User talk:Nyttend/Archive 24

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Authority control integration

Thanks very much for your comments on the proposal on the Village Pump. We've refined it and worked out some more details after the discussion, and there is now a community Request for Comment to approve it being implemented. Any feedback gratefully received! Andrew Gray (talk) 09:53, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Kristen Lawrence Album Page

I am not sure what I need to do after receiving your notification of deletion of a page I cannot find on Wikipedia. Thank you for your assistance to this newbie to the Wikipedia protocol. Idaho50 (talk) 17:25, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Nyttend. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 June 27.
Message added 20:54, 1 July 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

The Bushranger _{One ping only} 20:54, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Marcus Qwertyus and Ohio politicians

With you being a resident of Ohio and knowledgable of Ohio politics, wouldn't you like to see these things improved upon? They are prominent to your society. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.255.52.242 (talk) 01:38, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Ole Wich

Hello, Nyttend. I just returned after a 15-month wikibreak and discovered that an article Ole Wich that I started some years ago has been PRODded and deleted. I wondered whether, in your capacity as administrator, you'd be kind enough to userify the article for me so that I can assess for myself whether the article is worth improving or whether it really deserved to be deleted. Best regards, Euchiasmus (talk) 07:42, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

It hadn't progressed beyond the original one sentence and gallery of Commons images that you started it with. But proposed deletion can be restored in place (by Nyttend or via Project:Requests for undeletion) if challenged after the fact. Uncle G (talk) 08:08, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
- Restored per your request; see User:Euchiasmus/Ole Wich. Nyttend (talk) 11:40, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
  - Thanks. I'll see if I can find any more information and references that could establish notability. Regards, Euchiasmus (talk) 12:56, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Calvin999

Did you read the first section discussing that? Your assertion that discussion supports restoration of talk page access doesn't seem to match the discussion at all. Please comment on that back at Wikipedia talk:Blocking policy ‎ Toddst1 (talk) 20:23, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

RE: Charles Taylor

Hello, Nyttend. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities.
Message added 21:29, 5 July 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Lewis and Clark County Hospital Historic District

I'm finding little info on this. Can you find the NRHP nom form? I'm having trouble. Draft is here: User:PumpkinSky/Lewis and Clark County Hospital Historic District. Feel free to edit. Thanks.PumpkinSky talk 22:46, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Got one from the Montana office and the NRHP says they'll send me one. Thanks!PumpkinSky talk 16:43, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Slide show on Commons?

Hoping you might know how to do this.

I'm doing a 20 minute presentation at Wikimania on "Working with WP:NRHP" and using a Powerpoint presentation on Saturday the 14th. Twenty minutes is not a lot of time and I want to be sure that the slide show is easily accessible. There are 6 slides plus a title page. Is there any way to put it on Commons in a format that keeps the weblinks?

I'd also like folks at WP:NRHP to be able to comment, so I can make changes if needed. Smallbones (talk) 11:56, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

This is the best solution so far [1] Smallbones (talk) 13:01, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Do you get a better pic of the Yellow River footbridge? It was high water when I was there and couldn't get anything from the side. Smallbones (talk) 14:47, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest

The more y'all attempt to explain yourselves, the more you do one, more, or all of the following:

1. Imply that Wikipedia editors know everything and therefore there is no need for our contributions (informational, financial, or otherwise).

2. Suggest that Wikipedia editors ALWAYS know more than the subject matter experts on how best to present/organize the information on a specific subject.

3. Attempting to contribute to Wikipedia is a waste of time.

4. You didn’t actually read (or at lease understand) our comments before auto responding.

5. You haven’t read the material sufficiently and/or are knowledgeable enough about the subject to understand why it is presented/organized in the way suggested.

6. Other “things” that are often felt, but are both inappropriate and counter productive to include in this forum.

Your explanation fits YOUR example perfectly. Entity A is still entity A (but by a shorter name) when part B and then later part C is removed.

However, that does not work in this case. Entity A became entity B (hence article B) and then entities C, D, E, & F combined to make entity G (hence article G). Entities H, I, & J combined to become entity K (hence article K). Much later entity G & K combined to make entity M (hence article M). Then entity M combined with entity B to make entity N, but only after entity L is split off from entity B (thereby creating a need for article N--otherwise, which article do you modify?).

In a little more simple terms if entity X merges with entity Y to become entity Z, which article should be modified, article X or article Y? The most reasonable approach is to create article Z, with references to both article X and article Y. Entities splitting or dividing (as in the case of your example) are a much different case.

We DID begin substantial modifications of a previous article, but quickly realized that doing so created more confusion than clarification. Therefore we undid our modifications and created [or attempted to create] a new article.

When it was declined, we were told to update the existing article–however, the “existing” article named IS the one that was declined. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.119.83.174 (talk) 18:52, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Appparently we have confirmed by our further treatment 1, 2, and mostly 3 above! 161.119.83.174 (talk) 22:32, 8 July 2012 (UTC) 161.119.83.174 (talk) 22:58, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Request for Arbitration

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Admin Involvement and Handling of Edits by Sockpuppets and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—

Thanks,--TrevelyanL85A2 (talk) 20:07, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

In response to your comment on the case page, I presume the comment from a sock that you mention is this one. Should that be the case then the connection is that the same sock left such a comment on Trev's talk page and a similar dispute with Mathsci arose.--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 01:35, 9 July 2012 (UTC) Hello. You have a new message at The Devil's Advocate's talk page.

Ensure you read my newest response on Devil's page.PumpkinSky talk 02:11, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Barns that are round

Argh! That list you pointed me to looks to me like a rough draft that ought to be moved directly to its creator's user space, or possibly to NRHP wikiproject space, until he develops it into something that merits inclusion in article space. I seem to recall that one or more of the noticeboard discussions last year concluded with support for that sort of action if he persisted in creating rough drafts in article space, but I don't remember exactly what happened -- and I am not inclined right at the moment to figure out what actually resulted from those discussions.

The individual articles that I sampled are a mixed bag. I haven't yet found any of the most egregious speculative (e.g., "is or was" or "either/or") statements, blank spaces to be filled in later, or paragraph-length quotations of prosaic information, but several of the ones I checked were pre-existing articles written by someone else. --Orlady (talk) 02:43, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for doing that history merge. I believe that one of my edit summaries indicated it was needed, but I didn't have time to do it. Thanks also for move-protecting the page; I thought about salting the article-space page, but we can hope that the move protection will be sufficient.

That new page-moving interface is seriously confusing when dealing with subpages in user space! --Orlady (talk) 17:51, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Apparently I'm still not permitted to attempt to communicate on the actual user's user talk page. [2] --Orlady (talk) 15:10, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Marking resolves copyright problems

Hi, I gather from User:Moonriddengirl's advice to another editor working at Copyright problems [3], we mark articles as resolved but don't remove them from the listing page. That way we can keep track of the articles that were worked on and when. I took the liberty of fixing this for you at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2012 May 29. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 16:38, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, thanks for the note and the work. I must admit that I'm uncertain about the context — MRG's comment sounds to me to be addressing the removal of items from CCIs, since they consist of potential mass infringement by the same person, but CP seems to me also to include instances of isolated potential infringment without patterns that need to be tracked. If "they are only listed at CP when they need to be handled at CP", why would we still need to list an article at CP if I've resolved the issue and thus the article doesn't need any more handling from people at CP? Nyttend (talk) 16:56, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

It can look confusing because she was responding to two questions from the editor. The first part was about whether to remove an article from the original day listing if it's been relisted on another day. The answer was to leave it but mark it as relisted. The Clerks and admins who close a whole day's page look to see that each article listed there has been dealt with, and if they all have (which includes relisting), that day's page is untranscluded from the main CP page, but kept as a record. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 17:17, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Question about your Indiana/Michigan/Ohio Tri-point photo

Hey, I've been informed that the tri-point you have a picture of (File:Indiana-Michigan-Ohio tripoint marker.jpg) is the true boundary of where IN/MI/OH meet. I thought that the survey disc located nearby in the road under the face plate was the actual point, but supposedly a newer marker contradicts that. Do you have any information on that newer marker since your photo is from May of 2012? Thanks! Frank12 (talk) 16:54, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for getting back to me. I wanted to visit the spot soon and that's why I was researching the location. I found a geocaching page talking about it [4] and in there people have tagged photos of both the granite benchmark (BM1841) [5] from the 1915 Michigan-Ohio joint survey and of the disc located in the road near the marker [6] . Someone also tagged the description of the benchmark [7], giving its location and where in 1960 it read: A 10-INCH SQUARE GRANITE POST, PROJECTING 1.3 FEET ABOVE GROUND, HAS INCISED THERON THE FOLLOWING LEGENDS, ON THE TOP, STATE LINE, MICHIGAN ON THE N FACE, OHIO ON THE S FACE, AND INDIANA LINE 20 FEET WEST IS ON THE W FACE. NOTHING IS INCISED ABOVE GROUND ON THE E FACE. I thought from all of the pictures I had seen of that broken marker I could read "DIANA ) FEET". I also referenced the Williams County, Ohio Engineer's office for Northwest Township [8] , and they have that road included on their map as a loosely paved road, which I thought I had seen in another picture labeled as "Williams County Road 1".

I'm not trying to come across as a know-it-all or anything of that sort, it's just that I had arrived at my conclusion from what I had looked at and was confused when I was told the granite marker and not the disc was the point. I didn't understand the purpose of the disc and its location in the road if that wasn't the point. Anyway, thank you again for getting back to me and for the photos you've contributed. I'm very interested in things related to boundaries and since this one was the closest tri-point to where I grew up, it sparked my interest, and I wanted to know what to look for. Frank12 (talk) 18:41, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

J.H. Manchester Round Barn / Round Barn (New Hampshire, Ohio)

Hi. I see that new stub article Round Barn (New Hampshire, Ohio) is about the "Round Barn" NRHP listed within National Register of Historic Places listings in Auglaize County, Ohio that is pipelinked to red-link J.H. Manchester Round Barn, which I think is your preferred title for the article. Do you want to move the started article to that preferred name? Or wait and start the red-linked title as a new article later, if/when you are ready to do a DYK for it? If the latter then the stub could be redirected to that, unless that is cheating in DYK terms. Actually, a developed article would meet 5X criteria for DYK, even without it being a new article. I am bit rusty about all this. Anyhow, please feel free to move the article, and it would be nice if you share whatever else you have there, too. Thanks, --do ncr am 17:07, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

I think you might have replied elsewhere, but I don't recall what the upshot is. Is it okay if I make the move of article to your preferred name, so that the NRHP list-article links to the article that now exists for the site? I'd be happy to see you make the move. I'll watch here. --do ncr am 04:12, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Go ahead if you want, or leave it alone if you want; it will need to be moved eventually, but I'm not going to tell you that you have to do it right now. Most of my wikiwork in upcoming days will be photos; on a weekend trip I visited all remaining sites in Indiana's Delaware, Grant, Huntington, Madison, Marion, and Wabash counties (plus one in Hancock County), so I have a good deal of uploading to do. Indiana is now well past 75% illustrated; I've gotten every single site southwest of Indianapolis and most in the southeast and north central, and what I've not gotten in the far north is often illustrated by Chris Light. Nyttend (talk) 04:28, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Oklahoma Digital Maps Collection

Thank you for getting back with me about my external link question from June 11th. However, I could not find your response. I am hoping with your experience with this issue you might be able to lead me in the right direction. As a fellow library/graduate student I appreciate the help. I really would like to know if an external link for this map collection can be added to the pages I've identified or not. Thanks! Athiker99 (talk) 21:06, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Trees of Eternity

Nyttend, could you take another look--are the musicians actually independently notable; does the band meet WP:MUSIC--I am too ignorant to be able to tell, but there seems to be a set of inter-related pages depending on each other DGG ( talk ) 20:14, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Josette Manin - President of the General Council of Martinique

Thankyou for responding to my query regarding the French article relating to Josette Manin. But I believe I have misled you in my request. My desire was to see the French article for Josette Manin translated and posted on the English Wikipedia. I cannot translate French into English. I was curious if there was a procedure whereby administrators or contributors in Wikipedia could translate the article and post it. It just annoyed me that the English version did not have access to the bio info on this person that was available in the French version. I apologise if I gave you the wrong impression that I wanted to translate the article myself. Yameogo (talk) 10:56, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

