User talk:Mabdul/Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Thank you!

Mabdul,

Thank you for your terrific advice last week and helping improve the Disabled Sports USA page. There is no way I could have done it without your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davejsimonson (talk • contribs) 02:43, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Personyze logo.jpg

Resolved

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Personyze logo.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Fleet Command (talk) 12:57, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Err, why the upload with that low quality image File:Personyze logo.png? Only because it is a png? mabdul 22:09, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, actually someone had marked the original file for downsizing with {{Non-free reduce}}. (Wasn't it you? Funny, why did I think it was you?) Anyway, I thought at the current size, the PNG file is considered a size reduction over the JPEG one; plus, the PNG one has a transparent background too.

But go ahead and do whatever you think is necessary in this case. I won't interfere. Fleet Command (talk) 10:09, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Oh indeed, I did tag the image. Dunno why. Doesn't matter an png with a transparent background is better. mabdul 16:14, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Need some help

Resolved

You've done some editing on this particular AfC, but I need some help. I don't have time to fix all the issues with it at the moment, please take a look at my talk page (I'm not quite sure it's even notable enough for WP). GregLChest (talk • contribs) is having referencing issues with his AfC Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/SpiderGraph_chart. I will maybe be able to work on his AfC later today or perhaps tomorrow, but the ref issues are so entwined with the text I feel like I can't handle it alone. Thanks in advance & Cheers, Shearonink (talk) 18:08, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

As it seems (I watchlisted the page since I declined it the first time) Greg L is able to reference now correctly. (although the refs are not good) mabdul 16:14, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Just a heads up...

Resolved

You might be interested this section as it might be something that your bot could correct. Also, is there any way that you could set it so that it will remove the five AFC submission templates that users will sometimes add to articles? Thanks! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 06:17, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Not my bot, but I found the error. (as noted in the sectio you linked, left a notice at User talk:Petrb - the real bot operator). mabdul 16:14, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Mabdul. You have new messages at Personyze's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Talkback

Hello, Mabdul. You have new messages at Dcshank's talk page.
Message added 05:14, 6 January 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

DCS (Talk Talk) 05:14, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Mabdul. You have new messages at Dcshank's talk page.
Message added 19:03, 6 January 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

DCS(Talk Talk) 19:03, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Appreciate the move!

Resolved

Thanks, mabdul for moving Bread and Circuses. I've learned now to name the show articles properly when it needs disambiguating in order to prevent having to move it! Thanks again! — WylieCoyote (talk) 01:35, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

You're welcomed; Leave a notice here on my talkpage if you need more blacklisted pages moved ;) mabdul 16:14, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Permission

Re File:Wiki0057.jpg, it doesn't need permission because it's my own file. I thought I made that clear. I've never had any trouble before. What's the problem?

Sardaka (talk) 06:38, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

The problem I have with this file is that it looks like a copyright violation from any page - it has no EXIF data, which is normally added by every camera and it is a really low resolution image. Please send a mail to our OTRS team as described in the red box you removed twice! If you don't do it, I will retag the image! And last but no least a source is also missing. You don't state who shot the image nor where it is from (if not taken by you). mabdul 16:14, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

The reason it has no EXIF is that it is a slide scanned on, not a digital image. That's also why it is low res. I will try again, but please double check all this before retaging or whatever.

Sardaka (talk) 10:48, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

(merged the two sections) Err no!

1. Every scanner adds EXIF data (maybe an exception might be a 10 years old one)
2. you could easily send a mail to our OTRS team and they will discuss this issue with you and
3. that picture could easily scanned with a higher resolution. I simply doubt that this is a scanned image! That would the fleck at the left upper corner explain...

Regards, mabdul 10:57, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you and looking for help

Thank you for help reviewing/editing my article submission, Mathew D. McCubbins. Many of the modifications I made were at the recommendation of the previous reviewer which I may have not effectively executed in totality. Can you please advise me how to best improve the article to meet Wikipedia's guidelines as there are still cautionary banners at the top. For example, it notes on the top that the individual may not meet notability standards. This individual is one of the more preeminent living American political scientists, so how do I establish this other than the secondary sources referenced? Thank you for any assistance you might be able to provide as I am still learning in this process. Andrea.colleen.francis (talk)andrea.colleen.francis —Preceding undated comment added 18:54, 10 January 2012 (UTC).

I was thinking very long how to answer this question - but to precises I can't answer it. I would remove all publications because of WP:NOT - we are no directory and removing again all external links from the text (per WP:EL). To get a second (and a third and fourth, etc) opinion, try to ask at our help desk! mabdul 20:02, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Why was Pixlr Editor remove from raster graphics...

Hello, I'm wondering why Pixlr Editor was taken out ? It is a graphical image application... It is free, but proprietary. I though I had put it into the right category... Thanks for your response, Jmdeschamps (talk) 16:47, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Did you read the link in my edit summary? It points you to that essay: WP:WTAF - long story short: write first an article about the application and then link it. In the early days of Wikipedia redlinks were useful to know which article should be created, but since a few years we have reached a basis including most of the notable topics. If you think the software is notable (read WP:NSOFT) and you can find some reliable, third party references, write an article and then it can/should be added back to the list. mabdul 16:54, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, I was not to sure about that, I did it the other way around (took me about 30 minutes to write the article), and when I came to test the link I was confronted to a speedy deletion for the article... for which I'm awaiting further information ... thanks again, I'll do it the other way next time! Jmdeschamps (talk) 17:08, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

OK, rather easy. Go to WP:WIZARD (our article wizard) and follow the instructions their. The biggest problem we have to face with -defacto- every article is that every claim/fact has to be verifiable by the reader through references - and moreover we need some independent and reliable sources (means newspaper/magazine articles - no forums, blogs, wikis, etc.) which show "us" (==Wikipedia) that a (in this case) software/webpage is notable. Similar to the other contributors on your talkpage, I would/will help you with the styling and adding stuff if you can point me to some useful references when/if you start a new article. (really follow the many steps in the wizard to understand our policies better and to get "an idea" how we want it) An independent reviewer (or depending on my own time - me) will check the article and then accept it (move it) or either decline your draft. If that happens, you get another chance (as many as you need) to improve your article. If an article went through the AFC process (Articles for Creation - the article wizard) it is mostly secure for getting again deleted! mabdul 11:50, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

OK, thank you for your time already. I'll be concentrating on the wikibook for awhile, but should be back with another article on the subject eventually. Talk to you later. Jmdeschamps (talk) 13:36, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Historical wikipedia page Kewill deleted

Please forward to me or restore historical wiki document Kewill fast deleted after close to 10 yrs by admin user DGG. Thanks cboulton<no spam>acm.org — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boul22435 (talk • contribs) 19:50, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Huch? That page was deleted nearly a month ago and - to say the truth - I don't have any knowledge what on this page was and I highly doubt that this page was existent for over 10 years - you can check the nostalgia Wikipedia which was closed 2001-12-20. But since an admin deleted that article my initial concerns were correct that the page was highly promotional. mabdul 21:29, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Ok make that 10 yrs a solid 5 yrs with hundreds of edited contributions. The page was factual and contemporary historical. Wikipedia is being frittered away by powerful administrators intent on casting history in their own light. Any chance I can a copy of the deleted works, its precious efforts (I'll find another wiki to post the Kewill page) dmode (talk) 22:01, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

(Parenthesis added) Since I'm no administrator, I was using google and finally I found an old version of the page at ask.com - it was clearly correct to delete that page since it has neither any relevant reliable, third party references and somehow I doubt that it was long here available at Wikipedia. Now I'm citing my message which is on your talkpage: "If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you." Otherwise request a so called "userfy" at DGG's talkpage. Regards, mabdul 23:52, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Articles for Creation Appeal

Articles for Creation urgently needs your help! Articles for Creation is desperately short of reviewers! We are looking for urgent help, from experienced editors, in reviewing submissions in the pending submissions queue. Currently there are 2423 submissions waiting to be reviewed. Do you have what it takes? Are you familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines? Do you know what Wikipedia is and is not? Do you have a working knowledge of the Manual of Style, particularly article naming conventions? Are you autoconfirmed? Can you review submissions based on their individual merits? If the answer to these questions is yes, then please read the reviewing instructions and donate a little of your time to helping tackle the backlog.

