Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:47, 9 February 2008

Archives

Archive 1 - Up to 4 July 2007 Archive 2 - 4 July 2007 to 23 July 2007 Archive 3 - 23 July 2007 to 6 August 2007 Archive 4 - 7 August 2007 to 19 September 2007 Archive 5 - In progress

Marvelously calm and objective response to unblock request

I was really impressed by your response to an unblock request. (The diff looks confusing; the part you actually added begins with "|decline=".) Given the tone of the request you were replying to, I find the wording of your response to be a model of detachment, diplomacy and objectivity. --Coppertwig (talk) 01:21, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, I really appreciate that. :) Trusilver 04:39, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Are you crazy?

Are you crazy? You deleted the article, which was about one of the biggest factions of the largest Italian political party, without even waiting for me to hangon. As I understand that you did a mistake in good faith, I ask you kindly to revert your edit as it was simply undefendable. Thank you! --Checco (talk) 20:14, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Let's see... one of the biggest factions of the largest Italian political parties which was launched, according to your article.... today. No, I support the nomination for CSD. If you can show me some references that pass WP:N, I will either reinstated it or send it to AfD and let consensus decide. Trusilver 20:33, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

All the Italian newspapers wrote about it in their websites today (see Google news) because Veltroni, leader of the Democratic Party, attended the convention. Anyway, as merge of Liberal DS with other groups, I cannot understand how can it be considered not encyclopedic. The faction is composed of a number of MPs, by former ministers (Zanone, Bianco, Bassanini) and other leading politicians (notably Morando, leader of Liberal DS), as this source reckons. They will have soon a website. I don't feel any particular sympathy for them (as you may desume from my userpage), but they are definitely relevant for Misplaced Pages, as are all other Italian political party factions, on which other users and I are working. If you see my record, you will understand that I write on every Italian political party or faction. --Checco (talk) 20:46, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

The article had a reference. I don't know why you did not read it. Anyway Liberal PD is the translation of "Liberal PD" (Italian not Romanian!) and means the liberal part of PD, acronym for Democratic Party. Please read articles before deleting them! --Checco (talk) 20:49, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I did read it and your suggestion that I did not is baseless and counterproductive to getting what you want. But as you know... or should know... you need to have multiple non-trivial sources. ESPECIALLY when dealing with current events which tend to be dismissed as non-notable half the time anyway. I'm going to reinstate it on a wait and see basis. Add some references to the article and I will watch the news over the next few days concerning it. If it appears to satisfy notability than that's the end of it. If it doesn't I will AfD it and let consensus decide. Sound good? Trusilver 20:52, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Very good. Thank you. --Checco (talk) 20:56, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Done. I will check back on it on Monday or Tuesday both here and in the news. Trusilver 21:01, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

a thank you note

		Thanks for participating in my RfA!
		Although it failed 43/27/0, I'm happy because the outcome has been very helpful in many meaningful ways. Your support and remarks contributed so much to this. If you followed my RfA you know what happened. Most of the editors who posted opposing opinions have never edited with me. Some articles I edit deal with controversial topics and with respect to a very few of these, editors who didn't know much about me had some worries about confrontational editing and civility. Since I support their high standards I can easily (and will gladly) address this. The support and ecouragement to run again soon has been wonderful, thanks again. Cheers! Gwen Gale (talk) 05:28, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Barn-ey

Thanks for the (in lieu of) barnstar. Kakofonous (talk) 01:55, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Problem with warning templates

When we revert vandalism by someone who already received a level 4 warning, any other warnings make it seem like, "Oh, we didn't really mean it when we said that was your last warning," like the parent who says, "This is the last time I'm going to tell you" five times before taking action. What about something like this?. I'd like some feedback on this as a possible template for non-admins to use when they revert past a level 4 warning. Thanks. Doczilla (talk) 10:02, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Excellent work. I like it. Trusilver 17:18, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. Of the handful of AIV-experienced people I checked with, I got 4 yeas and 3 nays -- a majority favoring it but certainly not a consensus. The naysayers made some smart points, and if the AIV process consistently worked as smoothly and as quickly as possible, I might be more inclined to drop this idea based on their thoughts. Of course, something like this doesn't have to appeal to everybody. I guess I'll run this by people who check the talk page for the Misplaced Pages:WikiProject user warnings. Thanks again. Doczilla (talk) 03:14, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

At the suggestion of User:Master of Puppets, I've opened the discussion up at WT:AIV#Past-last_warning. Thanks again! Doczilla (talk) 03:50, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Damn you sinebot...

made me laugh out loud in my watchlist. You do realize you can opt out of sinebot? Just add the {{NoAutosign}} tag to the bottom of your userpage. Cheers, Keeper | 76 22:09, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

• laughs* I know, but it keeps me honest. When I see the activity in an article I just edited, it makes me realize that I forgot to sign something. :) Trusilver 00:20, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Only hoodoo

Is it fun that to sweep what your intellect could not dissolve? To remove the articles which stands on reason will not mean your understanding must exist.--220.98.236.108 (talk) 07:40, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Clever play with words, however your article was deleted because it did not assert notability. Have a good day. Trusilver 07:43, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Possible to Speed that image as well?

