, Oni73. Next to my username which you must have clicked it clearly explains the reasons it was deleted. Note that if you request undeletion in accordance with the proposed deletion policy if you do not work on improving the article then it could be deleted again. Rjd0060 (talk) 12:46, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
Josh Charles (musician)
Why was Josh Charles deleted ? he has been featured in numerous national publications, tv shows, and is an active producer and well-known songwriter and keyboard player.
I just found out today that my wikipedia page (David Allen (Game Designer)) was deleted in April of this year. I found this out today by tracing a link from one of the games I've created listed on Wikipedia. I am David Allen (the game designer), and I would appreciate it if my page is restored. My username is Requnix
The original page is/was: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Allen_(game_designer)
Requnix, I've restored the article. Also, please sign your talk page posts by leaving four tildes (~~~~) so that they are identifiable to you and timestamped. Thank you. Rjd0060 (talk) 04:54, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
Obviously because of repeated vandalism as seen in the reason for protection. Dakar (talk) 02:17, 1 August 2015 (UTC) There was no vandalism all info was cited with resources. Just because you dont like them dosent mean their accolades cant be added. I thought the whole concept is adding different opinions to the page, regardless of personal beliefs. Ive been polite and resonable, but the fact that any positive info aim
dded
concerning them is deleted is ridiculous.I IM
I protected it in accordance with the protection policy as it was subject to constant disruptive editing. Rjd0060 (talk) 23:54, 1 August 2015 (UTC) Im aware sir, but that does not fall on me. That is purely because everytime i put info someone would delete it making me have to retype it again and again.
Hello Rjd0060. Please, can you undelete article about Slovak footballer Michal Jakubek, he made his debut for MFK Skalica against FK Senica on 2 August 2015. source:[118], Thank you in advance IQual (talk) 10:11, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
I've restored the article, IQual. I encourage you to work on improving the aspects of the article that led to its deletion otherwise it could end up being deleted again. Rjd0060 (talk) 20:50, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Mike Nawrocki. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Stifle (talk) 09:20, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of World Film Magic. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Please reinstall page for World Film Magic, there are more references that can be added. Thank You Sysytom59 (talk) 02:49, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
Please thoroughly review the Proposed Deletion policy, specifically the section regarding undeletion requests if you would like the article undeleted, that is not an issue and there is no need for a deletion review.
If the article is restored it need to be brought up to Wikipedia's qualify standards otherwise it could be deleted again via another process is unlikely to be reversed. Rjd0060 (talk) 02:38, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
The oage indicates that you deleted the page because of notability. Let me point out that Nupur has fought two elections, one which she won, and the other which she contested against the Chief Minister of Delhi Arvind Kejriwal. She is an author, lawyer, youth leader and one of the youngest leaders of the ruling party. Please do reinstate the page. happy to provide you content to back everything of what I have said
User: rajneilkamath — Preceding undated comment added 17:17, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
To RJD0060,
Hello!
As far as we know it shows that you deleted the page "Nupur Sharma" on 31st July 2015 at 17:56 pm. The reasons that you've mentioned for deletion of the page are incorrect which are -
1. She has fought 2 elections and not just one. First was the DUSU election in 2008 and won the position of the president of Delhi University. She fought her second election in January (Vidhansabha 2015) against the chief minister of Delhi and gave him a tough fight.
2. Talking of "no notability " - we have been going through several Wikipedia pages of people/personalities we've hardly heard of /seen - extinct in the world of media (I can share some examples if you ask for some)
3. To use the word Unsuccessful is easy but to justify it is a task. How can a woman who at the age of 30 has recently fought an election against the chief minister of Delhi cannot be successful? Somebody who we keep watching on almost all news channels all day long - how can she be unsuccessful and have no notability. So if you say that by loosing the Vidhansabha election against Kejriwal by a very small margin is unsuccessful then what do you call winning the DUSU elections in 2008? Let's be very clear on what we are trying to proove. A lawyer by profession, a columnist and a young leader of the BJP definitely is famous, active and successful.
Please do reinstate the page. We will be happy to provide you with the correct content/information as and when required.