Talkback

Hello, Mabdul. You have new messages at A412's talk page.
Message added 15:36, 17 January 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

A412 (Talk * C) 15:36, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Jambo OpenOffice

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:02, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Restaurant Week Logo Deletion Request

I request you to change the speedy deletion request immediately. I am totally authorised to use the logo. I am the creator of the logo and have complete authority over it. Please let me know what I need to do to prevent the said deletion. Look forward to your help. Varunr (talk) 14:42, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

See my comment at Commons:User talk:mabdul#Restaurant Week related images. mabdul 15:59, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Belgian franks

An IP on the FFU requested the upload of the three images of Belgian franks (1, 2 & 3), claiming that they can be used under the same license as File:BEL-500f-rev.jpg. Is the OTRS ticket:2011052510005785 applicable to these files or not? Regards, Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{Let's talk}_{about my edits?} 14:51, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

I just send a mail to JCB, the person who closed that DR COMMONS:Commons:Deletion_requests/Images_of_money_of_Belgium, because I simply cannot find the ticket in the system... mabdul 15:57, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/SpiderGraph chart - Alter Decision????

Dear Mabdul,

I didn't know that I was altering any decision. I complied with the last objection on the 15th and have not heard anything since. The instructions say that if I feel that I have corrected the reviewer's objections, then I can resubmit. Is there still something wrong with my article? If so, I haven't been told what it is. I guess I'm just anxious! Sorry, if I did something wrong! Gregory L. Chester 01:16, 20 January 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by GregLChest (talk • contribs)

Hi,

I was rechecking my decline and it was simply correct.

This "diff" (a difference between the last decline and your resubmit) shows that you only removed a new line and didn't changed anything. Since I trust User:Ktr101 (the last decliner) and I'm familiar with this draft - I had defacto nothing to check since nothing changed. Moreover I could have declined the draft as advertising or maybe being not neutral because containing: ®, ©, many boldings and italics, advises for readers ( "NOTE: None of the above 6 obscure limitations of Radar charts exists when using SpiderGraph charts, because area is not a factor and all measurements are linear and straight foreward! Consequently, trade-off decisions can be calculated and not estimated, as done with Radar charts!") (which aren't encyclopedic), etc.

I also don't believe that the references you included show any notability since most referring to "radar charting", are unreliable (blogs) or have other problems.

Regards, mabdul 12:28, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Update: new user warning test results available

Hi WP:UWTEST member, we wanted to share a quick update on the status of the project. Here's the skinny:

1. We're happy to say we have a new round of testing results available! Since there are tests on several Wikipedias, we're collecting all results at the project page on Meta. We've also now got some help from Wikimedia Foundation data analyst Ryan Faulkner, and should have more test results in the coming weeks.
2. Last but not least, check out the four tests currently running at the documentation page.

Thanks for your interest, and don't hesitate to drop by the talk page if you have a suggestion or question. Maryana (WMF) (talk) 19:34, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

About User:Losing Cadence

Hello I'm the creator of the Losing Cadence page, I see you've come across my page and it appears you want to have it removed because you believe that it is "blatant self promotion" though that is not the case, Losing Cadence is about to be signed to Indiaola Records(the lable that also has bands such as A Day To Remember and more) The band has also toured with Hawthorne Heights. As a fan I feel that they qualify for a Wikipedia page and i've put a lot of effort into it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LosingAlex (talk • contribs) 08:19, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Huch? I? I never came in touch neither with you nor with the other account. User:Taroaldo was the nominator of the user page and please check the Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:Losing_Cadence page and explain why it shouldn't get deleted. Keep in mind that this is not a vote! It is a discussion. Regards, mabdul 13:01, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/SpiderGraph chart - answer to your last comments

Dear Mabdul,

The previous last change to my article was to remove underlines from the "6 Comments section." The person that declined it said that the article would be "GOOD TO GO" after the underlines where removed! After I did that, I was declined because of Notability, which I answered and then waited several days. After not hearing anything, I resubmitted it to get someone's attention, thinking that the objection was corrected. I still haven't heard anything about my reply since it was entered on the 15th. You said that nothing changed. WRONG, the thing that changed was that I answered a Notability decline and heard nothing about my answer.

This article is definitely not about advertising! It's an impartial comparison of two charting methods that the public is confused about! Unfortunately for the Radar Chart, I can't help it that my research turned up so many negative articles about using the Radar Chart, while I was trying to be neutral! I didn't write the articles, I just referenced them!

The NOTE you mentioned, only points out the difference between the two charting methods, which is what the article is all about. Also, I don't understand the ® & © comment?? In the Wikipedia articles that mention Microsoft, it's always followed by ® symbol. The word SpiderGraph also has been Registered, why can't that be followed by a ® too! A trademark symbol only shows creditability!

I don't think you understand! The Notability is NOT about the references that find fault with the Radar chart, it's about Wikipedia having an article on Radar Charts and NOT HAVING an article about a competitive charting method that's being confused with the Radar chart by the public, that also appears to be better after reading all the negative user comments! By not clearing up the confusion, it says Wikipedia is promoting the confusion!

In the "6 Comments section" you pointed out a problem, so per your comments, I have removed ALL italics, quotation marks and BOLD areas that highlighted the difference between the two charting methods. Unfortunately, that's the reason for the article, which points out the differences between the two charting methods and explains where the confusion may have come from, as well as references 8 examples (out of approx. 45 confused articles that I found).

To address your comment about Blog References: My two (2) largely used references were 1) Ref #1 is from Microsoft and 2) Ref #2 is from a Microsoft & Sun Microsystems Partner by the name of Scott Logic LTD., a rather large technical consultancy with offices in the London, Bristol, Edinburgh, and Newcastle, England. Below is an excerpt taken from their website:

Our (Scott Logic's) Logical Approach

The market for nearshore outsourcing within the global financial sector is vast, and is set to grow in the future. Scott Logic is a world-class consultancy geared towards attracting, developing and retaining elite talent to offer world-beating consultancy and create enterprising solutions for our clients.

Our corporate ethos is founded on three central beliefs that underpin all of our team and client management decisions:

We build unique working relationships with all our clients, continually striving to appreciate and work in line with their cultural values.

We attract, develop and retain truly world-class talent, and forge tight bonds with our region’s academic community, to assist the development of our client services.

We provide a thriving and creative workplace for our team, which helps to deliver the very best results for our clients.

May I suggest that you look up their website (www.ScottLogic.co.uk). You will discover that it is not your run-of-the-mill Blog! Their Blog critiques on any and all of the latest technical achievements!

In fairness, I would say that most Blogs, in general, have a reputation to guard and only try to offer their comments as a user, finding a problem and offering a possible solution to other users.

Respectfully submitted, 71.53.164.3 (talk) 03:44, 23 January 2012 (UTC) 71.53.164.3 (talk) 03:48, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi Greg,

"The person that declined it said that the article would be "GOOD TO GO" after the underlines where removed!" - I was really sad that a new (==unexperienced) user was declining with this reason - because it is simply untrue. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and I don't think that there is really a place for your article. "After I did that, I was declined because of Notability, which I answered and then waited several days." - "we" reviewers should read a draft independently and with a neutral and fresh opinion and checking all. Mostly this is rather easy, but if somebody thinks that your draft is "good to go" and the next has another opinion - well that's life. I requested User:CharlieEchoTango (an experienced reviewer and administrator) to help us.

"Also, I don't understand the ® & © comment?? In the Wikipedia articles that mention Microsoft, it's always followed by ® symbol. The word SpiderGraph also has been Registered, why can't that be followed by a ® too! A trademark symbol only shows creditability!" Huch? Please show me where in the article Microsoft is a (c) or a (r) or a tm symbol is - moreover show me any article - if you find any - it should be removed! Please read our policy at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Trademarks: "Do not use the ™ and ® symbols, or similar, in either article text or citations, unless unavoidably necessary for context (for instance, to distinguish between generic and brand names for drugs)."

Companies, music related topics, books, etc. have different notability criteria (e.g. a single was/is in a national chart) - but to verify and prove that, we need third party, reliable, independent references - and I don't see that in your draft. There might be a difference between a radar chart and your spider chart - and it is not a easy topic to write an article for an encyclopedia. Please read also related WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS.

mabdul 13:10, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

My problem with your MS and Scott references are - they are either talking about radar chart, or they are not independent. You stated somewhere (can't find it at the moment), that you license the spider chart - how do I/the reader know that Scott logic haven't/hadn't licensed your product (and thus not being independent any longer)? You didn't included any references with an editor review! mabdul 13:37, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

---

intervening in discussion after request at my talk page

GregLChest, first, three things : you have a conflict of interest as you apparently coined the term in 1985, the article is largely unsourced to the extent required by WP:V, and all instances of (r), (c), (tm) as well as most instances of italics and repeated wikilinks should be removed.

