User talk:力/Archive 4

Latest comment: 6 years ago by Power~enwiki in topic Rules for ANI
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 9

16:19, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

18:46, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Some sort of RfC proposal

Hello. I saw your discussion over at the WikiProject Cricket talk page last October here. I can see that there was no cooperation for a good faith discussion by Cricket project members. I tried to find the WP:AN discussion that you handed off to, but was unable to find it. Do you have link for that? In any case, I would like to create wording for an RFC that is going to change or get rid of WP:NCRIC and WP:CRIN.

The project members there obviously have no desire to be in agreement with reasonable Notability criteria and GNG. I am wondering if we could confer on wording for an RfC so we can get this out to the community and have some changes. I might invite one other editor to participate if we can get started. Let me know what you think. Thanks. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 06:34, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

@Steve Quinn: I started on an RfC at User:Power~enwiki/sandbox/rfc before the holidays, but haven't had a chance to look at it (or the WT:N/WT:NSPORT discussions) for a few weeks. power~enwiki (π, ν) 19:59, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

AfD close

Hi. Could you reconsider restating your close rationale at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Idaho–Idaho_State_football_rivalry? I'm not contesting the "keep", just your rationale about no rule about local coverage. The main argument seems to be that there is enough significant coverage to meet GNG. Local coverage (not to confused with one argument about local interest) was not a major theme in the AfD. As a reminder, WP:NACD advises: "Close calls and controversial decisions are better left to admins." Again, I'm not suggesting an overturn of your decision, just a tweak of the rationale. Thanks in advance.—Bagumba (talk) 02:22, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

I'll expand my note. power~enwiki (π, ν) 02:30, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing my AfD

Hi there! Thanks for moving my AfD on Mark Tatum to a RfD for me. I usually stick to editing pages themselves and don't often do more complicated things like nominate deletions, so I'm not entirely familiar with the processes yet. Thanks for your help! --Andymii (talk) 03:25, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Joey Gibson (political activist) for deletion

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Joey Gibson (political activist) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joey Gibson (political activist) until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Darkness Shines (talk) 14:53, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

23:56, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

17:07, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

On ReleaseTheMemo

(note Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ReleaseTheMemo)

I still believe this is not a reasonable topic for an encyclopedia article at this time. Apparently the community still feels that, due to it being mentioned repeatedly in partisan news sources, it meets WP:GNG.

Overall, it's on-its-face obvious to me that the sources are not secondary sources, they are contemporary news articles. Beyond that, the content is speculative in nature, and alternating between blatantly partisan points of view; either "it's a Russian op" or "it's a memo that will change the political landscape".

Regardless, I'm confident this article will not exist in 10 years time. It probably won't exist in 1 year's time. If the "memo" is released and is notable in any way, it will have an article and ReleaseTheMemo will be merged there. If nothing happens, it should get merged to an article such as Social media hysterias during the Trump administration. power~enwiki (π, ν) 19:32, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

I hear "#TheUndateables" is trending. Perhaps we need an article on that too. The more AfDs I see, the more I tend toward deletionism. O3000 (talk) 22:11, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Pssst....

Delete the pox statement before it's too late - that AfD is under DS - Civility....Atsme📞📧 03:04, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

If you want an encyclopedia without Shakespeare, you're welcome to build it without me. I look forward to bringing an ARBCOM case if that's considered a civility violation. power~enwiki (π, ν) 03:06, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
I was thinking more on the line of the Old West, not the Shakes...  Atsme📞📧 03:08, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Argument placement

In my view, your argument in the new RfC should be in your !vote. Not to say that there is any consistency in that, and I wouldn't even bring it up if I didn't know you're capable of receiving such suggestions in the constructive way they are intended. The use of RfCs leaves a lot of room for improvement in general, in my opinion.
If you disagree with the suggestion, fine. ―Mandruss  03:14, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

I put it where I did intentionally, but I'm not certain it's the right spot. I didn't feel I could summarize my position briefly enough to put it at the top without biasing the discussion. power~enwiki (π, ν) 03:16, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
I don't see a problem with a !vote of that length. If you do, you could summarize the longer rationale and end with "See elaboration in Discussion", or something. But the longer !vote wouldn't bias the discussion any more than the first !vote in any RfC, and somebody has to be first. The main thing for me is that a !vote should state an argument, and "as nom" by itself is not an argument. ―Mandruss  03:21, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
OK, you've convinced me. Comment moved. power~enwiki (π, ν) 03:23, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
Excellent, thanks. The neutrality thing applies to what comes before the !voting, and even that is ignored half the time. ―Mandruss  03:26, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

