User talk:Shimeru/Archive 10
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 5 | ← | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 |
A previous articles for deletion debate you oversaw.
Hello Shimeru, I'm interested in what criteria you use to judge whether or not there is a consensus to delete. I have been considering nominating "United States and state terrorism" for another shot at deletion as the article is hopelessly biased and efforts to address this have gotten nowhere over the course of the articles inclusion on Wikipedia. (Please note that I am not second guessing what transpired, only trying to figure out whether it is worth perusing and how best to present the case) Is consensus considered unanimity, majority, plurality? Are there stated guidelines for judging this? Thanks for your time. V7-sport (talk) 01:45, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
GOCE Year-end Report
Season's Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors
  We have reached the end of the year, and what a year it has been! The Guild of Copy Editors was full of activity, and we achieved numerous important milestones in 2010. Read all about these in the Guild's 2010 Year-End Report.
Get your copy of the Guild's 2010 Year-End Report here
On behalf of the Guild, we take this opportunity to wish you Season's Greetings and Happy New Year. See you in 2011!
– Your Coordinators: S Masters (lead), Diannaa, The Utahraptor, and Tea with toast. |
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 06:44, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
This page was remade can you place in the past history. Thanks
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ben_Hansbrough
24.239.153.58 (talk) 02:09, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
GOCE drive newsletter
The Guild of Copy Editors – May 2011 Backlog Elimination Drive The Guild of Copy Editors invite you to participate in the May 2011 Backlog Elimination Drive, a month-long effort to reduce the backlog of articles that require copy-editing. The drive began on May 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and will end on May 31 at 23:59 (UTC). The goals of this backlog elimination drive are to eliminate as many articles as possible from the 2009 backlog and to reduce the overall backlog by 15%. ! NEW ! In an effort to encourage the final elimination of all 2009 articles, we will be tracking them on the leaderboard for this drive. Awards and barnstars We look forward to meeting you on the drive! Your GOCE coordinators: SMasters, Diannaa, Tea with toast, Chaosdruid, and Torchiest |
You are receiving a copy of this newsletter as you are a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, or have participated in one of our drives. If you do not wish to receive future newsletters, please add you name here. Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 08:03, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
Ben Hansbrough
why'd you delete the ben hansbrough page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.13.234.137 (talk) 02:05, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
- According to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ben Hansbrough. Shimeru 01:57, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
Help Please
Help please! There are more than several software company pages in Canada with factual info. Can you please help me reinstate the page (or at least get a copy for editing) and instruct me on how to not have this classified as advertising. Page --> User:MichelleWestMarketer/DisclosureNet — Preceding unsigned comment added by MichelleWestMarketer (talk • contribs) 14:50, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
GOCE drive invitation
| Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors
The latest GOCE backlog elimination drive is under way! It began on 1 July and so far 18 people have signed up to help us reduce the number of articles in need of copyediting. This drive will give a 50% bonus for articles edited from the GOCE requests page. Although we have cleared the backlog of 2009 articles there are still 3,935 articles needing copyediting and any help, no matter how small, would be appreciated. We are appealing to all GOCE members, and any other editors who wish to participate, to come and help us reduce the number of articles needing copyediting, as well as the backlog of requests. If you have not signed up yet, why not take a look at the current signatories and help us by adding your name and copyediting a few articles. Barnstars will be given to anyone who edits more than 4,000 words, with special awards for the top 5 in the categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", and "Number of articles of over 5,000 words". |
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 09:26, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
Bold restoration of Dieselpunk
Hi,
I was reviewing the decision made on the deletion of Dieselpunk. It seems that the article was significantly updated from the original AfD. I was able to find multiple sources including Gazette publishing that shows this article is not OR. Also the concensus seems to suggest keep. I was planning to revert and if you would like you can re AfD, is there any objection to this? Valoem talk 16:30, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
- If you feel that you have reliable sources, by all means, go for it. I doubt I'll be AfDing it -- I close AfDs sometimes, but rarely nominate articles any more. Shimeru 02:44, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
Milan Lalkovič
Hello - is it possible to restore this article - this player makes his debut at 1500 GMT and thus will become notable BBC sport] Thanks Zanoni (talk) 13:56, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
AfD review request
I would like you to review Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Croatia–Mongolia relations (2nd nomination) again, in light of three things:
- You closed it as no consensus without it having been relisted. It could have been given some more time instead.
