Revision as of 20:35, 14 May 2012 view sourceGreg L (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers31,897 edits →Is this in jest or a joke?: expand← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:36, 14 May 2012 view source DangerousPanda (talk | contribs)38,827 edits →Near-incoherent rants: more smacNext edit → | ||
Line 285: | Line 285: | ||
:::: Have you ''seen'' the teenagers these days? I'd be in sooo much trouble if I was back in high school right now (]<span style="border:1px solid black;">''' ] '''</span>]) 20:16, 14 May 2012 (UTC) | :::: Have you ''seen'' the teenagers these days? I'd be in sooo much trouble if I was back in high school right now (]<span style="border:1px solid black;">''' ] '''</span>]) 20:16, 14 May 2012 (UTC) | ||
::::: If only ... one can dream ... -- ] (]) 20:28, 14 May 2012 (UTC) | ::::: If only ... one can dream ... -- ] (]) 20:28, 14 May 2012 (UTC) | ||
:::::: Careful; this isn't ] :-P (]<span style="border:1px solid black;">''' ] '''</span>]) 20:36, 14 May 2012 (UTC) | |||
== Is ''this'' better? == | == Is ''this'' better? == |
Revision as of 20:36, 14 May 2012
This is DangerousPanda's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15Auto-archiving period: 15 days |
Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Capri Anderson (2nd nomination)
Good bye, good riddanceThe following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
How exactly do you get "delete" instead of at least "no consensus" for this? The version of the article from the first AfD (which I didn't create or even see, btw) was all about "her relationship with a star", and apparently the article was recreated so many times back then that it was salted. But then after she was nominated for pornographic awards in multiple years, I created the article again in my userspace, and User:Chick Bowen not only saw it and approved of it, but s/he even moved it into mainspace. Would an admin have done that if notability wasn't present? And I don't understand why articles I create lately are deleted when they do pass the guideline. I shouldn't have to keep explaining this to people, but just because WP:PORNBIO is under discussion doesn't mean it should be ignored. Erpert 05:21, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- I'm certain that you read my rather detailed closing message (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:02, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- I did, but it should be consensus in conjunction with guidelines, not just consensus. Erpert 19:18, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- Exactly. My close was 100% in line with policies. Thanks for making my point for me ... it's easier when that happens (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 19:25, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- That's not what I meant. WP:PORNBIO is under discussion, but it's still a guideline. Some people seem to think that just because it's under discussion means that it should be ignored (which is exactly what the delete !voters said), and I haven't seen anything on Misplaced Pages that says that that's what that means. To be honest, it almost amounts to votestacking (which I'm not accusing you of doing, btw). Let me ask you this: how, exactly, does Anderson not pass WP:PORNBIO? Erpert 19:31, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- Policies outweigh guidelines, as I noted in my close. The policy of most-restrictive (especially in BLP's) must apply. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 19:42, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- People always say things like this when I make a good point and they can't answer my question. I guess Misplaced Pages has turned into a place where people can just ignore guidelines they don't like and get away with it. And it doesn't violate any policy either, but I doubt you care. Whatever. Erpert 19:52, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- Policies outweigh guidelines, as I noted in my close. The policy of most-restrictive (especially in BLP's) must apply. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 19:42, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- That's not what I meant. WP:PORNBIO is under discussion, but it's still a guideline. Some people seem to think that just because it's under discussion means that it should be ignored (which is exactly what the delete !voters said), and I haven't seen anything on Misplaced Pages that says that that's what that means. To be honest, it almost amounts to votestacking (which I'm not accusing you of doing, btw). Let me ask you this: how, exactly, does Anderson not pass WP:PORNBIO? Erpert 19:31, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- Exactly. My close was 100% in line with policies. Thanks for making my point for me ... it's easier when that happens (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 19:25, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- I did, but it should be consensus in conjunction with guidelines, not just consensus. Erpert 19:18, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
A question to my TPS's
Now that I have an editor who has copied my unique, detailed sig verbatim (see here), is it:
- time for a major change of sig
- time for a minor change of sig
- time to not give a crap
See here if desired (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:22, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- If someone copied mine i would change it. How about a change of colour if you don't want a wholesale change.Edinburgh Wanderer 23:49, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
Why You deleted the Bollywood Xplorer
May i know why you deleted the Bollywood Xplorer on (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement (CSDH)) ground? Please check again whether its come under this or not. I believe you have acted improperly. I want to go for Dispute resolution process or Arbitration Committee directly.--CrazyAboutBollywood 19:19, 29 April 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by CrazyAboutBollywood (talk • contribs)
- Here's a better idea: make a WP:USERSPACEDRAFT. Make sure it meets WP:FIRSTARTICLE - including reliable sourcing, notability, and our WP:MOS. When you think it's ready to actually be an article, check with a few wise individuals. Until then, it remains deleted and is protected from being recreated. You don't jump from deletion to ArbComm ... that's ridiculous (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 19:28, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
