Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 18:55, 11 September 2008

Archives 2007 Aug 13 – Oct 14 Oct 14 – Nov 11 Nov 12 – Dec 26 Dec 26 – → 2008 ← – Feb 28 Feb 29 – May 16 May 16 – Aug 22 Aug 23 – Dec 14 Dec 16 – → 2009 ← - Jun 20 Jun 30 - → 2010- 2014 Jul 2010 - Jun 2012 Jul 2012 - Dec 2014 2015 Jan 2015 - present /Archives for a full archive

Ulster Defence Regiment

Hi, may I now formally ask for you to lift the page protection at Ulster Defence Regiment? Discussion has died down, the disputed section has been rewritten and the warring editors appear to have desisted. I'm on vacation at the moment and I'd like to do some work on the artilce before returning to my own employment on Monday. I'd be grateful - thank you. The Thunderer (talk) 03:47, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. Fingers crossed. The Thunderer (talk) 21:12, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm now getting intervention from here. I'd be interested in your opinion on the subject matter because I personally can't see the logic behind this chap's actions, which I think are well enough intentioned.The Thunderer (talk) 15:11, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Intervention it is an admin removing images inline with policy. Once again you are involved in an edit war, with an admin now, who removed images from your article. I seem to recal that you said you would not engage in any more edit wars so as to avoid a block for edit warring, but yet again you are, and the article is only unprotected. God forbid an editor who trys to change this article to anything that YOU dont like doesnt matter if you are violating policy just a case of I put it there and it stays. BigDunc 17:18, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

I am not getting involved in this dispute. - Rjd0060 (talk) 17:26, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Firstly: I didn't know the guy was an admin to start with. When I reverted his removal of the images I posted a discussion message on his talk page. Secondly I discussed the mantter with him politely then thirdly realised that the problem could be overcome by using Crown Copyright in stead of Album Cover Rationale. You can clearly see I posted a message here asking for assistance and opinion and kept the other admin up to date as well with what I was doing. So no, I didn't engage in edit warring. I see from your prompt interjection however BigDunc that you're sitting there like a vulture waiting for the first mistake I make. Let me advise you that I have made sometrhing like 700 edits on Misplaced Pages since the UDR page was protected, just over 100 since the page was unprotected, of which 38 have been on the Ulster Defence Regiment page. I have had no difficulties with anyone in that period until now. Of course I realise that none of this carries any weight with you at all. Being polite, asking for assistance and generally playing the game by the rules and making 750 useful edits doesn't seem to suit your agenda but one little problem and you're right in there. Go ahead then, fill your boots, follow me around like a dog and see how much it affects me. The Thunderer (talk) 17:37, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

No one has challenged any of your edits and when they do, guess what, you editwar, 2 reversions in succession is an edit war. And dont flatter yourself in to thinking that I am sitting like a vulture waiting to correct your mistakes. I could have removed the images when I saw them but left them as I knew as soon as I did the tired old accusations would have came flooding out and as I said I just couldn't be arsed to deal with the nonsense. BigDunc 17:50, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Rjd0060, not withstanding the above I would still appreciate your comments on how I handled the issue of the images. I believe I have sorted it out properly by changing the tags to Crown Copyright and as the admin who removed the images hasn't intervened again I can only assume he accepts that. what do you think? The Thunderer (talk) 17:39, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Once I realised the other editor was an admin I engaged him/her in dialogue and searched for a way round the issue. I discovered that Crown Copyright allowed the use of their published material for educational purposes. I then changed the tags to that of Crown Copyright, non-free and after informing the admin of that, reverted the images back and removed their orphan status. I have not heard from that admin since so can only assume I've done the right thing. If it subsequently transpires I haven't and he/she removes them again then I shall have to follow the policy to protest their removal, find the correct tagging and ask to include them in the article again. Do you think anything I've done in this instance has been improper? I've loaded quite a few images in the last few days but most of them have been simpler "own image-public domain" stuff or where copyright has expired. This is rather a new experience for me. The Thunderer (talk) 17:54, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

May I draw your attention t0 this please? The Thunderer (talk) 17:06, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Televisionary

Hi, you just deleted my page "televisionary". I'm not questioning your reason for this, i was just wondering if you could let me have a copy of the page so i can re-look at it. Since it's been deleted i can't see it anywhere. you can contact me at harrynrobinson@hotmail.com. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dwightwitherspoon (talk • contribs) 08:28, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Problem on a page you protected.

You protected the page Misplaced Pages:Contact_us/Article_problem/Vandalism. I noticed an error on the page, which I've noted on its talkpage here, however no action has been taken yet, so I figured I'd contact you, as the admin who locked it up. (I'm not an admin, so I can't just fix it myself.) It appears that a chunk of text went missing with this edit from June 24. Thanks for your attention. Yilloslime (t) 20:32, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

The problem I see--and maybe I'm just missing something is:

The "We use the "revert" to refer to" seems be dangling. We use it to refer to...what? I'm not sure what it's supposed to say, but the current version seem very wrong to me, but maybe I'm just missing something. What do you think? Yilloslime (t) 21:46, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Much better! Looks great now. thanks for looking into this. Yilloslime (t) 22:19, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Burnt Oak Records Deletion

Given that Misplaced Pages features article on the members of parliament for Yukon, it seems strange that anyone would suggest the deletion of the 'Burnt Oak Records' page in lieu of them being one of the foremost indie labels responsible for the recent surge of musical output in southern Ontario. Moreover: they've received extensive coverage from the music press in Central Canada, and two of their artists (Elbow Beach Surf Club & Richard Laviolette) are apparently noteworthy enough to have pages on Misplaced Pages created by different parties. Is there any way we can reverse this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.224.197.156 (talk) 02:49, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

WP:ACC tool account request (jeremyb)

Is this sufficient? (pretend I spelled registered correctly) Thanks --Jeremyb (talk) 05:33, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Sarah Palin protection wheel war

The Sarah Palin wheel war arbitration case, on which you have commented, is now open.

