User talk:Armbrust/Archive 9

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Contents

Closing RfA's

 Question: Can you please tell me what you do to close the RfA's. Do you have to manually put the closing box around it or is there a template for that. I would assume it's a template and I can't seem to find out which one it is. Could you help me?—cyberpower (Talk to Me)(Contributions) 17:42, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You can find the instructions and templates for closing RFA's at Wikipedia:Bureaucrats#Promotions and RfX closures. (Note, however that non-bureaucrats should only close clearly unsuccessful requests.) Regards, Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talk aboutabout my edits? 17:49, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you.—cyberpower (Talk to Me)(Contributions) 19:34, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 02 January 2012

Re:File:PT19 EL-2000-00262.jpg

Re:File:PT19 EL-2000-00262.jpg

how you found this image? nix? Bulwersator (talk) 15:03, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
PS Is it possible to reduce size of your editnotice? Bulwersator (talk) 15:03, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I did a Google search with "EL-2000-00262", and on this page I have found the link to the NASA picture. About the editnotice, don't know, but will try. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talk aboutabout my edits? 15:07, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Have reduced the editnotice a little. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talk aboutabout my edits? 15:41, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Double thanks Bulwersator (talk) 15:43, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kolkata S. Krishnamoorthy AfD

I was really confused there for a second until I realized we were both trying to close the same AfD at more or less the same time. It's a good thing we both had the same conclusion on the outcome.--Kubigula (talk) 17:12, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. I didn't notice you already closed it, until I reloaded the page. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talk aboutabout my edits? 17:13, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

inre Jelenin svet AfD

I love a challenge. I found enough significant coverage of Jelena's World in reliable sources Politika, Hürriyet and others,[1] to improve the article. Of course, what I immediately had to address was that the plot in the nominated version was a copyvio of the synopsis on the production website. There was easily enough to fix it on up. I gladly invite you to revisit Jelenin svet to see what was you first nominated[2] has become significantly better.[3] Cheers. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 01:13, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Responded at the AFD nomination page. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 09:21, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
When looking at the original, I could understand the nomination... specially as coverage under its Serbian title was so limited. Thanks for looking back in. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 20:19, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

AfD

Hi. When redirecting schools as you did at [4], please remember to include the {{R from school}} template. It populates an important category that is used for statistical purposes. Thanks. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:36, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for doing that for me. Totally forgot about it. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 09:22, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I really need your help

Hi Armbrust, I'm sure your a very nice guy and you helped me with nomination of transfer to the Wikimedia commons of the image File:Accra Skyline - Wide view.jpg which stopped it from being deleted, thank you so much for that because I don't know how to licence my uploaded images that well.

I would be really really grateful if you can help me licence the following five images that you have been nominated for deletion because their really important images that would be really important to their Wikipedia articles:

I would be really grateful Armbrust if you can help with the licencing of those five images to stop them from being deleted, thank you so much Armbrust. Regards - MarkMysoe (talk) 14:32, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I can't help you. These files claim non-free use but clearly fail non-free content criterias #1 (replace-ability) and #8 (contextual signigicant). After a little search it looks like, that the first image is copyrighted by BP, the second is copyrighted by Tullow Oil, the third is copyrighted to Ghana Oil, the fourth is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution, Noncommercial, No Derivative 3.0 (but Wikipedia can't accept noncommercial or no derivative works) and the fifth is copyrighted to Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the People's Republic of China. You could of course try to seek permission from the copyright holders (see Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries), but without permission they can't be used on Wikipedia. Regards, Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 14:55, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reverts on Steve Davis

Hey Armbrust, please attempt to engage the anon IP on the talk page rather than continually reverting. I don't want to call WP:3RR on anyone, so I'd appreciate it if you could discuss things. I'll revert the Davis page and protect it if I have to. What do you think? The Rambling Man (talk) 17:11, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 17:11, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Cool. Try to be patient with the IP, perhaps he/she is unaware of our policies/guidelines etc... The Rambling Man (talk) 17:17, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is, that s/he thinks s/he knows them. The IP even accused me of owning the article, because I removed original research and irrelevant information. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 17:22, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine, we just have to have an open discussion, although the IP has just been blocked... not helpful! The Rambling Man (talk) 17:23, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
We will see, because the first unregistered user, who inserted this material, had an other IP. (Possibly the same user.) Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 17:27, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Almost certainly. As you say, we'll see. Thanks for your understanding. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:28, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just a head's up... I earlier submitted a WP:3RR report on the IP in question regarding this page. Given that you had a fair number of reverts in there too, you may want to reply on that thread. --Tgeairn (talk) 17:37, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the information. I will have an eye on it. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 17:41, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oops!

Hi Armbrust. Thanks for doing all the closures. It looks as if I've pasted a lot of my reminders here. I won't place any more, but please remember the 'R' template - it will save me a lot of work;) Cheers, --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:04, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relistings

This relates to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Brodkorb and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nick D'Agostino. Why is it the fact that these articles are BLPs a reason to relist them a second time? Nobody has recommended keeping either article after two weeks. I don't see how extending the discussion again facilitates the principle that "Material about living persons added to any Wikipedia page must be written with the greatest care and attention to verifiability, neutrality, and avoiding original research." --Metropolitan90 (talk) 01:55, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have relisted them to have a more clear consensus on the deletion of these BLPs. If you disagree, than you can go ahead and delete the articles. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 08:16, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your decline of file upload

Hi Armbrust, as you invite to talk about your edits: I would like to know why you declined my request for a file upload already on 2 January. Your comment on 29 December read: "Comment: Place request on hold until draft isn't moved to article space. If this doesn't happen within seven days, than this request will be declined. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talk aboutabout my edits? 14:21, 29 December 2011 (UTC)." Today is the end of that 7-day-period. I had waited for comments from two friends on my very first article - just to find that you already moved on. If it is still possible to reconsider my request, please note that I just requested AfC submission of my article. Thanks and regards Uwe. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Utrenkner (talk • contribs) 14:44, 5 January 2012‎

Sorry, that was an error on my part. It looks like I have declined it after the date of the request (14:03, 26 December 2011 (UTC)). I have now restored your request. Again, sorry for any inconvenience. Regards, Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 14:53, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
File is now uploaded, you can find it at File:IEA Solar Heating and Cooling Programme logo.jpg. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 07:53, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much. I really appreciate your help!!! Uwe. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Utrenkner (talk • contribs) 09:32, 6 January 2012

Katharine Hepburn

Based on your comments, I have split this into template:Katharine Hepburn and template:Katharine Hepburn filmography. If there is policy against actor filmography templates, per MOS:FILM, then I suppose the second one should be deleted? Frietjes (talk) 22:43, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As MOS:FILM#Navigation says "WikiProject consensus is against including actor templates since not all actors have substantial appearances in all their films and since multiple actors in a film would overpopulate the bottom of a film article with actor templates regardless of role prominence." From the consensus summary of filmography navbox templates it looks like will happen sooner or later. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 22:54, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, and have asked the admin for clarification here. thank you. Frietjes (talk) 23:21, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

