Jump to content

User talk:Swpb/Archive/2016

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


Happy New Year, Swpb!

Swpb, I wish you and those dear to you
golden days of love and joy in a

Happy New Year 2016!

Best regards,
Sam Sailor Talk! 00:18, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Pass on!
Send this greeting by adding {{subst:User:Sam Sailor/Templates/HappyNewYear}} to user talk pages.
Information icon Automatic level-2 heading and auto-signing included.
(Unknown artist, Norway, 1916)

Possibly unfree File:Mountaingoat.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Mountaingoat.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 15:51, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Satellite space segment, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Battery. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:00, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Seljuk eternity_sign

The Armenian eternity sign (Armenian: Հավերժության հայկական նշան) is an ancient Armenian national symbol and a symbol of the national identity of the Armenian people.[1] It is one of the most common symbols in Armenian architecture,[2][3] carved on khachkars and on walls of churches.Samizambak (talk) 19:17, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Seljuk architecture carved on medrese and on walls of mosque in Anatolia.Samizambak (talk) 19:19, 5 February 2016 (UTC) http://taksikonya.com/etiketler/konya-sircali-medrese/Samizambak (talk) 19:22, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

February events and meetups in DC

Greetings from Wikimedia DC!

February is shaping up to be a record-breaking month for us, with nine scheduled edit-a-thons and several other events:

We hope to see you at one—or all—of these events!

Do you have an idea for a future event? Please write to us at info@wikimediadc.org!

Kirill Lokshin (talk) 16:41, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

You're receiving this message because you signed up for updates about DC meetups. To unsubscribe, please remove your name from the list.

Alright...

I saw the refs as to why you asked for my article to be deleted, but I disagree. I contested it, but too late, its gone. While it was published, I just don't have time to complete it at the very moment. I'm trying to be of help, and add things such as Byethost, and yes they are well known. Still I think it would of been better if you had helped edit it and not asked for it to be deleted. Would you be willing to help me with this? No this is not a complaint, I'm just asking politely. MasterData (talk) 18:13, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

To editor MasterData: Give me one reliable source, independent of the subject, that discusses the subject in more than a passing way and establishes its notability, and I'll be glad to help you. Without that, the page should not be here. There are tens of thousands of hosting services out there; how many do you think merit an encyclopedia article? —swpbT 18:55, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
To editor Swpb: I'll give you review sources like this one [1] or even this one [2]. I consider reviews reliable sources and are independent. If I need more, I will dig deeper into it. MasterData (talk) 04:26, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
User-submitted reviews do not undergo any editorial scrutiny, and certainly do not count as reliable sources. "Expert" reviews might be considered reliable, if the expertise of the author can be established. For the first page you cite, I cannot find anything on "Craig Timmins" to establish expertise, outside the site itself. For the second page, the "expert" author is not even identified. In any event, neither publication seems to have any sort of established reputation for quality or editorial oversight.
You can keep digging if you want, but I think it's very likely that sources which would meet our standards simply do not exist for this topic, and regardless, reliable sources are a necessary but not sufficient condition for inclusion. —swpbT 17:55, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Telford (name)

Hello Swpb,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Telford (name) for deletion, because it appears to duplicate an existing Wikipedia article, [[{{{article}}}]].

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. ubiquity (talk) 18:44, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

To editor Ubiquity: You might want to give the edit summary a look before you apply a speedy tag. This page was created in a split from the disambiguation page, which should not contain etymology. —swpbT 18:47, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

You're right, sorry. ubiquity (talk) 18:48, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of article bethel Gwarimbo

I need clarity as to why you have tagged my article for speedy deletion? Aezj81 (talk) 15:17, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

For the same reasons it was denied at Articles for Creation: the text is a pure advertisement, filled with unsupported (and unsupportable) claims and opinions, and there is zero evidence that the subject is noteworthy enough to merit an encyclopedia article. You should probably post this to a social media site instead, where these sorts of things are appropriate. —swpbT 15:24, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

King of the World

What exactly makes a single notable? I think if a song is released as a single, it deserves a Wiki page, as was done with Thank God for Girls and Do You Wanna Get High?. U2fan01 (talk) 19:56, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

To editor U2fan01: See WP:NSONG, particularly this bit: "a standalone article is only appropriate when there is enough material to warrant a reasonably detailed article; articles unlikely ever to grow beyond stubs should be merged to articles about an artist or album." Cheers, —swpbT 19:59, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

List of notable anglophones known by their middle names

@Cornnich, 96.249.6.241, and 96.249.10.110: See User talk:Thnidu#Proposed deletion of List of notable anglophones known by their middle names.

