| Revision as of 17:26, 3 December 2012 editNiteshift36 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers41,783 edits →A redirect?← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:39, 3 December 2012 edit undoMark Arsten (talk | contribs)131,188 edits ArchiveNext edit → | ||
| Line 48: | Line 48: | ||
| | navbar = none | | navbar = none | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| <big>Welcome to my talk page, please leave new messages at the bottom</big> | |||
| ==Lorry Girl== | ==Lorry Girl== | ||
| Line 53: | Line 55: | ||
| :Hi, I'll move the article to your userspace so you can add references and update the page, then we can think about whether it meet the ] guideline. ] (]) 14:50, 2 December 2012 (UTC) | :Hi, I'll move the article to your userspace so you can add references and update the page, then we can think about whether it meet the ] guideline. ] (]) 14:50, 2 December 2012 (UTC) | ||
| :Ok, the article is at ] now. Let me know when you've updated and added references, thanks. ] (]) 14:53, 2 December 2012 (UTC) | :Ok, the article is at ] now. Let me know when you've updated and added references, thanks. ] (]) 14:53, 2 December 2012 (UTC) | ||
| ==Quantum thermodynamics== | |||
| While I was a dissenter, I agree there was eventual consensus to redirect this article. I do not, however, see such a consensus for deletion. Perhaps you were overzealous in this case? I would like to hear your reasoning. Thanks, ] (]) 20:08, 30 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :I'm a bit confused by your comment: I don't believe that I deleted anything--I think I just redirected it. Otherwise, I agree that eventually a redirect consensus emerged. You can still access the contents of the page through page history, even though it's been redirected. Could you clarify what you mean? ] (]) 20:12, 30 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::Thanks for your reply. Comparing previous and current versions in the edit history for the ] page shows both the addition of a redirect tag to the ] page and the deletion of the page's contents, a net change of -6,988 characters. Am I misinterpreting? ] (]) 20:28, 30 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::Yes, that's correct. When a page is redirected, all of its contents are removed (but accessible in page history) and the contents are replaced with <nowiki>#REDIRECT ]</nowiki>. ] (]) 20:31, 30 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Thanks for the explanation and sorry for blaming you for what was an automated deletion. While it is true that contents can be accessed in page history, redirects don't seem cheap to me anymore. ] (]) 20:49, 30 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Yeah, it can be tough. Hope you're not discouraged. ] (]) 21:03, 30 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ==JEE Toppers== | |||
| why did u delete http://en.wikipedia.org/List_of_IIT_JEE_Toppers | |||
| ? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 08:39, 9 November 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| :You can see the reasons offered for deletion at ]. I performed the deletion because I believed that the participants in the discussion had reached a consensus. ] (]) 15:30, 9 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == You got mail stuff == | |||
| Just what I hate about wikipeidia. If you and Floquenbeam feel the need, oh well. But count me out of anything further. Having enough trouble watching all the hypocrisy on wikipedia. Sorry to see you succumb. ] (]) 22:59, 17 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Sorry if that offended you... it honestly had nothing to do with today's conflict though. ] (]) 23:03, 17 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::well, why did it have to be conducted in secret then? ] (]) 23:29, 17 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::Replied to you via e-mail, ironically. ] (]) 23:44, 17 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ==Black Diesel== | |||
| *This message will go any and all pages that discuss your credibility Mark, and I want an exact report from you why the page was erased. You can email me the report at mboros4@hotmail.com. As your legislation page requests of me to, per your redirect. I don’t really agree this Mark is on the up and up. He has made bold lies to remove a page that has been on the site for years. It is believed he is in collusion with special interests to promote or sabotage with out following proper guild lines. Please Google search "black diesel". It comes up with thousands of articles on a new form of alternative fuel. It was listed as a nickname for a cultural method of alternative fuel and has been growing in magnitude the world over. A company perfected the method and has a product released worldwide that produces the alternative fuel. A few other lower tech versions are also commercially available. A week later, after years, the page is attacked. Please go to the erased black diesel page and look how one user which has several alternate identities, made comments to remove and Mark followed up by saying no such alternative fuel exists, by google search. The one multiple ID fellow has primary ID as E8. He seems to be a wind energy supporter most likely ethanol as well by the name. The guy is a sell out and caution needs to be taken. Thanks.] (]) 06:29, 21 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Hi, the page was erased because there was a consensus (]) that it did not meet our notability guidelines (]). Please see ] & ] for more information. If you still disagree with my closing, you can file to have it overturned at ]. ] (]) 13:30, 21 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Not Evans == | |||
| Now that that's over... if I find myself with free time and an urge to write about something American, I'll ping you. I was quite pleased by how that went (although you deserve most of the credit). — ] (]) 15:01, 18 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Yes, that was a very pleasant time. You deserve a lot of credit too... I never would have pushed past GA without you. My next articles will be forays back into the wide world of unusual religious groups--] is up next. ] (]) 15:39, 18 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :*Good luck with that, don't think I'll be able to review. I haven't even finished writing about ''Theory of Literature'' yet (I did finish '']'', which looks pretty good for an Indonesian subject that old). And now, with mid-terms... oh well, at least Post-co is easy enough: Nationalism in ]'s ''Kami, Perempuan''. — ] (]) 15:44, 18 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::*Well, don't push yourself too hard. Remember to relax every now and then :) ] (]) 17:36, 18 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::*Is ] up your alley? ] (]) 18:42, 18 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::*Yes it is! I have a copy of '''' on my bookshelf... hopefully I'll get around to improving one of our articles on the topic. ] (]) 18:44, 18 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::::*Interesting indeed. I'll try and not stress too much. We've been watching '']'' when I can steal some time to be with the Mrs — ] (]) 22:14, 18 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::*Sounds like a good way to wind down :) ] (]) 22:41, 18 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::*I'd much rather do Misplaced Pages work, but if I ignore her she ends up ... — ] (]) 22:44, 18 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::*I hope she's not watching this page! ] (]) 22:51, 18 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::::*She doesn't even want to read my (Indonesian-language) featured articles. Let alone something in English. — ] (]) 23:06, 18 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::::*Well, I guess you're safe then! ] (]) 23:10, 18 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::::::*]. — ] (]) 23:18, 18 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Recent GAN == | |||
| Hey there Mark. Seeing as you just finished the GAN on ], I wanted to point out that someone has already started a good article review. I felt like you should know. Cheers! --♫ ] (<small>]</small>) 23:13, 18 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Wow, that was quick, less than an hour. Thanks for the note... I feel like there's some history I'm missing here. ] (]) 23:16, 18 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Articles requested per fair use == | |||
| . Says at least 9 though. | |||
| :Odd, there's a similar, but slightly different headline at . ] (]) 02:06, 19 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::There are three versions. . . Probably corrections. | |||
| Please let me know if you have issues or when done. ] (]) 02:14, 19 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == A barnstar for you! == | |||
| {| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;" | |||
| |rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ] | |||
| |style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Barnstar of Diplomacy''' | |||
| |- | |||
| |style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Thanks a lot for backing me up on Kammuri and going through all of that work. It really means a lot! ♫ ] (<small>]</small>) 02:31, 19 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| |} | |||
