Misplaced Pages

This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated.

Archives

• Nov 2007 – June 2008  • June 2008 – Sept 2008  • Sept 2008 – April 2009  • April 2009 – June 2009  • June 2009 – Aug 2009  • Aug 2009 – Oct 2009  • Nov 2009 – present

WP:NODRAMA/2

Just a quick reminder that the Second Great Misplaced Pages Dramaout has begun. Please log any work you do at Misplaced Pages:The Great Misplaced Pages Dramaout/2nd/Log. Good luck! --Jayron32 01:49, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Wow, thanks - I probably would have forgotten. JamieS93 02:05, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Important notice about VOTE 3 in the CDA poll

You are receiving this message as you have voted in VOTE 3 at the Community de-Adminship 'Proposal Finalization' Poll.

It has been pointed out that VOTE 3 was confusing, and that voters have been assuming that the question was about creating an actual two-phase CDA process. The question is merely about having a two-phase poll on CDA at the eventual RfC, where the community will have their vote (eg a "yes/no for CDA” poll, followed a choice of proposal types perhaps).

As I wrote the question, I'll take responsibility for the confusion. It does make sense if read through to the end, but it certainly wasn't as clear as it should have been, or needed to be!

Please amend your vote if appropriate - it seems that many (if not most) people interpreted the question in the way that was not intended.

Regards, Matt Lewis (talk) 16:01, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion or not?

Hi there. In your summary for closing the Graphical interface of future operating system article, you've written that "The result was delete. Since it's so clearly WP:NOT, with zero chance, we should have been able to speedy that". Incidentally, we were able to speedy that article, and I had already, on the same day the article was created on 16 January 2010, placed a CSD tag on that page. An admin declined the speedy deletion, and suggested I take it to Afd, which I did. My question is this: who is right in this issue, the admin who declined the speedy deletion, or you, the admin who confirmed that this article should have been speedily deleted? Amsaim (talk) 14:37, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

• Hmm. Interesting that you brought that up. :-) I can't say it's a matter of "right or wrong" so much as application of discretion. Fabrictramp probably did fine, if you want to strictly follow the CSD criteria. However, IMO our CSD system has become overly bureaucratic at times. And when deciding whether or not to on-sight delete something, we shouldn't be worrying about petty stuff like "G2 vs G3, but not quite A3", but instead looking at the bigger picture. I often write custon deletion summaries, because it can give a better explanation than one of the templated reasons.
• I think A7 could be overused in deletions, but on the other hand, I've seen articles like "my top 10 favorite list of bands" or "something my friend made up yesterday" that were PRODded instead of speedy deleted, which I disagree with. We should be able to speedy things like that. In the closure statement, I was speaking in a semi-theoretical sense. Like I said, nothing wrong with Fabrictramp's decision, but it's my personal opinion that we should delete articles that are clearly not encyclopedic (WP:NOT, etc.) and would be snow cases at AFD (besides stuff like WP:CRYSTAL - that should not be within a single admin's scope, and requires a discussion). Otherwise, it wastes people's time to vote "delete" on irredeemable articles. Best, JamieS93 19:38, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Templates to delete

Hi. You deleted but then restored Template:Superleague Formula races. I would ask you to redelete it as the point was that it has merged with another template so the information is already there. It wasn't a mistake putting it up for deletion. There is another one, Template:Superleague Formula which follows the same story line by which the information has been moved in an appropriate way so as to leave the template defunct of any use. I would appreciate the deletion of both. Thanks. Officially Mr X (talk) 20:21, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

By "mistake" I meant that the deletion was my mistake. :-) I was attempting to delete several templates (all tagged for deletion by another user, for a different reason), and I accidentally deleted the SF races template, too, before even looking into the situation. Just a pure mistake on my part. I just deleted both for you under WP:CSD#G6 ("housekeeping, cleanup") since it doesn't look like "T2" was the CSD reason you were looking for. Best, JamieS93 22:15, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

I probably shouldn't make requests here but nobody is sorting out any deletions at the moment and these three templates just need deleting as they are devoid of use: Template:China Superbike Championship Circuit, Template:GP3 Seasons, Template:Formula V6 Asia Series circuits. Thanks. Officially Mr X (talk) 12:45, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Looks like one of my colleagues just deleted them. :-) JamieS93 13:05, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

o: PeterSymonds (talk) 13:07, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Bulbasaur