That said, the article is not suitable for an encyclopedia in its current form.

• The 'charting method' paragraph is unsourced, and reads like a how-to. That's a WP:NOT right here.
• The 'not to be confused' section is completely unsuitable for an encyclopedia. Some of it seems to be original research attempting to prove a point, e.g. “may have begun between the two types of charts”, “where the simularities should end”, “The answer however”. Some parts read like an advertisement, e.g. “that help you make better, smarter decisions”. In any case, the tone is wrong. Wikipedia should not provide “the answer”, nor should it address the reader directly as a “you”.
• I fail to see how the rest of the article is relevant. “Comments regarding limitations...”, etc, these are all unsuitable paragraphs that may have editorial value, but have very little encyclopedic value.

Bottom line is, there might be a potential article here given some of the sources, but it would have to be written from scratch as an encyclopedic article, not something one would read in a specialized magazine with the kind of in-depth comparison, advantage vs. disadvantage sales pitch, comments by vested parties, etc, we see here.

The conflict of interest issue is a serious one, it is very hard for someone with one to understand how having an editorial tone and purpose is incompatible with an encyclopedic tone and purpose. This is why we strongly discourage editors with a conflict of interest to edit articles about topics they are involved with. CharlieEchoTango (contact) 00:19, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

the message below was moved from my talk page, to keep things together CharlieEchoTango (contact) 00:02, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Dear Mabdul & CharlieEchoTango,

Thanx for your input! I sure hope you can help me make my article more encyclopedic! I also hope I can prove to you both that this is definitely a neutral and impartial article, that's very worthwhile and notable, as well as being long over due!

Mabdul, you were right about the Wikipedia articles that I read, so as you will see, I have followed your advice and removed all Trademark & Copyright Symbols found in the article. I just didn't realize that encyclopedias must have some exception to the laws governing registered symbols, that the outside world doesn't have.

I am referring to the Online Technical Writing: Book Design article, found at URL: http://www.prismnet.com/~hcexres/textbook/book_design.html#editionnotice Referring to: Edition Notice - Copyright & Trademark paragraphs and also the following Trademark Section.

As you can see, I have defined what a SpiderGraph chart is and tried to explain in this article, just how easy and straight forward the SpiderGraph charting method (1981) is by using just three simple steps, which will aid in making "directly calculated and visual" trade-off decisions. Also, noting that there has been a lot of disappointment & confusion regarding the Radar charting method, I have tried to impartially compare, item for item, the SpiderGraph charting method to that of the Excel Radar charting method (9-30-85), to help clear up any misinformation and confusion.

Charlie, whether or not I coined the term SpiderGraph is immaterial. How can you say there's a Conflict of Interest on my part, when I go out of my way to make an impartial comparison, item for item, between the two types of charts? In addition, the 6 Linitations were quoted from other users comments and a little lower, you will see that what they said has been backed-up by a Wikipedia article!

Even you Mabdul, seem to be confused, by stating:

---

There might be a difference between a radar chart and your spider chart - and it is not a easy topic to write an article for an encyclopedia.

---

You state that you are quite familiar with my draft, which is about "the SpiderGraph being confused with the Spider chart," and yet above you say "your" spider chart! Consequently, I guess it's also not easy to discern a technical difference, if you're not to technically inclined.

Unfortunately, Microsoft (a competitor) won't be to pleased to learn that they spent millions of dollars to develop the Excel (Geometric) charting method software that uses spreadsheets to indirectly make Radar charts that aid in making "trend estimated" trade-off decisions, that are not as precise as desired. This is attested to in my article by mentioning articles written by some of their unhappy Radar chart users. Wikipedia itself has said as much! (Refer to Wikipedia: Microsoft Excel, under the section labled "Quirks - Statistical functions.")

---

My problem with your MS and Scott references are - they are either talking about radar chart, (they are definately talking about Radar charts; Scott is the MS partner/consultant that writes a blog!) or they are not independent. You stated somewhere (can't find it at the moment), that you license the spider chart (I never said that!) - how do I/the reader know that Scott logic haven't/hadn't licensed your product (and thus not being independent any longer)? You didn't included any references with an editor review! (I'm not sure what that meant, but it sounds like you're grabbing at straws!) mabdul 13:37, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

---

Charlie, after Mabdul's comment: "Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and I don't think that there is really a place for your article." and your comment, I went to WP:NOT per your instructions and here's what I observed:

---

WP:NOT#DICT 2. Dictionary entries. Encyclopedia articles are about a person, or a group, a concept, a place, a thing, an event, etc. In some cases, a word or phrase itself may be an encyclopedic subject, such as Macedonia (terminology) or truthiness. However, articles rarely, if ever, contain more than one distinct definition or usage of the article's title. Articles about the cultural significance (is public misrepresentation & confusion of cultural significance?) or mathematical significance (is estimation vs. calculation to obtain an answer, a mathematical significance?) of individual numbers (45 companies exhibiting confusion in their articles) are also acceptable.

---

Reading the above clarification, it seems that my article is exactly the type of material Wikipedia is looking for!

I would also think, that anyone writing an article for Wikipedia "must cover the topic in the most factual and comprehensive way possible!" I also believe that if the writer uncovers any confusion or misinformation, it would be necessary to clear up that misinformation with the facts, in order to eliminate any confusion regarding that topic in the future! And if that confusion developed over 27 years, who could pinpoint where it came from? Knowing that there is confusion after reading 45 different articles, to play safe, one could not make accusations, but one would have to simply imply that "the confusion may have happened in such & such a way!"

Charlie, when you accused me of saying “that help you make better, smarter decisions” or addressing the reader as "you," I guess that you didn't notice that it was followed by my Citation #8, which was taken directly from the Microsoft Excel 2010 product information sheet, word for word!

---

We're sorry, but we cannot accept unsourced articles, or sources that are not reliable per the verifiability policy. Please cite reliable, third-party sources in the article. Third-party sources are needed so the information can be verified, and so the notability of the topic can be established.

---

I'm not sure how you could say that this is an unsourced article, you must have overlooked Citations #5 and #15. As far as a reliable third-party source and notable topic, Citation #15 is a reference to an Industry Handbook that can be found in the Library of Congress, which includes a description of the SpiderGraph chart. I would say that for anything to be included in an Industry's Standard Handbook, it would have to be very Notable before that could happen!

The main reason there aren't more sources to reference about the SpiderGraph chart is very obvious, that is, if you know anything about how Internet Search Engines work. Many companies make their living keeping websites on the first page of a search. Without their help, your website moves away from the first page and soon into obscurity and then attrition takes over! However, even though the SpiderGraph chart has been obscure for a few years, it deserves its place in History and that's where your help and Wikipedia come in!

Respectfully submitted, Gregory L. Chester

Gregory L. Chester 23:47, 31 January 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by GregLChest (talk • contribs)

Talkback

Hello, Mabdul. You have new messages at B.wilson's talk page.
Message added 02:27, 26 January 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Bryce (talk | contribs) 02:27, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Ariel Agemian

Hello Mabdul. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Ariel Agemian, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: I have good faith that this source in the ticket is the same source that you found. Wikipedia:OTRS noticeboard. Thank you. Guerillero | My Talk 03:11, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Uugh, yeah. I didn't recognize the OTRS ticket at the talkpage. Thanks. I can confirm that the text is fitting. This was the first time I came across a text related ticket. Regards mabdul 03:23, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Tooth Meridian Chart

Thanks for the comments. The actual page was deleted months ago though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Youngje13 (talk • contribs) 18:02, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Heh, yeah, I was cleaning up one of our tracking and maintaining category - our project (WP:AFC) needs "any" decline template at the top. So, sry for bothering you - normally these submitters are mostly inactive and don't have turned on their email notification. mabdul 19:56, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks for letting me know. Youngje13 (talk) 21:05, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Tracey's Delights

How did you make that an attack page? I have zapped it as blatant spam, but I didn't see any attack. JohnCD (talk) 22:18, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Maybe G11 is better, although it could be an attack page since it talks about (if I remember correctly) about adult parties and giving private details (telefon number). mabdul 19:57, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

I suppose it just might have been someone trying to make Tracey look bad... anyway, it's gone. Cheers, JohnCD (talk) 22:53, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

DRV

A notification that the Templates for Discussion discussion (oy, repetition) has been taken to a deletion review discussion. The Article Rescue Squadron was notified, and as notifications to previous involved parties isn't normal practise, I and a few ARS members agreed that, in the interests of transparency and fairness, we should let everyone know...hence this talkpage message ;).

