Jump to content

User talk:Salvidrim!/Q2 2015 Archive

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 Archives

 2011 - Q3–Q4
 2012 - Q1 · Q2 · Q3 · Q4 
 2013 - Q1 · Q2 · Q3 · Q4 
 2014 - Q1 · Q2 · Q3 · Q4 
 2015 - Q1 · Q2 · Q3 · Q4 
 2016 - Q1 · Q2 · Q3 · Q4 
 2017 - Q1 · Q2 · Q3 · Q4 
 2018 - Q1 · Q2 · Q3 · Q4 
 2019 - Q1 · Q2 · Q3 · Q4 
 2020 - Q1 · Q2 · Q3 · Q4 
 2021 - Q1 · Q2 · Q3–Q4
 2022 - Q1–Q4
 2023 - Q1–Q4
 2024 - Q1–Q4

List of burn centers in the Kanto Region listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect List of burn centers in the Kanto Region. Since you had some involvement with the List of burn centers in the Kanto Region redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Clarinetguy097 (talk) 23:39, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q1 2015

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter
Volume 8, No. 1 — 1st Quarter, 2015
Previous issue | Index | Next issue

Project At a Glance
As of Q1 2015, the project has:

Content

Project Navigation
To receive future editions of this newsletter, click here to sign up on the distribution list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:46, 1 April 2015 (UTC)


You ever regret making a certain article?

'Cause I do, haha! I almost regret being on the opposite end of that debate over Muslim Massacre with MickMacNee, though for different reasons than he has. I regret that I boosted the creator's ego definitely, and propagating offensive stuff. Being an objectivist is an unfortunate thing. :v - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 10:55, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

  • I haven't had the opportunity to regret any article creation (yet!), but I can definitely empathize! For what's it's worth, I think that specific article has enough reason to exist. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 13:17, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

I believe my Article was notable enough this time

Hello. I believe my Article was notable enough this time however it is deleted without giving me any satisfactory explanation. The procedure i have followed: Make draft, join chat and spend 1 whole day to edit and compose excellent article based on suggestion and edits by experts at the chat, submit draft, draft accepted, draft reviewed and edited by WikiProject_Video_games editor and completely published. Then i ask chat again about isn’t this too much edit? then primefac opens speedy delete then it is deleted without giving me any explanation in matter of minutes. If you check the issue i appreciate ty very much : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MonsterMMORPG . And there were not any discussion it was deleted immediately. One more notice: I checked same genre games articles and majority of them have way more less authority references and even some have 0 references. Thank you very much for your help. OnlineGamesExpert (talk) 12:38, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

  • You've been blocked for harassing (meaning: mass-posting on various uninvolved admins' talk pages) as well as e-mailing them (you e-mailed me, I can't be the only one), as well as displaying a generally combative attitude towards Bbb23. Nonetheless, I think the article needs to be judged on its own merits (and not on who wrote it), and I find that the latest revision has vastly different sourcing that the version AfD's three years ago, which (IMO) makes it inelegible for G4 deletion "per previous discussion". I have restored it (and it will surely shortly be sent to a new AfD, where it may or may not be deleted again). ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 18:00, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Invitation

I'd like to invite you to join the WikiProject R&B and Soul Music. We are currently on demand for new members, the project was dying, but with your help we can revive it and make it one of the best WikiProjects. Make me sure that you'll think about this and remember cooperative works can do amazing things. Regards Dfrr (talk) 20:01, 13 April 2015 (UTC)


Saw your note

I saw your note on ANI regarding my filing. I did shorten it up, however, that really was a summary , but I understand what you mean. Thank you. KoshVorlon R.I.P Leonard Nimoy "Live Long and Prosper" 18:22, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

  • Np. I know some cases are really hard to fully present without long texts but I'm just trying to provide guidance in how to maximize success at AN. :) ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 18:52, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

In Re

In re this: I'm no longer active on WP but still read it. I abided by the IBAN and TBAN (in place since Feb 2013) while still editing and, if I return, have zero interest in appealing either. And I have no objections to your proposed re-wording of the entry at WP: EDR. But "fabrication" is offensive and inaccurate, particularly two years on without incident.Tristan noir (talk) 16:42, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Yea, I don't particularly enjoy the implications behind the chosen verb either. I'll look for alternatives. :) ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 16:46, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the prompt reply. Your proposed "initiated" seems fair enough and removes the black brush and tar.Tristan noir (talk) 16:52, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Draft:David D. Demarest concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:David D. Demarest, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:32, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Thomas Anderson concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Thomas Anderson, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:37, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Notice

