User talk:Music1201/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 → Archive 5

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi Music1201! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

-- 08:17, Friday, March 25, 2016 (UTC)

Mission 1 Mission 2 Mission 3 Mission 4 Mission 5 Mission 6 Mission 7
Say Hello to the World An Invitation to Earth Small Changes, Big Impact The Neutral Point of View The Veil of Verifiability The Civility Code Looking Good Together

I have listened to your opinion regarding user names

I felt your comment was valid, although unsubstantiated. So I went ahead and changed my username to alleviate any confusion for users. Thank you.

CreativArticles5134 (talk)

12:26:41, 4 May 2016 review of submission by Rebecka fleetwood smith


i would like to know what to change in the style format as requested? if you coul dgive me some pointers i can fix that asap thankyou!


Re: Sara Elizabeth Dill

Hi there, I noticed you added G12 to the multiple issues db tag. Were you able to find a URL for a source that it is copied from? I tried when I first tagged it to be speedy-ed because of the unusual formatting but several Google searches turned up nothing. RA0808 talkcontribs 21:18, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

@RA0808 Yes, here is the source it was copied from, and here is the Copyvio Report that has it listed as 68% copied. Another source it was copied from is here. Music1201 (talk) 21:24, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Ok great! Your Google-fu is obviously better than mine. :P RA0808 talkcontribs 21:28, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello

Hi! This is Peterye2005. Thank you for reviewing the page which I created (The Ultimate Book of Hockey Trivia for Kids) Peterye2005 (talk) 22:58, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Article reviewing

Kia ora, please make sure you are aware of what is considered a WP:STUB. An article you reviewed (Kevin Stuart (rugby union)) has since been upgraded to a start class. Cheers bro. Sirpottingmix (talk) 23:27, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

@Sirpottingmix: It was a stub at the time of review. Music1201 (talk) 23:28, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
@Music: Not at all, no information has been added since creation. I'm not trying to argue with you, just a minor issue. Sirpottingmix (talk) 23:49, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
@Sirpottingmix: Okay! Music1201 (talk) 23:55, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Contested Deletion

Hey, I did copy and paste from the Stanford Who's Who, but I was intending on editing it so it didn't plagiarize. Stanford's Who's Who should definitely have it's own wiki page as it is the gold standard for industry professionals and creates and cultivates a network of leaders in their respective industries. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Billygotescruff (talk • contribs) 22:56, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

@Billygotescruff Even if you intended on editing it, WP:CLOP and WP:C-P both say that "Close Paraphrasing" is prohibited (basically changing the words of a copy and pasted text). Music1201 (talk) 23:02, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
@[[User:Music1201[Music1201]] Word I got you. It should be good now I think. Can you take a look? I'm new to wikipedia and am still learning the ropes, thanks for your patience. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Billygotescruff (talk • contribs) 00:11, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
@Billygotescruff: It looks good now! Thanks for fixing it. Music1201 (talk) 00:14, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Starbucks, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Target. 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) 10:22, 21 March 2016 (UTC)


Dear Music1201. I don't know how to send the message to you. I just get the gmail. you delete my AC DC rectify and smoothing. I don't know what the point is copyright problems. Please let me know that point. and also, is that is my patented technology to share to the peoples. and linked academia.edu of my site. After I have to plan to try more the information about rectifies technologies. So, How could delete possible to unfigured problems?! Is this wiki are such a sites? anybody can possible to delete or you are an administrator? I hope to know the more rules . Before a several month ago, I was external linked my information to someone's wiki page. and they do not allow that!. some funny. So, I make the Wiki page. But I don't know why exactly deleted without the agreements! Good day!. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeong, ym (talk • contribs) 11:54, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

AfD tags

Hey. Just a note, that removal of AFD tags thing is mostly unconditional. In this case, leave it in place - the admin can make the call, since it's up for speedy, and if the speedy is declined, it just goes through the AFD process. Cheers, --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 06:08, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion request for "Protection types"

