Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ethelh (talk | contribs) at 18:29, 21 April 2009 (→RBIs). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archives

Pre-March March 2008 April 2008 May 2008 June 2008 July 2008 August 2008 September 2008 October 2008 Nov/December 2008 January 2009 February 2009 March 2009

If you leave a message here, I'll reply here. The same applies to you. If I leave a message on your page, I keep it watchlisted and I'll see when you reply. If you cannot be polite when typing your message here, please do not click Save page. Thank you.

Liam Gallagher

Flag your minor edits as minor, mate :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hrhadam (talk • contribs) 22:48, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't know what you're talking about either. Enigma 02:00, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Enigmaaaa!

Replied on my talk page ;) Ariel♥Gold 02:23, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

		The BLP Barnstar
		And here it is! Thank you for all your work helping to keep articles in line with the WP:BLP! Ariel♥Gold 05:56, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Added the two current biography-related barnstars to the Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Biography page. :) Ariel♥Gold 06:04, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

there is nothing wrong with what i added to the Wandy Rodriguez page. Besides, i only added the last paragraph. The other stuff was put there by someone else. The last paragraph is relevant to his current situation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobizzle (talk • contribs) 22:17, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Wandy Rodriguez NEVER had cited info. Maybe you should hammer the other people who edited it before me. Bobizzle (talk) 22:45, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Travel ping sent

--VS 01:52, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

T-Y

Cheers for the reversion you did on my userpage. Good Ol’factory 08:24, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. Au revoir for now. Enigma 16:49, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

RE: User talk:BetacommandBot

The information contained in that header is valuable for anybody with questions with regards to copyright information. I find it quite helpful. Users who think it is productive go go around making such edits as tagging pages as "banned" are another issue, but there is nothing I can do to help such users. I don't really think the info is bitey though. Also, looking at the history, I don't think we have to be concerned with many people posting questions there. - Rjd0060 (talk) 19:04, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

I understand and for the most part agree. I just don't think that is bitey. It is clear and concise, to the point, but copyright can be a confusing area and being blunt sometimes is the best way to explain things. Unless I've missed something specific there, I honestly don't see the concern. Regards, - Rjd0060 (talk) 19:17, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, I won't be reverting - I just don't see the need to remove all of the information, and plaster the "BANNED" notice at the top. I missed #11 there when I was reading it. Perhaps the other items can be rewritten a bit. I don't mean to put you off of doing it, as it is certainly not my page. To reiterate, my only concern was the removal of all of the information and the notice. - Rjd0060 (talk) 19:29, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

see User:Lar/Liberal_Semi

...per our discussion. Note, your TPWs are more than welcome to add articles to the list, and/or spread the word. ++Lar: t/c 03:54, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Au Revoir

Instead of using AFD, you could have found consensus to merge at Misplaced Pages:MRFD to enforce any resulting redirects. Might be something to keep in mind for later. - Mgm| 11:25, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. I will keep that in mind for the future. I do feel that in these cases, deletion is the best way to get it to stick. Otherwise, I have to watch the page closely because someone is bound to restore the information I removed. It's happened too many times to count. I feel the best way would be to delete, create anew as a redirect, and protect the page. Enigma 14:44, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Enigmaman - I closed the AfD per your withdrawl and being willing to merge the articles. After closing the AfD itself, I found out that somebody needed to use this computer in a hurry, so I was rushed and only hope that I did the multi-nomination closure formatting correctly. Best, JamieS93 20:29, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

I reopened. An admin has to close it because another editor also favors deletion. Enigma 00:49, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Okay, that's fine. From my experience at AfD, though, there is nothing wrong with withdrawing even after somebody has !voted for deletion, and I've never heard that it'd require an admin. But if you'd prefer an admin to have the final say in the closure, I'm cool with that, and feel free to do what you want. :) Best, JamieS93 02:05, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm fairly certain that a nominator can only withdraw an AfD if there are no other delete !votes. Once there are, it's out of the nominator's hands. This is similar to how the creator of an article cannot request deletion based on being the creator if others have contributed. Enigma 03:45, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Re: Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/Ali_bubba

 Done, speedy closed. Cheers, –Juliancolton |  20:11, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Let 'Em Bleed: The Mixxtape series

Each album in the series peaked on the Billboard charts. They are notable. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 02:02, 11 April 2009 (UTC))

Re: Question

Hmm, probably not a SNOW close at the moment. I usually close an AfD early when at least 5 editors (aside from the nominator) unanimously agree. Otherwise, it's usually better to simply let the discussion run its course. Cheers, –Juliancolton |  22:15, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

No wonder people leave here all the time, the vandals keep winning.

Well, my concerns have been ignored and the listings removed from AIV with no action. No wonder people leave here all the time, the vandals keep winning. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 05:42, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and by the way, 65.73.168.122 (talk · contribs) is clearly the same person, no matter that it's an IP address, since they have edited nothing but movie articles. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 05:46, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

I am not an administrator. I was just explaining why the report was declined. Admins at AIV tend to be strict in application of blocks. You can bring your concerns to another administrator if you feel strongly about it. Enigma 12:53, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

If you can show me diffs of whatever the problem is then I'll take a look. Scarian 13:10, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Not to speak for him, Pat, but here are the relevant article histories: . Vandalized both articles multiple times. Very possibly from a static IP, which has hit film articles in the past. Enigma 13:20, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Seeing as it's probably just one person, we can just revert and/or protect once it gets out of control. For example, in the case of GRAWP, we didn't prevent page moves for new accounts until he got real annoying. Scarian 21:28, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

RBIs

Actually, it should be RBIs, unless it is a columnar list. See, for example, discussion at --Ethelh (talk) 18:13, 21 April 2009 (UTC)