JamVM NAC

Regarding this NAC: given the obvious canvassing on this AfD, I don't really think an NAC was appropriate. "Only one person advocated deletion" is not a valid closure either. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 15:59, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Undone NAC, feel free to close it if you want. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 16:02, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It wouldn't be appropriate for me to close because I'm the one who added the original PROD tag; however, thanks for reopening to allow for a full close. Cheers! Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 17:15, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kris Herzog

The Kris Herzog page is being vandalized, Please Lock Down or Restrict Edits to Senior Wikipedia Editors lie yourself. The paparazzi hate Kris Herzog, as he is a celebrity bodyguard and they have already sent me threatening emails saying they would vandalize the new Kris Herzog page. I just removed vandalism on the Kris Herzog page, there will be much more, unless you lock it down and/or restrict edits to senior Wikipedia members like yourself. His company, The Bodyguard Group, is a free job placement service, free of charge for any veteran, not a security company, they seem to attack him with that. I do not know how to do this myself, please help me. Thanks, Amanda, Student, New York University (— Preceding unsigned comment added by Aad351 (talk • contribs) 19:56, 6 January 2012‎

Warned user and will a look at the article. If they continue than I will report him at WP:AIV. If other editors continue the same vandalism, than I will request protection at WP:RFPP. (Note only admins can lock pages, but I'm not one of them.) Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 20:06, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank You Very Much :-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aad351 (talk • contribs) 20:34, 6 January 2012

Moving Wait list to Wait list (college admissions)

As per discussion, I'm trying to move the article to a more specific name, that is, "Wait list (college admissions)", so the old article "Wait list" is no longer needed.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 13:38, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You just done a copy-and-paste move, which violated policy. For how to move articles see Help:Move. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 13:49, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If you'd like me to go ahead and try again to move the article, using the right procedure, let me know. I still think the title should be "Wait list (college admissions)" since it really describes what the article is about.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 14:32, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have no opinion of the title of the article, but the way you done it wasn't right. You can do the move the right way after Wait list (college admissions) was deleted. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 14:35, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Uhm

While I'd have closed this request just like you did and, in general, non-admin comments are always welcome and often very useful, requests on WP:PERM should only be actioned by an admin. Cheers. Salvio Let's talk about it! 00:00, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Will remember next time. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 00:02, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps cent was not a good idea

That malformed RfC is headed into SNOW land. Allegedly a second one is coming. The first one will distract/confuse/irritate those who see it abandoned in favor of a second one (and soon at that). –OneLeafKnowsAutumn (talk) 10:30, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you clicked on the link, than you would seen, that not I added it to CENT. Nothing else to say. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 10:32, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for the mixup! Cheers –OneLeafKnowsAutumn (talk) 10:44, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, the edit summary was maybe a little confusing. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 10:46, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

rfpp noticeboard

Hi. The rfpp noticeboard seems a bit backlogged occasionally. I saw you make this edit semi auto clearking - diff is that a mono book addition that I can add and use? Youreallycan (talk) 14:53, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Add importScript('User:Rami_R/rfppClerk.js'); to your js page. It work if you edit the page, it adds "RFPP clerk" to the Toolbox. Regards, Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 14:57, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Armbrust - Youreallycan (talk) 15:05, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again - it doesn't seem to be working and adding it seems to remove my Qui watches you buttons, online, busy etc.. any ideas? Youreallycan (talk) 14:31, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Have you tried to bypass your cache. I don't use Qui, maybe you could remove it. I have no other idea. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 14:34, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I got it now - it's asking , no signature? Youreallycan (talk) 14:42, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No signature is needed, because you make no comments. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 14:49, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ah - got it all now - many thanks for your patience - regards - Youreallycan (talk) 14:51, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Saint Rose School

G'day Armbrust. When you closed and redirected the AfD regarding Saint Rose School, you didn't move through any information on the school to the locality. The result is that someone who could be searching for Saint Rose School gets redirected to an article that, apparently, has nothing to do with what they searched for (i.e., WP:SURPRISE!).

I've added the schools that I can see from Google Maps, but I have no local knowledge, do not know how enrolment catchment works in the US, so if you could please check my work at Girard, Ohio, I'd appreciate it. ˜danjel [ talk | contribs ] 15:56, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but absolutely don't know anything about this. I think the talk page of WikiProject Schools would be the best place to ask this question. Regards, Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 16:01, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, I'm a member of that project. There's been an enormous blitz on AfD'ing school articles the last couple of weeks by a couple of users who seem to be intent on creating chaos.
You closed 3 of those AfD's (that I've found so far) that really should have been redirected to an education section of the target article (per precedent, WP:OUTCOMES#Schools). I'm not really interested in whether or not the article is kept, but it is important to ensure that people aren't surprised by random search results, so I'm trying to sort through the mess that this has caused.
I'm just letting you know so that, in future, if you choose to close a school related AfD, then please create an education section to which the redirect should refer. More information, I suppose at WT:WPSCH#Secondary Concern: Redirects/Merges won't be fulfilled properly
I've also caught New Windsor, New York and Roosevelt, Utah as closed and redirected by you. Working on them now. Cheers ˜danjel [ talk | contribs ] 16:09, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I closed the following school AfD's a redirect recently:
  1. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/St. Joseph's School (New Windsor, New York)
  2. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/St. Christine School
  3. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/North Davis Preparatory Academy
  4. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Saint Rose School
  5. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hillcrest School (Moncton)
  6. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/King City Public School
  7. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/St. Francis Upper Primary School
  8. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jiangdu Middle School
  9. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harivallabh Kalidas Primary School
  10. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harley Avenue Primary School
  11. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/St. Francis of Assisi's English Primary School
  12. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eagle View Elementary K-8
Regards, Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 16:19, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers. A list is useful... I'll fix them when I wake up tomorrow (or you can do it now if you're keen? :) All it needs is an Education section saying "In such and such there are a few schools including ....") ˜danjel [ talk | contribs ] 16:23, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think, I let you do this. Good night. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 16:26, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Casino Rama Skins Game

Hi, just a friendly note to remember the carryovers when adding the amounts. When no one wins money in an end, it is carried over to the next end. See Skins Game#Curling. -- Earl Andrew - talk 16:51, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the link. I didn't know about the carry overs. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 17:00, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Chess move

Hello, on my chess game, User:B.wilson/chess, you accidentally initiated an invalid move, because black pieces cannot move backwards. I have undone it, and I'll give you another chance to move. Thanks for playing! --Bryce (talk | contribs) 02:20, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tried again. The annotation is maybe not right, please check the actual move before reverting. By the way the previous move was valid, as I moved the pawn on E7 to F6. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 11:20, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That move was valid and the annotation is precise. The previous move was invalid, as pawns can't move backwards. --Bryce (talk | contribs) 12:09, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

May El-Khalil

Hello, could you please have a look on this article and tell whats still wrong with it. The lady got several awards, and there are five sources. --Nicola54 (talk) 13:03, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Contested the proposed deletion for you, but I advise to add more third party reliable sources to the article. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 13:19, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thank you. --Nicola54 (talk) 13:21, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I added one more source, I hope its sufficient now. --Nicola54 (talk) 14:15, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elana Amsterdam