| ::Thanks for the barnstar! ] (]) 02:34, 19 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::Definitely. If you ever need any copyediting, lemme know! Sourcing, on the other hand, might prove controversial :P --♫ ] (<small>]</small>) 02:41, 19 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::lol, thanks for the offer. I've been working on ] lately. Any copyediting help with that would be much appreciated. It's kind of a funny topic, but I've tried to treat it as encyclopedic as possible. ] (]) 02:47, 19 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Definitely I can give that a look! I don't want to GA review it, in case people accuse of quid pro quo or something, but I'll give it a read through and leave comments on the talk page. --♫ ] (<small>]</small>) 02:56, 19 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::Yes, that would be perfect. Hope you like it. It will be nice to have more feedback before someone picks it up for GA. ] (]) 02:58, 19 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| I did a checklinks which said there're are five dead ones. But they seem fixed? ] (]) 18:41, 19 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Yeah, that tool's not infallible, so it's good to check the ones that it flags manually, as well. I had it show a link as dead the other day that loaded fine when I clicked on it. I've never fixed the dead ones with the wayback machine before, but I guess it's not that hard once you learn how. ] (]) 18:44, 19 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :*Webcitation... be preemptive. Hence why my FAs should probably not have to be delisted for dead links. — ] (]) 14:47, 22 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| Hi Mark, I recently listed this article for protection at ] which you protected and stated if the vandalism persists to contact you. Since the lifting of the protection, it has persisted, so I was wondering if we could get something a bit more permanent or whether should I go back to the requestse page. Cheers. ] (]) 19:44, 21 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Thanks for the note, I escalated to one month for protection... my same offer applies to the expiry of this one though too. ] (]) 20:12, 21 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::Thank you, if it persists once this expires I'll let you know. ] (]) 20:34, 21 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Is it allowed in Misplaced Pages? == | |||
| Hello, Mark | |||
| Quick question: Someone has used this sentence in a WP:FAR discussion against me: | |||
| <blockquote>I also note that Codename Lisa (the nominator at FAC) and Jasper Deng (another proponent at FAC) are also cited in ], again for lack of balance in coverage of another Microsoft product. This is beginning to look very suspicious indeed.</blockquote> | |||
| Is it allowed in Misplaced Pages? | |||
| Best regards,<br/>] (]) 08:24, 22 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :No, not really. Will look into it. ] (]) 14:36, 22 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :*Not without some serious diffs, at least. — ] (]) 14:42, 22 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::*In any case, there are so many things wrong with that FAR that it will probably be speedy closed within the next day or two. ] (]) 14:59, 22 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == ] article == | |||
| Mark, the same IP is back at it at the Eye color article. I don't know what to tell this IP anymore, aside from "In this case, you can't add a source asserting that that's what the image is of." And that they need to better read over ] and ]. ] (]) 01:12, 24 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Thanks for the note, I semi-protected the eye color article for a while. Let me know if you have trouble with them on any others. ] (]) 01:22, 24 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::Thank you a lot, Mark. ] (]) 02:22, 24 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Peaks article == | |||
| Hey man. One of the sources you suggested I check out for "Episode 14" seems to be behind a paywall. If you can access it, would you mind firing me a copy to have a look at? Otherwise I can't really vet it for use. :P If you can't access it, I can try WP:RX, it was great before for ''Eraserhead''. ] ] 01:17, 24 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :No, I don't have immediate access, checking with the RX would probably be best. That Church and Change fellow is pretty quick with them lately. ] (]) 01:22, 24 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == List of unreleased Lady Gaga songs == | |||
| Hey Mark, I never saved any of my info from my ] that was deleted. Are you able to take the info and move it to my ] so I can update it before including it with ]? The page wasn't available before and now it is. I'd like to merge the info like other artists have.--] (]) 16:42, 24 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Ok, sure. It's at ] now. ] (]) 16:46, 24 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::Fast! Thanks so much Mark!--] (]) 16:47, 24 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::Yeah, you caught me at just the right time :) ] (]) 16:51, 24 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Cocks == | |||
| Once I'm finished erecting '']'' (see what I did there?), would you be willing to give a non-formal peer review? I may put it up for PR too later. Right now I'm trying to get to FA before I go on DYK :-D — ] (]) 01:22, 26 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :lol, sure, I'll do a informal (or even formal) review--sounds kinda hard though. And if you ever have time, I have an article ] too. ] (]) 01:28, 26 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::Ok, looks pretty interesting, I'll try to post some comments tomorrow. ] (]) 01:37, 26 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::*<s>Oh, I'm not done yet! Still have a bit of developing, and the lead (head?) needs to be bigger. — ] (]) 04:38, 26 October 2012 (UTC)</s> | |||
| *Okay, more or less as big as it'll get. Waiting on some feedback from RX for something, but that's minor. — ] (]) 07:36, 26 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| **Yeah, it's nice to have some articles about art films, nice change of pace from all the mainstream stuff. ] (]) 12:56, 26 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ***Indeed. I don't wanna be called a one trick horse! (Mind you, Catholic bishops ''are'' quite different than Muslim soldiers or films on child molestation, but that's all Indonesian so...) — ] (]) 13:16, 26 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ****Yeah, I'd like to avoid that too. Kind of what I was going for with Meth Mouth. ] (]) 13:40, 26 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| *****Well, you ''do'' have ] under your belt. — ] (]) 14:21, 26 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ******Yeah, I guess I don't have anything to complain about. ] (]) 14:26, 26 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| *******Evans is a little outta left field for you too, as was Anderson. As a side note: Cracked.com is feeling nasty today. Nazis, fetishes, and a human hair cave. — ] (]) 14:33, 26 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ********Oh yes, probably for Halloween? Ehh, it is a little early for that though. Do they have Halloween in Indonesia? ] (]) 14:38, 26 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| *********I saw some bats in a sports store, but nothing on the scale as what they have back home. Almost makes me feel sorry for my kids, when I get some. No medicine like tooth-rotting candy. — ] (]) 14:40, 26 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| **********lol, reminds me of the December I spent looking for Christmas decorations in Morocco. I eventually saw a couple. ] (]) 14:42, 26 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ***********Bare-bones Christmas decorations are fairly simple to find, and you can even rent Santa suits (I'm wearing one in some FB pictures). However, most families that celebrate Christmas keep it religious and don't exchange gifts. At least there's nothing like Japan's "KFC is a traditional Christmas dinner" — ] (]) 14:46, 26 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ************Yeah, I guess there are probably more Christians in Indonesia than Morocco. Japan is a very funny country... don't think I'll spend Christmas there though. Also, I'm worried that Sandy will interfere with my Misplaced Pages editing, she sure is . ] (]) 14:53, 26 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| *************Oh my, keep an eye on that. Merapi's been calm here, so unless those Mayans were onto something... — ] (]) 15:05, 26 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| *Left some comments at the PR, going to bed now. I think for this one you may have to break out actual SubGenius literature as the information on their beliefs is a little light. — ] (]) 15:52, 26 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| **Essentially, in several places you hint at information which you don't present in the article. I've noted a couple at the PR — ] (]) 15:53, 26 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ***Ok, thanks for the comments, just finished reading your article a minute ago. ] (]) 15:57, 26 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ****Thanks for the comments. Odd how an 8-minute long Canadian film can have almost as much text as an 83-minute Indonesian film. — ] (]) 23:18, 26 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| *****Yeah, that is odd, but I guess that's how things are. ] (]) 02:55, 27 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ******Indeed. I've asked Cas to take a look too (he did the GA review). Should be a fairly simple FAC... after Sudirman passes. — ] (]) 03:00, 27 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Freeway Jam == | |||
| . <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]]</span></small> 23:52, 27 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Wow, sounds pretty good! ] (]) 23:57, 27 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Finally! == | |||
