User talk:Cirt/Archive 16
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 | 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 10 | ← | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | → | Archive 20 |
In the Shadow of the Moons
Hi Cirt. Are you going to add some information to In the Shadow of the Moons so that it is distinct from Nan Sook Hong? No rush. Thanks. Borock (talk) 14:49, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Hello Cirt. I was not aware that Delhi Belgian Club was nominated for deletion and I feel that I can improve the article to make its notability more clear. The club is part of the history of Belgian immigrants in South-Central Ontario and is visited many times per year by tours[1] from Belgium. There are only five [2] Belgian clubs in English speaking provinces of Canada and this one is known as "the largest Belgian club in North America" [3]. Over 60,000[4] Flemish families settled in the area which was the primary settlement location of Flemish in the world as of 1970 (The Belgians in Ontario: a history, p.249). Could you please give me a chance to improve the article by un-deleting it or restoring the latest version to my user space? Thanks, Mmn100 (talk) 17:08, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Nomination of Daryl Wine Bar and Restaurant for deletion
The article Daryl Wine Bar and Restaurant is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daryl Wine Bar and Restaurant 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 17:33, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
List
Hi! I saw you were involved with a previous nomination for deletion of List of suicides in fiction, and felt you should be informed of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of suicides in fiction (3rd nomination). Thanks!--Yaksar (let's chat) 17:34, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you for the notice. -- Cirt (talk) 19:54, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
- On a totally unrelated note, I feel like we got off on the wrong foot. Now that everything seems to have calmed down, I'd like to apologize for any behavior you may have objected to, and I hope we can work together productively in the future.--Yaksar (let's chat) 20:17, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you. I feel the same way. Let us both try to move forwards. ;) Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 20:19, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
- Great. May I ask, out of curiosity, for the rationale of your comment at the AfD? It seems to be a well written support for the creation of an article on Suicide in Fiction, but I'm not sure if it applies to the list. You don't have to answer that if you don't want, I just was interested in how you felt and wanted your opinion out of the muddle of that page.--Yaksar (let's chat) 20:32, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
- It is a great rationale for the existence of both pages. In fact, they would both then academically complement the other. ;) -- Cirt (talk) 20:33, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
- Hmm, ok. I don't necessarily agree with that logic, but thank you.--Yaksar (let's chat) 20:37, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
- It is a great rationale for the existence of both pages. In fact, they would both then academically complement the other. ;) -- Cirt (talk) 20:33, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
- Great. May I ask, out of curiosity, for the rationale of your comment at the AfD? It seems to be a well written support for the creation of an article on Suicide in Fiction, but I'm not sure if it applies to the list. You don't have to answer that if you don't want, I just was interested in how you felt and wanted your opinion out of the muddle of that page.--Yaksar (let's chat) 20:32, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you. I feel the same way. Let us both try to move forwards. ;) Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 20:19, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
- On a totally unrelated note, I feel like we got off on the wrong foot. Now that everything seems to have calmed down, I'd like to apologize for any behavior you may have objected to, and I hope we can work together productively in the future.--Yaksar (let's chat) 20:17, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
deletion of Kite Flying Society page
Hello Cirt -
I noticed you deleted our Kite Flying Society (band) page. I am wondering what we should go about doing to satisfy wikipedia admins as to the validity of our page. We have been featured on the CBS program "How I Met Your Mother"; we were on national top 10 album lists in 2006 and 2010; we have extensive press from a variety of media (in our home city of San Diego and elsewhere). I see any number of bands on wikipedia (including some from San Diego) who are not even active but are allowed to keep their page. We, KFS, have experienced far greater success, exposure and attention than these bands and yet our page was deleted. Did we not document our sources well enough? What would you suggest? We are still actively making music and are more than a simple fly-by-night garage band. Since our page's deletion, we have been featured on two more critics' Top Albums of 2010 award, which shows relevance and lasting power. We're currently recording our third album as well.
Thank you for your help and advice, Dustin Illingworth / Kite Flying Society dustin.illignworth@gmail.com
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.62.17.146 (talk) 20:59, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
DYK for The Best American Magazine Writing 2007
 | On 4 February 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The Best American Magazine Writing 2007, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the American Society of Magazine Editors book The Best American Magazine Writing 2007 features investigative journalism about the Beslan school hostage crisis and survivors of Agent Orange? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:03, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
Hello. I just now noticed that you blocked Missiondolores (talk · contribs) in September 2010.[5] Considering the incredible work this user has performed, not only releasing their text for use on Mission Dolores mural (since rewritten), but also donating three rare images,[6][7][8] I am honestly at a complete loss as to understanding why they were blocked. Could you look into this for me? Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 04:53, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
Today's New Yorker Article
The Apostate: Paul Haggis vs. the Church of Scientology by Lawrence Wright February 14, 2011 I assume you already saw this already but just in case you missed it. I myself have not had time to read it all but the parts I did read seem very useful. The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 20:05, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you. There are parts that are quite informative, indeed. And others that are a bit creepy. -- Cirt (talk) 21:21, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
- Just finished reading it, I have to disagree its disturbing. CoS, is really being pushed to the tipping point. A well respected NRM scholar (you can guess who, we talked about him recently) mentioned at AAR that the shift from "Cult labeling," and "brainwashing" to the more incendiary abuse (Miscavige alleged abuse, Mcpherson) has been a important rhetorical shift. He also commented that since The St. Peterburg Times report and the project Chanology protests are pushing leadership to its most precarious state since LRH passed. I am interested to see what reaction the Church gives... if any. The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 04:11, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, that will be interesting, especially in light of the prior history of Operation Snow White. -- Cirt (talk) 14:40, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
- Just finished reading it, I have to disagree its disturbing. CoS, is really being pushed to the tipping point. A well respected NRM scholar (you can guess who, we talked about him recently) mentioned at AAR that the shift from "Cult labeling," and "brainwashing" to the more incendiary abuse (Miscavige alleged abuse, Mcpherson) has been a important rhetorical shift. He also commented that since The St. Peterburg Times report and the project Chanology protests are pushing leadership to its most precarious state since LRH passed. I am interested to see what reaction the Church gives... if any. The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 04:11, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
This looks like a slam dunk delete and I almost punched it yesterday but something smells about that AFD and I'm not quite sure what it is. The only thing that stands out is that many of the "delete" !votes were "follow the leader metoos".
I don't think it could have been closed any other way though. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:04, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
- If it helps, almost all of the "per noms" were young accounts (although not necessarily created in the last fortnight) whose talk pages were full of behaviour warnings and other evidence of poor editing judgement. Some, but not all, were Serbian/Albanian POV warriors. However, White Writer and Gaius Claudius Nero (also "per noms") appear to have a long history of constructive, quality edits in this subject matter. So clearly "per nom" was an opinion capable of being held by experienced Wikipedians. - DustFormsWords (talk) 01:10, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
- I guess if you disregarded the "metoos" from the POV warriors a "no consensus" close is possible but the admin who did that would be taking his lumps at DRV. (ie people screaming "SUPERVOTE SUPERVOTE"). --Ron Ritzman (talk) 14:37, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
- Good points, all. ;) -- Cirt (talk) 01:20, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
Image
Hey, can you use your admin magic and see if you can find the last time File:Bert_and_Ernie_Married.jpg was nominated for deletion for derivative work? Thanks, CTJF83 12:45, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
Please create
User Георги Тодоров hi please create page serb albanien war pls cirt —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.236.141.207 (talk) 16:38, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
- Try posting to Wikipedia:WikiProject Serbia's talk page. -- Cirt (talk) 16:40, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
Finder-Spyder
I'm not bothering with all the utterly overly complex wiki code - I'd just like to know why you deleted the Finder Spyder wiki page? Many thanks Carlosos —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.218.143.28 (talk) 17:18, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
- Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Finder-Spyder. -- Cirt (talk) 17:19, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi Cirt
Apparently your close of the Brian David Mitchell afd is being interpreted as a rationale to never merge any portion of the two articles, bypassing any examination of the pertinent guidelines (obviously in my opinion, of course!) In any case, could you chime in and help us thread through the apparently complicated procedural issues involved? The current discussion on this matter is taking place here. If this would be possible, we will be sincerely appreciative. Thanks!--Hodgson-Burnett's Secret Garden (talk) 00:31, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Helena von Schantz
I wish to appeal your decision to delete Helena von Schantz. Essentially there was no discussion and the criteria for deletion appears to have been as a politician not as a liberal feminist writer on gender and the law and education. I don't think that was fair and not helpful to trying to provide some space for Swedish gender politics here. I would be happy to discuss this further, but currently she is 'notable' for having taken the leader of the women's caucus of the Liberal Party to task over her position on morality and the law. Michael Goodyear (talk) 17:30, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
- I am sorry, but discussion was open for a good deal of time at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Helena von Schantz. I would be most willing to make a userfied copy available in your userspace as a subpage for you to work on as a proposed draft version. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 17:50, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you for the offer - I accept. Maybe I am not understanding the process - yes the discussion was open - I said my bit - there was no response by Friday - on Saturday 2 people said not notable - I returned on Monday, and the article was gone. I hardly call that discussion. As I said above the original notice of intended deletion was based on that of a politician, which is not fair. Now if I undersatand your offer above, I can continue to work on the article and if I think there is substantially more information, I can re-create it? (so far I have been successful in all justifications for new pages) Thanks. Michael Goodyear (talk) 18:20, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Bulbous Cell Media Group - deleted page
Dear Cirt, I am contacting you regarding this post: 06:24, 9 February 2011 Cirt (talk | contribs) deleted "Talk:Bulbous Cell Media Group" (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bulbous Cell Media Group) I had actually added 2 valuable sources under the references section this morning. I'd appreciate if you could please kindly let me know why the page has been deleted and if the references were not sufficient? I have actually found more articles about Bulbous Cell on the internet today that I could also add. Please note that I am not trying to promote this company - I only did research on media agencies here in Tokyo, and was surprised that this company (where a friend of mine used to work for) did not appear on Wikipedia. Thank you in advance for your help.--Eaninat (talk) 07:49, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Could you advise me when would be possible to take the noticeboards off, please? ({notability|date=January 2011} {refimproveBLP|date=January 2011} {coi|date=January 2011}) --Artvoyt (talk) 11:01, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
DYK for The Mystery of a Hansom Cab
| | On 10 February 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The Mystery of a Hansom Cab, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that in 1887, The Mystery of a Hansom Cab by Fergus Hume outsold Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes novel A Study in Scarlet worldwide? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
rʨanaɢ (talk) 20:52, 9 February 2011 (UTC) 06:02, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
AFD issues
On 28 January, you deleted Jean-Patrick Constantini per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jean-Patrick Constantini. However, in the time between the beginning of the deletion discussion and the closure, the article was moved to Jean-Patrick Costantini (note alternate spelling). This article is still available (complete with AFD notice). Can you complete the AFD by deleting this moved article? WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 15:02, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Re Mitchell afd and now soon-to-be ani
I'm at a loss with regard to what venue to take my frustration over at the Brian David Mitchell talkpage to so I've decided to try----wp:ani? (BTW I will admit I was disappointed with your closing rationale at the pertinent afd--not at all in anyway whatsoever with what I imagine was the rationale itself but rather with your explanation of the same, which seems to remain inscrutable either to me or to my disputant on the talkpage, since I interpret it as your not choosing to weigh in on the proposed merger while he interprets it as your having done so........!)--Hodgson-Burnett's Secret Garden (talk) 15:25, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
- It's here.--Hodgson-Burnett's Secret Garden (talk) 16:02, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Personal attacks, threats and interference
Once again, The Transhumanist (talk · contribs) is interfering with the Contents test. I'm not going to waste my time here if such attempts at sabotage and intimidation continue.
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:RichardF#Please_be_on_the_lookout
- http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Contents_pages_(header_bar)&oldid=413200560
- http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Portal:Contents/TOC_navbar&oldid=413200380
What actions can be taken to stop this now? RichardF (talk) 03:08, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Ashley Boettcher
What is the last page you created this page. I wanted to create this page, so find out the last page that was on Ashley Boettcher. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BrennanTorres1998 (talk • contribs) 07:06, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Portal promotions
Thanks - and done. And I've removed lots of unnecessary "noinclude" tags from the page, so it looks a bit less complicated now. So, we're back up to 150 now, but for how long, given the current state of WP:FPOR? BencherliteTalk 07:17, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Spongecell
Hi Cirt,
I'm writing you to be aware of why Spongecell was deleted from Wikipedia. I recently updated the company info and added a few links to some articles that Spongecell appeared in. It seems that it was deleted shortly after that. I'm hoping you could shed a little light on the situation. Spongecell has always been about honesty and I would like to continue that. The company is very reputable, is not spam and only has the best of intentions. So anything I can do to understand better, make any changes to get the page back up would be much appreciated.
Thanks!
Dansponge (talk) 15:50, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
- Suggest you could work on a proposed draft version, within a subpage of your userspace, to see if the subject fails or satisfies WP:NOTE. I could make such a copy available, at your request. ;) -- Cirt (talk) 21:09, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Could you do that Cirt?
Dansponge (talk) 20:45, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
You deleted this page but this player has competed in the main draw in one of the major professional tournaments (2010 BGL Luxembourg Open – Singles, so she satisfies the 3rd criteria of tennis players notability (Luxembourg tournament is a WTA Tour tournament)Vinz57 (talk) 20:32, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) It was deleted per a consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yulia Putintseva. You would have to take your disagreement with its deletion to WP:DRV CTJF83 20:36, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
- No. The instructions at DRV say: "Deletion Review is to be used where someone is unable to resolve the issue in discussion with the administrator (or other editor) in question. This should be attempted first – courteously invite the admin to take a second look." So Vinz57 was right to take it here first and regrettably we now have a DRV when one might not have been needed (for Cirt: here). --Mkativerata (talk) 12:43, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
- Note: I undid my prior AFD close. I restored the page. I relisted the AFD for another potential seven days of discussion. The AFD discussion is ongoing, again, here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yulia Putintseva. This DRV can now be closed, with discussion arguing for notability or lack thereof, continuing at the AFD page. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 14:39, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
- No. The instructions at DRV say: "Deletion Review is to be used where someone is unable to resolve the issue in discussion with the administrator (or other editor) in question. This should be attempted first – courteously invite the admin to take a second look." So Vinz57 was right to take it here first and regrettably we now have a DRV when one might not have been needed (for Cirt: here). --Mkativerata (talk) 12:43, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Your DYK nomination of Richard Smith (silent film director)
Hello! Your submission of Richard Smith (silent film director) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! KimChee (talk) 04:34, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Nonzero Records
Just trying to understand how you resolved to delete the article given that there was only one delete but there was also one keep. I was in the process of adding more independent verifiable references and would have appreciated more time to provide them. The AFD discussion had only ben listed for eight days and I would have thought that it should have been left open to allow more time for a true debate/discussion to occur. Dan arndt (talk) 05:23, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
- I would be most willing to provide a userfied copy for you, if you wish to work on it in your userspace to further satisfy WP:NOTE, and then consult back with me before moving it back into mainspace. ;) -- Cirt (talk) 20:51, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
- That would certainly assist as I have located multiple verifiable references for the label, which will easily satisfy the notability requirements - something that could have been achieved without the need to delete the article. You still haven't answered my question on how a debate could be closed with only two responses - surely it could have been kept open in order to get a better consensus of views. Dan arndt (talk) 01:15, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Have just finished a whole series of references for Nonzero Records and was about to re-instate the article back on the mainspace but thought it might be worthwhile for another set of eyes to have a look. Dan arndt (talk) 02:23, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Richard Smith (silent film director) Article
Cirt,
Article: Richard Smith (silent film director)
You are the first administrator on en.wikipedia.org to be appreciated for something I did which was so small on an article you started. The article name got me confused for a while and it wasn't until I finished and move onto another article, that I realised "silent film director" isn't like todays movies. Anything that I can help with for example feedback or tidy up an article that you don't have much time for, you can ask me on my talkpage. Just leave a short message and the article link. You can find me doing the WikiProject Military History or WikiProject Biography mainly but I do have others that I help clean up, assess or try and put on the talkpage things that would improve the article for someone who maybe interested in that article. Adamdaley (talk) 02:46, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
User:Yms375/Idol Family History and User talk:Yms375/Idol Family History were mentioned or alluded to by MER-C (talk · contribs), me, and DARTH SIDIOUS 2 (talk · contribs) as pages that should also be deleted. Would you delete them per Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Yms375/sandbox, or should I start a new MfD for them? Cunard (talk) 09:33, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
DYK for T. Arthur Cottam
| | On 14 February 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article T. Arthur Cottam, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Pornographic Apathetic by film director T. Arthur Cottam was featured at film festivals in South Korea and France, and at an art exhibit in Vienna? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Thank you for your help Victuallers (talk) 06:03, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Invitation to work on a possible RfC/U
I am working on a potential RfC/U about User:Geo Swan. The draft is located at User:Fram/Sandbox. I have used a discussion where you were involved as part of the evidence, and would like to invite you to go over the draft RfC and add or correct whatever you feel is necessary. Obviously, if you feel that an RfC/U is not appropriate or not the best step to take, feel free to let me know as well. Fram (talk) 11:54, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
- It looks very good so far. ;) -- Cirt (talk) 14:31, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
- Now live at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Geo Swan. Fram (talk) 13:17, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
slander aloud?