What do you mean by a few wise individuals? Clear me first. No body is helping here. Lots of admin creating only regime instead of helping the users like me. I have checked this deleted article with the duplication detection tool easily available on the internet. It is showing only 3% relevancy. I have also checked other wiki articles with there website, the tool is showing 17% relevancy. Why that are not coming under this criteria? I know you will say that i should not compare the deleted article with other existing articles. Ok being a common wiki editor its not my right to ask to a admin? As far as i know about wikipedia it is a unbiased, the why this biasing? I have checked This wiki article is present on wiki since a long time, so why deletion now? It seems it is only due to some user who don't think this article should present on wikipedia and tagging for deletion and a few admin favoring that users blindly. Why? Please Please let me know what should i do now? --CrazyAboutBollywood 19:59, 29 April 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by CrazyAboutBollywood (talk • contribs)
- I have advised you on what to do. Go. Try it. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 20:01, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
Ok Thanks for your reply. How to decide who is wise individual? If i believe i not getting any wise individual, will you help me in creating and reviewing the articles? May i create the deleted articles freshly again?--CrazyAboutBollywood 20:07, 29 April 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by CrazyAboutBollywood (talk • contribs)
- Please re-read my original reply: the article CANNOT be re-created right now - I have implemented protection because of the repeated violations. Read the blue-linked policies/documents, especially WP:USERSPACEDRAFT. No, I cannot assist in creating - it's not a topic of interest/significant knowledge to me, so I am unaware of valid sources at this time. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 20:11, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
Ok let me know How this deleted article violate the copyright? If u checked, will u provide me the duplication content reference. This article has only 13 words relevancy. How it is violating the copyright? Wiki guidline says that couple of sentences can be quoted and it is safe. How it is violating the copyright?--CrazyAboutBollywood 20:21, 29 April 2012 (UTC)-- — Preceding unsigned comment added by CrazyAboutBollywood (talk • contribs)
I believe you have acted improperly. I will go for dispute resolution process.--CrazyAboutBollywood 20:59, 29 April 2012 (UTC)--CrazyAboutBollywood 20:59, 29 April 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by CrazyAboutBollywood (talk • contribs)
- See WP:CLOSEPARAPHRASING. Dispute resolution is for existing articles - yours does not exist. Do you have another account? (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 21:10, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- CrazyAboutBollywood I don't think you are getting it right. Threatening or abusing any wiki editor is not the way to go forward. I think it is really sensible to read all the wiki policies Bwilkin has laid for you, especially notability. The article in question is not deleted only because of copyright infringement, it also doesn't meet the wiki notability criteria, which is rather the main reason for deletion, I hope this helps. Fanofbollywood (talk) 21:41, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
Please will you review my case
The source issue is no longer that important in the debate (that is being sorted at RS/N), and I'm not seeking administrative action, but there has been a major dispute over the structure of the article. Slimvirgin is making major structural changes to the article to the List of vegans article without a consensus. Following the Passion of the Christ incident, you advised me to go Dispute Resolution to resolve an editing dispute. I have done this and she is refusing point blank to engage at dispute resolution, and has now asked her friend on the vegan article to write a program to remove all the citation templates, which frankly is ridiculous: Misplaced Pages:Citing_sources#Citation_templates_and_tools states the citation templates should not be removed without consensus. I have requested at the 3rr case that while the DR case is going on structural changes to the article should cease, and should only being undertaken within the remit of DR now I have opened the case. This is advice you gave me, and now an editor is just ignoring the process and planning on making even further changes. I am not asking for any blocks, just that all editors (including this admin) seeking to make structural changes to the list be compelled to gain a consensus at the open DR case. I think my request at the discussion is very reasonable, and I don't see the point of going through DR if editors aren't bound by it. Betty Logan (talk) 23:40, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- I tried it your way. I think you generally have higher ideals than most of your peers, but your aspirations on here just do not meet the reality of what Misplaced Pages really is, so I'm leaving, see Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard#Admin_refusing_to_participate_in_dispute_resolution. Thankyou for how you dealt with Armbrust; I know he let you down a bit but you were always good to him, it was nice to see someone else value what he did. Betty Logan (talk) 03:42, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
ani
Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Need_an_uninvolved_admin_to_close_a_POINTY_MfD Nobody Ent 02:17, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
AN/ANI
You'll never guess but I THOUGHT there was something odd about the content where I was editing. Not being a regular on that page I sensed unfamiliar surroundings; but it's late evening (early AM now) in the UK and I fell victim to the confusion. I'll remember for next time. Thanks for dealing with it and I hope that will be an end to it. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 23:09, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Help please
You recently protected 2012 Midi-Pyrénées shootings because of persistent edit-warring. I am encountering further difficulty in making any progress, and I request that you view Talk:2012 Midi-Pyrénées shootings, and advise me how to continue. I am being told to "wait for another editor", that frequently opposes me, and am being reverted without adequate explanation.