| Ha ha! ] — ] (]) 15:41, 28 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Wow, that is an impressive project there--I'll have to take a look at it soon. TK might be interested in it too, actually. ] (]) 16:21, 28 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :*I don't know how much she goes for the academic aspect, but yeah it may be right up her alley. I'm probably going to add a couple images if I can find relevant ones. — ] (]) 22:36, 28 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::*Looking at it again, I can see why it took a while to finish that. ] (]) 22:39, 28 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::*That and the reading was ''dull''. No ] or ] or ] or ]... — ] (]) 22:42, 28 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::*lol, yeah, bit of a break from the usual then. ] (]) 22:57, 28 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::::*Indeed. Heh. — ] (]) 23:00, 28 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Deletion of Jonathan Shipley (writer) == | |||
| Hi, I'm George Page (TGAPGeorge), the author of the page for Jonathan Shipley (writer). I do know the author, I have read many of his works, and I like to consider us friends. I created his page because of his extensive list of published works, and that he continues to publish stories each year. | |||
| Today, I was going to add four more 2012 publications to his list when I discovered y'all had deleted all my work. I'd like to talk about why this was done, and address a few issues with this whole process. | |||
| There are two main problems I have at the moment: | |||
| 1. Why wasn't I notified? At least a quick email letting me know the page was in jeopardy would have been appreciated. I might have been able to help, explain, or taken directions for changes. | |||
| 2. "Non-Notable" seems to be the theme for the deletion of this page. I won't be petty and ask to see a list of published works (non-wikipedia) of those who decided Shipley wasn't worthy. Instead, I will point out a consistent, record of being published numerous times over a span of thirty years. The most notable include stories published in two volumes of Marion Zimmer Bradley's anthology, Sword & Sorceress. The S&S anthology has come out every year for the past twenty-eight years, is sold around the world, and copies of various years can still be found on the bookshelves of Barnes and Noble and the like. It is a very notable anthology, and any story published in the anthology is very notable as well. Elizabeth Waters, the current editor of the Sword & Sorceress anthology would not appreciate her work as being described as "non-notable". | |||
| Hadley Rille Books (see[REDACTED] page) has published two of Shipley's works. It would be interesting for them to know that their books are non-notable as well. | |||
| In general, if there are links, or cites, or anything that put nails in this page's coffin, that is my fault. Shipley's page was my first major[REDACTED] piece, and it's very possible I made mistakes. I read scores of articles in the help section before I wrote anything, but those aren't very clear to begin with, and do not give very good direction or advice. I have no problem with the sub-pages getting deleted; there were not complete, and I wasn't sure if I was doing them right anyway. However, the main page, Jonathan Shipley (writer), should not be deleted. | |||
| Thank you for your time, | |||
| George Page | |||
| ] (]) 05:58, 29 October 2012 (UTC)TGAPGeorge | |||
| :Hi, I'll answer your questions in order: 1. While it would have been polite of the nominator to notify you, they're not technically required to do so. 2. The page was deleted because there was a consensus (]) that it did not meet our notability guidelines (]). Please see ] & ] for more information. Can you provide links to newspapers, magazines, or books that discuss Mr. Shipley? If so, we might be able to have the page restored, at least temporarily. You can apply to have the deletion overturned at ] if you think I made an error. See ] for specific arguments that could be helpful in restoring the page. 3. The polish of the page shouldn't play a role in deletion, so I don't think it's your fault. ] (]) 17:07, 29 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ==Disambiguation link notification for October 29== | |||
| Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited ], you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ] (] | ]). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. <small>Read the ]{{*}} Join us at the ].</small> | |||
| It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these ]. Thanks, ] (]) 11:12, 29 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Gilligan == | |||
| Much obliged for venturing once more into the strange world of pre-war English cricket! Non-cricketers always appreciated, and I always ask someone to check the cricket side of things as well. ] (]) 19:07, 29 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :No problem, my pleasure. I have a few sections left will probably get to them tomorrow. ] (]) 19:09, 29 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Broadleaf Commerce Deletion == | |||
| Hi there Mark - I'm the Director of Marketing for Broadleaf Commerce and noted the company's Wiki was deleted - is there anything I can do to have it restored? Thanks in advance - appreciate the Wiki crowd! ~Brad <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 13:35, 30 October 2012 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| :Hi Brad, the article was deleted because it was concluded that there was insufficient media coverage of the company. It is difficult to have deleted pages restored, but if you can provide multiple detailed articles from established magazines/newspapers/books about the company, you can apply to have the deletion overturned at ]. See ] and ] for details on what would have to be provided. Good luck, ] (]) 15:54, 30 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Mourdock article title == | |||
| I've just commented on the talk page for that article. But due to urgent BLP issues, I'm bringing this to your talk page as well. The problem with the current title is that it includes "pregnancy . . . from rape . . . god intended" while leaving out "horrible situation". This makes Mourdock's quote appear worse than it acutally was. If you are going to have an article about a quote, it's not fair to cherry pick the worst parts. ] (]) 15:57, 30 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :I tend to agree with your criticism of the article's title, I've moved it. ] (]) 16:04, 30 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Just for fun == | |||
| Not sure what got me thinking about this, but I just nominated an article for TFA that sounds like the ones you normally work on. Meet ], Kentucky's accused-bioterrorist-turned-governor! Thought you might find it an interesting read on a slow day sometime. If you find it main page worthy, you can drop a note at ]. ] <sup><span class="plainlinks">(] '''·''' ])</span></sup> 17:59, 31 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Hey, that does sound interesting, I'll have to check that out. Thanks for the tip! ] (]) 18:01, 31 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == A something-or-other for you! == | |||
| {| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #e7ffe7;" | |||
| |rowspan="2" valign="top" | ] | |||
| |rowspan="2" | | |||
| |style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: bottom; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Human Rights Barnstar''' | |||
| |- | |||
| |style="vertical-align: top; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | For contributing ] of ]. -- ] (]) 18:27, 31 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| |} | |||
| :I was just admiring it again this afternoon--congratulations on a great article. -- ] (]) 18:27, 31 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::Thank you, it was a tough article to write, but I'm glad that I did. ] (]) 18:29, 31 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| <div style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; background-color: #ddd; border: 5px solid #ddd; {{box-shadow|0.1em|0.1em|0.5em|rgba(0,0,0,0.75)}} {{border-radius|0.5em}}">]<p style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 0;">'']''</p></div> | |||
| :::Thank you for doing it, are you ready for special treats? All the way to the bottom for United Nations Convention Against Torture, 8 years ago ;) --] (]) 22:01, 31 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Thank you for the popcorn :) ] (]) 23:47, 31 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Thanks for playing a good part in the story ;) | |||
| :::::ps: do you have an idea who wrote it? --] (]) 22:57, 1 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::Oh, I see now, very interesting. ] (]) 23:06, 1 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::*I just read that after seeing it here. Interesting read. BTW Mark, when do you think you'll bring CotSG to GA? — ] (]) 23:21, 1 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::*Probably pretty soon. Someone picked it out of the GAN queue last weekend, so I'm just waiting for his comments at the moment. ] (]) 23:31, 1 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::*Oh, kewlz. I'm waiting for ] to finish at FA before bringing '']'' there. ('']'' is taking forever at GAC) — ] (]) 23:37, 1 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::::*Good reviewers are hard to find, but there are some out there! ] (]) 23:41, 1 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::::*Indeed. I think part of it is because the subject is so far out of their comfort zone. — ] (]) 04:09, 2 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| I suggested ] ], there's a debate you may want to take part in. --] (]) 01:15, 16 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Ok, thanks for the note! ] (]) 02:48, 16 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ==Query== | |||