NPP Backlog Drive Appreciation

  Thank You
Thank you for reviewing articles during the 2018 NPP New Year Backlog Drive. Always more to do, but thanks for participating. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 05:43, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Second (SI unit)

You have undone my splitting of the article second, which referred to a clock time second, and has flip/flopped back and forth between this topic and that of an SI second, which is not the same thing. Since the contention cannot be resolved, and it is a shame that it can't, I've split the article for SI second off into its own article. While there is considerable duplication of content between the articles, I don't care about the article for second (SI unit), let someone else eliminate the duplication there. At least they have a place to work, and the article with title 'second' can be free of interference. So I am going to undo your redirect of 'second (SI unit)' to article 'second', and restore the article I split off. Sbalfour (talk) 23:11, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Feel free to revert for now. I'm not sure how there's a need for separate articles; I'll comment on the talk page when I have more time to look at this. power~enwiki (π, ν) 23:28, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Civility in infobox discussions case opened

You were recently listed as a party to or recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility in infobox discussions. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility in infobox discussions/Evidence. Please add your evidence by February 17, 2018, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility in infobox discussions/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:49, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

20:51, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Realtor.com draft

Greetings, Power~enwiki. On behalf of Move, I am still looking for a neutral editor to assist with reviewing a proposed draft to replace the current Realtor.com article. I have made many improvements and trims to the draft I put forth back in September, based on feedback from a few editors. I see you are an active editor and member of WikiProject Companies. I am curious if you might be willing to take a look at the proposed draft and copy over content appropriately. If not, I will try to find other WikiProject Companies participants who may be able to help. Thanks for your consideration. Inkian Jason (talk) 21:21, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello 力, thank you for your efforts in reviewing new pages!
 
 
The NPP backlog at the end of the drive with the number of unreviewed articles by creation date. Red is older than 90 days, orange is between 90 and 30 days old, and green is younger than 30 days.

Backlog update:

  • The new page backlog is currently at 3819 unreviewed articles, with a further 6660 unreviewed redirects.
  • We are very close to eliminating the backlog completely; please help by reviewing a few extra articles each day!

New Year Backlog Drive results:

  • We made massive progress during the recent four weeks of the NPP Backlog Drive, during which the backlog reduced by nearly six thousand articles and the length of the backlog by almost 3 months!

General project update:

  • ACTRIAL will end it's initial phase on the 14th of March. Our goal is to reduce the backlog significantly below the 90 day index point by the 14th of March. Please consider helping with this goal by reviewing a few additional pages a day.
  • Reviewing redirects is an important and necessary part of New Page Patrol. Please read the guideline on appropriate redirects for advice on reviewing redirects. Inappropriate redirects can be re-targeted or nominated for deletion at RfD.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. 20:32, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

PROD BLP

This was not eligible for a PROD BLP. Regards, Sam Sailor 13:45, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about Nellie Bowles

Hello, Power~enwiki,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Nellie Bowles should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nellie Bowles .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks,

Mduvekot (talk) 17:58, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Mario is or Mario Is: A post-move discussion

Your talk page appears to be the appropriate location to restart the post-move of the Mario is Missing! article.

I came across an inconsistency in the capitalization between 'is' and 'Is'. When I investigated further, I found it difficult to determine which is correct as most references to this game display the title in ALL CAPS, with the Wikipedia community ultimately deciding to capitalize the 'i' as a standard format.

However, on the back of the box, the game is clearly printed as "Mario is Missing!" with the 'i' lowercase, and it is standard title formatting whether music recording, movie, or video game, to lowercase the word 'is'. Thus, there is sufficient evidence that the Mario Is Missing! article incorrectly capitalizes the 'i'.

I   disagree with the move of capitalizing 'Is', though the original discussion has closed. I therefore request to reopen the discussion, citing that the fore mentioned arguments hadn't been properly addressed before the decision was finalized.