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Issues_at_Rgloucester.27s_talk_page. Thank you. Tutelary (talk) 21:19, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Society of Mechanical Engineers

Hi! The article Society of Mechanical Engineers was previously created by Vigneshwar29395, and than speedily deleted. It is now recreated by Vicky29395. I would like to ask you to compare the deleted version and the new version, to see if they are too similar. I'm suspecting that those two accounts are the same person. Vanjagenije (talk) 11:03, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

The deleted revisions are actually just an infobox. Comparing the deleted revision to the first recreation revision: both are just infoboxes, but (surprisingly) the recreation has different wordings and different data when compared to the originally deleted revision. However, even that can't balance the username similarities and the fact both recreated the same title -- in my mind, it's clear they are the same person. Neither is blocked and there is no overlap first account stopped in May 2013, then second account used one day in August 2014, then came back to first account in 2015) so I'm not sure if there is any action to take, we might be better off warning about content. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 13:39, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. Are you going to warn the user? Vanjagenije (talk) 14:24, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Ted Yoder

Hello, Salvidrim!. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Ted Yoder".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by one of two methods (don't do both): 1) follow the instructions at WP:REFUND/G13, or 2) copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Draft:Ted Yoder}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, and click "Save page". An administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 15:33, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank You!!

I've been having are hard time trying to explain to the i.p that it was stock sound effects. Isaac Marshall was never credited as Bowser, so I gave up after I reverted once in, can you help me explain to the i.p on Bowser's talk page please, I'm getting a little irritated repeating myself to the i.p, help would be appreciated. --Vaati the Wind Demon (talk) 21:41, 29 April 2015 (UTC)


Scan req

Hey Sal—any chance I could get a scan of the Yoshi's Island playback in Nintendo Power #273, November 2011? czar ⨹ 00:23, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Sure, I'll try to get this for ya yesterday! ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 00:58, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
I have it with me, I'll get scans in a couple of hours. Czar, do you prefer sending me an e-mail I can reply to, or do you want me to upload the pages on Imgur? ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 16:08, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
Whatever works for you (sent an email), but I prefer Dropbox/download links over attachments. Thanks! czar ⨹ 17:11, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Re: the Mario project, are you into any of those five? How about any of the others? The five I listed at WTVG were the ones I thought would be closest to GA with just a bit of cleanup. I was planning to do SMB2 (since I have the sourcing from The Lost Levels research) and the three Land games next (most in need of a rewrite and I'd be starting from scratch anyway) but I don't know what best suits your style. What would you like? czar ⨹ 03:03, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
  • I've never been a very good prose composer; even then, I'm better at de-stubifying small articles up to B or C than taking potable articles across the GA treshold. What articles exactly would you defined as part of the proposed GT's topic? ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 03:09, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
The Template:Mario franchise games listed under Super Mario series would be the GT scope, I think. It also will be easier to work on SML1 through 3 at once since the sources are going to overlap, but if you're excited about that one, go for it. Another option if you're into the source stuff would be helping me compile all the print coverage for those three and then I can handle the prose. (Though I think the only way to get better at it is indeed to try) czar ⨹ 13:29, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
Super Mario (series) will be one helluva beast too! I've always been more of a copyeditor/wikifier than a writer, but I guess if I'm gonna pull my weight around here I have to get down and dirty sometimes. :p ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 14:21, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Here's the full translation:
The friend of kids is back... on Game boy!

Mario, worlwide star of video gaming, cherished child of Nintendo, discovers with joy a new playground: the Game Boy.
Mario goes to rescue Princess Daisy, held captive by the infamous Tatanga. This adventure of our favorite plumber is specially designed for the Game Boy. As was the case in the first Super Mario game, numerous options are hidden in the background -- gold pieces, invincibility stars, and secret passages or shortcuts. From mushrooms to become Super Mario to flowers to make him ferocious, nothing is forgotten and our hero remains likeable.
On the graphics side, we can't expect miracles on a liquid crystal screen. However, the result is very fine, and the Mario Bros. universe is respected. The musique is sublime, different for each world, it's a blast in stereo. Super Mario Land is a masterpiece, as playable as on a normal console and with a practically unlimited lifetime. It takes its place as the pinnacle of portable video gaming. To be consumed via carry-out or on-the-spot...