Hi, There are a few people who I follow in the circles of leadership development, one of which is Arthur Carmazzi. I do understand that your editors find him distasteful and do not want him on Wikipedia, however, as I searched for his recent contributions, I saw the Wikipedia link was still up on Google. And when I went to the page it states how Mr Carmazzi is a "notorious spammer". I am not to judge whether he is or not, I am sure you have sophisticated technics to identify spammers, however the claim is the Mr. Carmazzi is doing this himself (would seem unlikely from an internationally know figure) using "sock IP address" apparently including my IP and my comments. So if they are wrong about me, they may be wrong about others too. In any case, I personally feel that it is unseemly, and certainly not in good faith, to have a page ranked #3 in Google that calls him a spammer. After all, we believe what we read in Wikipedia.
I have informed his office and I am sure they will be contacting someone. I just wanted to inform someone and your welcome comments was so pleasant, I thought you may be a neutral party that could observe the situation. I made 2 comments on that page, one was deleted and the other was ignored. 180.249.132.107 (talk) 12:18, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
- That page was deleted already, after a deletion discussion here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arthur Carmazzi. -- Cirt (talk) 12:24, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Now that the two week trial period is completed, please respond to the proposal, Adding topical links to contents pages navigational headers and footers, as you see fit. Regards, RichardF (talk) 14:00, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
After some checking
I am still convinced that it was Sherurcij. See also this link [9] This old article of Sherurcij is also very similar to the new article that Papermoneyisjustpaper just created. I am quite sure that this has nothing directly to do with Geo Swan. IQinn (talk) 13:16, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
- I agree with IQinn, Cirt. I have had long dealings with this contributor, and the method used to talk around the Request for Deletion was eerily similar. --Yachtsman1 (talk) 15:14, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
note - BLPN - New Village Leadership Academy
Hi, just a note to let you know, you have got a mention in this thread at the BLP noticeboard, regards. Off2riorob (talk) 22:41, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
IP User 68.104.61.40
THANK YOU. JerseyGirlMedia (talk) 03:34, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
DYK for Richard Smith (silent film director)
| | On 16 February 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Richard Smith (silent film director), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Richard Smith directed the Marx Brothers in their first film, Humor Risk? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Materialscientist (talk) 06:05, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Very informative Chart
You have created a very nice chart over at Wikipedia talk:Sockpuppet investigations/Shutterbug, It makes clear a continued patter. I like this one too over at Wikipedia talk:Requests for checkuser/Case/COFS#Update: Additional confirmations in COFS checkuser case. I was wondering what you thought of this user Quantumsilverfish (talk · contribs) who is criticized the sourcing at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/L. Ron Hubbard/archive2? The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 18:44, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- User:I'm4aNPOV I am pretty sure its the first CoS account on Wiki The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 19:52, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Broken AFD request
I have no idea about all the AFD processes/templates, but I noticed that the malformed deletion request Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Diplomat is languishing at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2011_February_8 (where ordinarily it would have been closed yesterday). Can you fix it and relist it? Thanks! Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:00, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Request for undeletion of my page
Good morning Cirt,
I would like to request undeletion for my page Binary University College of Management and Entrepreneurship. Kindly undelete and give me a maximum of 7 days to make the necessary ammendments as per the Wikipedia specifications.
Please let me know if this will be possible soon,
Kind Regards, Admin Binary University College — Preceding unsigned comment added by Valerie Pgs (talk • contribs) 03:09, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
Talkback notice
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Delicious carbuncle (talk) 23:51, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 15:41, 18 February 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Bacon WikiCup 2011 revisited
- Pages
- Wikipedia:Bacon WikiCup
- User:SuperHamster/Bacon Challenge 2011
- User:SuperHamster/Bacon WikiCup 2011
- User:SuperHamster/Bacon WikiCup 2011/Submissions
- History
- Ideas
- Films? — Bacon Grabbers, Canadian Bacon, Slaughterhouse (film) (aka Bacon Bits)
- Books? — search on authors from prior year, also: Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon by Craig Fass, Brian Turtle, and Mike Ginelli
- Drinks? — Bacon and Tomato Sandwich, Bacon Liquor & Tomato
- Quality upgrade? The Bacon Cookbook, The BLT Cookbook (peer review)
Other ideas for new articles? ... Hrm ... -- Cirt (talk) 16:31, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
- You stole all of the good topics. D: That's why I haven't gotten to do any. SilverserenC 16:53, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
- Glad I could help out! I was tempted to send you a message a couple of weeks ago, but had an awful feeling it would be a bit too close to gloating... Anyway am quite chuffed I managed to overtake your rather good score and will be watching your next move carefully ;) WormTT 17:33, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
Your block
Hey Cirt, just to let you know, 24.25.218.135 geolocates to California, not the place Stubes99 supposedly is. --Bsadowski1 06:02, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Worst Prequel, Remake, Rip-off or Sequel Golden Raspberry Award winners
Category:Worst Prequel, Remake, Rip-off or Sequel Golden Raspberry Award winners, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Yaksar (let's chat) 20:17, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Worst Screenplay Golden Raspberry Award winners
Category:Worst Screenplay Golden Raspberry Award winners, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Yaksar (let's chat) 20:17, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
Truth According to Wikipedia GAR
Just stopping by to let you know RL has been significantly busier than expected yesterday and today, and then over the weekend I'm away from Wikipedia, but I haven't forgotten your GAR and I will be back to it on (Australian) Monday! - DustFormsWords (talk) 06:15, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
- Okay, thank you. -- Cirt (talk) 15:21, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
- Hi - My initial review of this article is complete. Please leave a message on my talk page when you are ready for me to revisit the review. - DustFormsWords (talk) 04:52, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
I want to create a new article Giridharilal Kedia
I want to create a new biography of a well known respected person, Giridharilal Kedia, which you have deleted on 12 January 2010, 02:15. so please help me on creating this biography.
I hope you can understand my language. if there is be any wrong from my side then please forgive that.. thank you... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Odisha1 (talk • contribs) 17:01, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
Bacon Challenge 2011 coming to a close
Dear ever-so-valiant Bacon Challenge 2011 participant:
Almost a year ago, the Bacon Challenge 2011 kicked off for the third year in a row with the annual mission of expanding and bettering Wikipedia's coverage of bacon. We are almost at the end of this year's Bacon Challenge, which ends on March 1st. I am pleased to say that, during this time period, Bacon Challenge participants have done a great job. Ten new pages have been created. Two articles have been granted the status of being good articles. Over one hundred reliable sources have been placed into articles, and over 7,500 words have been added. Six articles have been featured on Wikipedia's main page under the "Did you know..." section. These are all excellent results.
The Bacon WikiCup has also been exciting to watch. Contributors have been racking up more and more points as the deadline approaches. As I post this message, 
Worm That Turned is in the lead, with 
Cirt in second, and 
Acather96 in third. Cirt currently has created the most new pages, while Worm That Turned has done the most work in expanding articles and achieving DYKs. Acather96 has done the most work with image uploads. Remember, while the Bacon Challenge is ending in just a few days, it's not too late to make any last-minute contributions to get a few more Bacon WikiCup points. Everyone who contributes at least something will earn a virtual commemorative medal, so if you haven't contributed anything bacon-related to Wikipedia, now's your chance. Contributions can be submitted up until the end of March 7th, but only for contributions that were done before the beginning of March. The extra week is provided for participants to report any last-minute contributions, and to allow for any contributions that require a timely process (such as a good article or DYK nomination) to go through. At the end of the event, scores for the Bacon WikiCup will be completed and re-checked, and prizes will be distributed. Thanks and good luck! ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 04:11, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
The Bugle: Volume LVIX, January 2011
|
![[6]](https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/File:Missiondoloresmural-2.jpg){kind=link}
![[7]](https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/File:Sacredheart2.jpg){kind=link}
![[8]](https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/File:Missionbasilica.jpg){kind=link}
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 15:25, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
March 2011 GAN backlog elimination drive a week away
WikiProject Good Articles will be running a GAN backlog elimination drive for the entire month of March. The goal of this drive is to bring the number of outstanding Good Article nominations down to below 50. This will help editors in restoring confidence to the GAN process as well as actively improving, polishing, and rewarding good content. If you are interested in participating in the drive, please place your name here. Awards will be given out to those who review certain numbers of GANs as well as to those who review the most. On behalf of my co-coordinator Wizardman, we hope we can see you in March. MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 00:31, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
Signpost...
Been a while since I bothered you about that Dispatch on FPs. Had a little bit of a falling out with Wikipedia myself. Haven't written anything significant for the post in a while. Anyhow, I still think you should write it, especially considering the Dispatch hasn't had anything since November. ResMar 03:22, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
The Giannini Foundation of Agricultural Economics
- The Giannini Foundation of Agricultural Economics · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions]
I saw this page has been previously deleted, I was wondering if I could create the article?
Spick3 (talk) 23:22, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
- Cirt--I do not find the article entirely promotional. This is a famous foundation, and the article just needs some editing, to remove duplication with other articles and also a little material which follows their website too closely. I suggest you restore it, & I'll do the necessary. (I know I have the ability to do so myself, but I want to ask you first.) DGG ( talk ) 23:40, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
- I would have to agree with DGG on this one. It doesn't look too spammy. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:15, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- Cirt--I do not find the article entirely promotional. This is a famous foundation, and the article just needs some editing, to remove duplication with other articles and also a little material which follows their website too closely. I suggest you restore it, & I'll do the necessary. (I know I have the ability to do so myself, but I want to ask you first.) DGG ( talk ) 23:40, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Would I recreate the page and you edit it? Or would Cirt somehow reactivate the page and you edit it? Thanks! Spick3 (talk) 00:02, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Done, now at User:Spick3/The Giannini Foundation of Agricultural Economics. You may work on it there, as a proposed draft version. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 02:41, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Thank you. I made some edits, including removing all of the external links. What else should be done before it is made into a full article? Spick3 (talk) 22:21, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
Could you please explain...
Could you please explain the history of this SPI? You are the first person to make an entry in this SPI, and you initially named me as the sockpuppet master. Geo Swan (talk) 17:01, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Linkin Park
Since you deleted the Wikiproject, could you please delete the related subpages for it as well? (Check my edit history, I tagged them all for G8.) Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 21:42, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
Image
Can you give me your opinion on this? Is it worth requesting undelete? CTJF83 12:31, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
As you are a contributor to the Musicals articles, I would value your comments at Talk:Musical theatre, where an editor wishes to delete all of the ELs to the article. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:58, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
Deletion review for Giridharilal Kedia
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Giridharilal Kedia. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Odisha1 (talk) 06:56, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
Thank You!
|
The Featured Sound Main Page Proposal Voter Barnstar | |
| I was truly humbled by the overwhelming community support for the recent proposal to place featured sounds on the main page. The proposal closed on Tuesday with 57 people in support and only 2 in opposition. It should take a few weeks for everything to get coded and tested, and once that is done the community will be presented with a mock up to assess on aesthetic appeal. Finally, I invite all of you to participate in the featured sounds process itself. Whether you're a performer, an uploader, or just come across a sound file you find top quality, and that meets the featured sound criteria, you can nominate it at Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates. Featured sounds is also looking for people to help assess candidates (also at Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates.) Thanks again for such a strong showing of support, and I hope to see you at featured sounds in the future. |
Ignoring your close
Hi Cirt, boldly following/ignoring your close on Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/On_Verra, I redirected Ma Petite Lumiere to Jocelyne Labylle, as I think that is more usefull. If you disagree, feel free to delete, since that was your close. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 22:57, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi Cirt! I note that you are returning the favour of my slow review by being slow to respond! The seven days on this GAR have run out today but I know that you had responded almost immediately to my initial comments so I'm assuming you would like me to hold the GA open rather than closing it. Could you let me know what's going on with this one? If you're busy at the moment one possibility is to close it as Fail, with an option to jump the queue on your next nomination of the article by coming straight to me. Or if you can start improvements now there'd be no problem with holding it open another week. - DustFormsWords (talk) 05:24, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
- Hi. It having been another three days with no response I am regretfully going to close this GA review as Fail. However if you decide to re-nominate when you return from your wikibreak I would be more than happy to help you jump the queue and, in essence, resume my original GAR. Just leave me a message on my talk page if you want to go down that route. - DustFormsWords (talk) 02:12, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
Spongecell
Hi Cirt,
I'm writing you in response to trying to get the Spongecell Wikipedia page back online. It looks like you made some changes, I just don't really know what my next steps for setting this up again is?
Thanks,
(69.193.172.234 (talk) 20:44, 28 February 2011 (UTC))
Victor Filotti
You have deleted the article Victor Filotti which I posted, on the basis of a very short discussion in which a single other wikipedian participated. I do not request the reinstatement of the article, but I would like to recover the information which I have posted. Is there any way in which this information can be recovered for my own use, or is it forever lost? Afil (talk) 01:17, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Removing page BugNET and its recreation avoidance.
Hi Cirt,
You have removed a page titled BugNET from the Wikipedia and you marked it to not be recreated again. As I have used BugNET which is a Issue Tracking software and I know this is a noteable software comparing to other Issue Tracking Softwares mentioned in the wikipedia. I would like to ask you to revert its page back or let me to recreate its page. As Comparison_of_issue-tracking_systems is a good source between comparison of this kind of software, I wanted to have this software in this page.
If you want to read more about BugNET you can see its website at http://www.bugnetproject.com/
Thank you for your attention.
Ehsan — Preceding unsigned comment added by EBouhendi (talk • contribs) 10:39, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
Article deletion discussion
Hi. Can you voice your opinion on the Beth Sotelo deletion discussion here? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 02:09, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Missed one!
When you deleted Franjo Topic, you missed that someone had moved the article to Franjo Topić after the AfD was started (I think). End result is that the article still exists, but isn't a recreation, so G6 may not technically apply. Please delete. Thanks. The-Pope (talk) 15:44, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Tarique Mustafa's Page Deletion
Hi Cirt,
I have a few questions about my page being deleted by you. According to you, my page has been deleted because Tarique Mustafa is not a notable person. However, this is what I have on my research about him. Tarique Mustafa is an important Computer Security Engineer that brought the Data Leak Prevention to the new generation. Because of that, he has received the award from Frost & Sullivan about Excellence in Technology Innovation Awards in 2009. Although I don't work for him, I still strongly believe that he is notable enough to meet all the notability standards of Wikipedia. I have edited my page and ready to send to you for rechecking before posting.
Thank you.