File:Frasier Crane.jpg

I have uploaded prior image, File:Jaleel White Steve Urkel.jpg, which also appears in Getty Images, and I must say that I tried keeping it. However, prior publications do not lessen risk of deletion, even if it belongs to the networks. I've done other photos before, and they appear at Getty. Therefore, you can ask Stefan2 about it. --George Ho (talk) 17:20, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Well, I previously assumed that an image of a mere actor in character can be adequate. However, I realize that a non-free image must indicate an overall visual characteristics. Also, even when originally published by network, the licensing to Getty is still... how do you explain it? Anyway, if we can't settle this, then we can go to WP:MCQ then. --George Ho (talk) 18:14, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

As for the Jack Sparrow thing, that... could be used for commercial purposes, but we don't know yet. Back to the Urkel thing, Hullaballoo has a point: evidence to prove that any photo was released by a network as a promo is required. Even a network can use a photo of Urkel for profits. --George Ho (talk) 18:24, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Okay, here are my big shots at this: File:Jaleel White Steve Urkel.jpg (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs). One user assumes that Getty license has no effect at all. However, The other user, Stefan2, presumes or assumes that commercial use triumphs any other use, regardless of original intent and publication. Just in case, the photo of Cheers cast was deleted because of its higher commercial value. --George Ho (talk) 19:48, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

I haven't heard anything from you yet since I last replied to you two days ago. What gives? --George Ho (talk) 23:47, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

In that case, do you want to challenge the deletion of either Cheers cast photo or Steve Urkel photo? --George Ho (talk) 02:19, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

This matter in general is discussed in WP:VPP#Images of fictional characters and/or shows in Getty Images. --George Ho (talk) 20:34, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Another update: Stefan2 has nominated this article for deletion. --George Ho (talk) 21:31, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

This image is gone... FOREVER! ... Unless you have evidence that the decision was inadequate to summarize arguments. WP:DRV; you know that, right? --George Ho (talk) 00:54, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

P.S.N.A.College of Engineering and Technology

I tagged it for CSD per Talk:PSNA_College_of_Engineering_and_Technology#Merger_proposal. Did you decline because the page has been around for a year and a half (thus apparently exempt for R3), or because the title isn't a typo? benzband (talk) 20:16, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I won't bother nominating it. benzband (talk) 07:59, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Nyttend. You have new messages at WilliamH's talk page.
Message added 23:20, 14 July 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

WilliamH (talk) 23:20, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Cedar Falls Iowa Edit

This is rather late of me to notice, but on July 2 you deleted the info I put into the Cedar Falls Iowa Demographics section. You put the 2000 census data back in which I usually delete since its no longer up to date, and that's fine I have no problems with you putting it back in. It's the other thing you did I find rather odd. You replaced my three paragraphs of 2010 census data which had about twice as much statistical info with the old paragraphs that were there before I edited the page, is there any reason for this? Jamo2008 (talk) 03:39, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Looking at your contributions, I've just realised that you're running an unapproved bot on this account. Stop now. Any further bot editing without a request for approval is in violation of our bot policy and will result in a temporary block. Nyttend (talk) 14:36, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

I submitted the request for approval so can you now at least answer my original question?Jamo2008 (talk) 17:18, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Ok I see that now on the Cedar Falls page but you might as well undo that one too like your reverting all of my other perfectly legitmate edits just because they were automated doesn't mean the data isn't correct and legitimate you could at least wait for the yah or nah from the bot page before undoing all of my work. Jamo2008 (talk) 17:32, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Demographics of Nebraska communities

I notice that you've reverted a number of recent changes in which User:Jamo2008 added a percent sign to the demographics section of articles on Nebraska communites (for example, this diff). Any reason for this? The percent sign seemed quite appropriate to me; and your reversion has removed a space, producing "0.1Pacific Islander".

On some other reversions of Jamo2008's edits, you've restored the old phrasing for the third paragraph of the "Demographics" section, including the rather awful "In the village the population was spread out..." phrasing. For what it's worth, Jamo2008 and I mooted a change to this phrasing at WikiProject Cities; we got disappointingly little response, but the single not-us person who responded to us favored the change. Is there a good Wikireason for keeping the old phrasing, or another reason why you reverted Jamo2008's edits?

Finally, I note that you added a "minor edit" tag to these reversions, even when they involved striking >200 characters and reverting to the old boilerplate. Is this appropriate? I ask not to score a point, but in ignorance: I'd always thought that the minor-edit tag was reserved for uncontroversial edits, e.g. corrections of indisputable spelling and grammar errors. —Ammodramus (talk) 00:42, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply; I hadn't known that there'd been discussion on this. Do you happen to recall where it took place? If possible, I'd still like to push for a change in the boilerplate—that "spread out" really sticks in my craw. Ammodramus (talk) 02:27, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm also interested in a diff or link to the aforementioned consensus. Since a serious amount of work has been undone (bot issues aside), it is reasonable to ask you to find the consensus. Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 17:04, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

I also tried to instigate discussion of changing the census boilerplate, at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_United_States/Archive_7#Census boilerplate . . . That discussion got a lot farther than the one at the Cities wikiproject (there were some excellent suggestions on the standard language), but there were relatively few participants (in spite of the alleged large participation in that Wikiproject) -- and it apparently included no one who was involved with telling bots to update this information. We need to find all of the parties and all of the bits and pieces of discussion to get all of the census data updated in a sensible fashion. --Orlady (talk) 17:31, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Stringer Stone House

Some time ago, you asked me to look up this place the next time I was in Jefferson County. I finally made it, and I think I am too late. I found a house on Warren Street with number 224 on the side, and took some photos, but it seems it was just a weird coincidence since it doesn't look like the one described here [9]. I looked on street view on google maps a few minutes ago, near the dairy queen described in the Jefferson county genealogical website, and saw a vacant lot near the creek. I probably will be down there again sometime, and will give it a closer look. By the way, the Dairy Queen is several hundred yards west of the location listed in Stringer Stone House.
Roseohioresident (talk) 18:53, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

(Talk page stalker) It appears to have burned down. Also here and here. Sigh. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:19, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Porceln

Hello Nyttend! I am new on Wikipedia and I find it a bit confusal... You deleted my article because of copyright issues, but how can I bring it back to edit it? I don`t want to restart it from a blank sheet, can you help me? Thankas, (Porceln (talk) 08:11, 17 July 2012 (UTC))

Sorry, you misunderstood me, I understand now, that I have to write it on my own, I just wanted to have the previous text as an example. I hope that`s permitted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Porceln (talk • contribs) 10:57, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

The Republic (Columbus)

I suppose I agree with half your edit here. I had put this newspaper in "Media in Indianapolis" becuase Columbus (Bartholomew County, to be precise), though it's not in the usual nine-county definition of Indy metro, is in the Indianapolis television market. I'm never sure under what circumstances suburban/exurban newspapers belong in the "Media in ..." categories -- never? Only if their coverage area touches on the main city? Only if they're in the Census-defined metro? And is that MSA or CMSA? Or, for sake of consistency with the radio and television entries in the category, do we use the TV market boundaries, which usually would encompass the largest area? If you know of any consensus on this point I would be glad to read it.

As for the deletion of Category:Bartholomew County, Indiana I assume that your thinking was that Category:Columbus, Indiana is a subcategory of the Bartholomew Co. category. It is, but it's three generations removed (via Category:Populated places in Bartholomew County, Indiana and Category:Geography of Bartholomew County, Indiana, hardly an intuitive path for someone looking for a news outlet with countywide reach). I included the city category because The Republic is a company based in Columbus, but the county category becuase it's a media organization covering the entire county. I think it ought to be categorized in both locations. _``` t b w i l l i e _` $1.25 _` 20:16, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

The AN3 template

It's {{AN3|p|semi=yes|3 days}}. T. Canens (talk) 05:58, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Article about Radha Thomas

I am currently working on the Wiki page for Ms Radha Thomas. She is an Indian jazz singer and songwriter. In fact, she is known as a diva in the Indian jazz scene. She previously was with the band Human Bondage and has sung and performed globally. The article is still under development. I haven't completed it or submitted it for review yet. You can have a look at it at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Radha_Thomas. I will be requesting your help and advice (as usual) in making it conform to all Wiki standards. If you do a Google Search for Radha (https://www.google.co.in/#hl=en&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&q=Radha+Thomas&oq=Radha+Thomas&gs_l=hp.3..0l2j0i30l2.1190.3159.0.3385.12.12.0.0.0.0.282.1949.0j11j1.12.0...0.0...1c.dYmnNUlMsQM&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=f6ee012440c72a74&biw=1024&bih=509) you will find dozens of articles and links to her work. As of now, the article is still under development and I will come bug you for help soon! Varunr (talk) 06:45, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I think I have completed the article and am contemplating it to move it to the AFC space. Before that, I'd really appreciate if you could have a look and give me some inputs, suggestions and advice and hopefully a green signal :-). Here's the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Radha_Thomas Varunr (talk) 08:56, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

dyk query

Hi; spotted your query; if your hook includes two dark blue links then I think it also needs two qpq reviews; thanks, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 07:11, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Stoner Site

Hello! Your submission of Stoner Site at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! LauraHale (talk) 13:06, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Safetray

Hi Nyttend. I mentioned you at Template:Did you know nominations/Safetray. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 14:20, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Well Done!

You have been awarded the Manliness Award for helping to construct a great encyclopedia

Incomplete DYK nomination

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Stoner Site at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 07:18, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Safety Regulations Governing the Transport of Radioactive Material

Dear Sir, Could you please tell me where this copyright infringement is? I have supplied links to back the statements up. I was not aware they fall into the category of copyright if you use the links as a reference. Any feedback gratefully received. Regards. Articles for creation/Safety Regulations Governing the Transport of Radioactive Material.

Arata Fujiwara

Hi, you once (back in 2009) deleted the page Arata Fujiwara as a blatant hoax, it was part of a mass nomination of similar articles. There's now an Olympic athlete by that name so if you can still view the deleted material I'd just like to check that there was nothing relevant on it that could be used now. Thanks - Basement12 (T.C) 23:07, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Absolutely nothing useful, unfortunately. The deleted content was simply a citation to this book and a statement that Arata is a Japanese prince, the son of Prince So-and-so, and the grandson of Prince Such-and-such. Reading the discussion tells you pretty much all that there is to know about this article's content and probably equally much about all of the other articles. Nyttend (talk) 01:50, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Oh well, worth a try. Thanks for looking - Basement12 (T.C) 02:13, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Your comment at Arbitration

Forgive me if i am wrong, but isn't your comment intended here in the India-Pakistan section, and not at Clarification request: Annotation of case pages for sanctioned users who have changed username? Regards, Anir1uph | talk | contrib 02:41, 20 July 2012 (UTC) (please ignore if i have made a mistake)

Seems like you already noticed that. :) Regards, Anir1uph | talk | contrib 02:42, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

New messages

Hello, Nyttend. You have new messages at Sfan00 IMG's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:19, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Your impartiality has been questioned (not by me), and you deserve to know

See Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion#Navigators USA. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:07, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Helena Historic District

I ran the query on this and it says there are 15 buildings. I know you probably told me how before, but how can I get an accurate listing? The query tool didn't tell me nor give a link to the PDF. This is Helena, Montana, not one of the other Helenas. PumpkinSky talk 19:36, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

The names of the 15 places would help a lot. Addresses even better. I'll write that guy in MT for the nom form. Anywhere else I can get this info?PumpkinSky talk 01:09, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

The Republic

Hello, Nyttend. You have new messages at Toll Booth Willie's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

tb

Hello, Nyttend. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Help_desk#Looking_for_a_template_name.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

architecture categories

Hi Nyttend -- I note with some alarm your edits to Brookfield Center Historic District (Brookfield, Connecticut) and some other NRHP historic district articles, in which you remove architecture categories with an edit summary to the extent that architecture categores aren't valid unless every building displays that style. That is a new view, and I think not reasonable. For someone interested in Greek Revival style, which I happen to like a lot, one wants to be able to find historic districts that are noted for including that type. There are many hundreds, possibly thousands of HD articles having architecture categories.

