Jump to content

User talk:Shawn à Montréal/Archive 3

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

Bio stub

[edit]

Thank you for helping with the article on Philip Weller. Apparently the references are insufficient; this account was set up by the communications department of the International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River, the only source that we used and that is available online is the Danube Watch article that we linked to. If you have suggestions on how to improve the article, we would be happy to hear from you! Icpdr-pp —Preceding undated comment added 08:07, 7 February 2011 (UTC).[reply]

An old CFD

[edit]

Please see this, and renominate according to a new proposal, should you desire. This discussion never got off the ground. Courcelles (talk) 08:52, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

[edit]

I didn't mean to come across as critical of your position, I was simply trying to convey my thoughts on the matter. Sorry if I stepped on your toes. Cheers —DoRD (talk) 19:49, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Category contributions

[edit]

Did you know that you can easily find out which categories you created by clicking the 'My Contributions' tab and then displaying 500 entries and then by searching within the page for created? Helps when researching stuff.  ;-) Vegaswikian (talk) 22:44, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nudecline, Nopetro and Mac

[edit]

OK, I have a list here of possible problem categories from Nudecline, Nopetro and Mac. Believe me, that this is not the end since I concentrated on categories that they created. Feel free to add notes about what to do about the categories in the list. Some of these may even be worth keeping. The list can be used to continue the nominations. Vegaswikian (talk) 06:35, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To save on hair, perhaps we should just delete all of Mac/Nopetro/whatever's categories and let people recreate them if they prove valid. Mangoe (talk) 20:36, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And even more fun: dubious redirects

[edit]

I've found some curious/bogonic redirects in the course of this and have started a list of these to review here. Mangoe (talk) 16:22, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Redirects have a much lower bar to be kept as useful. I'd guess that most of the ones you flagged would be kept. Try if you like, of course, but I think you'll find Rfding generally isn't worth the bother. best, Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:30, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've found several so far that make some rather surprising connections (some rather odd stuff about ham, for instance). I've also found a bunch that direct a rather general term to a specific instance. Mangoe (talk) 17:25, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
My advice is to just retarget them as you see fit. I wouldn't bother with RfD unless necessary. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:32, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That's mostly what I'm doing, except for the few that ISTM ought to be deleted outright. Mangoe (talk) 18:26, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Military history edits to Stanley Park

[edit]

Shawn I based my contributions on the military history of Stanly Park on 3 sources.


^ Moogk, Peter N. (1978), Vancouver Defended. A History of the Men and Arms of the Lower Mainland Defences, 1859 - 1949., Vancouver: Antonson Publishing, ISBN 0919900267

http://www.cmp-cpm.forces.gc.ca/dhh-dhp/his/rep-rap/doc/ahqr-rqga/ahq001.pdf

http://www.northamericanforts.com/Canada/bc.html#van


I looked at adding them to the references but was afraid to muck up the existing list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ColinPark (talk • contribs) 15:35, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Articles_for_deletion/Mass_killings_under_Communist_regimes_(3rd_nomination)#Mass_killings_under_Communist_regimes exists

[edit]

neutral notification Collect (talk) 12:34, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Non-admin closes

[edit]
No. Yes. Sort of. :) Cgingold (talk) 21:27, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This has got to be the least helpful reply I've ever received. Really. If you don't want to be helpful, save us both the trouble and don't leave a reply like this. It's worse than being ignored. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:39, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh crap. Sorry, Shawn! What a crazy fucked up mess -- and all with the best of intentions! I was on my way out the door and didn't have time for a full-blown response, so I made it as concise as possible: 3 really short replies to your 3 questions. I thought it was very clever! (But now I can see how you could have misconstrued that... Apparently the distance between "clever" and "bonehead" is amazingly small!) Then I quickly copied my reply here from my talk page, where I had first replied to your note. But somewhere in that process this crucial little bit got left behind: <More shortly>
A couple of hours later I posted my followup response -- again, on my talk page. I just assumed you would check there -- not realizing that you had already replied to my inadvertently infuriating response on your talk page. After a while, it occurred to me that I should copy my followup and post it on your talk page, just to be sure you saw it. And that's when I discovered this crazy fucked up mess...
I'm sure there's a "lesson" somewhere in all of this! Probably something like: "Beware of overly-hurried conversations that are raggedly split between two talk pages... "
Okay, so here's that followup response I came here to post:
"...there used to be a page where it basically stated explicitly that non-admins were permitted to close out CFDs in cases where there is an uncontroversial decision to Keep. That page may still exist, but I can't locate it, and I suspect the passages I'm referring to may have been removed. Right now the only thing I can point you to is Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Administrator instructions." Hope that helps! Cgingold (talk) 02:21, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
PS - I've been laughing my ass off about all of this -- and I hope you are, too, now that you've read the explanation! Best regards, Cgingold (talk) 02:34, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Good grief... What gives? (Are you sulking or something?) Cgingold (talk) 08:58, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, I'm around, thanks. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 11:31, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