Why has a request for speedy deletion been placed on the page "Protection types"? Pankej Khanna (talk) 08:10, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Because 1) Wikipedia related pages must go in the Wikipedia namespace and 2) There is already a page about this at Wikipedia:Protection policy. Music1201 (talk) 08:11, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

The request has been contested. Pankej Khanna (talk) 08:42, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

@Pankej Khanna: An administrator has deleted the page. Music1201 (talk) 08:43, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

The deletion of the page was undone. Pankej Khanna (talk) 08:45, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

@Pankej Khanna: Please stop recreating the page, it does not belong in the article namespace. Music1201 (talk) 08:46, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Lucy O'Brien (professor)

Hello Music1201. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Lucy O'Brien (professor), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you. Shirt58 (talk) 09:59, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Frank Cowper

Hello Music1201, just curious why the new article on Frank Cowper got tagged for notability; the first five of the seven refs seem quite adequate to me: Noyster (talk), 10:22, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

NPP

Hi. We appreciate your enthusiasm but maintenance tasks are not an appropria area for newcomers to begin their Wikipedia experience. A near-admin proficiency is required for patrolling new pages so I'm going to ask you to refrain from patrolling and tagging pages untill you have significantly more experience and have read and fully understood WP:NPP, all the pages it links to, and read WP:DELETION and memorised all the criteria. In the meantime, if you wish to cut your teeth on some much simper maintenance tasks, when you have made 200 edits to mainspace you will qualify for entry to the Counter Vandalism Academy where you can learn about vandalism and how to combat it effectively. Happy editing! --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:29, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

@Kudpung: Please look at my CSD log. More than 85% of pages I nominated for speedy deletion have been deleted. I have operated a MediaWiki website for over 2 years, I'm not neccessarily a newcomer. Can you please provide a specific example of maintenance tasked I should not have performed? No one else seems to think I should stop patrolling pages. Music1201 (talk) 02:56, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
WADR I'm not interested in what you have done on other projects. The comments on your talk page clearly indicate that you do not have sufficient knowledge for this task and have not done the prescribed reading. Your CSD log does not, and cannot reveal the full picture. NPP must be done accurately or not at all. Thank you. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:05, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
@Kudpung: OK I understand now and agree. Can I at least mark obvious violations to the Wikipedia Policy with tags, and continue patrolling recent changes? Music1201 (talk) 03:09, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Most minor reviewing tasks require audited competency. I suggest you check out WP:PERM and see what fits, but even there you will need considerably more experience in order to convince the other admins hat you are ready for it. You don't need a user right to fight vandalism but editors are expected to have either 500 edits to mainspace or graduated from the Academy (when they can then apply for the 'Rollback' right). Please do not however attempt to patrol new pages either with Twinkle (which should no longer be used since 2012 for this task) or Page Curation.
For a more gentle indoctrination, you may wish to read the current discussion at WT:NPP to understand what we have been up against all these years and why the situation is now just short of melt-down. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:24, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
@Kudpung: Ok- Are you currently available to train at the Counter Vandalism Academy, the only current trainer there is at the opposite time-zone. Music1201 (talk) 03:33, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
I'm afraid I'm not available; I have my work cut out developing new methods of controlling the quality of NPP and its software. I closed the CVUA down a few years ago after it had been turned into a MMORPG by a bunch of schoolkids, and then I redesigned it but I do not have the time to be one of its trainers. That said, I am on exactly the opposite time zone to you, and most of our current vandal patrollers have the experience they need because thy waited and contributed to articles, and we also now have more very sophisticated bots doing most of it. hence the CVUA isn't a very busy place these days. If English is your first language and you have a good command of it, you shouldn't have much trouble in identifying vandalism.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:02, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

WP:LEAD

Hi Music1201 - please have a read of WP:LEAD. The section in Wikipedia articles above the table of contents is a summary of the article below. Please don't add things directly to the lead, unless it reliably sourced in the body of the article. That's how we roll in Wikipedia. Thanks! Jytdog (talk) 06:53, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