Here are some "reliable" sources:
- http://www.eetimes.com/design/other/4014346/Security-event-correlation-Raw-network-security-data-to-real-time-action
- http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/070108-nextier.html
- http://www.securitymattersmag.com/security-matters-magazine-article-detail.php?id=453
- http://www.solnet.com.pe/pdf/DLP-Russia2010_Mustafa.pdf
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Heomap1983 (talk • contribs) — Heomap1983 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
- (talk page stalker)Does this look like we need a checkuser? --Orange Mike | Talk 22:16, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- Could you please explain what you mean by checkuser?Vinh 23:14, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
- Following up the request at Help Desk,[10] I posted a WP:GNG review of the Tarique Mustafa topic on Heomap1983's talk page here. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 13:12, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
- Hi Cirt, Here is the new article that I just created in my page User:Heomap1983/Tarique Mustafa. Would you please take a quick look and give me some feedback? because I need to recreate title name "Tarique Mustafa" that has been locked by you. Thank you
- In response to your questions/objections please be informed that the subject of this article (Tarique Mustafa) is a well known technologist in the data security space who has been awarded many Industrial Awards and multiple independent third parties have written about him and his groundbreaking contributions in the area of Data Security and Semantic Search resulting in Key Patents. I am including here several links about Independent Third Party Articles and References that have been cited to the subject's (Tarique Mustafa's) work in the Data Security and Semantic Search Field. Pleas do take time to properly review each of these (see included below) Third Party Articles and References regarding the subject of this article before you arbitrarily pass judgement on the "notability" of this person. AGAIN, here are the Third Party Articles and References for you attention:
“Everything You Know About Wireless Is Wrong: A treatise on the evolution of Mobile Computing Technology and Market”, In Proc. of UCLA Wireless Conference, 2001
Data Leak Prevention appliance
nexTier Demos Data Leakage Prevention at RSA
nexTier Intros Next-Gen Data-Leakage Prevention
Embedded.com Design Articles Vinh 23:59, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
- With regards to User:Heomap1983/Tarique Mustafa, please read WP:V, WP:RS, WP:CITE, WP:CIT, and WP:Article development, on how to cite and properly format articles. -- Cirt (talk) 15:53, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Hope all is well
I haven't seen you around for a while. Hope all is well. Best regards. - Hydroxonium (H3O+) 07:17, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
article deletion
Hello. Please explain your deletion of this article: "Juan Castillo (filmmaker)." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elba2323 (talk • contribs) 00:12, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
- Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Juan Castillo (filmmaker). -- Cirt (talk) 15:54, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Big thanks
For helping NY Detox through its GA review. Best wishes, MartinPoulter (talk) 16:41, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
House episodes
Since when is WP:ITSNOTABLE a valid argument? I see nothing that suggests every episode is notable. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 17:56, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
- Are there any episodes you have failed to find secondary source coverage for, in your research? -- Cirt (talk) 19:30, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, almost every freaking single one. Stuff like TV.com is not reliable. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 22:33, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Most interesting that Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paternity (House) seems to be trending towards WP:SNOW type Keep result. -- Cirt (talk) 20:08, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
- I think it's getting snow-closed only because it's a bundle AFD. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 22:33, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Junko Sakurada
The article Junko Sakurada you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Junko Sakurada for eventual comments about the article. Well done! Jezhotwells (talk) 18:11, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Image
Is it worth trying to request undeletion of File:Bert and Ernie Married.jpg as actually being free, or not? This also. CTJF83 19:38, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
- Ok, I just wanted your opinion.... CTJF83 19:45, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
AfD
I noticed you recently closed the AfD for Longfellows poetical works. But during the discussion, the article was moved to Longfellow's Poetical Works,[11] so that article should be deleted as well. TFD (talk) 20:28, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Are you sure about this close? The only source claimed to be reliable was demonstrated in the discussion to be a self-published personal web site. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:38, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
- I would suggest waiting one week, and posting to those interested in improving the page and encouraging them to speedily do so. Then, I would strongly support your re-nominating the page to AFD again, for a fresh discussion. Feel free to keep me posted. ;) Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 20:39, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Hey Cirt--I understand the 2-2 vote (not counting mine) can be seen as "no consensus," but surely you agree that the sourcing for that article leaves a lot to be desired; it's basically nothing but a few websites. One 'keep' voter added references which aren't anywhere near WP:RS, and even PhilBridger stated he couldn't find anything. Moreover, among the lengthy comments of the other 'keep' voter, an SPA if ever there was one, is a remark that betrays a conflict of interest (never mind the basic lack of knowledge of our guidelines): "I have permission from Mario’s management to edit several independent web pages and part of a music website relevant to Mario's music." In my opinion, the complete lack of reliable sources on the internets (see [12], [13], and [14]) should also give cause for concern. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 21:09, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but I don't agree with your judgement to keep this article. If you check who voted on this AfD, you'll find two IPs from Austria, and two newly registered user. All four have only "contributed" to this AfD. To me, that looks an awful lot like WP:SOCK or WP:MEAT. --bender235 (talk) 21:55, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
- Hrm, good point, I have re-nominated it now. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 21:57, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
- And by the way, if you read the AfD, you'll notice I repeatedly asked for someone to name a reliable source for Raffetseder's notability. The best someone came up with was an interview Raffetseder gave a couple of months ago to a small Vienna community radio. That's ridiculous. Raffetseder is non-existant in the news. --bender235 (talk) 22:00, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Note to self - Free Speech, "The People's Darling Privilege"
Talk:Free Speech, "The People's Darling Privilege"/GA1. -- Cirt (talk) 06:01, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
Aaron Saxton GA nomation
Hello,
I have reviewed Aaron Saxton; the review can be found at Talk:Aaron Saxton/GA1. Based on the state of the article, I cannot promote it immediately. However, I feel the concerns can be addressed easily. Thus, I am putting the review on hold for seven days. The article will be reassessed against the criteria by March 12, 2011. RJaguar3 | u | t 18:58, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the protection on Template:JewishPolishHistory. It looks like the revert war on Template:JewishPolishHistory is just a skirmish in a larger revert war that appears to be based on an over-application of the MOS Icon guidelines by Gnevin and counter-action by Fry1989. Would appreciate some Admin intervention with the two editors per WP:GETALIFE. Ajh1492 (talk) 20:45, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi, does anything ever come of this: "Adding topical links to contents pages navigational headers and footers"? Does someone "close" it or do we all just go on our merry ways? -- RichardF (talk) 17:06, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Since you closed the debate, I thought I'd let you know that I went ahead and redirected "Morpheous" to Morpheus as per User:Reyk's suggestion. The alternate spelling appears to be in use, so a redirect seems appropriate. If this photographer becomes notable at a later date, the article can always be recreated as Morpheous (photographer). Cheers. freshacconci talktalk 22:56, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
Tarique Mustafa
There's a new submission for a page that you previously deleted-> Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Tarique_Mustafa
Can you please take a look at it? I have also requested couple of other people to take a look at it. Meanwhile, I have marked it "Under Review". If you feel it should not be accepted, can you please reject the page or let me know and I will do it. Otherwise I will go ahead with the usual review process and give feedback to the author accordingly.
regards
--abhishek singh (talk) 19:05, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
Truth According To Wikipedia
Hi. I would be happy to reopen the GA on this now that you're back at the desk but unfortunately things are a little busy for me right now and I'm not sure I can give it the attention it deserves for a couple of days. If you can stand to wait a couple of days I'll be happy to do it (give me a talk page poke if necessary) but you're welcome to relist if you'd prefer. - DustFormsWords (talk) 22:19, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi Cirt. Because you participated in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of YouTube celebrities (4th nomination), your input is sought at Talk:List of YouTube personalities#RfC: The criteria for inclusion on List of YouTube personalities. There are disputes over who should be and who shouldn't be included in the list. Cunard (talk) 23:12, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
Cirt, would you give a third opinion at User talk:Cunard#Talk:List of YouTube personalities#RFC: Ray William Johnson? I asked Casliber (talk · contribs) but he isn't interested. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:13, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
Electronics and the environment
Can you userfy (over to here) what little content that was at Electronics and the environment? Ta. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 03:35, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi, it looks like you forgot to close the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brian Green (lawyer) after deleting the article. I would do it but I participated. J04n(talk page) 10:56, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
Question about RfA comment
I have noticed that you made the comment "Oppose, concerns about breadth and depth of experience." on my RfA. Are you referring to CSD experience, or to something else? --Slon02 (talk) 03:18, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
Deleting of List of call centre companies in Pakistan
Dear Brother,
I highly appreciate your kind action on my article however would you be kindly enough to let me know why did you take this step to delete it brother i will certainly highly appreciate it ...!!
- Thanks for your precious time to read this message
Yours Truly,--Faizanalivarya (talk) 03:21, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
Water Tribe AfD
Hi. You closed WP:Articles for deletion/Water Tribe, which covered Water Tribe and Air Nomads, as delete. Since their content had been merged to Universe of Avatar: The Last Airbender, would you mind restoring and moving them to Talk:Universe of Avatar: The Last Airbender/Water Tribe and Talk:Universe of Avatar: The Last Airbender/Air Nomads respectively, per WP:Merge and delete#Move to subpage of talk page? Thanks. Flatscan (talk) 05:05, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
I'd just like to bring to your attention this AfD as you deleted the articles redirect counterpart 2011 Challenger of Dallas - Singles Qualifying, and thought you may be interested in weighing in on this AfD. Afro (Talk) 14:36, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
Chesdovi and 1RR on Israel, Palestine and the United Nations
Hello Cirt -- I see that in January you blocked Chesdovi (talk · contribs) for >1RR. Perhaps I should go to a noticeboard instead, but: would you consider what appears to me as a >1RR by this editor today on Israel, Palestine and the United Nations? Two edits are clearly reverts (with an intervening one by User:Number 57): [15] and [16], restoring text, as seen in this earlier revision. My effort to bring this issue to the attention of the editor in question was rewarded with yet another edit on the article. If I need to take this to a noticeboard instead, please just say so -- I've not tried this approach before, going to an admin directly first. thank you, Nomoskedasticity (talk) 16:13, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
- Just to let you know I subsequently took this to ANI and was told (puzzlingly, in my view) that there was no violation of 1RR here. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 04:42, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
You recently acted on my request to protect this article. The editor or editors that I referred to in my protection request have returned to the article to revert the sourced changes I made. I'd rather not take such a mundane matter to AN/I and I am not familiar with the activity at the Biography Project. Should I just move on? Is there another forum better suited or should I post at the Biography Project? Any advice would be appreciated. Thanks Tiderolls 01:00, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Structured dialogic design
Dear Cirt, I have taken the initiative to begin an article in Wikipedia about the science of structured dialogic design. This is a relatively young and fast evolving science, but in my opinion very important. The European commission has included it in at least 10 large projects already in the last few years as a means of achieving consensus among diverse groups of people with conflicting interests and points of views. I probably don't understand yet the rules of Wikipedia, this is why I need some help. The article was up for discussion and a number of people objected to its deletion proposing specific arguments. On the contrary those proposing the deletion did not provide any specific argument. For example, the first editor who proposed deletion simply removed ALL references to the actual science calling it "copyrighted" material" and then made the argument that was was left behind was not important enough (and he was right, because he deleted the actual content).
Could you please help and advice how we can go about saving this contribution?
am a strong supporter of Wikipedia. One of the reasons is because the public can find also new concepts which one cannot find it regular encyclopedias. In 10 years from today I am sure this science might even be taught in schools. But for now, Wikipedia is the place for it.
What are our options? I appreciate your time. Futuristas (talk) 07:51, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Structured dialogic design - if you wish to work on a proposed draft version within a subpage of your userspace, in order to attempt to see if it does not fail WP:NOTE, I could provide that to you. ;) -- Cirt (talk) 15:55, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
We would greatly appreciate that. Would you also be available to provide some feedback and help whether what we would be doing satisfactorily responds to the criticisms that led to its deletion? Futuristas (talk) 18:18, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
"we" is two more authors one in Europe and one in the US who have been editing the article and defended it when it was proposed for deletion. I plan to ask them to help in the edit since they have knowledge of the subject. Futuristas (talk) 11:24, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
- Ah, okay, just wanted to make sure that the Futuristas (talk · contribs) account was not controlled by an organization. -- Cirt (talk) 16:15, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
Of course not! So, will you place the article in my user space? Futuristas (talk) 12:04, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
Dear Cirt, I am still awaiting your response (a) whether you can place back the article in my user space (b) whether you would be available/willing to provide feedback and help whether the revisions would satisfactorily respond to the criticisms that led to its deletion and (c ) to recover the discussions which took place in the articles discussion section and maybe copy it to the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Structured dialogic design
where some other comments have been placed. Otherwise Wikipedia is loosing the discussions that took place regarding this article.
Futuristas (talk) 08:09, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
Brian Green (lawyer)
It looks like you deleted Brian Green (lawyer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) while its AFD remains open:
- 2011-02-26: Proposed for deletion
- 2011-03-05: Relisted for additional comment
- 2011-03-06: Article deleted
- As of 2011-03-09: AFD remains open.
Help re: template
Hi. You're good with templates, so I wondered if you can get this template to collapse?: {{Oz}}
For example, it is at the bottom of The Wizard of Oz (2011 musical) and takes up a huge amount of space. BTW, do we need all those darn templates? Thanks for any help! All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:59, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks to TJRC for fixing the template! I still wonder, Cirt, if there are too many tempates at the bottom of The Wizard of Oz (2011 musical)? All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 00:35, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi Cirt. Could you ask you to please explain your closure for the Jasmine Revolution AFD? I ask because I just closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2010–2011 anti-government protests as delete, and King of Hearts closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2010-2011 Worldwide protests as delete last week as well. NW (Talk) 17:45, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
Deletion of Brian Green (lawyer)
You forgot to close the AFD :)
|
Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly. |
--Ron Ritzman (talk) 03:29, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Religion
Per these contributions, please respond at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Religion. Thanks. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 02:27, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
DYK for Did You Know People Can Fly?
| | On 13 March 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Did You Know People Can Fly?, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Did You Know People Can Fly? is the first full-length album by Kaddisfly? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 08:46, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Deletion review for Wikipedia:WikiProject Conceptual Jungle
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Wikipedia:WikiProject Conceptual Jungle. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Stifle (talk) 19:45, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Mobile browser strings
thank you for deleting this i came here via a link and instead didn't get what i was looking for you ass —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.45.41.225 (talk) 23:10, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
You are valuable to the project & I just wanted to say thanks
Hi Cirt. I don't want to pry, it's just that I noticed you've been taking some breaks recently. You see, you are one of the people here that I admire greatly and I learn by watching you work. I just wanted to say that you are extremely valuable to the project and to thank you for everything you have done. Thanks very much.
Just to clarify, your value lies in the fact that you know what's going on and you have a perspective of this project that's important. It's your opinion that I really value. I appreciate all the admin work you do as well as the work on articles, but what is most important is your comments on how Wikipedia is/should be running things. I just needed to let you know that your efforts are valued. Thanks. - Hydroxonium (T•C•V) 05:05, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
Paul Carrigan GA
Hey Cirt! I've been reviewing your nomination of Paul Carrigan, and have some issues that you may like to address. Cheers, Brambleclawx 14:00, 15 March 2011 (UTC) 
Please reconsider
Hi, I am not perfect in Wikipedia, but wanted you to reconsider this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nyla_Hasan&action=edit&redlink=1
As time is going on more and more news agencies are reporting this and this is a very important part of history for Pakistan, as these rare women are coming out and representing the nation: Have a look at the recent article and please let me know your thoughts and if possible restore it according to what you think can be written. http://tribune.com.pk/story/132516/mrs-pakistan-world-forever-young/
Thanks --Sonisona 05:11, 16 March 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sonisona (talk • contribs)
The Bugle: Issue LX, February 2011
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 21:22, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
White Ring - Sources for WP:NM
Hi Cirt,
I am not an experienced editor, especially not for music. I have found several articles which discuss the band White Ring and an interview with one of the members about the music genre White House. One of the British National papers, The Guardian, has an article about another Witch House band which are on the same label and mentions the band in passing. Can you help me with the page?
Regards, lofaesofa — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lofaesofa (talk • contribs) 22:58, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
GE peer review
Please consider participating in the Gospel of the Ebionites peer review to prepare the article for GAC. Thank you. Ovadyah (talk) 09:27, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
Deletion review for Water Tribe
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Water Tribe. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review.
I tried to contact you at User talk:Cirt/Archive 16#Water Tribe AfD, but you have been inactive. Flatscan (talk) 05:13, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
/* note - BLPN - Aaron Saxton* /
Hi, there is a thread here at the BLP noticeboard regarding your contributions to the Aaron Saxton BLP, thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 18:18, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:2004 L. Ron Hubbard To the Stars.jpg
File:2004 L. Ron Hubbard To the Stars.jpg is currently orphaned, so I nominated it for deletion. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 20:12, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
Article deleted
Dear Cirt, I believe you have deleted wrongfully the article Olavo de Carvalho. The person in question is a well-known journalist and politizai commentator In Brazil (as its article in ptwiki shows. Unfortunately, it has been the victim of a smear campaign (both there and here) of a radical leftist user who dislike him politically (the IPs and the "Cedric" account in the deletion discussion, a known sockpuppeteer who has been blocked in ptwiki after Meta confirmed his/her abuse). I would like to appeal this decision, how should I proceed? Regards, RafaAzevedo msg 22:05, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
- Pardon my intrusion. Probably not by reposting; I've added a G4 WP:CSD tag. For what it's worth, I am the one who nominated the article for deletion, and my edit history should make quite plausible what is the truth: which is that I had no idea who Caravalho was until I stumbled on the page and was amazed by all the polemical back and forth (about which RafaAzevedo is quite correct), coupled with complete inattention to the fact that this article (and its Portuguese equivalent) had not managed to find any WP:RS adequate to support an article who seems to fail WP:AUTHOR. I just wanted to weigh in with a reminder that "radical leftists who dislike him" may exist, but that wasn't really the reason this deletion happened. Wareh (talk) 13:38, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
The Maids of Honor wikipedia page
Cirt,
Can you please tell me why you deleted The Maids of Honor wikipedia page? This band is a legitimate entity that has released material, has a viable fan base and has had their music played in at least 6 major television programs. Members of their band include grammy nominated songwriter Greg Camp of Smash Mouth and television celebrity Lex van den Berghe of Survivor fame. Their inclusion in the wikipedia community makes complete sense. Please advise and explain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zombiepalooza (talk • contribs) 03:03, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
- See where multiple users agree is failed our Notability Criteria for bands at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Maids of Honor (band) The Resident Anthropologist (Talk / contribs) 23:02, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
abramis academic publishing - delete 1st February.
Dear Sirs,
I do not have an issue with our page being deleted if it does not conform to wikipedia content guidelines, however the statement below is pretty derogatory and not true. We do not charge a fee for the majority of work we publish through abramis and we are selective in what we publish. We publish academic journals for the University of Lincoln and the English Dept at the University of Leeds. We also featured in an article in the Times Higher Education magazine (2 December 2010) Feel the Rush, Professor Tim Luckhurst, University of Kent. This may not be sufficiently notable for the purposes of wikipedia, and I have no objection to this.
We are a small company with a business model that utilises on-demand publishing but 'fancy copy-shop' in my view is not a fair comment. We have had some issues with one of our theoretical physics authors but this is not a fair reflection of the catalogue. We have just published two separate physics works with authors from the University of Oxford. Again, the objection is not that you wish to delete our reference, it is the comment that is displayed at the foot of this message.
I use wikipedia every day and have nothing but respect for the work that you do, but it is a very challenging business environment out there and statements like this do us no favours.