The scores in the little red box: Graphics: 85% - Sound: 90% - Lifetime: 95% - Player fun (duh!): 100%.
Hope it helps! :) ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 03:54, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Somehow I had completely missed this message!! Sorry!
Super Marioland

Game Boy, Nintendo cartridge
Mario's new adventure starts in Egypt, where you explore a pyramid, and continues throughout the world. Every ingredient which made the success of this series is present in this version: bonuses, hidden rooms and secret passages. Nintendo's most famous hero had to be present for the Game Boy's launch. Most of the levels are inspired in great part from Super Mario Bros., but there are also interesting innovations such as shoot-'em-up sequences where Mario pilots an airplane or a submarine. This game draws us in immediately and once again, we are seduced by the flexibility and precision of the controls. Essential.

Author: Alain Huyghues-Lacour
Scores - Interest: 18 | Graphics: 5 stars | Animation: 5 stars | Sound: 4 stars | Price: B
Hope it helps, Czar! :) ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 19:05, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks! Really appreciate it. Would you have any ideas what the ratings are out of? Is there no cumulative assessment? I can't find a key for what interest or price means (I'm guessing it means what it implies directly to the reviewer). There's also a little white star next to the title—not sure if that signifies anything. The following review list had "avis" with quality words like bof/a connaitre/hit, which I translated as whatever/a must/a hit, but I didn't see anything like that in the previous section with actual reviews. czar ⨹ 20:13, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
There's no explicit explanation.
  • Interest seems to be out of 20
  • Stars seem to go from "-" (equivalent to N/A) to 6 stars but it's not mentioned if it's out of 6 or if it could go higher
  • Price seems to be A-B-C-D-E (assuming A is "better"), but it's not clear if it ranks Price or Price-in-relation-to-quality. Judging from Supertrux's short-form review, it's pretty likely Price by itself that is measured, because it says "it may be cheap, but IT SUCKS ASS", but still got an A for price.
  • The white star in the blue square does have an explanation: "The [star symbol] indicates that another version of this software was tested in a previous issues Hits column." -- I don't think there were any other versions of SML at that point, and in the review they refer to it as "this version", so they're probably referring to SMB as the "other version".
  • "Bof!" = Meh, whatever | "À connaître" = To discover | "HIT" = You take a guess! -- This table is basically a list of shorter reviews, with some comments on the right. Roughly analoguous to modern "drop, rent or buy" tags appended to some game reviews.
Lemme know if there's anything else! :) ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 23:13, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Forgot to ping you Czar, so dunno if you've seen my reply. :) ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 16:48, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Favourite Video Games

Hello, fellow Nintendo fan. How are you, sir? I just came by to ask your favourite (I am American, but I am using Canadian spelling here) video games. Mine include (but are not limited to) Super Mario Bros., Excitebike, Yoshi's Cookie, too many to name. I saw the trouble that some unregistered Wikipedian caused when he made up all those fake video game articles and templates. Some people never learn! Anyway, I won't bother you. Take care.—Bde1982 22:56, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

L235 has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can 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.

Wow, your work is severely underappreciated. My sincerest thanks for all of your work on WIkipedia :)

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

--L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 03:50, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

  • Hehe, thanks! I'm not sure that my work can really be called underappareciated -- most days I feel like I don't do much at all on here compared to others. :) ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 03:57, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks...

...for the update. BMK (talk) 15:12, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Believe me, this is something I wish I could've avoided by virtue of the thing not existing at all in the first place. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 16:59, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Me too. And thanks for the page protection and rev-del. I just about to post a request at RFPP. BMK (talk) 21:33, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
*shrugs* People suck. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 21:37, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
"I love humanity, it's people I can't stand." BMK (talk) 21:44, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Human interaction is a nice concept but in practice it's a goddamn mess. :) ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 21:56, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thank you for deleting the excess page that I accidentally made in my botched move out of draft space, haha. Sergecross73 msg me 15:51, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Pagemoves sometimes trip me up too, don't sweat it. :) ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 16:59, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

May I ask for assistance again?

I think it would be a good idea to semi my talk page. Thanks. BMK (talk) 23:27, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

I was just thinking the same. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 23:37, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks! BMK (talk) 23:44, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
(edit conflict)If BMK would behave, this action would not be required. 103.11.192.114 (talk) 23:42, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Whatever you say. :) ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 23:45, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
IP is an open proxy, per his statement here, and WP:Open proxy detection, so a block would seem to be in order. BMK (talk) 23:50, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks again. BMK (talk) 23:53, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

You're going to get awfully tired of hearing from me. Our friend just hit User:Beyond My Ken/thoughts. Could you protect it please? And if you have the time and inclination, perhaps you can just protect all the files in my userspace, there aren't many of them. I'd appreciate it. BMK (talk) 00:44, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

this should  do the trick. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 01:04, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Many thanks! BMK (talk) 01:48, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