@Jytdog: Thanks but the edit I made is basic information that is sourced in nearly every reference in the entire article. WP:LEAD does not say to not add things to the lead. Music1201 (talk) 06:55, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
I'm talking about this. And don't WP:WIKILAWYER - it is a bad road to go down. Jytdog (talk) 07:05, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
@Jytdog: Ok. Music1201 (talk) 07:06, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
great. btw LEAD just fleshes out WP:MOS, see Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Section_organization for more guidance if you like. Jytdog (talk) 07:08, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The New Page Patroller's Barnstar
I just saw your CSD log and it's surprisingly large for someone who joined half a month ago, and even better, most of the links are red. Keep up the good work! — Omni Flames (talk contribs) 07:49, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Louis B. Rautenbach

I notice that you removed a speedy template that I added requesting that it be translated. Here is the Google translate version

Louis B. Rautenbach's love for the Afrikaans language and his passion for writing and telling stories , it brought about his destiny to bring about the publication of four non- fiction books .Its versatile plans were for the future publications include , among others , successive books , small story books and even a script . Read more on the blog page . His love of history , and especially stories of the Bible , bring your stories continue that lewensinspirerend and makes one think about the spiritual life and the transience of man . His goal as a writer is that the reader , among other things, to reflect on life .

So not only is it not in English, meeting A2, it is a direct copy from his blog, so it meets G12, but it is also blatantly promotion, so it meets G11. This is now the second time we have crossed paths today. Do you have a vendetta against me? David.moreno72 (talk) 11:13, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

@David.moreno72: Only English content should be added to the English Wikipedia, also Google translate is not normally seen as an acceptable way of translation. — Music1201 talk 19:52, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
Yes, but if, when translated, the content would be eligible for speedy deletion, there's no need to translate it, instead it should just be deleted. Google Translate is not an acceptable way of translation, unless you're just using it to get a general idea of what the content says. — Omni Flames (talk contribs) 22:20, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

A Dobos torte for you!

7&6=thirteen (☎) has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it.


To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

7&6=thirteen (☎) 01:23, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

WP:Sandbox

I think our IP vandal should get his mantra tatooed on his forehead! 28 times already. Sheesh! 7&6=thirteen (☎) 01:17, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

I know right! I'm trying to get an admin's attention but none seem to be on right now. — Music1201 talk 01:25, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
I put down lots of tracks there. And our nemesis has gone away for now. Wasted a half hour of his time and ours. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 01:29, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, our warnings seem to have scared him away. — Music1201 talk 01:30, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
And our reversions every minute may have worn him out, and convinced him that his attack was just a waste of time. And it was. Sometimes it would be good to be an admin, especially late on a Sunday night when they've all gone elsewhere. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 01:33, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
I'm always thinking that too! — Music1201 talk 01:37, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

First thing I should do is get Twinkle and Huggle. Time to automate. Well past time actually. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 01:46, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Do you not have Twinkle?? — Music1201 talk 01:47, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
No. I've been a Luddite, I must confess. Do what I do manually. Better tools would mean I work smarter and accomplish more. Brains not brawn. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 01:50, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Yuntae kim

I am not yuntae kim, I am just a citizen of his town. He is running for federal representative. so I, as his supporter, try to make his page. I am a student at university of oklahoma physics phd student. Further information about me can found in my school page. My name is saesun kim, and I can prove my identication if you request. Kim8104 (talk) 06:51, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Yun-Tae Kim

Hello Music1201. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Yun-Tae Kim, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you. Shirt58 (talk) 11:10, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

That unreviewed page...

Actually, that's quite appropriate given the circumstances. Still not convinced it should be here, but it is quite appropriate to have another set of eyes on this. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 04:00, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

???

what do you mean? --Clemeneol (talk) 01:10, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

@Clemeneol: Please see this link to the unconstructive edits you made. Adding the words you put in the biography of living persons is rude and not allowed by Wikipedia. — Music1201 talk 01:12, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Banning?