@Swpb: I did not create this list; please see Talk:Middle name#Moving list to separate page.

Another option could be to move it back to Middle name#English, where it was before.

Meanwhile, I have not edited the new article, nor have I time to do so now. I have copied it to my sandbox, nowiki-ing the hatnote and category templates; and I have pinged the most recent editor(s?) of the list (as a section of Middle name#English) at the top of this comment. --Thnidu (talk) 22:52, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

"Not English" template

Hi, yesterday you tagged Sadai varna pandian thalapthy with the Template:Not English template. However, you did not add it to WP:PNT, which notifies people who are capable of translating the article. There is an instruction on how to do it that appears on the template. Thanks, AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 04:11, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

NextGenSearchBot Sppedy deletion

Hi both NextGenSearchBot and Zoominfo Crawler are the same agents whic belong to the category Web scraping and Web scraping Category:Web_crawlers they are worth mentioning both as it refers to the way scrappers are identified on when crawling sites. They are also like Apache camel or Yahoo Pipes or Scrappy. If there its a better way to improve my contribution please advice Br Gabriel Vergara — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gabriel.vergara (talk • contribs)

To editor Gabriel.vergara: Your pages do not satisfy the requirements of WP:Notability; they make no assertion of notability, and offer no sources at all. This crawler agent seems to be far from important enough for one encyclopedia article, much less two. Please read our inclusion criteria, or use the Article wizard, before creating any more pages. Also, please add comments to the bottom, not the top, of talk pages and user talk pages like this one, and sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~) -- this will add your hyperlinked name and the date and time of your comment when you save it. —swpbT 21:42, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Ok I will tomorrow review the documents now its late eve in Finland and get back to you , I appreciate your valuable feedback. Thanks and br Gabriel Vergara. gv_sec_trans 23:07, 2 March 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gabriel.vergara (talk • contribs)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Synthetic cannabinoids, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page TMA. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:06, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Fantasy fandom

I'm not the author or a contributor on the article, but I did remove the CSD. When another editor has contested the CSD you really shouldn't place it back, per WP:CSD. I'm going to remove the CSD since it shows a credible claim of significance (that's all it really has to do at this point), but if you'd like to WP:AFD that obviously won't be removed. Thanks - Garchy (talk) 20:27, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Looks like you sorted it out and did it for me. Thanks Garchy (talk) 20:27, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
To editor Garchy: To me, it looked like, rather than contesting yourself, you were removing the tag simply because the creator wanted it removed; clearly that would not be sufficient reason. Then I saw you had commented on the talk page, and figured you meant to contest as yourself, a third party. —swpbT 20:30, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
It did get confusing! Didn't help that the page creator DID remove the template as well, which they shouldn't have. Glad it got figured out! -Garchy (talk) 20:31, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Utente:Paolippe

Not that it will help much (this is insane!) but I've attempted to reach out to the user on the Italian wiki. I don't blame you if you ask for moderator intervention, this must be exhausting. Thanks, Garchy (talk) 20:53, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

To editor Garchy: Good call. Not sure how the user could have missed all the message notices on the wiki he was actually editing on, unless there was some automation in use. —swpbT 21:06, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for suggestion. I won't edit Utente:Paolippe. You can delete it. --Paolippe (talk) 21:11, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

March events and meetups in DC

Greetings from Wikimedia DC!

Looking for something to do in DC in March? We have a series of great events planned for the month:

Can't make it to an event? Most of our edit-a-thons allow virtual participation; see the guide for more details.

Do you have an idea for a future event? Please write to us at info@wikimediadc.org!

Kirill Lokshin (talk) 16:29, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

You're receiving this message because you signed up for updates about DC meetups. To unsubscribe, please remove your name from the list.

Speedy deletion: the Left Right Lefts

Simply a description of a band on the punk band listings. Currently in the process of structuring its content. Tony saturday (talk) 19:41, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

To editor Tony saturday: Is the band notable? By that, I mean does it meet our notability criteria? Do you have reliable sources (no, Facebook does not count) proving that? Without that, we cannot keep your page here. This is an encyclopedia, not a social media site. —swpbT 19:44, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ground segment, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Redundancy. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:53, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

speedy deletion: GoBeauty

To editor Swpb: Hi, hope I'm adding this the right way. I've just received your note about deletion (the page was already gone when I saw this). This was my first ever page, first of several I hope, generally in the same subject area for the EMEA region, so may I ask, what particularly was wrong with it, if you remember, e.g. was it the way I quoted the citations? And, is there a way to put it up in a sandbox so that I can get it right before posting?

(I realise you're busy, but if you can hint at direction, then I'll get it right in my own time, I'm still quite slow!)