The deletion log lists the reason as a lack of multiple reliable sources. There are a few I have found already - two credible news sources and a video interview - which contradict this. The production company haven't had any involvement with the page since its creation where multiple authors - apparently not just people connected to the film - have contributed. The Wiki page for this film acts to educate people on what is achievable through determination and how money doesn't always dictate a project's success. The page also conveniently aggregate all of the key information from articles written on the film so far onto a well presented, extremely familiar format for people across the globe.
By reinstating it you will help lots of young people achieve recognition for their work and start their careers.
I hope you don't mind me contacting you but I believe this is a really worthwhile cause. I contributed to this project on the Kickstarter early last year but am not directly connected with the film or its creators, for your reference.
Hello Rjd0060, could you please undelete the RealDownloader page? I wasn't aware the page was under review until today that I realized that RealDownloader, which I have been using for a while, appears to not be included in the newest release of Real networks with Windows 10 (not sure about previous versions of Windows). RealDownloader is, or maybe was, a very reliable video downloader utility supporting different video formats. Along with RealDownloader RealPlayer Converter and RealPlayer Trimmer were also installed... an edit that I'll make next to the RealNetworks page ;)
I never read the deleted article so not sure what I would find there but I was looking for the current state of the RealDownloader product, wheather it works with Windows 10 with which browsers and whether it is included with the new RealNetworks media player so I could decide to upgrade or not. The RealNetworks website does not talk about it at all.
Hello Rjd0060, I just found out a Page I had started long back has been deleted. I wasn't aware the page was under review until today. Can you please undelete it? The page is Prakash Belawadi. If there is an issue with the content added to this wiki page, let me review and correct it. Hope it can be reinstated. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Desi~enwiki (talk • contribs) 10:59, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello Rjd0060, I just found out that Kalkitech Page has been deleted. I wasn't aware the page was under review until today. Kalkitech is a 16 year old company and doing great work in utility communication standardization in India. I am not sure what Wikipedia guidelines for notability is, but i do believe if a page has been there for many many years, i do believe it has survived the test of time and one fine morning, it getting deleted is not correct or good. If it is not fit, it should have been taken out long long ago. Would appreciate if you can you please undelete it? . I forgot my wikipedia login and hence signing in as guest115.119.161.30 (talk) 11:16, 12 August 2015 (UTC) Prasanth
I will undelete it if you realize that the policy hasn't changed, as you implied. It was nominated for deletion and nobody objected for 7 days. Rjd0060 (talk) 12:30, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
Kvng, The entire first paragraph was a near exact copy from another site, which was posted long before the article was created. It was added by 203.35.82.168 on 2014 JAN 30. The content was taken from Techtarget and we were contacted to removed it - which is what is contained in the ticket that you do not have access to, as it is restricted to proper OTRS agents. Anything else I can do for you? Rjd0060 (talk) Rjd0060 (talk) 12:57, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
I need you to restore one more power ranger actor who you deleted as you assumed that was his only notability. Kevin Duhaney, is also an established cartoon and animation voice over artist, been in many disney channel shows, and also is a musician with music on youtube. So he has not only just done Power Rangers. So please restore his page like you did with the other two, thank you. This is also the last one it should be. Boaxy (talk) 08:10, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
Boaxy, well what I need is for you to refactor your request with a complete list of articles you'd like restored. Furthermore, I don't appreciate your comment that "[I] assumed". For your information, the proposed deletion policy takes the decision making away from the administrator who deletes the article. It was nominated by a user, remained pending for a deletion without a single objection for 7 days, and I simply came along and deleted it. In fact, I likely didn't even read the article. Remember that assumptions are dangerous. Regards, Rjd0060 (talk) 12:42, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
As I mentioned before, this is the last article. I originally meant to conclude it in the first request. I apologize for my attitude. I just saw your reason for deletion was non notability outside of power rangers. I would agree if he didn't have nobility outside of that, but he does. Boaxy (talk) 12:45, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
So yes again this is the final article, I took the time to make sure, there should be no further inquiries about this issue.
Hello Rjd0060 I noticed that CEVA logistics page has been deleted. The reason for deletion that was mentioned was: Fails notability requirements per WP:CORP). Can you undelete the page. CEVA is one of the largest logistics companies in the world and as such notable enough to have an article on wikipedia.
