Open main menu

User talk:gtdp

Archive (2005-2008)

Contents

Who are you album listed at Redirects for discussionEdit

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Who are you album. Since you had some involvement with the Who are you album redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). –BLACK FALCON (TALK) 18:08, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Notice of redirect discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion for Incarceration in the United KingdomEdit

Incarceration in the United Kingdom listed at Redirects for discussionEdit

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Incarceration in the United Kingdom. Since you had some involvement with the Incarceration in the United Kingdom redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Oldak Quill 15:08, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Pegilogo.jpgEdit

 

Thanks for uploading File:Pegilogo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 04:44, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Software BugEdit

I sincerely apoligise, I was just too excited I have recently read a Dan Brown book related to that you see and once I read the information I desperately wanted to post it on here, when I found there was a page on it I couldn't resist editing it. Conboy98 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Conboy98 (talkcontribs) 12:14, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

AIVEdit

Hello, per your request at AIV[1]. I've blocked the IP. The warnings were not typical to make a block, however the pattern of vandalism by the same user in for example this history, indicated that the same individual had seen all the warnings before, not to mention being blocked for it. Without the pattern from other IPs, it's likely a block wouldn't have happened with a single edit after their first warning. Hope that helps. -- zzuuzz (talk) 14:23, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

{{start date}}Edit

Thank you for bringing that up on my talk page, rather than just reverting it or whatnot! I'm a clueless newbie when it comes to editing things like infoboxes/templates/etc. –flodded(gripe) 12:55, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

No worries, I'm much the same, I wouldn't have known it was wrong if I hadn't had just been reading the post on the talk page as you made your edit! -- gtdp (T)/(C) 12:58, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

2011 Sendai earthquake & tsunamiEdit

Thank you so much for being a constructive asset to wikipedia! Wikipedia could not exist without people like you! Although it is promoted as something that one should do even without doing whatever on Wikipedia, I'd like to give you a smile with all the upper-most positive intentions! I hope that you therefore hold it even closer: A big smile to you because of your involvement in the 2011 Sendai earthquake, which you can find below this message! Ρόμπστερ 1983 Life's short, talk fast

Smile Greetings!Edit

As been spoken about above this mssg. :) Ρόμπστερ 1983 Life's short, talk fast 00:04, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

  Thank you, it's much appreciated, especially on such an emotionally-draining article as this one :) -- gtdp (T)/(C) 06:41, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

You are now a reviewerEdit

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged revisions, underwent a two-month trial which ended on 15 August 2010. Its continued use is still being discussed by the community, you are free to participate in such discussions. Many articles still have pending changes protection applied, however, and the ability to review pending changes continues to be of use.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under level 1 pending changes and edits made by non-reviewers to level 2 pending changes protected articles (usually high traffic articles). Pending changes was applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't grant you status nor change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. GFOLEY FOUR— 00:17, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks very much. -- gtdp (T)/(C) 06:41, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

excuse my obtusenessEdit

I see you added an 'edit request not done per lack of consensus to the Shakespeare Authorship FAC archive page. I'm not sure what this means, and would appreciate a clarification. Despite the heading of the section, no edit request was actually made there. Knitwitted used that template to complain about one source, and promote another source. A complaint that a POV source wasn't used is not a request to have that source edited in. It is true that, as the discussion evolved, the editor suggested a major source be elided. Knitwitted announced his her intention to disrupt the FAC, and followers of the Oxfordian school were forewarned that his her disruption was imminent, and to sit up, tune in and watch the spectacle. Since the whole section consists of a tongue-in-cheek piece of disruptive gamesmanship it can han hardly be considered to be an 'edit request' nor to provide conditions for securing consensus. Therefore I fail to understand why the slightly farcical proceeding should be marked with an eye-catching sign as if it were signalling a failure of editors to satisfy one of several FAC criteria. In anticipation, thanks.Nishidani (talk) 18:31, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi Nishidani, thanks for your message. I realise now that my message on the talk page might have been confusing: as Knitwitted had used the {{edit semi-protected}} template, it was showing up on CAT:ESP, which was contributing to a backlog there. He She used the template incorrectly, as the template says that it should only be used for definite and specific edit suggestions, not what he she used the template for, which appeared to be (as you say) to start a discussion about sources. My edit nullified that template so that the page didn't show up in the category page contributing to the backlog, and so that other users like me didn't have to go to the page, only to read through the discussion and find that no action should be taken. The comment shouldn't be taken as anything negative to do with the article achieving FAC status or not, in fact the opposite - it goes to show that due care and attention has been taken to ensure that the article meets consensus, an important part of becoming featured. I hope this goes some way to alleviating your concerns, please let me know if there's anything else I can help with. Thanks again. -- gtdp (T)/(C) 18:44, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, pal. I know you guys have a heck of a load of stuff to get through, and explaining to twits like myself, with not the slightest grasp on the indispensable technical aspects of wikiworkings, must be a drag. So thanks indeed for the clarification. Cheers Nishidani (talk) 20:43, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
No worries, explaining decisions to people is a pretty routine part of sorting out edit requests so it's no problem at all, and I definitely wouldn't think of describing you as a twit - we're all just contributors helping out the project in our own ways. Thanks again for your message. -- gtdp (T)/(C) 06:52, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