Thanks, Alex Alex Disarono (talk) 23:19, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

To editor Alex Disarono: Yes, you can create a sandbox in your userspace, e.g.: User:Alex Disarono/GoBeauty; or you can create a page in draft space, e.g: Draft:GoBeauty. From memory, the deleted page made very heavy use of advertising language, and came across as an attempt to promote the subject, rather than impart neutrally-worded, factual (i.e., encyclopedic) information about it. If a subject is truly notable enough to merit an article, you don't need to sell it. You can get a better idea of what's acceptable and what's not by checking out WP:NPOV, WP:PEACOCK, and WP:PROMOTION. —swpbT 13:06, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
To editor Swpb: Brilliant, yes I agree, very good point, thank you!! (and thanks for the how to's)

Alex Alex Disarono (talk) 14:51, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Double speedy

Hey, looks like we tagged Ramesh deuba for speedy deletion at the exact same time. Hope you don't mind that I took yours off - looked weird to have two tags on the same page. --Drm310 (talk) 19:20, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Uncat cats

Just FYI just to save you looking, I've knocked off all of the uncategorised categories apart from the China ones from Zee money/Emausbot. I did nearly 300 of them a while back, I just needed a break before going back to them! My Wiki time is rather patchy so I'm not much use for regular maintenance, instead I come in and hit a backlog on a one-off basis, so I'm afraid I can't commit to chasing these things on an ongoing basis. Cheers.Le Deluge (talk) 20:20, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

To editor Le Deluge: Nicely done! Don't feel bad about any patchiness; all help is appreciated! —swpbT 20:21, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
And it's now all done - for now... I'm not sure how much more time I'll have in this block, but there's always backlogs to tackle! Le Deluge (talk) 14:32, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Splits

I don't know why you are so against the splitting. I mean, come on, I saw you are working for 10 years, I am no different devoted like you, I never did it without reading guidelines for Splitting, I am honest. Beside obvious discussion was quite minimal on those author pages, so I did always with good faith and being bold. I will try to discuss any matter that the splits on articles we can observe are quite incapable of holding the bibliographies but please let's assume good discussion and not threatening and malign each other. Many of these articles needed such splits. But we have to gather and talk, since I think there should be more included into the decisions.

Kindest regards and greatest respect:The Mad Hatter (talk)
To editor Mad Hatter: It's not my talk page where you need to make your case; it is the talk pages of the articles you believe should be split. Place the {{split}} template on the top of the article, initiate a discussion on the talk page, and wait a reasonable time for responses. Since, as you say, some of these pages may not be closely watched, I think you should give at least ten days. As you know, I oppose most of these splits as unjustified by the length of readable text, and the guideline is firmly with me on that — so you will need to demonstrate significant support, not merely silence, before you proceed. I believe you have misread WP:SIZESPLIT; it is readable text size that matters, not total page size. As such, nearly all of your splits fall far short of the criteria. If you think the criteria are wrong, then you need to start a policy discussion. —swpbT 12:24, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
To editor Mad Hatter: If I might interject, although this is not my area whatsoever and I've not followed the history - I think Mad Hatter does have a point. My test is always to think about what a GA version of an article would look like, and looking at something like Jennifer Roberson, I think the detail in the bibliography would be excessive for the GA version of the biography. So I think there is the basis for a content-based split, on the grounds that the article is about a person and not the books. I have no opinion whether the book summaries belong in Wikipedia, but either they should be shortened and kept in the bio article, or split out into a separate article. One or the other, because at the moment the article is very unbalanced and it just doesn't work as an article. Anne McCaffrey looks a bit more marginal. I'd agree that discussion should be started on the Talk pages - and the issue flagged on WT:BIOG and WT:BOOKS or appropriate taskforces thereof.Le Deluge (talk) 14:32, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
That's a valid point; there may be an argument for content-based as opposed to size-based splits, in some cases. The proper process needs to be followed, of course. —swpbT 14:37, 14 April 2016 (UTC)


Anne McCaffrey has a special Anne McCaffrey bibliography and we are just dublicating the material in the main article. I left only... Clasification section I think, into the article, and I don't understand why so swiftly it got reverted, and I even gave a notice that it is dublicating with the main article. Jennifer Roberson and Jim Butcher are perfect exemple that the articles are getting out of proportion to hold such lenghty bibliographies. I did the same on Robert Jordan and pointed out that Jordan is a notable Conan author, but we should look over the articles if they are getting too big to hold such information, we should split the pages into their own Bibliography like I did on Gregory Benford and the R.A. Salvatore bibliography, that can be found in the special Category for Fantasy bibliographies or the same for Sci-Fi. There is no need for such a mash up in the main article.