CfD closes

[edit]

Just a comment since you don't do closes. Some of the closers want to see more then one opinion before they close a discussion. I try to look at ones on the last day to see if I can offer an opinion on the topic if no one else has. Sometimes I can't for various reasons. It would be nice if one or two others could also look these over and offer an opinion, even if it does not agree with what was proposed. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:56, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. Since I (ahem) don't do closes! I will continue to try my best, thanks, Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:31, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Mac

[edit]

Hello Shawn. It seems that a checkuser was declined on this case, so an admin who is considering action will need to make a decision based on behavior. Your evidence looks like the best so far, but it would be more convincing if it included diffs. I was involved in the Mac case a long time ago, and I do recall some of the things you mentioned. However Bsea has only 28 edits, which is not much if you can only consider behavior and not IPs. If you have the patience, take a look at es:Especial:Contribuciones/Bsea his 180 contributions on the Spanish wiki. If he makes bad categories or redirects there, it should be evident. If you don't have any more time for this, I do understand. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 01:42, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank for your note. I'm not as sure Bsea is Mac and have removed the suspected sock template from his user page. I'm prepared to take a wait and see approach. best regards, Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:53, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tudor Revival

[edit]

My advice is to just let this one run out and keep an eye the article in case he tries an AFD. Giano has been, shall we say, a frequent flyer in Arbcom. Mangoe (talk) 02:56, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank semi-spam

[edit]

Thanks for your support in my RfA, which was closed as successful. Manitobans are awesome, but then so are Canadians in general ;-) Cheers, Nikkimaria (talk) 15:46, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're most welcome. Incidentally, I just created Category:Films set in Manitoba and its Winnipeg subcat and am gradually adding to it. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:51, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mansion districts category as applied to Albany, NY's Mansion district

[edit]

Re this: I'm not sure you read the article closely, because if you had you'd understand that the neighborhood has, well, not that much in the way of historic mansions. It gets its name from its location just below the New York State Executive Mansion.

If you want an article I've worked on that would fit it better (or what it looks like you're trying to get at), try Bellevue Avenue Historic District. I also suggest you try to define it.

Generally I like this idea. I've been thinking for a while at WP:NRHP that we should categorize historic districts we have articles about by type ("downtown", "residential", "industrial", "rural", "riverside", "lakeside", "seaside" etc.). Maybe this is a good way to start seeing if this would work. Daniel Case (talk) 04:36, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for the advice. I've inputted the changes. As for the wisdom of this particular category, well, I guess we'll see if it comes up in a CfD at some point. It just seemed to me like there were some pretty prominent former mansion districts. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 05:53, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

NFL Europa/Europe

[edit]

Cats. added Please see here. Thanks. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:49, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tudorbethan is back

[edit]

Well, Cydebot "fixed" the article name to match the categories, and now someone (whom I gather has invested quite a bit of time in the article) has moved it back to Tudorbethan architecture. You might want to take a look at this since the next response is likely to be an attempt to rename the category. Mangoe (talk) 15:58, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Saffron Terror

[edit]

I noticed that you placed Category:Saffron Terrorism on a number of pages. Since your edits seem to be in category organization I will assume good faith and guess you saw the page and placed related pages into the category at face value. Unfortunately, no one has been convicted of any crimes related to "Saffron terror" and not only that, many of the incidents were actually found to be the handiwork of other groups. Just be more careful, that's all.Pectoretalk 14:31, 7 September 2010 (UTC) [reply]

Sorry just saw your note of AFD, I removed the article however because of the contention of the phrase.Pectoretalk 14:41, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Little Alien

[edit]