Best Wishes Ankh.Morpork 23:31, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Unblock on hold
I see that you placed an unblock at User talk:Notshane on hold back in February. Perhaps you could have another look at it. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:09, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
- I think the last time I looked the discussion wasn't going well. However ... if you're OK with the sample article he did, then you are free to unblock IMO. Daniel Case (talk) 14:58, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Help with updating one picture
Hello Bwilkins, I work for Kurupt's record label and he has directed me to somehow change his picture on his Wiki article. He strongly dislikes the picture that was used to represent him over the years in his article. I believe the file name on wiki commons is Kurupt in Abu Dahbi or something like that and its a horrible picture of him. I requested confirmed status/permissions manually last night to simply update the picture and was denied status and referred to you by another admin stating major conflicts of interest. i do not wish to change any wording of the article, in fact i believe the wording and information listed is highly correct, except official website but thats not an issue right now. I went ahead and updated the picture to Kurupt's liking last night without confirmed status and the picture I found he is ok with and everything seemed to be ok but now I'm getting notices saying the picture might be deleted in seven days and so forth. Can you please help me in achieving my goal of getting a new picture of my boss on his wiki? This shouldn't be a hard task. Thank you for any help on this. Scunni (talk) 18:06, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
- If the current image is on Commons, then you should probably upload the current one to Commons as well ... they have different processes (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 18:43, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Why have you deleted the CAFA Cougars page?
- Cafa cougars · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) ·
I wish to enquire about the reason for which you deleted the CAFA Cougars page. As far as me, and all members of the team are concerned, it is both relevant and informative. Leatherdaddy69 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leatherdaddy69 (talk • contribs) 12:37, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
- Someone tagged the "article" as not being notable. Indeed, in my verification the team does not appear to meet the notability requirements, especially as per WP:FOOTY. You may wish to be further aware of WP:COI (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:41, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Why delete A-fu Teng?
"disrespect" and incivility gets one nowhere. I'll note that WP:REFUND request has already been made. Offer to userfy has apparently been declined (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:31, 4 May 2012 (UTC)The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Please read the page carefully before you do something like deleting a page. It was relisted after references were provided, and the consensus after the relist is to KEEP. It's obvious from your comment "Consensus is to delete" that you have not read the page carefully like you should. Please respect other people's work who provided references as requested. http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/A-fu_Teng Timmyshin (talk) 02:03, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- I guess you didn't come here to discuss it nicely. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:00, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- That's the response you can provide? Whether I'm nice or not is beside the point, the point is you have not been responsible when you deleted the article, and you don't have the manhood to admit your mistake. You claimed it failed WP:Music. For the criteria listed on WP:Music, even if you had read the article for 1 minute, you can see the artist met #2, #4, not to mention 3 references from non-trivial national sources which meet #1. An editor doesn't have to be perfect, but making a major decision based on 2 inaccurate pieces of information and then refusing to admit & correct it only shows at the least that you are not qualified and not responsible. Timmyshin (talk) 16:28, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- Whether you're nice is part of the point: civility is part of the code of conduct. There are probably editors who will look less favorably on a deletion review request if the discussion is a string of personal attacks by you than if it is a polite discussion about your differing interpretations of the sourcing of the article and the consensus from the deletion discussion. —C.Fred (talk) 16:49, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- Stop diverting the issue. In my original post I used 2 "pleases" and talked about "respect other people's work" and somehow that is interpreted as uncivil, and "personal attacks"? So only begging is allowed on wiki? Look, we are all unpaid volunteers on wiki. From your link I can see wiki emphasizes "respect". When the page was first deleted, I spend hours finding and properly citing sources, romanizing the name, translating the titles of the sources, and he comes in and deletes it just like