You forgot to move the talk page. Thanks! _Blake 23:57, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Sure, done. JamieS93 13:46, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Err. The talk page you deleted had a section on some sources found. Is there any way you can move that page to where Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Pokémon/Bulbasaur was so the section can be retrieved? Or is it hopeless now? _Blake 15:09, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I forgot to undelete those edits. Now that the edits are restored, there's a full record in the rev history (and the "possible refs" section has been restored to the bottom of the talk page). Looks like everything is in place, since you re-added the {{ArticleHistory}} template. Lemme know if you all need anything else. Cheers, JamieS93 16:16, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Also, if you will, can you delete the two revisions I made to Meowth on 1 September 2009 and then the (redirect) revision on WP:POKE/Meowth. After that it can be history merged.(silly conflicting histories...) Thanks for your help! _Blake 16:28, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Reverted the "redirect" edit and merged the page histories. I can't individually delete revisions without deleting the whole page and restoring specific edits, so I'm just leaving alone the two edits on 1 September. JamieS93 16:39, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Oh, I was under the impression it couldn't be history merged because those edits were conflicting. Thanks a bunch!_Blake 16:41, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

No problem! JamieS93 16:42, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm confused by all of this activity. What part of WP:MAD prohibits having the history of the source article associated with a page in project space?

It was my understanding that the revisions from both pages were pertinent to the history/developement of the article. Thus it's best (or possibly required per GFDL, depending on the case) to merge the page history. JamieS93 16:59, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Nope. Bulbasaur was moved to project space, and the redirect to project space retargeted to the list. There was a little bit of edit warring, and Black Kite took care of the history at that time. The only thing this activity has done is make it easier for the group that refuses to respect consensus on the article to restore it to article space.—Kww(talk) 17:12, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Bulbasaur is currently a redirect to the list. If edit warring begins again, we can cross that bridge when we come to it. JamieS93 18:05, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

User rights

Hey JamieS93. Could you remove me from the autoreviewer and rollbacker groups, please? I don't create new articles and I don't vandalism patrolling. Thanks! :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 03:12, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Done. Jamie doesn't need all those extra log actions. :) –Juliancolton |  03:53, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Tsk tsk Jamie. How could you! :-p Killiondude (talk) 05:39, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

K, fair enough. :-) And Julian, I need all the log actions I can get. JamieS93 18:20, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Please restore

You have deleted Talk:Dag Frøland (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs) giving the reason "‎ (G7: One author who has requested deletion or blanked the page)". I don't know why you conceded to this request without checking whether the user who requested the delete was the only contributor on the page. Please restore the page minus any possibly damaging contributions. __meco (talk) 07:47, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

The user who requested deletion (a bot) was indeed the only contributor to the page, and there would be no point in restoring it. I have created a new page instead. decltype (talk) 07:56, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

That is very strange. I'm (almost) sure there was a page with the banners earlier. Oh well :-) __meco (talk) 10:01, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of Template:Latest stable software release/mzirc

Please restore {{Latest stable software release/mzirc}} and its talk page. It did not meet the speedy deletion criteria and is still in use. Thanks. --Tothwolf (talk) 00:36, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Restored. :-) My fault for not checking to see that it was linked at Comparison of Internet Relay Chat clients. JamieS93 00:38, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

No worries, thanks. I could not remove the speedy deletion template myself because I created the template itself, so a bot would have reverted me had I tried. --Tothwolf (talk) 00:48, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Switchfoot

It's good to see somebody watching these talk pages... sadly generally nobody responds even with prompting :) You can read my concerns at Talk:Switchfoot/GA1. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs 20:31, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

If you make significant strides I'll keep it open as long as needed (well, not forever, but...) The one-week limit is just to push through the stuff that depends on someone actually showing up or not (I've been getting snippy responses to the effect of "fail it then, you bastard", so I can't wait 'till this is all done :P) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs 21:00, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Jamie, let me know if you can't get it done and I'll help/do it. But not this weekend... Royalbroil 21:32, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