Kind regards
Richard Franklin abramis academic
Delete According to their own website they specialize "in the innovative on-demand publishing model" which means they are nothing else than a fancy copy-shop that also may do a bit of promotion on the side. They print whatever you send them for a fee. This doesn't pass WP:CORP. Travelbird (talk) 09:46, 30 January 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.33.14.6 (talk)
DYK
Cirt--I left you in the dust at Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of DYKs! Probably you haven't updated in a while; please do so, since I get disoriented if I don't see your taillights in the dark night of article creation. Drmies (talk) 17:50, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Deletion Review for Lacunae Expanse
You deleted the page I created claiming the game has not been reviewed. Here are some reviews: http://blogs.perl.org/users/ovid/2010/10/the-lacuna-expanse.html
http://www.perl.com/pub/2010/10/colonizing-the-lacuna-expanse-with-perl.html
http://web.appstorm.net/quick-look/quicklook-games/quick-look-the-lacuna-expanse/
http://www.brighthub.com/video-games/mmo/reviews/93296.aspx
I'm sure you can find more if you look. Qchristensen (talk) 22:23, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Bacon WikiCup 2011 Awards
|
Bacon WikiCup 2011 - Participant Medal | |
| Due to your work in expanding bacon-related content during the Bacon WikiCup 2011, you have been awarded the Bacon WikiCup 2011 Particpant Medal. You received a final score of 310, earning yourself second place. Congratulations, and thank you for your great work! ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 09:03, 3 April 2011 (UTC) |
Also...
|
The Original Barnstar | |
| For scoring the most points in creating pages (80 points to be exact) in the Bacon WikiCup 2011. Congratulations! ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 09:03, 3 April 2011 (UTC) |
Reviewing some material on Ariosophy last night, I noticed that the above named individual in Russia has created the above named church as a kind of Russian variation on the old Ariosophy. I found one article specifically about the church, and several others which dealt with Lazarenko himself. The Church is described in an article in the St. Petersburg Times as having been created as a political and paramilitary instrument. I'm going to search for some more sources over the next couple of days, but thought that you might be interested in the subject. John Carter (talk) 20:20, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Daily Palette
What do I have to do to get The Daily Palette page reinstated? Tbliss558 (talk) 00:15, 15 April 2011 (UTC)tbliss558
creation of a new topic - Tagle family
hi Cirt,
Good Day. I would like to request the re-creation of the page of the Tagle family. I was not able to add important sources back then but i promise to add as much sources as i can. Please reconsider. Thank you Sebastian016 (talk) 10:35, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
Recreation of Mani Nouri
Hi cirt, i wish to recreate the page of Mani Nouri. I read the discussion and i believe that i can make a new page with more sources and credibility. Thanks, please consider it. Appreciate it.--Irancinemairan (talk) 08:06, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
Deleted article Murdo MacDonald-Bayne 22/4/11
I'm not familiar with wikipedia conventions so please forgive me for copying this from a deleted article talk page here: I use Wikipedia almost daily and am very grateful for it. I have only very rarely attempted to edit or contribute to Wikipedia, finding 'wikis' a little beyond my computer skills. (I regularly use Wordpress without difficulty and have used wikispaces). I am sitting here in London (that's in England you know) and was extremely disappointed to see that an article about MacDonald-Bayne had been deleted. I had come to Wikipedia hoping to learn something more about this (to judge by his writing) extraordinary man. I am sitting with a copy of MacDonald-Bayne's "I am the Life" in front of me (hence my interest), a 159 page small format paper-back first published by L.N. Fowler & Co. Ltd of 1201/3 High Road, Chadwell Heath, Romford, Essex (less than two miles from my birthplace in Seven Kings, Ilford, Essex) in September 1948 (when I was two years old!) and running to the Sixth Impression in 1979. I have had the book for years, don't know where I got it but it has a sticker on the back from L.N. Fowler price £2.50. I don't believe that all articles need to be exhaustively 'cited' or 'sourced'. If they were, you might as well buy Encyclopedia Britannica. (I wonder if that has an article about MacDonald-Bayne?) Is this an example of Americo-centric thinking? ('some obscure Scottish spiritualist' (he doesn't appear to have been a spiritualist and was Scots not Scottish) with no 'sources' - so let's bin it) or is it something more sinister? Has Wikipedia now been infiltrated by the fascist American churches (some of whom would certainly crucify a MacDonald-Bayne) or the CIA? (by 'fascist American churches' I mean those churches which are fascist - I'm right and you're wrong' - not all American churches). Might the article be restored so that we can read it and perhaps add, edit, comment or provide sources?? Thanks in anticipation (sorry your editor doesn't like my English spelling, English place names or complex sentence structure) Trevor J. Bending —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.44.171.47 (talk) 10:42, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXI, March 2011
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 01:26, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
|
The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | |
| I, Mikhailov Kusserow, hereby award Cirt with The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar for outstanding achievement in countering vandalism. — Mikhailov Kusserow (talk) 03:14, 29 April 2011 (UTC) |
Undelete Chuck Allison
I disagree with your decision to delete Chuck Allison from WP. He is notable within the C++ community and has published tons. Please restore his page and stop making wikipedia worse. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikidrone (talk • contribs) 15:16, March 9, 2011
Request reinstatement for article deleted 9 OCT 2010- King Lizzard
Changed info, added relevance and 14 cites. If marked for re-deletion please give me a chance to correct. Thanks for your patience.
Biography
Lizzard was born and raised in Detroit, Michigan during the 1960s, but living most of his life in Los Angeles, California. He is the son of country singer, songwriter Johnny Colmus [1] who wrote songs for Loretta Lynn and Ernest Tubb[2]. In 1973 he moved to California where he earned an acting scholarship[3]. From 1979-1983 he played bass guitar for a band called Legacy, which opened for Cheap Trick, Chuck Berry and Molly Hatchet[4]. Lizzard cites Jimmy Page for his guitar playing style and obsession with the Les Paul Guitar. In 1997 he moved to Las Vegas where he performed and recorded with his father[5] and adopted the name King Lizzard. In 1997 he formed a techno rock band, Living Karma, with the late Misty Bennetts. From 1999-2002 he led King Lizzard's Hearts of Darkness Band. From 2001 to 2004 he hosted Inside Sin City and Sounds of Sin on LVRocks Radio [6]. In 2004 Lizzard played his last show with Pieter Holland and Les Warner of The Cult at the Beach Las Vegas[7][8]. In 2004 he became an ordained minister [9]. From 2003 to present he has been working for the 57th Wing at Nellis Air Force Base[10]. King Lizzard is married to photographer Queen Lizzard (Lana Colmus)[11]. He has four CDs available at iTune[12], Amazon [13] and other retailers.
Albums
- The Sin City Symphony (1998)
- The Patient in Room 666 (2003)
- ...and friends (2006)
- The Return of the Patient in Room 666 (2011)
References
- ^ "Johnny Colmus at Hillbilly Music".
- ^ "I'll Just Call Your Darlin' lyrics".
- ^ "King Lizzard on LastFM".
- ^ "King Lizzard at Music Connection".
- ^ "Official Johnny Colmus website".
- ^ "LVRocks Radio".
- ^ "LVRockers live at The Beach Las Vegas".
- ^ "The Beach Las Vegas".
- ^ "ULC Ministry List".
- ^ "Randall Colmus Linked In".
- ^ "The Official Queen Lizzard Photography Site".
- ^ "iTunes".
- ^ "Amazon".
External links
Terra Mariana needs additional citations for verification.
Hi Cirt, FYI, all the facts you've tagged needing citations on Terra Mariana are from the sources provided in the article. Do you mean there needs to be specific pages listed from the sources below for each 'citation needed' tag? Also in some cases refs have been provided in the lede, so do you think it would be necessary to duplicate the ref in the article body as well?
I would like you to take a look at User:MichaelQSchmidt/Jonathan Keltz. There was an article about this fellow that was sent to AFD in January 2010.[17] As I myself commented back then, I felt that while the fellow might be seen to meet WP:ENT, there was simply not enough reliable coverage at that time upon which to build a decent BLP. That has changed. In the intervening 14 months, the fellow has received growing coverage and recognition he lacked originally. And with the new coverage, available only since the deletion,[18] I feel it benefits the project to have this new version of the article return to mainspace to further grow and be expanded. There was no flaw in the reasoning for original deletion... but this is not exactly the same as the article that was deleted, due to actor's career and coverage not sitting still over the last 14 months. I seek your approval in its return AND in it not being mistakenly speedied as a G4 recreation. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 21:00, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
- Just an additional note: RHaworth gave his blessing to an return to mainspace,[19] and sent me a link to the version he speedied, which I then found in a google cache.[20] I can well understand his deletion of that earlier version. Yikes. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 05:09, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
I hate having to keep bringing this up, but you were the deleting admin, so I'm going to come back to you to ask about whether or not I've managed to establish WP:N for the article yet? My only real other argument towards having it restored to mainspace as it is, is unfortunately still WP:OTHERSTUFF with several anime conventions in the European anime template at the bottom of the page having established even less notability.
This is also probably a sub-question to this, but would any imagery help the notability at all? TheChrisD Rants•Edits 22:16, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Carlson Young
Carlson Young is an American teen actress and Singer. she played Tiffany in As the Bell Rings. she appeared in True Blood. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hannah797 (talk • contribs) 17:49, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
OTRS request
Do you think you could expedite the processing on this image, permission for which was sent in by the subject of the photo? (I gather it is a self-take by webcam, and looks it) I'd really like to look efficient here, as Paul is a longtime acquaintance. Let me know as well if there is anything that needs doing.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:55, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
AfD
Please see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/As a Peace-Loving Global Citizen (2nd nomination). Thanks. Kitfoxxe (talk) 14:13, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
Hey!
Welcome back from your 2 months off! Hey, I have file mover on here, would you be willing to give it to me on Commons? CTJF83 17:02, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
Ali Tim
Hello,
I have seen Ali Tim has been deleted. I do not understand why? However, I wouldn't get into the longevity of policies and guidelines laid down by Wikipedia, I request you to guide me on creating verifiable articles. Will highly appreciate your response! Have a good day! Samia BR (talk) 08:30, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
Closure not comple
Hi Cirt, I just wanted to let you know that you may have missed a bottom template or something at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kris Wang. The blue box only reaches about halfway down. Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:15, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
B1A4
I am curious as to why you decided that the B1A4 article should be deleted even after going through the articles for deletion process. From a clear count of numbers, 4 people were for it and 3 against and most those against said so before later information came up. Plus, the main reason against was over whether they met notability criteria, but I showed with sources that they did in more than one way. Plus, no one debated my findings so I thought they were a sure keep. Even if it was unclear, my understanding is that by default in that situation the article is kept.
You did not mention whatsoever what reason you gave for deletion as such I feel like the article should go under deletion review because your action makes no sense. It doesn't seem to follow the AfD page at all. To simplify things before that, would you mind explaining what you were thinking? Snowclrops (talk) 00:00, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
Les Brown article deletion
You say that the evidence about Les Brown is unsupportable... that you "can not even find evidence for the one thing that ought to be possible, a marriage to Gladys Knight." Les Brown is real, and his work is real. It took me a couple of minutes to find a photo of [http://books.google.com/books?id=ijgDAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA32&lpg=PA32&dq=les+brown+gladys+knight+married&source=bl&ots=T_Ex5DChtD&sig=5gc90M_SZ6J6eKh8bZ3zXRLKxqY&hl=en&ei=XwVPTciGC46CsQPc5fjrCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&ved=0CE8Q6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=les%20brown%20gladys%20knight%20married&f=false the happy couple. And his service in the Ohio Legislature is an easily retrievable matter of public record. What's you beef with Les Brown, Cirt? I'm beginning to think that Wikipedia has become unsupportable. Roadturn (talk) 14:33, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi Cirt, I wondered if you wouldn't mind adding your thoughts to this discussion? Parrot of Doom 17:49, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
Good to see you back
Have a nice WikiBreak? The Resident Anthropologist (talk)•(contribs) 20:50, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
could you please explain why you closed as keep. I thought it was a relist or no consensus at best. LibStar (talk) 07:10, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
- Hrm, let's give it some time to allow interested parties to do some research, and we can revisit the issue in a couple months time. -- Cirt (talk) 07:16, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
RFC discussion of User:Philip Baird Shearer
A request for comments has been filed concerning the conduct of Philip Baird Shearer (talk · contribs). You are invited to comment on the discussion at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Philip Baird Shearer. -- Parrot of Doom 10:49, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
Portal:Scientology/Intro
- Sorry, the intro subpage was identical to the intro to the article Scientology. The first sentence hadn't been updated to what has been the intro to the article for around a month so I thought I would update it. Where can I request consensus to get it synchronized?--Jacksoncw (talk) 16:57, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
Weazie
Sorry to intrude, but you've just blocked Weazie for vandalism, and I can't see any vandalistic edits from them. I'm trying to talk to the other side of that conflict now with Sempi, and it seems that Weazie wasn't vandalizing, and was discussing edits on the talk page. Am I missing something? Thanks in advance. Dayewalker (talk) 07:03, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
- This person, Daywalker, is twisting the truth and appeared out of nowhere to defend Weazie. Daywalker was not a part of the recent discussion. Obviously, Daywalker must be a friend of Weazie.
- In the discussion Weazie claims that I suggested removal of the whole section he deleted. This further proves that he is ignoring the discussion except for what he wanted to use as an excuse to delete things. What I wrote in the discussion is, "Maybe there shouldn't be a "Possible sources" section. The problem is not that the sources have been unreliable, the problem is the title of the section itself. I already suggested a solution at the very beginning of this discussion section."
- Weazie took my first sentence and used it as an excuse to delete the whole section, while ignoring the other sentences, suggesting that the title was the problem. So, in deleting the section entirely, without reading the other two sentences, nor the previous suggestion mentioned in the third, it proves Weazie was merely looking for excuses to delete things, while ignoring the rest of the discussion; even within the same paragraph! Sempi (talk) 07:20, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks. And "for the record": I do not know who Dayewalker is. --Weazie (talk) 14:04, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
I didn't mention this is the report, but the multiple contributions deleted were not mine. I had no personal interest in reporting these deletions. They were all from other contributors that were engaging in the discussion, but were were not active at the moment and none of them had given any consensus to the deletion of their contributions.
One of them, Anythingyouwant had this to say, "I'm not going to bother arguing with you, or trying to satisfy you, because instead of modifying or rephrasing you prefer to completely delete material that is obviously relevant. Banging my head against the wall would be more useful. :-) Cheers" Anythingyouwant, appears to have given up and been chased away due to Weazie's repeated deletions. Sempi (talk) 05:33, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
Deletion review for B1A4
An editor has asked for a deletion review of B1A4. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review.
Where you going with this, Cirt? GA review? You have my blessing. Great work--thanks! Drmies (talk) 04:09, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
RFC/U (Sempi)
Hi. I have created a Request for Comment concerning Sempi (talk · contribs). You can find it here. I'm notifying you personally because you are mentioned in the RFC/U as someone who tried in vain to get Sempi to improve his conduct vis-à-vis the Natural born citizen clause of the U.S. Constitution article. Since you were a user who tried and failed to resolve this dispute, you might wish to consider adding your name to the list of users "certifying" the RFC/U; at least two formal certifiers are required in order for an RFC/U to proceed. Richwales (talk · contribs) 06:27, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
No wonder you are defending the actions of this group to unfairly suppress and delete information from this article! You Rich Wales, seem to have a conflict of interest! (link removed)
Hi Cirt. While I have every faith in your closures of AfD, I am questioning the wisdom of reopening and relisting this especially when a deletion review was called for. IMO, until our requirements for WP:RS and WP:V are satisfied until notability is clearly asserted, this twice deleted article should remain deleted. These guys clearly have an agenda, demonstrated by their constant disruption of due process, harrassment, and personal attacks, and I am wondering if sock/meat is also part of the tactics. I have no personal interest in the outcome of this article other than that Wikipedia policy is acknowledged. Regards, --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:14, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
- Feel free to comment at WP:DRV about it. -- Cirt (talk) 07:14, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
- Hmm... seems like the DRV was opened, and closed, while I was asleep in my time zone. If the article passes with the new sources, that's fine by me of course, but that Snowclops is a rather persistent, and not altogether civil fellow. If I hadn't been involved, my finger would have been hovering over a uw button. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:30, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
Pair Options
Hi Cirt, why did you decide that the Pair Options article should be deleted only after a few days ? this does not allow time for a due process. I would ask you to open it for deletion review again, for example I did not have time even to state my opinion, and I am not the article editor, PLUS, I have few concrete suggestions to the notability issue (references). Exotic Options are a complicated subject and due process should be given time .--Mikeruon (talk) 19:13, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
Wow!
That was quick--I was in the midst of writing User:J.Gowers up for ANI. Thanks. Still, the way that user is editing they're heading for an indefinite block. Later, Drmies (talk) 17:49, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
Unblock request of J.Gowers
Hello Cirt. J.Gowers (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), whom you have blocked, is requesting to be unblocked. The request for unblock is on hold while waiting for a comment from you. Regards, Sandstein 17:55, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
Mobility-as-a-Service
Why was this entry deleted about a year ago? Does a record exist of what the entry said before its deletion? I am curious to learn more about this subject and get a good definition.
Thanks.