The edits I notice include:

Druid Hills Historic District (Atlanta, Georgia) ‎ (Architectural style categories aren't appropriate for HDs unless all the buildings have the same style) (top)
02:28, 24 July 2012 (diff | hist) . . (-354)‎ . . Buena Vista Park Historic District ‎ (Architectural style categories aren't appropriate for HDs unless all the buildings have the same style; cleanup styles in text) (top)
02:27, 24 July 2012 (diff | hist) . . (-174)‎ . . Brookfield Center Historic District (Brookfield, Connecticut) ‎ (Architectural style categories aren't appropriate for HDs unless all the buildings have the same style)
02:26, 24 July 2012 (diff | hist) . . (-115)‎ . . Adams Street Historic District

It seems these edits eradicate useful info and I am reverting these four. Can I please suggest that you not make changes like these, without some general discussion?

Sincerely, --do ncr am 03:46, 24 July 2012 (UTC) ‎

Got your note back. I'll watch here. I am uncomfortable in getting into a thing with you, I don't want a thing going on. I asked editor Vegaswikian, who has removed date categories from many NRHP hd articles, to comment. I have not opposed V's edits, because the date categories involved phrasing that was probably not correct (and is likely not correct in many regular NRHP non-hd articles. For a simple Category:Greek Revival architecture tag, it is I think clear that the style is represented in the hd or non-d. If it was represented saliently or widely enough to be included in the NRIS fields for these, then usually I would think that such categories are very good for the articles. And I and others have done a lot of work to put them there. I agree with your sentiment that these should not be considered too lightly; I would not be happy to see them lightly removed. --do ncr am 04:04, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

FYI, for just one state, Connecticut, there are about 43 hds among 66 articles having Category:Greek Revival architecture in Connecticut, including Coventry Glass Factory Historic District for one more example. The article states that Greek Revival and Federal architecture is represented in the district, and there are corresponding categories, appropriate in my view. Removing the 43 hd articles' categories would undermine use of the category by readers to find their way to Greek Revival architecture in the state, imho. --do ncr am 04:28, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

I see you reverted my restoration of architectural categories, plus a bit more wikilinking done by me in the same edit, at Brookfield Center Historic District (Brookfield, Connecticut), plus reverted at least one of the other 3. I don't know where we are in BRD; I would think your removal of arch categories is the bold, unexpected step, which i reverted and began discussion here. I'll leave them be for now, hope for some others' comments. --do ncr am 04:09, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Districts do not generally represent something that happens in one year, and there are exceptions. So if you have a district in a date related category, that is probably incorrect unless everything in the district happened on the specified date. The same would apply for architecture styles. If everything is in a given style, then it would be acceptable to have the district in that category. In all of these cases, redirects to handle the buildings, correctly categorizing them in a style and date category is acceptable after the building has a mention in the district article (this allows for sourcing). It would be nice if the generator would actually create more specific categories since the NRHP articles always seem to appear in less then optimal categories. As a general rule, unless everything in a category should be eligible for the parent categories. For articles, this is less well defined with redirects being the best solution. Vegaswikian (talk) 05:16, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Commenting on Adams Street Historic District, the article states It includes Bungalow/Craftsman architecture and Folk Victorian architecture. Based on that, I don't think that merits including those style categories on the district article. My recommendation would be to list the contributing properties in the district article as a table. That could include the date built, the style of the building, architect, and other pertinent information. Once this is established, then redirects could be created correctly categorizing each of the buildings if anyone feels the need. Vegaswikian (talk) 05:25, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Vegaswikian, I am surprised at your view on the architecture categories, which seems extreme to me. I can't find one of the old examples now, but on the date categories what had been in many HD and non-HD articles was something like Category:Buildings and structures completed in 1896, which was not really acceptable as an extrapolation from 1896 being a year listed in NRIS having some association with a property (without knowledge of it being a date of anything built, perhaps it was an event of significance, and without reference to second part of a date range, e.g. built during 1896-1908, where the 2nd date in a range is not made available in the article. It seems acceptable/good to me that you removed those category-type assertions from many NRHP HD articles.

About a category like Category:Greek Revival architecture for an HD, however, there is no misleading or likely-to-be-incorrect assertion made. The presence of Greek Revival architecture is of reader interest. I first sort of disliked Greek Revival architecture, by the way, but came to like it when I learned more about it, how it represented both an American superficial google-news-browsing-like interest in democratic revolution going on in Greece (note the architectural style does not look much like anything in Greece; it is a pure American concoction) and a first American rejection of English styles such as Adamesque in favor of anything not-English. --do ncr am 06:38, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

The problem with districts is that you don't know when is was constructed from the infobox. As you said, those dates in the infobox don't state what they are for. Thankfully some of the articles are written in a way that we know what the date is. When an article says that the district contains 20 building built in 1873, we know when it was built. So clearly in a case like that we know a lot more. When the article states that the district includes properties in 4 neighborhoods built over 10 years, then clearly the district was not built in a single year, no matter what the infobox implies. One interesting thing about districts, these are collections of buildings that have been tied together in a group, for some historical reason. If the district did not exist a century ago, can we assert that it did? Also, I think that the properties in districts can change over time. So including districts in certain very specific categories is probably not advised. The notability and the defining characteristics are for the listed properties and not the district. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:30, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

* Without commenting on the specifics of the district article vs specific properties, I am interested in the feeling that "something has to be 100% in order to be in a category or it shouldnt apply". The Metropolitan Museum of Art is in Category:Museums of Ancient Rome and Category:Museums of American art. Even though the museum is dedicated exclusively to neither, it's collections are larger than almost any special purpose museum dedicated to either. But thats appropriate because it's a world class museum of art. What I'm saying is that I'd expect to see proportionality play more of a role. If 90% of the houses are Greek Revival and the other 10% are mixed, then why not mark it greek revival? If something is only 10% Colonial, why highlight it? It could be I'm missing something obvious or key differences between museums and historical buildings. dm (talk) 06:47, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

I can't read the minds of every person who uses Wikipedia categories, but it seems to me that readers would expect to find some content that is clearly relevant to the style or type. Accordingly, the architectural style categories should be reserved for articles that are focused on a work of a particular style or have some content with strong relevance to a specific style. Many U.S. historic districts have lists of styles because a variety of styles (generally "revivals' of older styles) were used. For example, the Hincheyville Historic District (in the same city as the Adams St. district) has 70 buildings (almost all single-family houses) and a source lists 10 architectural styles as being represented -- in that kind of context, the list of architectural styles is merely trivia and not a defining characteristic suitable for categorization. Under my notion, the determination of whether an article belongs in an architecture category admittedly requires some subjective judgment, but I hope that people will exercise judgment and not list historic districts in these categories unless the sources indicate a strong association. The NRIS database does not seem to be a particularly solid source for this purpose -- it often appears to me that the lists in the database are truncated; for example, for that Hincheyville district it lists just three styles. --Orlady (talk) 18:54, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Orlady, I think we're saying exactly the same thing. I would expect to find substantive content associated with a topic that had a related category assigned. I would expect good judgment from the editor who assigned it, probably erring on the side of not adding a category if it was borderline. dm (talk) 03:46, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Our RfD discussion

I had said "let me think on it further" in reply to you at one point. Just letting you know that I've finished thinking about it. Of the file redirects listed on that day, I voiced my support for deletion on three of them which I believe to be too vague to keep. As for the others, I do not intend to speak against any keep argument they receive. As I mentioned in my one response at Pieratsunset.JPG, I'm open to further discussion beyond the scope of specific redirects if you want to pursue it, but I'm just as comfortable leaving what I've said to stand for itself so it's up to you. (Feel free to reply here or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Redirect. I have them both on watchlist.) BigNate37_(T) 23:04, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Court House, Arlington, Virginia

Hello Nyttend,

I actually copied the Court House, Arlington, Virginia article that you deleted from another article on this site that was titled Courthouse, Arlington, Virginia. The official name of the neighborhood is "Court House" so I changed the article title and set up a re-direct from the original article. I do not know about the Meet Up page. It might have been copied by the original author of the article or maybe the Meet Up person copied it from Wikipedia. Can you please put my page back up? I do not know how to message you or use the Talk Back code. Is this the right place to message you?

Thank you! tdp1980 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tdp1980 (talk • contribs) 04:01, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

20120813. Thank you for letting me know about the MOVE link. I have now moved the original article. tdp1980

Please close Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Ftrosanna

Thanks for speedying User:Ftrosanna. Would you mind closing the MfD too? Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Ftrosanna. Thanks. --Surturz (talk) 11:59, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

File:ClavenCliff.jpg

Still, there must be another criteria, like {{db-g6}}. --George Ho (talk) 18:06, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Any other file can use this name, but a redirect? Why? Just because it's cheap? What are policies to have file names as redirects to another file? --George Ho (talk) 22:30, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

What's the point of keeping it as a redirect? --George Ho (talk) 01:04, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

That link doesn't apply to this situation, and even this doesn't have any relevant or useful link, like mainspace or talkspace. Why can't you allow anybody to use this name for another file? I don't get how harmful deleting this useless redirect is, even when prior revisions show it. --George Ho (talk) 01:14, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

This proves that the renaming situation is already fixed. Anything else? --George Ho (talk) 04:36, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

It's already fixed by someone else. --George Ho (talk) 06:06, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Question about National Register of Historic Places listings in Eagle County, Colorado

Nyttend: On the page for the National Register of Historic Places listings in Eagle County, Colorado, the listing for the Wolcott Bridge occurrs twice, once in the main section (Listings County-Wide) and once in the Former Listings section. Can it be removed from the main list? Kind regards, Jeffrey Beall (talk) 01:04, 26 July 2012 (UTC).

Thanks. Jeffrey Beall (talk) 15:12, 26 July 2012 (UTC) .

Re: Luís Capela

Thank you for acknowledging me about it. Once I decided to check broken redirects everyday, but quickly recognized that an administrator will always check for Broken redirects each day. Vanischenum^Talk 10:02, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Writing an article

Help me on writing a tremendous article on the topic "Role of youth in nation's development". It is neither my homework nor a Wikipedia article, I have to give a huge stage performance. 106.212.40.209 (talk) 16:13, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Check this out

User:PumpkinSky/Helena Historic District (Montana). There were 4 submissions so the db generated 4 of these. Will have to sort out. This one will be a pain and there are many buildings.

C1 empty categories

Looking at upcoming C1 speedy deletions, I see that you tagged several empty categories. How do you find them? It seems that most multi-tagging is done by people who empty them inappropriately, but your contributions show me that you're doing everything rightly. Nyttend (talk) 01:02, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

The database report at Wikipedia:Database reports/Empty categories is updated regularly to identify categories that are empty. Some, of course, may have been emptied out of process, but I'm sure there are many different reasons how a category becomes empty. May task, when I go through the list in this report, is solely for maintenance. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 01:47, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

International Relations Department

Hi Nyttend. I noticed you just axed INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS DEPARTMENT - you may also want to grab International Relations Department, made by the same editor - which I initially marked for cleanup, but now realising it is copyvio, I've G12'd it. Thanks :) BarkingFish 14:08, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

AfD Closure

Hi Nyttend! You might like to close the deletion discussion of the "Indo-Pakistani War of 1971-Inside Secret", you recently deleted. --SMS ^Talk 15:46, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Done Darkness Shines (talk) 19:56, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

File:Frasiercast.jpg

I would hope that you are interested. However, even your "keep" argument may not triumph deletion, as I must warn you. --George Ho (talk) 05:45, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Queen of Clubs / Queen of clubs / queen of clubs ?