K, thanks! JamieS93 21:57, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

David Baynton-Power

Hello. I saw you edited David Baynton-Power. To satisfy my curiosity, did you you find it from User talk:WereSpielChequers or from somewhere else? --Apoc2400 (talk) 22:28, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Yep, I saw it from there. Which prompted me to visit CAT:BLP, so thereafter I noticed it was in the Dec 2006 category. JamieS93 22:45, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Ok. I have noticed that when I have something restored, somebody else often adds sources before I get to add mine. Perhaps I should ask to have them restored to my user space, to avoid duplicating effort. --Apoc2400 (talk) 22:56, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I didn't want to step on toes/edit conflict. The article just caught my attention as a musician (I work with music articles a lot), so I thought I'd hit up Allmusic and pop in a source. :-) JamieS93 23:36, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

No problem in this case. I hadn't found the Allmusic source. I am happy to move on and leave this in your hands. I also found this source , but it is probably not reliable enough. --Apoc2400 (talk) 23:50, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Semi-protect

Thanks for the user-page armor. :) The vandal(s) in the last 24 hours created accounts, then went after my talk page, then haven't done anything since. I'm keeping lists of them, along with the original info, in case this flares up again. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 16:55, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

No problem. :-) I just indef'd the two as VOAs, btw. JamieS93 17:42, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

		The Admin's Barnstar
		For showing confidence in an editor and for digging deeper in an effort to resolve a problem, please allow me to grant you this token of my appreciation. McDoobAU93 (talk) 18:04, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Why, thank you...I didn't do anything special! ;-) I appreciate it, though. :) JamieS93 21:32, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

JamieS93

I am a resident in Assemblymember Espaillat's District. i am right now at his district office telling him of whats happening. I would like to update Assemblymember Adriano Espaillat's biography with truthful information. I respect the freedom of speech, but the information the person posted are 100% Inherently untruthful. Please check the Assemeblymember's website, http://www.assembly.state.ny.us/mem/?ad=072 He is one of the most respected legislators in the nation.

If you have any question, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Denny Pichardo —Preceding unsigned comment added by Denny Pichardo (talk • contribs) 20:56, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Adriano Espaillat

Dear JamieS93,

The article Adriano Espaillat has been VANDALIZED and PAGE BLANKED several times over the past 24 hours.

The version which you restored was PAGE BLANKED within a matter of minutes.

Some protection for this page may be appropriate.

Thank you,

69.203.119.66 (talk) 20:25, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Adriano Espaillat -- AGAIN

Dear JamieS93,

As you can see, the Adriano Espaillat article which you restored has just been PAGE BLANKED again.

I believe this article needs some page protection.

69.203.119.66 (talk) 21:18, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Re your message: Not a problem. I took out the one remaining referenced statement as I thought it put a little too much undue weight on the subject compared to the length of the rest of the article. The section title was rather loaded, too. So now the article is totally unreferenced. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 02:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Re your message: Excellent! -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 22:26, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

JamieS93,

Please look into the history of the following IP address:

69.203.119.66

I believe this person represents a vandal who has a clear motive to defame Assemblyman Espaillat. Please look into 'attacks' on his web page and then follow the (history of 69.203.119.66) trail to discover who this person is.

Also, the page has been corrected but misinformation can still be seen via a Google search of Adriano Espaillat because the info that comes up on said search is affiliated with what can be seen by clicking on the "Cached" link and not the corrected article.

Please advise because the last thing we need is sick people with a deceptive agenda using[REDACTED] as a platform to lie about a good man.

Thank you much!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.97.104.30 (talk) 17:14, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

You may want to read my comment to this IP on my talk page. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 17:48, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

User talk:Janusboye

Thanks for fixing my bot's mistake here. I'll make sure that the bot doesn't mark user talk pages for CSD G7 in the future. Best, - Kingpin (talk) 20:45, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Oh good, thanks. Exactly what I was thinking. JamieS93 22:12, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Guillermo Linares

Can you take a look at this article, too? The same IP that did the hatchet job on the Adriano Espaillat article did the same to this one. I removed almost everything, but the article is kind of an stubby mess. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 04:43, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I will soon. JamieS93 00:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Participation at my RfA

Thank you for taking the time to weigh in on my RfA. It was successful, in that the community's wish not to grant me the tools at this time was honored. I'm taking all the comments as constructive feedback and hope to become more valuable to the project as a result; I've also discovered several new areas in which to work. Because debating the merits of a candidate can be taxing on the heart and brain, I offer this kitten as a low-allergen, low-stress token of my appreciation. --otherlleft 14:20, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm unconcerned, really. The editors who opposed have largely indicated that they would reconsider if their specific concerns were addressed, and I consider it really good advice. Whether I try again or not the feedback has been a huge help for me.--otherlleft 19:27, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Rover's Morning Glory: please see ongoing discussion here