Thank you for your time and consideration of this issue.
Christopher, Sheridan, OR (talk) 21:44, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

@DeNoel: I think the best approach would be to create a new requested move based on your arguments. Your claim doesn't contradict that MOS:CT says that "is" should be capitalized. Re-opening an RM that has been closed for over a week isn't something that I'm going to do here. power~enwiki (π, ν) 04:47, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for your reply.
I already attempted to move the article once, but my request was auto-rejected, stating the page already existed and that I would need admin approval to proceed. That's as far as I got when I decided to dig a little deeper into the matter (and how I found my way here); I didn't feel using the Undo feature on your previous article move would be a prudent first-step. If you can point me to the page/process for admin-assisted article move requests, I would appreciate that.
Christopher, Sheridan, OR (talk) 05:22, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
See WP:RM, specifically Requested_moves#Requesting_a_single_page_move. You simply need to add the template with your rationale to a new section on the talk page. power~enwiki (π, ν) 05:26, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

21:59, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm SamHolt6. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, People's Open Network, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

SamHolt6 (talk) 01:04, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

I only reviewed it as part of an A7 tagging. I'll AfD it now. power~enwiki (π, ν) 01:22, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Smart mattress

I redirected Eight Smart Mattress to Eight Sleep, and moved the smart mattress redirect to its own page as a stub. Do you think it should be renamed to Smart bed? It could be a potential article. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 20:29, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

A page you started (Timeline of the 19th century) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Timeline of the 19th century, Power~enwiki!

Wikipedia editor SamHolt6 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Reviewed, thanks for creating such an extensive list, I will have fun reading it in it's entirety

To reply, leave a comment on SamHolt6's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

SamHolt6 (talk) 05:44, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

@SamHolt6: I take credit for none of it; I moved it from 19th century, where I am taking a hatchet to it as it's not in paragraph form and contains a lot of trivial details. (note edit summary) power~enwiki (π, ν) 05:45, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
@Power~enwiki: Bah well you at least have alerted me to its existence. Cheers.--SamHolt6 (talk) 05:51, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Astrophysical plasma

Perhaps you might comment on a disagreement at [43]. Thanks, Attic Salt (talk) 18:49, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

22:55, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Toothless tiger

Whilst I agree that User:203.122.226.126 (talk) is a disruptive pain, I'm puzzled by what you think you might be achieving by posting this on their talk page. (Clearly, it achieved nothing. i.e. [51], [52] and [53]) Are you going to do something that might achieve something? (Anything?) Or are you leaving it to someone else? Pdfpdf (talk) 09:02, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Parliament post discusion

First of all forgiveness for having edited without control.

You are right in that in the section of Origines it is good to name the Nordic parliaments, but in my opinion they can not be considered the first ones. I have read the sources, and they do not have the same validity as UNESCO.

The first source you have put is a web page about Nordic history, but that does not ensure that they were really the first parliament. The second source is a PDF that only states that they were the first, but that says absolutely nothing, it is not an old document or historical proof, and the same happens with the Sicilian Parliament (discussed further in the discussion box) and with the remaining Nordic Parliament, are unreliable sources. And the first paragraph directly lacks a source, you can not take that as true, either.

The UNESCO organization through the Leon Decree (which are old documents) affirms that it was the first Parliament that is known today in an officially documented manner.

A greeting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.94.210.236 (talk) 19:11, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Please tell me your use of the nacc tag had nothing to do with me...please!

Hi Power~enwiki,

I see that you used the nacc tag (never knew it existed, but might use it now) at ANI before your comment. Can I ask why you did that? Thank you and regards, --Malerooster (talk) 01:31, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Nothing to do with you. When dealing with new editors who are complaining at AN/ANI, I sometimes find it useful to make clear to them that I definitely can't help even if I wanted to. power~enwiki (π, ν) 01:37, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
Interesting and thank you. Yes, that makes sense. I had added the nac tag to a closure above, which I think is appropriate and can be helpful as well, and was reverted so I thought it might be related. I guess not everybody is out to get me ;), cheers, --Malerooster (talk) 01:45, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
My generic ANI advice is: "Nobody has ever helped their own cause in any way by participating at ANI. Even non-controversial edits have a way of getting people into trouble." power~enwiki (π, ν) 01:47, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
lol, very true. As "they" say, no good deed goes unpunished. --Malerooster (talk) 02:08, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

HA!