If anyone has an issue with me sending these out, do drop me a note on my talkpage. Regards, Ironholds (talk) 10:25, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

FYI. --Flominator (talk) 08:53, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Article about Restaurant Week

Resolved

Just wanted your feedback on a new article that I have created. Does it meet Wiki standards? Would appreciate your comments and feedback (and help!). Here's the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Bangalore_restaurant_week Varunr (talk) 11:28, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Since User:Chzz accepted the article. mabdul 14:29, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

AFC.

I'm not the creator of that article, poke this user. Ta. Steven Zhang ^{Join the DR army!} 21:35, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

For that comment you should get another trout! You added your name in the template and didn't corrected it... mabdul 21:40, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Eh, I don't help at AFC much. I had to ask someone what the pending template was... Steven Zhang ^{Join the DR army!} 21:44, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Islami banks usury based!!

==Islami banks Usury based==
Allah subhana said “Ribah’ (Usary) is Haram and business is Halal. Islam permits no business without goods. (Except Abadan, goodwill).In Islam the term profit and interest is not equal. Following Islamic Shariah build various kind of Islamic economic institutions, may Allah bless you on the world and afterward. By this way you may not capable of staying sophisticated air conditioned palace computing rhetorical Interest. For this you might have spread on the earth with goods for business. Hazrat Omar bin Khattab (R:) said :Banning of interest is the last verse and Rasul (S:) is over but He (S:) did not kept enough regulations at every divisions related interest. So doubtful divisions related interest should be avoided. (Ibnu Maja,Darami,Meshkat) Some shorts of prohibited sales and buying are given bellow : 1.Sale goods that are not in hand is illegal.(tirmiji.Meshkat). 2.Dont be advanced buyer before goods are not in the hands of saler.(Motta:) 3.Dont sale goods by two conditions.(with pay 5 without pay 6Taka.) (Malek,Tirmiji,Abudaud) 4Advance buying (Buy-us solom) has separate seven regulations.(Meshkat)(Study in detail)without following those sections Advance buying will be illegal in the wiew of Islam. Tactfully price of waiting.5.Doutful business will be taken for riba.6.If second person collect money from first person and send up to next person to next person until next person deals in goods then all person (except first person and last person who dealt in goods) are making usary/riba.7.By avoiding Islamic Shariah tactful business isillegal. 8.Without taking liability sale / buying is illegal.8.When bargaining with one customer is going on another customer should not be attained to same buying.10. Broker’s (blood-sucking middle men the bankers)are illegal.(buying goods that is not in hand without paying money).11.Goods marketing is Halal on the other hand Money marketing is Haram. 12.Islamic concepts about sirkat: In the past Arabs don’t have any idea about limited company. Now a day thy use the term Sirkat as synonym of limited company. Sirkat is divided into two (a)Milk(in ownership) (b) Okud(in sale/buy).Okud is divided into three (a)goods(b)service(c)goodwill. Those three are divided into two (a)Equal capital and liability (b)Unequal capital and liability. In Islamic Shariah there have some schedule about Sirkat. By avoiding the schedule of Sirkat business will not be legal at the view of islam.Commercial Banks of Bangladesh may have invest not more then 10% of their capital in Share Market. That accumulated money is from the clients. The so called Islamic Banks get profit from Share Market and distribute that among their clients. It is money marketing and clear reba.13.To store food more than forty days is prohibited. 14.To store daily necessaries for more money is prohibited.14.Fees that Islamic Banks added incase of failure of installment as per due is riba.“Abu Hurira (r:) reported that the messenger of Allah said : Usury has got seventy division. The easiest division of them is a man’s marrying his mother”. (Ibn.Maja) .Now question arises, is Banking/ Insurance possible without interest? This is indeed a very vital and most permanent question. Banking/ Insurance company makes business with money marketing not direct goods marketing. ……………………………………………… — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.30.38.54 (talk • contribs) 13:13, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

WP:TL;DR; Great, and what do you want to explain me now? mabdul 12:16, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/National CV

Hello Mabdul I see that you have removed the reference (to The National CV Group of Britain's website), but the reference is only to an example of a National CV, the sole one known at present. The group comprises 30 historians, part of a UK national schools history project.I don't know of any other reference. Is the article acceptable as it is without the reference? If so, then that is fine. With every best wish John E Hart — Preceding unsigned comment added by John E Hart (talk • contribs) 12:20, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry? As you can see here, I only fixed the markup of the submission - it still lacks (and lacked before) an independent source! mabdul 17:01, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Zishan Engineers

I can let you know why an admin removed content from the page. The content was removed since it contained explanation of how design engineering in Pakistan has been affected by govermental policies and how it affected the job scope of such a company. The admin < Beagel> felt that this was redundant and omitted it. Mecheng761 (talk) 14:07, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Could you let me know which two admins have reported minor differences? The reason why this article was initially Afd was due to being unable to establish notability. The article I have posted and the one that was AfD has a huge difference. I found three articles in newspapers which talk about this organization.

If you go on my talk page : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Mecheng761/Zishan_Engineers . You would notice that Admin Beagel has left comments that this is now a notable organization due to the news paper refences and deserves an article. I think it would be better if this is reviewed by Admins who had initially Afd the article and can see if there concerns have been addressed. Please let me know Mecheng761 (talk) 16:31, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Just for clarification – I am not admin (and have no intention to become). However, I was the person who made the first AfD nomination. The main reason this time was lack of notability. I think that this issue is resolved as quite recently there has been sufficient media coverage about this company. Another reason for nominating for deletion (which was not added to the discussion) was promotional tone and violation of WP:NOT by the original creator of this article. As of today, this issue is also resolved by extensive copy-editing and removal of promotional pieces. I can't agree that there are only minor differences. You may compare yourself the current version with the version which was nominated for deletion (compared to the first nomination and compared to the second nomination). For these reasons, I support submission of this page. Beagel (talk) 18:29, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/World Engineering Xchange

Hello Mabdul,

I have added a citation for the information posted on our cite. The article still needs more information, but please let me know if the citing is correct.

Regards, — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.77.171.30 (talk) 19:44, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't know what I have to say now. I "fixed" the markup of the reference (read WP:REFB), but it still needs another kind of references: newscoverage! (read the short WP:42 page) Regards, mabdul 14:13, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Tom Verri

I have scanned newspaper articles of Tom Verri how do I get them to you?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Exclusivewiki (talk • contribs) 20:22, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

You don't have to send them to anybody (although it might help in the reviewing process). Send me a mail over this link Special:EmailUser/Mabdul and I will respond to you so that you can send me a mail. Please read also WP:REFB to understand how we style the information. Regards, mabdul 14:55, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/EYC Ltd

Mabdul can you suggest which bits need third party citations. I included them where i thought there might be controversy but clearly I missed some. If you can suggest what needs coroboration I will source it as it is all available.

Many thanks

PS Apologies fro not logging in but I may work with eitehr EYC or their competitor dunnhumby one day and would not wish to be seen as having been involved with whichever I do not work with simply because I have researched them a bit and shared what I founf with wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.86.118.100 (talk) 16:17, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

At the moment, it appears that the article does not have any sources. All information in Wikipedia articles needs to be verifiable in reliable third party sources. Reliable sources include newspaper articles, magazines, book, or other media released by an organization with a strong reputation for fact checking. If you can't verify information in the article, then it is considered original research, and it should be removed. Alpha_Quadrant ^(talk) 01:58, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Your review at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/School Of Technology,Gandhinagar

Mr. Mabdul,

I want to tell you that the article is completely genuine.This is the article about one world class engineering institutionItalic text located in the prime area of Gujarat.