Please follow this link. ReplyToMegaS (talk) 01:06, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm no longer involved with the article as an admin, so I don't really care to follow the discussion. Regards, Jamie♥S93 01:15, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Article deletion

Dear JamieS93: I am the user who initially created the entry on R oger P incus and then requested that it be deleted. I appreciate that the deletion request was granted. Can you also cause the person's name not to appear at all on Misplaced Pages? Right now, the record of the deleted entry is one of the first hits one gets when you Google him. Thanks.Pearsonbill (talk) 15:25, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi Pearson. Well, once the article is deleted, there's not a lot we can do about search engines retaining the entry - Google usually picks up Misplaced Pages articles and lists them within a couple of hours. And once an article is deleted, the original content or log entry will be temporarily cached on mirror websites or a Google search.

There is a mechanism on WP called "Oversight" that allows for certain edits to be permanently "suppressed" - however, this action is only performed in extreme cases (when somebody's privacy is compromised, etc). My best advice would be to simply wait a couple of days, and it'll disappear from search queries. Is there any particular reason why this page needs to be wiped from the logs? Regards, JamieS93 17:06, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, JamieS93, for the info. The reason why I'd like to delete the page from the logs is that the person who is the subject of the aborted entry is a real person who is an emerging fiction writer. I was trying to do him a good deed by giving him a Misplaced Pages entry, but the entry was deemed not sufficiently notable. Now, I fear I have inadvertently done him a bad deed, because when he is Googled, one of the hits is on WP, and when that hit is clicked on, the person's name comes up with the deletion notice -- basically inducatubg that the person was not considered WP-worthy. I understand WP's decision to deem him not sufficiently notable, but now he is the unwitting subject of a stigmatizing WP statement. Can you remove the statement and thereby undo my unintended bad deed? :)Pearsonbill (talk) 17:54, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Hey Pearsonbill. Google caches separately, and we unfortunately have no control over when they refresh (but they do it fairly regularly). You may expedite the process by requesting directly if you have a Google account. I'm sorry we cannot offer a faster response, but I'm sure the information will not remain for long.

Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 23:24, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Andrew Murray Pretoria

Hi Jamie, Plse be more specific on why you deleted (A church with very old history and Andrew Murray is an author with huge volume books in circulation for more than 100 years) First check who Andrew Murray was before you delete. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Micmicl (talk • contribs)

The article was deleted because it was written like an advertisement or promotional piece about the church. Murray might be notable, but any article must be written from a neutral point-of-view and include reliable sources that prove notability. Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia - we have content standards, and all information must be unbiased and reasonably professional. You may wish to read the page WP:NOT. Best, JamieS93 20:01, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Vancouver

Hi Jaime, first off thank you for responding to my request. I did have another request if possible that I forgot to mention. Other Olympic articles have been protected until the end of the 2010 Winter Games: March 28th, 2010. See Olympic Games protection request for an alternative example. Hope this is possible. Mkdw 23:21, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Hmm. I considered protecting it longer - but I'm thinking that, while major articles such as "Winter Olympic Games" will be be highly viewed/vandalized over the coming weeks, the Olympic city itself might not receive much attention after the first several days. You might be right that it'll need longer, though. I'll watch the article when the protection expires and reapply the semi if needed. Fair enough? :) Best, JamieS93 13:59, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Christian music chart

Now that R&R magazine doesn't exist anymore, I've had a dilemma. Billboard magazine does a horrible job with ranking Christian music songs. It ranks "Beautiful Ending" as peaking at #29. That's in left field! I heard it ranked in the Top 2 or 3 on other charts like the Weekend 22 & I bet it hit #1. So Never Alone (song) never charted? Yea, right! It was the most played song of the year. What reliable chart can we use that's accurate? What have you been using? Please respond here on your talk page - it's on my watchlist. Royalbroil 14:02, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I loved R&R. :-( I've simply been using Billboard's Christian songs chart, which I agree, does a bad job representing what tracks are most popular. With singles that were released in the R&R era ("We Need Each Other", "Give Me Your Eyes"), I'm just leaving the R&R stuff in there. No need to remove it. For newer singles, Billboard is kind of our only choice. It's usually discouraged to use an individual music provider as a "chart", but it also wouldn't hurt to mention how a song/album charted on iTunes' sales - most press/media coverage mentions iTunes like it's a music industry standard. Did we ever figure out who W22 gets their charts from? IIRC, they were either using R&R's Christian CHR data, or obtaining their own. JamieS93 14:18, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