• Evidence for the arbitrators may be submitted at Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Sarah Palin protection wheel war/Evidence. Evidence should be submitted within one week, if possible.
• Your contributions are also welcome at Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Sarah Palin protection wheel war/Workshop.

For the Arbitration Committee, Anthøny ✉ 21:11, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Zachary Simons

On August 1 you deleted Zachary Simons as an expired prod. I didn't contest it (despite being the article's creator) because I agreed with the rationale. While I still don't think an independent article is possible, I'd like to undelete the article and salvage its content as part of an article I'm putting together on the Detroit Tigers' minor league organization (currently at User:Mackensen/Detroit Tigers minor league players). I don't think we need the whole machinery of AfD/DRV here, but I wanted to run it by you first before doing anything. Best, Mackensen (talk) 14:47, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Mikael Ljungman

Recently you elected to keep the article Mikael Ljungman based on no consensus having being reached in the deletion debate. This was despite the fact that the only two Keep votes are from a single purpose account obviously linked with Mikael Ljungman and an account that was created mere minutes before the vote was placed. I fear that the Misplaced Pages process for avoiding abuse of the encyclopedia for self-promotion by non-notable businesses is no longer effective if policy is now to keep articles such as this where the article's subject can sway the administrators so easily. --Fugu Alienking (talk) 03:19, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review for Flamboyant bella

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Flamboyant bella. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Davewild (talk) 09:41, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

RE:Meta logo

I have replied at that forum specified. —Anonymous Dissident 01:59, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

User:DefensiveBlack/Homotown

I was wondering why you deleted this page. I noticed that you said it was an attack. I bewilders my mind that in the year 2008, people still use sexual preferences as slurs. I am a gay American. I am proud of who I am. I am stunned and appalled that you believe being called gay is an insult. Unfortunately I am only openly gay on Misplaced Pages. It is people like you that prevent people like me from being who I am. --DefensiveBlack (talk) 03:09, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Please restore List of Jehovah's Witnesses conventions

Please restore List of Jehovah's Witnesses conventions. I was just about to deprod it. I plan on adding merge tags to see where the editors of Jehovah's Witnesses want to put the data. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 02:18, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Hooray!

Please pop by the thread I created at User_talk:Dmcdevit#Hip_Hip_Hooray, as I believe you were the deleting admin. Hooray! --Dweller (talk) 16:04, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Zero Hour

Hey,

Are you the guy to talk to about the deletion of the Zero Hour article? I had a look into Notability (music) and find that Zero Hour fulfills two of these criteria, namely:

• Has become the most prominent representative of a notable style or of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Misplaced Pages standards, including verifiability.

and

• Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels (i.e. an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable).

Zero Hour are *the* foremost Technical Metal band. As for the label, they are signed with Sensory Records, a label that features Gordian Knot (band), Redemption (band), Edenbridge (band), ARK (band), Spiral Architect, and which released Riverside (band)'s first album.

Because of these factors I respectfully ask for an undeletion of the Zero Hour page.

Thank you!

--Daniel Klein (talk) 18:27, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Further to this (I'm not sure where to properly reply to things you said on my talk page--is this okay?), I have reviewed the proposed deletion page and I did refer to the notability music page in my text above. I'm not quite sure what sort of work the article needed? The band *is* signed with one of the major independent labels (one of *the* most important labels in the progressive metal niche) and I believe the article stated that? I'm also not sure if I can view the article at all right now while it is deleted. I'm sorry I haven't participated much here on WP and thus don't know a lot of the rules or how these things are usually done. I was just checking the article earlier today to remind myself of the drummer's name and was shocked to find the article gone. So in short: exactly what do I need to do to help undelete the article? --Daniel Klein (talk) 19:43, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh, alright, so: could you please restore the Zero Hour article? And once you have and I have had a look at it, would you mind very much if I came back to you and asked you what sort of edits it needs to survive? (Assuming, of course, the answer to this question will be non-trivial, which I assume it will be.) Thanks! --Daniel Klein (talk) 02:41, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the restore! I've had a look at WP:MUSIC and the article, but I'm still not sure what I need to do to improve the article because it is my interpretation that it already fulfills the guidelines in that it states that the band is signed with Sensory Records and Sensory Records are definitely one of the major labels in progressive metal. I've asked for help with the Wikiproject Metal guys; I'm also considering to make Zero Hour's importance in Technical Metal (a subject which I notice still doesn't have a page here either) clearer. But I guess my first step will be to wait to hear back from the Wikiproject: Metal guys since they should know best. So I guess this is just to let you know that it might be a few days until I do anything to the article. Thanks! --Daniel Klein (talk) 15:44, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Great Britain at the Olympics

Hi, I believe you were the admin who protected the above page from editing. It appears the parties involved have resolved their dispute on the talk page, but they don't seem to have notified you (I think the user who said they would has since been banned). Could you now unprotect it so that updates from the 2008 Games can be made? Cheers Basement12 (T.C) 00:36, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Baklunish

Hello! :) In July, Baklunish was apparently proposed for deletion. It may not be a viable article on its own, but there may be potential to merge it into an article on Greyhawk. I'm wondering if it's possible to restore the original article, and turn it into a redirect, thus preserving the edit history? Thanks!  :) BOZ (talk) 16:06, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, sir.  :) BOZ (talk) 19:34, 10 September 2008 (UTC)