I can't see any reason for using caps for this, but the usage is inconsistent. See the articles linked from {{Playing cards}} such as King of clubs - all of these use lower case for the suit. Usage in the article Playing cards is mixed, though often uses caps. I've asked at Talk:Playing_card#Queen_of_Clubs_.2F_Queen_of_clubs_.2F_queen_of_clubs_.3F, and have added a note at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Board_and_table_games#Queen_of_Clubs_.2F_Queen_of_clubs_.2F_queen_of_clubs_.3F. PamD 20:47, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Abismo de pasión

Article might need semi-protection one day. Machine translated synopsis was recently removed by me and it was added by him again. Platinum Star (talk) 19:22, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Index to isotope pages orphaned redirects

Hi Nyttend, I notice you left quite a few orphaned links on deletion of Index to isotope pages. Could you still clean those up? Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 12:22, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

The index (or template) itself was moved to template:Index to isotope pages. With the redirect gone, it can't be found. Would you prefer it back in article space, or do you think it's better where it is now? Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 18:44, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

My bad, I didn't notice it was back in main. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 18:52, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Nyttend, why did you delete the redirect? ~~That was disruptive behaviour, using a speedy to create a mess. What were you thinking?~~ -DePiep (talk) 14:52, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Can you explain why you rewarded the R2 speedy while it is not applicable, and why you did not take care of the redlinks it created? -DePiep (talk) 21:58, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

re your reply [10]. So this happened. After I moved the page (from main to template space) on July 24, [11], there was no such redirect to userspace and all was fine. Clearly Martin Hoekstra moved the page to (his) userspace [12], invoking R2 situation. Afterwards Martin Hoekstra was evasive in his aims, responsibility and actions [13]. The end was that mainspace had redlinks, after which some user un-did my original move. All in all: MH moved it for unspecified reasons or intentions, so the R2 situation was created, you deleted by being mislead, and now the original move was undone. This is not a correct situation. I suggest you recreate the situation as it was before the MH move to userspace (on August 1) and subsequent log actions. Desired end situation: page code now in mainspace Index to isotope pages moved to Template:Index to isotope pages (by periodic table), with a redirect in the old moved page (straight workings). -DePiep (talk) 23:15, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

re your[14]. In short: the move to userspace by Martin Hoekstra (MH), and possibly other MH actions, triggered a bad sequence. Of course after that R2 was to the point. I can not see who put the R2 on it, or when (I am not an admin). At some an R3 tag was present [15]. In all this, MH was very unhelpful in clarifying motives and actions, especially his own (he did point to you though). The move to MH userspace could be called disruptive. So all this made my confusion, and now it looks like your isolated action was not wrong (I struck). The problem with the current situation is that the page now is back in mainspace, while it should be in template space (through speedy, i.e. no talk). I get it that you have no opinion on that, but that is the answer. Since you say that you don't see reason to revert your action (seen in isolation), you'll not mind me taking the whole to ANI. -DePiep (talk) 15:35, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

I read your new stuff. (Was the 03:00, 2 August 2012 Matthewrbowker edit the curious R3 maybe?) -DePiep (talk) 15:52, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the logs overview. Your reply to me [16] I read: a. current situation is OK, becasue no red links, and b. my R2 deletion in itself was correct. Both are right. So in this detail, I have no argument against it (your edits). But seen the whole of it, I want to have the content in Template space (as I moved August 24), and I'll have to challenge MH's move to Userspace, which started the cascade. Hence my thought of ANI. I cannot even move it (because the target is occupied), anyway I wish to have this resolved via talkings. After (my wished) reversion (code in template space), a correct Move discussion could be started -- that is the right way. -DePiep (talk) 16:11, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Just a question. Now that you've researched all this, and have the overview, do you feel comfortable in moving the content code form Article to Template (as I I'd like/request)? Saves me writing the ANI. But hey, only if you like it. -DePiep (talk) 16:26, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

I didn't press you, I asked. And earlier on you said the actual place (space) of the content didn't matter to you. -DePiep (talk) 16:57, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

All fine then. -DePiep (talk) 17:02, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

File:Mohammad Hassan Mohebbi.jpg

Dear Nyttend; according to WP:PD guideline (section "Copyright restorations") images like File:Mohammad Hassan Mohebbi.jpg may be used in en.wikipedia under a "public domain" claim only if the copyright in the country of origin has expired. This image is currently copyrighted in Iran. Raamin (talk) 17:38, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

File:Kianoush Rostami.jpg and File:Ali Mazaheri.jpg

Dear Nyttend; File:Kianoush Rostami.jpg and File:Ali Mazaheri.jpg are just variations of image 1 and image 2. This watermarekd images that you see are previews; original image sizes are 4149x2460 px and 3000x2010 px, and for sale! The links I provided are for informations about the original copyright holders; both images are created by non-Iranian entities (image 1 by Bertrand Guay, image 2 by Ryan Pierse) and are copyrighted in the US. Raamin (talk) 17:37, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

reply: As I said before, original size for these 2 images are 4149x2460 px and 3000x2010 px (large files), and you should buy the originals, If you want them! I didn't buy these; other customers, such as newspapers, magazines etc. buy these images from AFP, Getty images and the like and use them. It is very unlikely to find the original images in the web for free. But for copyright purposes: Getty images provides detailed informations about these images in question; you can see the name of photographers and the cration date and sources. These two images are not created in Iran, not created by Iranian entities and thus copyrighted in the US. Raamin (talk) 18:25, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Atmel AVR attiny comparison chart

I agree that the tag was wrong, but I think it's a copyvio as the format is the same as the tables at the Atmel site. I got interrupted and had to go out before I could find it, but I'm sure it's in there. I left a note in the hope that someone else would do some digging. Peridon (talk) 18:53, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Read the diffs - there was no context when I added the tag. [17] Osarius - Want a chat? 19:34, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

...and there was/is no link back to the page that this table came from originally. I believe my tag was correct. Osarius - Want a chat? 19:35, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Fair enough for me - I didn't look at timings. I was more concerned about copyvio and left your tag in place until I (or someone) could find the source (a jam pot to catch a wasp). Not one of my best comparisons, but you know what I mean. Peridon (talk) 19:53, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Mnap25 (talk · contribs)

Remember him? I believe it was you who gave him a final warning for continued failure to update the date when updating the stats. He's at it again. AutomaticStrikeout 03:34, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the efficiency. Hopefully the lesson will be learned. AutomaticStrikeout 03:42, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi Nyttend. I recently reverted your revert to the Jeff Karstens article. He does have 38 losses. If you check the article's history you'll see I made a mistake when updating his record on 8/2(I took his losses from 37 to "378"); I made a mistake. AutomaticStrikeout had a good eye and fixed it. Eventually the birthplace was also messed up so I just fixed that as well in a separate (and later) edit. Mnap25 was correct in setting the loss to no. 38. Also, I didn't see any summary in your revert, Nyttend, but I assume your revert of Mnap25's edit was in good faith. I have noticed issues with Mnap25 in the past, as well, but I think he's in the right on this one. Zepppep (talk) 03:54, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Link Rot??

Hi! I'm puzzled by your declining a set of my requests for deletions of talk pages that had been left as orphans as a result of page moves. The group of requests that I made all had a similar history.

See Talk:Louis Lengendre (historian) for example. The history here is that the article was created with the title "Louis Legendre (historian)". Another editor moved the article to "Louis Legendre" commenting that there was no need for disambiguation in the title. Unfortunately a bot (Yobot) then ran off an out of date list of articles and created the talk page Talk:Louis Lengendre (historian) even though there the article Louis Lengendre (historian) now existed only as a redirect. I moved this talk page to Talk:Louis Lengendre, having first checked that there were no links to it. Finally I proposed the deletion of Talk:Louis Lengendre (historian) to complete the tidy up.

Hence my puzzlement about your concern that deleting the page could cause link rot. Could you clarify?

--Quiet Editor (talk) 12:06, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Building a case for a RfC/U

Hello! I am currently in the process of putting together a Request for Comment/User conduct regarding the potentially disruptive editing by user Tim Zukas. It is pertaining to this user's continued refusal to cite sources properly, including on some articles with GA status. As you can see on his talk page here, this has been going on for quite some time now. I am asking for your input due to the fact that you have commented on this user's talk page about these problems.

If you would be so kind, please pop over and take a look at the draft I have created for the RfC/U and add your comments. If you would like to be a part of this, let me know and I will keep you posted once it is ready to be submitted.

Thanks! nf utvol (talk) 23:16, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look, feel free to make any more changes you think would be helpful. I'll let you know when I put this up for the RfC. nf utvol (talk) 14:29, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Got it... I just made a few changes. I think the real issue here is that he just goes on the offensive whenever someone politely asks that he provide a more thorough citation. The sheer volume of his edits that are ambiguously cited, including in articles that have gone through the GA wringer, is just starting to become disruptive. I'm not stuck on the text of the RFC by any means, so like I said, feel free to make any changes if you think they'll address the heart of the problem more effectively. nf utvol (talk) 14:52, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

File:JRR Tolkien signature - from Commons.svg

I was just going to remove the speedy tag there when you inserted the PD license. I'm still a bit worried though about the fact that this signature may still be copyrighted in the UK (see the discussions at Commons). And please feel free to weigh in at Talk:J. R. R. Tolkien where the upload bot has left a note. De728631 (talk) 14:15, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

We have {{PD-signature}} for a reason too, and it says that "Note that this tag cannot be used on all signatures, as not all signatures are copyright-free." Typefaces and letters are just mechanically reproduced writings but signing one's name by hand may be seen as a creative act in some jurisdictions. De728631 (talk) 14:23, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

I have now nominated the file for deletion at Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2012 August 4. Can't find a reason to keep it under a FUR. De728631 (talk) 14:54, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Good job

So I used the wrong CSD tag, but if you were actually good at being an administrator you would have seen the blatant copyright breach. I've replaced the tag, let's hope you can get it right this time. Iamthemuffinman (talk) 15:01, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Re: File:02 Calma Pueblo.ogg

See my reply at the technical village pump. What you did was fine ... it was my computer that was the problem! Graham87 15:42, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

That's quite absurd

[18] What's the problem? It's spam and needs to go. It's his only "contribution". Wikipedia isn't free hosting for personal web pages but supposedly an encyclopedia. Palosirkka (talk) 19:56, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

F10

Okay I got it. Thank you for warn to me.--Reality 15:44, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Baraka mutabaruka

Hello. I'm sure you know more than I do about speedy deletion criteria, so if this page doesn't meet the ones I chose, please could you suggest what should be done about a page that's a copy-paste of a genuine article about a real living person with the infobox details changed (to the name of a third person, whether a random name or that of the article's creator I cannot tell)? I'd have thought that such a creation didn't belong in mainspace? thanks for your time, Struway2 (talk) 16:20, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your explanation: I'll try and make myself clearer another time. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 16:45, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia Takes America

If you want to do something for Wikipedia:Wikipedia Takes America, I think User:Bob the Wikipedian and User:LoriLee might be able to help. I'm not sure who else is in your area, but think there might be additional folks. Cheers. --Aude (talk) 12:43, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Count me in, so long as I don't have prior commitments. Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:44, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Sounds fair. Is there a list somewhere of the cities in between that you have quite a bit to do in yet? Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:27, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Hmm. Perhaps a hike through a state park would work. Turkey Run State Park and Shades State Park are near one another and have excellent formations for hiking and no-gear-needed climbing that have not been photographed yet for Wikipedia, including the Devil's Punchbowl, Turkey Backbone, and Devil's Backbone (which is a thrill in itself to climb). Shades and Turkey Run are two of my favorite places to hike. Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:24, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Heh...yeah, that's a bit further north than I remembered it being. I'll keep thinking about it and let you know if I think of something. Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:03, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

I'd like to encourage you to try out our handy-dandy Wikipedia:Wikipedia Takes America#Event page wizard! Also, keep in mind a place with a few NRHP sites would be good.--Pharos (talk) 14:03, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Re: Edward Tyrer

Thank you for your comment. The article is based on its Chinese version in the Chinese Wikipedia, which was also written by me. Since I am not a native English speaker, you are welcome to rework parts that you find awkward or you can point out the problems to see whether I can correct them one by one.--Clithering (talk) 11:23, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

The biographical note was translated by me in a rush and it looks much better now after your help. Thank you so much!--Clithering (talk) 13:37, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Gasparovic dispute

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.173.110.130 (talk) 13:43, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/1993 Madrid bombings

Hi Nyttend, regarding your change and purely out of curiousity why is the relative pronoun which "wrong" in that case? Valenciano (talk) 21:56, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

ANI-notice Isotopes

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is WP:ANI/Incidents#Index to isotope pages, moves and a deletion ended incorrect.The discussion is about the topic Index to isotope pages. Thank you. -DePiep (talk) 11:16, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Nyttend, I used your name in a joke (at ANI). Should be idle, but could cause issues. Not my intention to harm/introduce you. -DePiep (talk) 02:04, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

That's the wrong way to get attention, DP. Calling someone's actions stupid doesn't help the situation either. Robby The Penguin (talk) (contribs) 02:08, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict)After I read your comment on my Talk page: it was a joke. Six months block? That was just to trigger ANI-admins. I'm sorry I disturbed you, I did not even think you'd not get it. Meanwhile, the issue at ANI was not solved but archived. -DePiep (talk) 02:12, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