Mind if I ask why you removed Category:Right of Asylum from Little Alien? --Pascal666 17:18, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not delete categories simply because they are red links. In this case, the category is actually at Category:Right of asylum. When using HotCat, if you click on the ± to the right of a red-linked category it will automatically fix the capitalization for you. Because you did not leave an edit summary I could not tell if you removed the category for cause or simply because it was a red link. Red-linked categories are extremely helpful both because they can often be changed by one character to an existing category and they indicate which categories are in demand and should be created. --Pascal666 06:39, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redlinked categories are not helpful in the slightest, per WP:CAT, which clearly states that "An article should never be left with a non-existent (redlinked) category on it. Either the category should be created, or else the link should be removed or changed to a category that does exist." However, yes, if it's a case of just correcting the category name to change it to a blue link rather than deleting, that's what should be done. If that was the case here, then that's what I should have done, certainly. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:51, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Artificial Island of Brighton

[edit]

Hey Shawn, I didn't realize the article would disappear, even from my view, upon deletion. Is there a way to get a copy of it back as a base for my new article? Thanks for any help you can offer. Ddinglebb (talk) 23:41, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mac

[edit]

You seem to be the resident mac expert. There's a 'new' editor truckCard, and I found Category:Driving licenses courtesy of mac, and TC's first edits; but after that I found nothing much. Any ideas? Occuli (talk) 01:10, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

[edit]

Shawn, thanks so much for the support vote in my RfA. I loved your comment on my signature (though I changed it anyway). Warm wishes, Wifione ....... Leave a message 19:44, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • You're most welcome. Yes, your signature was one of my favourites. Ah, well. Pleasantly surprised that your RfA succeeded on this try, as the Opposes did seem to be piling up, though looking through them, I'm sure the closing bureaucrat made the right choice. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:03, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi:)

[edit]

Hi Shawn, I think you really took my questions and the connected response in a negative manner. It wasn't intended to be like that. Although I've replied on the RfA, I thought I'll pop in and leave another hi out here :) Take care Shawn. Wifione ....... Leave a message 14:55, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Please see my reply at the RfA, best, Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:57, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Foster Care

[edit]

Would appreciate your comments at Talk:Foster_care#Non_topic_text. Thanks. Student7 (talk) 20:38, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I don't have anything to contribute to this. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:56, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Documentary film cats

[edit]

Hi Shawn. All the CfD changes have now been done. I see you've made this and this cat. Are they duplications of this and this? Hopefully everything should be pretty standarized now! Thanks. Lugnuts (talk) 06:48, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, they're top level cats for documentary films and documentary TV programming subcats about foo. As I mentioned in the CfD, I do think they're needed for some of the more popular categories. best, Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:27, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Film awards

[edit]

You have just withdrawn a film award category from CFD. However, you should be aware (as a regular CFD contributor) that award categories are considered as over-categorisation. The normal outcome is to listify and delete, if there is no list or plain delete if a list exists. Lists do the job much better than categories, as they can be placed in date order and have the basis of the award, in this case the film edited, in a furhter column. When this comes up again, I will be voting for deletion for these reasons. Peterkingiron (talk) 11:18, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Romántico (film) for deletion

[edit]

A discussion has begun about whether the article Romántico (film), which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Romántico (film) until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. User:Whenaxis 20:43, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Category:2010 architecture

[edit]

I started cleaning up Category:2010 architecture based on the proposal at CfD and boy, what a mess. There is stuff in there that has nothing to do with 2010. Feel free to jump in. My plan is to work backwards since I don't believe that may buildings and stuff will have dates in the future, but then I have found some in the cleanup. Vegaswikian (talk) 03:57, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Documentary by topic stubs

[edit]

Yup - the discussion's at WP:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals, and they are listed on WP:WikiProject Stub sorting/To do as upcoming splits. As for the image, most of them have specific images which seem to be standard ones for films relating to specific subjects (e.g., File:Biofilm.png. The ones which don't I used a generic image called File:Movie.png... which I didn't check at the time, but you're right - it seems to be Jimmy W. If you can find a better icon, feel free to replace it! Grutness...wha? 01:41, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The new image is a lot better, though I've reduced it to 40px, which is usuallyb the preferred size for stub templates. AFAIK there's no specific guidelines for the icons in template, though there has been quite a bit of discussion about them from time to time at WT:Stub. WP:Stub's the first place to go for most info about stub templates in general. As to using the templates, feel free to use them whenever you like - I'm slowly going through the huge list in Category:Documentary film stubs, but there's over a thousand of them, so it's taking a while! Grutness...wha? 04:19, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oops - I was wrong - the discussion on icon sizes seems to mainly be at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Stub sorting, most recently here. PS - I've noted your comments on the proposal page about the Art(s) category and taken the relevant category to WP:SFD fopr possible renaming. Grutness...wha? 04:31, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
:) I actually took my user name from this place. Grutness...wha? 22:02, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Shawn -you wrote: I've been attempting to update the template descriptions for Template:Bio-documentary-stub and its sibling categories to reflect the fact that we now have a growing category for interactive Category:Web documentaries that can take their place alongside TV and radio docs in these stubs. But of course films, thanks to you, should now be diffused to the documentary film stubs by topic subcats. And if that's the case, should we remove all mention of "film" in these higher level docs by topic stubs? Is there a way to state in these template descriptions that films should not be added, or should that simply go on the stub category page itself, and not in the template?