- The keep !votes were mostly contested based on WP:V and WP:NOR and AFAICT this wasn't answered. Therefore, they might be invalid.
- It's been another year and the article is still in the same state, proving my point on it being hopeless.
Thanks in advance. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 22:38, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
- That seems like good reason to renominate it to me. I'm not about to simply delete it outright, though. Shimeru 04:50, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
Hi Shimeru. I saw your name in Wikipedia:Peer_review/volunteers#Philosophy_and_religion. I am trying to move the article to FA status and have initiated a peer review. Your critic would be appreciated at Wikipedia:Peer review/Ahalya/archive1. --Redtigerxyz Talk 11:54, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
Happy Adminship Anniversary
Deleted Article
Dear Shimeru,
First off I apologize for any missteps I have had in the Wikipedia editing process. I hope I am following correct talk page guidelines. Anyway, I created an article entitled "Steve Obsitnik" about a candidate running for Congress in CT. The article was deleted and I saw that you are flagged to return deleted articles. Could I recieve the text back? And would there be a place to go to check why it was deleted? Thank you for your help!
William Sadock
P.S. It originally had POV issues, but I took out the bias and it was kept up for a couple days after during which thime the flag for deletion was removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by William.Sadock (talk • contribs) 15:19, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your help. Slowly understanding the way Wikipedia works. I can use the one in my sandbox. I forgot about that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by William.Sadock (talk • contribs) 18:57, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 00:30, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
AfDs
Hi mate, just wondering if there was a particular reason you closed those AfDs that had only just been relisted? Did you disagree with the relists? You didn't really provide a rationale in either close or your edit summaries - just thought it was worth checking with you. Cheers, Stalwart111 04:12, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
- Oh, I think I've worked it out - the notice above my post. Yeah, glad you've decided to use your tools today to keep from losing them, but you should probably be a bit more careful about closing AfDs in today's log - those are going to be either new or newly relisted. Try the logs from 7-8 days ago where closes will be required, yeah? Cheers, Stalwart111 04:17, 1 June 2013 (UTC).
- My mistake. They were still linked from the old log when I got around to them, and I wasn't careful enough. Sorry about that. 174.79.190.66 (talk) 00:10, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. WormTT(talk) 11:14, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:54, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 01:30, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
Extended confirmed protection
Hello, Shimeru. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.
Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.
In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:
- Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
- A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.
Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:49, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
Notification of imminent suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next several days. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. — xaosflux Talk 23:56, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
Suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions have been removed pending your return. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. — xaosflux Talk 00:28, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
Tinywarz
This page was deleted back on 19:18, 6 May 2010 (UTC) by yourself. The only ever editing I did was on this wiki and I care about the game and the community although it has lost many users over the years. It still has a small community and I would like to compile the deleted info and archive the data. Please since I am a wiki newbie and have no idea what I am do, please help me with getting this wiki un-delete for a couple days so I may copy the info and put it on a web domain that can be used by the community. After about 3 days I should have all the pages and it may be deleted again.
Thank you and I have no idea how this interface works. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dfencenking (talk • contribs) 15:16, 8 December 2016 (UTC) Dfencenking (talk) 15:18, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
Gary Brooks Faulkner, deleted page
Now that Mr Faulkner is the subject of a movie (Army Of One (2016)), I believe the circumstances have changed making him a notable figure. My understanding is that would now make him eligible for undeletion. 50.35.104.187 (talk) 07:09, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
Glass blower Peter Ivy
@Shimeru:. There is currently no article on Japanese-American glass blower and artist by the name of Peter Ivy. I am wondering if you'd be willing to write a short article about him on Wikipedia? There is a YouTube video about him which you can see here. Enjoy!-Davidbena (talk) 14:58, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
FAR for Kitsune
I have nominated Kitsune for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. (t · c) buidhe 04:47, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:Merge school
Template:Merge school has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. --Trialpears (talk) 14:03, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
Nomination of Kitsune in popular culture for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kitsune in popular culture (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.