DePiep, bots or users prematurely close and/or archive information on occasion. It happens. When it happens, instead of disruptively trying to seek attention, contact someone; maybe the bot owner or the closing admin, and discuss it with them. If it was a bot, you could even be bold and restore it. Asking for insane blocks for good admins like Nyttend, even as a joke, cause extreme disruption, as you have seen. It's seriously like taking that big, beautiful edit count of yours and throwing it in the trash. It's what grudge trolls do. Robby The Penguin (talk) (contribs) 02:20, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Stop bothering Nyttend at home, you Penguin. -DePiep (talk) 02:31, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

I am not bothering Nyttend. Rather, I am defending him against your disruptive edits. Robby The Penguin (talk) (contribs) 02:36, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

It was a joke, you stupid trolling penguin. A 6 month thing for Nyttend and you don't even get the beginning of a light? Sorry again, Nyttend. Even 12 months would not float the joke with penguins. Won't happen again. -DePiep (talk) 03:18, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't care if it was real or if it was a joke. It was unfounded either way. The fact that it is a joke makes it worse. That kind of thing should not be taken as a joke, especially not on ANI. You should really know better. Robby The Penguin (talk) (contribs) 03:24, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

SL_Benfica_Handball_roster

Hi, can you please delete this one too-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:SL_Benfica_Handball_roster. I created another one by mistake when the previous one didn' load.--Threeohsix (talk) 11:49, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Sandbox speedy deletion

hiya,

i was the one that created teh sandbox and it was for testing porpuses to try gaina consensus on the main article whilst it was in full protection, full protection is no logner need nither is the sandbox i thought test page was the right choice rather than owner one--Andrewcrawford (talk - contrib) 12:47, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Sorry i am dyslexic so convey things isn't easy for me i will try again. ok the main Rangers F.C. was on full protection for about 2 months due to content dispute. At the end of last month i created the sandbox as testing ground for updated article whilst it was on full protection so giving users a way to resolve the content dispute in way that satisfy everyone, but now the main article rangers f.c. is no longer fully protected as it no longer needed and the sandbox was created as testing place to replace the main one, i thought testing was better as that what i created it for. hopefully that makes more sense--Andrewcrawford (talk - contrib) 12:59, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Personal attacks/trolling made against you

On WP: ANI, an editor ranted about archiving, as well as requesting that you be blocked for 6 months (here). I reverted the post as trolling, and the editor continued to edit war, finally stopping when User:Bbb23 reverted him (here). I just thought that you should know, being the subject of his rants. BTW, a couple of editors have tried to gang up on me, waving seniority and edit counts in my face. I really hope this doesn't escalate, i'm getting a headache from all this ANI stuff. Robby The Penguin (talk) (contribs) 01:55, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

I really hope this doesn't escalate says the editor who did not solve a single point. -DePiep (talk) 02:41, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

You continue to ignore the one point I am trying to make you understand. You disrupted Wikipedia in trying to get bad attention by posting a fake block request. Not a good way to try and get attention. Robby The Penguin (talk) (contribs) 02:47, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Great. I think you start getting the idea what Wikipedia is. If only you could disconfuse your names. -DePiep (talk) 02:59, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

No, I have all my names right. Lets continue this discussion on my page, instead of (as you said) bothering Nyttend. Robby The Penguin (talk) (contribs) 03:19, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

End of Thread. -DePiep (talk) 03:33, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

AC3 images

Nyttend, I noticed your terse edit summary, and frankly it struck me as conceited. On checking both images, I interpreted CSD F1 as permitting the flagging of a non-free image where another with identical properties justifies deletion. In the context, the images display (i) Connor Kenway's hand inside the Redcoat's jacket, rather than around the neck, (ii) identical post-processing, (iii) identical file format, and I was indeed cognisant of the Wii U banners and logos. If F1 simply incorporates files identical in every aspect, save file size, then I'm mistaken and I stand corrected. Yet the edit summary is exactly the tone that infuriates and riles others; if I'm mistaken, the courteous thing is simply to notify me and elaborate on the error. Anyway, I reduced the Wii U version to an appropriate size for infobox images, roughly 300x400 and uploaded it: File:Assassin's Creed III Game Cover.jpg for Assassin's Creed III. If that's also in error, feel free to revert... Mephistophelian (talk) 18:50, 11 August 2012 (UTC).

DYK for Stoner Site

On 12 August 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Stoner Site, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Stoner archaeological site in Illinois is unusual for its lack of evidence of substantial occupation by any people other than the Allison-Lamotte culture? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Stoner Site. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:04, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Allison-Lamotte culture

On 12 August 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Allison-Lamotte culture, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Stoner archaeological site in Illinois is unusual for its lack of evidence of substantial occupation by any people other than the Allison-Lamotte culture? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:04, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hi there, i'm afraid you marked my edit here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Prince_Hussein_Bin_Abdullah_II%27s_Academy_Of_Civil_Protection&action=edit&redlink=1 for speed deletion and it has been deleted, i want to let you know that i have permission to use the information that i imported from that website, i know the webmasters there personally and they have allowed me to create the wikipedia page, can you please undo the deletion? thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bewinxed (talk • contribs) 14:43, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

SkyFireOS

Are you sure the WT pages for AfD discussions are appropriate? They contribute to discussions' fragmentation and add some work for participants and closing admins with no benefit. What if nobody noticed it at all? — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 15:11, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

There's nothing wrong with having a talk page for an AFD; just copy the content into the AFD and leave the page in existence.
— Nyttend (at user talk:czarkoff#SkyFireOS) 15:13, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh, I see discussion fragmentation is of no concern to you. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 15:30, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

As I said, you're free to copy the content over there. Deletion of the page will not resolve the fragmentation; it will only make it worse, because nobody will be able to go to the talk page to see the original comment that you copied.
— Nyttend (at user talk:czarkoff#SkyFireOS) 15:34, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, as I copied the comment, I'm not particularly sure that there is any additional value in keeping the source. Still, if the page is there, someone may post their comments there under false impression that the deletion discussions are supposed to work this way. To me, having such pages somehow goes aginst WP:BITE. P.S. could you please answer here? It is unreasonably difficult to follow the discussion when it is spread across several pages. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 15:48, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

If you hadn't redirected it, I would have added a comment saying "Please don't add votes to this page", but redirecting is a better idea than mine. Nyttend (talk) 15:59, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Liancourt Rocks Discussion.

SPA sockpuppet hidden

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

I would advise you to read [19]and to begin heeding it, because you're falling into [20] territory. This is advice that you should surely take into consideration while you're accusing me of bad faith and disruption without viable reason.
I can't comprehend how you drew the conclusion that I was attacking you just because we were in disagreement.(The talk pages are for editors to discuss possible changes. Why discuss changes if you're not willing to hear responses from other users?) I don't understand your logic in wanting to make a change to an article only to say it doesn't change anything.(so why bother?) This action is completely without reason which doesn't really make sense to me.

This is going nowhere, with people assuming bad faith and making attacks on proposed changes that don't change anything.

This doesn't really make sense.Keviexw (talk) 20:59, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

You say you are unfamiliar with the situation, but you stated earlier that you were just exposed to it thus not being partial to the "dispute", so in essence, you are very much aware of the dispute, (this makes you aware of the situation). You, unknowingly leaked this information out yourself. Also, please do not twist my words. I never said you were "disrupting things and not being truthful by changing the order of the names" I made it clear when I said that "it only begs the question of your true motives and your claim to being impartial by wanting the names switched around". You never gave a reason why you wanted them switched around, so yes; it begs the question. I gave you the benefit of the doubt and the opportunity to justify it but instead you decided to play victim thinking someone was attacking you; which wasn't the case and was definitely not my intentions.Keviexw (talk) 01:17, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

I was paying attention, which is the reason why I told you, your proposed revision didn't make sense. Listen, I don't plan on going back and fourth with you on this for time indefinite; we both have better things to do other than linger on this. Have a good day sir.Keviexw (talk) 17:37, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Please see

Please see the discussion at Template talk:NRHP row#Edit war

Smallbones (talk) 22:10, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

To gift

Hi Nyttend, regarding your comment that the verb form of "gift" is "give", I would like to point out that there in fact is a verb to gift which fits perfectly in the context. There is a slight difference in meaning between to give and to gift, with the latter explicitly referring to something changing hands for free. Just for your information. - TaalVerbeteraar (talk) 14:18, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

I, too, have seen "gift" used as a verb, but this is one of those usages that is rejected by a majority of the survey respondents when surveys are done of English-language mavens. Some have given up and accepted it as an inevitability, though: [21] [22] --Orlady (talk) 14:35, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Please see the discussion you started on the Village Pump.

Wikipedia:Image placeholders is not a guideline or anything of the sort. I believe you'll find the evidence of that compelling, so I've suggested that you withdraw the RfC. Thanks in advance. Smallbones (talk) 15:48, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

3RR

Thank you.--Santos30 (talk) 20:32, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Edit warring

Hello. I would like to draw your attention to an edit war being undertaking here. Reverts are too frequent to count now and I have reported it on the relevant notice board. What happens now? I am trying to edit something different on that page but it is impossible to do. Thank you. Spc 21 (talk) 20:41, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Santos 30

Hi there!. Few days ago I asked a checkuser at Meta about this user, you can read my reasons there. After discussing this request on the mailing list, steward Marco Aurelio answered me that I should go to each project and ask for a CU. Meanwhile the same request was made at Spanish Wikipedia, the result was positive. After that, Domenico/Santos30 was blocked for the third time: six months.
Note 1: In Spanish Wikipedia the retired template means nothing, in fact some editors use it to get attention or to slam their editions when they are angry about a situation. Later on they back again.
Note 2: If you review his contributions you will notice that Santos30 was a sleeping acount that began editing after Domenico's withdraw at Spanish Wikipedia.
I would like to report this incident on the board in order to evaluate this behavior. As you can read my reasons in Meta, there are several articles that have been affected, especially for the renaming of some files in Commons which has affected other Wikipedias too. Should I ask CU here? (User:83.34.153.98/Domenico/Santos30), what do you recommend? Jaontiveros (talk) 05:36, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Another Confused Wikipedian - you deleted a page from my sandbox?

Hi. I'm Jillian. You came to my sandbox, deleted a page in progress, and gave the reason that it had been publicly deleted in the past? Advice I received from the Wiki Editor community at that time was to create a page in my own private user sandbox to develop a better more wiki-approved article, then present it to be peer-edited and then published to wiki after that level of approval. Please tell me why you came to my private user sandbox, as my understanding is that it is out of line to patrol a user's private sandbox space?? Jilliance (talk) 17:51, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Divineabraham, more info here!

Hello, I'm another account or a sock account of Divine Abraham, this account was active since 21:49, 13 January 2012. I know that I will get blocked for saying that I'm a sock puppet, but I want to say that I want Divineabraham to be unblocked, please. I can continue like this without being caught but I don't want that because I want Divineabraham back. If you still think I don't deserve an unblock then block this account as well. Thanks for understanding!

My User Page:My Talk Page:My Contributions

17:08, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Marian Richero

Thanks for noticing that the MARIAN RICHERO article was Speedied before the AfD completed. I swear I looked at that AfD three times and still missed it. --Tgeairn (talk) 00:25, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Re:Grog

Grog is using ground pottery or previously fired clay as a tempering agent to the clay used to make pottery, to keep it from shrinking and cracking during the drying, firing and cooling process. Different cultures have preferred different materials as a temper, including ground shell, sand, ground stone and grog. See Primitive Pottery: Adding Temper to Clay, seems pretty informative. I'm unsure why no one has ever done an article on WP about tempering, it is a pretty important part of ceramics making. Currently it redirects to temper with a further link to Ceramic. Hope this helps and you are well, He iro 23:26, 17 August 2012 (UTC) See also GLOSSARY OF CERAMIC ATTRIBUTES, and I also found this, lol, didn't realize we had it Grog (clay). He iro 23:30, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Request for deletion of SL Benfica archery section

This article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S.L._Benfica_%28archery%29 is replicated in the main page at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S.L._Benfica#Archery They say the same. But the main reason is that the archery section is closed, you can't find them on the website http://www.slbenfica.pt/en-us/home.aspx, check the +more section. --Threeohsix (talk) 13:21, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

I have find a better solution, I created a template for desactived sections. No need to delete Archery. Sorry for the inconvenience.--Threeohsix (talk) 13:02, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Ahmed Dabbah at DYK

Thanks for identifying that problem. I will work soon on upgrading it to 1500 words, which shouldn't be a big deal, and will notify you upon completion.