While I concede the keeps clearly outnumbered the deletes, I don't believe this fit the criteria for a non-admin close, i.e., "absent any contentious debate among participants", especially right after my own remarks questioning the sources. I think you should have left this for an admin and recommend that you undo your close. Msnicki (talk) 16:49, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but the discussion ended in a clear consensus to keep the article. I won't undo the close. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 17:40, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Elana Amsterdam. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Msnicki (talk) 18:08, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

AfD closure

Hi there, Armbrust. I noticed your non-admin closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kim Sa-rang (singer) no consensus. Non-admin closures should only really be done in cases of clear consensus where the closer has the technical ability to perform the outcome (so keep, redirect and most merges). No consensus closures by non-admins should generally be avoided. Can I recommend that you undo your closure of that discussion and allow an admin to deal with it (they might close it as non-consensus or choose to relist it)? Thanks. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 20:27, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's needed there. The discussion was already relisted twice, but no further discussion occurred, (otherwise I wouldn't closed it as no consensus). Also a third relist is highly unlikely, and if someone disagrees, he can speedily renominate the article, because there was no consensus. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 20:37, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I use to make such "no consensus" closes as a non-admin where the close was based on lack of participation per WP:NPASR so IMHO this was an appropriate NAC. However, in the future please add the phrase "with leave to speedy renominate" (or a similar phrase) in such cases. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 15:00, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the advice. Will do next time. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 15:04, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 09 January 2012

2011–12 Biathlon World Cup – World Cup 4

Hi there, I just reverted what you did to 2011–12 Biathlon World Cup – World Cup 4 because merging discussion is ongoing and you may join for further consensus among Wiki community. Cheers! — Rammaumtalkstalk 04:36, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 08:02, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Closing AfD's – Placing AfD link on talk pages

Hello. Just a note, I've noticed that when closing AfD's, you've been placing the ({{Old AfD multi}})

tag at the top of article talk pages. Please note that per guidelines for closing AfD's here Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Administrator instructions, the instructions are to place the tag below Wikiproject headers:

"Click "edit" on the article page and copy the entire {{Old AfD multi}} template that is inside the AfD tag, then paste that entire template onto the article's talk page (normally below the WikiProject tags, if applicable), and then save using an edit summary such as "Adding {{Old AfD multi}}"."

Just a friendly notification. Happy editing! Northamerica1000(talk) 07:41, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well the placement of this tag isn't my choice, as I don't add it manually, but with the help of a script of Mr.Z-man. As many admins use this script, maybe the instruction needs to changed. (And this isn't a guideline, because it isn't marked as such.) Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 07:49, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't aware of the Mr.Z-man/closeAFD tool. Yes, it seems prudent to notify the author of the script about this matter. The rationale is that the script should follow policy. After all, article talk pages are primarily about articles, not the closed debates about them, which is very likely why the policy is for the tag to be placed below Wikiproject headers. I'll await your response. Northamerica1000(talk) 08:15, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well you can contact Mr.Z-man if you want (altough he is inactive since 8 December 2011). By the way, I don't know why do you think it, but the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Administrator instructions is neither a guideline nor a policy and the page doesn't even claim to one of them. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 08:23, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. I placed a notice on the user talk page about this matter here. You're correct that the administrator instructions for closing AfD's aren't a policy or guideline page; it's an instruction page about how to correctly close AfD's, likely based upon consensus. Anyway, it would be nice if you could place the tags per these instructions. If you're not interested in that, then I'll continue to correct these for you when I see them. Happy editing! Northamerica1000(talk) 08:47, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not interested in it. Feel free to correct the placement of the template. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 08:55, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've notified the apparent author of the script about the tag misplacement here. Northamerica1000(talk) 09:03, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Question regarding filemover

Hi Armbrust,

Thanks for renaming that file. What's the deal with filemover permissions; if I were to request them do I stand any chance of actually getting them (unlike eg. checkuser)? Cheers,
--Carbon Rodney 08:39, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The filemover userright is for users, who have experience in the file namespace. You currently have only one edit in these namespace and didn't upload any files. This userright is granted to users "who regularly work with media files and have demonstrated familiarity with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines surrounding renaming this type of media". If you gathered more experience in the file namespace, than you can request this userright at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/File mover. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 09:05, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Armbrust, Thank you for the information. --Carbon Rodney 22:13, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Current sport

What's your objection to the template? It exists for a reason. It's important that readers understand that a such an article is a moving target and may be wrong from moment to moment while the event is ongoing and that they should check news sources if they need very current details. If you object to the template generally, that's probably something to take up at Template talk:Current sport or WP:TFD. If you just feel it's not needed right this very minute, its nice for other editors' convenience to just leave it commented out until needed again, so no one has to go look up the parameters again. :-) — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ Contribs. 11:51, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone home? — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ Contribs. 21:19, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I thinked there is nothing for me to say. The reason for the existence of this template is to warn users, that the article is rapidly changing, and not to indicate, that the event is ongoing. (These events could only change rapidly by the violation of the WP:NOTNEWS policy - live scoring.) For example 27 edits in 5 days isn't rapid enough for this template. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 21:24, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Except we cannot keep editors from updating the article with live scoring (on a match, not frame basis), which they regularly do with ongoing snooker tournament articles. It's more important to warn readers that an article is frequently changing because the event is still ongoing than it it is to try to prevent use of a template because you think editors shouldn't be updating the scores frequently. I'm curious what you think is a good use of this template. What do you think is "often enough"? More than 5 changes per day seems plenty often to me. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ Contribs. 02:46, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A page is rapidly evolving if it has at least 30 edits per day. Live scoring on snooker articles become very rare in the last year, because I try to stop it and it looks like they don't do it any more. In the last year there was only one editor trying to do it (on the 2011 World Snooker Championship) and s/he was even blocked for it. But a hard limit, from which on some one can speak from rapid evolving, should be discussed at the templates talk page for wider discussion. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 09:50, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Good idea. I've raised the issue there. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ Contribs. 21:19, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Avaya ERS-5600 Systems

When you closed this AfD, did you in investigate the reasons for this edit ? I would not blame you if you did not as it took me a bit of time to spot it, but it looks like User:Geek2003 stuck another editors !vote out because they had a semi-retired notice on the talk page. On the face of it looks like a clear keep, but looking closer I now think the discussion appears to be a little manipulated; what do you think ? Mtking (edits) 12:09, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, but I think it doesn't change the consensus of the discussion. Alan Liefting has nominated the article for deletion and thus there was no need for him to write "Delete" at the beginning of the nomination. (As I see s/he only struck this word was out.) The nominators rationale was an argument to avoid and the other delete !vote was adequately refuted by the addition of multiple third party reliable sources.Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 12:23, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I still feel that User:Geek2003's actions on the AfD are suspect, the appearance that he !voted twice by, the appearance of removing the nomination, but will leave it at that for now and perhaps re-nom if the article does not get more coverage, I assume you would have no issue with a re-nom ? Mtking (edits) 22:08, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The "double !vote" isn't an issue, because I considered the his/her first !vote as a comment only. I don't have anything against a re-nomination, but advice against doing it too soon after this AfD. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 22:17, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for Creation Appeal

Articles for Creation urgently needs your help!