Basically, the foo-documentary-stub templates can still be used, and the foo-documentary-film-stub types are subtypes of them. So in theory, it's still fine to use the broader templates. The usual way of noting that there are more finely defined subtypes is in the top of the stub categories, along with notes at any relevant WikiProjects. A great example are geography stubs, which have over the years been filtered down from a plain geo-stub to division by national subregions. It's still fine to use US-geo-stub for a place in Arizona, even though there's an Arizona-geo-stub and lots on separate templates for individual Arizona counties - all the details of these stub types are listed at the top of Category:United States geography stubs and Category:Arizona geography stubs. The same basic principle would apply here. Hope that makes sense. Grutness...wha? 23:06, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

[edit]

Thank you for nominating some of the categories created by User:Stefanomione. I often see the categories he creates and they just don't seem right, but half the time I can never put my finger on why. It's very frustrating. Good Ol’factory (talk) 13:09, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Category:Indigenous peoples of North America biography stubs

[edit]

Not really - the usual size for splitting's about 600-800 stubs. 200-400 is regarded as pretty near the best size for s atub category (as a compromise between ease of sorting through and eease of finding something that the browser knows enough to edit). As far as splitting goes (once that becomes necessary), it might be easier to split by why they are notable - there are quite a few artists in there, for instance, who could be split out. That would get around the tribal-group or nation-specific split. Grutness...wha? 22:17, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Question about close connection/neutral point of view tag

[edit]

Hi Shawn: Thanks for your constructive input on the "articles for deletion" page for the HEXACO model of personality structure, and for the helpful tips on my talk page. I wanted to ask you a couple of questions about the "close connection" or "neutral point of view" tag on the article. First, if you consider any parts of the article to be written in a non-neutral tone, could you please let me know? (I'd very much like to edit any that seem not to be neutral.) Also, is there any process for removing this tag from the article, presumably after some kind of checking for neutrality? Thanks in advance, Mike M C Ashton (talk) 18:21, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking down the tag! Best regards, Mike M C Ashton (talk) 20:59, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sunflower

[edit]

One reason I have sent Educational Segregation in Sunflower County, Mississippi to AfD is because there is a threat of more in the same vein. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:55, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unbelievable Request to Delete Article Because Donna Musil is "Not Notable"

[edit]

The Documentary made by Donna Musil ("Brats: Our Journey Home") WON TWENTY-ONE FILM AWARDS (amply referenced in the article).

Honestly, if you are going to volunteer for Wikipedia then you should actually read the whole article before making reverts/calling for an article deletion.

I removed the banner calling for deletion, because it is just so absurd that it was placed here.

98.245.148.9 (talk) 19:41, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, it was actually six (6) film awards that it won. That is still plenty evidence of notability. And your insistence on a "lack of notability" revert is therefore evidence of malicious vandalism.

Your edit that these six awards means that it won only a "handful of awards" is transparently manipulative and lacking in any sense of real fairness.

98.245.148.9 (talk) 20:06, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciations

[edit]

Thanks for your tweaks at Special When Lit. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 08:11, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

CFD for Category:Preserved computers

[edit]

You beat me to it! Mangoe (talk) 20:06, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

CFD close

[edit]

See this close and my comments there, which you may want to pursue. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:51, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I Was a Child...