that, without even reading the page. I don't need to be personally attacking him, he knows well how much time he spent before he deleted the article. If he can honestly say he spent as much time as the other reviewers on that page, then he has my apologies. Timmyshin (talk) 22:45, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- Whether you're nice is part of the point: civility is part of the code of conduct. There are probably editors who will look less favorably on a deletion review request if the discussion is a string of personal attacks by you than if it is a polite discussion about your differing interpretations of the sourcing of the article and the consensus from the deletion discussion. —C.Fred (talk) 16:49, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- That's the response you can provide? Whether I'm nice or not is beside the point, the point is you have not been responsible when you deleted the article, and you don't have the manhood to admit your mistake. You claimed it failed WP:Music. For the criteria listed on WP:Music, even if you had read the article for 1 minute, you can see the artist met #2, #4, not to mention 3 references from non-trivial national sources which meet #1. An editor doesn't have to be perfect, but making a major decision based on 2 inaccurate pieces of information and then refusing to admit & correct it only shows at the least that you are not qualified and not responsible. Timmyshin (talk) 16:28, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
If I may ask, did you do any vetting of the sources, or did you just go by the discussion on the talk page? I noticed there were three sources in the article, though I don't think any of them were in English. Also, one of the delete !votes was kind of conditional: the user indicated that he might have to reconsider if sources were found. Based on that, I'm not sure there's a clear consensus; I don't think you made a "serious mistake," but I think I might have relisted or closed as no consensus, if I'd been the closing admin. Do you think that at least restoration to user space might be a good solution, to allow Timmyshin to continue to develop the article and hopefully to pull in more sources? —C.Fred (talk) 16:56, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- This is one that I dug for some additional resources, combined with the discussions. I found some translated articles, none of which convinced me of meeting WP:BAND...in part due to reliability, but also content. I'm never beyond userfying, but discussion has to be polite first. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 21:28, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- That wasn't clear from the closing message; thank you for clarifying. I'm happy with the close of the AfD; I'll leave it for Timmyshin to indicate if he wishes the text moved to his user space. —C.Fred (talk) 21:59, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- he'll have to be a heck of a lot more civil, if that's the direction he chooses :-). But he already knew that because it's visible every time he edits this page (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 22:04, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- Where is your response to me pointing out the artist meeting #1, #2 and #4 on WP:Band? Stop using civility as an excuse to divert the issue. Timmyshin (talk) 22:48, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- he'll have to be a heck of a lot more civil, if that's the direction he chooses :-). But he already knew that because it's visible every time he edits this page (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 22:04, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- It's clear from the closing message that you did not "dig for additional resources" before you deleted it. Where is your response to the fact that there was no consensus but you insisting there is? Timmyshin (talk) 22:52, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- Really? How do you determine "consensus"? Even if it was a !vote, you have a nominator, two well-reasoned deleted !votes, and a keep !vote - 3-1 if tally mattered. You're really going to have to work harder at your WP:AGF and WP:CIVIL. I'm not using Civility to skirt the issue, so that's a red-herring: when you edited this page, you read the top that says I will not, period, discuss the deletion if your discussion included incivility and attacks. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:33, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
- That wasn't clear from the closing message; thank you for clarifying. I'm happy with the close of the AfD; I'll leave it for Timmyshin to indicate if he wishes the text moved to his user space. —C.Fred (talk) 21:59, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
War criminals in Canada - to the point
In case I am ever in your shoes:
- when would you censure a 3 revision revert violator and when would the article be fully protected and for how long.?
- To what extent an admin's self-associated with an article's subject be considered involvement (e.g. you have delared to be a Canadian Admin - would that even be considered WP:Involved when you help out in a dispute on an article critical with Canadian policy?
- After protecting an article is is customary for the protector to follow development on the talk page? or should other channals like ArbCom be used to sort things out?