You can see the notability of article at UGC(university grants comission) website,the highest body of higher education in India. And i have placed the link for that. I strongly emphasize you see in this regard, because the students at 10 and 10+2 level in India are taking admission in this institute.It is one of the finest colleges in gujarat for engineering education. and the college is guided by the great industrialist Mukesh Ambani. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajeevsingh007 (talk • contribs) 08:04, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Huch? I declined your article because of lacking reliable and independent references, not notability (that was somebody else). Please, at the moment this article lacks completely reliable, independent, 3rd party references! Keep in mind that every fact/claim has to be verifiable by the reader through references! Regards, mabdul 14:01, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

'Summaries' tab on wiki-courses

Moved to Wikipedia talk:Ambassadors

 – After a discussion with Pharos in IRC. mabdul 17:07, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Madbul. I've removed 'Summaries' as a standard tab, since its purpose was not described, and the vast majority of classes were not using it. Something like this could be added for classes that want it, though.--Pharos (talk) 16:11, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Lynx

Hello! I'm now trying to improve Lynx (web browser) article in order to send it to WP:GAN. Your previous experience with Arena (web browser) would probably be very valuable in this case, so I would ask you to get involved with Lynx's referencing and other WP:GAN-related tasks if your time and scope of interest allow you. Thanks in advance. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 13:52, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

I will check this later and try to find more stuff. mabdul 12:38, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: User:Addshore/Sandbox

Hello Mabdul. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of User:Addshore/Sandbox, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: I don't see any reason to delete an empty user sandbox unless the user requests it - I have one myself which is often empty, and though this user hasn't been very active lately, he did edit today. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 20:03, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

If I use the CSD tab of TWINKLE, it shows me: "G7: Author requests deletion, or author blanked" - and the G criteria are in all namespaces valid... mabdul 03:34, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

But yeah, you might be correct that I shouldn't check the userspacedrafts of others people ;) I have enough stuff to do... mabdul 03:36, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I think you can assume that if a user wants one of his own user pages deleted he would {{db-u1}} it rather than just blanking. I use my sandbox as a scratchpad, using "Show preview", then copy the result out: if I ever press "Save page" it's usually by mistake. Cheers, JohnCD (talk)

DYK nomination of Teambox

Hello! Your submission of Teambox 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! Pgallert (talk) 23:21, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

How to add license info about logo to web-page

Hello, Mabdul!

I want to upload logo to the D (programming language) page from the official site (dlogo.png). Currently the site have no license on it's contents. Copyright holder (Walter Bright) was nice and allowed me to modify html-sources to add license at my choice for the logo.
So, my questions are:
1. I've stopped on the CC-SA-BY 3.0, but not sure if it's a good fit (I'm really new to legal stuff). I think requirements are:

• Walter should be able to change license any time later
• Free (as in beer and freedom) use, modification and redistribution for everyone, no matter commercial or free work (here I'm not sure if ShareAlike part will create unnecessary restrictions )
• Preferably there should be no visual changes to the page (CC logo or text at the bottom).

2. Where do I add license, how should it look like ? Should it be smth like

<!-- Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike -->
<img id="logo" ...>
<!--/ Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike -->

Note, that license should apply to the logo only, not texts and articles.

I'm really lost here, any advise would be much appreciated! --Alexander N. Malakhov (talk) 12:46, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, there are multiple ways we can upload the logo:

• as you guess as a valid WP:FAIRUSE image for the D article (nothing have to be changed on his page; enwp compatible)
• CC-BY-SA (click that link; Wikimedia Commons compatible)
• a even (in this case) better choice might be the GFDL (because of "All derivative works must be licensed under the same license."; commons compatible)
• a 4th variant would be the duallicense of GFDL and CC-BY-SA (commons compatible)
• and another solution (I'm a fan of such stuff): BSD licenses (commons compatible)
• Keep in mind: although he releases an image under any license (and except of the CC-0/public domain licenses) he is still the copyright holder and can change the licenses - that is the reason why Wikipedia changed it's license a few years ago!

The notice can be placed in different ways, either in any extra page (like the terms of use), in html code, or even in the EXIF data of the image! (All variants should mention that only the logo is implied for this)

Regards, mabdul 03:52, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Lincoln University School of Law, 1938 - 1955

To the Reviewer: While I appreciate your effort in reviewing the article, I must disagree with your implied suggestion to expand on the topic within the article on Lincoln University of Missouri. The history of the School of Law entailed many factual matters pointing ti its "separateness" from Lincoln University of Missouri: it was in a separate location; it was created at a date much later than the mother institution, it was a professional school whereas the university offered baccalaureate degrees only,it was created during the Jim Crow era in order to avoid integration of the White and Black races, and it ceased to exist at about the time of Brown v. Board of Education. At a minimum, the foregoing give the article noteworthy status which entitles the article for unqualified acceptance as an article in Wikipedia. So, my opinion is that you are incorrect and I reassert that this submission be accepted as a article. I respectfully request that the article be accepted and that you respond to both these comments and my request. Slidhome (talk) 15:32, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Huch? I hadn't done anything on this page (until now - i tagged the page with the template ibid)... but after a short check on your submission and I believe that User:Nolelover (the reviewer) did decline this draft correctly, because you didn't include any third party, independent, and reliable source (like newscoverage). mabdul 15:41, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Oh I see, I was notifying you since Nolelover missed to place that message on your talkpage. mabdul 16:40, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Isa_Vandi

Dear Mabdul Thank you so much for reviewing my article. Now that it has been accepted, what shall I do next? and I also received a note that there was a problem with the picture I had uploaded, how can I fix that? --M.Kafi (talk) 19:09, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for the late response: please send a mail to our OTRS team with your official email address. See also Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries. Regards, mabdul 09:54, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Your Uninvited changes to my talk page

It's my fucking talk page. If I wanted an archive, I would have made one myself. Keep your damn hands off. Kinston eagle (talk) 16:22, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Uninvited? So why do you remove then the {{archiveme}} template at the top since October 2011? Please read also WP:UP#OWN - you don't own this page! If you read Help:Archiving a talk page, you will notice following notice:

The talk page guidelines suggest archiving when the talk page exceeds 50 KB or has more than 10 main topics. However, when to archive, and what may be the optimal length for a talk page, are subjective decisions that should be adapted to each case. For example, ongoing discussions and nearby sections they reference should generally be kept intact.

So, why not archiving it (also a user requested that in October 2011! mabdul 16:40, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

So far as I can tell, these are all suggestions. The template says "please consider" archiving it, not "please archive it immediately." Talk page guidelines say the same thing..."suggest." None of these are reasons to start going around and archive other people's talk pages without their permission. only (talk) 16:44, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Per the User talk page guidelines, users do not own their user pages or their user talk pages. While it is considered a courtesy, there is no requirement for other users to ask for permission before making an edit. Alpha_Quadrant ^(talk) 17:13, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Not erasing some other person's request for me to consider archiving my talk page within some arbitrary time period is now an invitation for a third party to come and vandalize my page? Your logic is twisted. Kinston eagle (talk) 22:31, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Kinston eagle, you need to reread the vandalism policy. Simply archiving a talk page is not vandalism. Alpha_Quadrant ^(talk) 22:50, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Archiving

Can I ask on what grounds you're archiving other people's talk pages? I see no place where this is asked for by these users, and no policy/discussion that suggests we should be archiving people's talk pages for them. only (talk) 16:41, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

See my comment above. mabdul 16:42, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

All of the talk pages he archived were in Category:Archive requests. Alpha_Quadrant ^(talk) 16:45, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

CSD File:Webclock.png

Resolved

 – Cropped. mabdul 12:38, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi I had nominated the file for speedy because it had improper license. I agree that the FUR covers the use of WebClock screen shot but it does not cover the use of IE to obtain the screen shot. Microsoft does not allow screen shots that contain third-party content. I am listing it for regular FFD if you have any concern, you can comment there. Sumanch (talk) 21:15, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

German source check request

Resolved

Hi Mabdul, per this discussion on my talk page, I was wondering if you had time to take a look at this google news search and see if any of the sources are reliable and third party. I would go over them myself, but the sources are in German. Thank you, Alpha_Quadrant ^(talk) 02:45, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Article rescued. mabdul 10:40, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Please review the article

Resolved

Hello! I sought help from a friend. And managed to give some more references to the article Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Agha Ibrahim Akram that you reviewed. Kindly review it again and see if now the sources are reliable and independent.