| :Hello sir,Auto wiki browser using rights are just approved to me but found little difficulty in understanding user manual .I have seen alerts but didnt get how to find and fix them from whole article within the the edit box of software.Thanx] <sup>]</sup> 20:42, 1 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::Hi, to be honest, I use AWB regularly but generally just for typo fixing. I'm not sure if I've done much with the alerts at all. I think the best place to ask for help would be ]. Good luck, ] (]) 21:02, 1 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::Ok I will ask there then please tell me how to do typofixing exactly because i dont want to commit any mistake.] <sup>]</sup> | |||
| :::To fix typos, you go to the "options" tab and click "Enable RegexTypoFix" on the bottom of the screen. Then you just have to make a list of pages to check (use the source drop-down box on the center of the left side of the screen, go to random pages if you can't think of anything specific to check) and then go to the "start" tab and click start. That should do it. ] might be of help, I'm a bit of a novice about some of its functions. Good luck, ] (]) 22:41, 1 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == A bowl of strawberries for you! == | |||
| {| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;" | |||
| |style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ] | |||
| |style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Thanx a lot ! I got it. Have a great day ahead.Take care :) ] <sup>]</sup> 07:21, 2 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| |} | |||
| :You're welcome, glad to hear it! ] (]) 14:13, 2 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| Hi Mark! | |||
| I terribly sorry to bother you, but I noticed that you previously protected the ] article so that only established editors can edit it - I think there might be a need for that protection once again. Several anons have appeared, all inserting a sentence that has as a reference - a YouTube video, in violation of ]. I reverted a couple of times, now realizing that I might have broken the 3RR - if I did, I apologize and I'll stop reverting anyways (I already gave tons of input on the matter on the talk page), but could you advise me on how I should respond? And is there anything you can do to help? | |||
| Thanks a bunch, | |||
| --] (]) 01:14, 3 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Ok, I protected--that was pretty clear cut. BTW, reverting copyvios is an exception to 3RR. You might want to try to explain to the IP on his talk page though. Let me know if there are any other issues. ] (]) 01:21, 3 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::Thanks Mark! Cheers, --] (]) 01:30, 3 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ----Hi Mark! I've noticed that you've protected the Boris Malagurski page and that's cool, but can you please instruct a content editor (or something similar) to have a look-see at the issue in question, and several issues raised prior. Several editors appear to have an issue with UrbanVillager, citing he is editing the page without giving due process to neutrality and including all angles of the matter at hand. I only raise this issue because one-leaning articles irk me so. Thanks for your consideration. --] (]) 01:28, 3 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Hello, sorry if you've been confused about the reverting and protection. The issue was that you were linking to a mirror of a newscast, which is technically not allowed here (you would have to link to the news stations website or official YouTube channel for it to be allowed). The best way to get input from uninvolved editors about neutrality would be posting a new section at the ] or maybe the ]. You'll usually be able to get comments from fresh editors at one of those. Let me know if you have any more questions. ] (]) 01:40, 3 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ---I understand. Thank you for the clarification, but I assumed that my YouTube post was credible because it is broadcast on Boris Malagurski's official YouTube Channel. Is that also not considered official enough, since Boris Malagurski is the one in question、and he is the one broadcasting a CTV news report? --] (]) 02:37, 3 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Yeah, copyright is the issue here. CTV owns the rights to the broadcast, so we only link to it if the site is run by the network or on the network's official channel. The ] guideline explains things in more detail. ] (]) 02:59, 3 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| Hello again Mark! | |||
| You mentioned that I could let you know if there were any issues with the article. Well, I think I might need some guidance. I've been very active on the ] and ] (Malagurski's film) articles, and I feel like the discussion on the talk pages with some editors is going nowhere. To be precise, the IP address above, together with ] and ], who apparently have personal or ideological issues with Malagurski and his film, and openly state that on the talk pages, are attempting to alter the articles using, as references, self-published blogs and websites which all fail ] - I read it through. | |||
| The thing is that all the reliable references on the articles have a neutral or positive view of Malagurski, while the only criticism of his work that can be found is by individual unreliable bloggers. I suggested the creation of a "Criticism" section when criticism published by reliable sources appears, but have received personal attacks as replies - some have accused me of being biased, even being Boris Malagurski himself! I feel like the moment I suggest something short of attacking Malagurski and his films, I'm labelled as "biased" by these editors. | |||
| Now, I'm a nice guy and I really don't like arguing, I'm the kind of person who likes compromises and have always been able to reach compromises with people who also seek them. I tried ] and attempting to discuss on how to make the Boris Malagurski article better (instead of engaging in a discussion about what Misplaced Pages editors personally think about Malagurski and his work), but got met with more personal attacks, specifically by ]. I have no interest in there not being a critical note in the articles, but only if its published by a reliable source, am I right to hold that position? I'd like to discuss these articles with Misplaced Pages editors who want to make the articles better, but the editors I mentioned are clogging up talk page space by discussing personal opinions on the topic, copy/pasting sentences from blogs,... pretty much acting like Misplaced Pages is an Internet forum. | |||
| Sorry if I'm bothering you with all this information, but I don't know what else to do. I tried informing them that Misplaced Pages is not the place for those kinds of discussions, but this had no effect. Mark, what should I do? Regards, --] (]) 02:15, 5 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Oh hey, sorry that I forgot to respond to this. It totally slipped my mind last week. I only have a minute, but I think you might want to go to ] or ] depending on how clear the disruption is (ANI will only work for clear disruption). Sorry that I can't be more help, ] (]) 18:00, 13 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ==DFW Parking== | |||
| RE: Armin Cruz Sr DFW VP of Parking I was an employee of the DFW Airport for a number of years......It is common knowledge he was the father of Armin Cruz, the person convicted of the war crimes...awkward, yes, but fact.....not sure how else to phrase it......] (]) 00:54, 4 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Unfortunately, we need sources to state that. See ] & ] for details. ] (]) 00:55, 4 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :*Not to mention ]... — ] (]) 00:58, 4 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::*Yes, good point, I should have mentioned that. ] (]) 00:59, 4 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ==]== | |||
| Hi Mark worked on the above article and added reliable sources to the article . Help me to add the article under the title '''Kagapujandar'''. ] (]) 15:23, 4 November 2012 (UTC) Arulraja | |||
| :Hi Arulraja, glad to see that you've been working on the article. I'm unfamiliar with the subject area, so I'm hesitant to make a decision one way or another here. I think it would be best if you filed to have the deletion overturned at ], noting that you wish to have the draft reinstated. That way you can get feedback from multiple editors. Regards, ] (]) 15:39, 4 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == FYI == | |||
| --''']]]''' 19:45, 4 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Ok, thanks for the note, I'll take it up with him. ] (]) 20:56, 4 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ==Saw your comment..== | |||
| ..on AN/I, re Wikipediocracy and interaction bans. Maybe an interaction ban between Wikipediocracy members and Misplaced Pages editors? {{Smiley}} ''] ]'', <small>06:49, 5 November 2012 (UTC).</small><br /> | |||
| :lol, that just might work! :) ] (]) 13:07, 5 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == List of songs recorded by Lady Gaga == | |||
