Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by The Thunderer (talk | contribs) at 17:54, 29 August 2008 (→Ulster Defence Regiment: rp). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

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

Holywell, Swords

The article relating to the community where I and 2000 other people live was deleted as a non-notable housing estate on 23 April. I disagree with this interpretation of the Holywell community and if I had been aware of the proposal for deletion I would have made my views known and discuses with the proposers. I would be very grateful if you could please reinstate the article so that I can view the comments and address any issues or concerns people have. Dvdgraham (talk) 14:51, 4 June 2008

Hello

DougsTech (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by DougsTech (talk • contribs) 21:08, August 13, 2008

Dismissiveness

Would you please restore the Dismissiveness article to my user space, as it was deleted without notifying me as the creator on my talk page. Dhaluza (talk) 09:32, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I've seen the discussion. Restoring an article to user space is a courtesy that any admin can do for someone who wants to work on the article, but it is also a courtesy to ask the admin who deleted the article first. Your response on my talk page indicates that you are either unfamiliar with this process, or unnecessarily defensive. Either way, if you decline to restore it, I can always ask another admin. Dhaluza (talk) 15:32, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

I did not say this was a requirement, just a courtesy that most admins would do for an editor who wants to work on a deleted article. BTW, WP:DICDEF is one of the easist concerns to address, and should be handled with care at AfD, since all articles start out with a definition. For a specific example in this case, see as a source of content that could be added to expand this article. I prefer to work on it in my user space, so please restore it there with the history as requested. Thanks. Dhaluza (talk) 15:54, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I can now see that it was in fact edited down to a dicdef by User:Cumulus Clouds who then nominated it for deletion on this basis (and without seeking my input as creator). Rather dirty pool IMHO. Dhaluza (talk) 16:06, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

• Here's your one and only warning to refrain from any personal attacks and if you continue I will seek sanctions. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 02:03, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Have a look now, and see if the subject really couldn't be more than a WP:DICDEF.

Would you consider overturning your close of the AfD, since the point of the discussion is now moot. Dhaluza (talk) 12:28, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Oversight question

Hi. :) I note that you cleared the article Paul Doktor after receiving verification of permission. I'm so glad it came through! I'm dropping you a line to see if you are also handling clearing Yaltah Menuhin. The articles were created by the same user and sourced to the same website, and the copy of the permissions letter he cc'ed to me addressed both articles. I don't know, of course, if he sent another letter to the Communications Committee that only covered the one. However, I thought I would check, since the second article covered in the same letter may have been overlooked. Please let me know if I should forward that letter to Permissions again. I had such trouble contacting the gentleman in the first place, thanks to e-mail wonkishness, that I'd hope not to have to ask him to send the letter again himself.

I'll be watching your talk page, so feel free to answer here. On the other hand, I'm comfortable with an answer at my own page, too. I like to keep complex conversations together for continuity, but this one shouldn't be that complex, I shouldn't think. :D

Thanks for any enlightenment you can offer. --Moonriddengirl 16:40, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks so much! I'm so glad to mark that one off the "to do" list. Certainly one of the most complex copyright clearance situation I've ever gotten involved in! (Except, perhaps, Neural correlates of consciousness, which required bouncing from person to person like a superball. :)) --Moonriddengirl 16:49, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Afterburn(Carowinds)

Hi there, I'm a little confused as to why the article on the roller coaster Afterburn was deleted. The deletion log says it was proposed because of lack of notability, but I don't see how Afterburn is any less notable than many of the other rides in the same park.

Basically I'm wondering why this article was singled out.

Thanks, Abowers87 (talk) 04:07, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Template:Editabuselinks

Yes, okay, it isn't called "Administrator reports", but this is more informative to a new person finding their way around. If they want to report something to the administrators, they'll click on "Administrator reports", but there is a higher chance they'll be confused with "Administrators'", because the latter could almost be construed as a place where admins exclusively posted. —Anonymous Dissident 02:18, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Image removal

Hi, Is there a policy discussion somewhere about image removal vs replacement? I fixed the image from Marian Doctrines page by using another, but instead of removing it, is there a better way of admins replacing them? I am no Wiki-experet, but pleas esuggest that to other admins as a policy issue. Thanks History2007 (talk) 05:39, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

No problem, I usually have no idea what I am talking about either. But in this case, I meant that you removed an image from Marian doctrines of the Catholic Church and I thought it would have been more appropriate if you had replaced it. But no big deal. History2007 (talk) 14:29, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Script

I don't know why you want this, but just don't do something with it that'll get you locked in the village stocks.

var titles = ; 
if(titles.indexOf(wgPageName.replace(/_/g, " ")) != -1) {
    history.go(-1); //Takes you back 1 page.
}

To populate the list of pages that should not be viewed, add values to the array. Best, —Animum (talk) 16:18, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you and question

Thanks for blocking that anon regarding the Batman stuff. I have one problem, though. The last edit on the Egghead article contains his garbage stuff he was adding. I want to remove it, but I would then violate WP:3RR. What can/should I do? Unschool (talk) 20:12, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Request

Hello

As far as I can tell now, the lemma and notability of the Article AI_effect should be o.k., and so I ask you for restoring the article.

Thank you in advance - Columnist (talk) 08:44, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Rhiannon Thomas

Hello. I noticed you deleted Rhiannon Thomas. If you did, please recreate it. Try the link below. Also, in RJD, I assume the R stands for Ryan. What does the J and the D stand for? Andrzejestrować Zajaczajkowski Plecaxpiwórserafinowiczaświadzenie Poświadczyxwiadectwo-Bjornovich (talk) (contributions) 09:58, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Andrzejestrować Zajaczajkowski Plecaxpiwórserafinowiczaświadzenie Poświadczyxwiadectwo-Bjornovich (talk) (contributions) 14:28, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Could you possibly tell me why this has been recreated? I'm about to put it up for Afd but would like to understand the background. Thanks. --Kleinzach 01:50, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Is there any time limit? --Kleinzach 02:31, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

No, for creation of an article after deletion following a prod. --Kleinzach 02:33, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I didn't know that. --Kleinzach 02:36, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

i cannot login

Hi.dear admin , I cannot login to my account. and a message pops up that says:

• Enforced wikibreak until Friday, June 06, 2008 5:00:00 PM (currently Saturday, January 03, 2004 8:09:46 AM). Bye!

What's the matter?would you help me.by the way i recently have made a monobook page that one of my friends told me it may be because of that. but I still have a problem logging in. please help me. my username is bbadree. 85.9.98.132 (talk) 15:41, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I have replied at User talk:85.9.98.132. - Rjd0060 (talk) 15:46, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I did it earlier , but it does not work.do you want my userword and password to do it yourself? 85.9.98.132 (talk) 15:56, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

No, you will have to do it on your own computer. Also, never *ever* give your password out. Let me try deleting the page. Try again now. - Rjd0060 (talk) 15:58, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

no .it doesn't work!.85.9.98.132 (talk) 16:05, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

The only thing I could suggest now is that you change the time and date of your computer to something beyond June 6, 2008, if it isn't already. - Rjd0060 (talk) 16:25, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

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)

question...

I left a message for the person who tagged Darold W. Killmer for deletion. Can I ask you whether you were aware the nominator didn't see fit to comply with the deletion policies' recommendations that good faith nominators advise article creators when they make a nominations? If you weren't aware can I ask you whether you would still have completed the deletion if you had been aware?

Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 20:11, 27 August 2008 (UTC)