The Mad Hatter (talk)
To editor Mad Hatter: Again, the place you need to make your case is not here, but on the article's talk pages. You need editors with an interest in the specific articles to weigh in and agree with you. No amount of discussion on my personal talk page is going to suffice. —swpbT 14:45, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Deletion?

Hi, Just a question, why are you proposing nearly all my articles for deletion? 102Legobrick (talk) 14:54, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

To editor 102Legobrick: Read the nomination. It tells you everything you need to know. Although your removal of the prods without explanation rubbed me the wrong way, you can be assured this isn't personal; I truly believe these pages are not acceptable by Wikipedia standards, at least in their current state. Feel free to look for more and better resources and add information on why each of these vessels is notable, if such information exists. —swpbT 15:02, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
For all mentioned yachts I have found additional sources, and I added them to the corresponding articles. I hope this is enough to take them off the deletion list. 102Legobrick (talk) 18:28, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Printing Revolution

He only created a redirect. You need to contact the editor who made it an article. Johnbod (talk) 03:27, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Datuk G. Palanivel listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Datuk G. Palanivel. Since you had some involvement with the Datuk G. Palanivel redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Alexander Iskandar (talk) 04:45, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Spy-Fi

Where did claim any of these accusations against you? I just claimed that since there is no opposition to the split there is no further need for consensus. WP:BRD allows people to do this unless somebody has a valid reason to oppose such a move so then consensus must be reached, but it's no longer needed here. I started a discussion days ago and nobody ever opposed so at this point we no longer need consensus.

I never accused you of anything.--Taeyebaar (talk) 15:44, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

To editor Taeyebaar: I don't understand half of what you're trying to say (what is this talk of you accusing me of something?), but what I do understand you have totally wrong. You knew there was "opposition to the split", because I reverted it, so claiming there was no opposition is false. You didn't ping anyone in your "discussion" (do you understand that linking to a user like [[User:Swpb]] is not the same thing as pinging them with the {{to}} template?) Regardless of what you thought when, policy is clear: where there is no consensus, the original version stands (that means before the split). If you want to split again, you'll need to get a real consensus. Mad Hatter is facing community sanction for doing what you're doing, so don't think you are immune from the same. —swpbT 17:49, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

speedy deletion: LoadFocus

This page should not be speedily deleted because... (your reason here) --Rob Lippiatt 20:33, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello, I am only just starting with this article but please do not delete it. In uk English non league football colon Lippiatt is most likely one of the most well known and successful and therefore is of significant historical importance

To editor Swpb:

Hello,

I am new to creating content on Wikipedia, and just wanted to understand what should I do not to get the page deleted again? Page deleted: swpbT 15:25, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, Andrew Andrew.qatestacc (talk) 15:16, 16 April 2016 (UTC) User:Andrew.qatestacc 15:08 - Saturday, 16 April 2016

My Reason

Hi As i already mentioned that i am a web designer so as a learner i want to learn Wikipedia markup language and so that why i am trying 'cause it provide an environment to execute it's markup language. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deepak Singh Bisht Nainital (talk • contribs) 18:57, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

To editor Deepak Singh Bisht Nainital: Did you read the reply I wrote for you? There are spaces where you can learn and practice all you want. The main article space is not one of them. That is why the page you made is being deleted. —swpbT 19:00, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Aragam, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Himalayan and North Kashmir. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:00, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Re 5th dimension

I just wished to tell you that the G1 speedy deletion criteria (patent nonsense) only applies if the page is gibberish, for example if someone created a page with the content "dindiaq3g3dkijopdj" or any random letters that don't make words. As long as you can read words, G1 does not apply. 331dot (talk) 16:07, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

To editor 331dot: The criterion does not say that. It says "incoherent text". To me, that describes the tagged page perfectly. If you want the criterion to specify "no readable words", you need to get a consensus to change it to say that. —swpbT 16:09, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
It says "incoherent text or gibberish" on my Twinkle listing for G1 and "if you can understand it, G1 does not apply"; I can understand "Ascending into 5th dimension means living in accordance with the truth". 331dot (talk) 16:16, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
To editor 331dot: WP:PN, which G1 links to, specifically identifies "word salad" as nonsense. Whether this page is word salad or not may be debatable. What's not debatable is this: pages (in general) can absolutely be deleted under G1 when they are made up of real words. So please do not try that argument with anyone else, until and unless you achieve a consensus to change the wording of the criterion. —swpbT 16:19, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
I apologize for my poor wording; that's not what I meant to suggest. I of course agree that random words strung together incoherently merit G1, but I was too focused on referring to this specific example to point that out. 331dot (talk) 16:23, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Ghost Of Anna

Hi. Just to let you know I deleted it as a blatant hoax. I don't think A7 really applies to ghosts... 8-o Peridon (talk) 20:50, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

It might from the page creator's perspective... —swpbT

DeMarco

Please stop flagging mine for deletion. I get you dopnt delete it yourself but you flag it for them. I am brand new to Wikipedia and it is a pain having to start, restart and restart my article.

