User talk:Alexf/Archive 4

Ban Requested

Can you please ban Plutofilms. He is advertising constantly. He has even taken to vandalising Wax in order to spread his advertisements. He has also deleted speedy tags. Undeath (talk) 02:09, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

User has already been blocked indef, a little before your message. Request was posted to WP:AIV Alexf⁴² 02:11, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Someone beat me to it lol. Thanks for the help. Can you take a look at Candle making. He did a copy paste before adding his hangon tag. It needs to be deleted. Undeath (talk) 02:19, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Done. Please remember to post block requests at WP:AIV. It will get faster attention than alerting one individual admin. Happy wiking. Alexf⁴² 02:22, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

That might have been quicker, but I saw your involvement with his articles too. Oh well, what's done is done. Uh...also, is "wiking" a word? (it sounds like viking with a w intead of wiky ing.) Undeath (talk) 02:25, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi Alexf. Could I ask you to revisit the above? On the 14th (ie, after the above kerfluffle), the user moved over to the Soap article, and began a series of edits focused on linking to the same site. It doesn't seem that the intended message got through. Dxco (talk) 03:45, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

User has been warned in his Talk page. Will keep an eye. I still AGF but even that has a limit. Thanks for the heads up. Alexf⁴² 11:22, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

AlexF- I think I took care of it. The candle history stuff was from that first time and I changed it. Took out information about actual equipment and got rid of citations since I do not want to be accused of spam. In reference to the charge of mentioning only one website, I have referenced ones that are about the topic- I think 4 total. If someone has a better one they can find it and replace it.

In regard to M&P, you took out the external link and I cannot find anything wrong with replacing microwave oven with direct heat melters and water jacket melters. In regard to Dekisugi in the Soap section, he/she is totally off base. The link I added clearly supports the citation needed for how soap cleans. If he/she thinks that it looks better to have this whole explanation of how soap works without a citation I disagree. I think this link was appropriate.http://www.soapmelters.com/Handcrafted-Soap-Commercial-Soap-How-Handcrafted-Soap-s/54.htm was appropriate Also, to discuss soap equipment from the 1800s and only commercial soap without referencing to soap equipment over the past 30 years to even current, especially with the fact that a growing number of Americans use handcrafted soap is silly. As with candle making, it seems silly to have only machines from 100 years ago. Either way, I won't bother adding any more content to it. As I stated before, I deleted much of the candle making information you asked for. Thanks for pointing out the problems and giving me a chance to correct. I think I'll move out of crafts and hobbies to other fields at this point. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Plutofilms (talk • contribs) 19:47, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Ive spent some more time going through Plutofilm's edits. Wow. Seriously, wow. This is the most concerted effort at promoting a site I have yet seen. Nearly *every edit* this user has made was either to create an excuse to link to his/her site, or to straight-up link to it. Page after page, this user adds links to soap/waxmelters.com and one or two other related sites. All these sites are effectively the identical site, with a different front end, and are fully commercial. On one wiki page this user created from scratch, all the "external" links were to the same site with different front end/skin, so to speak, and one was straight-up to a link farm site - the page was about equipment this person sells on their site, with the sole excuse to create a page to add "citation" links to said site. In most cases, the "citation" is to a little "factoid" list on his/her commercial site, which itself lists as source a generic looking "association" site, or a company name that is a redirect back to the same site. Simply put, this user and every edit they have done has a bald-faced blatant effort to promote their commercial site, get the pagerank up, and get their borderline link-farmey selves high in the good list (and its working, too).

I very much believe this user should be banned, their spamlinks removed (Ive been doing that already), and their new pages (which exist solely as a vehicle to add links to thier sites) removed. Why this last bit? It was bad faith edits. Instead of a new user rolling in and saying "I think the topic of X is notable, and Ill write a new article about it," these are cases of a spammer coming to wikipedia for the sole purpose of creating opportunities to self promote. Let's not let spamming be the process through which we create new pages. Dxco (talk) 18:32, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

I hear your concerns. The articles have been cleaned up of spam (as of this writing). They are not without merit, yet they do not have any or enough references. They have way too many requests for citations on way too many unreferenced claims. It is now for the community of editors, and the author(s) to provide the references and citations or the claims will be removed by any editor. Most of the fact check requests are new so they need some time to wait and see. A couple (though not from this user), are from Sept 2007 and one from July and they are getting stale. Alexf⁴² 13:22, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you!