I was wondering where how they compile their chart. About helps a bit. I'm going to email them and find out more details! Can I include your email address in the request and ask for them to respond to both of us? I was contemplating Christian Radio Weekly as a potential source. Royalbroil 14:31, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Good idea! Jamie.wiki at gmail.com is mine. JamieS93 14:35, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

I discovered something strange. R&R is clearly still generating weekly chart information . Even if there's no separate weekly "R&R" publication, they're obviously still reporting charts, so programs like Weekend 22 have been picking up the data and continuing on like normal. As I recall the two charts (CHR & W22) always matched up identically. So it looks like R&R must still be reporting, tho that's not the impression I got back in July - they basically said, "all operations shut down, see Billboard now". JamieS93 22:59, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Wow, that's surprising for the reasons that you outlined! I know that W22 used to use R&R, they said it on the program (or was it on the website?). Obviously I haven't done the email yet - I've been too busy on other things. I still need to do it and this should make the email more interesting. Thanks for letting me know! Royalbroil 01:45, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank You

Thank You for deleting page User:Nascar1996/Jimmie Johnson.I was hoping that someone would delete it just in case someone wanted to use it.Thanks again. From:Nascar1996 ( talk • my edits )

Re:Kingoomieiii

-FASTILY 20:46, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Image deletes

Hi JamieS93. When you deleted File:TSSA head office sign, Euston.jpg and File:Interior of Merseyrail 508 after Angel Trains refurbishment.jpg, did you miss the {{nocommons}} templates on both images? Please reverse your deletions. Thanks. ⇦REDVERS⇨ Say NO to Commons bullying 07:58, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Restored. Sorry about that. Best, JamieS93 14:18, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Final discussion for Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

Hello, I note that you have commented on the first phase of Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

As this RFC closes, there are two proposals being considered:

1. Proposal to Close This RfC
2. Alternate proposal to close this RFC: we don't need a whole new layer of bureaucracy

Your opinion on this is welcome. Okip 02:19, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Warning

There is no consensus. Debresser and Avraham claim there is one, but every time I challenge them to come up with specifics, they refuse.

Essentially they are performing WP:OWN and forum shopping - they refuse to use article talk pages, for example.

I keep coming up on ANI because Debresser keeps raising it. Its an extremely misleading tactic of his - he's been warned against it by the Arbitration Committee, but he continues to do it

See

• log of Avraham's failures to comply with basic NPOV, CIVILITY, and OWN policies
• log of Debresser's failures to comply with basic NPOV, CIVILITY, and OWN policies
• Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Chabad movement (especially "Debresser! You have yourself been guilty of dragging many cases to ANI any time you do not get your way.")

Page Protection

Thanks for the protection applied to the Robbie Savage page. Would you also consider doing the same to the Kris Commons page? There have been 9 separate entries of vandalism in the last 24 hours. Thanks, Animaly2k2 (talk) 14:23, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

 Done, semi-protected for a week. JamieS93 16:11, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Protection

Could you take a look at James Buchanan? The vandalism level this page has received in the past weeks are to very high levels, and I think it may warrant a protection. Please give me your thoughts. Thanks. Connormah (talk | contribs) 20:41, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

I've semi-protected it for a month, cause I agree that the vandalism level is high (basically every IP edit lately has been unproductive). JamieS93 22:02, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Sacco and Vanzetti

Thanks for protecting Woodrow Wilson. Might you consider some protection for Sacco and Vanzetti? Thanks.

Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 20:47, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a week. It's never been protected before, and it looks like the vandalism has risen only recently, so 1 week seems good at this point. JamieS93 22:04, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Smile!