Thank you.
Pemberly (talk) 08:37, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Pemberly, I'm afraid you are not realizing one of the core principles of Wikipedia and that is articles should contain verifiable material rather than the alleged "truth". Please click edit here on this section and read the information contained in the grey box ("If you are here...") and reply back if you would still like the article to be restored. Thank you. Rjd0060 (talk) 12:51, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Margaret Sanger
I'd love to know how you hope this will play out. The page has been something of a hotbed since the start of the latest assault on Planned Parenthood funding in July, and certainly we can expect that to continue through the anticipated Fall Congressional session, and perhaps into winter’s GOP primary season. If the problems cannot simply be made to go away, it might be better to deal with them sooner rather than later -- both because long wrangles are bad for volunteers, and more pressingly because this might well come ripe just as Arbcom gets finished with Shabbazz/Israel-Palestine. With continuing attention on Gender Gap and Gamergate at Wikipedia, a blowup here won't be good for the project.
But you do have some advantages. It might not be obvious, but Margaret Sanger falls under Gamergate as a gender-related dispute: if Lena Dunham’s sister does (and we have an ARCA ruling on that), certainly Sanger does. The 30 day/500 edit rule in place at Gamergate won't solve all the problems, but may make life easier. MarkBernstein (talk) 21:33, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
MarkBernstein, duly noted however as I noted I chose not to block you all for the reason that there are other things you can contribute to if you don't want to discuss and reach some sort of agreement. And to be honest your account stands out the most when looking at the reversions in the history. So back to your initial comment about my thoughts on how it will play out: my only interest was to cease the current edit warring and disruption. I've done so. Rjd0060 (talk) 21:37, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
sorry you think so. I'm not entirely sure, strictly speaking, that I've proposed a single revert on that page. I did do quite a bit of line editing today-- something in whichI have some professional background, incidentally, and which the article sorely needs. But if you really think that's unwelcome, well, good luck with the project while it lasts. MarkBernstein (talk) 00:58, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
Request to undelete Ameriprise Auto & Home Insurance
Hello Rjd0060. I understand the reason for deletion. We would like to work to improve the article, to meet the Wikipedia quality standards for Wikipedia. Would it be possible for you to undelete it, so that we may work on it. Also, can you point me to a resource that explains a period of time by which we need to make updates? I want to be sure we are working within the Wikipedia guidelines. Thank you, in advance, for your assistance.
LeahVanRooy (talk) 20:43, 23 August 2015 (UTC)Leah Van Rooy
LeahVanRooy, I've restored the article. There is no time limit for improvement - it's a matter of an editor finding and creating a discussion for deletion. Those discussions take about a week - during which time you are free to work on the article. If people see an improvement is begin made, chances are they will work with you. Rjd0060 (talk) 21:04, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
Micheline Montreuil
If I indef'd it for an extended period, it was strictly an accidental selection of the wrong item from the drop-down menu of time options. I certainly didn't intend to protect it for anything more than the minimum amount of time necessary (i.e. 3 hours, the smallest block of time possible) to ensure that I'd have the time to explain to Ms. Montreuil why I had made the changes to her version that she was re-reverting — if I did select anything other than 3 hours, it was a pure accident and not at all what I was trying to do. Bearcat (talk) 20:46, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
No, I haven't visited the wiki since you left both messages. Note that people are not required to notify you but are encouraged to do so as a courtesy. Additionally, you could request undeletion elsewhere if we're not around. Anyways, I've restored it. Rjd0060 (talk) 02:40, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Yeah I understand all that it's common courtesy though at least on articles. Content creators should be respected to to fix the work. All that being said would you mind re-deleting it I reviewed it and did quite a bit of searching and the nominator was correct in their assessment, so while I'm irritated with how they did it ultimately I agree with the rationale at this point. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 04:07, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Undeletion of PreScouter
Hi Rjdoo600, Could you undelete the page PreScouter, it is an information-services company based in Evanston that has over 260 clients in the Fortune 500. Find more information at www.prescouter.com or www.prescouter.org
Spiderone, that is not really prohibited - they are simlpy objecting to the deletion, clearly. I see there is now an AfD discussion so that will be the best way to go forward. Rjd0060 (talk) 12:33, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello Rjd0060, could you please undelete the RealDownloader page? I wasn't aware the page was under review until today that I realized that RealDownloader, which I have been using for a while, appears to not be included in the newest release of Real networks with Windows 10 (not sure about previous versions of Windows). RealDownloader is, or maybe was, a very reliable video downloader utility supporting different video formats. Along with RealDownloader RealPlayer Converter and RealPlayer Trimmer were also installed... an edit that I'll make next to the RealNetworks page ;)
I never read the deleted article so not sure what I would find there but I was looking for the current state of the RealDownloader product, wheather it works with Windows 10 with which browsers and whether it is included with the new RealNetworks media player so I could decide to upgrade or not. The RealNetworks website does not talk about it at all.