The one the vandal was inserting, it has copyright tag on it, and no status showing. If you are unsure which I speak of I can link it. Dureo (talk) 08:33, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Ahh beat me to the punch :P Dureo (talk) 08:34, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Heh, wasn't me. Somebody else got it before I could. Trusilver 08:34, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

the Greek Gods

Hey man, not cool. You went and deleted before i finished typing my explanation. If you would be so kind to undo that so i can put the significane, which there is, i would be eternally gracious. It was mainly a mistake of mine that I saved the page before fully completing it. I was too anxious to have it posted. Thats my mistake, I should have made sure it met ALL criteria before saving it to prevent something like this happening. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Limonns (talk • contribs) 02:22, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

• Please be merciful. :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Limonns (talk • contribs) 02:38, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

The reason it took me so long to respond was that I wanted to completely research the subject of this article before making a decision. The article you have created has only a single source which names "The Greek Gods" without context or details. Only a single sentence even pays mention to them. Even the name itself is suspect seeing that the entire article is founded only on what "Cle Sloan" said, which fails notability for lack of "multiple non-trivial sources". Trusilver 02:50, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Ok thats fine. I guess the fact that I found a source containing their name finally allowed me to make what I thought was a just article based on some things I had heard. I see where you're coming from. Also, no problem about the late response, and thanks for at least looking into reverting the article. Sorry about the mistake. Limonns (talk) 02:55, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

No problem, have a good evening. :) Trusilver 02:57, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Tgannon

I noticed your comments on User talk:Tgannon in regards to his unblock review. I'm halfway tempted to shorten his block to maybe a month or less. If I decide to do this, how do I note this on his talk page? It's not really an "accept", but it's not really a "decline" either. You'll have to excuse me, I'm a very new admin. Jauerback/_dude. 03:06, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Usually when I do this, what I do is put it as "Accept". But then stipulate afterward that this is not an unblock but a shortening of the block to the desired timeframe. And I would probably shorten it down to a week or so myself. His edits do appear to be in good faith even if he needs to stop trying to brute force something into an article and talk about it instead. Trusilver 03:10, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I think I did it right. Jauerback/_dude. 03:34, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/Gutza

I'm support #14. Here's hoping you speak better Romanian than I do... Dihydrogen Monoxide (party) 09:13, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the Barnstar Trusilver.  Dust Rider  Talk  19:47, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks

I am not one for sending round pretty pictures, but after my recent RfA, which passed 68/1/7, I am now relaxed and this is to thank you for your comments, which I will take on board. I look forward to wielding the mop with alacrity. Or two lacrities. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 21:41, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

jdchamp31

It is not appreciated how you treat me on your talk page. It would be really nice as an administrator for you to maybe step in to help the situation instead of telling me how sick of it you are. Jdchamp31 (talk) 22:24, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

I have a better idea. How about you really try to work with others instead of reporting them to WP:AIV and calling it harassment for simply not agreeing with you. Trusilver 23:32, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Check the edit history on his talk page. I am trying to compromise. Jdchamp31 (talk) 23:35, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

He refuses to compromise Jdchamp31 (talk) 00:01, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Works for me. Stop doing what you are doing and wait to see what happens. ONLY report him when he is clearly in violation of policy. If you have any doubt about it, send me a message and I will take a look at it. But he's clearly unwilling to come to any kind of compromise, so I will take it on a case by case basis from here on out. Trusilver 00:22, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I want to get formal mediation I am trying Jdchamp31 (talk) 00:28, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I suggest you start with the Mediation Cabal. If you start a case there, I will pick it up. That is a good first stop on the way toward formal mediation and eventually arbitration. Trusilver 00:29, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I filed it Jdchamp31 (talk) 00:34, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Response

Look at his response. Is that appropriate? Jdchamp31 (talk) 00:40, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Had him blocked for 31 Hours Jdchamp31 (talk) 01:28, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Edit Summary - 00:31, 1 February 2008 (hist) (diff) User talk:Squiggleslash‎ (→One more time... nicely. - Reponse: Please do. I dare you. Grow a pair. You should have blocked Jdchamp two weeks ago.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdchamp31 (talk • contribs)