[edit]

Hi Shawn. I have a question. On I Was a Child of Holocaust Survivors, should the film categories be included? The article seems to be focused on the novel (albeit short), so shouldn't the categories reflect that? I'm just not sure here. BOVINEBOY2008 23:19, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

RFA

[edit]

Didn't you mean to add the "#" to the page? Instead of the "*"--intelatitalk 01:41, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

[edit]
Hello, Shawn à Montréal. You have new messages at HelloAnnyong's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

inre Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reunion Island: An Overview

[edit]

I made a comment at the AFD that it should be closed as moot. The article is gone and there really is nothing now to discuss. However, and surprisingly,[1] a quite decent review of this film in a suitable film RS, Film Threat, popped up mere hours ago. Turns out the puppets only hurt themselves. Tell ya what though... if more decent reviews "pop up" over the next few weeks to meet WP:NF, I may rewrite this one myself... and will hope for your blessing in a properly sourced article returning. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 07:17, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Amp Electric Vehicles

[edit]

Hello Shawn in Montreal. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Amp Electric Vehicles, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Banned user created a redirect; another editor wrote the article. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 23:13, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mass-reverting

[edit]

Is this really productive? Blindly reverting over 1000 edits by this user is not helpful. If your intention is not to feed the troll, you aren't succeeding. Since a few of your taggings are being declined, please consider halting these reverts. PeterSymonds (talk) 16:53, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • First of all, I am not "blindly" reverting Mac's edits: I do take the time to check the diffs to see what he has added before removing. And I have put a lot of work into doing so. Secondly, I am convinced, after having spent literally months, with others, undoing damage done by Mac, that denying him the satisfaction of adding to this project with each successive sock ID is the only way to get him to stop. I have no problem whatsoever if responsible editors wish to restore some of these deleted edits; a "few" people doing so is no reason for me to stop, as far as I can see. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:02, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Diamondland

[edit]

Hi, Shawn. Thank you for the information. Well, as far as I know this user didn't have a vandalic behaviour in spanish Wikipedia. He seemed like a newbie creating the first article. Having more than one identity doesn't have to be bad at all, if you don't use them as puppets to vandalize. Anyway, I'll be aware. Thanks. Atila rey (talk) 11:04, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Montefiore Club

[edit]

Hello. Do you live anywhere near Guy and St. Cath? I need a snapshot. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 11:16, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Anna, I'm rarely downtown anymore. But if and when I am, I will try to take a shot. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:07, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. I will bug others in the Montreal cat. Will let you know if I crap out. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 16:19, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dailymotion assessment

[edit]

Thanks for improving the assessment of Dailymotion. --Pnm (talk) 01:43, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

[edit]
Hello, Shawn à Montréal. You have new messages at Freshacconci's talk page.
Message added 04:00, 8 February 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Nomination of Eskrimadors for deletion

[edit]

The article Eskrimadors is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eskrimadors 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. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 10:28, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Romanesque revival architecture in Canada

[edit]

Category:Romanesque revival architecture in Canada, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mike Selinker (talk) 11:41, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

RfA

[edit]

You should run. Keepscases (talk) 05:01, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

National Screen Institute

[edit]

I saw a need for this article and so I wrote it. But the article could benefit from expansion and further sourcing. As you are listed at the WikiProject Film/Canadian cinema task force, perhaps you might care to help out? Expanding on the school's programs? Listing the awards its presented (and recipients)? How other media in Canada recognize the intitute and its efforts? Thanks, Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 07:23, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Apology

[edit]

Shawn in Montreal, please accept my apology for any/all negative statements I've made against you. I am sorry and I realise that you really had nothing against me or the edits I've done to wikipedia. Regards, Argolin (talk) 05:26, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Page got deleted - Can you edit it and restore it

[edit]

Hi, I am not too perfect in wiki, but I wanted you to reconsider this page - http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nyla_Hasan&action=edit&redlink=1

because there some important links that can be added: http://tribune.com.pk/story/132516/mrs-pakistan-world-forever-young/ This is just one good source. There are others as well.

Let me know if you can help in any way. Thanks--Sonisona 05:08, 16 March 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sonisona (talk • contribs)

Warning

[edit]

If your "Jim Crow" nonsense is not removed within 48 hours, I will be taking further action at AN/I. Keepscases (talk) 02:27, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re your comment

[edit]

Please don't make threats. You are not an Administrator.

The listing (for renaming or deletion) was made by a new editor who, by his editing history, seems to be very active in suggesting categories for deletion.