Max 66.94.95.18 (talk) 19:41, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for File:Everybody Draw Mohammed Day.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Everybody Draw Mohammed Day.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Russavia I'm chanting as we speak 15:05, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
Santorum on Computing project
I haven't the foggiest why you added this to the computing project but I have reverted the notice as it seems to be totally unrelated. Dmcq (talk) 21:34, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
- Okay, no worries, -- Cirt (talk) 04:38, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
WikiProject Oregon Triple Crown
My RFA
I am wondering what your concern is with regard to temperament. Thank you. N419BH 06:58, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
- Indications include a bit too quick with that delete tagging, which indicates brash decision making. -- Cirt (talk) 06:59, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
- Fair enough, though I'd characterize it as a misreading of policy rather than making decisions too fast. I'll go back to NPP and prove I've learned, and be back come July or August for another go. I hope I will have proved myself by then and you will be able to support along with the other opposers. Thank you for your input and constructive criticism, I truly appreciate it, though of course failing RFA is a bit disappointing. N419BH 07:07, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
- If you do as you say, I would be more willing to reconsider my position at a later point in time for a subsequent candidacy. ;) -- Cirt (talk) 07:08, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
- Who knows, maybe you'll end up doing what Courcelles did with DeltaQuad and nominate me ;). Seriously though, I appreciate it. It's still open because I want to gather feedback now on what I can do to improve, hence asking what you meant by temperament. BTW you mention experience as well; are you referring to total experience or inexperience with CSD or something else? N419BH 07:14, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
- Both depth and breadth. -- Cirt (talk) 07:16, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
- K, where would you like to see additional work? N419BH 07:17, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
- Both depth and breadth. -- Cirt (talk) 07:16, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
- Who knows, maybe you'll end up doing what Courcelles did with DeltaQuad and nominate me ;). Seriously though, I appreciate it. It's still open because I want to gather feedback now on what I can do to improve, hence asking what you meant by temperament. BTW you mention experience as well; are you referring to total experience or inexperience with CSD or something else? N419BH 07:14, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
- If you do as you say, I would be more willing to reconsider my position at a later point in time for a subsequent candidacy. ;) -- Cirt (talk) 07:08, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
- Fair enough, though I'd characterize it as a misreading of policy rather than making decisions too fast. I'll go back to NPP and prove I've learned, and be back come July or August for another go. I hope I will have proved myself by then and you will be able to support along with the other opposers. Thank you for your input and constructive criticism, I truly appreciate it, though of course failing RFA is a bit disappointing. N419BH 07:07, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
FAMTIES
Dear Cirt,
I hope all is well.
I jus recognized that the Famties page was deleted.
I had the opinion that this production team had more than enough success to be an important matter for wikipedia.
Can you pls let me know why you disagree? Is their any more information needed? Pls let me know.
Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Radioenemy2012 (talk • contribs) 13:32, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
Cirt, you closed this AFD as delete yesterday, but apparently didn't actually delete the article, merely an apparent redirect. JFYI. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 08:47, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
I am surprised that you closed the decision based on two rather weak arguments to delete, while ignoring the other two comments there.--Huaiwei (talk) 11:34, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
- Done, now deleted, thanks! ;) -- Cirt (talk) 13:59, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
- Hate to be a pain, but it appears Singapore Youth Festival Central Judging results for Chinese orchestra was tagged to the same AFD, so that has to go too. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 14:01, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
userfication request
Hello, would you please userfy LightStream for me please? I feel this article with the references provided, plus a couple others (I'm sifting through some dead tree sources on BBN) may satisfy WP:GNG. I'll run this by a DRV before throwing it back into mainspace. Thanks! riffic (talk) 08:49, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
- Done, now at User:Riffic/LightStream. -- Cirt (talk) 14:01, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi
Hi Cirt, There is a wikipedia issue that I would like to discuss with you in a private discussion, if that option is possible, please let me know of how to contact you by e-mail. Many thanks Kaaveh (talk) 08:35, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
Early XfD closures
Please don't close deletion discussions early, such as you did at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:User WikiProject New York Mets. I see from the log there that it was opened at 23:08, 9 May 2011 (UTC) and closed at 04:26, 16 May 2011 (UTC), which means it was open for 6 days, 5 hours, and 18 minutes - and not 7 days like it should. Early closures should never be done except under the conditions of Speedy Keep, Speedy delete or the snowball clause - none of which apply here. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 13:00, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
ANI mention
You have been directly or indirectly mentioned on this ANI thread. --Damiens.rf 14:45, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
Brandon Lee (pornographic actor)
I believe that the [AfD for Brandon Lee] was decided incorrectly. I am not an expert at gay pornography but two scholarly works[21][22] have written about Lee's status within gay pornography as the first Asian pornographic actor that takes the top (dominant) role. He is also described in another scholarly work as being the most popular gay asian porn actor.[23] Not only does the coverage satisfy the GNG, it verifies that Lee would pass criteria 3 of WP:PORNBIO as he is considered a pioneer in gay pornography based on his race and reverse role. The discussion in the AfD applying PORNBIO completely ignores criteria 3 and Lee's unique contribution to gay pornography. Morbidthoughts (talk) 09:49, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
- Hrm, I would be most willing to userfy it for you, so that you can work on improving the sourcing and quality of the article so as to make an argument for its notability, if you wish to do so. -- Cirt (talk) 14:03, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
- Okay, I'll try to improve it even though I don't know much about gay pornography and never saw the original article. It seems like there are enough reliable sources out there to write a decent bio. Morbidthoughts (talk) 17:02, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Done, now at User:Morbidthoughts/Brandon Lee (pornographic actor). Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 17:04, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
CorpNet.com
Can you please tell me why exactly the CorpNet.com page was deleted? The page is in compliance w/ rules and had many notable sources and references as all editors requested. There is no final explination of why the page was deleted and their page is legit. Even the MyCorporation.com page is still alive, which is in their industry, and seems completley worthless to me with no valid reason for existing especially if the CorpNet.com page is taken down. Thank you, I appreciate your feedback ABKS (talk) 18:41, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
- Not really the best argument, see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. -- Cirt (talk) 21:22, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Deletion
If the page for T. Mills has been decided to be deleted, how come it hasn't been deleted yet? - GunMetal Angel 19:05, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXII, April 2011
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:05, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Michael Prysner
Hi there, Are you certain you made the correct decision to close the AfD on Michael Prysner? There were a number of independent sources which covered him in detail which were simply disregarded. Look at this interview from London, this interview on Press TV and this interview from Russia. What do you think?--TM 01:27, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
- I would be most willing to userfy it for you, so that you can work on improving the sourcing and quality of the article so as to make an argument for its notability, if you wish to do so. -- Cirt (talk) 21:25, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
- That would be great. However, do you really think these sources and the other provided in the discussion indicate a realistic consensus to delete?--TM 02:14, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Done, now at User:Namiba/Michael Prysner. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 02:20, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Future portal question
This might sound like a strange question, but I looked for an answer and could not find one. I'm working on putting together a portal based just on the highways and roads of the state of Michigan. There are currently 221 articles (plus a few lists) with a bit of room for additional articles in the future. There are currently 112 GAs or higher in the state's highway subproject. So far I've come up with, on paper at least:
- 15 GA or higher articles
- 7 FAs
- 1 A-Class currently at FAC
- 2 other A-Class articles
- 22 photos
- 54 DYK hooks
Over time there is no issue with adding to the article content selected for the portal, even if the shorter and less important highways are excluded. (Just as a comparison, the rest of the state of Michigan only has 16 FAs and 67 GAs out of 4031 articles.) I'm initially considering setting up the portal to use monthly updates, and pre-coding the first 15–20 selections. If I were to get the whole portal created and all of the content set up for such a long period of pred-determined updates, would that be acceptable for a FPoC nomination?
Most portals rotate/randomize, but I prefer to follow the main P:USRD practice of giving the spotlight to a specific article for a month at a time. (The New York portal does the same thing, but randomizes the photos and DYK.) I'm actually even thinking of setting the photos on a schedule so that if the article features a road from the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, the photo would feature one from the Lower Peninsula or vice versa. At five hooks per set, at most I'd come up with 44 DYK sets if all 220 or so articles got a hook, and that's not likely, so I'll probably either have to code that out on a long-term schedule until exhaustion and set it to rotate after, or just rotate it now. Your thoughts and suggestions are appreciated. Imzadi 1979 → 10:20, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
Nancy Cartwright is upset with us
Thought you might like to know about this edit to Nancy Cartwright's article:
I've actually never seen that bit in the article before, but I believe you added it. It does seem a bit lengthy and could be trimmed, but it is well sourced. I wonder if she objects because it's untrue, or if it's because she doesn't want herself tied to him? -- Scorpion0422 17:01, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
Vandalism
An IP address you blocked yesterday vandalized a page. Warn that address.--1966batfan (talk) 19:58, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
206.53.199.98--1966batfan (talk) 00:41, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
aferdita dreshaj
Warn 76.243.192.122 for repeated vandalism of the page Aferdita Dreshaj.--1966batfan (talk) 00:39, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Clicker.com
FYI, there are indications of some spamming of links to (and mentions of) Clicker.com information; the note in question that you saw is not especially relevant --Ckatzchatspy 02:58, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Your block of 75.47.142.236
It's an IP hopper, hard at work. Please see Wikipedia:Ani#Help_with_a_rangeblock. Toddst1 (talk) 03:04, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
You beat me too it - ec with my finger on the del button. Could you please also salt for persistent recreation. Thanks. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:11, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Pair Options
I am the editor of a large part of Pair Options. Please see above - I would ask for re listing so more people would be able to express their views. I did considerable editing and reference adding after the submission for deletion, that I strongly believe those who submitted for deletion did not even bother to read. --WillliamG (talk) 13:22, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
- A bit too late for that. But I would be more than happy to userfy it for you! ;) Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 17:15, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
Thank you very much , Cirt! I would appreciate your doing that. --WillliamG (talk) 12:18, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
How a debate can be close so quickly? - Triple accounting
I don't understand how you reach the conclusion that the deletion had to be done... Just because Smerdis of Tlön asked a caustic question? Of course not it isn't possible that you get a loan just on your emotional balance... But certainly a depressed person has less chance than a charismatic one... Anyway. The point is not about is Triple Accounting relevant but if Triple Accounting is notable... And from my small perspective of Belgian living in Brussels and working with social entreprenors... This concept is being noted more and more. Olivier C (talk) 15:09, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
I asked how to support the article... You main respond was just to shoot it down... How constructive is it?
- I would be most willing to userfy it for you, so that you can work on improving the sourcing and quality of the article so as to make an argument for its notability, if you wish to do so. -- Cirt (talk) 21:25, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the offer, I am not sure to have the time now but at least it would a space for me to work on the draft having the possibility to make connection and use all the wiki code, instead of working on a word page. I accept your offer. What should I do to facilitate that userfication?
Olivier C (talk) 06:06, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
- Done, now at User:Olivier C/Triple Accounting. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 18:08, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
GingerBread Lane wiki piece
Can the recently deleted GingerBread Lane wiki piece be reinstated so that the edited version that looks like a wiki piece can be posted please. If then you choose to delete the piece, so be it. It looks to me like a couple of the delete votes were for those not understanding the scope of how big the exhibit actually is, how many visits it has, and further a couple of the delete votes were frustrated with how long the edits took. I only contracted a third party to do the wiki page because I was advised by Verno Whitney of wiki in an email that I should have a third party do the piece. I initially found out that someone did the wiki piece for GBL, without my blessing, knowledge, or request, and it looked like hell. So seeing it was up for deletion, I emailed wiki asking how to stop it. The number one reccomendation was to have a neutral third party write the piece. I evidently mistakenly contracted a web designer who is good with wiki to do the piece. I did ask wiki support was this a violation of the COI, and was told no being that the person doing the wiki entry had no stake in the company and their only stake is to improve the wiki entry. The exhibit gets seen annually by over 150,000, it is a rather impressive display. If at all possible, can you please see your way clear to open it back up so that the now finished changes can be displayed, then make the decision? thank you so much, Jon ( kcdcchef )
Oh, the new page. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:A-E-I-Owned-You —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kcdcchef (talk • contribs) 05:09, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
- I would be most willing to userfy it for you, so that you can work on improving the sourcing and quality of the article so as to make an argument for its notability, if you wish to do so. -- Cirt (talk) 17:57, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Here is the new page, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:A-E-I-Owned-You, please have a look and tell me if this is now more up to standards regarding sourcing and you know, looking like a wiki page. It is 150% better. Please advise me where to go from here. I personally feel it looks like a wiki page now and has some more legit sourcing. I left out the two online newsletters that mention GBL, and focused on the news stories from national level periodicals. Thanks Cirt. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.236.97.1 (talk) 21:59, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
- Please read WP:Article development, WP:CITE, WP:RS, and WP:V. -- Cirt (talk) 05:16, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
Okay, I think I got this now Cirt. And thank you for your time, your patience, your candor, and your not getting mad at a computer idiot like me. Seriously.
I have good sources on this, pieces that have been published in national media and further recognized newspapers, post, trib, times, gazette. So what I am getting here is that I need to go through and link the parts of the wiki piece to where you can find them in reliable news sources. Got it. On it. Should have it back to you tomorrow. Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kcdcchef (talk • contribs) 06:44, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
Agreed. Working on that right now. When it is done, it will have 10 citations that take you to the various news arcticles that cite the facts. In regards to it needing a lot of formatting work, I am assuming you are referring to how it presently reads also? If so, we are on same page. I am having the text changed up a little, it still reads like hell, if that is what you are talking about. Doesnt make a lot of sense still. But it does look better though, right? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kcdcchef (talk • contribs) 06:58, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
Deletion of page Rooma Mehra
Hi Cirt!
I have great respect for you and you come closest to being my role model in my ambitions as a novice to become a Wikipedian! This being said, I realise that a Wikipedian of your calibre would delete a page with sufficient reason to justify it. However, I take the liberty of addressing (not challenging) the rather fast deletion of the page Rooma Mehra. Since it was awaiting citations, perhaps the process of research should have been given some time.
Just a thought and a request for reinstating the article till all the citations have been obtained.
Warm regards, and have a nice day
Anthonio2010 (talk) 07:13, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
- I would be most willing to userfy it for you, so that you can work on improving the sourcing and quality of the article so as to make an argument for its notability, if you wish to do so. -- Cirt (talk) 17:57, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Thank you very much indeed, Cirt! I would really appreciate your doing that. Warm regards, and have a nice day!