Can you ban me please? --Clemeneol (talk) 01:17, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

@Clemeneol: I do not have the technical ability to block you, and even if I did I would not because I see you have a suspected sockpuppet notice on your user page. — Music1201 talk 01:20, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Battle of Francesville

I should have pinged you after I left my comment. Sorry for the oversight. Thanks for looking at that page and googling the topic. That adds weight to the request for deletion. This was a rather poor attempt at a hoax. The after the fact justification that it took place during the war but was not part of it was lame. It seems to me that this was more of an effort just to see if they could get away with putting up something like this, perhaps that no one really was watching. Donner60 (talk) 04:56, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

I just looked back at the talk page. The article has been deleted. Donner60 (talk) 04:59, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Narcissism in popular culture

A tag has been placed on Narcissism in popular culture requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from the article namespace to a different namespace except the Category, Template, Wikipedia, Help, or Portal namespaces.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, 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 from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Stefan2 (talk) 19:44, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Pending changes reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

Manifest Destiny

Hi. I've opened a discussion of your close of Manifest destiny (as I said there, it's hard to even type that without the upper-case "D"). It has been lower-cased since its inception in 2002, which seems to be one of the major mistakes within Wikipedia pages, and has made us an extreme outlier in search engine results. Those search engine views, and data within the discussion, points out the specific evidence showing that upper-casing this page follows books and website capitalization. I don't know how you poured over and studied that data in less than a minute, but I'll assume good faith. Can you please explain your reasoning further in the discussion section on the talk page? Thanks. Randy Kryn 13:59, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

The discussion was opened on 12:37, 1 April 2016 (UTC) and closed on 20:54, 4 April 2016 (UTC). Isn't less than four days a relatively short amount of time to arrive at a close? Please state the Wikipedia policy you are using to determine when a discussion should be closed. I'm not that familiar with the policy regarding time or duration for a discussion. Thanks.Mitchumch (talk) 20:36, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
Mitchumch, fancy meeting you here. Naw, Manifest d. (D!) was closed on April 10, not April 4. The rules/guidelines/gotcha's say an RM should stay up at least a week, so this close was fine in terms of time. With all of these major ones I think a new suggestion should be put into effect, that Wikipedia projects which might have an interest in the RM should be notified. And I am still unclear on pings, folks we know should have commented on the bus thing and didn't even know about it, but pinging them might be a problem for all I know. I hope we all learn something from these disputed closes. Randy Kryn 22:14, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
Randy Kryn Thanks for the catch. Not sure how I missed that. Anyhow, as far as pinging people just use WP:Rfc process. However, you cannot violate WP:CANVASS. Learned this lesson thru hard knocks. Mitchumch (talk) 00:32, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Congratulations on becoming a reviewer! — Omni Flames (talk contribs) 06:56, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

DRN help needed and volunteer roll call

You are receiving this message because you have listed yourself on the list of volunteers at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard/Volunteering#List of the DRN volunteers.

First, assistance is needed at DRN. We have recently closed a number of cases without any services being provided for lack of a volunteer willing to take the case. There are at least three cases awaiting a volunteer at this moment. Please consider taking one.

Second, this is a volunteer roll call. If you remain interested in helping at DRN and are willing to actively do so by taking at least one case (and seeing it through) or helping with administrative matters at least once per calendar month, please add your name to this roll call list. Individuals currently on the principal volunteer list who do not add their name on the roll call list will be removed from the principal volunteer list after June 30, 2016 unless the DRN Coordinator chooses to retain their name for the best interest of DRN or the encyclopedia. Individuals whose names are removed after June 30, 2016, should feel free to re-add their names to the principal volunteer list, but are respectfully requested not to do so unless they are willing to take part at DRN at least one time per month as noted above. No one is going to be monitoring to see if you live up to that commitment, but we respectfully ask that you either live up to it or remove your name from the principal volunteer list.