Hi Alexf... Thanks for taking care of deleting the "NLM Classification" redirect. I accidentally created it with the quotes and would have deleted it myself, but couldn't figure out how. Sorry for the trouble. --Hennap (talk) 03:19, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

User:Fila943

Thanks for your warning on this user's talk page following his recent vandalism of Argentina. His recent edit on User:Signalhead's talk page could be intepreted as a veiled threat.

This appears to the third main incarnation of this user having been previously blocked twice for sockpuppetry. --Stewart ^(talk) 14:10, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Blocked for harassment. Alexf⁴² 14:15, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks. --Stewart ^(talk) 14:16, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks from me too. Signalhead (talk) 15:24, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: Religion category

Oakie Doke Sir-Nobby (talk) 16:53, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I take it you agree then. Cat removed from article as per Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Football/Archive_12#Categories_on_player.27s_religion_-_relevance.3F. Alexf⁴² 17:06, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

It's no less relevant than the Italian-Argentine category. If the person fits into that category they should be included. Sir-Nobby (talk) 20:57, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm InTouch

Hi Alexf, I was wondering why you deleted the page I'm InTouch that I had been working on for blatant advertising. I don't think I used any words/phrases that were promotional and advertising like. I tried to just describe the product's function and detail key version changes. I was looking at the page for other software products such as Windows XP and GoToMyPC and thought they are pretty similar in style and tone to what I was writing. Any feedback would be appreciated.

Jacob52283 (talk) 18:13, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I took a second look at the page. Although it seems like advertising for a product, I'll take your word on it, for the moment. Please add info and cite 3rd party reliable sources to justify the page. Restore was granted. No guarantees on what other editors/admins may decide on this page. Good luck. Alexf⁴² 18:51, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

My Quotes page deleted

why was it deleted? I did not request it to be deleted.. Σαι ( Talk) 07:06, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Page restored. There were a lot of your pages listed for WP:CSD. I was doing CSD patrol and there was a backlog. I did yours by mistake and did not do the rest as they sounded fishy. Had forgotten to restore it. Apologies. Alexf⁴² 11:15, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

No probs. My taskbar page was also deleted.. by another admin.. would you please check for me? Σαι ( Talk) 11:30, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

You want that undeleted? It shows it was created and maintained by User:Gaogier Alexf⁴² 11:35, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Clique Deletion

Hey, why did you delete my page on the Clique Summer Collection? I worked for 2 hours finding the summerys and cover pics! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tlrmet (talk • contribs) 01:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

It was the fifth speedy deletion of the same article for copyright violation. To avoid your article from being deleted, you must follow the rules. First, you must respect copyright, second, when an editor tags your article for speddy deletionand you want to attract an administrator's attention that you want to defend the article, you must place a {{hangon}} tag as explained in the CSD message then immediately explain your reasons in the article's Talk page . You failed to do this. Articles can be deleted as per WP:CSD and the Deletion process. Please review these documents. Also please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). Alexf⁴² 02:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

The Marshalls

Why did you delete my page? I was in the middle of writing about The Marshalls and you decided to delete it and i demand to know why. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Themarshall1 (talk • contribs) 02:47, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Please read WP:CSD and read the notice that the editor that posted the CSD tag left in your Talk page. Also please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). Alexf⁴² 14:04, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

AIV

Thanks for helping out just then. Regards, Rudget. 13:20, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Why did you delete the article i just created ?

BMV (Artist) ????