Anthonio2010 (talk) 09:31, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
- Done, now at User:Anthonio2010/Rooma Mehra. -- Cirt (talk) 03:20, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
Mentioned at ANI
Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Revision_deletion_questions. --NeilN talk to me 12:52, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you. Curious as to why the individual that started the ANI thread, neglected to post a notification. -- Cirt (talk) 17:57, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
- The ANI discussion was about the revision deletion of an edit summary and only mentions you in passing. If you were also involved in the revision deletion or the request for suppression, I would welcome your comments at ANI. Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 18:55, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
Deletion of the page Amitabh Mitra
I would like to request you to extend the discussion period on the deletion of the page on Amitabh Mitra as it was noticed after some time. Please consider this request so that discussion on notability and information from South African Wikipedian Poets may be provided in support
Amitabhmitra (talk) 08:16, 20 May 2011 (UTC))
I would also request you to if possible to userfy the article so that further development can be tried
Amitabhmitra (talk) 08:27, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
- Done, now at User:Amitabhmitra/Amitabh Mitra. -- Cirt (talk) 15:21, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
Articles for Deletion: 2011 Asian Indoor Games
Hi Cirt, I noticed that Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2011 Asian Indoor Games is marked as unclosed but does not seem to have been relisted. Is there any way to be sure, and if possible could you relist or close it? Thanks. Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:40, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
- (Talk-page stalker) Now closed. BencherliteTalk 10:57, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks *tosses WikiSteak to Bencherlite*. Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:09, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
- thanks *burp* BencherliteTalk 13:19, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks *tosses WikiSteak to Bencherlite*. Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:09, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
Vokle.com Deletion
Hi Cirt,
About eight months ago you deleted VOKLE's page (Vokle.com) and cited a lack of sources (which at the time I think was a very fair assessment). Now we've gained a lot more press exposure through sources such Forbes and TechCrunch and I would love the chance to access the article and add references to satisfy the WikiGNG. Is the best procedure from here to userfy the article so that I can edit it? Thanks for your time,
--Rsnoopyb (talk) 21:40, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
- Done, now at User:Rsnoopyb/Vokle. -- Cirt (talk) 03:05, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
St. Matthew's
Before locking the page will you please check that it is factually correct? Currently it is not. The GMC does not disapprove the school. δiji.broke.it. 23:51, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
- Please use {{Edit protected}}, in a new subsection on the article's talk page, for that. -- Cirt (talk) 03:03, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- Why would I need to do that? I had it factually correct and then it was reverted before you locked it. Simply revert it back to my edit and that'll be the end of it. δiji.broke.it. 03:54, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- Please see Wikipedia:Wrong Version. -- Cirt (talk) 04:15, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- Dude, just look at the stinking cite that even the guy that keeps reverting me is posting. It takes 30 seconds. Cut the crap and get this factually correct or I will take action against you and the other editor. There is no debate, this ends now. δiji.broke.it. 04:30, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- FYI as the article states, St. Matts is in the Caymans, not Belize. δiji.broke.it. 04:32, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- Please see Wikipedia:Wrong Version. -- Cirt (talk) 04:15, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- Why would I need to do that? I had it factually correct and then it was reverted before you locked it. Simply revert it back to my edit and that'll be the end of it. δiji.broke.it. 03:54, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
Please, engage in discussion, at the article's talk page. -- Cirt (talk) 04:34, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- It got nuked. Is there a conspiracy against the truth here? δiji.broke.it. 05:19, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
Request undeletion of BugNET article
I've made important additions to the article Comparison of issue-tracking systems but my contributions were removed because the original BugNET article that was referenced was also removed. BugNET is an open source product that is gaining more and more popularity and plays an important role in the landscape of different issue tracking software available. When compared to many of the other products listed in the article Comparison of issue-tracking systems, it is not clear at all why BugNET would be rejected whereas other lesser known and unremarkable products remain. I think the most sensible approach is to allow inclusion of any product as long as as it appears to have or to have had a legitimate following for a significant amount of time. For these reasons I would like to request undeletion of both the BugNET article as well as my contributions to the Comparison of issue-tracking systems article and I was told to talk with you in order to have this done. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeffreyhartpierson (talk • contribs) 04:55, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
I'm wondering if you could expand slightly on your closing rationale. While more users argued to keep, their arguments are extremely weak and I provided detailed, specific arguments with a solid base in Wikipedia policies and I am not the only one who saw it that way. As I mentioned, it is not even verified that there is a street by this name, the one and only reliable source anyone has found about this subject only mentions a gate. The rest of the content of the article is original research coupled with some "facts" sourced to a spy novel. I think a bit more than a one-word explanation of why those arguments are invalid is in order. Beeblebrox (talk) 14:49, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- Hrm, perhaps you are correct in some respects. The consensus was a weak keep at best. However, perhaps we can allow for some time for the individuals who commented to attempt to improve upon the quality of the article. I would certainly have no objections if you wished to renominate the article for consideration of another discussion, at a later point in time, after allowing for some quality improvement efforts to be made. Perhaps you could notify those editors, and give them a heads up, that this might be your intention going forwards. -- Cirt (talk) 14:51, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- I've already taken that approach. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ma'ale HaShalom was nine months ago, and ran for three weeks. Mostly the same users participated, and this one crappy source is all they could find. I even went looking for speakers of Hebrew to help find sources. This article has already had it's chance, and it has failed to live up to our most basic content policies both times. Beeblebrox (talk) 15:00, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- I would suggest notifying those users of this proposal, and then renominating in two weeks if there are no significant improvements. Then, you can cite this conversation. ;) -- Cirt (talk) 15:05, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- I have to say I'm disappointed. Do logic and reason count for nothing here anymore? Why, after two AFDs over the course of nine months that ran for a total of four weeks, should I have to wait a further two weeks for the promised sources to appear? Look at the first AFD. I tried to find them myself. So have several other users. Yet nobody has found them and again the article is kept merely because of the assertion that sources must exist. I can insist that sources exist that prove my cat is the president of the moon, but that doesn't make it so. Beeblebrox (talk) 16:01, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- I would suggest notifying those users of this proposal, and then renominating in two weeks if there are no significant improvements. Then, you can cite this conversation. ;) -- Cirt (talk) 15:05, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- I've already taken that approach. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ma'ale HaShalom was nine months ago, and ran for three weeks. Mostly the same users participated, and this one crappy source is all they could find. I even went looking for speakers of Hebrew to help find sources. This article has already had it's chance, and it has failed to live up to our most basic content policies both times. Beeblebrox (talk) 15:00, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 00:47, 22 May 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
- It wasn't "userfication" I had in mind but restoring the article and reopening the AFD. While the requester may have a COI he also might have a point. The nominator was hinting that the term was being used for marketing purposes at pivotmylife but I don't see that company mentioned in the article. A little more discussion would be helpful if only to show to the refund requester that our consensus based deletion process works. (er more or less) --Ron Ritzman (talk) 03:45, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi Cirt. I think you mean "Deletion endorsed", instead of "Delete". Cunard (talk) 04:25, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
QuuxPlayer
Hi there, I am contacting you because you were involved in the deletion of the article on QuuxPlayer. I was surprised to find that Wikipedia contains no article on QuuxPlayer so I wrote one and was about to submit it only to discover that the previous article was deleted for lack of notability. I found Quuxplayer about six months ago after Googling for alternatives to foobar2000 and browsing various forums and download sites (e.g. [24][25][26][27]) where it was well recommended. Unfortunately I can't recall all the sources now but Quuxplayer is liked for its simplicity, sound quality and built-in support for internet radio, has been available on numerous download sites for at least three years, and received strong editors' reviews on CNET and PC World, even before it became freeware. Could this article be considered for resurrection, and if so, how can I kick off the process? Rubywine (talk) 02:05, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
- Done, now at User:Rubywine/QuuxPlayer. Be sure to check the edit history for older versions. -- Cirt (talk) 02:48, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
Userfy Request
Cirt,
I would like to obtain a userfy copy of the deleted article: Ralph Sirianni. The article was deleted on May 16, 2011, under the belief that "The subject appears to be notable only through local sources and is not nationally recognized." This is not true, and I take responsibility for not providing more substance to the article to demonstrate national recognition, as well as other WP:GNG and WP:ARTIST relevant material.
Thanks. Exchange26 (talk) 15:37, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
User affected by range block
Hi - could you have a look at the unblock request on User talk:LobtsterJ please, as they seem to be caught up in a range block you've implemented. As I don't know the background to the range block (other than being related to sock puppetry), I'm reluctant to allow this user IP block exemption without getting input from you first. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 12:13, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
File:John Sweeney with Mark Rathbun and Mike Rinder.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:John Sweeney with Mark Rathbun and Mike Rinder.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Damiens.rf 12:55, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
File:Santorum Most Outrageous Word of the Year 2004.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Santorum Most Outrageous Word of the Year 2004.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Damiens.rf 12:57, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
Early closure of Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2011 May 16#techophilia
Cirt, you closed Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2011 May 16#techophilia 17 hours and 36 minutes early. Od Mishehu has brought up early XfD closures a week earlier. This prevents other admins from closing DRVs or MfDs and may lead to admins' closing earlier and earlier than the set seven days. I ask that you do not close DRVs or MfDs early. Your early closures of Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Rmxriver and Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:WillManning and snow closures of Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Franavar and Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Smebranding/SME Branding may have contributed to Salvio giuliano (talk · contribs)'s closing Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Nandiyanto and Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Sonoran Mamma/The Masque over 12 hours early.
I raised the same issue with The ed17 at User:The ed17/Archives/37#Early DRV closures. I wrote:
Although I do not disagree with any of your DRV closures, I ask that you let them run for the full seven days unless there are exceptional circumstances, such as the discussions at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2011 February 14 (where WP:SNOW was applicable), or uncontroversial requests, such as the restoration of a contested prod. Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2011 February 10#Extravagance should have run for the full seven days and been closed no earlier than 19:50, 17 February 2011 (UTC) since it was initiated on 19:50, 10 February 2011 (UTC). DRV is the final court of appeal, so to prevent potential controversy, it is best to let the DRV discussions run the full seven days. This also allows more admins to close DRVs and guards against admins' closing earlier and earlier than the set 7 days (see DGG's comment at User talk:Spartaz/Archive9#closing in September 2009). Cunard (talk) 10:55, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
I ask you not to invoke WP:SNOW in the last 24 or 48 hours of a discussion to justify closing a debate half a day early. This will lead to admins' closing earlier and earlier. Cunard (talk) 07:55, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
- Alright, you raise a good point. In that particular DRV, one could have seen how there was unanimous debate consensus from respondents after the initial nomination. However, even so, you are perhaps correct in that it was a tad bit too early, even with regard to WP:SNOW. I will certainly keep that in mind in the future. Thanks, -- Cirt (talk) 11:34, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
- The main problem is that admins who have followed the full seven day rule will be unable to close the XfDs or DRVs. In order to close the discussions, they will have to close earlier than you. This isn't good because as DGG said, "Even a few hours early tend to drift, as other people go to 6, 12, etc." To prevent admins "racing" each other to close discussions, it is best to let the full seven days elapse before closing the debates—even in cases where WP:SNOW could arguably apply. Cunard (talk) 23:40, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
- Certainly a reasonable idea, especially for the less obvious cases. ;) Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 00:42, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, especially for the less obvious ones such as Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Colonel Warden/RIP (2nd nomination). I pity whoever has the guts to close Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2011 May 16#User:Colonel Warden/RIP. Any close will be disagreed with by at least half the participants. Not a good position for a closing admin to be in. ;) Cunard (talk) 01:05, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
- Certainly a reasonable idea, especially for the less obvious cases. ;) Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 00:42, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
- The main problem is that admins who have followed the full seven day rule will be unable to close the XfDs or DRVs. In order to close the discussions, they will have to close earlier than you. This isn't good because as DGG said, "Even a few hours early tend to drift, as other people go to 6, 12, etc." To prevent admins "racing" each other to close discussions, it is best to let the full seven days elapse before closing the debates—even in cases where WP:SNOW could arguably apply. Cunard (talk) 23:40, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
Re: AIV report
Hi - about the AIV report I left concerning the page Paulo Henrique Chagas de Lima, the issue is still on going and I'm struggling to keep up with the reverts - can the page be protected? Mato (talk) 22:51, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
If I didn't know bwtter, I'd almost say that was a chan bomb. Any idea what they were saying? Was that cheering or obscenities? HalfShadow 23:01, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
I seemed to have gotten them to understand what they've done wrong, and the post to user pages appear to be accidental: they don't understand where their message is supposed to go. I've seen other new users make the same mistake. Unless they've done something else and I just can't see it because it's been deleted, I request an unblock. HalfShadow 02:17, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
- An editor has expressed concern that this IP address has been used by Gsandler. The unblock request should be made at User talk:Gsandler, and preferably handled by a Checkuser. -- Cirt (talk) 02:28, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
Sacred Paths Center Deletion
I am the president of the board of directors for the Sacred Paths Center. The Sacred Paths Center is the first pagan community center in the nation. With us being the first and only two years old, it is nearly impossible to be in outside credible resources. We held off on making an entry this long waiting for Dr. Murphy Pizza (no, that is not a made up name, it really is her name) to have her dissertation published hoping it may be enough.
We are registered with the state of Minnesota as a not for profit organization and are in the process of filing for our 501c3 status.
I am asking that you please restore our article. If it helps, the Sacred Paths Center is used by the Wiccan Church of Minnesota, a federally recognized church. State = 1D-166 Federal = 36-3616607 In addition, we were just recognized in the Women's Press as the best in the area for women's spirituality.
I hope you are willing to restore this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KevinOfMinnesota (talk • contribs) 12:19, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
- I would be most willing to userfy it for you, so that you can work on improving the sourcing and quality of the article so as to make an argument for its notability, if you wish to do so. -- Cirt (talk) 15:22, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
- We are most certainly interested in your assistance. Also the SPC is mentioned in a PhD's Dissertation. The anthropologist did her work in the Twin Cities' pagan community. A PhD dissertation is highly reviewed by peers who are fully credentialed, so I am wondering why it is not considered a credible source. Dr. Pizza is also the editor of Handbook of Contemporary Paganism which is published by Brill Academic Publishers and sold by Amazon.com. I would hope that gives her some credibility. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KevinOfMinnesota (talk • contribs) 03:53, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Done, now at User:KevinOfMinnesota/Sacred Paths Center. -- Cirt (talk) 03:56, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Talkback
You probably have the GA nomination watchlisted, but just in case, I've dropped a talkback.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
GingerBread Lane - Have a look Cirt
Cirt, I think this looks like a wiki piece, reads like a wiki piece, has very strong sourcing ( Pittsburgh Trib Review,Pittsburgh Post Gazette, Wash Post, Martha Stewart Living, ) and some other sourcing too. It has been formatted much better, done in an appropriate wiki way, with the small numbers leading to sources. I think it ready to be on wikipedia. I am hoping you agree. Here is the new one, make sure you are reading the new one, here it is.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:A-E-I-Owned-You
Thanks Cirt. Kcdcchef (talk) 20:56, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
- Looks a bit better, could use some additional secondary source references from other more varied publications. -- Cirt (talk) 20:58, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
Cirt, I have many press pieces like this that are scanned in to my webpage, but no longer online. Can they be used? There are many on my website.
http://www.gingerbread-lane.org/press3large.html
I can literally add 5-6 new sources right away to the wiki piece if you let me use these. Washgington Afro America, additional Wash Post pieces, a Washingtonian piece. Is it okay to use these? They are legit news sources. Just no longer online ( not everything used to be archived as I am sure you know ) Kcdcchef (talk) 21:35, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
- You do not need a live link, just satisfy enough info for WP:V. But please read WP:COPYLINKS, as well. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 21:37, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
Done. Just added 5 more sources, Wash times, 1999, Wash afro american 1999, pitts trib reviuew jan 2007, pittsburgh living 2010, and pittsburgh trib 2010. That is 5 more secondary sources, all completely seperate from the ones I had been using. Also adding a See Also section to other wiki pieces on gingerbread, gingerbread men, and German gingerbread. Are we good to go yet? Kcdcchef (talk) 23:00, 24 May 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kcdcchef (talk • contribs) 22:57, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
- Done, back at GingerBread Lane, with AFD for reevaluation. -- Cirt (talk) 23:00, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
Groovy, and thanks. What will it take to finally get all that stuff at the top of the page, AFD, etc, removed? Once others see it;s better now? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kcdcchef (talk • contribs) 23:02, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
You didnt put the latest and greatest version up there, the one you put up stops at 13 sources, the latest has 19 sources. Radio Fan already said delete, but he isnt looking at right page.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:A-E-I-Owned-You
Not sure how, but here is the correct one wth 19 souces. RadioFan didnt see the correct version, I feel he/she should before jumping to delete. Kcdcchef (talk) 23:14, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
Done. Just didnt want to get busted on the COI stuff. Kcdcchef (talk) 23:17, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
Block of 212.183.128.2
Cirt, please consider reviewing the block of the 212.IP. All I see is one comment on a talk page today, and a stale act of vandalism earlier in the month. Please take note on the subject talk page concerning this being a shared IP. I'll be offline for awhile, but would appreciate your attention on this matter. I'll check back later. 66.87.111.151 (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
- Done! -- Cirt (talk) 01:47, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
- Cirt, Not sure whats up. It looks like the block was removed, then reinstated for a week on the 212IP. I'm not seeing the problem. Also noted that you blocked a range of over 16000 IP's for a week on the last IP I was using. Not sure why, when you sample the range, there are a lot of good editors getting hit here. Might want to discuss this with a checkuser to see what the collateral damage is going to be. I'll check back later. Cheers! 79.143.178.233 (talk) 03:13, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
212.183.128.2
212.183.128.2 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
66.87.111.151 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
66.87.82.229 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
How does an IP turn up, out of the clear blue sky, to ask when a blocked user is going to be unblocked, unless he's a sock of that blocked user? And how does another IP, as in the previous section, know about this? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:49, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
- OK, I get it now. Some character on the 66.87 subnet is engaged in some sort of gnat-level harassment campaign. And you bought into it. Whatever. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:54, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
- Please file a request at WP:SPI. -- Cirt (talk) 02:01, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
- They won't do IP's. You're passing the buck. You got tricked by that harassing California-based IP, and you can't own up to it. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 02:08, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
- Nope, I am not. There is even a standard template at WP:AIV, referring sock cases to WP:SPI. -- Cirt (talk) 02:13, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
- When an editor is an obvious sock, no SPI is needed, as it will be denied anyway due to the duck test; and most admins crusing AIV will do the right thing in such cases, as they did earlier today.
You got tricked; you messed up; and you can't admit it.←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 02:17, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
- When an editor is an obvious sock, no SPI is needed, as it will be denied anyway due to the duck test; and most admins crusing AIV will do the right thing in such cases, as they did earlier today.
- Nope, I am not. There is even a standard template at WP:AIV, referring sock cases to WP:SPI. -- Cirt (talk) 02:13, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
- They won't do IP's. You're passing the buck. You got tricked by that harassing California-based IP, and you can't own up to it. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 02:08, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
- Please file a request at WP:SPI. -- Cirt (talk) 02:01, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
You convinced me. You are correct. -- Cirt (talk) 02:18, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
- Excellent. And I apologize for my tone. Feel free to yell at me in return if I mess up. :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 02:20, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
- According to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Factocop/Archive, the previous known IP's, which are in a different range and provider, nonetheless emanate from London. That was some months back. I don't know how to look at the contributions of a range of IP's. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 02:27, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
Eliot House AFD
Could you help me understand the closure of WP:Articles for deletion/Eliot House? Obviously there was no consensus, but I had thought that policy was the most important thing, and if there are no references supporting notability, then it would be deleted, even if some people made the silly claim that minor mentions in passing were adequate. Matchups 02:24, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
thanks
Hello Cirt. Thanks for blocking this bozo Runsroute (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Unfortunately they moved the entire article to rename the page with their vandalising edit. Is there any chance that you will be able to move it back? Thanks for your time. MarnetteD | Talk 02:49, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
- Oops I see that it has already been taken care of. Hopefully normal editing will return shortly Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 02:50, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
You are most welcome. ;) Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 02:53, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
Self-deletion of image you uploaded and voted keep
Hi, would you post a deletion rationale at Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2011_May_23#File:Santorum_Most_Outrageous_Word_of_the_Year_2004.jpg? You were the uploader and voted for keeping it, but still you speed-deleted the image just one day after nomination. Whatever changed in your mind would be educating, and possibly quotable in future deletion discussions.