- when can we expect to see the protection removed ? BO; talk 02:18, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- I'm literally aghast at how much of this you have mistaken (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 22:07, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- I hope this revised version is something you can better respond too - I have removed much of the background and assumption. Thanks! BO; talk 10:57, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
- ...oh great, now you have refactored it, and completely changed the meaning of my reply. Don't ever do that. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:51, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
- Hey I am trying to get your input in good faith ? Why are you avoiding the questions? — Preceding unsigned comment added by OrenBochman (talk • contribs)
- I'm not avoiding: I'm teaching a man to fish :-) Refactoring is bad, bad, bad ... (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:04, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
- I tried to reintoduce the original version using <DEL> but it was removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OrenBochman (talk • contribs)
- Yes, did you see the mess your edits made to this talkpage? I was forced to undo them all (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 23:02, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
- Yep I was tryin to fix it - when you reverted. BTW The preview looked ok but the saved version was obviouly broken. I'd have opened a bug in Bugzilla - if I figured out the issue. Anyhow I'd prefer at this point if you deleted this section altogether. BO; talk 21:03, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, did you see the mess your edits made to this talkpage? I was forced to undo them all (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 23:02, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
- I tried to reintoduce the original version using <DEL> but it was removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OrenBochman (talk • contribs)
- I'm not avoiding: I'm teaching a man to fish :-) Refactoring is bad, bad, bad ... (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:04, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
- Hey I am trying to get your input in good faith ? Why are you avoiding the questions? — Preceding unsigned comment added by OrenBochman (talk • contribs)
- ...oh great, now you have refactored it, and completely changed the meaning of my reply. Don't ever do that. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:51, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
- I hope this revised version is something you can better respond too - I have removed much of the background and assumption. Thanks! BO; talk 10:57, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
User:Cla68
What do you think about User:Cla68 now that he has changed it? I'm inclined to withdraw the DRV on the grounds that the MfD is no longer necessary, but I'd like your input first. ‑Scottywong| chat _ 14:20, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
- It could be closed ... however, the concern would be that once the heat is off, he adds it again. Granted, DRV is just going to re-open the MFD and not make a real decision - OTHER than confirming that early closure of such discussions in wholly inappropriate. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 16:15, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
Some people just don't listen…
So basically, on Escape the Fate I removed all these bands under this associated acts section that have like barely (if not anything) to do with the band and and this guy non-stoppingly reverts it. He's been blocked for these reasons before. And today, I left him this talk page comment clearly saying it's in a guideline not to do what he's doing (which it is) and then he goes back to the article, reverts me again and gives a threat. Can you do something about this? • GunMetal Angel 21:56, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
- Geez, reminds me of someone else whose case recently slipped into my archives (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:48, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
- Okay, things are getting weird now, you may want to check the history for Escape the Fate. I'm feeling the page may need to get a full protection soon because there's other users (if not sockpuppets) that are doing the same thing to the page and re-adding all those bands. I've decided to stop reverting at this point (I've done two more reverts since the last 24 hours that I've reverted) so I'm staying in the safe zone now and not going beyond that. But have given each and every user a talk page comment telling them to stop before going on. This guy seems to be the most recent concern. ………Why is it so hard to follow the rules? • GunMetal Angel 22:59, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
- We've reached a consensus on my page, I was confused and thought he was a vandal but now that I've checked his contributions I can see I was mistaken. I will leave you to your edits Gunmetal. TJD2 (talk) 23:09, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
War criminals in Canada - Request for Unprotection
I am requesting the page be unprotected per WP:RUP. The request is to allow updating the sourcing of the article since 20 new sources have been uncovered on the talk page. This is neccessary to sort them in such a way that WP:N and WP:Vis not only established but also demonstrated. The same goes for WP:NPOV. BO; talk 04:16, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
- ...and how about WP:CFORK? (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:49, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not sure I follow your meaning? BO; talk 11:36, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
- You want to be an admin. Does the article deserve to stand alone on its own, or is it a mere content fork from something else? This is quite possibly the easiest question out there (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:03, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not sure I follow your meaning? BO; talk 11:36, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
- Good question but the question is not that simple to me. First of all I have become invested in that article. Second from an info-centric view there is a good argument to give it a specific article - It covers a non trivial intersection of material from other article while introducing new and specific information that is either too specific for the other subjects or altogether off topic for them. Thirdly from a wikipedia point of view it satisfies WP:N since there are so far about 4 (academic) books on the specific subject. BO; talk 14:34, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
- Hi - I wish someone would nominate it and get rid of it - if its going to be kept, we need to do something with the article sooner rather than later, especially the lede - User OrenB is working on the lede in his userspace, which I great and this is what he has so far - User:OrenBochman/ToDo#Alternate Lead Sections - Youreallycan 05:04, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
GUMS - Galway University University Society
Wondering on what basis you deleted the Galway University Musical Societies wiki page? I can't seem to think of any explanation.
We recently composed a 7 page booklet on the history of the society. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.203.219.138 (talk) 17:34, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
- That doesn't make it notable. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 18:59, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Recall clerking
I'm updating User:MBisanz/Recall and was wondering if you would be willing to serve as a clerk? MBisanz 21:28, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
- Wow, that's complex ... but I will agree to be one of the clerks. I'd say it's an honour to be asked, but I'm sure that's a mixed message! :-) (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:11, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks! Mixed emotions are a good thing. I grabbed you because our paths don't cross often, but you still seem like someone capable of making reasoned judgments. MBisanz 23:18, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
- Hopefully I never need to be used :-) (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 23:22, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks! Mixed emotions are a good thing. I grabbed you because our paths don't cross often, but you still seem like someone capable of making reasoned judgments. MBisanz 23:18, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Funny angry people
I just read your exchange with the uncommonly tempestuous Seeker4262, and I was highly amused. I have never seen anything quite like it, Misplaced Pages will be a much duller place without him/her. Nicely handled. ⊂| Mr.choppers |⊃ (talk) 07:34, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
- I have to admit, the entire thing was quite surreal. The guy was provided every piece of assistance possible, so an indef block is unfortunate. If only he'd put that kind of energy into making an article that actually met the policies/requirements, then it might have been as a minimum a DYK. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:23, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
User:123.243.76.19
Hi BWilkins, could you please see my proposal on User_talk:123.243.76.19 to move content discussion to Talk:Bob_Carr. I was blocked on my first good faith edit to Bob_Carr previously. I'd like a community consensus sought. Thanks. —Preceding undated comment added 13:38, 7 May 2012 (UTC).