Hello JamieS93, Hamtechperson has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

For granting me rollback! Hamtechperson 22:14, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Rollback Privileges

Just wanted to drop you a line and say thanks for approving me for rollback! I'm looking forward to getting down to work with it. :-) --Warbirdadmiral (talk) 22:37, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

MediaWiki:Deletereason-dropdown

Hi there. Some of use just noticed that you changed MediaWiki:Deletereason-dropdown with these edits. The change has been reverted since your changes conflict with both the wording of A7 and {{db-a7}}. Please see WT:CSD#A7: No indication that the article may meet notability guidelines? if you want to comment on this edit. I'd like to ask you not to make similar edits without prior discussion first again, since such changes have a huge impact on all admins' actions. Regards SoWhy 13:02, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Okay, sure. I'll reply there when possible. JamieS93 13:47, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

SPI for Keepcalmandcarryon

I see that you were the Admin that deleted SPI for keepcalmandcarryon/Archive. I am unfamiliar with these processes. You seem to have carried out a speedy deletion of the content citing G7: One author who has requested deletion or blanked the page. I assume that this was the subject (Keepcalmandcarryon) of the investigation.

Normally I wouldn't have bothered one way or the other as I had minimal involvement in it. However having waited until its deletion, Keepcalmandcarryon is now making allegations against me concerning my involvement. Without access to its content (or at least the fore-knowledge of intending deletion to take an Export copy for private reference), I have no means of making an evidence based response. If she wanted to rule a line under the investigation then fair enough, but this is just a case of "having your cake and eating it".

I know from my own Wikimedia instances that administrators can a undelete articles. However, is there any WP process by which I can have access to this content so that I can frame a defence against these claims. Siggghhhh. -- TerryE (talk) 01:55, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

I was actually just deleting the lowercase "k" version of the page, apparently a minor mistake made by the page author. The archive was moved to a capital "K" at: Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet_investigations/Keepcalmandcarryon/Archive. JamieS93 02:03, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Feewwww. Thanks. I'll take an export and dump it into one of my Wikis just in case. I can now go back to her with an informed response. Like the ❤, BTW :-) -- TerryE (talk) 02:13, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

The Tobymac Page

Hello, JamieS93 my name is The K.O. KIng. I really need your help in editing the Tobymac page. It needs a major rewrite. I have helped the article out a little bit but it still needs more information on Tobymac himself. Any help you can offer will be greatly appreciated. I would like the Tobymac page to be like the Newsboys page, very organized and well written. I cannot do this alone (grammer is not my strongpoint). Please help me redo the Tobymac page and please reply to me ASAP about what we can do to fix that page. The K.O. King (talk) 16:28, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Man, I'd love to help. The article isn't as bad as it used to be, but I agree there's still much to be improved (sourcing, lead summary, research for career sect), especially since Toby's one of the highest-viewed CCM articles. Lately I've found myself with varying amounts of available time. Sometimes I've got plenty, but other times studying is a necessity. I'll try to help with the page, if possible. JamieS93 18:24, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. If there is anything I can do to help as well, please let me know. I would not have bothered you, but as I said before grammer is NOT my strong point. Tobymac knowledge, however is a different story. I know that you are probably good at grammer, but if I can provide any help just let me know. The K.O. King (talk) 15:35, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Protection inquiry

Could you take a look at Meriwether Lewis? Although the vandalism here is not all in one days, it is rather spread out, and there seems to be little to none productive IP edits. I'd appreciate an opinion. Thanks. Connormah (talk | contribs) 04:00, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

That article would do good with a long-term protection, eventually. I went ahead and gave it a 1-month semi just now, since it's been protected twice before. Even though this isn't the ordinary case of "excessive" or intense vandalism within a smaller period of time, none of the recent edits have been constructive. It warrants semi-protection, cause I'd say that's the root of WP:PROT: is there excessive disruption, and/or will we lose any decent edits upon protection? Doesn't pass the test, so it ought to be protected. Regards, JamieS93 20:45, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

The RfC on the Community de-Adminship proposal has begun

The RfC on the Community de-Adminship proposal was started on the 22nd Feb, and it runs for 28 days. Please note that the existing CDA proposal was (in the end) run as something of a working compromise, so CDA is still largely being floated as an idea.

Also note that, although the RfC is in 'poll format' (Support, Oppose, and Neutral, with Comments underneath), this RfC is still essentially a 'Request for Comment'. Currently, similar comments on CDA's value are being made under all three polls.

Whatever you vote, your vote is welcome!

Regards, Matt Lewis (talk) 11:17, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Russian Misplaced Pages

Could you please reprotect the article as content dispute is still unresolved? SkyBon 04:51, 6 March 2010 (UTC)