Articles for Creation is desperately short of reviewers! We are looking for urgent help, from experienced editors, in reviewing submissions in the pending submissions queue. Currently the are 2574 submissions waiting to be reviewed.

Do you have what it takes?
  1. Are you familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines?
  2. Do you know what Wikipedia is and is not?
  3. Do you have a working knowledge of the Manual of Style, particularly article naming conventions?
  4. Are you autoconfirmed?
  5. Can you review submissions based on their individual merits?

If the answer to these questions is yes, then please read the reviewing instructions and donate a little of your time to helping tackle the backlog.

The main reason, why I don't patrol this category regularly, is that I don't like to read about subject, which don't interest me. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 19:55, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure

Thank you for your clerking at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure. I appreciate your efforts and hope you continue the good work. Best, Cunard (talk) 08:46, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nari Kusakawa

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

Hi, Armbrust, please undo your defective close. Thanks and all the best —S Marshall T/C 16:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the close was in any way defective. If you give me a valid reason for it, than I will reconsider undoing it. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 16:45, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
WP:BLPREMOVE. I nominated the article for deletion because it contained no sources, and now, after the end of the AfD, it still contains no sources. —S Marshall T/C 17:33, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That still doesn't change the fact, that there was a rough consensus for keeping the article, as the article passes WP:AUTHOR#3. The discussion about rewriting and retitling the article can take place at the articles talk page. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 17:54, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Armbrust, just !voting "keep" at the AfD is never going to be sufficient to keep an unsourced BLP. Sources must actually be added to the article, and unsourced statements removed. I also respectfully suggest that your editing of the article to address the concerns I'm raising here, after you'd already closed the AfD as "keep", won't look very good if I'm forced to open a deletion review. Please could you just reverse yourself and relist the debate in the hope of input from editors who aren't active in WikiProject Anime and manga? All the best—S Marshall T/C 18:12, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I stand by the close, but it you think it's not right, than you may ask an administrator to review it per WP:NACD: "Decisions are subject to review and may be reopened by any administrator." Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 18:27, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, please see Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2012 January 16. All the best—S Marshall T/C 19:06, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
And please now see WP:AN/I.—S Marshall T/C 19:53, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
WP:BLP trumps the supposed consensus here. Not sure what you were thinking closing what's not only a barely 2-1 !vote, but also closing an unsourced BLP as "keep". (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 22:58, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

...About Del/Rev

Your comment in the deletion review needs a correction: there was a consensus about WP:AUTHOR, not WP:NACTOR.I thought to fix it myself, but I think it's better you do so. - Cavarrone (talk) 21:08, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oops. Used the wrong shortcut! Thanks for pointing out. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 21:13, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Query

Hi. You've been doing an exemplary job closing AfDs. One today, however, raised a question in my mind. It was Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Engadine Public School. I agree completely with you that, as you noted in your close, "There is a clear consensus, that a separate article for this school isn't warranted". You closed it as a redirect, which I personally was open to. But looking at the !votes, that didn't seem to have consensus support, as best I could tell -- only 1 other !voter supported that result. In contrast, 5 editors called for deletion (only), and I also indicated an openness to deletion. That seemed to me to be the consensus at the AfD. Thoughts? Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 22:39, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe I was a little too bold with this closure. Undone it for now as the other possible result would be delete, which close I can't make. I will keep an eye on it and if it will be deleted, than I will recreate it as a redirect to Engadine,_New_South_Wales#Schools. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 22:49, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for taking another look. As I said, and is clear at the AfD, I personally am not against a redirect. But delete did seem to be the consensus view, and editors such as sysop Bearian clearly based their !votes on our policy at Wikipedia:Verifiability, so it seemed that a redirect might violate both our policy on following consensus and our policy on verifiability, IMHO. Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 23:09, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 16 January 2012

Greetings

Greetings, good sir! I just happened to be looking around Wikipedia:RfA and found the request for MikeLynch. In it, you had asked an additional question and eventually !voted neutral, and a day later changed to support. You have not struck your neutral !vote.

I would have done it myself, but knowing it's not considered appropriate to edit users' comments - even in the case of this sort of error - I opted to give you a heads-up instead. Good day and I hope the impending blackout doesn't darken your spirits. =) CycloneGU (talk) 01:23, 18 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As I see it was correctly intended and struck. The bot doesn't count at least. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 09:18, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, looks like it's updated now. Was it struck before and I missed it? CycloneGU (talk) 03:38, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like you missed it, but it doesn't really matter. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 12:33, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please help me improve my submission

Hi .... I need you help! I am confused about how to improve the Etsko Schuitema submission till its accepted. Kindly let me know what I should add to it to make it more verifiable. Warmly, afia (Afia Mansoor (talk) 09:25, 19 January 2012 (UTC))[reply]

The submission now contains multiple reliable sources, it now needs inline citations. For this see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners with citation templates. It also need wikifyng and the addition of links to other articles. Regards, Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 09:33, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

Thanks. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 17:46, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/History of Tabernacle, New Jersey

Why the relist? No one disagreed with merging, and no one urged deletion at all so this even should have been speedy closed as I had stated. postdlf (talk) 13:25, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, it looks like I misinterpreted your "speedy keep" !vote. Closed as merge. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 13:29, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. postdlf (talk) 13:54, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Classic (snooker) edits

Is the format specified here actually laid out anywhere on the snooker's project's pages, or is this yet another hidden guideline that simply confuses editors acting in good faith to improve articles? At the very least data tables should contain class="wikitable" and a caption is strongly recommended for accessibility reasons. A better solution than enforcing some nonstandard layou would be update the rest of the snooker articles to use tables the same way the rest of the encyclopedia does. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 13:53, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There was a discussion at WT:SNOOKER to change the tables, but no results came out of it. I don't have anything against converting them to Wikitable as long as the table has a center align, and retains the colors and flags. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 13:59, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Would you agree to this format? It uses class="wikitable", the colors and the flags. For me its perfectly acceptable. If you agree to it, than I convert all other tables in the next 24 hours. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 14:30, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've tidied the markup in your sandbox, and if you're happy with that compromise then so am I. Thanks. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 10:08, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 13:18, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/COLOURlovers

You closed this as Keep? That's insane. The best that can be said was no consensus. The "strong keep" doesn't make that editor's vote any more important, especially when the arguments made were patently false. The site DID NOT win any Webby awards, it was merely nominated, and that nomination process is trivially easy. Please consider changing the closure to be a more accurate reflection of the discussion. DreamGuy (talk) 14:56, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

They didn't win the Webby Awards, that's true. I don't know anything about how the nomination process is, but multiple nomination might be enough. Undone close and relisted for further input. Happy editing, Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 15:04, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. DreamGuy (talk) 15:22, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

NACs

Please consider re-opening the AFDs for "Onward Muslim Soldiers" and "The Myth of Islamic Tolerance". 3 deletes against 3 keeps does not constitute consensus to keep, and certainly not a strong enough consensus for a non-admin closure. If there are reasons for discounting the delete votes, ie. if you believe they're not based in policy, it's incumbent on you to explain that in your close. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 15:19, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Close expand. If you have any other query, than leave a message. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 15:32, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You evaluate the sources as reliable and significant, but the fact that they aren't is exactly why delete/redirect voters are voting to delete/redirect. If you have your own opinion on the notability of the subjects, you should be voting, not closing. Taken to WP:AN to request reopening/relisting. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 22:34, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotect W. E. B. Du Bois?