Best regards, TransporterMan (talk · contribs) (Current DRN coordinator) (Not watching this page) Sent via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:05, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Pending changes

Please ensure you do not accept pending changes that add unsourced or poorly sourced personal information to articles as you did at here. It is these types of edits that pending changes was enabled to prevent. Thank you, --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:54, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

@Ponyo: Thanks for letting me know. I would have normally checked it but since it was simply adding content instead of editing I assumed it was valid. I will be sure to check all pending changes in the future. — Music1201 talk 21:12, 12 April 2016 (UTC)


Article "essay/personal reflection" Flag: Inquiry

Hello,

I ought to begin by saying that my article "Instances of Insubordination in the PLA during the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests." is part of a larger effort to expand wikipedia's coverage of the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests, undertaken by students in my university's History department. The above article is the first i've written, and so when it was rapidly flagged I became interested in understanding why. I'd like to make whatever changes are nessesary, and was wondering if you had any advice on how to proceed.

Cheers,

Burning Tenshu (talk) 00:26, 13 April 2016 (UTC)


Disregard the warning. That previous person was an imposter

Hi, Early you received a post about being warned and possibly being blocked. That was an imposter who created a similar username, but with only 1 “p” at User:Winterystepe. He's now blocked. im just letting you know that Im the real person and I won't do that. Shoutout to Tassedethe for taking quick action in 6 minutes. Happy Editing Winterysteppe (talk) 00:35, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Concerns on the Wiki article - Night Markets in Hong Kong

Hi there, I am one of the contributors of the article "Night Markets in Hong Kong". After your review on the article, you left the comment saying that" This article may require copy editing for WP:Manual of Style. You can assist by editing it. (March 2016)". I am just wondering why would you tag this to my article. In WP:Manual of Style, a plenty of topics are being included. Therefore, could you kindly tell us what the problem is there, and can you delete that tag after I make the correct changes?

Tsuihohin (talk) 05:19, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

IP sock

Have you seen this - diff. He is an "IP sock" who is actively engaged in damaging Wikipedia. His frequent edits are in Action Hero Biju, Charlie, and Leela. See also the talk pages. --Charles Turing (talk) 14:11, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

@Charles Turning: Someone removed it from ANI. The IP address who posted that was evading a block. — Music1201 talk 21:38, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

May I suggest you slow down

After the close at manifest destiny (what does that even mean now?), and taking a look at your quickly speeding along speedy deletion log (where you wanted to get rid of a thing like 121st Pennsylvania Infantry), and seeing that you are not engaging in conversations on some topics where editors are asking for help on what you mean by edit-tags, may I suggest that you slow down and contemplate each deletion request, close, and possibly other actions you are taking. Wikipedia is not a race nor a daily appreciation of your edit count or deleted scalps, it is an encyclopedia, hopefully the world's best encyclopedia, and to shape it further into that role requires thought and, at times, discretion. If something is a long-term page and seems well-written maybe take the time to make sure and err on the side of keeping it, as you do seem to go through these things quickly. Thanks. Randy Kryn 15:42, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