Your rationale in the log, "G7: One author who has requested deletion", felt somewhat incomplete.
Thanks, --Damiens.rf 03:41, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
- I was simply deferring to the emerging consensus. -- Cirt (talk) 04:25, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
- Couldn't you live through this? Next time, at lest, keep the record straight on the log message. Thanks, --Damiens.rf 05:04, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
If you're in a mood to do some more admin-stuff, would you mind semi-protecting that page again? Protection was removed for some unknown reason, and the IP who keeps trying to post a large section, about some internal soap opera at the Austin PD, is back there again. Thank you! (I posted this at WP:RFPP but no action was taken.) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:45, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
- Done! -- Cirt (talk) 05:34, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you! Hopefully that will encourage discussion in lieu of edit-warring. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 05:59, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi Cirt, did you mean to delete the other two bundled articles as well? -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:49, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
why did you delete my article on umplayer?
hi, i just spend the last hour editing an article about umplayer (a highly respected open source media player) which you just deleted :s you gave reason that the software in question is non-notable, but i want you to know sir that it's the 3rd most popluar media player in the world and i've spend countless hours working with other developers for no compensation to achieve the best damn media player possible. so i ask you sir to re-institude the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orejwan (talk • contribs) 14:21, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
- I would be most willing to userfy it for you, so that you can work on improving the sourcing and quality of the article so as to make an argument for its notability, if you wish to do so. -- Cirt (talk) 14:24, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
Sure! please tell me what needs to be doing, I though i did a prety good job with everything but this is my first (and only) Wiki article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orejwan (talk • contribs) 14:37, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
- Done, now at User:Orejwan/UMPlayer media player. -- Cirt (talk) 14:41, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
sorry cirt, can you please explain what needs to be doing? also, i would like to change the name from 'UMPlayer_media_player' to simply 'UMPlayer' — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orejwan (talk • contribs) 15:02, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
sorry i'm a little confused
hi Cirt,
sorry i'm new to wikipedia so this is really annoying; i'm writing you about the article of the UMPlayer i've written, which you've deleted. now it seems that you've also blocked my user for link spaming (which i don't see how this is possible at all with no ref tags but that's besides the point). now the article i've written was in my opinion well though of and well prased and had plenty of refrences, it might not be a gem but certianly better than some of the other aritcles i've read, and the software in question is very notable (it's one of the world's most popular applications) and is featured on countless sites such as cnet, brothersoft, softpedia, etc.
i have to tell you that i'm about to give up; i'm tired of this run about, all i was trying to do is write an article about a highly esteemed well regarded open source software that no one is getting paid for, and not only that my article got deleted (several times) but my user and ip were blocked by you. so please tell me what needs to be done to rectify this problem.
best- ori — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orejwan (talk • contribs) 15:00, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
- I would suggest you contact WP:Help desk. Please read WP:Article development, WP:V, WP:RS, and WP:CITE. -- Cirt (talk) 22:12, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
House Hasson Hardware
Why did you delete the article House Hasson Hardware. I worked hard putting that on Wikipedia you deleted it? Can you put it back up? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.67.104.178 (talk) 17:37, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
- I would be most willing to userfy it for you, so that you can work on improving the sourcing and quality of the article so as to make an argument for its notability, if you wish to do so. But you would first have to create an account on Wikipedia. -- Cirt (talk) 22:15, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
What is a argument for notability? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.67.104.178 (talk) 15:34, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi
Hi, just so you know. An editors has asked that the protection on the Casey Anthony homicide article should be removed. I strongly advice against it. Just to let you know as you were the one who protected the article.--BabbaQ (talk) 18:22, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
Wikien thread
Please note that there is a thread on the Wikien list discussing your work on the Santorum (neologism) article. This is the post that started the thread, the others are accessible from this listing. --JN466 19:35, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
More socks of Porgers active
Toddst1 told me to contact you if he was not available. I found another sockpuppet of Porgers (talk · contribs). It is IP # 69.70.75.106 . I got an email saying someone "from the IP address 69.70.75.106 requested that we send you a new login password for the English Wikipedia." What should I do about it? I also noticed that User 69.70.75.106 has been editing the Jean Chrétien article again. I hate to get into another edit war, as one is brewing if no one else steps in. --Skol fir (talk) 22:42, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
- Hi Cirt. One of the confirmed sock-puppets for Porgers -- User:70.48.238.196 -- is active again requesting password changes. How is that possible, when this IP address was blocked for one month on 22 May? ("account creation blocked, e-mail blocked with an expiry time of 1 month"). I just got a message 1/2 hour ago that "Someone (probably you, from IP address 70.48.238.196) requested a new password for Wikiversity." I never requested any such thing!. He is still on the loose. Can this nonsense not be stopped? This IP address has to be globally blocked across all projects. --Skol fir (talk) 04:16, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
- In case you don't think I am serious, look at these suspicious edits just carried out on Wikiversity by someone from IP address 70.48.238.196. Should we just ignore this? --Skol fir (talk) 06:09, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
Advocacy concerns
I have a concern with your editing, which on several occasions seems to have veered into political advocacy, in violation of WP:NOTADVOCATE policy. There are several instances of this.
Kenneth Dickson and Joel Anderson (US election candidates)
The first one relates to your editing of the articles Kenneth Dickson (AfD1, AfD2) and Joel Anderson. Both Dickson and Anderson were candidates in a local California election that took place in June 2010. There were three main contenders; the third, Jeff Stone, does not have a Wikipedia article. (Anderson won, Dickson was said by press to have done "surprisingly" well.)
Prior to that election, you wrote the abovementioned, highly flattering article on Kenneth Dickson (see feedback from other editors in the two AfDs). You also completely re-wrote the article on the other candidate, Joel Anderson, prior to the election, increasing its size five-fold in a single edit. That too resulted in an upbeat article that ended with endorsements:
"On April 6, 2010, Anderson received the endorsement of San Diego Assemblyman Nathan Fletcher, who described the candidate as "a rock-solid conservative that gets things done in Sacramento".[28] Anderson also received endorsements from the California Republican Assembly and from Congressman Duncan Hunter.[29] In his endorsement, Congressman Hunter called Anderson "a great conservative leader who has fought to strengthen the economy by supporting tax credits to encourage new hiring and by eliminating excessive regulations on businesses."[30]"
Some time after the election, Kenneth Dickson was deleted by User:John Vandenberg, after considerable community discussion. A substantial number of editors judged it to be a promotional article on a non-notable local politician. I did not participate in either deletion discussion, but later noted that Kenneth Dickson was prominently discussed in forums discussing what used to be a main focus of your editing here, until you agreed to step back from the topic, at the urging of several admins and an arbitrator: Scientology.
Kenneth Dickson was discussed on these forums in the following terms:
"There are two Republicans running against Jeff Stone. One, Joel Anderson, has a few ethical problems stemming from creative juggling of campaign funds. The other, Kenneth Dickson, appears to have a clean reputation. As a Republican, he is supporting the usual issues associated with that party, including freedom of religious expression. ... Gold Base is within the Senate district Stone, Anderson and Dickson are competing for. Dickson's campaign site is here: ... I think, given Joel Anderson's tainted reputation, Dickson is the best Republican candidate to beat Jeff Stone." [28]
In a later discussion about Wikipedia on that same forum, discussing your work here, a contributor named Xenubarb referred to you by name, saying, "I helped Cirt acquire some photos of politicians for the Jeff Stone/campaign articles. It's a bitch. You have to have the photo provider sign some thing stating permission to use the image, and copyright claims acknowledged. Two politicians didn't even bother to respond, so no pix for them." [29]
I was left with no other reasonable conclusion than that you had consciously tried to use Wikipedia to influence the outcome of the election, biasing our coverage against the candidate not favoured on that forum, Stone.
Jose Peralta and Hiram Monserrate (US election candidates)
Two politicians that have similarly been discussed at Scientology message boards are Jose Peralta and Hiram Monserrate. Examples: [30],[31]. As can be seen, Monserrate was viewed as a "political supporter" of Scientology, and Peralta was viewed as the candidate to be preferred. I note that prior to the March 16, 2010, election, you completely overhauled Peralta's article: [32], [33], increasing its size 25-fold, and adding an image of a smiling Peralta uploaded by yourself. The article concludes with a blue call-out box saying,
"Now more than ever we need a strong voice in the state Senate and Jose Peralta will be a senator we can be proud of."
The article appeared on DYK on 12 March 2010, four days prior to the election, with the hook:
"Did you know that Jose Peralta was the first Latino elected to the New York State Assembly from Queens, New York?"
Your article contained no voices critical of Peralta, even though such voices could easily have been sourced, for example "Smith: Is Jose Peralta Really All That Much Better Than Hiram Monserrate?", New York (magazine); "Assemblyman Jose Peralta scored $500,000 in taxpayer funds for inactive nonprofit", New York Daily News.
At the same time, you also edited Hiram Monserrate. Your edits in that BLP focused on expanding coverage of Monserrate's legal and personal problems at the time. [34][35][36][37] and others.
Again, the impression I was left with was that you were quite consciously trying to use Wikipedia to influence the outcome of the election.
Daryl Wine Bar and Restaurant
You wrote Daryl Wine Bar and Restaurant (AfD1, AfD2). Several editors viewed this as a puff piece of a non-notable restaurant; it was kept as no consensus in the first AfD, after User:DGG edited it down significantly to reduce its promotional tone, and then deleted in the second AfD. The owner is a former Scientologist turned critic; Jimbo Wales commented in the AfD: "That there is a connection to Scientology here is quite relevant to any thoughtful understanding of what is going on." You denied at the time that moral support for anti-Scientologists affected the way you wrote the article, although you said you had read about it on a Scientology critic's blog.
Corbin Fisher
Leaving Scientology behind, you also wrote the article Corbin Fisher, on a gay porn company. It's an article you created, and like Jose Peralta, it featured (until today, when you removed it) a blue call-out box with an endorsement:
"I've always had a lot of professional and personal admiration for [Corbin Fisher] because they really defined a new space in gay adult entertainment".
The article strikes me as a perfect PR piece. At least, if I tried to write a PR piece, I could do no better. The article also appeared as a DYK on the main page, with the hook:
"Did you know ... that the gay pornography film studio Corbin Fisher offers contracted actors health benefits and a 401(k) plan?"
When other editors added material from sources that might portray the company in a less favourable light ([38], [39]), you deleted all of it, including parts that were adequately sourced, with the edit summary "better to keep in chronological order". Was this appropriate, and in the spirit of NPOV?
Santorum (neologism)
Recently, since about the time that the press reported that Rick Santorum, a politician who has been in controversy over his statements about homosexuality, might be running for president, you have been working on Santorum (neologism), an article on a campaign that seeks to ridicule him by associating his name with anal sex, greatly expanding the article. As you know, this has caused concern on the Wikien-l list that you are using Wikipedia as a platform for political campaigning. You created three new templates that include the term santorum, adding several hundred in-bound links to your article, which presently is the top Google result for Santorum's surname.
Summary
There are other aspects of your editing that have caused me concern over the years, such as:
- your uploading self-published sources to sister projects, and using them in Wikipedia in a way that I and other editors felt were violations of WP:BLPSPS policy (examples: [40], [41]),
- other BLP violations (example: [42]),
- your editing of Everybody Draw Mohammed Day, which likewise seemed an overly upbeat article designed to promote the event,
- your defensive stance towards other editors expressing criticism of, or wishing to contribute to, the articles you work on,
- making an item related to your personal interests appear in the "On this day" section of the main page, by editing the Selected anniversaries page just prior to the relevant date ([43], reverted by User:NuclearWarfare a few days later (edit summary: "It may be a GA, but it is hardly of landmark importance"), but only after it had run on the main page).
To summarise, you seem to have made conscious attempts to influence the outcome of several US elections, in the service of off-site campaigns, and to have written a number of unduly promotional articles. Are you prepared to take any of these concerns on board, and to work on the live articles mentioned to balance them out? And to the extent that you feel my impressions may be accurate, are you prepared to no longer engage in these kinds of editing behaviour? --JN466 04:31, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Reply by Cirt - I strive to defer to on-Wikipedia discussion and community consensus
- Comment
- What we have here are multiple issues that prior to this post to my user talk page, Jayen466 (talk · contribs) has chiefly only complained about on the website Wikipedia Review. Where there were community processes and dispute resolution, such as Requests for Comment, Third Opinion, or Articles for Deletion debates - even in situations where the outcome of the community consensus is the opposite of my personal opinions or point of view - I always strive to respectfully defer to that community consensus. But the majority of the complaining by Jayen466 (talk · contribs) is performed in the form of posts on external websites and forum-shopping, whether it be on Wikipedia Review or more lately at WikiEN-l.
- Articles mentioned above
- Kenneth Dickson - this article was deleted after AFD, and I respect and defer to the community consensus here. After the AFD in which it was deleted, I made the decision to abide by that deletion discussion, and the outcome of the community discussion. In that case, the community process worked quite well.
- Joel Anderson is notable. At the time of my improvements to the article, he was a sitting member of the California Assembly. He went on to become a member of the California State Senate. Prior to my work on the article, the WP:BLP page was largely very poorly referenced. After my work on the article, the page was meticulously referenced. I improved a page on a BLP. There were no on-Wikipedia discussions of my work on this article, or objections to it, in a forum or process such as AFD. Apparently Jayen466 (talk · contribs) is attempting to criticize me here for not adding negative info about a BLP to this article.
- Jose Peralta is notable. At the time of my improvements to the article, he was a sitting member of the New York State Assembly. Prior to my improvements to the article, the BLP page was a stub, and entirely unsourced. After my improvements to the article, the page was meticulously referenced. Apparently Jayen466 (talk · contribs) is attempting to criticize me here for not adding negative info about a BLP to this article.
- Hiram Monserrate - I did add some sourced criticism to this article. There was never any dispute resolution about it, and talk page discussion resolved the issues discussed. If there had been on-Wikipedia discussion, I would have deferred to standard processes such a AFD, or talk page content based Request for Comment.
- Daryl Wine Bar and Restaurant - this article was deleted after AFD, and I respect and defer to the community consensus here. After the AFD in which it was deleted, I made the decision to abide by that deletion discussion, and the outcome of the community discussion. In that case, the community process worked quite well.
- Corbin Fisher - I came by this article organically, through my interest in the U.S. Supreme Court Case, called Hustler Magazine v. Falwell. That Supreme Court case was cited in another ongoing case at the time, Beck v. Eiland-Hall, an article I successfully took to WP:GA status. Through research on one of the free speech lawyers from that case, I improved the article on attorney Marc Randazza. After performing research on that article, I came by the topic of Corbin Fisher.
- Santorum (neologism) - I had seen this article in a poor state in the past. Before my improvements to the page, it contained unreferenced info and citation needed tags. After my improvements to the article, every single sentence was meticulously referenced. Evidently Jayen466 (talk · contribs) would have rather I never improved that page, and preferred the version that was more poorly sourced, and had remained that way for some time.
- Summary
- In summary, when community processes and dispute resolution occur, that is the best way to handle conflicts, on-Wikipedia. And regardless of whatever the outcome of those on-Wikipedia discussions are, I always do my best to abide by the outcome of the Wikipedia community. -- Cirt (talk) 04:55, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- I accept that you bow to community consensus, if not always gracefully at first. But I also think that you often fly under the radar, and edit with a definite advocacy goal for as long as you can get away with it. It's too bad that no one spotted your tinkering with the election candidates' BLPs at the time they mattered, but you should be able to see that that type of editing is problematic, even if no one is calling you out on it here at the time. --JN466 05:17, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- I am not sure that you do accept that I bow to community consensus. You have not even mentioned that until I brought it up, myself. -- Cirt (talk) 05:18, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- Jayen466, it's absurd to say that Cirt is violating WP:NOT by writing a quality article on a gay porn company, or that a single favorable quotation turned it into advocacy. You're turning writing articles into a crime, and your obsession with Cirt is disruptive. Will Beback talk 06:24, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- I am not sure that you do accept that I bow to community consensus. You have not even mentioned that until I brought it up, myself. -- Cirt (talk) 05:18, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- I accept that you bow to community consensus, if not always gracefully at first. But I also think that you often fly under the radar, and edit with a definite advocacy goal for as long as you can get away with it. It's too bad that no one spotted your tinkering with the election candidates' BLPs at the time they mattered, but you should be able to see that that type of editing is problematic, even if no one is calling you out on it here at the time. --JN466 05:17, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- Note: I submit my work for review.
- I post to multiple WikiProject talkpages, notifying them of new articles I create, new processes I am involved in, etc.
- I submit articles that are ready and well-sourced for GA Review.
- I submit articles for Peer Review.
- I submit articles that I think are good candidates after that to FAC review.
- I respond swiftly during these community review processes to address concerns.