45.55.180.126 is our guy as well. BMK (talk) 07:41, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

  • ...as you can tell from his puerile and adolescent edits on this page. Also 13.45.55.180.126 as well. Somehow Kumioko (for that is who this editor is) seems to think it's clever to be able to edit from numerous IPs. In reality, it's the kind of "cleverness" shown by those lacking in the ability to co-exist with other humans.We call these people "sociopaths", and we either pity them, or incarcerate them. BMK (talk) 07:50, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Mostly it's a feeling: I've been the target of attacks by Kumioko before, and these fit the profile - the technical abilility, the nature of the comments and edit summaries, the sociopathy of it all. True, Kumioko does have a tendency to brag about his "accomplishments", and this vandal has not, so far, done that explicitly. It is possible that it's not Kumioko? Sure, very possible, but that's how I feel it "in my bones". Mostly, though, it really doesn't matter. Kumioko's done this kind of thing and worse, so it's not as if I'm maligning him by ascribing the attacks to him. He's already banned, so there's no administrative purpose in investigating further to see if it is him or not. The open proxies get blocked because they're open proxies. So... until I see some evidence that convinces me otherwise, I'm going with my gut here. BMK (talk) 22:45, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
    • I understand that is your feeling based on your experience, but I'd hope that a little good faith could be extended to Kumioko because I've spent some time talking to him and working with him and I think that if people gave him a chance and were a little less discouraging to him then he could be a very productive editor to the project and he has the potential to be a net gain. I know he has made some mistakes and done some stupid stuff and whatnot, but I think if he could truly get a clean start with a good mentor, he'd be an asset. I understand if you're hesitant to give him the benefit of that doubt, and I know you've had your own share of disagreements as have I. I'd also like to see Δ possibly come back at some point, despite the fact that he can be very difficult for some editors to work with (because he communicates worse than I do, if that's even possible), but he makes a very good technical editor. Anyways, I guess my point is that despite being banned, we shouldn't pile on someone for something we have no evidence that they did because they may actually have learned their lesson and be trying to rehabilitate and get a clean start. :) — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 00:16, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
  • With respect, people have already tried that with Kumioko in a couple of places - not just here on Wikipedia. For whatever reason, he went off the rails and is now a completely unproductive editor for the most part. He starts off being productive, but quickly becomes bitter and it just deteriorates rapidly from there. Whilst I have no idea if this is Kumioko myself (I doubt they're the only banned editor with a grudge against BMK and Wikipedia in general), there is no question that whoever is behind these IP attacks needs to find something better to do. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 00:24, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

In case you were wondering, Kumioko's edits don't make me mad, they make me a little sad that an intelligent and resourceful person could descend so far as to think that replacing an editor's name with "Cunt" is something that anybody on Wikipedia would find of value. Here was a guy who was once a productive contributor who, through his own actions, has became a common, ordinary vandal - and not even an interesting one. I'm sure there are explanations for this in his real life, but I'm not going to go into that now. I suppose he's attempting to become "Wikipedia's greatest vandal", or something trivial like that, but what a disappointment.BMK (talk) 08:05, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Incidentally, after you read the previous two messages from me, feel free to revert back to a pervious version of the talk page if you'd rather not have it strewn with Kumioko's "cunt"s BMK (talk) 08:14, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Fucking hell... ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 16:07, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
I would blank it all but for the sake of clarity I prefer cleanup + revdel. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 16:23, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
That must have been a pain in the neck. BMK (talk) 21:29, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
I think you missed one - the edit summary at 03:52, 11 May 2015. BMK (talk) 22:54, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, I tried clearing as little as possible but missed this one. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 23:13, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Kumioko has just contacted me via IRC and asked me to pass on the message that the IP in question isn't him. The IP address he's using for IRC is currently blocked, and isn't the IP address in question here, beyond that, I can't confirm or deny the accuracy of his message. Nick (talk) 00:08, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

That's interesting, because just today I started having the sense that it wasn't him - a combination of the bland monotony of the edits, which is unlike Kumioko's style, and the fact that today's IP had made some article edits which didn't seem as if they were in K's wheelhouse. Since it doesn't really make much difference one way or the other -- the edits are what the edits are -- I plan to stop referring to the vandal as "Kumioko", barring some other evidence which would change my mind. @Nick:, if you want to pass that on to him, it's fine with me. BMK (talk) 00:16, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Returning sock

When you are online next can you take a look at Gdteda (talk · contribs), the latest sock of Adityashashtri? Thanks. Abecedare (talk) 15:42, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

 Done

Hey can you look at my talkpage history?