| Hi Mark, will you please add your opinion to this talk page? I would like an admin's opinion over this condescending child thinking he's an admin. ] --''']''' | ] 23:53, 5 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| *Replied there. TV, "condescending child" is getting close to ]. You may want to be careful. — ] (]) 00:17, 6 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| *@TV, Crisco is much more experienced with list articles than I am, so you're probably better off getting his opinion. Thanks for the help Crisco. ] (]) 00:22, 6 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| **Don't mention it! — ] (]) 00:37, 6 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ***Condescending is a fact (look at the comments), child is another fact (he's 20). Thanks for your replies! --''']''' | ] 00:49, 6 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ****One person's child is another person's adult. He's old enough to vote where he is, so he's legally an adult. — ] (]) 01:19, 6 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == stale user draft == | |||
| the user hasnt edited this page (nor any page) since you userfied this ] after the afd. does it go through an MFD or does the Afd apply for a speedy? -- ] 06:15, 6 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :I think it would go to Mfd--I'm not sure that there's a speedy for stale drafts. ] (]) 13:57, 6 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ==Australian Christian Lobby== | |||
| Thank you for trying to resolve the dispute re the ]. | |||
| Editor Dominus Vobisdu does not seem to want to resolve the issues. He does not appear to even read the resolution-discussions. He makes little or no contribution to discussion. ("Not at all interested. Never was". http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Dominus_Vobisdu#Notice_of_Dispute_resolution_discussion - but yet again, can delete within 6 minutes). In his latest ACL TP contribution he provided a single (was-easily-refuted) sentence. He even ignores Misplaced Pages's ''Core content policy - No original research'' Appreciate you advice here. ] (]) 22:50, 6 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Hmm, I suggest you open a thread to discuss the latest revert on the talk page, then hopefully a few users will chime in. Then if he reverts again you can demonstrate that he's against consensus. Also, you might ask Hahc21 for his opinion, too. ] (]) 23:59, 6 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == That edit i did == | |||
| Indeed that comment was not exactly the most intellectually valid edit. I personally just find that whole article to be stereo typed and inadequate. I do however feel that the addition of a section perhaps briefly covering the varied "sub" subcultures within goth would greatly enhance the article, groups such as; Industrial goths, cyber goth(they're not the same thing)vaudeville goth and many others are not fairly represented in this article. An opinion that i'm sure would be shared by many goths themselves is that; as a subculture it is hugely diverse and impossible to make great sweeping inclusive statements such as seem to be displayed here. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 01:11, 7 November 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| :Ok, I suppose that's a reasonable point you make. I suggest you post that on the article's talk page, you might be able to draw some more interested editors to fix up the page a bit. Good luck, ] (]) 01:12, 7 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Vandalism? == | |||
| Fair enough the edits on the Jade Goody page are generally unpleasant, and i shall no longer do that, i was just "experimenting" as you say, to see what would happen. However the edits and concerns i have regarding the Gothic subculture page, i feel are valid and will endeavor to improve that page in a manner that is acceptable. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 01:24, 7 November 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| :Ok, please do concentrate on the goth page instead of the Goody page. Thanks, ] (]) 01:26, 7 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::You should be aware that there are several of us who revert vandalism such as yours, and in each case Mark has beaten me to the revert button. had he not reverted your vandalism, I would have. The best thing you can do for yourself right now is STOP before your account gets blocked. --]<sup class="noprint">[]]</sup> 01:29, 7 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == ] article vandalism seems to be sock == | |||
| ] and ] seem to be the same person, judging from what was added. ] (]) 03:01, 7 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Ok, I'll keep an eye on him. ] (]) 13:35, 7 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Bhutto semi-protect? == | |||
| I noticed you had edited the Bhutto article. Its constantly under siege from editors wishing to change the sourced Rajput to Arain. This is probably a political "statement" of some kind. I've added a good RS and wondered if you would now consider a semi protect since most of the changes are made by IPs. Hopefully that will stabilize that article somewhat. I'll look for more academic-type sources soon to add to the source I just added. Thanks for your consideration.(] (]) 16:43, 7 November 2012 (UTC)) | |||
| :Oh... unless you consider yourself to be involved. (] (]) 16:45, 7 November 2012 (UTC)) | |||
| ::Huh, I had forgotten all about that article. In fact, were my edits not in the history I wouldn't believe you. But anyway, I think there's a decent case for semiprotection here. I've semi-d for a week, if you have problems when that runs out I can do it for longer etc. ] (]) 17:00, 7 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::Thanks, that was fast. Yes, I dug through the history to see if an admin had been around and came up with your name. This reversion to Arain has been going on for a long time so I may be back soon for more help. Many thanks.(] (]) 17:04, 7 November 2012 (UTC)) | |||
| ::::Ok, sure, just let me know. ] (]) 17:08, 7 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Looks like IPs have now taken user names and are vandalizing the ] article. Changing a few words is a bother but vandalizing the source is a bit of a pain to fix. I'm not sure blocking the users will help. Might they just come back with new user names. I've warned this user and it looks like he's causing problems on other articles as well.. Any help is appreciated. Thanks :O)(] (]) 14:34, 13 November 2012 (UTC)) | |||
| ::::::Hmm, you might want to take them to the edit warring noticeboard if they keep reverting (]). ] (]) 17:59, 13 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::::Ok thanks. I'll probably do that, although I don't see this as an edit war situation, or I wouldn't be reverting myself. I hold myself to one revert. This is an ongoing effort to make a political statement, and to vandalize the article it seems and its been going on for at least a couple of years in this article. I didn't think much about it just reverted in the past but this has been more persistent and includes messing around with the refs harder to notice and catch which concerns me. I may just take it to AN. And thanks again. (] (]) 18:14, 13 November 2012 (UTC)) | |||
| == Thank you == | |||
| Thanks for commenting at ]. I think I've addressed everything you mentioned, and I left a comment. Best. ] (]) 18:52, 7 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Alright, I'll check it out. ] (]) 19:00, 7 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::This is to be my first FAC. I was thinking of asking a couple others to take a look before FAC and then potentially going ahead with it soon. Does that sound wise? ] (]) 19:07, 7 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::Yes, that might still be a good idea--better to get too much preparation in than too little! ] (]) 19:10, 7 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Ivy Sports Symposium == | |||
| ], which you deleted as a result of the discussion ], has now been recreated twice by ], who I assume is the original author. I speedied it once as ], but I think that a more permanent solution might be in order. He appears to be recreating it from a saved copy, as the recreated page includes the full Afd tag and reference. I'm not sure where else to bring this to, so I brought it to you as the closing admin.] (]) 00:39, 8 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Thanks for the note, I've deleted and salted. Hopefully this will put a rest to it! ] (]) 00:45, 8 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Paul Summerville == | |||
| ] has recreated his wiki page again despite a decisive vote. Any ideas as the closing admin? ] (]) 03:05, 8 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Well, since it's at ] at the moment, I think it is Ok to have it up for now. The DRV will decide what to do with it, I guess. ] (]) 03:10, 8 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :*Refused the CSD, per above. — ] (]) 03:16, 8 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::Ok, sounds good. ] (]) 03:30, 8 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Constructive Contributions == | |||
| What exactly do you believe was unconstructive about my update to the Star Wars page? <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 03:28, 8 November 2012 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| :Well, for one thing, you changed its name to "Star Trek". ] (]) 03:30, 8 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Are they not the same? I was informed that the names could be used interchangabley | |||
| ::No, they're not actually the same... ] (]) 03:42, 8 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::I'm pretty sure they are <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 03:44, 8 November 2012 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| *Obvious trolling is obvious. — ] (]) 08:33, 12 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ==GA Notice== | |||