Thanks! --Activism1234 04:13, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

I added in another paragraph. Is it good now? Thanks. --Activism1234 04:41, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

The original one was created at the wrong (at least officially) spelling of the name, so I moved it over the one which had been created more recently at the right name and was correctly formatted (e.g. using the correct template), then restored the second one created to get the proper formatting back. I can delete the revisions from the second one if that helps? Number 5 7 21:36, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

OK, all reversed. The original reason I did it is because Activism1234 wanted to the history to show they were the creator of the article. Number 5 7 21:55, 19 August 2012 (UTC) PS - you didn't come across as angry, so don't worry about it. Number 5 7 21:55, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Help desk - images

Don't think we need those full size images at the HD. Please consider editing your reply to remove them.--ukexpat (talk) 21:26, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Moving Burma to Myanmar - ongoing poll

This is to let you know that an ongoing poll is taking place to move Burma to Myanmar. I know this happened just recently but no administrator would close these frequent rm's down, so here we go again. This note is going out to wikipedia members who have participated in Burma/Myanmar name changing polls in the past. It does not include banned members nor those with only ip addresses. Thank you. Fyunck(click) (talk) 23:30, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Ginn's Furniture Store

On 22 August 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ginn's Furniture Store, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Ginn's Furniture Store (pictured) is a rare survivor of repeated Ohio River floods that destroyed most of downtown Milton, Kentucky? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ginn's Furniture Store. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Orlady (talk) 00:03, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Jennie's Bake Shop

Hi, I noticed you deleted the page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennie%27s_Bake_Shop

Could you userfy or email me a copy of it? Thanks, Ruggermcdonnybrook (talk) 15:22, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 23

Hi. When you recently edited Ennis Archaeological Site, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lithics (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:07, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Gary Fish bio deletion

Nyttend, you deleted the Gary Fish bio entry that I authored. I believe it was because you didn't consider him a big enough public figure. However, Wiki is filled with similar bio entries of CEOs of similar companies. When you weigh this with how much third-party media coverage Gary Fish has received and the fact that he's founder, president and CEO of the largest privately held information security firm in North America, I'd like to know more about your reasoning. Thanks. SecurejcSecurejc (talk) 17:29, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Nyttend, Gary Fish is the feature subject of the "Newsmakers" section in today's Kansas City Business Journal. It's in the paid print edition, so I can't send you the entire link, but it's at this site: www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/print-edition/2012/08/24/up-close-gary-fish-ceo-of-fishnet.html

This article also mentions that he's CEO of FireMon LLC and DomoTek, which could be added to his Wiki entry if you would re-establish it.

Gary's company, FishNet Security, is also featured in today's Kansas City Star newspaper at the following link: www.kansascity.com/2012/08/23/3776415/fishnet-securitys-new-headquarters.html

Because FishNet Security is the largest information security firm in North America, I believe that also adds to his notability factor. Would you consider allowing the re-establishment of this entry? Thanks.64.151.55.70 (talk) 20:16, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Gary Fish has a long history of being covered by the media and third-party business profile sites, such as this one: http://www.crunchbase.com/person/gary-fish. Your own Wiki entry on Notability states this about "notable topics": "We consider evidence from reliable independent sources to gauge this attention." I would consider major metro publications and business profile sites to be reliable independent sources outside the company's influence and independent of the subect, in this case, Gary Fish. His contributions inside the information security industry are well-known. securejcSecurejc (talk) 21:18, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Ticaboo, Utah

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Ticaboo, Utah requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:44, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Apologies for the above message. In my haste to get rid of the copyvio and clean up the rest of the promo around the site by the editor (which took me the best part of an hour), it was done with Twinkle. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:21, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Recent edits to The_Crown

The wording you put in does not make sense. No legislature may advise the crown on anything that is not part of it's jurisdiction. The legislature of Australia, can only advise on what falls within it's jurisdiction. IF multiple legislatures have jurisdiction over something, than each legislature advises it's "instance" of the crown. Ex. The Ontario legislature will advise the Ontario Crown, but cannot advise the Canadian Crown. (Different legal entities) Even if both legislatures have jurisdiction over something. --Education does not equal common sense. 我不在乎 03:12, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Re- STiki discussion page

Thank you for your reference to the difficulty that arose last night.

Good of you to notice.

Have a drink on me! Sincerely -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 13:34, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Ennis Archaeological Site

On 27 August 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ennis Archaeological Site, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that more than 7,000 years of artifacts have been found at the Ennis Archaeological Site in Indiana? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ennis Archaeological Site. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 16:02, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Campus Ambassador 2012-2013

Hello,

Thanks so much for contacting me! It would be great to have another CA at IU Bloomington. This semester we are working with one class on a project. If everything goes as planned, we will be working with a few classes next semester so it would be great to have you trained and ready to assist for next semester. Before we can do the training, I will need to talk with you a little more about being a CA. What days/times work best for you? Etlib (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:49, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

IP editor

Can something be done about this editor? All he ever does is add information about a telenovela that hasn't aired yet in Mexico, it's origin. In addition, he also added a copyvio sypnosis, which was taken from here. Discospinster also reverted 3 similar copyvio edits from another editor. Platinum Star (talk) 00:19, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

CBS Records

I found out after the fact that you renamed CBS Records (2006) back to CBS Records after I had changed it back and made CBS Records a disambig page. Can you add your input to the CBS Records section of the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard as well as the Talk:CBS Records (2006) page as an editor named Norton caused the mess by trying to put a lot of info on two unrelated CBS Records entities in the CBS Records article. Steelbeard1 (talk) 02:09, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Please look at the Talk:CBS Records page again as Norton inserted a poll about whether to make the DAB page be "CBS Records" (which it is now) or "CBS Records (disambiguation)" which Norton wants it to be despite the intervention of admins. Steelbeard1 (talk) 18:31, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Carmino Ravosa

Hi, you deleted a photo of Carmino Ravosa, one of my photos and I believe I marked it as CC Attribution (own work). Also, I don't see why you deleted it. I would have appreciated if you left a note on my page and/or put it in the Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files page. Can you please explain your reasoning? Thanks.ɱ 23:33, 29 August 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by ɱ (talk • contribs)

When I copy it from a website that I made, with permission, with the image actually being my own work, then I am able to mark it as such, and you should not go assuming that I am some regular person who just stole it after a Google search, where in that case, it would be a copyright violation.--ɱ 17:47, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

You cannot just go deleting thing willy-nilly wherever you like, just because you have a hunch, because you were misinformed. Next time, send me a note, or better yet, don't do it.--ɱ 17:49, 30 August 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by ɱ (talk • contribs)

DYK for Hovey Lake Archaeological District

On 30 August 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Hovey Lake Archaeological District, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Hovey Lake Archaeological District in Indiana's southwestern corner is endangered by flooding, oil derricks, bird hunters, and vandals? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Hovey Lake Archaeological District. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Portuguese Rugby Cup

Can you please delete or redirect this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portuguese_Rugby_Cup to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ta%C3%A7a_de_Portugal_de_Rugby. Because of a lack of information on the Portuguese Rugby Template, I did not know that a article on Portuguese Rugby Cup already existed. Or you delete mine and copied everything I've done to the Portuguese Rugby Cup already in existence. I prefer that you deleted Portuguese Rugby Cup because I've done redirect's to my article in various other articles. And my article is more complete. Thanks --Threeohsix (talk) 13:20, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

CSD of Help Me (Green Day song)

Unfortunately the {{db-g3}} template does not include a "reason" field for me to explain why the article is a hoax. I explained it in my edit summary, which I assume you didn't see. Allow me to explain: The song is purported to be a single from ¡Uno!, but does not even appear on that album (check the track listing in the article). Green Day has never released a song titled "Help Me", nor is such a song listed on any of their three upcoming albums. The song does not exist, therefore the article is a hoax. In addition, the creator—Thesethmoviechannelmovies (talk · contribs)—appears to be a hoax-only account: They have added patently false credits to a number of articles such as adding actress Michelle Rodriguez into the writing credits of other Green Day articles (Rodriguez has never had any association with the band whatsoever) and adding the members of Green Day to the credits of various children's cartoons (which they have never participated in). I gave Thesethmoviechannelmovies a warning for this, then I realized that all their contributions were patent falsehoods, including this "Help Me" article. There is no evidence that this song exists or will exist. The whole thing is a hoax. Just look at the credits listed in the infobox: Michelle Rodriguez as producer? Patently false. Tara Strong (a voice actress for children's cartoons) as writer? Patently false. The whole article is a blatant hoax. --IllaZilla (talk) 18:27, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Procedural question — why not simply use {{db}}? {{db|because it is a hoax (G3), as explained at talk}} would get the job done fine, along with a short explanation at the talk page. I don't see any sources linked for the portions of the article on which you're relying for your conclusion of hoax (e.g. the Uno! track listing), and without sources contradicting an article's statements, I'm not going to delete an article as a hoax unless it's so obvious that anyone can see that it's false. No objections to this being deleted through PROD (thanks for restoring it), but the very fact that your explanation is so long is a good indication that it's not blatant. Nyttend (talk) 19:12, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm dumbfounded. How is this not blatantly obvious? The article says this song is a single from ¡Uno!, but the song is not on ¡Uno!. Look at the album's track listing on Wikipedia, on Allmusic, and on Green Day's very own website. The album does not include a song titled "Help Me". I don't have to prove that it doesn't, the article creator has to prove that it does (the creator, as I said before, has been inserting falsehoods into a number of other articles as well). I don't see why I should have to go through a bunch of hoops to have an article deleted when it's an obvious hoax, created by a hoax-only account. You're really straining my logic meter here. --IllaZilla (talk) 22:12, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Deleted. Until now, you failed to provide any links that showed a complete tracklist for this album. Wikipedia articles are not a reliable source, and your argument that I should delete something based on its absence from an unsourced list on Wikipedia is a very bad idea. Arguments such as "this is a hoax-only account" are very good for AFD nominations and PROD rationales, but they are completely insufficient for speedy deletion. Remember that "Hoaxes are generally not speedy deletion candidates"; you've shown me the proof that this is an exceptional case, but until now you had not shown me that proof. Now that you've shown me links from the band's website, it's obvious that this is a hoax. Nyttend (talk) 22:18, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I've gone ahead and deleted the article based on your new rationale. (My apologies to Nyttend, who deserved the honor, but I didn't know if he was editing right now.) IllaZilla, the reason that admins are reluctant to speedy-delete alleged hoaxes, apart from the technical policy issues, is that there have been instances when something that looked like a probable hoax turned out to be completely true. Therefore, most admins will only speedy where it's clear that something is a blatant and evident hoax, which is what the additional information you supplied above provided in this case. On the other hand, I do appreciate your having pushed to get a blatant hoax deleted one you were sure that's what it was. The troublesome part is that when I did a quick Google search to double-check that there were no hits for this alleged song, the number-one hit that did come up was this article—along with your "this article is a hoax" notation at the top. So, thanks for helping us get it right. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:25, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Oops, here I completely forgot to do the deletion; thanks for taking care of it. Nyttend (talk) 22:31, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Hey there, Thesethmoviechannelmovies is back as 70.137.129.162 (talk · contribs) and has re-created the hoax article Help Me (Green Day song). It needs to be re-deleted (and probably salted). I tagged it with {{db-repost}} but I don't think that technically applies since there was no AfD. --IllaZilla (talk) 02:32, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi again. You just deleted Talk:Help Me (Green Day song) that I'd tagged with {{db-g8}}. This is now the 4th time that this serial hoaxter has re-created the deleted article by putting it on the talk page. It has been deleted under g8 each time. Would you be averse to salting the talk page and/or blocking the IP that keep re-creating it? --IllaZilla (talk) 02:39, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Ellerbusch Site at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 07:35, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

GAN Ellerbusch Site placed on hold

See Talk:Ellerbusch Site/GA1

Had a hard time understanding it, even though I am familiar with the subject in general. Best wishes, MathewTownsend (talk) 03:21, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

ps - the photos you've taken on the Commons are wonderful! MathewTownsend (talk) 12:33, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

The Olive Branch: A Dispute Resolution Newsletter (Issue #1)

Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.