- I participate in community processes, specifically to get these types of feedback. -- Cirt (talk) 05:21, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- Can I take this as an indication that you feel none of the above behaviours should give anyone grounds for concern? --JN466 05:58, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- No, that is not what I said, they may of course be grounds for concern. But I make it a practice to submit my edits for review, through community processes. I post to WikiProject talkpages with notices of such edits and of new article creation. And I submit quality improvements for review such as GA and FA. -- Cirt (talk) 05:59, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- Well, what might those legitimate grounds for concern be? --JN466 06:02, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- Jayen, if my goal were to "fly under the radar", I would not be so willing and make such an effort to seek out community review processes such as by posting to WikiProject talkpages with updates about my edits, deferring to community consensus, and submitting my work for quality review. -- Cirt (talk) 06:02, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- You know as well as I do that submissions for DYK undergo minimum scrutiny. Is it proper to submit a flattering bio of a politician for DYK a week before an election? --JN466 06:05, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- I stopped watching those articles. They are no longer on my watchlist. I removed hundreds of pages related to Scientology from my watchlists, months ago. I make an effort and strive to notify WikiProject talkpages of my new article creation. I have done this new step, precisely to elicit additional review and give more notices about my article quality improvement work. -- Cirt (talk) 06:07, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- You have not answered the question. Is it proper to submit a flattering bio of a politician for DYK a week before an election? Is it proper to sneak in a Werner Erhard piece (given your investment in that topic) into the main page "On this day ..." slot a few hours before the date changes, without consultation? That is flying under the radar. --JN466 06:10, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- You are not responding to my repeated statements about how I have modified my behavior. And for the record, I make a practice to no longer watch or edit those selected anniversary pages, and I dropped those off of my watchlists months ago. -- Cirt (talk) 06:12, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- Note: To be specific, I agree it is best to wait until after an election to submit related articles for DYK. -- Cirt (talk) 06:13, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- You are not responding to my repeated statements about how I have modified my behavior. And for the record, I make a practice to no longer watch or edit those selected anniversary pages, and I dropped those off of my watchlists months ago. -- Cirt (talk) 06:12, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- You have not answered the question. Is it proper to submit a flattering bio of a politician for DYK a week before an election? Is it proper to sneak in a Werner Erhard piece (given your investment in that topic) into the main page "On this day ..." slot a few hours before the date changes, without consultation? That is flying under the radar. --JN466 06:10, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- I stopped watching those articles. They are no longer on my watchlist. I removed hundreds of pages related to Scientology from my watchlists, months ago. I make an effort and strive to notify WikiProject talkpages of my new article creation. I have done this new step, precisely to elicit additional review and give more notices about my article quality improvement work. -- Cirt (talk) 06:07, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- You know as well as I do that submissions for DYK undergo minimum scrutiny. Is it proper to submit a flattering bio of a politician for DYK a week before an election? --JN466 06:05, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- Jayen, if my goal were to "fly under the radar", I would not be so willing and make such an effort to seek out community review processes such as by posting to WikiProject talkpages with updates about my edits, deferring to community consensus, and submitting my work for quality review. -- Cirt (talk) 06:02, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- Well, what might those legitimate grounds for concern be? --JN466 06:02, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- No, that is not what I said, they may of course be grounds for concern. But I make it a practice to submit my edits for review, through community processes. I post to WikiProject talkpages with notices of such edits and of new article creation. And I submit quality improvements for review such as GA and FA. -- Cirt (talk) 05:59, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Comments by others
Cirt, I hate to have to say this, because I respect your ability to write good Wikipedia articles, but your response is disingenuous.
- First of all, who cares if Jayen has discussed some of this on Wikipedia Review? What's important is the issue here in Wikipedia. You are not being persecuted.
- You aren't addressing Jayen's concerns, which is that the pattern involved in the articles he mentions gives the appearance of favoring certain political candidates, typically ones who are anti-Scientology. The off-site comments by others he mentions give evidence of you being involved in a campaign to do so. You didn't address this.
- I think you wrote a balanced article on the Santorum thing, except for the title (and perhaps the templates, although I'm reserving judgement on that for now). I noticed from the start, and have made a couple of comments on it on the talk page, along with others like Fred Bauder, that the article really isn't about the neologism, it's about Savage's campaign to use it against Santorum, thus the valid suggestion to change the article title. If you had an NPOV interest in the article, then I think you would be more willing to compromise on that point. Cla68 (talk) 05:09, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- No comment on anything else, but the title has been subject to debate ad nauseum on various noticeboards and no one editor can really be considered responsible for its current form. I think Cirt participated in those debates but that is certainly his prerogative as an editor. Protonk (talk) 06:06, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Response to Cla68
- It is relevant that Jayen466 (talk · contribs) has focused on me at Wikipedia Review. He has done so to the exclusion of dispute resolution here on this project. Indeed, most of the above-listed articles have not been through any on-Wikipedia processes such as WP:3O, WP:RFC, or WP:AFD. And where they did go through AFD, I deferred to the outcome of the on-Wikipedia community consensus.
- I have backed away a bit from the topic of Scientology some months ago, only keeping maintenance on prior GA and FA projects.
- I thank you for your comments about my improvements to the article Santorum (neologism). The article is about many aspects, including all of what you have mentioned, and the neologism itself. And there is consensus for this on the article's talk page, and in 3 prior AFDs. If there were another form of on-Wikipedia process relating to that article, such as AFD, RFC, etc, I would go along and participate in that process as well, with a good faith assumption that the on-Wikipedia process would come to an appropriate resolution from community consensus.
-- Cirt (talk) 05:13, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
My reaction to the above: Cirt is being Wikihounded
Sure looks to me like Jayen466 has a well-documented axe to grind against Cirt, and that this is a case of WP:WIKIHOUND. Jusdafax 05:37, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- Well, you are correct in that Jayen466 (talk · contribs) has been warned for WP:WIKIHOUND diff, as an aside he has also been called out for forum-shopping when he does not get his way diff. -- Cirt (talk) 05:46, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- Cirt, as I think you know, I have your page watchlisted. I don't read every post here but this one caught my eye. I am not sure if I understand what Jayen's beef is with you but trashing you to 'Wikipedia Review', a website I have zero interest in, stinks. Looks to me like he will do anything to get what he wants. It seems to me to be clear-cut, across-the-board WP:HARASSMENT, and a stop should be put to it, in my view. Jusdafax 06:01, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- Disclaimer: I have been giving Cirt some off-wiki advice in the past. I get the distinct impression that Cirt's accusation of WikiHounding is absolutely 100% the case. Immediately, in the WikiEn-l discussion about Santorum, Jayen's first response was to connect the santorum aritcle with past editing about sexuality. It seems that he has prepared a careful playbook in order to argue against Cirt in every discussion and has made a series of connections of Cirt's editing about advocating for politicians which doesn't seem to be the case. I have had discussions about what types of articles Cirt should be editing because of his concern about the concern he caused in the Scientology topic area, and I advised him to handle more literary or less controversal topic areas, because he was good at writing those articles. As far as I can tell, he has significantly changed his editing habits and his willingness to branch out to articles like Santorum, and to work with community consensus to change the articles, seems like significant proof to me of his good intention. I would like to ask Jayen to politely back off on this one, or their might be room for community intervention of some sort, Sadads (talk) 09:10, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- Cirt, as I think you know, I have your page watchlisted. I don't read every post here but this one caught my eye. I am not sure if I understand what Jayen's beef is with you but trashing you to 'Wikipedia Review', a website I have zero interest in, stinks. Looks to me like he will do anything to get what he wants. It seems to me to be clear-cut, across-the-board WP:HARASSMENT, and a stop should be put to it, in my view. Jusdafax 06:01, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- At best it seems that Jayen is accusing Cirt of not writing articles with a tone Jayen prefers, but I believe this is a case of Cirt being wikihounded. I think that rather than Cirt attempting to fix elections using wikipedia it is more the case that prior to elections a large amount of reliable sources appear reporting on the subjects enabling Cirt to improve the articles in question. Cirt has demonstrated that his goal has been to improve the articles and election time gives him the tools to do so. Cirt shouldn't be expected to completely cover every aspect of an article, weigh out the pro's and Con's of every topic, cover and provide references for all the reliable sources, and then come up with an article which will satisfy everyone concerned...that is what other editors are around for, if they didn't step up it isn't his fault. Based on the scope of these accusations in both timeline and topic matter I think this is a clear case of wikihounding.Coffeepusher (talk) 11:08, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- That argument has been tried before: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive656#Potential_WP:CANVASSING_by_User:Cirt. Then, as now, Cirt's actions had attracted attention and caused intense debate in a community forum that I follow. The result was that several admins, and in the end an arbitrator, asked Cirt to step back from the topic area, as s/he was overinvolved. That there have been past attempts by Cirt to affect the outcome of US elections through Wikipedia (with the help of folks from "Why we protest") is relevant in the present context -- simply because it demonstrates that Cirt has been open to the idea of bringing external campaign groups' agenda to Wikipedia. And I cannot think of a single other case where a Wikipedian wrote an extremely laudatory article on a political candidate, and then had it appear on the main page four days before the election. An editor and admin should not need to be told that this is improper.
- As for your theory, Coffeepusher, that it was a sudden wealth of sources that spurred Cirt's editing, it is not borne out by the facts. Most of the sources that Cirt used to expand Jose Peralta were several years old (less than a third were current). The simple fact of the matter is that Peralta's opponent, Monserrate, was friendly towards Scientology; he had even done a Scientology program and liked it. Saying it's okay for an admin to write a non-neutral article and get it featured on the main page, as long as no other editors notice and intervene, is a poor interpretation of site policy. Your and Jusdafax's past interests in Scientology are duly noted. --JN466 12:15, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- Your ad hominem is duly noted, and I raise you your own past interest in Scientology.Coffeepusher (talk) 15:20, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- ... my "past interest" in Scientology, Jayen? Is anyone who has ever edited a Scientology article on Wikipedia on some kind of list you are keeping? I can't remember the last time I edited a Scientology article, so it must have been what, a year ago? That you know my own past history better than I do speaks volumes for your obsessive interest and builds a case against you. Want some great advice? Drop this now, because it sure looks to me like you are shooting yourself in the foot. Jusdafax 19:21, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- Your ad hominem is duly noted, and I raise you your own past interest in Scientology.Coffeepusher (talk) 15:20, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- At best it seems that Jayen is accusing Cirt of not writing articles with a tone Jayen prefers, but I believe this is a case of Cirt being wikihounded. I think that rather than Cirt attempting to fix elections using wikipedia it is more the case that prior to elections a large amount of reliable sources appear reporting on the subjects enabling Cirt to improve the articles in question. Cirt has demonstrated that his goal has been to improve the articles and election time gives him the tools to do so. Cirt shouldn't be expected to completely cover every aspect of an article, weigh out the pro's and Con's of every topic, cover and provide references for all the reliable sources, and then come up with an article which will satisfy everyone concerned...that is what other editors are around for, if they didn't step up it isn't his fault. Based on the scope of these accusations in both timeline and topic matter I think this is a clear case of wikihounding.Coffeepusher (talk) 11:08, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- The wikihounding claims do appear to be justified by the evidence. It's a bit strange to me that every time my Wikipedia editing/viewing brings me into contact with Cirt's generally high quality of work over a period of at least two years now, Jayen is in there as an antagonist. It doesn't seem like the behaviour of someone with merely a series of content disagreements with another contributor. Every contributor (and I happily include myself in this - my talk page archives are replete with instances) is accountable for what they do on here, but this is not an excuse for acting on a long-held grudge which seems to be over an entirely unrelated matter (Cirt's edits on new religious movements, in a nutshell). Orderinchaos 19:06, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. The Resident Anthropologist (talk)•(contribs) 23:34, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- Cirt, it seems to me that the activity at ANI regarding Jayen466 indicates considerable community concern regarding his ongoing violations of WP:HARASSMENT. In addition, Jayen's invitation for others to attack you, which I have commented on with no reply from him, appears to me to be a blatant violation of WP:TAGTEAM, which has been confirmed by several tangential new sections and proposals which have drawn well-deserved comments of disbelief, but had the effect of defocusing the issue of Jayen466's continued Wikihounding of you, which may well be the intent. I make this observation here to continue to document the problem and isolate the various stages, per my original observation that began this post. With best wishes and continued concerns, Jusdafax 18:38, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi
OK thanks for blocking Cameron Scott even so for just a week the users behaviour on the Caylee Anthony homicide was blatant vandalism in my opinion. Could you please check out user Niteshift36s edits and especially hateful comments on the Caylee Anthony talk page, I find them to be really offensive and the user seem to just removing huge part of the article without reason just like Cameron Scott. Thanks once again!--BabbaQ (talk) 05:18, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Cameron Scott
I'm having trouble seeing why Cameron Scott was blocked for a week for vandalism. What am I missing in his or the IP's contribution history? Protonk (talk) 05:20, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- He used both his old username Cameron Scott and his current IP to remove huge part on the article in question. Also he was offensive towards me earlier in the day etc etc etc.. There is sufficient evidence to support a weeks block.--BabbaQ (talk) 05:24, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- The etc etc etc matters in this case. What did he say. And looking at the article in question I see content removals with edit summaries. Not trying to be a jerk, but I don't see how we get a week block for vandalism. Protonk (talk) 05:39, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- The total amount of content removed is quite small—mainly, he reordered existing content. Bongomatic 05:42, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- Cirt, forgive me for cluttering up your talk page with this, but I have taken the bold step of reverting BabbaQ edits. (BabbaQ reverted back to a version prior to Cameron Scott's edits.) The reason for my edit is the newer version appears be a better formated version and that version contained a number of edits by others after Cameron Scott's edits. BTW - I also do not believe this article needs full protection. If anyone wishes to respond to my comments, I suggest we leave Cirt's page and comment on BabbaQ talk page. My best to all and again Cirt, my apologies for the clutter. ttonyb (talk) 06:08, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- The total amount of content removed is quite small—mainly, he reordered existing content. Bongomatic 05:42, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- The etc etc etc matters in this case. What did he say. And looking at the article in question I see content removals with edit summaries. Not trying to be a jerk, but I don't see how we get a week block for vandalism. Protonk (talk) 05:39, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- Hey Cirt I know you are busy with the mess up above but I would like some comment on this. It is very odd to see a user with no apparent recent vandalism blocked for a week and I am curious if there was a mistake or if I am missing something glaring. Protonk (talk) 06:34, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
So in summary, you locked a page which did not need locking and when I questioned this you blocked me for 'vandalism' - this is the very model of admin abuse. My block record now indicated I was blocked for vandalism and is a stain on my record. --Cameron Scott (talk) 06:51, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- I am sorry about that. There were legitimate concerns, but it is indeed correct that I should have referred the user to WP:SPI and WP:ANI. I hope you take care to engage more in the future on article talk pages. -- Cirt (talk) 06:53, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- Mistakes happen man. He blocked you presumably because of an AIV report. Someone noticed the block, asked about it and it was reversed. We all would have been happier had no block occurred in the first place but as it stands a single block reversed in an hour is not a big deal. Protonk (talk) 06:56, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- which has absolutely *nothing* to do with a block for vandalism - nobody above can see any evidence of vandalism, I have asked for specific evidence of vandalism and you have been completely silence on the matter. As far as I can see the run of events is as follows:
1) you protect a page in error 2) I ask for an unblock of the page (as 87.x.x.) 3) I then return to my account (and note so on the talkpage of that article) 4) you take it on face value that the page has been subject to vandalism and do no checks 5) you block me.
It's either a catalogue of errors on your part or you simply hit the buttons as you see fit or more worryingly, you block me because you didn't like the questioning of the page protection. Yours actions in this matter make no sense any other way. --Cameron Scott (talk) 06:59, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- The block was a mistake, I should have suggested the user report to WP:SPI or WP:ANI. But I also agree with this comment diff by Protonk. -- Cirt (talk) 07:01, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
That's nice but I'm still left with a block log that indicates that I am a vandal, and you are still offering no explanation of why you blocked me or fully protected a page (Both at the request of a single editor - BabbaQ) for vandalism when neither had occured. One of those errors on it's own we could indeed say "it's a mistake" but the two together are different admin actions that indicate that you are using buttons with doing any actual checks, you are simply taking statements made to you at face value. I'll leave this matter at that. --Cameron Scott (talk) 07:06, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Sorry I meant Semi-protected the article above, again to protect against vandalism that does not exist. The most mystifying aspect of all this is how you take every statement off BabbaQ on face value and act on it accordingly. --Cameron Scott (talk) 07:13, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- I made a mistake about the block. I said that already. Semi-protecting an article is a big difference from full-protecting an article, however. -- Cirt (talk) 07:15, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- Right but *why* did you semi-protect the article? As far as I can see there is no vandalism in the recent history that would require such a move - that's the point I'm trying to make - in both cases, you simply to hit the buttons without actually doing any checks - that's not what an Admin is suppose to do. --Cameron Scott (talk) 07:18, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- What? That's *now* and therefore irrelevant to your historical actions that actually kicked off the problems. Even taking that on board, you are now digging yourself into a hole, you've got one editor who doesn't understand the difference between vandalism and editing and four long-term editors who have agreed that the article looks better in it's current form. Moreover, there is no edit-warring occurring - Full protection would simply be another error on your part. --Cameron Scott (talk) 07:23, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- Ok, one final thing - looking at the block policy, you can do a quick block and unblock to note in my log that my vandalism block was in error. If you could do that I would be very grateful and considered this matter closed. --Cameron Scott (talk) 07:26, 26 May 2011 (UTC)