Ok, so your typo fix was obviously.... well fuck that anyway: Does the community consider it cool for me to make a fix like that on a closed AN/I? I lurk it a couple times a week, but I'm not trying to be a real participant until I get a much better handle on this. Gabriel syme (talk) 06:27, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

It's generally discouraged to edit other people's comments, though if it's prominent and annoying enough nobody will object. Also: "Nobody has ever helped their own cause in any way by participating at ANI. Even non-controversial edits have a way of getting people into trouble." power~enwiki (π, ν) 06:29, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
That"s fair. I just scan those closing summaries and I hate to see an easy typo in them, those people are some of the true soldiers, I want them to look good. Gabriel syme (talk) 06:39, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

About ZenCash Notability

There is confusion between ZenCash and ZCash because although both come from the same branch and use the same zk-SNARKs protocol, they have differences in their configuration, the main difference is ZenCash is focused on encrypting messages and publishing data.

For the development of this article I used the article published by the Univerisity of South Carolina.

https://www.sc.edu/study/colleges_schools/moore/about_the_moore_school/news/2017/zencash.php

Here, they explain the reason why Zen Cash is innovative giving a unique service to messaging and data-sharing.

“What we’re trying to do is not only create a system that allows for secure and anonymous transactions, but also extend that to messaging and data-sharing, which has never been done before,” she said. “The entire point of the Zen system is to allow any sort of data, monetary or otherwise, to be transacted in a secure, near-instantaneous way.”

As many other Wikipedia Cryptocurrencies articles as Bitcoin; I use the White Paper as the main reliable article to obtain information about its foundation. This strictly follows the info-box cryptocurrency template proposed by Wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Infobox_cryptocurrency

--Fergus_Manx 04:16, 26 February 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SpaceMAN (talkcontribs)

19:52, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

very much my bad

That is absolutely on me for not reading the big fat notice at the top of the page. Thanks for reverting my mistake. Um, I hope it's not out of line, is the argument sound? How could archiving those sources slow down performance? Gabriel syme (talk) 06:56, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

I'm not sure of the exact details. At some point the text editor starts to lag based on the amount of wiki text. As a rule of thumb, I try to keep pages under 350KB if at all possible. There's also increased bandwidth for readers, but that's generally trivial. power~enwiki (π, ν) 07:00, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
Ok, that's fair, I've noticed when I have to edit a lead (editing the entire article source, is there a way to edit the lead as it's own section?), I do get massive slowdown on big articles. Admittedly, my system is pretty antiquated... oh wait that's why. I would be interested in the gritty details though. Gabriel syme (talk) 07:10, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Boggy Theorem

Mind explaining the hoaxness. Math makes me cross-eyed--Dlohcierekim (talk) 18:48, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Antiderivative may help. Calling the standard constant C the "Boggy Constant" is pure nonsense. The ref is to a random paper in German on quantum mechanics from 1928. power~enwiki (π, ν) 18:51, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. Nope Still cross-eyed. Creator and socks blocked. --Dlohcierekim (talk) 19:09, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Quinn Norton

I put that reference there, because to disambiguate her name with Quinn Nordin is ridiculous, so I thought to extend the ridiculousness to the next level. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SapphiresBlue (talkcontribs) 04:47, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

WP:POINT. power~enwiki (π, ν) 04:49, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

"no claim of notability"

Please review the talkpage at "talk:Zenphoto." Nicole Sharp (talk) 07:18, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

"Complete waste of time"

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Telling the members of the Women in Red project that they're obviously not interested in promoting women on the encyclopedia isn't insulting their motivations? --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 21:25, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

I read it as saying they weren't interested in DYK. power~enwiki (π, ν) 21:26, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
Oh, that's so not what he said. Read the whole thing, in context. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 21:43, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
No, that's so what he said, read the whole thing without being INVOLVED. Last warning. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:45, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I want to become a good editor of wiki ...how ?