In this issue:

Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
Research: The most recent DR data
Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
Proposal: It's time to close the Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts noticeboard. Agree or disagree?

Read the entire first edition of The Olive Branch -->

--The Olive Branch 19:20, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

list of scandals ... -gate

You've changed the inclusion criterion to something which is too broad and invites spamming by everyone who's pet scandal has been referred to in any rag with a -gate. I understand the desire to remove self-references, but we need to make sure that the inclusion criterion is documented correctly somewhere. aprock (talk) 00:24, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

One of the most insidious of these things was the cheating scandal at the Hambletonian, which became known as GaitGate. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:45, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for updating the criteria. I think the one you've put up solves most of the problems well. Some may find it to be a bit limiting, but that may not be a bad thing for the project. aprock (talk) 04:08, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Note

Regarding this,[23] "What did I do?", it occurs to me that if you keep cutting the size of WP:ANI in half, you'll never finish. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:40, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Well, it went from 441,000 to 225,000, or something like that. That's still not something you see every day. :) And, yes, Zeno... The Warrior Paradoxist. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:49, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Oh, I see. You moved half of it offline, and boxed up everything else. So for a few hot seconds, anyway, it became the shortest ANI on record. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:19, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Nyttend. You have new messages at Rrburke's talk page.
Message added 15:45, 5 September 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-- Rrburke (talk) 15:45, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Nyttend. Now you can add socking: [24]. -- Rrburke (talk) 15:52, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Nyttend. You have new messages at Rrburke's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Editor

The editor I speak of was warned 2 times (at different times) for plagiarizing synopsis of telenovelas and pasting them here, without giving the original author credit. I personally feel that the warnings are not enough, as (s)he's not learning from his mistakes. It wouldn't be a problem if (s)he wrote an original synopsis instead of taking an existing one and translating it in English. Can I present evidence before I proceed? Platinum Star (talk) 21:16, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Sure, I can wait until tomorrow. According to the talk page, it's not the first time that the editor posts copyvio material here (2 of them date back from 2011). Plus, I didn't know that copyvios were that serious, so I did nothing about it at that time. My other concern is the amount of unsourced content that (s)he adds here, claiming at times that they're from facebook, twitter, or just "fact" without any valid source.

Nace un Idolo, Reina Madre, La Patrona, El Señor de los Cielos, and El Rostro de la Venganza. Everything listed above were copied word-for-word from here.

Quererte Así. Taken from here. Platinum Star (talk) 22:48, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Much appreciated, thanks. Platinum Star (talk) 02:12, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Nyttend. You have new messages at Rrburke's talk page.
Message added 21:58, 5 September 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-- Rrburke (talk) 21:58, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Duffy Site

On 6 September 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Duffy Site, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that pottery from the Duffy Archaeological Site in Illinois is distinctive for its lack of decorative elements? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Duffy Site. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:02, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Spanish Fort Site (Holly Bluff, Mississippi)

Hello! Your submission of Spanish Fort Site (Holly Bluff, Mississippi) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Secretlondon (talk) 21:14, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Suggestions for who to contact for Lidice Memorial

I photographed the Lidice Memorial, a sculpture in Phillips, Wisconsin [25]. It is listed on the National Register of Historic Places listings in Price County, Wisconsin. Of course images of sculptures aren't able to be uploaded to Commons without the permission of the architect except if old. This one was created in 1944 so PD-US (pre 1923) isn't applicable. Any thoughts on who I could contact about releasing the rights? I'm watching your talk page. Royal broil 04:19, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Is it difficult for you to get back to the site? If not, return and check for a copyright notice in a prominent spot; it's quite possible that the sculptor will have omitted it, and without a prominent copyright notice, you'll be able to use a {{PD-US-no notice}}. You could also check for {{PD-US-not renewed}}, which for a work by a foreign sculptor is probably going to be applicable. Aside from that, I don't have any suggestions. Nyttend (talk) 10:54, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestions! It's very far away - many hours. So far that I haven't been in that area for about 10 years. How can you research if it's copyright wasn't reviewed? Royal broil 14:04, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

There are renewal databases, but I don't remember which ones are better and more comprehensive. Perhaps you should ask at WP:MCQ? Nyttend (talk) 13:59, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Ellerbusch Site

On 8 September 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ellerbusch Site, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Ellerbusch Archaeological Site in the U.S. state of Indiana was picked for extensive excavation partly because it was so small? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ellerbusch Site. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Yngvadottir (talk) 16:02, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Spanish Fort Site (Holly Bluff, Mississippi)

On 10 September 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Spanish Fort Site (Holly Bluff, Mississippi), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Mississippi's Spanish Fort is neither Spanish nor a fort? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Spanish Fort Site (Holly Bluff, Mississippi). You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 00:03, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Please explain

G'day, Nyttend, thanks for taking an interest. So that I understand, can you please explain your reasoning for not deleting Talk:Z Special Unit/Archives/2012/February‎, Talk:Z Special Unit//Archive 1‎ (and the others that I requested)? To me they seem like pretty straight forward house keeping deletions, particularly the one that is a typo. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 11:38, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

As I said in the rationale for the // archive page, R3 doesn't apply to redirects that are created by pagemoves, and the existence of the monthly pages as redirects isn't hurting anything. Nyttend (talk) 11:40, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Fair enough, but I really don't see the point of keeping them as they serve no purpose other than to take up server space. But anyway, thanks for your time. AustralianRupert (talk) 11:48, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

thanks again

i'll go check the user talk page sites right now but your explanation was clear. this takes a bit of getting used to and i appreciate you taking the time to lend a hand 70.57.74.41 (talk) 18:01, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Tenedos

You might want to check a few common modern English-language maps and reconsider. You may have been misinformed. Chrisrus (talk) 16:23, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Burlington Township Falcons

Hey I was just wondering: why exactly did you deny my speedy delete on first image I uploaded and delete the larger file with better quality? You know they are actually the same file, I just edited the other one to be smaller and renamed it. So what's the deal yo? Banan14kab (talk) 05:13, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Ok I didn't know that. So the lower resolution is just in favor because of the pixillation and all that? Banan14kab (talk) 05:20, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Note to self

Demographic vandalism at Marion, Illinois. Nyttend backup (talk) 13:00, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

re: Photo request

I think I can do it. Perhaps coming Tuesday, I'll let you know when it's on Commons. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 22:40, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Ancillary copyright and Google

I haven't looked back at this since my initial editing of the article, but I remember that Google ceasing operations in Germany was one option they'd considered, so they must have operations in Germany. Wnt (talk) 16:13, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Kappa V Archaeological Site

On 16 September 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Kappa V Archaeological Site, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that more than half of the Kappa V Archaeological Site (flooding pictured) has been destroyed by wave wash erosion? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Kappa V Archaeological Site. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Yngvadottir (talk) 00:02, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Broadbent Baronets

Hello, so this and all others like, stay?? I wasn't sure. There are a lot of them, thought I would remove the clutter, if possible. Regards Crusoe8181 (talk) 04:31, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

I came in on the tail end of your exchange, because of an edit by Crusoe8181 to an article over a different baronet, but I added a comment to User talk:Crusoe8181 over needlessly changing redirects after a page move based on WP:NOTBROKEN. -- PBS (talk) 09:35, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

AFC

Hi, can you approve my article?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Constitution_of_Somalia

Thanks 26oo (talk) 12:47, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

"Lost" site info You mentioned on a talk page.

Here is a hint on speeding up Your search for which site goes with which URL: type in the site name and paste in as many URLs as Your search engine will allow. That should give You quick results. Kdammers (talk) 07:10, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Re-adding United States to articles

Whew! I was not looking forward to cleaning up that mess. Thanks for doing the grunt work. Bms4880 (talk) 13:14, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

I agree with the effort may I help? The entire state of Mississippi needs an overhaul as does WVCoal town guy (talk) 23:48, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Nyttend. You have new messages at I Jethrobot's talk page.
Message added 04:41, 21 September 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 04:41, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

PhpFox

Hey, I was wondering if you only deleted the article due to the AfD or you deleted it as you thought it did not address the problems raised in it. John F. Lewis (talk) 13:27, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

reply. John F. Lewis (talk) 13:37, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Guideline

Any progress on this? I'm thinking it ought to be upped in officialness myself now. Sven Manguard Wha? 04:25, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

It appears that I'd completely forgotten about it. Cambalachero's comment swayed me against pursuing my original course, and I guess that I'd never gotten around to an alternate. I'm soon to leave for church, but I'll see what I can do later today. Nyttend (talk) 12:47, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Proposal started; basically, I'm proposing that we remove the "when to move" section from the help page to the guideline page, which would resolve both the issue of having the list at the wrong page and the issue of making it a guideline. You can find the proposal at Wikipedia talk:File mover; I would have put it at Wikipedia talk:File names, but there's an unrelated RFC already running there, and I didn't want to see two RFCs at the same page at the same time, so I simply left a note pointing to the RFC at WT:IFN. Nyttend (talk) 02:24, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Cleveland Memory images

Thanks much for the tip. --Batard0 (talk) 03:35, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Coal town/ versus coal towns Cat

Hey Nyttend, I created the cat and I am ok either way to be honest. I just want to be certain the pages are recatted correctly. IF I can in any way provide feedback, let me knowCoal town guy (talk) 23:36, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

MUCH appreciate the reply. I will also follow your direction on US in place namesCoal town guy (talk) 00:56, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

GROOVY, the towns are being moved as I type!!Coal town guy (talk) 18:27, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Beverly Hills, California

This is an invitation to comment on the discusion at Talk:Beverly_Hills,_California#Requested_move to rename "Beverly Hills, California" to "Beverly Hills". I thought naming consistancy across all US City articles was important. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 07:27, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Nyttend, you closed the above discussion. Eight minutes later, one of the involved discussants (not an administrator) reversed your closure, saying "this is clearly premature". Just FYI. --MelanieN (talk) 14:51, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Nyttend is hardly an "uninvolved" administrator on the USPLACE issue. His bias is well documented. For example:

The vast majority of reliable English-language sources referring to American communities are American, and the vast majority of American sources referring to these communities use the state names. The current rule is simple and unambiguous, but getting rid of it will open up virtually all communities to disputes over their names. Nyttend (talk) 04:38, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Nyttend should not be closing USPLACE related discussions at all, much less closing them while discussion is still very active and still well under 7 days. --Born2cycle (talk) 15:27, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Discussions about a guideline's content do not make me involved with regard to that guideline's implementation; I am only involved because I offered an opinion on the talk page just now. Your insistence on rejecting projectwide consensus with a pointy RM is quite troubling. Nyttend (talk) 23:11, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

DYK queue

You did impressively well on your first update of the DYK queue. (One of many Wikipedia processes that is not documented as well as it might be.)

The one thing that looks odd to me is that you signed the update with Casliber's name, rather than your own. For whatever reason, the administrator who moves the hooks to the queue normally uses three tildes in the DYKbotdo template to sign their name to the queue (i.e., {{DYKbotdo|~~~}}).

Also, it's desirable to go to Template:Did you know/Queue/NextPrep to update the number of the next prep area. Looks like BlueMoonset took care of that. --Orlady (talk) 02:54, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Need a Admin Close

Would you mind closing this thread. There really is "no consensus" for either side, no real side coming out the "winner" of the !vote and with the last edit back in August and it being brought back up today (September 25) and the entire thread itself has been going on since July 28, it's time for it to be closed. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 03:59, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

First off, thanks for the close on that. Second, give a look-see to this ANI thread as it has the most-used templates for archiving a discussion. I put those on the WP:TVS thread and removed the "hat" and "hab" templates (made it look weird). You can update it as you wish. Again thanks...Neutralhomer • Talk • 04:25, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Non-free license templates

Thanks for the response, In updating the one you looked at, It should provide hints on how to update the others :)

I can't update all of them because they are protected.