Tagged as possible copyvio from [1]. Also tagged as CSD A7. See CSD note in your Talk page. Wikipedia takes copyright violations seriously. Please read the Copyright and deletion policies. Also please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). Alexf⁴² 14:04, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

User talk:203.30.68.49

I ignored your comment on WP:AIV that 203.30.68.49 hasn't vandalized since their last warning (which was Feb. 12th) when they vandalized on the 13th and 14th. Mangojuice^talk 13:50, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

OK. Your call. Alexf⁴² 13:53, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Article about Web Dynpro ABAP was deleted

Hello Alex,

started to create an article about Web Dynpro ABAP. It was deleted with the reason that it was about a real person. It's not a person, but a software programming model. Notability is high. Please verify this by using Google. It returns 51.700 pages. I provided two links - one by the makers of this software, the other one from an external source to address verifiability. Since the content is externally available on these 51.700 public web sites, there's no copyright violoation.

Thomas szuecs 14:55, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

The article deletion reason was wrong. Should have been web does not asser notability. I WP:AGF and restored it. Must be worked on to assert notability. Remember that, as any article, it is subject to revision by other editors and must stand on its own merits or it might be marked for deletion again. Alexf⁴² 15:04, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Request

Can you temporarily undelete User:Moe Epsilon (all the revisions) and User:Moe Epsilon/Barnstars so I can check something? These are my old userspaces and I wanted to check them. — Save_Us † 01:45, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Doczilla's RfA

Change to

.: Oh, no! There goes To-ky-o! Admin Doczilla! :. File:Godzilla(01)reverse.jpg Thanks for !voting! Thank you for !voting in my RfA which resulted in the collapse of civilization with 92 (94?) support, 1 oppose, and 1 neutral. Blame jc37 and Hiding for nominating me, everyone who had questions or comments, everyone who !voted, everyone who tallied the numbers correctly, and WJBScribe who closed without shouting, "No mop for you!" Seriously, your response has overwhelmed me. I am deeply grateful. STS-67 patch. Alexf42 Thank you for casting the 67th vote in support "The bad news is time flies. The good news is you're the pilot." - Michael Althsuler

Thank You for your help

Thank you very much for your message[2].I will also subst my warning before them.It is because people like Wikipedia runs.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 12:28, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Suspect user pages

In cases of users named the same as companies as in User:Printplast for example, it would be better if you reported them to AIV as they are in the user space, not main space as articles.

Er, I'm not following: as a suspect username, doesn't it pretty much by definition go to Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention, not the vandalism page? --Calton | Talk 13:01, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

You are correct. That would be better. In any case they should not be at CSD. Cheers. :) Alexf⁴² 13:02, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of a Great Part Of Football Olympics

You have deleted great part of football olympics page! Are you sure of this? or is it an error? I think you would to delete only the backlink of "general statistics"!! Please write your motivations on the talk page. Stanza13 (talk) 13:12, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Page has been restored. I understood you had requested a CSD. Did not realize it was on AfD, so we'll let it run its course. Alexf⁴² 13:16, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Te page is not been restored, see here:Football at the Summer Olympics? I'm not refering to General Statistics on Football at the Summer Olympics!that page for my opinion can be deleted. But on Football at the Summer Olympics you have deleted very important informations (topscorer, results, etc..)...please restore them!Stanza13 (talk) 13:27, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

I see now what you mean. Those were deleted by TW as backlinks to the CSD deleted page. You could have just reverted the edit. Done. No prob. Alexf⁴² 13:46, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

List of environmental websites

Is it possible to revert the page (you may delete the blogs, ...) but keep the diy websites. They would be very useful to the diy culture community and environmental activists.

KVDP (talk) 13:47, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry but no. Please read Wikipedia is not a repository of links, nor a directory. Alexf⁴² 13:59, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Block of 86.145.10.52

You might want to check on User:Joshestrin as the likely anon from this IP. I noticed you threw up the block (well-deserved imo) but the ip user is mostly editing the article for Josh estrin, which was started by User:Joshestrin and blanking speedy deletes, etc. I'll keep an eye on it myself as well and let you know if there's any obvious tomfoolery here. Thanks! CredoFromStart ^talk 16:30, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Keep an eye and report on AIV if warranted. Alexf⁴² 16:31, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for the revert on my talk page! _GB^T/C 16:59, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