- All article discussion should have taken place on the article talkpage anyway. Blocked users may only use their talkpage to request unblock, not other dicussion (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 14:40, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Jay's Musik Blog
Here is my proposal that I am working on to post to RSN. Give it a look over and your opinion on your talk page if you want to? Thanks!HotHat (talk) 00:56, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
- It's a ridiculous argument. The articles I write that appear in various newspapers may meet WP:RS, but my personal blogs sure as heck do not (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:59, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
- if that is your stance then we need to change the USERGENERATED policy because as I see it the website above meets the criteria right on because of his past work experience with regard to Christian Music Review and now New Release Tuesday. Sorry, that I just don't quite see it like you do on this issue.22:47, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
2011–12 NHL season
This edit where you wrote "can never be the top of bracket for the #8 team" is wrong. Immediately below the ladder it reads "During the first three rounds home ice is determined by seeding number, not position on the bracket." See also ] and 2011 Stanley Cup playoffs and 2010–11 NHL season and read the discussion at Talk:2011 Stanley Cup playoffs#Playoff bracket: Conference Finals ordering of teams. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:46, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
- Odd that ... this is, after all, the beginning of the third round - which puts my edit squarely in line with what you quoted (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:56, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
Users not adhering to WP:SPEAKENGLISH on talk pages
Hi Bwilkins,
Sorry to bother you, but it has been drawn to my attention that a user has engaged in an edit war over Template:History of Georgia, and has since started to canvass other users by posting comments in Georgian and not using English, as per guidance at WP:SPEAKENGLISH. I've posted a polite caution to the users, but you may wish to hop over and intervene if you feel it is necessary. GeorgianJorjadze (talk · contribs) has been warned once before about not communicating in English. Wesley☀Mouse 23:13, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
Sockpuppetry case
Hello can you please check these accounts: user:wakwakwiki, user:banimustafa, user:soufray, user:StrictWikiEditor, user:Jerashray all these 5 accounts refer to the same person.--94.249.93.242 (talk) 00:32, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
- For block evasion and admin shopping while blocked, I have extended the block on your registered account to 1 week. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 00:45, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
HELP ME PLEASE
Go look at my talk page one editor is trying to get notable stuff deleted from this encyclopedia.HotHat (talk) 21:55, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
- I suspect the user to be a SOCK, just look at the other times Asjetruss0009 tried to get Dara Maclean speed deleted, and W23fffd tried to get The Rescue deleted.HotHat (talk) 21:59, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
- You appear to be canvassing, and I suggest you stop (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 15:30, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
- Okay, I will stop, I will even go one better, I am out! Have fun dealing with the trolls.HotHat (talk) 20:53, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
- You appear to be canvassing, and I suggest you stop (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 15:30, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
AJona1992's AN/I
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Best, Jonayo! 23:54, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
Request for confirm status date 10/05/2012
Dear Sir, I think there might have been a miscommunication as my heading mentioned that I would write about brands and organisations. I was mentioning you of the fact that I do take up assignments from them in writing creative prose. I would similarly like to share what i have discovered while doing so in to wikipedia so that the people around the world will gain a glimpse of inside Sri Lanka.