I removed the comment because I am intending to merge two of the "Doctor in the House" categories (television and films) together, so the argument (that the category is only a small one) will no longer apply. Figaro (talk) 14:55, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I wasn't trying to threaten you, I was only trying to point out that continuing along your course of action could only lead to one thing: a block. Not by me, of course. The editor who nominated your category for renaming is relatively new but he is an editor in good standing, who does a lot of valuable work on film articles and categories. Please WP:AGF and make your arguments at the CfD, if you wish. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:43, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
When I returned to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 April 16, to make a comment about merging the two categories, in order to rectify the situation, I noticed that you had made a personal remark about me on the Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 April 16 page. This is not allowed by Wikipedia and is actually strictly against Wikipedia policy. All you needed to do was to revert my edit - not try to shame me in a public forum. I have now deleted your comment regarding me. Figaro (talk) 16:04, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I notice that you have now remarked again about me on the Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 April 16 page. I will now delete you latest remark about me. If you reinstate either of your comments naming me in what is a public forum, I will take up the matter with the Administrators. Figaro (talk) 16:14, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I simply restored my comment that you had deleted. You may disagree with my comments at CfD but you have no right to delete them. If you do so again I will issue another warning and we will be one step closer to my requesting that you be blocked. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:21, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:People form Côte Saint-Luc, Quebec

[edit]

Category:People form Côte Saint-Luc, Quebec, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:09, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cross-cultural article

[edit]

Shawn, I just wrote you a note on the discussion page about a Wikipedia article entirled Cross-cultural that includes and gives examples of Cross-cultural theatre, so the article you were calling for does in fact exist. Best to you. And again, thanks for putting various things in perspective. Mx96

  • Thanks, yes I see that this article offers some examples of cross or "inter-cultural" theatre such as Madame Butterfly. I don't believe that that helps to justify a category for Cross- or multi-cultural theatre, however. And in any case I'm not interested in adding more to this CfD discussion: I believe it's time for me to step back and let others have their say. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:54, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I understand and that's fine. Goodbye for now. Mx96 07:46, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rms

[edit]

I am not sure I understand your comment. My username and the email address I used when I registered on Wikipedia in 2005 are the same. That was then permitted. I know such usernames are no longer permitted but I have been "grandfathered in", and am keeping this username, as was clearly addressed in my Arbcom unban agreement. Believe me, this matter was resolved quite some time ago, to the chagrin of some, but the acceptance of the overwhelming majority of my peers. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 14:12, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I checked the diffs. User:Occuli appears to have just changed the font from the one I used by default to the one normally used. Should be OK. You can ask him if you want, but he's not a vandal or anything. Thanks for your concern. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 14:36, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oil on Ice

[edit]

Nice working with you - good additions. --Lexein (talk) 16:40, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mocumentaries

[edit]

Hi, What's the story with slapping the label "Mockumentary" on films which clearly are nothing of the kind?
Have you seen Les Ordres? I saw it in the presence of Michel Brault. Varlaam (talk) 23:26, 23 May 2011 (UTC) (Toronto)[reply]

Sorry. I had also discovered I, Tintin in a similar state, and had therefore jumped to conclusions.
That was your recent work.
Is that valid?
Sorry. Varlaam (talk) 00:44, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Hudson Yacht Club

[edit]

The article Hudson Yacht Club has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Long unreferenced article on a club with no significant claim to notability

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Sadads (talk) 16:20, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Outline of Quebec

[edit]

I noticed you are a participant of the WikiProject Quebec.

The Outline of Quebec was created a few days ago and is under vigorous development. It fills a gap in Wikipedia's set of outlines. It is the 3rd outline to date about a Canadian province/territory.

Outlines form one of the subsystems of Wikipedia's contents navigation system. For more information on outlines, see Wikipedia:Outlines and Wikipedia:WikiProject Outlines.

The goals for the Outline of Quebec is to complete it to as high a standard of quality as possible, and to make it even better than the Outline of Saskatchewan and the Outline of British Columbia.

Once the Outline of Quebec is completed, it will provide an important example to others creating outlines for the remaining provinces and territories of Canada.

Please take a look at the outline to see if you can notice (and fill in) any missing topics. Pictures would also be nice (the rarer and the more interesting, the better).

Thank you.

Sincerely, The Transhumanist 10:40, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cat created by Diamondland

[edit]

Hi Shawn. Our friend User:Diamondland created the category "Plug-in hybrid electric cars" before being blocked. Now some other user started moving articles from "Category:Plug-in hybrid vehicles"] to Daimondland unnecessary cat. I will reverse those edits, but to avoid future problems, can you delete the "Plug-in hybrid electric cars" cat? Best regards, Mariordo (talk) 23:01, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Shawn_à_Montréal/Archive_3&oldid=1139397022"