CSD in userspace

We may have to differ on this one - the reason I placed the tag was because the page was created through vandalism, and thus should be deleted, rather than just blanked. The IP address concerned has no contributions...or at least, no non-deleted contributions. If you have a look at the contributions of the user who placed those warnings, however, you'll see that he's pottering around creating, well, nonsense. G3, which is what I tagged the page, is a general criteria which applies to all namespaces, and although I agree that it's unusual to see it on user talk pages (I think it requires a rationale), if you reconsider I hope you'd agree that it wasn't inappropriate in this instance... _GB^T/C 17:14, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't have a particular problem with it, and I understand your explanation. It just gets a little tiresome while handling a deluge of CSD work to have to consider user pages too, which I do plenty of for AIV :) . Keep up the good work. Alexf⁴² 17:49, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

I was going to write "If it's really that tiresome why not vote in my current RfA...I'll help you out... ;-)", but see you already have. Thank you for your support! _GB^T/C 17:54, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Word of advice in your last comment. It could be viewed by some as canvassing, but not by me. I got in trouble in my RfA on exactly that issue. Good luck. Alexf⁴² 17:57, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Hopefully they would have noticed the slightly tongue-in-cheek nature, but struck through just in case. Thanks! _GB^T/C 18:02, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

The Wickler deletion

Hey Alex

I posted a page about The Wickler and I guess I pulled too much info/story from the press release so it was deleted as being a blatant ad. It's actually worthy of inclusion on Wiki. I want to try reposting a more encyclopedic/descriptive entry but wasn't sure if it would get instantly deleted just because I'm the same person posting about the same subject.

Let me know the best way to proceed and apologies for the carelessness.

Davidscharff (talk) 02:38, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Best way to proceed is to read about how to write in Wikipedia by reading the Five Pillars and what Wikipedia is not. The Manual of Style is a great guide too. Just remember that any article can be edited, refactored, or proposed for deletion if it violates the rules, by any editor. Alexf⁴² 13:08, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Context? After apple picking

Hi. WP:CSD#A1 specifies that it is for "Very short articles lacking sufficient context to identify the subject of the article." Context on this seems pretty clear to me: "After Apple Picking is a poem by Robert Frost, published in 1914." I was about to redirect the article to After Apple-Picking when it disappeared. I'm not sure that it's worth recreating under the circumstances (and in fact the article I was about to direct it to may not meet notability guidelines), but in case you have misread the policy I did want to point it out. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 18:32, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

By contrast, this article probably does need to be restored. WP:CSD#A7 is explicitly not for albums. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 18:37, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry if it feels like I'm piling on here, but the deletion of this Centerville, Barnstable, Massachusetts is problematic with GFDL. If you look at the article history, you will see that the material was copied by the editor who tagged it for speedy deletion and transplanted here. This is a page merge done out of process and must be repaired. The source page needs to be restored, with either a history merge to the new article destination or a redirect from the article where the material was drawn and the inclusion of a category {{R from merge}} to ensure that it is not deleted. The receiving article in that case needs a wikilink in the edit summary noting the source. I'm sure you didn't notice the history of that article and presumed that it was author-blanked. If you have no experience with this type of merge, I'd be happy to help with it. Just let me know. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 19:10, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Good point. Centerville restored. Go at it. :) Alexf⁴² 19:45, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

All right. That's done. :) As far as Fundamentals: The EP is concerned, if it's insufficiently notable, it should be prodded or AfDed. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 19:56, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi. Since you've been editing since I left this but haven't responded, I'm beginning to guess that you may disagree with my request that we apply policy as written to Fundamentals: The EP? If you'd like other opinions, I can request them at deletion review. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:18, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay. I was meaning to do it (done) but I'm in the middle of other edits (a lot of a/v work as usual :). I am not an expert on this particular subject but don't find it particularly notable. Please start an AfD if yoiou think it has a chance. Let other editors form a consensus. Thanks for your attention. Alexf⁴² 20:23, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. If it seems clearly non-notable, I'll drop a PROD on it. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:26, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Gracias

Gracias para su ayuda con el Delecion Rapidamente. Hablaba Espanol en escuela secundaria, pero desde entonces nunca. Thanks again :) ~kevin ^talk_email 19:00, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

RFA Card

My RFA →→→

Dear Alexf, here is a little note to say thank you for your kind vote on my request for adminship which succeeded with a final result of (29/5/5).