Hello Rjd0060, I just found out a Page I had started long back has been deleted. I wasn't aware the page was under review until today. Can you please undelete it? The page is Prakash Belawadi. If there is an issue with the content added to this wiki page, let me review and correct it. Hope it can be reinstated. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Desi~enwiki (talk • contribs) 10:59, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello Rjd0060, I just found out that Kalkitech Page has been deleted. I wasn't aware the page was under review until today. Kalkitech is a 16 year old company and doing great work in utility communication standardization in India. I am not sure what Wikipedia guidelines for notability is, but i do believe if a page has been there for many many years, i do believe it has survived the test of time and one fine morning, it getting deleted is not correct or good. If it is not fit, it should have been taken out long long ago. Would appreciate if you can you please undelete it? . I forgot my wikipedia login and hence signing in as guest115.119.161.30 (talk) 11:16, 12 August 2015 (UTC) Prasanth
I will undelete it if you realize that the policy hasn't changed, as you implied. It was nominated for deletion and nobody objected for 7 days. Rjd0060 (talk) 12:30, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
Kvng, The entire first paragraph was a near exact copy from another site, which was posted long before the article was created. It was added by 203.35.82.168 on 2014 JAN 30. The content was taken from Techtarget and we were contacted to removed it - which is what is contained in the ticket that you do not have access to, as it is restricted to proper OTRS agents. Anything else I can do for you? Rjd0060 (talk) Rjd0060 (talk) 12:57, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
I need you to restore one more power ranger actor who you deleted as you assumed that was his only notability. Kevin Duhaney, is also an established cartoon and animation voice over artist, been in many disney channel shows, and also is a musician with music on youtube. So he has not only just done Power Rangers. So please restore his page like you did with the other two, thank you. This is also the last one it should be. Boaxy (talk) 08:10, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
Boaxy, well what I need is for you to refactor your request with a complete list of articles you'd like restored. Furthermore, I don't appreciate your comment that "[I] assumed". For your information, the proposed deletion policy takes the decision making away from the administrator who deletes the article. It was nominated by a user, remained pending for a deletion without a single objection for 7 days, and I simply came along and deleted it. In fact, I likely didn't even read the article. Remember that assumptions are dangerous. Regards, Rjd0060 (talk) 12:42, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
As I mentioned before, this is the last article. I originally meant to conclude it in the first request. I apologize for my attitude. I just saw your reason for deletion was non notability outside of power rangers. I would agree if he didn't have nobility outside of that, but he does. Boaxy (talk) 12:45, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
So yes again this is the final article, I took the time to make sure, there should be no further inquiries about this issue.
Hey, I see that the previous message regarding the reversal of deletion of this page was removed without any further response. Just making sure you didn't accidentally overlook it. Thanks for any help. Schitzophonic 23:54, 15 September 2015 (BST) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Schitzophonic (talk • contribs)
Hello Rjd0060 I noticed that CEVA logistics page has been deleted. The reason for deletion that was mentioned was: Fails notability requirements per WP:CORP). Can you undelete the page. CEVA is one of the largest logistics companies in the world and as such notable enough to have an article on wikipedia.
Thank you.