Are you administrator ? (Jundiejj (talk) 05:29, 25 March 2018 (UTC))

Rather than making complaints to WP:ANI, perhaps you should improve one of the pages in Category:Articles lacking sources or Category:All Wikipedia Start-Class vital articles through improving the prose or adding references. power~enwiki (π, ν) 05:31, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
ok i will follow your advise..i am trying to improve articles...but my request is i want UN involed admin openion on my posted complaint at ANI.. (Jundiejj (talk) 05:39, 25 March 2018 (UTC))
As I said, "ma gavte la nata". power~enwiki (π, ν) 05:40, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
i am requesting you please place your openion on my complaint at ANI..I AM not bad faith editor..just i found a desruption (Jundiejj (talk) 05:42, 25 March 2018 (UTC))
I already said my opinion is that you're going to be blocked. You're defending one of two blocked editors in a way which suggests you are one of them, which is enough for a WP:SOCK block. If you aren't one of the editors involved in that AfD, I can't imagine why you'd be fixated on that. power~enwiki (π, ν) 05:45, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
For the record, power-enwiki, Jundiejj was a sock of nsmutte. The only thing to do with that sockmaster troll is to ignore and revert as much and as quickly as possible. --bonadea contributions talk 06:54, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Thank you

I am grateful for your support vote at my WP:AN#Topic ban appeal. My appreciation also for the words "I don't see any reason to keep a prohibition on editing DABs." —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 05:59, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

G.One (character)

Yes, of course the character can be included in Ra.One page, but all of its superpowers won't be detailed in another page. Thus, the article deserves a separate page, overall it is a fictional superhero that appeared in a film and video games and many of such characters have separate pages (even shorter that not includes superpowers, design and personality section). Kindly leave the article as it is if you can't improve it. I am aman goyal (talk) 07:37, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

User:Power~enwiki, what about those points!. Explain them first. I am aman goyal (talk) 08:05, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

@I am aman goyal: Please see this discussion. There was consensus to redirect the article. Please don't restore it again. (talk page stalker) SkyWarrior 08:07, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Power~enwiki, no one has replied me their either nor you. Hence the page must be restored. I am aman goyal (talk) 08:10, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

17:12, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Roger Bannister

Hi there! A lot of the referencing has been updated on Roger Bannister, so would you be able to take a look at it and let me know if you are happy for the article now to go to RD? Thank you! — Sasuke Sarutobi (talk) 09:04, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Narco-States in the United States of America (USA)

G11?--Dlohcierekim (talk) 00:09, 8 March 2018 (UTC) G10?--Dlohcierekim (talk) 00:10, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

He's promoting his own agenda. WP:G10 might also be reasonable. power~enwiki (π, ν) 00:12, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

About ArbComm

That user has been causing issues at XfD for much longer. He derailed some of my nominations with stupid incorrect twisted policy comments. I don't think it has anything to do with NJ, and everything to do with his enjoying disrupting discussions. [69] Legacypac (talk) 17:45, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

I'm aware of the other issues involving Unscintillating's AfD votes. power~enwiki (π, ν) 17:46, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

19:44, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Matt Van Komen

Hello Power~enwiki. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Matt Van Komen, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: claims significance, has 250+ GNews hits, use WP:AFD instead. Thank you. SoWhy 10:12, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

The claim of significance I saw (roughly, appearing in a "notable" high school basketball game) wasn't credible IMO. However, being 7'5 tall probably is. I probably won't bother with AfD despite WP:CRYSTAL; the page would be re-created soon anyway. power~enwiki (π, ν) 15:38, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Draft: Chilonia Union High School

Please published for me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Masumasu11 (talkcontribs) 21:41, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Dr. Pepper's Jaded Hearts Club Band

 

An article that you have been involved in editing—Dr. Pepper's Jaded Hearts Club Band —has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Audiovideodiscoo (talk) 03:26, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

15:03, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

PCR & Rollbacker

Hello Power~enwiki. Your account has been granted the "rollbacker" and "pending changes reviewer" user rights. These user rights allow you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes and quickly revert the edits of other users.

Rollback user right
 
Please keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:
Pending changes reviewer user right
 
The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection enabled is located at Special:StablePages. You may find the following pages useful to review:

Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of reviewer or rollback. If you no longer want either of these user rights, contact me and I'll remove it, alternatively you can leave a request on the administrators' noticeboard. Happy editing! ~ Amory (utc) 20:35, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Seeing your edits to your common.js and .css, I think maybe you might not want rollback? Will remove if you'd prefer. ~ Amory (utc) 00:54, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
I don't really care, I may use it for Huggle at some point. Pending-changes is definitely useful, though. power~enwiki (π, ν) 00:55, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
Okay, just let me know! Happy editing! ~ Amory (utc) 01:01, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) .mw-rollback-link {display:none !important;} works perfectly in my vector.css. I think you were just missing the "!important" which prevents other rules setting it to "inline" etc... -- Begoon 02:42, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