Need a NLT block on a sockpuppet account. see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Croonerman if you feel spi froggy but the legal threat is enough. I think this is the third version of this threat. It's also petty idea to look at the history and behavior of the master. Edit summaries are your friend lol. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 23:00, 11 May 2015 (UTC)


Your draft article, Draft:David D. Demarest

Hello, Salvidrim!. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "David D. Demarest".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by one of two methods (don't do both): 1) follow the instructions at WP:REFUND/G13, or 2) copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Draft:David D. Demarest}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, and click "Save page". An administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 18:02, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Thomas Anderson

Hello, Salvidrim!. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Thomas Anderson".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by one of two methods (don't do both): 1) follow the instructions at WP:REFUND/G13, or 2) copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Draft:Thomas Anderson}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, and click "Save page". An administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 22:01, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Carbon Casca

Who ever created this previous page wasn't professional, Carbon Casca is a Mosotho producer respected nationally in Lesotho so i dont understand why you deleted thepage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mohloboli (talk • contribs) 11:34, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Matt Furniss page, deleted?

Hi Salvidrim,

It was brought to my attention by one of my fans that the Wikipedia page about me was deleted.

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

Could you please restore the page? I have a fairly large body of work and interview references in the page which video game music enthusiasts use for research.

You can reach my directly at furniss@gmail.com

Many thanks.

Matt. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.42.98.197 (talk) 17:48, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Really disagree with this move, Salv. The Keep argument was baseless and I had the only argument from policy—wasn't even close to no consensus... – czar 18:20, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Perhaps, perhaps not -- but I didn't feel anywhere near confident enough about the "delete" closure to defend it. It's a bit late to "re-open and let any closer wrap it up", so maybe WP:DRV (or AFD2 but that seems really like a poor solution) would provide an appropriate "second evaluation" of the discussion? Technically it's the venue for when you disagree with the closer. I'm sorry if it feels evasive, but I hope you understand how I see it -- explaining to the subject of an article that his article was deleted on the basis of such an AfD, which (at face value) has one user voting Keep, one voting Redirect and one voting Delete... it doesn't make for the strongest case, it doesn't make for the solidest closure, because it doesn't make for the best consenus. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 18:45, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Sockpuppet alert

Our friend NYCSlover is back with his tell-tale edit of 240KB, this time hiding behing the IP 173.3.222.239. Time to nuke. The Banner talk 19:43, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

I can't remember, was there a rangeblock in place previously? If there was something and it expired recently I can always look into resetting it. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 19:47, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Same ISP as the January one. But that one (68.194.85.167) was a dynamic IP. This one is a static IP. The Banner talk 20:03, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

UxUmbrella's trollings

Please explain me why you persistent trolling him? 188.123.230.99 (talk) 10:27, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Yeah Salv! Why won't you leave this sweet and active member of the project alone!? Am I missing something here? Sergecross73 msg me 12:46, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
... Wow. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 16:43, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Salvidrim test

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. PamD 07:29, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

@Salvidrim!, I moved the page to your userspace.--Bbb23 (talk) 07:36, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
I CSD'd it because it was listed at Category:Stubs. PamD 07:45, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
@PamD: It shouldn't have been in article space. Next time it might be better to leave a note to that effect rather than CSD it, but no big deal.--Bbb23 (talk) 08:21, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Bbb23, it had to be in mainspace because it was used to test Twinkle. PamD I'm sorry that I neglected to delete it myself earlier, I was keeping it around in case I needed further testing. Since it had been linked to in relevant tests I have moved it back to Salvidrim test and deleted it there so the log entries are at their proper place. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 15:11, 31 May 2015 (UTC)


Bots


You are receiving this message because a technical change may affect a bot, gadget, or user script you have been using. The breaking change involves API calls. This change has been planned for two years. The WMF will start making this change on 30 June 2015. A partial list of affected bots can be seen here: https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2015-June/081931.html This includes all bots that are using pywikibot compat. Some of these bots have already been fixed. However, if you write user scripts or operate a bot that uses the API, then you should check your code, to make sure that it will not break.

What, exactly, is breaking? The "default continuation mode" for action=query requests to api.php will be changing to be easier for new coders to use correctly. To find out whether your script or bot may be affected, then search the source code (including any frameworks or libraries) for the string "query-continue". If that is not present, then the script or bot is not affected. In a few cases, the code will be present but not used. In that case, the script or bot will continue working.

This change will be part of 1.26wmf12. It will be deployed to test wikis (including mediawiki.org) on 30 June, to non-Wikipedias (such as Wiktionary) on 1 July, and to all Wikipedias on 2 July 2015.