2011 NRL season resultsEdit

Knowing that fixing it again would be kneejerk reverted (as you have done), I did indeed foreshadow the changes on the talk page. Completely ignored. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.233.52.75 (talk)

Nah, it can stay wrong, I just can't be bothered any more.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.233.52.75 (talk)

Hello young manEdit

Howdy, just read the message you sent me and I am greatly sorry for posting false info on the Slayer article. --Davemustainesdaddy3 (talk) 20:03, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

I appreciate your comment, but you haven't stopped doing the same thing at other articles. Please stop this or you may be blocked. Thanks. -- gtdp (T)/(C) 20:12, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion converted to PROD: Platform Independent Petri Net EditorEdit

Hello Gtdp, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I have converted the speedy deletion tag that you placed on Platform Independent Petri Net Editor to a proposed deletion tag. The speedy deletion criteria are extremely narrow to protect the encyclopedia, and do not fit the page in question. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 19:29, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your message, I had a feeling after I tagged it that I might have gone the wrong way (as its description does say A7 doesn't apply to "software"), but I couldn't tell from a look at the external link whether the whole thing was entirely web-based or not, which might make it fall under A7, and with no other references I thought it would likely be deleted anyway. In future I'll be sure to propose for deletion articles which don't specifically meet the CSD. Thanks again for the advice, it's very much appreciated. -- gtdp (T)/(C) 19:51, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
With CSD it's always better to err on the safe side. Software products are not covered in A7. I'm pretty sure it will be deleted as well, but when it doesn't fit a criterion fully, it's (almost) always best to go for PROD. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 20:25, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

New Page Patrol surveyEdit

New page patrol – Survey Invitation


Hello Gtdp! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.

  • If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only.
  • If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.

Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.


You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

Quixotic pleaEdit

  You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Wikipediholism test. Thanks. — {{U|Technical 13}} (etc) 06:21, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!Edit

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:08, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!Edit

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User talk:Mavrick12345678Edit

 

A tag has been placed on User talk:Mavrick12345678 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free Web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Cahk (talk) 23:31, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Europe 10,000 Challenge inviteEdit

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries, Iberian Peninsula, Romania, Slovenia etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon, sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 08:58, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!Edit

 Hello, Gtdp. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Wikiproject Spoken Wikipedia RevivalEdit

  Hello, I'm Jamesjpk. I wanted to let you know that the Wikiproject Spoken Wikipedia, has been tagged with a semi-active tag. I am messaging you about this because you are listed under the wiki-project's list of active participants. Please contribute to the WikiProject if you want to keep it alive! I hope that it becomes active again! Jamesjpk (talk) 22:25, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Tim Amann QuartetEdit

 

The article Tim Amann Quartet has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

All of the claims in the article are unverified, failing WP:BLP. The article isn't really about the band, it's about the frontman. Either way, the article fails WP:CREATIVE and WP:PROFESSOR.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. StraussInTheHouse (talk) 18:34, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "Gtdp".