Pemberly (talk) 08:37, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Pemberly, I'm afraid you are not realizing one of the core principles of Wikipedia and that is articles should contain verifiable material rather than the alleged "truth". Please click edit here on this section and read the information contained in the grey box ("If you are here...") and reply back if you would still like the article to be restored. Thank you. Rjd0060 (talk) 12:51, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello :Rjd0060, I was not aware of any unverifiable materials on the CEVA Logistics page. Information included there was possible to look up in third party online publications as well as in CEVA's Annual reports. Anyhow I can review the article and remove what may be considered unverifiable material or include sources. Indeed, I would like the article to be restored. Thank you. Pemberly (talk) 15:48, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi. I found the Fielded text article well written and not a copy of CSV. (I am not the author). Actually I studied the topic and features explained at [119] are true extension of what CSV offer. The author provided reference and I'd also add [120] for example. I'll think about improving the article as a result of my small research and I hope this can be enough to for undeletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jstaniek (talk • contribs) 14:27, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
I don't know why you deleted this article about a very important Afghan figure. [121][122] I read your reasons but the article should have been re-written or something and not deleted. Just type his name "Mahmud Tarzi" in google search, such person MUST have a Wikipedia article. Can you undelete it please?--Krzyhorse22 (talk) 22:24, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello User:Krzyhorse22. The proposed deletion policy doesn't require the administrator to rewrite an article. As you claimed to have read the comments, you should know that I personally have no opinion on the article content, subject nor anything else. My only interest was the fact that it was proposed for deletion by one user, and that proposal went unobjected for 1 week. Rjd0060 (talk) 01:07, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi there! I see you have deleted an article of this name in 2008. Is it possible if I take a look at the deleted article please? I would like to work on it as it is of historical significance to the local Christian community in Singapore. It is notable.
Please restore NewsBank -- it is most obviously a very notable archival news database service available at hundreds of libraries around the world -- akin to LexisNexis.
Further, the cites had lots of incoming links to the article as a way of helpful verification for the reader.
If need be, I'll work on it to ensure the article is properly cited.
After all, I see it was just a Prod and not AFD. If someone wants, after my quality improvement work is done, they can then try AFD.
Could you please restore the prior article history, its prior talk page history, and any redirects you may have deleted that were incoming to that page? Thank you, — Cirt (talk) 23:55, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
You can give me a list of pages to restore and I can restore them. Otherwise you can recreate redirects. I have restored the article history and the talk page history per your request. Rjd0060 (talk) 00:58, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
Is there a way to see which pages were the ones you'd deleted that were redirects? I'll try to find those and redirect them back. Thank you so much for your help, most appreciated !! :) — Cirt (talk) 01:35, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi! I see that you've deleted the article for Toma Bašić because of an expired PROD - ironically, that had happened on the exact day he became eligible for an article, having made his debut in a fully pro league ( Prva HNL ). His debut on 10 August 2015 can be verified on multiple websites (Soccerway for example). If it's possible please return the article, and I'll update it. Thanks!
Zlopseto (talk) 23:05, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi, RxPG is quite a popular website with over 500K users and is the largest and active medical forum in India. I was shocked to see the page missing and also wasn't able to find the discussion on proposed deletion list. Kindly help me to recreate the article. Thanks. --Pearll's SunTALK19:01, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
The reason it was deleted is explained very clearly in the orange box visible at the top of this page when you try to edit it, and in the deletion log where the article used to be - which you visited because that's how you found your way here. 01:01, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks so much for your reply. While i added a comment on your talk page the "show" option didn't work as expected (could have been a browser issue) so had requested details here. I have posted a request on the "Un-deletion" request page as per your suggestion. Hope the article would be restored so i can work on the same to improve it as per wiki standards. Thanks. --Pearll's SunTALK03:52, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
I request the undeletion of the article on actress 'Annie Wallace'. Over the past week she has received a significant amount of press as being the first trans actress to play a trans character on a British soap opera, namely 'Hollyoaks', and will appear in the show later this month. There are now numerous links on legitimate press sources.
This is practically a companion piece to the actor Riley Carter Millington, who HAS a page now, and whose announcement to the press occurred around the same time.