If your bot or script is receiving the warning about this upcoming change (as seen at https://www.mediawiki.org/w/api.php?action=query&list=allpages ), it's time to fix your code!

Either of the above solutions may be tested immediately, you'll know it works because you stop seeing the warning.

Do you need help with your own bot or script? Ask questions in e-mail on the mediawiki-api or wikitech-l mailing lists. Volunteers at m:Tech or w:en:WP:Village pump (technical) or w:en:Wikipedia:Bot owners' noticeboard may also be able to help you.

Are you using someone else's gadgets or user scripts? Most scripts are not affected. To find out if a script you use needs to be updated, then post a note at the discussion page for the gadget or the talk page of the user who originally made the script. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:04, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Arbitration motion regarding Arbitration enforcement

By motion, the Arbitration Committee authorises the following injunction effective immediately:

  1. The case is to be opened forthwith and entitled "Arbitration enforcement";
  2. During the case, no user who has commented about this matter on the AN page, the AE page or the Case Requests page, may take or initiate administrative action involving any of the named parties in this case.
  3. Reports of alleged breaches of (2) are to be made only by email to the Arbitration Committee, via the main contact page.

You are receiving this message because you have commented about this matter on the AN page, the AE page or the Case Requests page and are therefore restricted as specified in (2). For the Arbitration Committee, L235 (t / c / ping in reply) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:30, 29 June 2015 (UTC)


DRV and unsalt

While your edit summary says to unsalt Dairese Gary‎, it appears that you had instead salted it. Which was your intention?—Bagumba (talk) 20:17, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Forget it. I think you set it for auto confirmed.—Bagumba (talk) 20:19, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
I changed the createprotection from ‎[create=sysop]‎ to ‎[create=autoconfirmed]; I tried setting it to "all users" (thus unprotecting it) but for some reason the interface wouldn't let me. I've just gone back and unprotected it completely now. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 20:20, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

June 2015

Hi there.

I wanted to create an article for which I created my account. Not-purposefully I mistakenly made few disruptive edits (type out in my signature, reverting for good cause when I did not know that something else was also in the same edit that should be reverted). The article I created was deleted post AFD discussion and the consensus was that it marginally failed WP:GNG as Times of India City Supplements are not considered as reliable source by few editors (although many BLPs exists with non-valid or no sources at all). I asked for some time from the community to gather few more resources. I have few national sources (not one but many). I requested to be unblocked but I was been revoked from User page access as well. So I created a new account (completely in good faith), apologized for my past behaviour and promised not to repeat it again. But I was booked for WP:SOCK. (non wonder, it was same editor). I created a new account and started contributing to Wiki in more healthy way but again the same thing happened to me although I had good intentions. Few weeks later the article I created was stuffed up but any other person's article (that fails WP:BLP) so as to prevent me from doing so. Moreover, (my blocking admin) protected the page to (admin only) so as to completely isolate it. (As if the page turned into edit war or something. Just a simple BLP which is now notable enough to qualify WP:BLP, WP:GNG, WP:N) which annoyed me a lot (it seemed I was a terrorist and was being charged for nothing) and seemed a bit silly and an attempt to assert powers without assessment. Although many admins have really helped me on the way there are few who can't bear a simple problem which can be sorted out very easily.

If you can help sir, I would be very very thankful. I want a second chance please.

123.201.79.2 (talk) 17:37, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

What was the article title? ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 18:21, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Shekhar Chatterjee 123.201.79.2 (talk) 18:38, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

If you can give me a chance, I can list down the sources here. 123.201.79.2 (talk) 18:45, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

I am waiting for your response sir. 123.201.79.51 (talk) 10:40, 18 June 2015 (UTC)


I wasn't doing any vandalism or disrupting anything. Why am I blocked again? Can't I have a word to say? I know evading block is against policy but atleast give a chance to say something. 123.201.79.120 (talk) 13:33, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Blocked for blocked evasion. (If there's more to this story than I know about, feel free to adjust the block as you see fit, Salv.) Sergecross73 msg me 14:02, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Arbitration case opening

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Technical 13. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Technical 13/Evidence. Please add your evidence by June 30, 2015, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Technical 13/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Liz Read! Talk! 01:49, 17 June 2015 (UTC)


I am not sure about this...