Thank you! M Younis | talk 07:31, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Article is already reviewed and accepted. mabdul 10:39, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Do Nothing

Resolved

The problem is resolved now pls dont take any action on the portal Thanx & Regards McKinseies (talk) 14:05, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Templates

Resolved

Didn't know about the cache issue, thanks. How do you think the template looks now? Also, if you made a change to one of them, did you do the other 2? Ocaasi ^{t | c} 22:10, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

? All other templates doesn't and didn't have any "hidden" template in... or they are already fixed... mabdul 10:42, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Images deleted

I think images were deleted from article Cantabrian Chamois without informing the author. The author claims to me to have tagged the photo with appropriate copyright tag. Please address the issue further to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Javierperezbarberia#Your_submission_at_Articles_for_creation. (Sumitkumarjha75 (talk) 03:32, 17 February 2012 (UTC))

commons:User_talk:Javierperezbarberia - The author was informed multiple times that he should send a mail to the OTRS team... He still can do this (and if he is the copyrightholder) they will be restored. See also Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries. mabdul 09:45, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi there. The owners of each of the figures' copyright did send an e-mail (one for each figure) to permissions-commons [at] wikimedia.org indicating that they are the creators and/or sole owners of the exclusive copyright of the figures and explicitly agreed to the license Creative Commons Attribution-Share-Alike 3.0. Should we send them again? Thanks in advance Javier Pérez Barbería (talk) 14:47, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Hello Mabdul. We are puzzled about why the images of the Cantabrian Chamois article have been removed. As we have told you before, all the images owners sent their copyrigths. Could you, please, check that the copyrights have been received, and if not let us know what to do? Thanks in advance.(talk) 14:26, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, we have a big backlog of tickets in this system and since I'm no admin, I can't restore the images. You/we have to wait until the ticket is reviewed by an admin and he/she will store them then. mabdul 12:38, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Proposed changes to web browsers template

Resolved

 – thanks, will have a look. mabdul 12:38, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on my proposal about changes to {{web browsers}}. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 14:13, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Mabdul. You have new messages at Template talk:Web browsers.
Message added 23:16, 22 February 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, Mabdul. You have new messages at Template talk:Web browsers.
Message added 00:54, 23 February 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Your talk page

Resolved

Hello! Could you please copy the {{usertalkback}} to your talk page: it would facilitate creating a new section without hand-crafting the link. Thanks in advance! — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 14:06, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

You know that you have a + or a new comment at the top next to edit? (on the standard skin vector this might be under the hidden arrow) mabdul 12:23, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

I use Cologne Blue skin. It is rather limited in some aspects (no FA and GA icons, Twinkle and some other goodies don't work, no "new section" link, etc), but is visually pleasant (to me). It appears that Vector makes me somehow nervous... — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 13:02, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

I use modern, but even with your link I have on Talk:Main page on the left side following links:

• This page
• View article
• New section
• Printable version
• Watch this page

And under that there are all Twinkle links - check your browser again XD (lynx? XD) mabdul 13:06, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Ah. I have sidebar off: it ocupies too much space on my screen: I use netbook. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 17:23, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Heh, I have a 12" screen on my Laptop and thus I don't need to turn off such features. mabdul 12:38, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

For your hard work and dedication

Moved to User talk:Mabdul/barnstars

Thanks. mabdul 12:23, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Resolved

 – fixed. mabdul 12:38, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited Teambox, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alexa (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:36, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Articles for Creation appeal

Articles for Creation urgently needs your help! Articles for Creation is desperately short of reviewers! We are looking for urgent help, from experienced editors, in reviewing submissions in the pending submissions queue. Currently the are 2423 submissions waiting to be reviewed. Do you have what it takes? Are you familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines? Do you know what Wikipedia is and is not? Do you have a working knowledge of the Manual of Style, particularly article naming conventions? Are you autoconfirmed? Can you review submissions based on their individual merits? If the answer to these questions is yes, then please read the reviewing instructions and donate a little of your time to helping tackle the backlog.

--Bmusician 12:25, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Oh my... Please add a link to our new HD for populating it next time! mabdul 12:38, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Sure, but what's HD? help desk? --Bmusician 12:57, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

WP:AFCHD. mabdul 13:02, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Okay. --Bmusician 13:10, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Eysenck

Dear Mabdul,

I think having had a quick look Michael Eysenck seems very heavily cited - see [GS] and I think you might take some flak for this Afd. You might want to have another check and perhaps reconsider and perhaps even withdraw it. This is just a recommendation - no worries. Best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 14:09, 22 February 2012 (UTC))

Heavily cited? Sections: "Research Interests" and "Career history" are unreferenced, there is a long list of publications (ok), 4 external links (one dead, one a main page, one interview with him, and "notable quotes"), and two inline references: investopedia which cites that he has invented that, and finally a "reference" with only a photo. So what is not heavily cited? mabdul 14:15, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

- Hi I just meant that if you click on the google scholar link on the Afd he seem to easily pass WP:Prof and thus be notable and not suitable for Afd - clearly the article could do with work and referencing. I was just raising the issue so that you might want to withdraw the afd and avoid any problems. Anyway best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 16:51, 22 February 2012 (UTC))

Mmmh, yeah you are correct. I have withdrawn the nomination... mabdul 01:10, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

DGM logo: Thanks

Resolved

Thanks for your speedy help! Best regards,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 21:39, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome. mabdul 01:10, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/SpiderGraph chart - Notability & 3rd party Sources

Dear Mabdul,

As you know,I've been trying to make my article more encyclopedic since 10/2/2011 with the help of 7 Editors, of which you are one. The article seems pretty much finalized as of Feb. 15 and I wanted to let you know and to Thank You for all your help.

The article's main objections have been about Notability and citing published Sources that are reliable and independent. Now that I have files (to attach to an email) that would prove that fact, I find myself wondering just how I go about doing that?? It doesn't look as if any attachment files (let alone 8 files) are possible on your User talk page?? Can you tell me what I should do?

Gregory L. Chester (Redacted) Gregory L. Chester 01:04, 23 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by GregLChest (talk • contribs)

I won't do anything on this submission. If you do send me some mails, please don't; if you really believe that it has any chance to get accepted, then resubmit it - if you want to add offline references, then do it the same way like the "online references": simply use the ref tags. mabdul 01:09, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Shiva Ayyadurai for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Shiva Ayyadurai is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shiva Ayyadurai 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.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Msrasnw (talk • contribs) 15:09, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

TfD

Resolved

 – simply not found, template deleted!

what was wrong with my nomination on February 17? Frietjes (talk) 17:43, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, sry, I was only checking the talkpage of the creator and the link in the {{tfd}} notice is not always working since correctly. (especially because the page is going really long and thus it might crashes browsers - the tfd notice should redirecting in my eyes to the actual day, not the notice on the WP:TFD page...) mabdul 12:32, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Oh and I requested a change at Template talk:Tfd#link to "correct page". mabdul 13:48, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Browsers timeline template

Following the discussion about merging web browsers templates I started a new template based off {{early web browsers}}, though I got it developed into this monster. There is some information I had to find, that I didn't yet commit to respective articles, but now, given that I spent a few hours working on this beast, I want to know your opinion on whether it makes sense to develop it later. Suggestions on how to do that are also welcome. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 02:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Please not! This looks - say - ugly, too big and (in my eyes) more useless than the actual template. What is the problem with the actual template (except that we missed to add/expand the actual/new browsers/more years)? We simply can add collapse-able templates similar to the actual {{web browsers}} for - say - every ten (or 5) years. These graphical graphs are simply too big and should better go into the Timeline of web browsers or in the svg at this page. mabdul 14:04, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

I took a design that worked well for cars' timelines and tried to apply to browsers. As it is it won't go anywhere, as it is indeed ugly, too big and doesn't hel much with understanding a timeline. I hoped you could have some suggestions about what can be done with it, as I just don't have a clue. It seems you also don't see a way to make it usable... — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 09:33, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

The only idea I have is that we can leave it as it is now and only adding more stuff using the collapsable feature like in the redesigned web browser template. (so one for 1992-2000, one for 2000-2010, and finally one for 2010-2020, etc.) I like the ground idea of this template. we could also use the web browser template which is transcluded in the compaison and in the usageshare (?) page. Maybe merge the navtemplate with that overview template (in this case uncollapsed all years). mabdul 12:13, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

St Jude's Church

Resolved

 – I left a message at Sionk's talkpage. mabdul 12:46, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Thankyou for publishing St Jude's Church, I found the initial review comments from Sionk very odd, and was preparing to reply to them tomorrow! If there are any issues in the article, do get back to me. Basil — Preceding unsigned comment added by Basil Jradeh (talk • contribs) 17:57, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome. I will leave a comment at Sionk's talkpage and try to explain why I overruled his decision. Leave a "thank you" at Anna Frodesiak's talkpage! She was informing me. mabdul 12:35, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Rani Durgavati

Hi Mabdul,

I sent a response to your questions re my edit request for Rani Durgavati. I gave the website that has the translation of the akbarnamah and gave you the references. I think I may have posted in the wrong place although I can see it in my Talk page. I have got no response so far. Bkrish68 (talk) 07:39, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi, as you can see on the talk page at Talk:Rani Durgavati, you simply can add the sources on your own, because the page isn't protected in any kind. The best is reading WP:REFB how to do it correctly. mabdul 21:08, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

March 2012 Move-to-Commons drive

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Images and Media at 07:40, 29 February 2012 (UTC).