Hi. I noticed to added semi protection to W. E. B. Du Bois. I recently asked that it be UNprotected. I'm not entirely sure if it was protected before or not. It looks like it may have been. Can you unprotect it? Thanks. --Noleander (talk) 18:05, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I'm not an admin and only added the protection template. It looks like Kwamikagami (talk · contribs) forgot to ad it after protection in October 2010. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 18:09, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Frederick M. Lawrence

Please check the history of articles before tagging with {{prod blp}}. This one had references until the edits immediately preceding your tagging. Phil Bridger (talk) 12:02, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake. Will do next time. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 17:03, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

AfD - StopWar Vancouver on Jan 15, 2012

Hi - I see you have been taking care of AfD's on Jan 15 - this one seems to be skipped over (unless i can't see what happened to it). Is it to be deleted? Relisted? Kept??? (shudder....). Thanks. Soosim (talk) 16:59, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I can't help you with this one. It looks there is a consensus to delete the article, and because of this I can't close it. Only admins can close AfD's as delete (because only they can delete), and I'm not one of them. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 17:06, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Got it. Thanks. (Makes sense) Soosim (talk) 17:13, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Closure at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Torimono Dougu

Good work closing AFDs, but do make sure you remove the sorting template. I've done that for you here, so it's not really a problem. But leaving the sort template just means that editors looking at debates in that category will end up wasting their time by checking in on a closed out debate. No worries, just an FYI. Thanks for the help! UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 21:14, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note and removing the template. It looks like the script I use can't handle more than one {{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD}} templates at the same time as seen in this edit. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 21:23, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category request: Category:UK All-formats Number-one Games

Hi there, There would appear to be many pages supporting this category. The charts are generally published monthly, with a different game every month since the early 1980s. There will be games that remain number one for several months, but that still leaves at least 250. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.175.37.100 (talk) 07:33, 24 January 2012

Maybe you're right, but the name of the category seems a little strange. (The name Category:Number-one games in the United Kingdom would be better.) Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 12:15, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, maybe Category:All-format Number-one games in the United Kingdom, to distinguish from Just Spectrum, Gameboy or PS3 games (there is an individual chart for each system, and additionally a combined-format chart). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.175.37.100 (talk) 18:06, 25 January 2012‎
I think Category:Number-one games in the United Kingdom is the best solution, as it doesn't contain any console-related information. The "All-format" wording is a little nonsense. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 18:14, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, what you said is a fairly good solution, but I'd say the format is important. Unlike music, which does not differentiate between CD/vinyl/MP3, with video games there are different charts. Also, without anything to do with formats in the title of the category, it's not clear we're talking about video/console games, as opposed to board games etc. Suggest what you said, or a variation on Category:Number-ones in the UK combined games chart. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.175.37.100 (talk) 20:02, 25 January 2012
I still think Category:Number-one games in the United Kingdom is best solution. As it doesn't contain disambiguation elements both video and board games could be added to it. Of course you can request the creation of the category again, and if you do this, than I will not decline it. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 20:16, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Sweet_Jane_(Band)

Hello, I submitted this article and I have re written it so many times and tried to put as much information references etc up there and I'm starting to feel quite frustrated because there are other bands with far less references and have far less proof of notability. I am just really unsure as to what I am doing wrong to keep it getting rejected, If you could tell me specifically what I need to change that would be so helpful and I would be very grateful! Thank you for your time and I look forward to hearing from you, Lorcan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lorcanmce (talk • contribs) 10:09, 24 January 2012‎

It looks like Reekus records didn't close a hidden comment, which made the hole article hidden, except the references. Made some clean-up to the submission and put it back to the pending submissions for you. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 12:43, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks so much for your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lorcanmce (talk • contribs) 19:14, 24 January 2012‎

WP:NASCAR Newsletter (January 2012)

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject NASCAR at 04:02, 25 January 2012 (UTC).[reply]

South African Snooker Championship

Hello - if you want to remove all that information from my page - at least keep a record on the talk page? It took me a LOT of time to gather this info. Also, why did you remove it from the snooker template, and remove the template from the page? How would this tournament be categorized if it not a 'non-ranking' tournament?? Sandman30s (talk) 12:27, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is no need to record it on the talk page, it's still in the history of the page and can be restored if you find sources, for this challenged material. It doesn't matter how many time it took you to collect this information, if you can't verify it with reliable sources. As I said in my edit summary the template is only for professional tournaments, and only if they are active. There are no sources, this was ever professional. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 12:33, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Please then restore the third column (winners of 1977 To 1994 - S.A. Billiards And Snooker Control Board), the information of which is on the official roll of honour which you allowed. This is very important in the history of apartheid affected sport in my country. Sandman30s (talk) 09:25, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 10:04, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Sandman30s (talk) 11:44, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Now for my next argument :p If you look at the Perrie Mans page, you will see the first reference is 'Other National Professional Championship'. I used that on my page which you removed. I would like to use this link as a citation to my South African Snooker Championship to include the professional national champion information. My page is looking incomplete without that. The rest of the references on the Perrie Mans page also seem to verify the first reference. Sandman30s (talk) 11:50, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It would be a bad idea. These results are not on official roll of honour, and the 'Other National Professional Championship' source doesn't says it has anything to do with the South African Snooker Championship. If you want to add this, than you would need at least one reliable sources which says, that these events are the same. Currently they only have similar names, and to say after this they are the same event is original research, forbidden by policy. For example the Welsh Professional Championship and the Welsh Snooker Championship are not the same too. (BTW the Perry Mans article was corrected, and now it links to South African Professional Championship.) Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 11:58, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 23 January 2012

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chemical attack on behbahan battalion

I'm a little confused... ok, no. I'm completely stumped as to what you did on this article. TBH, I could have even seen you closing this as keep before your second relist, but to put it up for relist and then close it a few hours later after just two more keep !votes? What was that? If you're gonna relist it, why not let it run out? I'm not suggesting that it's gonna swing to delete, but that's a really odd close. Nolelover Talk·Contribs 00:18, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see nothing odd with this. This very similar to cases, where after a relist the article is deleted the same day, like this. At the time of the relist I wasn't sure, that closing it was a good idea, as the additional keep !vote was very week. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 00:36, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
But that wasn't the same person, and it wasn't a NAC. I'm not trying to say there was anything wrong with how you closed it, I just find it extremely odd that you would relist after, I agree, a weak keep, then close as keep just a few hours later after two more keeps that didn't even answer my original concerns. Nolelover Talk·Contribs 00:47, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisting AFDs

Hi, thanks for your work at AFD. Can you please take a look at WP:RELIST? It's not usual to relist AFDs endlessly in the hope that someone will come along, and anything beyond a second relisting should have a specific rationale given. If an AFD isn't getting participation, it should be closed as no consensus or soft delete (by an admin). Stifle (talk) 17:30, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you mean this, than  Done. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 17:41, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/List of awards and nominations received by Demi Lovato