... but user Tripple-ddd was switching on my alarm bells. Especially a 145k edit WARNING WARNING make me think of our friend NYCSlover. What do you think? False alarm? The Banner talk 20:48, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

I don't recall a previous sock of his engaging in actual discussion (see WT:VG), so I'm leaning towards the large edits being a coincidence in this case. Time will no doubt tell. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 16:32, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
True. We have to wait. The Banner talk 21:58, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Did those old socks have a major issue with moving pages? Because Tripple-ddd has a bad habit of moving things to completely inappropriate places (putting that article in user space, for example), and then shunting them to several different places (and across namespaces), making it hard to actually work out what was going on. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 22:29, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

User:Cada mori

Hi Salvidrim!. This is a courtesy notification of an unblock discussion going on with regards to Cada mori. I will likely be unblocking the account, and seeing as you are the blocking admin I wanted to make you aware in case you have anything to add. Best, Tiptoety talk 20:59, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the courtesy notification (blocking with the SPI Helper Script doesn't add user talk pages to my Watchlist). Of course I trust your judgement fully in this matter. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 21:07, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
Hey Tiptoety can you send me an e-mail? I'd like to forward you something another person sent me in regards to Cada mori. Thanks! :) ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 21:26, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
 Done - Tiptoety talk 09:44, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Death of Forrest Hayes

Hi Salvidrim, I wanted to know more about why you speedy deleted this page. I see you said it was an attack page, but I don't think it was unduly negative to qualify for deletion under that criterion. You also said that it was eligible for speedy deletion under G4 (recreation of material deleted at AFD). However, there have been a lot of new sources that have emerged since that AFD (WP:Articles for deletion/Forrest Hayes), and I think the event is also more notable than Hayes himself. For these reasons, would you consider restoring the page? Everymorning talk 14:18, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

  • The relevant policies are WP:VICTIM and WP:BDP. The only notable thing about Mr. Hayes is his gruesome/controversial death. Unless there are suddenly enough sources not about the circumstances of his death, I will not recreate (or endorse recreation) of this article. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 14:30, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

hi

quick question, is this allowed User_talk:109.155.60.103 person says they are not signed on, Special:Contributions/109.155.60.103 persons editing history, I though you could only have one account?--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 17:06, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Wikipedia allows users to edit without registering an account, in which case the edits are attributed to the IP address of the user at the time of the edit. Is there a problem? ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 17:18, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
in this first link it indicates the person has an account--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 17:22, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
There are various "legitimate" uses of multiple accounts and/or of a registered editor occasionally editing while logged out -- perhaps he's not home or on vacation and doesn't trust the public computer he is using? It is permissible to contribute in good-faith as an IP (if there's no evidence of sock puppetry). Can I ask what led you to ask me specifically about this? Just out of curiosity. :) ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 17:26, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
because your an administrator..hes done several edits at wikiproject med talk page and while I like to interact, its kind of strange to not know who this person is(he gave a couple of opinions which if I knew who he/she was I could direct myself to them, however he/she is anonymous so I cant say anything ..just view the history of the talk page today... he/she hasn't stopped [4]....16 edits today--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 17:32, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
I'm not sure "kind of strange" is any evidence that the user is violating sockpuppetry policy. Do you have any evidence that the use of this IP address constitutes a policy violation? I'd be more than happy to have your evidence reviewed if you know who the user behind this allegedly is. And "I'm an admin" doesn't tell me why you decided to talk to me, we have hundreds of admins. Did we interact before? ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 17:48, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
no we haven't interacted before,...I have no clue who he/she is...oh well, thanks anyway--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 17:53, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello. I happened to see this conversation. Yes, I am a somewhat experienced editor who has worked anonymously (both as a registered and a logged-out editor) around various areas of Wikipedia, including FA/GA in MED and elsewhere. For personal reasons I prefer to contribute as an IP. As I realize that some people are uncomfortable with gf IP contributions I do try to be as kind and considerate as I know how. I don't see that Ozzie10aaaa has any real cause to feel threatened, though I do realise that people's reactions vary. But, hey, I don't think I know you guys yet either IRL... another time maybe.... :) Best, 109.155.60.103 (talk) 23:41, 22 June 2015 (UTC) [just another gf contributor]

Washington Metro

Are you going to rename all the stations to a consistent naming convention, or are you just going to stop there? Are you going to fix succession and other related templates? Secondarywaltz (talk) 14:53, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