Kyle DeMarco 5/16/2016 Krdemarco (talk) 15:47, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

To editor Krdemarco: That is happening because your article is inappropriate. If you take the time to read the guidelines in the deletion tags, you can figure out how to create an article that does belong here. (Hint: don't advertise, and don't copy text from somewhere else.) Until you do that, I have no sympathy. —swpbT 15:49, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Delection of Praxi - Can I try again?

Hi, and thanks for your help. PRAXI is a company that has existed for more than fifty years and has collaborated to the Italian economic and social development. Also it is already mentioned in wikipedia to be one of the first Italian companies to buy a top-level domain. For all these reasons it seems to me we should have a dedicated entry in Wikipedia. But maybe you deleted my page Can you kindly explain me which guidelines I didn't respected? Thank you in advance. --Dpsmeb (talk) 16:08, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

  1. The text appears to have been copied from another webpage. Wikipedia's licensing terms prevent us from accepting content that may belong to someone else. See Wikipedia:Copyright violations.
  2. The text was highly promotional. We are an encyclopedia, not a place to advertise. Please see WP:NPOV and other guidelines like WP:ADVERT and WP:PEACOCK to understand the problem. —swpbT 16:13, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

GUI testing tools

Hi! Since yesterday you told me "then by all means, nominate it for deletion yourself." I did this amongst others with the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_GUI_testing_tools page, since this page mainly contains primary references to tools, many of which are commercial. Since this does not seem to be consistent with the wikipedia rules, I nominated it to see what happens and understand the process more.

Now I see that this page is really nominated for deletion....... But now comes the sad part. This list is actually very useful, I know many people that refer to it and who want to make it more complete! (the latter being impossible as I found after 5 tries!!) So this means that a useful encyclopedic entry that will now be lost? Isn´t it so that the wikipedia rules have become too complex to be managed? I wonder what would happen if every page would be nominated and investigated... How many would fit with all the rules?? T. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tanja vos (talk • contribs) 07:53, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia's rules are not "too complex to be managed" just because you can't handle them; hundreds of other editors handle them just fine. There's a difference between valuable pages with room for improvement (arguably all of them, including the one above that you tried to have deleted), and pages that don't meet even the most minimal, explicitly stated threshold for inclusion (i.e., yours, the like of which are removed by the dozens every day). Please add up all the time you've spend so far complaining about how it isn't fair, and compare that to the time you've spent indentifying reliable sources (if they even exist) for your pet subject, and then tell me you've used your time wisely. Better yet, don't tell me anything; this is getting tedious. You're not here to build an encyclopedia, you're here to promote a project you worked on—and we don't need you. —swpbT 13:08, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Page Deletion

Hey, as you know I am new here, just wanted to let you know that I really want the page not to be deleted. The information it gives is not a duplicate at all and has new information. Thanks for telling me I can contest the deletion BillyWikiLuigi (talk) 17:02, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Scoutisme Béninois, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Energy efficiency. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:11, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Motor coordination

That was a valid hatnote for an ambiguous term that redirected to the article, but only one of the three links to it was correct so I've redirected it to the disambiguation page instead. Peter James (talk) 19:44, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Carbon dioxide cleaning, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Grease. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:27, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey

The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:49, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation challenge

Hi. I was wondering why you were continuing to edit Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links/May 2016, when it is now June? --R'n'B (call me Russ) 19:50, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, my mistake. —swpbT 19:56, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
I understand, these things can sneak by us sometimes. :-) R'n'B (call me Russ) 20:26, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Form factor (design), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Maintenance. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:21, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Green aviation

Template:Green aviation has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. - Ahunt (talk) 12:57, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

ARCAPITA

Hi Swpb, thank you for your comments regarding my latest revision, you may not be aware but the page I am trying to edit has undergone some significant changes since emerging from Chapter 11 and formed as a new entity, the information under Arcapita's page is no longer relevant. I would like to update this page with pure factual information. Please can you tell me how I can go about this? I am happy to discuss all information with you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.105.127.34 (talk) 08:31, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 13 July

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:17, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Horse breeds