Hi! You reviewed my "articles for creation". Can you please tell me where your review so that I may improve on the article and that I will be able to let someone review it to be an article. Thanks. 125.237.123.182 (talk) 01:50, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with you submission is, that it doesn't have any context, just a huge table and references. You can see similar article in Category:Lists of awards by musician. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 11:25, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rideau Canal Festival

Hi Armbrust, I'm trying to organise Festivals. I'm come across Rideau Canal Festival. The result of the afd was to merge to Rideau Canal. Can you possible do this now? Thanks. Argolin (talk) 03:43, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I already merged it to the article in 2010. But it was later removed, with the edit summary "removed ad". I have added the information back. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 11:38, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks very much... Argolin (talk) 13:09, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 30 January 2012

Campaign Legal Center

Although your closure may be correct, it is controversial, as I (the nominator) and one other editor found no justification for inclusion, and only 2 other editors found any justification to keep, which I stated was contrary to guidelines. I ask that you reverse the closure and wait for an admin. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 09:05, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 09:36, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Hi Armbrust. Thanks for closing the Mulan AfD and userfying the article. Just in case you wondered how I removed that Category:English-language films, see this (the nowiki tags, to be exactly). Cheers! theFace 20:40, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2012 January newsletter

WikiCup 2012 is off to a flying start. At the time of writing, we have 112 contestants; comparable to last year, but slightly fewer than 2010. Signups will remain open for another week, after which time they will be closed for this year. Our currrent far-away leader is Conradh na Gaeilge Grapple X (submissions), due mostly to his work on a slew of good articles about The X-Files; there remain many such articles waiting to be reviewed at good article candidates. Second place is currently held by Minnesota Ruby2010 (submissions), whose points come mostly from good articles about television episodes, although good article reviews, did you knows and an article about a baroness round out the score. In third place is Mauritius Jivesh boodhun (submissions), who has scored 200 points for his work on a single featured article, as well as points for work on others, mostly in the area of pop music. In all, nine users have 100 or more points. However, at the other end of the scale, there are still dozens of participants who are yet to score. Please remember to update your submission pages promptly!

The 64 highest scoring participants will advance to round 2 in a month's time. There, they will be split into eight random groups of eight. The score needed to reach the next round is not at all clear; last year, 8 points guaranteed a place. The year before, 20.

A few participants and their work warrant a mention for achieving "firsts" in this competition.

  • Florida 12george1 (submissions) was the first to score, with his good article review of Illinois v. McArthur.
  • Florida 12george1 (submissions) was also the first to score points for an article, thanks to his work on Hurricane Debby (1982)- now a good article. Tropical storms have featured heavily in the Cup, and good articles currently have a relatively fast turnaround time for reviews.
  • Russia Sp33dyphil (submissions) was the first to score points for a did you know, with Russian submarine K-114 Tula. Military history is another subject which has seen a lot of Cup activity.
  • Russia Sp33dyphil (submissions) is also the first person to successfully claim bonus points. Terminator 2: Judgment Day is now a good article, and was eligible for bonus points because the subject was covered on more than 20 other Wikipedias at the start of the competition. It is fantastic to see bonus points being claimed so early!
  • Byzantine Empire Speciate (submissions) was the first to score points for an In the News entry, with Paedophryne amauensis. The lead image from the article was also used on the main page for a time, and it's certainly eye-catching!
  • Mauritius Jivesh boodhun (submissions) was the first to score points for a featured article, and is, at the moment, the only competitor to claim for one. The article, "Halo" (Beyoncé Knowles song), was also worth double points because of its wide coverage. While this is an article that Jivesh and others have worked on for some time, it is undeniable that he has put considerable work into it this year, pushing it over the edge.

We are yet to see any featured lists, featured topics or good topics, but this is unsurprising; firstly, the nomination processes with each of these can take some time, and, secondly, it can take a considerable amount of time to work content to this level. In a similar vein, we have seen only one featured article. The requirement that content must have been worked on this year to be eligible means that we did not expect to see these at the start of the competition. No points have been claimed for featured portals or pictures, but these are not content types which are often claimed; the former has never made a big impact on the WikiCup, while the latter has not done so since 2009's competition.

A quick rules clarification before the regular notices: If you are concerned that another user is claiming points inappropriately, please contact a judge to take a look at the article. Competitors policing one another can create a bad atmosphere, and may lead to inconsistencies and mistakes. Rest assured that we, the judges, are making an effort to check submissions, but it is possible that we will miss something. On a loosely related note: If you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 23:57, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

List of world eight-ball champions

Hi you seem to have some knowledge about cue sports. Someone added PoolMeister to this page and I can't find any references... do you know of such a tournament? Also, it would be appreciated if you could add some of the missing champions on this page... there is scant info before the 90's; seems we might have to resort to old magazines or scanned newspaper articles. Sandman30s (talk) 12:00, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I only follow snooker closely and don't know very much about eight-ball. Non the less I have removed the section as I couldn't find the information in any reliable sources. I could find only Wikipedia mirrors. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 12:12, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for all the cleanups and the references. So youtube references are not preferred? I thought it would be fun... also some of those youtube links are not easy to find. Sandman30s (talk) 10:41, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
According to WP:NOYT: "YouTube and other video-sharing sites are not reliable sources because anyone can create or manipulate a video clip and upload without editorial oversight, just as with a self-published website." Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 10:45, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ernest Yélémou

Many thanks for the notification, GiantSnowman 10:32, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

With pleasure. I thinked this was the best solution to this AfD due to the changes indicated by the nominator. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 10:53, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Administration?

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

I've seen your contributions... I'll be open to nominate you for RfA in case you're up to it. And yes, in any case, if you wish rollback for faster reversion of vandalism, do tell me. Best regards. Wifione Message 13:05, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I had to thoroughly think about accepting a third nomination, and I came to the following conclusion. I would be honoured to accept your nomination. Regards, Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 12:51, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fantastic. I'll engage you in the coming days on the various perspectives that one should be aware of before an RfA. Expect a flurry of communication from me starting next week. Kind regards. Wifione Message 20:01, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies for the delay. Request you to hold on till next week when I'll get free. Thanks for the patience. Kind regards. Wifione Message 07:54, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. This isn't a race. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 11:12, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you (SFD logo)

Thanks for uploading the new logo. You may have notice there is now a notice requesting for more sources on that page. I left a message here: User talk:SF007#Your comments on Software Freedom Day page . Do you have any suggestion as to the best course of action? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.206.63.93 (talk) 13:11, 2 February 2012‎

The problem is with the sources in the article. The general notability guideline requires significant coverage in independent reliable sources. The current three references doesn't pass this, as all three are connected to the in some way: ref 1 is the official blog of the president, ref 2 is the Wiki of the company and ref 3 is from the official website of the company. Blogs and Wikis are also not reliable. The solution to this is to add more references to the article as inline citations. It looks like to me like ref 3 has enough material from the press, they have just to be added. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 13:39, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re:José Manuel Martín in Cut-Throats Nine (1972)

Re:José Manuel Martín in Cut-Throats Nine (1972)