| {| class="wikitable" style="width: 100%;" | |||
| |- | |||
| ! height=30|<big>] Notice</big> | |||
| |- | |||
| | align="center" height=100|{{#switch: pass | |||
| |pass=The article ] that you nominated as a ] has passed ]; see the GA review for comments about the article. Well done!<br/><br/>— ]] 01:27, 9 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| |nom = Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article ] that you recently nominated for ]-status according to the ]. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to ] with any questions or comments you might have during this period.<br/><br/>— ]] 01:27, 9 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| |Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article ] in which you've been a major contributor, and has been nominated for ]-status according to the ]. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to ] with any questions or comments you might have during this period.<br/><br/>— ]] 01:27, 9 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| }} | |||
| |- | |||
| ! height=30|] · ] · ] · ] | |||
| |- | |||
| |} | |||
| ::Thanks for the note, and for the review. ] (]) 02:58, 9 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| Congrats!! :) --♫ ] (<small>]</small>) 19:42, 9 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == A barnstar for you! == | |||
| {| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;" | |||
| |rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ] | |||
| |style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar''' | |||
| |- | |||
| |style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Well deserved, my big friend. — ]] 04:27, 12 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| |} | |||
| :That barnstar came with a high price, Mark. Your dismissive comment about Till's previous disatisfaction with you was gratuitous and unbecoming an administrator, and has dropped you down a peg or two or three in my eyes. I have no idea about your previous history with him (I don't know him from Adam, and just know you by name), and really couldn't care any less, but bringing it up on ANI was ungentlemanly and below the belt, and tantamount to poisoning the well. It was inappropriate precisely because you were supposed to be acting in your role as impartial admistrator. Striking the comment and apologizing to Till both in the ANI and on his talk page would be the grown-up thing to do. ] (]) 08:36, 12 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::@DV I don't think there was anything wrong with what I said, so no apology will be forthcoming. @AXE Sorry to see how that turned out, but we shouldn't be surprised--ANI is a pretty unreasonable place these days. ] (]) 14:50, 12 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::Oh, I think I see the issue now! When I said "This should be taken with a grain of salt", "this" referred to my comment--not Till's complaint. I meant that I may not be 100% impartial, not that Till's views should be suspect because he complained about me. Is that how you took it? ] (]) 15:59, 12 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::Yes, that's how I took it, and you can understand why I would be a little shocked. I'm satisfied with your explanation, though, and relieved. Thanks. ] (]) 18:04, 12 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Alright, thanks for the note--I'll see you around. ] (]) 18:16, 12 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Should a user sub-page of a banned/blocked user be deleted? == | |||
| Hi Mark. I came across this user ] and I was wondering if it should be deleted? It appears that the user created it around the time they were banned and it does not seem to relate to Misplaced Pages or its mission in any way but I am unclear if I can slap a deletion template on it or there is another procedure. Since you took the last action against the users account would you mind giving me you opinion? Should the page be deleted (as {{tl|db-g5}} or some other such criteria) or should I just leave it alone. Thanks! ] (]) 21:07, 12 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :To be honest, I'm really not sure... might want to ask a more experienced admin. ] (]) 21:26, 12 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::Okay Mark, I will ask on ] or some such place. Thanks for the quick reply. ] (]) 21:32, 12 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Request to pick up ], now a GA, for a peer review (trying to get to FA) == | |||
| I expanded the article, covering, I believe, all major aspects, fixed some MOS issues, and tightened the language a bit. Thought the logical next step was a PR, before FAC. Thanks. ] (]) 21:21, 12 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Sounds interesting. I'll give it a PR, probably won't get to it for a few days though. ] (]) 21:26, 12 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::K. Thanks. ] (]) 02:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Semi protection == | |||
| I have already requested semi protection for the article ] at semi protection. Could you protect. <font color="#336699">]]]</font> 22:36, 12 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Not needed anymore. <font color="#336699">]]]</font> 22:58, 12 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Roy Mitchell == | |||
| Thanks, re: Mitchell. Unfortunately I only have one major source - Patricia Bernstein's book on the lynching of Washington - all other sources I could find mention Mitchell in passing, more or less. I'll improve the article when I can. I actually made the page on Mitchell after reading the interview you conducted, and then reading your page on Jesse Washington. It got me to reading more on lynchings during Jim Crow and I felt I had to write something on it; Mitchell seemed to be a fitting subject. Thanks for your work on these things. -] (]) 20:39, 14 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :You're very welcome, glad to know that you read the interview and it helped inspire you. Hopefully more sources will turn up! ] (]) 23:21, 14 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Frank's Cock == | |||
| Now here's a fun debate: would a TFA article be eligible for DYK? I was thinking of running the film for World AIDS Day (''Frank's Cock'' went through this morning. What a release.) — ] (]) 03:04, 16 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :I would hold out for Valentines day... but that's just me. ] (]) 03:09, 16 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :*LOL, there was more than enough drama at ]. Editors seem to have been taking the film more seriously than the director. — ] (]) 00:22, 17 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Church of the SubGenius == | |||
| Sorry I didn't get to this before the peer review closed, but I've left my comments at ]. Hope there's something helpful for you there. ] <sup><span class="plainlinks">(] '''·''' ])</span></sup> 16:24, 18 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Oh yes, my error there. Thanks for the comments, much appreciated. ] (]) 21:01, 18 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Look over this for me? == | |||
| Hi Mark, hope all's well in your neck of the woods! | |||
| I've been doing a lot of work on '']'' over the weekend and wondered if you (or any interested talk page stalkers :D) could take a look at it for me and let me know what you think. It's one of my favorite novels, but when I found the article the other day, it was a sad mess of original research and Sparknotes plagiarism. Hope to keep expanding it with more solid lit crit and take it to GA. Any comments/suggestions/critiques would be most appreciated! Thanks as always, ]] 19:47, 18 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Sounds interesting, I'm doing a bit of a wikibreak at the moment, but I'll try to get to it if I can. ] (]) 21:01, 18 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :: No worries! I might go ahead and nominate it at GAN, cos I think it's in a good place, but feel free to jump in at your leisure. Enjoy your wikibreak – you've earned it :) ]] 21:21, 18 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::Thanks, I realized that Misplaced Pages was causing me to neglect ] ] (]) 17:50, 21 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Help request == | |||
| Hi there, Mark. Could I possibly ask you a favour? The article ] should better be moved to the correct name of: "Beylerbeylik". If you look at the TP you will see that there is a consensus among concerned users in this change. However, possibly due to ignorance of this situation (no-one would expect that the concept of "Beylerbeylik" would be treated with an invented word such as "Beylerbeydom"; it looks something like instead of "kingdom" we say "kinghood" or "kingness") someone redirected "beylerbeylik" to "eyalet". If you kindly remove that redirect, we would like to move "Beylerbeydom" to "Beylerbeylik". Thank you very much, in advance, for your collaboration, help and time. All the best. --] (]) 21:37, 18 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Ok, done. ] (]) 00:49, 19 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::Thank you very much again and please enjoy some . Best. --] (]) 10:45, 19 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::Sounds good, brings back the memories of my trip to Turkey last year. ] (]) 17:50, 21 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ==Notice of Dispute resolution discussion== | |||
| ] | |||
| Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at ] regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we are requesting your participation to help find a resolution. The thread is "]". Please take a moment to review the simple guide and join the discussion. Thank you! | |||