Just an FYI, but Category:Horse breeds is a non-diffusing category. It's important to be that way for certain statistical tracking and maintenance of the articles in this group. So please don't remove it from any horse breed article even if you add a "child" category. I fixed the one you did remove and do want to thank you for adding the subcat. Thanks. Montanabw(talk) 21:44, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Edit summaries

Please use edit summaries. This is particularly important when nominating articles for deletion. Thanks. --Michig (talk) 12:58, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Algorithm, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Modulus. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:22, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Editor's Barnstar
Thank you for creating Degree of difficulty. It may be more obvious in some sports but not so much in others. I see it being helpful to readers in understanding aspects of competition that go beyond what we see and think of as "easy to execute" because of the expertise of athletes. Atsme📞📧 20:30, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! —swpbT 12:38, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

ani

Hi, did you forget to sign your opening statements at ani? Cardamon (talk) 20:56, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Personally, I agree with you about Montanabw. While, I should assume good faith, it's not easy when dealing with Montanabw. I could go on about dishonesty and double standards, but that isn't really constructive. It's just a shame that some people make editing Wikipedia such a confrontational experience. Spacecowboy420 (talk) 10:43, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
To editor Spacecowboy420: I appreciate it. Perhaps you can make a note to check in on her behavior once in a while; the only way this kind of abuse can be put to a stop is with the attentions of multiple editors. —swpbT 14:26, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
Thanks for cleaning up the Ramaunjan disambiguation page,... and many, many others. Your efforts to clean up the sites' disambiguation pages are appreciated. Neuroxic (talk) 06:23, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Thanks! —swpbT 13:20, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Category:Historic districts in USA Virginia Northern

Hi, you moved this category eight days ago but the contents haven't been moved because it's populated by a complicated template. Can you edit the template to move the contents over as well? Timrollpickering (talk) 10:23, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

To editor Timrollpickering: Maybe; my template syntax knowledge is limited. What is the template? —swpbT 12:40, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
I think it's Template:Infobox NRHP but it's very convoluted because it generates categories & co-ordinates from a single set of entries. This Historic districts categories have been a complete pain to deal with when moved. Timrollpickering (talk) 12:54, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Holy something, that's a complicated template. And a protected one. I'm sorry, but I think you'll have to get in touch with whoever originally wrote that, or someone much better at templates than me, to fix it. —swpbT 13:33, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Dynamism of a Dog on a Leash

On 30 August 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Dynamism of a Dog on a Leash, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the 1912 Futurist painting Dynamism of a Dog on a Leash was inspired by Giacomo Balla's fascination with chronophotography? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Dynamism of a Dog on a Leash. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Dynamism of a Dog on a Leash), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:02, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited American University, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rush Holt. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Severna Park (disambiguation)

A tag has been placed on Severna Park (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G6 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an orphaned disambiguation page which either

  • disambiguates two or fewer extant Wikipedia pages and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic); or
  • disambiguates no (zero) extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

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 "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. Nohomersryan (talk) 02:01, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Severna Park (disambiguation) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Severna Park (disambiguation) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Severna Park (disambiguation) 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. Nohomersryan (talk) 00:04, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Category:Wikipeidans who play Pokémon Go listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Category:Wikipeidans who play Pokémon Go. Since you had some involvement with the Category:Wikipeidans who play Pokémon Go redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. 333-blue 06:43, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Category:Rolling animals has been nominated for discussion

Category:Rolling animals, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. 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. --Animalparty! (talk) 20:19, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

TPERs

See Special:Diff/742464099 and Special:Diff/742464160. I interpreted your edit requests not to be for the same template, but for 3 seaprate ones. — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 21:54, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Yes, that was my intent. —swpbT 12:36, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Cyclone Haiyan listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Cyclone Haiyan. Since you had some involvement with the Cyclone Haiyan redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. N-C16 (talk) 07:18, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Creating categories

Hi, thanks for the reminder about categories. I will ensure you that I will not create any new categories at all in the future. I have addressed my mistakes also to both users you mentioned. Thank you and have a nice day. MbahGondrong (talk) 13:03, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

User:Thelmadatter/Solben (Bioenergy solutions)

Hello, I am a college student from the Tecnológico de Monterrey, and as a project of my Discourse Analysis and Academic Writing course I am working on the creation of an article about a Mexican biodiesel company. I would be very grateful if you could invest some of your time in checking my work in this article. Thank you very much; I am looking forward for your response. Have a nice day. Edgarbl3 (talk) 17:03, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

thank you

for your redirects of emptied geol cats - appreciated !! JarrahTree 22:35, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

.