I cannot thank you enough for you're support on my RFA. And now that I am a sysop, I will work hard to improve the encyclopedia with my new editing tools. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any queries you have. I would be glad to help you along with the other group of kind and helpful administrators.

Thank you again and I look forward to editing alongside you in the future. — Chetblong^{T C} 20:46, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: February 2008

Hello. It was me not logged in. You can trust as the information I added are true. I know them. Greetings. --Freddyballo (talk) 21:44, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Freddy: Huh? Sorry but I do many many edits. Unless you give me some more details I do not know what you are talking about. I have not posted nor corresponded with you under that name. Alexf⁴² 01:24, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Scusa, avrei dovuto essere più chiaro. Mi riferisco a questo. Saludos! --Freddyballo (talk) 19:26, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

YOU stop falsely changing Rafael Marquez

Alexf: Please don't take off other people's posts without researching information your self. Rafael Marquez was sold to Barcelona for 5 million euros not 25. http://goal.com/en/Articolo.aspx?ContenutoId=381762. If you wish to try and insult me again I can take it up with Wikipedia. If not, don't send people you don't know messages.

Also on another note, I've been looking over your page, and you seem to delete a lot of things that actually shouldn't be deleted. Maybe they are giving you too many things to look over. They should get more people to do it. I hope you are properly trained to do these things. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.197.180.127 (talk) 22:28, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Please calm down and be civil. I did not falsely accused you of anything, nor did I falsely revert a change. All I did was revert an unsourced posting and let you know about it in your Talk page. You did the correct thing and sourced it afterwards. That is fine and the way Wikipedia works. There were no insults whatsoever, only a standard unsourced level 2 notice: (Template:uw-unsourced2). If you feel threatened or insulted and you want to make a complaint, please do so following the proper procedures. If you need help doing so, please let me know and I'll be glad to point you in the right direction for complaints.

As per your second comment: "you seem to delete a lot of things". That is correct. I am an Admin and as such I have to take care of cleaning up WP:CSD and WP:PROD requests. Again, if you see anything wrong with this and feel threatened or insulted, by any means please do a formal complaint if you wish. It is your right an your prerogative. In the meantime, please remember to properly source your edits and to sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~) at the end. Alexf⁴² 01:21, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I am calm. My point was that even if you are an admin, you shouldn't use it to wield unnecessary power over everything. Before deleting something, actually ask questions before doing so. Anyone, and I mean anyone can be an admin. Don't get power happy. How would you like it if you included something correct in an article and someone wielding higher power than you deletes it. Doesn't feel good does it? 76.197.180.127 (talk) 02:13, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

You don't have to be Admin to edit. Any editor can refactor or remove any unsourced edit. If somebody reverts one of my edits, and it has happened as I am an editor just like you and everybody else, and the reversion is for a controversial unsourced edit; if I believe I am correct, I will promptly seek and source the edit. Generally I would have done it to begin with so it should not be a problem. Please read WP:VERIFY and WP:CITE if you haven't already. Happy wiking. Alexf⁴² 02:48, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

24K (Cuban Link album)

How does this deletion qualify under CSD A7? east.718 at 03:37, February 18, 2008

NN. It was "prod|concern = Per WP:MUSIC, unreleased albums are not notable unless there has been substantial coverage in reliable sources". If you think it has value, and I assume you do because you restored it, that is fine. I have no knowledge of the musician/band. PROD cleanup after 5 days. Cheers. Alexf⁴² 03:42, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Michele Marsh

1. Why do you believe that CSD A7 applied to this article (in which it was clearly stated that Michele Marsh was an anchorwoman at two New York City television stations and the subject of major press coverage)?
2. Why did you remove the links to this title (thereby discouraging users from creating a new article)? —David Levy 03:45, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

The article was PRODed and lasted for five days with no objections. It was in the PROD list of the day after expiration: "prod|concern = Non-notable anchorwoman from Connecticut.|month = February|day = 12|year = 2008|time = 02:16". I have restored the article so it can be worked on. The PROD process takes five days and if nobody objects after five days it is slated for deletion. Alexf⁴² 12:22, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you.