The updating was requested was because of - Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2012_September_16#Template:Has-NFUR

The sooner the update is done, the sooner the template can be orphaned and removed :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:08, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Penninghame Parish, Wigtownshire

Hi Nyttend, I notice you decliend the request to speedy delete Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Penninghame Parish, Wigtownshire. The only other edits, from what I can see, are routine AfC activities by reviewers. Surely we can safely presume that the draft article is written entirely by Scotire (I relise an IP has contributed, but that will almost certainly be the same person). There seems to be no purpose in restoring the page if the author has started a duplicate under a different name. Sionk (talk) 00:09, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Re: Legobot and redirect deletion

Thanks for fixing the automatic reason fill in. =) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 05:14, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flat Bastion Road

Nyttend, this is an extremely frustrating AfD. People are repeating the same keep arguments over and over again, but they are based on errors which have been pointed out days ago, both in the AfD and on the article talk page. There have been dozens of edits to the article since, and many keeps in the AfD, without anyone bothering to indicate why they still believe the article and why they believe my analysis wrong. The road is never mentioned in the centuries-old sources, the first mention is that a school is located there around 1830. When you remove all sources which are not about the road from the article, you are left with a much less impressive and much more run-of-the-mill road. I wouldn't so much mind if people then still argued that what was left is sufficient to establish notability, that is an opinion where people may happily disagree, but to see editors like you come along and vote based on a completely misleading article is frustrating.

As far as I know, you are a neutral party here, not closely associated or heavily opposed to the GibraltarpediA project (which should be irrelevant to this AfD, but sadly isn't). Could you do me a favour, and check the talk page of the article and the comment I made in the AfD, and judge whether my comments have any merit? If I am wrong in my conclusions, just tell me, and I will have learned something. But as it stands, the AfD gives the impression of a bunch of knee-jerk keep opinions based on a largely incorrect article, which state seems to be willfully kept by a number of people. Fram (talk) 07:12, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Syrian Air Flight 501

1-The banned user is Ryan kirkpatrick[26]. He created the article, no question about it. This is defintely a case of WP:GIANTDUCK His notorious spelling mistakes are all over it. 2- I'm going to AFD it. The article says its a mid-air but the problem is this. Rebels claim to have shot down the helicopter[27]. What type of crash is disputed, and even if it hit the plane does it meet notability requirements?...William 11:04, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Feel free to AFD it, but it's simply wrong to delete a page under G5 (or whatever the number is) when the creator has never been blocked. Nyttend (talk) 11:52, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

You don't understand WP:G5. "Pages created by banned or blocked users in violation of their ban or block, and which have no substantial edits by others." It doesn't matter that Melborn the editor who created the article hasn't been blocked yet. There is clear evidence he is Ryan kirkpatrick and Ryan has been banned from WP and all his sockpuppets are blocked the moment they are identified as one. A administrator, The Bushranger most usually, would have CSD the article as a Giant Duck, then started the Sockpuppet investigation afterwards to confirm this was another one of Ryan's socks. With sockpuppets an administrator doesn't have to confirm before deleting in obvious cases. Just look at this one case[28]. I have already noted this talk we're having on The Bushranger's talk page[29] so he can explain G5 better to you. Note I called you well intentioned and I meant it.

You could put the G5 tag back on it if you want and let an administrator decide the matter. That's up to you. Cheers!...William 12:21, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

You are aware, aren't you, that I'm an administrator? I understand the criteria quite well. The point is that puppetry has not yet been proven, so it would be inappropriate for me to delete it based solely on your allegations. Nyttend (talk) 16:40, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Sounds like a duck quacking into a megaphone to me. No question about it. Article creator blocked, and article re-tagged for G5 as a creation in violation of the ban. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 21:52, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

And I just deleted it. --Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 00:54, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Hobart Welded Steel House Co. articles and other Ohio NRHP articles

You are probably aware that I have been systematically creating articles about NRHP architects, builders and engineers, working from a list of ones who are associated with 5 or more NRHP-listed places. I came to the Hobart Welded Steel House Co. in that process.

As you do know, I recently started and developed the Hobart Welded Steel House Co. article, which includes a List of Hobart Welded Steel House Co. houses. It covers a concentration, the only concentration, of steel houses designed/built by that firm. There are 8 separate NRHP listings involving most of these houses. Consistent with the views of many editors about other MPS situations, I chose to deem it suitable to cover all 8 of the NRHP items in one combo article, the Hobart Welded Steel House Co. article. Accordingly I developed coverage about each of the NRHP-listed ones and set up redirects from the NRHP listing names.

I note that you have deleted seven of the redirects, as if to contest the coverage of the NRHP places in one combo article. If you wish to disagree and to split out separate articles, there would be obvious forums to discuss that, such as the Talk page of the combo article and the wt:NRHP forum. Your deletion entry for one (and i imagine others are similar) is: 05:37, 27 September 2012 Nyttend (talk | contribs) deleted page William Hobart Vacation House (R3: Recently created, implausible redirect) This seems inappropriate; it is a very conscious, reasonable redirect leading to coverage about the house and it is not "implausible" at all.

Would you please revert your deletions of the seven redirects:

It seems that you did not delete one similar redirect that i had created:

E. A. Hobart House

while the National Register of Historic Places listings in Miami County, Ohio list-article had included, instead, the variation

E.A. Hobart House which I just now created as a redirect.

Update: Those two were bluelinks. Nyttend, I see you now further deleted those two. I have obviously informed you that I consider these not to meet R3 or any other deletion criteria. In context, your deletion of them with R3 argument as "implausible redirects" seems unhelpful substitute for real discussion. Copied from my watchlist:

(Deletion log); 17:40 . . Nyttend (talk | contribs) deleted page E.A. Hobart House ‎(R3: Recently created, implausible redirect)

(Deletion log); 17:40 . . Nyttend (talk | contribs) deleted page E. A. Hobart House ‎(R3: Recently created, implausible redirect)

These can now be discussed with the others, anyhow. --do ncr am 17:51, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

I ask this as a courtesy. We can keep this issue separate, but I note you have contested against me in a way seeming peremptorially dismissive on other matters. I think you owe me the courtesy of a substantial reply (I'll watch here). And in general I think you owe me and other NRHP editors the courtesy of advance discussion on issues likely to be contested, rather than your implementing administrative actions that are likely going to be disputed, with avoidance of discussion. --do ncr am 05:52, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

I further notice you have deleted a number of other Ohio NRHP pages that I believe I created: (Deletion log); 05:43 . . Nyttend (talk | contribs) deleted page Talk:Geeting Covered Bridge ‎(G8: Talk page of a deleted page) (Deletion log); 05:43 . . Nyttend (talk | contribs) deleted page Talk:Christman Covered Bridge ‎(G8: Talk page of a deleted page) (Deletion log); 05:43 . . Nyttend (talk | contribs) deleted page Warnke Covered Bridge ‎(A3: Article that has no meaningful, substantive content) (Deletion log); 05:43 . . Nyttend (talk | contribs) deleted page Geeting Covered Bridge ‎(A3: Article that has no meaningful, substantive content) (Deletion log); 05:43 . . Nyttend (talk | contribs) deleted page Christman Covered Bridge ‎(A3: Article that has no meaningful, substantive content) (Deletion log); 05:40 . . Nyttend (talk | contribs) deleted page Talk:Old Union School (Chesterville, Ohio) ‎(G8: Talk page of a deleted page) (Deletion log); 05:40 . . Nyttend (talk | contribs) deleted page Old Union School (Chesterville, Ohio) ‎(A3: Article that has no meaningful, substantive

What is going on? --do ncr am 06:18, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

You replied at my talk page. With respect to:

I disagree completely with your assessment that I have created "pages that do not fit our inclusion standards." I disagree completely with your view: "As you saw from the deletion log, these pages have nothing substantive; pages created simply to support another page without information that belongs to them have no substantive content." They are obviously notable wikipedia topics as they are NRHP-listed places. The three bridge ones were started by me in connection with Everett S. Sherman article about a bridge-builder; they can and should be linked from local town articles and otherwise developed. There is no wikipedia policy that suggests these should not be articles.

You mentioned you could do history restorations later today or soon. There is no rush; i am busy too, so take your time. The current sandbox User:Doncram/sandbox extra that you put into my userspace, perhaps in a rushed way, has a confused merged history of multiple articles. I note it does reflect edits by at least one other editor than myself, by the way. Please do re-establish separate articles with their unique individual histories, for each separate article. The best location for these restorations, I believe, is at their mainspace names. But if it will make you happy, though I don't believe you are correct at all in any respect in your criticisms, I would be willing to try* to develop these 3 articles in sandbox spaces a little bit further before moving them back to mainspace. *(I.e. check this google book and check for other online sources. However if the online google book does not serve up the required pages in preview mode, as i note it is randomly selective in what it provides, and if I cannot find other sources, I would move them back to mainspace with minimal further development. That's reasonable, and still an accomodation to you, i think.)

About the 7 or 8 article topics related to Hobart Welded Steel House Co., you comment " Meanwhile, redirects to the company article for other houses are inappropriate, because the company is not the house in question." I think that misses my point that the Hobart Welded Steel House Co. article is a combo both about the firm and it is a list-article about the 22 works of that firm. I don't think it is necessary to split the article. I also don't think it is necessary to have 8 or 22 or any other number of separate articles about the individual works of the firm; they can all be handled in the firm/list article. I did just now add a separate section within the article to clarify which is the list of works. I don't think that any of your deletions of redirects was justified as speedy deletions by any policy; the redirects were obviously not accidental or implausible, as should be abundantly clear by now. I would concede the article could be organized differently, if you chose to discuss it at its Talk page or elsewhere. If it included a separate subsection for each NRHP listing, rather than just a separate row in the table, would that satisfy you (and would you then restore all the redirects so that they could be further refined to point to the individual subsections)? --do ncr am 14:43, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

You are also aware of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/St. Boniface Cemetery, Wrought-Iron Cross Site, in which some editors argued against there being separate articles for multiple NRHP-listed places covered in one NRHP MPS document, and preferred to have one combo article created. I had chosen to combine some local sets of NRHP places into articles and to start separate articles for all isolated ones. You !voted to delete all of the articles (so perhaps in favor of having a combo article, or maybe you were against even there being a combo article?) But anyhow, it has to be acceptable to have either a combo article or individual separate ones. Here I have chosen editorially to create one combo article, in part because the individual NRHP-listed places are all concentrated geographically rather than scattered across a state. This is the opposite situation to that of the Wrought-Iron Cross sites. --do ncr am 15:41, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Update about one. Thanks for restoring the histories. I added whatever i could find about Old Union School (Chesterville, Ohio), but was limited by what google preview would allow me to see, and restored that one to mainspace. I bet you have the hard-copy book and could edit that article further if you cared to. Will add a bit more to others, too. --do ncr am 00:44, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Goldschmidt House

It happens I just went to create article Goldschmidt House, linked from Paul Williams (architect) article which I was just editing, and I see that a previous page at that name was deleted by you in 2011, with message:

12:41, 26 April 2011 Nyttend (talk | contribs) deleted page Goldschmidt House (A3: Article has no meaningful, substantive content)

Could you please provide a copy of that article to my userspace. I have no idea if I ever edited that or not, but I am intending to create an article and would prefer to build upon what was originally there, if there is anything to use. --do ncr am 18:36, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Okay, got your reply that it had no edits by me and had no content, thanks. I started the article from scratch just now. Done on this point, thanks. --do ncr am 22:58, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

something strange

Something strange is going on with the edits of user:Bkonrad and his changes to the names of various township articles. Clearly the naming convention is what you did (including the county) (as shown by all other such articles) and not what user:Bkonrad is doing. Hmains (talk) 05:55, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Where is this supposed convention? The "evidence" you point to shows that Nyttend recently moved a lot of articles without any discussion to new names to conform with this supposed convention. There have been RM discussions in the past to move many of these articles to the shorter names. Before moving them back to some undocumented convention, please discuss the moves. older ≠ wiser 12:50, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

And Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pennsylvania#Townships shows there might have been WP:LOCALCONSENSUS for a time, but it clearly does not currently show consensus support for your proposal in 2009 to move the articles to your preferred name. And Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pennsylvania#Townships in Pennsylvania and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pennsylvania#Township article titles and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pennsylvania#Naming conventions for Townships in Pennsylvania also suggest there is not support for the supposed convention. older ≠ wiser 12:59, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Oops!

Oh, sorry, what I meant was: Oops! I Did It Again - The Best of Britney Spears -> Oops! I Did It Again: The Best of Britney Spears. This is per proper naming guidelines that are used on Wikipedia. Zac 02:34, 28 September 2012 (UTC)