Hello, re your deletion of my page colin lippiatt, this is not an article on a living person this is an aticle about my Father who passed away in 2010 so please leave the page as it is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.196.43.238 (talk) 07:59, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

WP:ACCIM rule #6

Replacing "to the right" with "adjacent" as you did here is not really an improvement. On Wikipedia mobile viewed on a mobile device the image will typically appear above the relevant text (that is in this particular case; depending on where the image wikitext has been inserted, in other cases it could be below). It is not even immediately above, so adjacent is still wrong, possibly even more confusing. For people using screenreaders it is entirely meaningless to use any kind of positional term. SpinningSpark 16:07, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

I appreciate that, but I disagree. I see no scenario where "adjacent" is worse than "left" or "right". The word "adjacent" encompasses "above" and "below", even when not immediately so. If I come across a page where it looks like "adjacent" will actually add confusion, I won't use it, but I have yet to see a page where that is the case. —swpbT 17:27, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

explain please

At the compact article you said "pointless and harmless" without any elaboration. You also said BRD, and I have started the thread. Please elaborate your views there. Thanks. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 20:53, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Swpb. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

DS alert (us politics)

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 21:45, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

No fault, no shame. I sent one to myself, also. Let's try to be less personalized at the article talk please? Thanks. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 21:46, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
No relevance either. Learn to understand that it's 100% acceptable for me to denigrate your writing without it being a comment on you personally. You're not going to get sympathy for a "conduct" complaint based on anything I've said to you. —swpbT 14:04, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Abbreviations on Disambig pages

Question: For a disambig article such as FA, it's my understanding that (based on WP:DABABBREV) an editor would only put abbreviations that commonly used and are in the target article (JFK or UK for example). I'm a bit new to the Disambiguation Project and I'm working through the November 2016 list. Am I on the right track here? ThanksDig Deeper (talk) 23:35, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

That's generally right, with the caveat of common sense (as in everything else). Commonly used abbreviations should appear in the target article, but if they don't, it may be worth digging deeper before removing them from the dab. Thanks for working on the backlog and for being concerned about doing it right, and welcome to the project!! —swpbT 14:07, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for getting back to me. I rather do things right than create more work for someone else. I don't mind doing some digging, and puns are always welcome! 😊Dig Deeper (talk) 04:13, 23 November 2016 (UTC) Dig Deeper (talk) 04:13, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Ha, totally unintended! —swpbT 14:10, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

New Page Review - newsletter

Hello Swpb/Archive,
Breaking the back of the backlog
We now have 804 New Page Reviewers! Most of you requested the user right to be able to do something about the huge backlog. Now it's time for action.
Mid July to 01 Oct 2016

If each reviewer does only 10 reviews a day over five days, the backlog will be down to zero and the daily input can then be processed by each reviewer doing only 2 or 3 reviews a day - that's about 5 minutes work!
Let's get that over and done with in time to relax for the holidays.

Second set of eyes

Not only are New Page Reviewers the guardians of quality of new articles, they are also in a position to ensure that pages are being correctly tagged for deletion and maintenance and that new authors are not being bitten. This is an important feature of your work. Read about it at the new Monitoring the system section in the tutorial.

Getting the tools we need - 2016 WMF Wishlist Survey: Please vote

With some tweaks to their look, and some additional features, Page Curation and New Pages Feed could easily be the best tools for patrollers and reviewers. We've listed most of what what we need at the 2016 WMF Wishlist Survey. Voting starts on 28 November - please turn out to make our bid the Foundation's top priority. Please help also by improving or commenting on our Wishlist entry at the Community Wishlist Survey. Many other important user suggestions are listed at at Page Curation.

Sent to all New Page Reviewers. Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:16, 26 November 2016 (UTC) .

Category:Recipients of Princess of Asturias Awards

What just happened here? Gjs238 (talk) 14:25, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

A mistake. —swpbT 14:29, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

BBC 12-hour Editathon - large influx of new pages & drafts expected

New Page Reviewers are asked to be especially on the look out 08:00-20:00 UTC (that's local London time - check your USA and AUS times) on Thursday 8 December for new pages. The BBC together with Wikimedia UK is holding a large 12-hour editathon. Many new articles and drafts are expected. See BBC 100 Women 2016: How to join our edit-a-thon. Follow also on #100womenwiki, and please, don't bite the newbies :) (user:Kudpung for NPR. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:55, 7 December 2016 (UTC))

New Page Review - newsletter #2

Hello Swpb/Archive,
Please help reduce the New Page backlog

This is our second request. The backlog is still growing. Your help is needed now - just a few minutes each day.