| {| style="border: 0; width: 100%;" | |||
| |- | |||
| | style="width: 50%; vertical-align: top;" | | |||
| {{collapse top|bg=#cae1ff|bg2=#f0f8ff|Guide for participants}} | |||
| If you wish to open a DR/N filing, click the '''''"Request dispute resolution"''''' button below this guide or go to ] for an easy to follow, step by step request form. | |||
| {{center|'''What this noticeboard is:'''}} | |||
| * It is an early step to resolve content disputes after ] discussions have stalled. If it's something we can't help you with, or is too complex to resolve here, our volunteers will point you in the right direction. | |||
| {{center|'''What this noticeboard is not:'''}} | |||
| * It is not a place to deal with the behavior of other editors. We deal with disputes about '''article content''', not disputes about '''user conduct'''. | |||
| * It is not a place to discuss disputes that are ] at other ]. | |||
| * It is not a substitute for the talk pages: the dispute must have been ] (not just through edit summaries) before resorting to DRN. | |||
| * It is not a court with judges or arbitrators that issue binding decisions: we focus on resolving disputes through consensus, compromise, and explanation of policy. | |||
| {{center|'''Things to remember:'''}} | |||
| * Discussions should be ], calm, ], ], and objective. Comment only about the article's ''content'', not ]. Participants who go off-topic or become uncivil may be asked to leave the discussion. | |||
| * Let the other editors know about the discussion by posting {{tls|drn-notice}} on their user talk page. | |||
| * Sign and date your posts with ] {{nowrap|"<code><nowiki>~~~~</nowiki></code>"}}. | |||
| * If you ever need any help, ask one of ], who will help you as best as they can. You may also wish to read through the FAQ page located ] and on the DR/N talkpage. | |||
| {{collapse bottom}} | |||
| <!--Template:DRN-notice-->] <sup>''] / ]''</sup> 19:45, 20 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Dispute over FA status Microsoft Security Essentials == | |||
| I have opened a dispute over the decision to award this article FA status which you were to some extent involved. You may wish to comment on the case ]. ] (]) 19:57, 20 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Thanks for the note, but I don't think I'll get involved. ] (]) 17:50, 21 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Re: question == | |||
| Thanks for asking, it was a really good one that made me stop and think. <font color="#cc6600">]</font><sup><small>(<font color="#ff6600">]</font>)</small></sup> 19:41, 21 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Merchandise giveaways == | |||
| {| class="barnstar" style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #FFFFCC; " | |||
| | ] | |||
| | valign=top | {{#if:|<div style="text-align: center; font-size: x-large; font-weight: bold; padding: 0; vertical-align: bottom; color: black">You deserve a thank you!</div> | |||
| ---- | |||
| }}<div style="color:black; text-align:center;"> I thought that you deserved something a bit extra for all of the amazing work you've done for the project. <br /> I've ] you for a ]! </div> | |||
| |} <font face="Impact">]]]</font> 03:24, 22 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Oh cool, thanks. I'll have to check that out. ] (]) 17:27, 22 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Captain Underpants AFD == | |||
| Because you participated in ] you might want to participate in ]. ] (]) 01:09, 24 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == B.C. Kochmit (2nd nomination) == | |||
| Dear Mark: The talk page for ] has the second nomination for AfD directing to the first discussion instead of the second, which should link to ]. Can you please fix this? Thanks!--] (]) 03:49, 24 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| Hey Mark. Can you protect this page from being re-created? Thanks. <font face="Arial" size="2em">] (])</font> 22:43, 26 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| : Note: I nominated for CSD (recreation of a deleted article, which was deleted yesterday) and the article cannot be fixed or improved because Status wants it to be protected from be created. What's the point of it existing? No logic or reasoning at all. Status reverted me twice and edit warred with me. ]• ] 22:45, 26 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :: It was not a RECREATION of a deleted article, it was a REDIRECT of a deleted article. Notice the difference. If someone is looking for the article, it will be redirected to her discography article. Simple. <font face="Arial" size="2em">] (])</font> 22:50, 26 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::: What do you call it then? If someone is looking, it will no longer appear in a few days. Simple. ]• ] 22:51, 26 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::: A '''redirect'''. <font face="Arial" size="2em">] (])</font> 22:53, 26 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::: ... of a recreated, deleted article. Ending this discussion now as it's someone else's user talk. ]• ] 22:55, 26 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::*Calvin/Aaron, I have to agree with Status here. A redirect is a valid option as there may be links to the collection both on or off Wiki, which would be broken by deletion. You can try ] if you are pretty certain this is not needed. BTW, recreation means recreating the content. A redirect is a completely different ball of wax — ] (]) 22:56, 26 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::: Why is it needed if Status wants it to be protected from being created? What's the point of it being a redirect? It may as well not be there. ]• ] 23:00, 26 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::::: Because the point of a redirect is to redirect someone to a similar topic. In this case, they can see it's chart position on the page it is redirect to. It can be protected so no other person can recreate the article, as it's been at AFD like 5 times. <font face="Arial" size="2em">] (])</font> 23:02, 26 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::: I don't see the point in this case. Deleted articles disappear from the search after a few days. End of. ]• ] 23:03, 26 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::*On Misplaced Pages. On other sites? RFD it first, and if it's kept I'll protect it. — ] (]) 23:06, 26 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ==Information== | |||
| I noticed your username commenting at an Arbcom discussion regarding civility. An effort is underway that would likely benifit if your views were included. I hope you will append regards at: ] Thank you for considering this request. ] (]) 08:21, 29 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Thanks for the note, but I don't know if I'll get involved. ] (]) 18:39, 30 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Oscillant/Oscillatory pools == | |||
| Hello Mark Arsten. I notice you've just deleted "Oscillant", however after that article had been proposed for deletion, the article's creator changed the article's name to "Oscillatory pools", and it is still in existence under this latter title. ] (]) 20:18, 30 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Ahh, got it now, thanks. I see someone was playing trick-the-admin again :) ] (]) 20:19, 30 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::Thanks for the speedy response - I wish everything in life happened as quick as that! <small>(caveat: only if I've asked for it to happen, that is....)</small> ] (]) 20:24, 30 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Happy December! == | |||
| {| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;" | |||
| |style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ] | |||
| |style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | The Holidays are coming up... enjoy this lovely brownie as your first treat! <font face="Arial" size="2em">] (])</font> 02:24, 1 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
| |} | |||
| :Thanks, much appreciated. ] (]) 04:34, 1 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Deletion of article about Miko Kung Fu == | == Deletion of article about Miko Kung Fu == | ||
| Line 612: | Line 75: | ||
| <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 19:32, 1 December 2012 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 19:32, 1 December 2012 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | ||
| :Hello, your article was deleted because there was a consensus (]) that it was not notable (]). We define notability as "significant coverage in reliable sources" (see ] & ] for more). To have the article restored, you'll have to show notability by providing example of coverage. Thanks, ] (]) 21:17, 1 December 2012 (UTC) | :Hello, your article was deleted because there was a consensus (]) that it was not notable (]). We define notability as "significant coverage in reliable sources" (see ] & ] for more). To have the article restored, you'll have to show notability by providing example of coverage. Thanks, ] (]) 21:17, 1 December 2012 (UTC) | ||
| == Hi There == | |||
| I appreciate your dedication to wikipedia | |||
| that was a test and you passed | |||
| here, have a q | |||
| q <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 01:16, 2 December 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| :LOL, thanks for the q. ] (]) 01:19, 2 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :*This is awesome. — ] (]) 09:58, 3 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Doubt regarding Bollywood movies == | == Doubt regarding Bollywood movies == | ||
| Line 630: | Line 81: | ||