I do not represent any company or an organisation in wikipedia in my username, please do provide me with an advice on how to obtain the confirmed status as I would greatly appreciate the assistance of yours. I am however currently have edited minor changes in few articles. Looking forward to hear from you. (Thewordbar (talk) 05:59, 11 May 2012 (UTC))
- The best way to obtain confirmed status is to actually edit articles! Remember that all information must be verifiable through reliable sources, and that articles must be about notable topics. There are millions of articles that need your help ... it only takes a few positive edits to become confirmed (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 08:48, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
Article deletions
Hello Bwilkins I created two pages for ‘Bastian Gotter’ and ‘Jason Njoku’ and they have been deleted instantly. I believe these pages should not be deleted because they represent the co-founders of iROKO Partners, a company backed by a US hedge fund who have brought the second biggest movie industry online from a region still believed to be a sleeping giant contrary to popular belief. As a result, the company and its founder have been receiving a lot of media coverage. Please see the following links: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-17896461 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/mediatechnologyandtelecoms/9190749/Facebook-investor-Tiger-Global-takes-stake-in-Nollywood-film-distributor.html http://www.forbes.com/sites/mfonobongnsehe/2012/04/04/tiger-global-backs-nigerian-internet-entepreneur-in-8-million-round/ http://edition.cnn.com/2011/BUSINESS/08/02/jason.njoku.nollywood.love/index.html
How can I proceed with getting these pages approved? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bayoak (talk • contribs) 13:11, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
- Let me just say that the iROKO article is barely allowable - I'm contemplating nominating it for deletion now. As such, the two personnel are clearly not notable outside of the company itself, and should not have article of their own (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 16:27, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
Your forgot to sign
Hey Bwilkins. Feel free to ignore and delete this, you forgot to sign ]. Just thought I'd let you know. MrLittleIrish 申 14:42, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
- Twinkle/Friendly seems to forget to do that these days ... a lot. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 16:28, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
Need a diff to be deleted.
Can you please delete this diff please? It is a bit crude and there is no need for someone to need to go back and view it.
Thank You, Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 19:02, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
Unblock?
Re User talk:Spc 21, it sounds like they messed up and won't do it again - would you be agreeable to an unblock? -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:14, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
- If you think it's believable this time, go ahead. I'm not overly convinced, myself. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 22:57, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
- I think the user understands what to do differently now. I would unblock per WP:AGF.—cyberpower Online 23:50, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
- he'll has pretty much shot himself in the foot based on his latest comments (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 00:16, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks, but I'll leave the block as it stands.(See their latest edit summary too!) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:47, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
- I think he shot himself in both feet. It's a strange feeling to be blocked, believe me I would know. I don't know why but one tends to lose it if they can't get themselves unblocked as quickly as possible. I remember showing some impatience when I was waiting for ArbCom to review my unblock request because I couldn't stand being blocked.—cyberpower Offline 12:03, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
- And I sympathize. WP:GAB really suggests that people shut up and calm down before requesting their unblocks. I smell a new essay ;-) (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:05, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
- No, no essay today. Today's Mother's Day so I'm not going to be very active today but, get yourself indefinitely blocked and have your only way to get yourself unblocked to send an appeal to ArbCom and you will start to lose it after a few days. You can't imagine how I felt at that time because I was violating a policy, that I didn't even know about at the time, left and right.—cyberpower Offline 12:30, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
- No, I mean I'm going to write one :-) (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:40, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
- Oh. Have fun.—cyberpower Online 16:38, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
- No, I mean I'm going to write one :-) (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:40, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
- No, no essay today. Today's Mother's Day so I'm not going to be very active today but, get yourself indefinitely blocked and have your only way to get yourself unblocked to send an appeal to ArbCom and you will start to lose it after a few days. You can't imagine how I felt at that time because I was violating a policy, that I didn't even know about at the time, left and right.—cyberpower Offline 12:30, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
- And I sympathize. WP:GAB really suggests that people shut up and calm down before requesting their unblocks. I smell a new essay ;-) (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:05, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
- I think he shot himself in both feet. It's a strange feeling to be blocked, believe me I would know. I don't know why but one tends to lose it if they can't get themselves unblocked as quickly as possible. I remember showing some impatience when I was waiting for ArbCom to review my unblock request because I couldn't stand being blocked.—cyberpower Offline 12:03, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks, but I'll leave the block as it stands.(See their latest edit summary too!) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:47, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