If the group was "clearly" notable it would be indicated in the article, which it is not. That's why it was deleted in the first place. I've restored it and now you should work on it to avoid another deletion. Regards, Rjd0060 (talk) 18:37, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the undelete. As per notability, being a military organization with US govt support would qualify for notability. --Soman (talk) 20:26, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Rjd0060,
I don't think we have crossed paths before. I was just looking at the deletion log and noticed that somehow you deleted dozens of CSDs and Expired PRODs in the same minute. I know how that action is done if it is a mass revert of a banned users edits. But how to you simultaneously delete so many pages from different editors all at the same time? Is it a script of some kind? Thanks for any answer you can provide. LizRead!Talk!22:35, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
Liz, the deletions were all related to the proposed deletion policy. The CSDs were simply a result of the deleted PROD article. But to answer your question, the deletions are assisted by Twinkle. The process that I use when deleting these articles is ensuring that the PROD tag remained in place for an uninterrupted required pending period and that there were no previous deletions. If those conditions are met, the articles are eligible for deletion and deleted. Any talk pages and redirects are also deleted in accordance with the deletion policy. If you have any other questions feel free to ask. Rjd0060 (talk) 02:51, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
07:55, 2 October 2015 Rjd0060 (talk | contribs) deleted page Appknox (Expired PROD, concern was: WP:PROMO, WP:TOOSOON article about a non-notable one year old startup, created by undisclosed paid editor.)
Which is not true at all. Regarding WP:PROMO the article was written in neutral stand-point. I would like to contribute and make sure, I can edit it properly and make the language more Neutral.
Regarding WP:TOOSOON is not applicable, since we are a funded start-up and we are already 1.65 years old. I don't see a clause which talks about a requirement for having an Article entry.
If you can un-delete the article, I can start working on it, and try to make the article better with a neutral standpoint and make sure, it doesn't falls under the WP:PROMO category.
Hi. I request the un-deletion of the article on UGallery. Writers in the interior design and tech industries are covering UGallery and its role in the growing online art market.
Request for information for deletion of SmartFocus page
Hi,
My Smartfocus page was deleted due to the coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline.
How can i find out which coverage it was within the page that wasn't justified enough?
I am unable to now view the page to justify any articles further, and we believe the page was reported by a disgruntled ex-employee of ours.
Can you please suggest how i move forward with this, as we would love to get the page back up and running.
I have deleted or made changes to some of the content that sounded like an advertisment, as this was stated as being the problem i believe. I have also add more / different references to justify what has been said.
Is there still a cause for concern for the page to be removed? Or can the page remain up now?
Further to my previous comment, can you confirm if the SmartFocus page is now within the Wikipedia guidelines, or if there is still a cause for concern?
I believe the changes i made have improved the page as to make it not sound like an advertisment and have justified the articles further by adding more relevant links.
Gary Carswell Deleted article at 00:48, 7 July 2015
This article was deleted at 00:48, 7 July 2015. Please could you confirm that this is an article about Gary Carswell a motor-cycle racer that died in an accident on the 11th April 2015 and the name of the editor that made the deletion request. The article has notability to the Isle of Man TT motor-cycle network of articles as a former Isle of Man TT competitor. I can expand the article and provide notability. Thanks ! agljones(talk)21:56, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello agljones. The subject of the deleted article is indeed the one you reference. It was a three-sentence stub. If you'd like to expand it I can restore the article. And lastly, it was nominated for deletion (via PROD) by Rocknrollmancer. Rjd0060 (talk) 23:32, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi. You semi-protected the subject article at 23:42, 21 March 2012 for three days due to "Persistent vandalism / BLP issues". Those issues appear to have arisen again, as the last six edits of this GA by IP addresses were unsourced. Please consider protecting it for a longer period. Thank you. — Jeff G. ツ(talk)23:41, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
Kindly undelete the article Magnolia (CMS). The article was deleted with the reason "Expired PROD", citing insufficient references per Wikipedia:Notability_(software) guidelines. I would like to attempt to revise the article to better meet the notability guidelines and provide more reliable references. Thank you, Ahietala
Hi Ahietala. I've restored it. It actually shouldn't have been deleted in the first place since it was deleted via PROD once previously. My mistake. Thanks for the note! Rjd0060 (talk) 21:40, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
Request for undeletion: List of The Sword of Truth characters