"Wikipedia does not have a File page with this exact title. " Bulwersator (talk) 11:49, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note. Forget to add the extension of the file. Corrected. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 11:52, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

About ANZ Ladies Masters

Hi, I noticed that you misunderstood from ALPG page that ANZ Ladies Masters (Currently Gold Coast RACV Australian Ladies Masters) had happened two times in 2011, one in February and one in March. I went to ALPG page and if you click 2010/2011 season, and if you see the date of ANZ Ladies Masters, the last one on the list, it is written as March 2-5, 2010. So the ANZ Ladies Masters did not happen in March 2011. The direct proof that ANZ Ladies Masters did not happen in March 2011 is that whom you had written as the runner-up of that event, Lee Bo-mee, participated in LPGA of Japan event Daikin Orchid Ladies, which was held through March 4-6. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThpRicky (talk • contribs) 07:15, 5 February 2012‎

Nice catch. Although I can't reach the ALPG website, the official website of the tournament list also just one tournament for 2011. I have corrected it on the 2011 ALPG Tour article too. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 10:56, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

RFA

Many thanks for your kind words! I'll wear the shirt with pride ;) Regards, GiantSnowman 10:46, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fluttershy ANI discussion non-admin closure

You didn't mention anything about the standard offer that some users mentioned. Also, it might be helpful to mention Fluttershy's willingness to undergo the "standard offer" process: [5], [6]. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 20:50, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Doing... Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 21:12, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 21:17, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Only three editors advocate this option, while others, who are against the ban, doesn't [sic] mention this at all."

I count four users (Beyond My Ken, Fluffernutter, Hasteur, OlEnglish) who make mention of the standard offer. There's also a typo. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 21:28, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well it's actually five (WilliamH). Corrected. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 21:31, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Old York (album)

You recently proposed that this article be deleted. However, the article has been PRODed once before, but deletion was contested by the author, so policy dictates that the article cannot be re-PRODed. If you think that the article should be deleted, you need to take it to AfD. Favonian (talk) 11:48, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 06 February 2012

Boldness and the RFP template

I would prefer that my RFPP requests be decided by actual admins, thanks. →Στc. 01:30, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, but in the future please don't modify my comment. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 01:36, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There is no modification to your comment. If you are not an administrator, it is expected that you use the {{nao}} template in the interest of full disclosure. Only administrators can approve or decline page protection. Thanks. — Nearly Headless Nick {C} 08:18, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree, that only admins can decline page protection, because this doesn't require access to the "protect button". Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 11:09, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree with your disagreement, because the editnotice on RPP says "administrator notation templates". This will not happen again, I hope. →Στc. 04:31, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

About File upload: Request for portrait upload

Hi! Its a picture of Peer, who is sitting next to me. I've almost just uploaded the image to the isotia site, which is his own publishing company website. How do I get a license to the picture? I can upload a picture of him holding a sign, stating its okay to use his picture for Wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SnowStarDK (talk • contribs) 18:26, 11 February 2012‎

You have two options. You either create a subpage of the website with the picture and statement, that you release it in the public domain, or you follow the descriptions described in WP:CONSENT. (In the latter case please send me a copy to armbrust@vipmail.hu.) Regards, Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 18:45, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Enjoy Your Break?

I hope your self inflicted break gave you a chance to get out of the house for the day! Keep up the amazing work with your stunning edits and winning personality. Sorry to see your prospective promotion to your "job" on wikipedia to be an admin was swiftly removed. Better luck next time - I'll be supporting you all the way because you truly are special on so many levels. All the best my friend :-) Spc 21 (talk) 18:34, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not at all. Should have followed my gut feeling to go to sleep. A bit late enlightenment. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 18:49, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You are owed this...

...A sincere apology, from my side, for ruining a clean block record... I've been feeling bad about this for a pretty long time and would want to tell you that my view about you as a brilliant editor and an extremely productive asset to Wikipedia hasn't changed a bit. I also wish to inform you that after a few months, perhaps before the next six months, if you're still open to considering my offer, I'll be more than pleased to nominate you as I had wanted earlier. I shall understand if you decline this offer, given the recent past, but I would strongly encourage you to look at the positives and contact me whenever you wish for any assistance you may desire. My kindest regards... and again, I'm sorry. Wifione Message 03:33, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Go for it Armbrust. You've got my support.—cyberpower (Talk to Me)(Contributions) 11:07, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

2011–12 ISU Speed Skating World Cup

Hi, I saw you added the Template "more footnotes" to 2011–12 ISU Speed Skating World Cup. All the results can be found on the ISUresults website, what are the extra footnotes you are looking for? - FakirNL (talk) 23:41, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article needs more inline citations. The standings sections are completely unreferenced, instead of placing one tag at the top of the article, I could have added two {{unreferenced section}} tags to these sections. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 23:47, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I added more inline citations and removed the template (and updated the scores a little). - FakirNL (talk) 10:14, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 13 February 2012

Official names

Hi there. I noticed that you moved the laws of Australian football to Australian rules football. Whilst this is probably ok from a disambiguation point, your edit summary of "this is the official name" is incorrect. Australian football is actually the official name of the sport but is not used often here due to the worldwide ambiguity that it has. The WP:COMMONNAME of Australian rules football is often used here to disambiguate it from football (any code) in Australia. Cheers The-Pope (talk) 05:26, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info. It looks like I have should write "this is the common name of the sport". Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 11:24, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Declined image upload...

Hi, I just saw that my request for image upload on "Apple Messages Application icon.png" was declined, with the explanation that the image is replaceable with a free one. However, it isn't the case, since the image is the specific icon of a computer software (that is, Apple Messages, for Mac OS X), intended to be used on the specific page of that specific software (that is Messages (application)). Such use of a computer software icon seems to be a common practice and appears to comply with the fair use principle. What should I do to have my request reevaluated? Mjameswh (talk) 20:49, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The image request was declined because you added the wrong link in the request. You have used the Messages link (which redirects to Message) instead of Messages (application). I uploaded this file to File:Messages (application) logo.png. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 14:00, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, really? Did I? Well thanks for your time uploading the image. Mjameswh (talk) 01:49, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Flummoxed

Tried to respond on my own page but couldn't get past the codes. I submitted a graph linked to my own website and the graph is my own work. I assented to a creative commons license for the work and I can find no link to a license on my website.Glehman (talk) 21:04, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If this is you're own website, than create a subpage on it, where you release the image under {{cc-by-sa-3.0}}. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 21:22, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Radio Moscow Stork.jpg

How do I prove that I own this image and that I give permission for its use? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.53.247.196 (talk) 03:44, 20 February 2012‎

I have no idea, how you can prove that for a Photobucket link. Maybe somebody at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions can help you. Also note, that "no derivative" (nd) and noncommercial (nc) files are not compatible with Wikipedia, and can't be uploaded there. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 11:57, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!