- he'll has pretty much shot himself in the foot based on his latest comments (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 00:16, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
- I think the user understands what to do differently now. I would unblock per WP:AGF.—cyberpower Online 23:50, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
Sympathy
I happened to come across this while going through the recent changes, and I have to say, I feel sympathy for the user, as I went through the same thing of not really listening to advice and such. I, too, edit warred, but I don't think I was as uncivil. I was at first around when I joined, but my last block for edit warring, which was indefinite, might I add, I wasn't much so -- not that I can recall, anyway. Just something I noticed. Hope you don't mind me commenting. =) - Zhou Yu (talk) 00:11, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
- I too am sympathetic but the community awareness sure is missing (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 00:18, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
Near-incoherent rants
WHO ARE YOU? YOU ARE ANONYMOUS AND SEEM TO HAVE INFINITE POWER TO BLOCK WHOEVER YOU DISAGREE WITH. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME ADDRESS AND AFFILIATIOINS. CLEARLY YOU HAVE AN HIDDEN AGENDA. PROFESSOR GEORGE PIECZENIK
I NOTICED THE EDITORS IN GENEWIKI ARE HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS. ARE YOU A HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT? PLEASE IDENTIFY YOURSELF AND YOUR ACADEMIC CREDENTIALS. YOU ARE SPREADING ENORMOUS AMOUNTS OF MISINFORMATION. YOU ARE THE INTELLECTUAL EQUIVALENT OF SNOOKI AS A SOCIAL LEADER, EXCEPT SHE HAS THE COURAGE TO IDENTIFY HERSELF. THOSE SHE SLEEPS WITH ARE ANONYMOUS. NICE TO HAVE A LOT OF CONTROL AND POWER WHEN YOU ARE ANONYMOUS. DOES THAT REMIND YOU OF ANY POLITICAL REGIME? YOU HAVE ASKED FACULTY TO SUPPORT YOU AGAINST THE GOVERNMENTS DESIRE TO IMPOSE SANCTIONS ON WIKI. I HAVE GIVEN WIKI THAT SUPPORT BOTH IN GETTING STUDENTS TO SUPPORT WIKI AND FINANCIALLY. NOW, I HAVE TO REVISE THAT OPINION. I WILL INSIST THAT STUDENTS NEVER USE WIKI REFERENCES AS THEY ARE JUST MADE UP BY HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS WITHOUT TRAINING IN PROPER REFERENCING. WHAT YOU ARE GOOD AT IS FORMATTING, NOT AT SUBSTANCE. YOU HAVE MADE FORMATTING THE CRITERIA FOR A KNOWLEDGE BASE. AND BEING ANONYMOUS. MORE IN SORROW THAN IN ANGER, PROF. GEORGE PIECZSENIK — Preceding unsigned comment added by GPieczenik (talk • contribs) (or at least block-evading socks thereof)
- I have put these incoherent rants back on to show a) the person clearly is not the educated "professor" they claim to be, and b) how misguided some people are. Heck, they cannot even identify the correct Wiki - this is "Misplaced Pages". (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 15:42, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
- Dear "professor", thanks for your kind words, and all in caps too! My profession is listed on my userpage - indeed, I write for a living, and like you, I teach the occasional class at one of the local universities. I'm obviously far from being anonymous. Like you, I have an advanced degree - which is useful when it comes to content, but obviously does nothing for behaviour.
- Misplaced Pages (not "the wiki") is a beneficial project, however is not (and likely never shall be) a reference for students. As a professor, you already know that. It's user-edited. Although all articles/statements must be sourced, it's not the same as academic work,
- I have never edited the same articles as you - so really, you're not someone I "disagree" with in terms of article content. As an administrator, however, I am required to uphold the rules and policies that you agreed with when you began editing this project. I repeat: you agreed to the rules and policies. That include conflict of interest, no legal threats, but more important right now, not evading a valid block. If you were a student and behaved the way you are in a classroom, you'd be blocked from entering the class - just as you are right now.
- Financial support and even political support are great: what we need from you are supporting the rules and policies that, once again, you agreed to. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 16:21, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
- ... and couldn't be bothered to identify his posting here ... thank God for Sinebot! -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 09:23, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
- Reading this has made me chuckle! And has put me in a really good mood! --Chip123456 (talk) 17:06, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
- I found it amusing too. More in sorrow than in anger. Oh well, back to high school I go. :) Toddst1 (talk) 17:13, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
- Have you seen the teenagers these days? I'd be in sooo much trouble if I was back in high school right now (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 20:16, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
- If only ... one can dream ... -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 20:28, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
- Careful; this isn't American Beauty (film) :-P (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 20:36, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
- If only ... one can dream ... -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 20:28, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
- Have you seen the teenagers these days? I'd be in sooo much trouble if I was back in high school right now (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 20:16, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
- I found it amusing too. More in sorrow than in anger. Oh well, back to high school I go. :) Toddst1 (talk) 17:13, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
- Reading this has made me chuckle! And has put me in a really good mood! --Chip123456 (talk) 17:06, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Is this better?
Talk:List of CAD programs. Greg L (talk) 18:35, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Is this in jest or a joke?
What do you mean with this: “dangerous”? Of course I can (may) talk to anyone I chose in real life. I’ve run my edits by cited Ph.D.s to make sure the material I write is correct and factual and correctly paraphrases what they mean. And everything is properly cited. Is there something wrong with that? Without even a ;-) emoticon at the end of that post, it looks like a breathtaking personal attack. Please explain yourself. Greg L (talk) 20:27, 14 May 2012 (UTC)