I apologize for the tone of the above, just reread it and I come across as a total jerk. Sorry. I was also wrong about the infantry article, where you had a valid concern which was resolved. What I could have said better, and I've only realized it in the last hour, is that I hope you come back to the manifest destiny discussion. I'm going to I write up a comment there that I've been mulling over, in hopes of possibly having a chance of you and others changing their minds and supporting a different close on the appeal process. I'd like to give it a try at consensus on the talk page, but was weirdly being a jerk here because that thought had not come to me as yet and I was taking something out on you, like a common bully. In my non-defense, I really think the RM move on manifest destiny is important for Wikipedia, and I'd appreciate a read of my next longish comment there, which I'll probably get up tomorrow. Wanted to try to clear the air. Thanks. Randy Kryn 22:04, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
@Randy Kryn: I completely agree with what you said in the first comment. I will try to slow down. — Music1201 talk 00:12, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. I was never a closer, nor wanted to be, so I can't imagine how hard some of those closes must be. So I was inappropriately in non-assume-good-faith mode, not even knowing the details and mind-picture construction of the RM map that contains all good-faith contradicting viewpoints. Most of them, I assume, could probably be done quickly. Then you get the epics. The 2015 Hillary Rodham Clinton/Hillary Clinton RM gave as good as it got, dozens of people on both sides of the Rodham swording point after point, so much of a map to create in the closer's mind that they needed recruit three of them who worked, I think, for over a month, on the details of the close. Should be made into a movie. So once again, my apology over my tone in that yelp above, just kicking around thinking that you are probably going to be a very good administrator here at some point and so I pushed a little at you using tough-teacher energy. Too much of it though, into the bullying zone, so my bad. Randy Kryn 1:28, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Girls Gone Wild (franchise)

Please do not close the move discussion at Talk:Girls_Gone_Wild_(franchise)#Requested_move_1_April_2016 again. Per WP:RMNAC non-admin closes should only be performed by experienced editors, a criterion you obviously do not meet since you have been only registered for less than a month. I recommend spending some time participating in "move" discussions before performing any more closes. Betty Logan (talk) 01:09, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

@Betty Logan: That discussion should clearly be closed as "No consensus." Even an inexperienced editor would be able to identify that. Considering that I have closed over 25 move discussions in the past 2 weeks and have not received criticism for any of them, I would call myself experienced, but that's your opinion. — Music1201 talk 03:02, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
I don't mean to criticize, but you could not possibly be more mistaken. Remember that consensus is largely based on the relative merits of the arguments advanced rather than participation. In this case, the discussion that you claimed "should clearly be closed as 'no consensus'" was instead closed as not moved.
I see you're interested in adminship. I assume some of your work—and the detailed statistics you keep—-is done in furtherance of that goal. If I may give you some friendly advice: you're going about it the wrong way. You've likely read through some RfAs and observed that participants care about backoffice participation (CSD, AfD, NPP, vandalism-fighting). All true. But voters care more about accuracy, caution, and diligence in these areas than mere participation: "be bold" is a philosophy for editing, not patrolling or reviewing. If you want to impress people, whether in a run for the mop or otherwise, focus on improving articles and helping other editors, not fighting crime. But if you do patrol, you should respond to the good-faith questions about your work that other editors have raised on your talk page, especially when they're asking for clarification. Best regards— Rebbing  06:41, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Crossovers

Hi Music1201, there was certainly consensus to move at Talk:Crossover in fiction#Requested move 5 April 2016, but could you elaborate on how you found consensus for the "Crossover in fiction" title? It was suggested by one user, two users spoke against it, and one user issued a blanket statement of support for all the alternatives. Both "Crossover fiction" and the original proposal, "Crossover (fiction)", appear to have had much stronger support. --BDD (talk) 13:11, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Draft talk:Yalghaar#Requested move 30 March 2016

Why is it required to go through AfC in order to revert a move from the article namespace to the draft namespace, although AfD normally would have been required to move the file to move the page to the draft namespace in the first place? --Stefan2 (talk) 12:42, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

@Stefan2: Because the move request was to move a page from the draft namespace to the mainspace, it wasn't undoing a revert. That's the whole purpose of AfC. — Music1201 talk 16:03, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
In what way is requesting a reversion of a move from the article namespace to the draft namespace not a request for a reversion? And what does AfC have to do with this? The page has never had any AfC tags, neither during the years when it was in the article namespace, nor during the weeks when it has been in the draft namespace. --Stefan2 (talk) 10:48, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Move review for Crossover in fiction

An editor has asked for a Move review of Crossover in fiction. Because you closed the move discussion for this page, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the move review. --BDD (talk) 13:49, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Music1201/Archive_1&oldid=1114536770"