Are you still adopting? --Chip123456 (talk) 18:05, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. If you have any question, than just ask. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 18:07, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
How would I customise my signature? And thanks for taking me on! --Chip123456 (talk) 18:22, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Go to Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-personal. In the signature field write in the new code, check "Treat the above as wiki markup", and than click on save. I can help creating the new code for the signature too, but than I have to know how the signature should look like. You should also read WP:CUSTOMSIG regarding what signatures can and can't continue. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 18:40, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Please can you help me to create one then please. I would like anything as long as it's nothing too grey, nothing to boyish something in the middle! Thanks! --Chip123456 (talk) 19:35, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but that is too vague for me to work with. Do you wanna use different colors only? Or other formating methods too? (Like superscript, subscript, other fonts.) Do you want, that your signature contains a link to you contributions too? Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 19:42, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I would like different colours if possible. A link to contributions would be good as well and a different font any of the ones you've suggested would be fine! Thanks --Chip123456 (talk) 19:52, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I will make a first attempt shortly. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 19:54, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! --Chip123456 (talk) 20:00, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
My first attempt is there: User:Armbrust/Work area. If you don't like the colors, than you choose different ones at List of colors. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 20:08, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's great, could you do it without the my edits bit? And dif font? If you can? Thanks! --Chip123456 (talk) 20:26, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Another try at the same place, it uses "Courier new". Note, however, that it only shows up at your browser, if the typeface is installed on your browser. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 21:42, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, me again; I've come here as follow-up to the WP:VPT discussion, to see how you were getting on with the font faces. I see that your work area contains a <font color="##E1AD21">; please note that the double # is an error, so that the desired colour is unrecognised in some browsers. If your browser shows <span style="font-family:'Courier new',monospace"><font color="##E1AD21">[[User:Chip123456|'''Chip''']]</font></span> and <span style="font-family:'Courier new',monospace">[[User:Chip123456|<span style="color:#E1AD21;">'''Chip'''</span>]]</span> the same (a yellowish ochre shade), it manages to work around it; but others won't do so, and will show the first one in a different colour (probably the normal blue/indigo link colour). If you remove one of the # from your work area, it should work better. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:32, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think I'm going to keep my normal one! Thanks for creating other ones though!--Chip123456 (talk) 17:26, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 February 2012

2012 Nagaland Premier League

Hey mate, I saw you put a non-free template on here. Obviously I removed it because non of the article is copyrighted but you undid it and said that it contains to many pictures. Anyway I just want to know, what do you want me to do. I tried making this page almost like other seasonal articles like 2012 Major League Soccer season which has a section which contains pictures of all of the stadiums that will be used during the season but instead of stadiums I want to use logos. I am just wondering, how is this wrong and how can I improve the article. I dont want to draw away people as this article will become more popular as it is recently in India. Cheers. --Arsenalkid700 (talk) 23:33, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well it's quite simple. The team section contains too many non-free images. Non-free images are however copyrighted by default, which means the tag is correct. Using free images of the stadiums would be the better solution. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 23:41, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I dont have pictures of the stadiums that I can use as the ones I can find were not taken by me nor do I have any permission to use them. Anyway, I am just going to take a wild guess here that I have a 0% chance of actually keeping these pictures in the 2012 Nagaland Premier League teams section. If there is a way for me to keep them there only, then please get back to me. Cheers. --Arsenalkid700 (talk) 00:29, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category moves

Could you please go through

and fix all the redlinks created by these category renames? Fences&Windows 00:33, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I almost finished Special:WhatLinksHere/Category:Wikipedia_procedural_policy but the following pages need an admin to correct the links: Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines & Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 02:15, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nice of you to do this, but please don't change the ones in archived discussions that have long since been closed. Those discussions should reflect the state of categories, etc. at the time of writing and should not be "updated". Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:04, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It would been better if you said that, before I finished that. Now that I done it on almost every pages, what shall I do? Self-revert on archives? (After I wake at least.) Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 03:07, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I don't think it's a big deal in most cases. The only ones I was meaning were the ones like old CFDs and AFDs that have specifically been "closed and archived" using templates like Template:cfd top and Template:cfd bottom that changes the colour of the background. Those are not ever supposed to be changed or updated. Changing it on talk pages that are just archived—as in old and not added to any more—is fine, I think. I believe I caught most of the ones that were in issue, so you don't have to go back and correct anything. But even if I missed one, it's not the end of the world and is a fairly minor point. I wouldn't worry about it at all. I was just asking you for future edits—wasn't sure if you had more to do or not. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:12, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) Done, see here and here. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:59, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 15:02, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Armbrust, thank you for restoring my comment at the AfD for Trimble Community Forest.  WP:TPO states, Never edit or move someone's comment to change its meaning,"  Unscintillating (talk) 03:59, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NASCAR Newsletter (February 2012)

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject NASCAR at 07:02, 25 February 2012 (UTC).[reply]

File:Osagyefo Dr. Kwame Nkrumah & Martin Luther King, Jr..jpg

Hi Armburst. A user has contested the deletion of the above file on my talk page. Since you nominated the file for deletion, your input would be appreciated. Thanks, FASTILY (TALK) 09:01, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 09:23, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 27 February 2012

WT:INB

Thanks for closing at WT:INB. That is another saga sorted out! - Sitush (talk) 20:30, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It was a rather long read , but the consensus was very clear on the matter. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 20:33, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of RFC tag

Armbrust - I do not know what motivated you to remove the RFC tag from the Article title RFC. However, I have restored it. RFCs should run 30 days. I will close it when that happens. You may not like the way the RFC is worded or the ideas it contains, but you are free to not participate as well. Please allow others in the community to say their peace, whatever it may be. Thanks --Mike Cline (talk) 13:57, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 14:05, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AN

Hi Armbrust, I replaced the post of mine that you moved. [7] I posted it to AN because there is a backlog on the move page, and it's holding up article development. So I'm hoping some kind person on AN might take pity. :) Cheers, SlimVirgin TALK|CONTRIBS 20:26, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 21:34, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. :) SlimVirgin TALK|CONTRIBS 22:02, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2012 February newsletter

Round 1 is already over! The 64 highest scorers have progressed to round 2. Our highest scorer was Conradh na Gaeilge Grapple X (submissions), again thanks mostly to a swathe of good articles on The X-Files. In second place was United Kingdom Tigerboy1966 (submissions), thanks an impressive list of did you knows about racehorses. Both scored over 400 points. Following behind with over 300 points were Minnesota Ruby2010 (submissions), Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions), Wisconsin Miyagawa (submissions) and Scotland Casliber (submissions). February also saw the competition's first featured list: List of colleges and universities in North Dakota, from Minnesota Ruby2010 (submissions). At the other end of the scale, 11 points was enough to secure a place in this round, and some contestants with 10 points made it into the round on a tiebreaker. This is higher than the 8 points that were needed last year, but lower than the 20 points required the year before. The number of points required to progress to round 3 will be significantly higher.

The remaining contestants have been split into 8 pools of 8, named A through H. Round two will finish in two months time on 28 April, when the two highest scorers in each pool, as well as the next 16 highest scorers, will progress to round 3. The pools were entirely random, so while some pools may end up being more competitive than others, this is by chance rather than design.

The judges would like to point out two quick rules reminders. First, any content promoted during the interim period (that is, on or after 27 February) is eligible for points in round 2. Second, any content worked on significantly this year is eligible for points if promoted in this round. On a related note, if you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which would otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 23:51, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Armbrust/Archive_9&oldid=1220769992"