Disambiguation link notification

Unresolved

 – I simply don't know which channel is correct. :/ mabdul 21:10, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited Kristin Kuhns Alexandre, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Channel 13 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:02, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Referencing Question

Hi Mabdul,

I thought you’d be a good person to ask advice about article referencing, hope this is ok?

In the case of biographical pages, is it ok to reference information on the website that the person works for if that company is publicly-listed, therefore all information has been verified by an external party? I had assumed that it was best to use third party sites instead, but for instances where this proves difficult, I just wanted to check as I couldn’t find anything definitive on the Wiki help pages. Thanks in advance for your help!

Sarah Sarahfuller1 (talk) 12:00, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, primary/secondary sources are totally OK for uncontroversial facts. I did a small cleanup on your recent addition. mabdul 12:53, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your help Mabdul! Sarahfuller1 (talk) 12:35, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Twinkle talkback

Hi,
well, yes, I did understand that that's what you're asking for, but can't you simply give me an example of the kind of notice you want to place so that I can see what you want to do (instead of how you think it could be done). Based on what I currently think you want to do I could name five different ways (of varying difficulty and general usefulness) to implement it. Without an actual example you make it hard for me to decide on one. :)
Amalthea 12:34, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

I want simply to be able to add more "radio buttons" for the talkback template I am using regular (e.g. A new response at WP:HD, WP:RT, etc). The easiest solution would be adding the same way like the welcome templates which also can be expanded. mabdul 15:53, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Ich weiß nicht warum Du mir partout kein explizites Beispiel geben willst, wenn ich Dich richtig verstehe dann hast Du die Templates die Du benutzen willst doch schon irgendwo da? Verrat sie mir doch bitte einfach. :)
"Einfach nur neue Radio Buttons hinzufügen" ist so schlicht nicht definiert genug, hinter den bestehenden Buttons sind ja nicht nur unterschiedliche Templates, jeder bestehende Button hat unterschiedlichen Input und leicht unterschiedliche Logik. Wenn es nur darum geht, ein Template mit einem Parameter zu hinterlassen dann kannst Du tatsächlich einfach ein custom welcome template dafür missbrauchen.
Und nein, ich versuche echt nicht schwierig zu sein. :) Ich kann schon versuchen zu raten wie Du das genau einsetzen willst, aber dann muss ich mir entweder mehr Arbeit machen als nötig oder es kommt was genauso halbares raus wie bei den Custom Welcome templates die momentan eher unbrauchbar sind.
Amalthea 16:23, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Ich weiß ja nicht was du hören willst: ich will einfach nur weitere Seiten zu dem tb-tab hinzufügen, weil copy and paste dauert mir in manchen Fällen (touchscreen an meinem "tablet laptop" - kein Bock den Bildschirm aufzuklappen um das touchpad zu benutzen) einfach zu lange... warum nicht einfach das existierende {{tb}} benutzen? Viele/Die meisten HD, etc. haben eh keine eigenen spezifischen Vorlagen.

"hinter den bestehenden Buttons sind ja nicht nur unterschiedliche Templates, jeder bestehende Button hat unterschiedlichen Input und leicht unterschiedliche Logik" - unterschiedlichen Input? nen level 2 section header (optional); unterschiedlichen Template? simply use tb! Ich bezweifle nicht dass du nicht schwierig sein möchtest, aber ich glaub du denkst einfach nur zu kompliziert ;)

mabdul 21:19, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Resolved

 – bot was down :/ mabdul 12:55, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Mabdul. You have new messages at Pol430's talk page.
Message added 09:24, 2 March 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hi Mabdul, any idea why so many submissions are ending up in user space? I though we changed article wizard to place things in AFC space, I'm probably missing something obvious... Pol430 talk to me 09:24, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Mabdul. You have new messages at Jetstreamer's talk page.
Message added 14:32, 3 March 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Jetstreamer ^Talk 14:32, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Yuki Yoshida

The article Yuki Yoshida has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication this football player has played in a professional league, and fails WP:GNG.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. Cloudz679 22:52, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

It appears that a redirect you created via AFC/R was converted into an article. As the subject doesn't appear to meet the notability guidelines, I have reverted to the redirect revision. Best, Alpha_Quadrant (talk) 23:24, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, thanks. I already nominated (lol, that should be informed! I was likely tired. mabdul 12:27, 4 March 2012 (UTC)) the second contributor of that page and left a talkpage message on the "article". mabdul 23:30, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Extra Help Required

Hi Mabdul. You were kind enough to help me, following a request on my talk page, for which you have my gratitude but are you able to explain how you managed to find/create the address so next time I'm able to do it myself? Best regards--Ykraps (talk) 10:37, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Oh yes of course. Here is a step-by-step instruction:

• open [1]
• right-click on "4Dorsetdistricts08.pdf [click to download]" and click "copy link address" (the wording might be different in your web browser) (that is then following link: http://www.swtourismalliance.org.uk/files/download.php?m=documents&f=100419151051-4Dorsetdistricts08.pdf )
• open now http://webcitation.org/ and click at the top on "ARCHIVE" (resulting that you get to http://webcitation.org/archive )
• paste in the first text field the pdf address
• enter your email address
• fill in optional fields
• hit save
• wait a few minutes and try the link

Regards, mabdul 11:31, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Ah, the option for me is "copy shortcut"! Many thanks--Ykraps (talk) 12:11, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Mabdul. You have new messages at Jetstreamer's talk page.
Message added Jetstreamer ^Talk 11:53, 5 March 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Jetstreamer ^Talk 11:53, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

β-testing

Hi! You indicated you'd like to help us beta-test the new MediaWiki 1.19 extension for the Education Program. Click here to get started.

Thanks, Rob SchnautZ (WMF) ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:00, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Clear Books

Hello, Mabdul. You have new messages at Czarkoff's talk page.
Message added 00:44, 7 March 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Actually you might want to participate in Articles for deletion/Clear Books, as it seems that you have something to say on this topic. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 13:50, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 7

Resolved

 – I like this bot... mabdul 11:40, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited Bynari, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Microsoft Exchange and Plugin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:33, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Bynari

Hi Mabdul, Why did you edit Bynari's page and plant negative information on purpose? It was updated by me, the president of Bynari, Inc. Do you profess to know more about my company and products than I do or are you simply trying to sabotage our company's page by planting information you know very well is incorrect and out of date? This is vandalism, especially coming someone who seems to do a lot of good work on Wikipedia! Since you seem to know so much about Bynari, it's amusing to see you put back the name of Hyun Kim who hasn't been with the company for almost 3 years:-) If you have time to play Wikepedia cop then you should have the courtesy and professionalism to at least contact us to confirm that the changes came from us; unless of course you have some ulterior motives for vandalising our page as a favor to a competitor that couldn't beat us on the marketplace!

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Bynariteam (talk • contribs) 21:58, 7 March 2012 (UTC) 

Hi Joel,

I really suggest that you get a new username since it violates our username policy.

"plant negative information" - sry? what are you talking about? Everything I changed and/or added was done in good faith and always cited with reliable references.

"you know very well is incorrect and out of date?" - all what I added was cited - if they are out of date, then this is because I simply didn't find any actual reference and I wasn't aware that these information were out of date - more over I rescued this article now two times for being deleted!

I removed the CEO from the article as you can also see in the history of the article.

"at least contact us to confirm that the changes came from us;" - no! that is simply not how Wikipedia is working! We try to cite every fact by using information which is accessible in third party, reliable and thus independent sources.