Can you please undelete List of The Sword of Truth characters? There are 17 books in the series, they have sold millions worldwide, and the TV series lasted for 2 seasons. While it does need to be improved, it should not be deleted. At the most, it should be merged to The Sword of Truth, but honestly I don't see how you could fit everyone on that page, even if you only include characters that appear in multiple books because there are a lot of them. JDDJS (talk) 15:03, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
In addition to what JDDJS stated, I came here to ask why you felt the article needed deletion per WP:G8. I also thought about asking Sandstein why he felt the need to tag the article for deletion when he is aware that such articles exist for every type of television show; for example, Sandstein and I are fans of the Game of Thrones series, but I don't see that he tagged the List of A Song of Ice and Fire characters and List of Game of Thrones characters articles, which are not much better than the List of The Sword of Truth characters article, for deletion. Yes, I'm invoking WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. I didn't notice until yesterday that Sandstein had prodded the article for deletion. I didn't think it would be deleted just like that, which is why I didn't address the matter on the article talk page. There are interviews given by the portrayers of the Legend of the Seeker characters, and that is just one way that the List of The Sword of Truth characters article can be fixed up. I suggest WP:Userfying the article in my userspace until it is further fixed up. JDDJS and others are more than welcomed to work on the article that way. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 18:43, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
My company, Sematext, is a legitimate IT consulting and software firm that has been in business for 5+ years. We have clients like Salesforce, Walmart, Thomson Reuters, Microsoft, and many others. Please check out site to see for yourself: https://sematext.com/
Several months ago our Wikipedia entry was deleted with the reason given as: "Advert for unnotable entity." With a customer list like we have, it is very far from being unnotable. Although we are a small company we are certainly legitimate. Can you please reinstate us soon, as we have some partnerships to be announced with larger companies this month and in 2016, and it looks odd to not even have a Wikipedia entry.
You can contact me directly with any questions: mick.emmett@sematext.com
May I ask why you have deleted the page "List of obfuscators for .NET"? I can't see any reason for this in the talk page. LonelyPixel (talk) 14:28, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
Please undelete the Jonathan Wutawunashe article. The person appears to have been a notable musician that is credited with reviving a genre (gospel music), is widely known in Zimbabwe, and is currently an ambassador. Thanks. Greenman (talk) 22:31, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
Our company, PixelMEDIA, is a legitimate, Web Development Agency that has been in business for ~22 years. We have clients like US Bank, Stonyfield Farms, Vibram Shoe, Stonewall Kitchen and countless others. (Please see our site for verification: https://pixelmedia.com/)
While our Agency's rich history is not written on our site, we have clients across the world looking to learn this, and Wikipedia is where this ought to be taking place.
In November our Wikipedia entry was deleted with the reason given as: "not passing Notability guidelines." As one of the oldest media agencies in New England, and dozens of awards spanning decades, and With a customer list like our, it is very far from being unnotable as an online encyclopedia entry.
We did not receive notice of its nomination for deletion, in which case we would have surely intervened.
We're requesting reinstatement of our page as soon as possible -
You can contact me directly with any questions: jremmes@pixelmedia.com
Resolved
But a little angel came along and fixed it! 
Thank you! You can thank others by using {{subst:Vangel}}! Marlith T/C 05:23, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Marlith T/C 05:23, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
RFA thanks 
:.
This one is the golden one and not the red no sign. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 22:26, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
"The bad news is time flies. The good news is you're the pilot." - Michael Althsuler 
Fixed. - Rjd0060 (talk) 16:26, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
нмŵוτнτ 15:32, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
. --Realist2 ('Come Speak To Me') 03:02, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
—Animum (talk) 22:39, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
Fixed —Animum (talk) 23:14, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
—Animum (talk) 01:56, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
.svg){kind=logo}
Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit that you made has been reverted or removed because it was a misuse of a warning or blocking template. Please use the sandbox for any tests you may want to do, or take a look at our introduction page to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia. Thank you. MUAHHHHHHHHHHHHHH! :) NonvocalScream (talk) 21:36, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
Done by stifle. MBisanz talk 15:48, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
Restored per PROD. MBisanz talk 18:06, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts.
Thanks for uploading File:Malaysia Airlines logo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
reverse.jpg){kind=link}
![[73]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Shane62.jpg){kind=link}
![[75]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_talk:Shane62.jpg){kind=link}
){kind=link}