I'm familiar with the WP:PROD process, and I saw from the deleted edit history that this article had been tagged, but you didn't indicate that this was the reason behind the deletion. You cited and quoted CSD A7, which made it appear as though you independently determined that the article qualified for speedy deletion under this criterion. This effectively superseded the proposed deletion, thereby removing the ability for anyone to legitimately restore (or have a sysop restore) the article at will.

I see that you cited/quoted CSD A7 when deleting some other articles around the same time. If all of these deletions were actually due to prod tags, I suggest that you restore and re-delete the articles with an appropriate summary. (Otherwise, users—particularly non-sysops—won't realize that they needn't go through a special process to get them restored.)

Also, I'm still wondering why you removed the incoming links. An article's deletion (especially one stemming from the proposed deletion process) doesn't necessarily mean that a valid article on the topic (or at least a suitable redirect to another article) cannot be created. Unless a title is nonsensical or spam-oriented (in which case the mentions should be eliminated, not merely de-linked), incoming links usually should remain.

Thanks again. —David Levy 19:04, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

David. Point taken. You are correct. Sorry for the delay in answering but I was out of town.It was an artifact of using TW for CSD then forgetting when changing to PROD pages, when I should have done them as PROD. My bad. Will do as you request as soon as I get home tonight (at work now). Thanks! Alexf⁴² 18:22, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! —David Levy 07:32, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Pieter Vink

Hi. Although not involved in the original article about this top UEFA referee for which there are countless sources towards his notability per standards set by all other international football (soccer) referees articles, I am re-creating it from scratch, and will show notability equal to, or in excess of, that shown in other acceptable referee articles. BTW, as a top referee without an article, his redlink is perfectly valid in the List of football referees, which list does not actually contain any unlinked names. I have replaced the link, red or otherwise. Thanks. Ref ^(chew)(do) 11:10, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

That's OK. A CSD tag was placed as non-notable and lasted for a little while. It was just a stub with barely any information. Maybe you can get some sources on him to make a starting article or at least a stub with enough for an infobox (place of birth, date of birth and the like). Alexf⁴² 12:16, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Done. That's the fastest "so-far complete" article I've ever done, and I believe the "New Wembley" bit is the really notable part. Thanks. Ref ^(chew)(do) 13:36, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Well done Ref! Beautiful job and much better that the previous article! Alexf⁴² 13:52, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi! All those backlinks you removed using TW, is it possible to revert them? Since the article is up and running again? I noticed it in UEFA Euro 2008 qualifying Group C, but I can see it was removed in the forthcoming UEFA Euro 2008 aswell.. If reverting is possible, this is maybe the best alternative, than editing all the articles in which the change was made. I guess there are a few of them! lil2mas (talk) 15:01, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it is possible. I'm just back in town (and at work now). Give me time when I get home tonight and I'll do it. Thanks! Alexf⁴² 18:22, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

All links to Pieter Vink have been restored. Alexf⁴² 00:01, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Thomas Lyford and Speedy Deletion

I thought we had five days once a speedy deletion tag was placed. Went to place the hangon tag and reference why the person was notable and found the article already deleted. Have I missed something?

Being a published author makes Tom Lyford notable but, perhaps instead of having a full article a stub article or grouping him with other notable alumni/faculty of Foxcroft Academy would make more sense. I'm fine with either of these but, just deleting him without giving me the chance to explain and or expand seems a little hasty. Jasynnash2 (talk) 11:17, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Answered in your page. Alexf⁴² 12:26, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Protection of my user page

Not that it affects me since I can edit it anyway, but was the idea to protect my userpage permanently just because of one heavy spate of vandalism that occurred on a night when I was out of town? Just wanted to know; unprotecting it makes it easier for other people to migrate the userboxes and do other housekeeping tasks (and as a matter of principle I believe no one, not even admins active in anti-vandal efforts, should be privileged with a protected user page).