All the article titles that were discussed have been modified to use the lowercase "station"; that is all. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 14:57, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
So you have chosen to leave this a mess - like before. The result was "no consensus". That is not a nice thing to do. Secondarywaltz (talk) 15:30, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
The outcome of the multiple RMs and the two MRVs was support for the lowercase "station" titles. I'm not sure sure why you judge that to be rude. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 16:09, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
Because the system is now inconsistent and you have screwed up the working of other templates, that had been previously stabilized. You should change them all if you believe in this naming convention. I don't care what name is used. Secondarywaltz (talk) 16:23, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
I can only apply the result of the consensus to the titles that were effectively under discussion. You're welcome to boldly rename others, or if controversial, to start RMs. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 19:03, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
So you really don't give a damn! What an attitude. Secondarywaltz (talk) 19:12, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
You don't come off as particularly pleasant either, buddy. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 19:20, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Salvidrim!. I have a question. The result of Talk:Greenbelt_station#Requested_move_7_February_2015 reads not moved. User:Jenks24 moved Potomac Ave station to Potomac Ave Station, saying no consensus. Is your decision to use the lowercase right? Sawol (talk) 06:20, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Please see the MRV. While sure, there is general consensus to use the lowercase titles, it can only really be applied to those articles that were discussed. Broadening the consensus to be applicable to other similar pages that were not in the original discussions would be overstepping the boundaries of current policy, although this could be mentioned as precedent in any later discussion. IMHO, y'all would be much better off with a wide discussion about the policies surrounding the titles of all these articles, and then applying the consensus outcome to all these articles. Requiring batch RMs or individual RMs when the reasoning behind them all are practically the same seems like it would needlessly take up time and effort... even though I thought WP:USSTATION was already pretty clear enough, it seems it is far from uncontroversial. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 20:33, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

FYI

See here. Just an FYI - it looks like he's kinda freaking out. I don't usually deal with username blocks, so I don't know what to tell him. (Also, he's ignored my past comments to him, so I'm not sure he'd even listen.) I was more just letting you know in case any future conflicts arose about it. Thanks! Sergecross73 msg me 15:02, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Notably, this part as well. Sergecross73 msg me 15:04, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Yea, I've got it watchlisted. Yunshui's comment explains perfectly why the original email to info-en wasn't treated as "appropriate identity confirmation". ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 15:11, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Oh wow. This is something I did not expect from all of this. GamerPro64 15:21, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
I hoped that if they are who they claim to be, identification would be quick and simple. But this is the Internet, and you never know who's behind a screen name, and impersonation is a very real thing that happens, so anytime I notice someone with an account name matching someone with an article (such as Tom Kudirka), blocking the account and requesting confirmation is the prudent thing to do IMO. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 15:26, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
So its pretty much a case of On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog. Not the first time I've seen impersonation on here so I'll remain skeptical unless they provide verification. GamerPro64 15:56, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, I didn't doubt it was him before, but I almost wonder if its impersonation. It seems like a professional businessman in the tech industry would do a better job at understanding, handling, and identifying himself. I guess we'll see. Sergecross73 msg me 16:06, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
So, I imagine he's moved on to another user name, though, I guess that's okay, since the main problem was the concern of impersonation, right? With this new name, that's no longer present. Sergecross73 msg me 17:32, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Doesn't that still count as a ban evasion? GamerPro64 17:46, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
The block message template specifically says that if they aren't the person in question (or, I guess, if they're unwilling to identify as such), they can make a new account. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 17:52, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Sounds a bit counterproductive, imo. But I guess that makes sense. GamerPro64 18:01, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

I'm in the process of identifying myself as Tom Kudirka Salvidrim!. Its just that I'm very busy, and I'm not going to pull my programmers of our current game just to edit an article. Frankly I'm surprised at how unprofessional these conversations have been especially by Sergecross73. Underdoger (talk) 18:20, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

I understand, and I hope that you understand that, if you are indeed Tom, this is done to sincerely protect you. I'm sure you wouldn't be happy to, one day, discover that someone unauthorized has been editing Wikipedia under your name without your knowledge. It is to avoid these situations that we act with great prudence in allowing people to edit with accounts bearing the name of "known" people. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 18:27, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

No problem Salvidrim!, I totally understand and it is appreciated. BTW, I didn't try to block you. I filled out the form at Unblock Ticket Request System only to unblock my Tom Kudirka username. I'm still learning the system. I'm getting there very slowly. Thanks and take care. Underdoger (talk) 18:49, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Picture

Salvidrim!, can you please explain to me how to keep Tom wiki.png from being deleted. The pic is of me and I own the pic. What code or info do I need to reference. Thank you in advance. 65.112.115.167 (talk) 20:40, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

I don't think it is currently at risk of being deleted? ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 20:42, 25 June 2015 (UTC).

Okay, once again you are right. Thank you my friend. Tomkudirka (talk) 21:14, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Salvidrim!/Q2_2015_Archive&oldid=1143284225"