User:Squiggleslash

User:Squiggleslash has sent me a question on this by private email during the night. Very early this morning I answered that I was willing to unblock if he could answer one question on the comments he made. I have not received any response (6 hours later). I will unblock based on your recommendation as I believe you to be correct. Thx. -- Alexf 17:37, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Great, thank you. Trusilver 17:39, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Trusilver, I am trying to work with him but he continues to refuse. What should I do. Jdchamp31 (talk) 22:29, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Reiko Katherine Akimoto

Hi Trusilver, I see you just deleted the above article per A7. I don't think it is A7, and IMHO is notable enough for its own article. Would you consider restoring it? Ryan Postlethwaite 02:42, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

I weakly disagree, but I'm apathetic enough about it not to care :). In other words....sure, why not. Trusilver 02:43, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Still, I don't see anything about it that makes it appear even half-assedly notable. I'm going to spend a couple days looking for sources when I can. If I can't find anything else to go into the article, I'm going to AfD it. We'll see what happens. Trusilver 02:47, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

I dno, I think notability is established because it's a character in a notable anime. I'd certainly welcome an AfD though just to make sure. Ryan Postlethwaite 02:51, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps a page of characters from that anime? I would certainly be happier to see one article outlining them all rather than a whole load of poorly-written stubs. Trusilver 02:52, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Yep, I agree - have you got a list of the characters? Ryan Postlethwaite 02:58, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't have the slightest clue. All of my knowledge about this anime came from googleing it before CSD'ing it. Trusilver 03:17, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

email

Hey Trusilver. I wrote you an email. :) —αἰτίας •discussion• 14:50, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Replied. Trusilver 16:16, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Replied, too. :) —αἰτίας •discussion• 00:35, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Reidweaver

Can you please review my comments on User talk:Reidweaver? Thanks, Bovlb (talk) 07:34, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

I might be a little bit cynical, but I am always suspicious of a new account whose first action is to post a link. I read the link that was posted, and I don't see anything about it that suggests it was anything other than a new user with COI issues promoting his site. Are you seeing something I'm not? Trusilver 07:46, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree it's a new user with COI issues, but coupled with utter confusion as to what he was being warned about. I'd say that merits a clearer warning, rather than an indefinite block. Bovlb (talk) 07:54, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

My position on it is generally apathetic. It's not a terribly clear case of spam linking, so I'm not going to push a position to keep the block in place. If you decide to unblock, I will not oppose it. Trusilver 08:02, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Bold text

Ken Lashley

Hello, I notice that you've removed the page on comics artist Ken Lashley, despite it being linked to from over a dozen other articles... I don't think I had as yet had any input into that page, but I did intend to, so if you could clarify what was on the page-as-deleted; what was missing and what will be required on the future page, that would be of considerable help, please. ntnon (talk) 20:57, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

The article was very short and lacked context. It had no references and did not assert notability of the subject. I suggest you really read up on WP:BIO before rewriting the article. If you have any questions or need any help, feel free to ask me. Trusilver 16:21, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

BRC

We've recently opened membership up to the editing community at large, so if you know any badasses, feel free to invite them. GlassCobra 07:27, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

- TRANSMISSION ENDS -

Jeztheman response

Hi Trusilver,

You left this message on the UserTalk page for Jeztheman ;

"I have deleted Syonide and Urban Bunny EP on the basis that they do fulfill the qualifications..."

You mean because they don't fulfill...right?

Thanks Berean Hunter (talk) 09:14, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes... that's what I meant. Trusilver 16:17, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Realty Technologies

Yes, you deleted an article saying that it is porpesed advertisement, when I am only writing the article to put information about the company out to the public. I didn't understand how it could be advertisement when I am not advertising any services, products, etc. The only thing remotly close to begin advertising is their objective, but that is their objective. Webgfx (talk) 16:29, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages is not a medium for advertising a company. There are untold numbers of companies out there in the world, and only a fraction of them pass the guidelines for notability outlined in WP:CORP. Realty Technologies had nothing in the article or in a google search that asserted anything close to the required notability to have an article written about it. Trusilver 16:39, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

User:Amelia9mm

A group of people have brought an off-wiki dispute to Misplaced Pages, this dispute includes real-world legal action and has prompted complaints ot the Foundation. This user is one of a group fo single purpose accounts with no history outside this subject. I blocked the lot. Guy (Help!) 16:47, 9 February 2008 (UTC)