Getting the tools we need

ONLY TWO DAYS LEFT TO VOTE

Sent to all New Page Reviewers. Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:55, 11 December 2016 (UTC) .

dab notices

see reply at User talk:BrownHairedGirl#dab_notices. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs)

Pepper

Hi !

I agree with your comment on the pepper-disambiguation.

The problem I ran into when trying to fix it is that it appears to me as if *most* of the pages linking to "pepper" really mean pepper as in the group of spices. Which means that:

Linking to black_pepper is wrong. Linking to the disambiguation is however also not correct, it is clear they mean "pepper (spice)" and not for example, "pepper (music)". I wrote about it on the talk-page for pepper.

What do you think about my idea: Write a new page "pepper (spice)" which talks about the group of spices commonly refered to as pepper (or peppers), and include links to the various types of peppers, such as black_pepper and chili_pepper.

Good ? Bad ? Wanna help ?

Weightlessness

Excuse me,but i didnt edit that page.You might be mistaken with someone else. 82.20.49.200 November the 13th 2007 5:19 (UTC)

Trønder

Sorry about that. I was not aware of the prosedure. I swear I was not comitting vandalism. Thanks for letting me know. Nastykermit (talk)

Slide

Hello, Swpb. You have new messages at Baffle gab1978's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Kaustubh Sarwate User: kausis

Nehru Institute of Mountaineering is a highly renowned mountaineering institute in India as well as in Asia. Yet there is very little information available about the courses they conduct. My endeavour was to attempt to capture this information thereby making it a fairly reliable source of information for both national and international students planning to do the course here. I believe the article provides a lot of detail which is otherwise not available either on wikipedia or externally. What I have covered is from my personal experience at the institute recently. Hence the request to maintain this information on wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kausis (talk • contribs)

Changing a pages title and url

Hi quick question, how do I edit the page title and url as I need to change Bob Ives (racing driver) to Bob Ives (Off Road Specialist). Still working on this page, updates will follow, so hopefully your be able to remove your tags.User:Fluffyghost

Yarkhushta

Shivanshis4

Hi !!

I am currently working on the page 'CFactory'..that's why it is blank..Please check it after some hours.And if you can, then approve it too.I am trying to follow all instructions of wikipedia. But i will appreciate if you will guide me.I am using it for the first time.

Thanks !! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shivanshis4 (talk • contribs)

The Bronx Times

You PRODded this, and it was deleted. Undeletion has been (rudely) requested at WP:REFUND, so per WP:DEL#Proposed deletion I have restored it, and now notify you in case you wish to consider AfD. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 17:30, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

To editor JohnCD: Thanks, indeed I have. —swpbT 13:40, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

An apology

I wish to apologize for the tone with which I responded to your comment on Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Sattar_Bhagat. While I believe entirely in what I said, perhaps I went about it in the wrong manner and was doing so purely out of frustration. I hope we can both move on from this. Bobo. 03:43, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Doubling down is not a great way to go about an apology. If you still insist that I lied or mislead anyone about anything, which it seems you do, then no, I do not accept this half-apology. It isn't just your tone that was wrong, it was your baseless factual claim. How you think I'd let that go is beyond me. —swpbT 13:25, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Durability

Hey, I'm a little confused about your revision of my edit. I reverted the same edits of that user that you had previously. The disambig page is for durability not "envirocondurability". Perhaps I'm missing something here? (Sorry if this isn't clear on mobile so can't elaborate much more) Chrissymad ❯❯❯ ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

The mysterious "envirocondurability" aside, there seems to be a clear attempt here to create a legitimate article about a primary topic simply called durability. There was and is some cleanup and expansion needed, but wholesale reversion to a dab page was not the right answer. Yes, I reverted to the dab before as well, but I've become convinced that the primary topic belongs here as a WP:BCA, rather than a dab. —swpbT 13:50, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Giacomo Balla

Hi, Swpb, I extended the list with another reference. Just wondering if it would make sense to add an extra column with the respective image from commons. Thank you for your time. Lotje (talk) 10:12, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

That's an excellent idea. —swpbT 13:37, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Teacher training colleges

Thanks for your message. 'Education schools' is not UK English usage; what is the Wikipedia policy on using locally relevant language? Are all UK universities going to be referred to as schools in Wikipedia? I would prefer to retain the distinct category, but would welcome your views. Sjoh0050 (talk) 16:57, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

To editor Sjoh0050: If British English uses a different term for the same concept, the correct solution is to create a redirect, never a separate category. It would be mayhem if we had separate categories every time British and American English call the same thing by a different name. If you think the (one) category could have a more universal name, I'd advise you to propose that on its talk page. —swpbT 17:56, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Swpb/Archive/2016&oldid=1089995115"