I got the CSS from User:Mr. Stradivarius/gadgets/ConfirmRollback. It's intended as a fallback there if there are script issues; I'm not sure if it should be updated or not. (and don't really care enough to find out) power~enwiki (π, ν) 02:44, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, I just hide the links to prevent accidental clicks, because I prefer to use an edit summary so Twinkle is a better "rollback" option for me. -- Begoon 02:49, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Ezidkhan (autonomous region)

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Autonomous Region of Ezidkhan and my talk page. There have been some confirmed socks involved in the past but the current article's creator isn't one of them. What's particularly annoying is that I admire the Yazidi struggle greatly, but using Wikipedia this way isn't appropriate. I'm on my iPad right now which I hate to use for editing and haven't compared the new version with the old, but it still doesn't seem to have sources newer than. Last September which is odd if this is really notable Doug Weller talk 06:16, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

It's virtually identical to the one deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Autonomous Region of Ezidkhan(see the NORN discussion I link to there) which was created by a sock. There's a lovely attack on my talk page too. I seem to have offended all the mapmaker experts on Wikipedia while supporting genocide. Doug Weller talk 08:47, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
I commented on that AfD, but apparently forgot about it. As you note, there continues to be no new sourcing for this group, and it's unclear what it is actually supposed to be (an Iraqi autonomous region or an independent country; a military government or a civilian one). power~enwiki (π, ν) 17:53, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
Although he can't resist the personal attacks, I'm trying to engage with him on his talk page, but I don't think he's able to understand what we mean by original research. Doug Weller talk 19:50, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Pyo Chang-won

Can you please provide a basis for each issue you have blanked on Pyo Chang-won so that we may get a discussion going? If you do now provide a basis, I'll assume there is no such basis to remove them and I'll just re-add them. Veritas et aequitas Korea (talk) 12:58, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Article for deletion

Hi, Power enwiki! Thank you for your attention to Repair the World. You proposed the article for deletion for WP:ORGDEPTH. I read the rules, but I think I need your help. Could you please show me an example how to fix the article and remove the deletion template? Thank you beforehand, Lidiia Kondratieva (talk) 08:01, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Your suggestion of a site ban for my account

Hello,

You said that you would support a site ban for my account if I didn't "drop" a metaphorical "stick". I though fail to see where I would have violated any guideline, or in any other way disturbed the community. All I want to do is not to be called an ass, a jerk, an idiot or silly. In other words, my aim is not to be insulted, even though I'm not part of the community anymore. Hence, I would like to ask you to explain why you would support a ban, because I fail to understand your motive. --Mathmensch (talk) 07:16, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

You seem uninterested in helping to build an encyclopedia, only in re-hashing old complaints. And apparently you've already found that out. power~enwiki (π, ν) 14:28, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Arbitration case request declined

The Arbitration Committee has declined the New Jersey-related AfDs arbitration case request, which you were listed as a party to. For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 20:18, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Oops, I think you linked the wrong case

As per this edit at AN/I: 1, I would point out that the user there was an AlextheWhovian, not Adamstom97. Maybe you got things a little mixed up? - Jack Sebastian (talk) 02:08, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Adamstom became involved there too. power~enwiki (π, ν) 02:10, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
Maybe you would find reading throught "voluminous" section to glean the point. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 02:58, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
I not what say, gumshoe? (aka: no, respond to the thread I linked at ANI, or else I'll assume you have no defense to that this is an ongoing dispute). power~enwiki (π, ν) 03:00, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Article Improvement

Is there a way for me to improve my article because on the list of suicides that have been attributed to bullying article hamed's name was on the list of suicides and there was no article about him so I decided to create an article to reduce the risk of his name being deleted on the suicide list. Please tell me some tips on how to improve my article that way it doesn't get deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anonymous1941 (talkcontribs) 18:55, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

You're referring to Suicide of Hamed Nastoh. I don't have anything useful to suggest, beyond suggesting you comment at the deletion discussion rather than here. power~enwiki (π, ν) 19:03, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

20:04, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Rules for ANI

Idiot is correct but maybe "unhelpful to your success" or "makes you look bad" Legacypac (talk) 19:40, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

  • I'd prefer something like "don't vote on matters you're INVOLVED in, merely comment", with "don't oppose sanctions against yourself" as a corollary. power~enwiki (π, ν) 19:42, 27 March 2018 (UTC)