| Thank you <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 15:31, 3 December 2012 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | Thank you <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 15:31, 3 December 2012 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | ||
| :Hi, my advice is to discuss the issue on ], and try to form a consensus among interested editors. Thanks! ] (]) 15:34, 3 December 2012 (UTC) | :Hi, my advice is to discuss the issue on ], and try to form a consensus among interested editors. Thanks! ] (]) 15:34, 3 December 2012 (UTC) | ||
| == A redirect? == | |||
| I'm truly astonished that the AFD for ] ended this way. Other than Jax0677, there was only one editor who favored redirect. The very last, Stuartyeates, and even then he said delete or redirect. Nobody argued for redirect except Jax0677, I word searched redirect and that's how I know this. | |||
| Can you change the outcome or do I need to DRV this?] 15:57, 3 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :I'm curious, why are you bothered by the existence of this redirect? Also, I count Jax, Stuart, and Stalwart approving or explicitly not objecting to a redirect and only one person voicing an opinion against one. So I don't think redirection is unreasonable, no. ] (]) 16:08, 3 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :And the one argument against redirection is pretty poor, as well. ] (]) 16:14, 3 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::The person clearly fails ] and most everyone who chimed in at the AFD, admitted that? If the person fails notability guidelines, why does it have to be a redirect? Silence on redirects doesn't mean editors approve of it. I guess this is going to DRV] 16:17, 3 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::I fail to see why I interpreted consensus incorrectly... you chose to remain silent, so your (unspoken) opinion wasn't counted. Also, there is no requirement that individuals must meet notability guidelines to have a redirect. ] (]) 16:31, 3 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Incorrect. I did take part in the AFD. As Niteshift states below your redirect outcomes goes clearly against the consensus.] 16:38, 3 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::::You took part in the Afd, but you didn't express an opinion about redirection. If someone doesn't say whether they support a redirect or not, I take that as no !vote with regards to redirection. ] (]) 16:45, 3 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::*So the author said "redirect", stuart says delete or redirect and Stalwart said "I think it would be a bit ''pointless''. Also concerned it might encourage recreation of an article later". Really one supporting a redirect, one saying he doesn't care and one saying he wouldn't fight a pointless effort......and that becomes the close despite the other six deletes. My concern, like Stalwart, is that it encourages recreating the article of a person that is clearly non-notable. Even the two who said re-directing was ok chose delete as their main choice. I'm not going to fight about it, but I do think the choice to re-direct was the wrong one and that it essentially ignored the clear consensus to delete. ] (]) 16:22, 3 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::*You were the only one to voice opposition to a redirect. Three people were amenable to that close. To go against the numerical consensus would require a strong argument. That a "redirect" would encourage the recreation of an article is not a particularly strong argument against a redirect, in my view. ] (]) 16:31, 3 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::::*You did go against the numerical consensus. 6 said delete. Just delete it. Get rid of it. Be gone. 2 said delete bet they didn't oppose redirect and 1 said redirect. Note that "not opposing" re-direct isn't supporting it. 1 even said it was pointless to do it. Now, what was the argument FOR redirect? ] was the sole arguement put forth by a single person and that isn't a strong reason either. The other 2 that didn't oppose it didn't argue for it and even expressed reasons why not to do it. ] (]) 16:52, 3 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::*I'll repeat what I said above, "If someone doesn't say whether they support a redirect or not, I take that as no !vote with regards to redirection". I don't assign !voters a position they haven't endorsed. In my experience, your strong anti-redirect sentiment is uncommon, so I don't assume people take that view. Redirects exist as an aide to the reader, and though there are some instances where redirects are bad, this seems like it would be helpful for someone with interest in the issue. | |||
| ::::::*Also, I find long, drawn-out arguments over trivial issues such as this to be a very poor use of time and resources. I'm actually baffled as to why you two see this as an issue that merits extensive discussion. I'd prefer that you spend your time doing more important things, but if you'd like to file a DRV, please do go ahead--I doubt either of use will change the other's mind here. ] (]) 17:07, 3 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::* Since we're talking about preferences, I'd prefer that you didn't take a condescending tone. I've not been the list bit uncivil here and frankly your 'go do something useful' dismissal is rude. This has hardly been "long and drawn-out". While you claim you don't assign voters a position they haven't expressed, you in effect do that when you presume that they don't oppose it by not even addressing it. There vote was delete. Gone. If they didn't express being amenable to re-directs, you presume they are by their silence. I've already said I dind;t think this was worth taking to DRV, but I am disappointed that you decided to try talking down to people and think that will net you better results. | |||
Revision as of 17:39, 3 December 2012
Every day, we lose what the wrongly blocked would have given that day. And a little bit of our souls.
 |
|
time to give it a rest. |
Welcome to my talk page, please leave new messages at the bottom
Lorry Girl
I have created an article named Lorry Girl and it has been deleted by you. The deletion tag said that the article lacks external references. At that time the references have not been available since the film was not projected. Now the film has been previewed woldwidely in over 40 centers and plenty of references are available. I request you to refix the page and I will put the references too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sonisoni (talk • contribs) 07:04, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
- Hi, I'll move the article to your userspace so you can add references and update the page, then we can think about whether it meet the WP:NFILM guideline. Mark Arsten (talk) 14:50, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
- Ok, the article is at User:Sonisoni/Lorry Girl now. Let me know when you've updated and added references, thanks. Mark Arsten (talk) 14:53, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
Deletion of article about Miko Kung Fu
Dear Mark,
I created an article about the martial art I have been training for the last 6 years - Miko Kung Fu. This article provided some basic information about the style and my intention was later on to add some more details concerning its history, specifics and relation to other martial arts. The credibility of the information could be checked easily at the official internet sites of the Miko Kung Fu schools across Europe, that I referred to.
However I saw that you deleted this article. Could you, please, explain why? The article was based purely on facts and there were no personal opinions expressed. Could you, please tell me, why I shouldn't consider this as censorship from your side.
Additionally - I see this deletion as an act of discrimination. If there are articles about Karate, Aikido, Ving Tsun, Capoeira and other martial arts, which is the objective reason that there cannot be an article about Miko Kung Fu?
It is hard to create something and obviously - it's very easy to destroy it. If there were some problems with the content, why didn't advise on them to be corrected on the first place? I don't understand how this corresponds with the values of Misplaced Pages - "The free Encyclopedia"...
Herewith I am asking you restore the article I wrote about Miko Kung Fu. Thank you in advance!
Regards, Teodor Totev — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kestenite (talk • contribs) 19:32, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
- Hello, your article was deleted because there was a consensus (WP:CON) that it was not notable (WP:N). We define notability as "significant coverage in reliable sources" (see WP:GNG & WP:RS for more). To have the article restored, you'll have to show notability by providing example of coverage. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 21:17, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
Doubt regarding Bollywood movies
I am shocked to see that Misplaced Pages provides figures pertaining to bollywood box office business from www.boxofficeindia.com which is not genuine. There are other releant sources like bollywoodhungama.com, addatoday.com, koimoi.com which provide accurate figures of box office. I request you to remove restriction from movie "Ek Tha Tiger" so that I can make changes to its collection which is about INR.198cr nut Misplaced Pages mentions it as INR 186 cr (Source boxofficeindia.com which is not accurate at all). Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Afzal57hhh (talk • contribs) 15:31, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
- Hi, my advice is to discuss the issue on Talk:Ek Tha Tiger, and try to form a consensus among interested editors. Thanks! Mark Arsten (talk) 15:34, 3 December 2012 (UTC)