Just wanted to know. Daniel Case (talk) 16:10, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Entirely correct. Your page showed up as a prot request. I checked and saw heavy vandalism so I protected it figuring that you could unprotect at your will. I agree with you that as a rule, user pages (even admins) should not be protected. That's why my user page is not. It was only done to stop the heavy vandalism until your return. Alexf⁴² 18:22, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Habitual Wiki Vandal strikes on the WNBA Page

Hello, the Women's National Basketball Association article was vandalized by 208.108.221.87 , here is the link [3]. under the Teams section...The user in question was given a plethora of warning and subsequent bans for vandalizing. It looks like this person hasn't learned the lesson. Can you please take action before more articles fall prey to vandalism.. Thanks ELO MnLynx Fan30 (talk) 21:41, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay. You got me at a busy moment as I was at work at the time. The best way is to report habitual vandals that have been duly warned, to AIV where you'll catch the quick attention of admins on duty. It is always a sure way and much faster than asking a specific admin. Alexf⁴² 00:13, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for taking care of Leonmcl123: There aren't many of us Wivenhoe fans, but we won't have our players' identities stolen! Could you help rescue another lower league player, Lee Roache from being misbranded as Matthew G Barrett without a lengthy page request delay. Thanks. Kevin McE (talk) 17:50, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

I am a little confused on this one. AFAIK there is a player named Lee Roache which is now restored, and there is no Matthew G Barrett. Is that correct? I can't find info on Barrett. Please enlighten me. Thanks. Alexf⁴² 18:15, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

As far as I am aware, there is no Matthew Barrett. Leon moved Lee Roache's details to a new name, and did likewise rebranding Danny Hart as Leon McLeod (deleted). For some reason, I was able to revert the Hart-McLeod move, but not the Roache-Barrett one. Why would that be? Is the history of the Roache page recoverable? Kevin McE (talk) 18:43, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

AFAIK he did a redirect of a redirect. Nasty. There is a Matthew Barrett (unrelated), but I could not find a footballer of that name, which is what he redirected. If I turn out to be wrong, please let me know and we can try to fix it. Thanks. Alexf⁴² 18:46, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

He moved Lee Roache to Matthew Barrett (English footballer), and shortly after moved that page to Matthew G Barrett. The talk page however has not been returned to Lee Roache, and neither has the page history. Can anything be done? Kevin McE (talk) 18:59, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Ah yes, I see now. Yes. Give me a little while as I was on my luch hour at work when this started and now I'm way past it. Will get to it soonest. We'll try to recover it. Thanks for the explanation. Alexf⁴² 19:02, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

All done now. Woody (talk) 19:45, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Woody! Alexf⁴² 20:24, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Re. Identityandconsulting

Re. this, I understand why you wrote the note in spanish. However, per WP:TPG's Use English, could you also provide a translation so others can appreciate what the user is being told. Thanks. Unbeatablevalue (talk) 23:32, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Done. (To be honest, I was meaning to do it soonest. The original message was written at 18:07 EST (23:07 UTC) right in the middle of the dinner call. I'd rather have a short delay in finishing the post in WP than face an angry wife. :-) ( Alexf⁴² 00:03, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

First things first! Thanks. Unbeatablevalue (talk) 01:28, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for blocking Gigalocus

I would just like to say thanks for blocking Gigalocus for me. My second guy blocked because of me now. Thanks for your help, he was very annoying. Addshore (talk) 12:17, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

No need to thank the admin who blocked. Just part of the job of trying to protect the project. Keep an eye out for unrepentant vandals, warn them properly using the provided templates, and report them to AIV when needed. Thanks. Alexf⁴² 12:19, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

The Marmite Sisters

Hi, you deleted that one as A7, but when double checking, the talk page shows that it was (weakly) kept in an AfD in 2006. What do you think? Should we restore and bring it to AfD again? -- lucasbfr ^talk 16:18, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

My bad. Yes indeed. It should be done. Article now restored. While doing a bundle of CSD that day, I missed the history on this page as being AfD in 2006. Thanks for the heads up. Alexf⁴² 17:50, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Self-limiting administrators

I have been working to formalize the concept behind my userbox. When you get a chance, could you please take a look at User:Bovlb/Self-limiting administrators and tell me if you think I'm on the right track? Thanks, Bovlb (talk) 22:23, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Answered there. Alexf⁴² 22:45, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Blocked a range you've been dealing with

I've blocked 118.137.0.0/17 for a week due to the massive amounts of vandlism only edits coming from that range (for example, on the article Sunrise (company)). As you've blocked several of the IPs in this range, I thought you'd want to know. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 00:25, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

deleted my article which is a real problem in my area

that article that you deleted was a real article. it is a real problem in my school district with some group of people vandalizing our students property so could you please undelete my article! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wolverine2008 (talk • contribs) 02:05, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

The proper way to request would be first mentioning what article, then signing your message. I delete dozens of articles as part of the CSD or PROD process.

After SineBot signed for you, finally I had a clue who you were and what article you are referring to. The article has no referneces and has been CSD twice. BTW, vandalism as you did to my page, won't get you anywhere. Alexf⁴² 02:10, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

maradona

joke? a joke? the photo was taken from a picture that represents in a picture the words "hand-god-maradona" is not a joke, is a pictery view. so if you don´t like it, dont tell me that is not serius...--168.226.104.94 (talk) 18:43, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

It is not encyclopedic. A doctored image to display a humorous situation in a particular action that the player did at one point is not needed. The action is already explained in the text. If you disagree, instead of reposting the image, please discuss it in the article's Talk page or at WP:FOOTY. -- Alexf⁴² 23:01, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

if "A doctored image to display a humorous situation in a particular action that the player did at one point is not needed. The action is already explained in the text" why there is a image with a draw of the situation? --168.226.106.87 (talk) 17:27, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Ah! acabo de ver que entendes castellano! bueno, lo que no entiendo es porque te parece una broma esa imagen. Ya de por si "la mano de dios" es bastante poco enciclopedico como artículo, asi que no veo el motovo de eliminar una imagen que aporta en su síntesis elementos para relacionar el tema. Los dibujos son una ayuda, y en este caso es una imagen poderosa, no veo el problema, no distrae. Tu punto de vista es el unico en el tema, me parece. Gracias de todos modos por el interes que demostras al luchar contra los vandalicos de wikipedia. un abrazo--168.226.106.87 (talk) 17:31, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Como dije antes, no veo que sea enciclopédico. Quizás el artículo tampoco lo sea (no lo había visto hasta que vos entraste). En todo caso, cambios de ese tipo deben ser discutidos en la página Talk o mejor aún en este caso en WT:WPF. Nota: es preferible escribir en inglés en en:WP para que todo el mundo entienda. Bienvenido y considerá (si aún no lo has hecho) de hacerte miembro de WP:ArF y de Wikiproject Argentina si te interesa.

(translation)As I said before, I don't see that as encyclopedic. Maybe the article itself isn't (I had not seen it until you came in). In any case, those kind of edits are better discussed in the Talk page or better yet in this case in WT:WPF. Note: is preferable to write in English in en:WP so everybody can understand. Welcome and consider (if you haven't already) becoming a member of WP:ArF and Wikiproject Argentina if you are interested. -- Alexf⁴² 18:13, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

LIGAS

I request that you reverse yourself on your A3 deletion of LIGAS. Soft redirects are a useful mechanism on the project, and like normal redirects are generally going to be short because they are pointing to content elsewhere. They should not, IMHO, generally be subject to A3 speedy deletion. If you want to see my more detailed arguments on the subject, pelase check out this AFD debate on another soft redirect. - TexasAndroid (talk) 19:59, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Restored as per your request and after reading Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Omglolwtfbbq. I was not aware of that AfD and for the record, I'm not sure I agree and would probably have opined as delete, as some others have done there, but I respect your opinion on the issue. It has now been restored. Cheers. -- Alexf⁴² 22:56, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

hi

For info. I blocked User:Alexevo91 as per your warning on his account. Victuallers (talk) 20:10, 25 February 2008 (UTC)