I really suggest you that you also read WP:COI (or our simple guide/version is located at WP:PSCOI)

Regards, mabdul 11:39, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Mabdul,

Thank you for the response but I find it laughable that you call a 10 year old article "Reliable"! Is it more "reliable and current than our website"? You do realize that in 10 years companies change alot: Executives, Addresses but mosly products? None of the products you've listed are made by Bynari anymore or have been rebranded. You insisted on taking an article in German and translated it into terrible English to give us a page which frankly now is a joke and makes no sense to the reader. It'd have been better if you just kept it blank. Just for clarity sake, what was wrong with the update that we did?

Regards, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bynariteam (talk • contribs) 14:41, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

moved discussion to the correct header; added indents; mabdul 16:12, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Hey, that's a wiki which everyone can edit! Feel free to improve it, I just wanted to improve the article and I did rescue it. I can use only references that I found - and please don't blame me - that they aren't up to date. You showed me, that there are some companies who simply don't want to get any improvement on their articles and I won't touch it any more and waste my time and energy on that. Please reconsider if that wasn't a bit a bit bitey and harsh for somebody who tried to improve an "unreferences" spammy and advertising article. mabdul 02:45, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

AfC proposal

Hello! I have a proposal regarding WP:AFC (and WP:AFD, actually) process that I would like to discuss with someone. It actually comes from my thinking over several AfDs of "Clear Books" article. The idea is that the special process is created for WP:AFC submissions for articles previously deleted in WP:AFD. This process should look like AfD – the article is passed after reaching the consensus among several editors. What do you think about it? — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 12:29, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Mmmmh, no. Please not. We already have a backlog regular with over ~500 submissions waiting for a review. The AFC should only hold off submissions which are clearly bad and getting deleted (CSD, PROD, AFD, doesn't matter) (and still getting the IPs and non-confirmed users the possibility to create new articles). Normally an article which gets deleted in an AFD should get restored over a WP:DR - in the case of the Clear Books - this is a special case because since the company is/might be not notable, you simply (can) chose writing "an identical" article about the software which might be notable (will check in a few minutes!)

Really the idea to get a (automated) way to discuss articles (on something like a new board) (esp salted ones) which were deleted before because of an XFD (mostly 'CSDed articles can be sorted out because they are mostly deleted because of G11/12) is a great idea. Yes, I think in these cases AFD participants should be informed. mabdul 13:06, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

See, the main problem is that current WP:AFC process doesn't give a chance to create a discussion, as the process is template-based. At least the template can be changed so that each AfC editor can express his concerns... — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 18:05, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

That isn't not true! A user/reviewer is able to move the submission to the WP-space and start a discussion at the WT space. It is also possible to start a discussion at the WT:AFC board or the WP:AFCHD. Another way to discuss is able to do this over {{AFC comment}} (depending on the length). mabdul 18:37, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

All of that is quirky. It would make much more sense to initially plant the AfCs in WP space, change the template to point to WT counterpart and have the opinions there. Both allows for better communication: in the end, the whole idea was to help the newcomers and to set a bar on non-notable topics – both of these are better addressed via discussion. And then the article gets moved to the mainspace with a talk page already containing the concerns and replies, so that it saves time for further discussions. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 08:49, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

That is not our fault! The article wizard is also (or esp.) for users without accounts (IPs) and nonconfirmed and they are simply only able to create in the talkspace pages and not in the normal space. mabdul 11:09, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it would make more sense to have article submissions in the Wikipedia: namespace. However, from a technical standpoint, that is currently impossible. IP addresses cannot create pages outside of talk namespaces, which is why Articles for Creation was created in the first place. Alpha_Quadrant (talk) 15:39, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

OK, then it could be done via subpages that would further be moved to Talk: space. Eg. WT:AFC/article and WT:AFC/article/discussion. – Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 09:09, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

No! This would be even more confusing. If the reviewer thinks he needs a discussion (doesn't matter with the "helpee" or with other reviewers) then every autoconfirmed can simply move the page and start a discussion at WT; If the article gets accepted, our tool and the "move tab" will move luckily both pages into mainspace. mabdul 09:34, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

About Cerebro_(Software)

Hi Mabdul,

I am about this edit - http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cerebro_%28software%29&diff=480889300&oldid=479866206

You comment was - "remove section, we have a comparison list for that!"

Where I can find list for ading comparison a visual review systems? see list Competitors on CineSync page

--Khar khar (talk) 20:07, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Please read WP:NOT - Wikipedia is not a directory and if there are lists and comparison articles, then these "competitor lists" should go in there. Cerebro is already listed in the Comparison of project-management software, but I don't know if there is a visual reviewing system comparison. (feel free to start a new list if you can't find any) FYI: I also removed the list in the CineSync article since it violated additional WP:EL/WP:ELNO. mabdul 02:55, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Netscape Navigator 2

I've started an article for Netscape Navigator 2. Thought you may be interested.Smallman12q (talk) 23:13, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Jamillah Knowles

Hi there ... In response to your requirement for footnotes. I thought that the references at the foot of the article were footnotes. Would you please be so kind as to tell me specifically what you require? Many thanks - daybydaiboy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daybydaiboy (talk • contribs) 23:13, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for the late response, your draft has some major problems:

• Please read WP:REFB how to cite correctly;
• Remove all external links out of the article text per WP:EL / WP:ELNO
• Find references talking about him; not made by him

mabdul 12:11, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Paid editing on Wikipedia draft

Hi Mabdul, I haven't been around irc much lately but I'm sure you're cranking away. :)

I just finished a massive draft on our own very topical subject of paid editing on Wikipedia. I would love your careful assessment in checking it for neutrality, formatting, organization, reference detail, etc. I hope you can take a quick look. Cheers! Ocaasi ^{t | c} 12:24, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

SpiderGraph chart - your 3/15 removal of "Additional reading"

Resolved

Dear Mabdul,

These "Additional reading" links that you removed have everything to do with the SpiderGraph chart article's Creditabilty! After all, the chart is a "decision-making tool" and these references furthers the reader's understanding & knowledge regarding the art of making decisions and they definitly compliment this article!

I would appreciate it, if you give the reader more knowledge than they expected from Wikipedia, by putting them back in! After all, they're not hurting anything!!

Thanx for your consideration and professionalism, Gregory L. Chester 21:54, 18 March 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by GregLChest (talk • contribs)

I restored them and removed the article from my watchlist. I simply don't have the faith to discuss any more! mabdul 14:04, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Dear Mabdul,

Thanks for reconsidering the Additional reading section and returning it! I'm glad you agreed with me! I think the article works much better now, because of your help!

Sincerely yours, Gregory L. Chester 17:17, 19 March 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by GregLChest (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia:Requests for bureaucratship/WilliamH

Hello, I have indented your recent vote at WilliamH's RFB since you had already supported. Thanks. Reaper Eternal (talk) 17:04, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

uuuups, thanks. I'm leaving normally tabs only open if I have left something unfinished (and so I thought I missed to !vote). Mmh, thanks for letting me know that. mabdul 17:06, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

You may find this amusing. :-) --(ʞɿɐʇ) ɐuɐʞsǝp 17:48, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Lynx2.gif

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Lynx2.gif. 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).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have questions, please post them here.
• I will automatically remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please ask an admin to turn it off here.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:41, 20 March 2012 (UTC) Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 13:38, 20 March 2012 (UTC) Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 01:09, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Resolved: bug reported about reposting known problem. Now I need to talk to the bad image remover. XD mabdul 13:44, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

free HighBeam accounts

You may be interested in WP:HighBeam.Smallman12q (talk) 13:27, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, thanks. I know, but I don't think that I need one. For that I'm simply doing not enough mainspace/article content work. The NS2 article is a good start, although we have really many articles which would need a major rewrite/expansion... mabdul 13:42, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Valery Maisky

Resolved

What is the appropriate procedure when one gets permission from the original author to include copyrighted material? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kromholz (talk • contribs) 22:27, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

see Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries. Regards, mabdul 12:16, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Mabdul. You have new messages at WheresTristan's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, Mabdul. You have new messages at WheresTristan's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

what i meant

Resolved

hey mabdul thanks for teaching me to sign. well becuase when i want to join (i know how to join)but the thing to put your name to join its not there. for the projects thing.--Friendly ant (talk) 19:39, 23 March 2012 (UTC)Friendly ant

about the guy with project problems

Resolved

well thanks anyway what i meant was that the button to add your name to the list its not their. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Friendly ant (talk • contribs) 21:36, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Hey there

Resolved

Please look in on this discussion, I am not sure I understand their question. Shearonink (talk) 22:29, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

I cannot locate your message to me about adding a reference for the Rani Durgavati page

I cannot locate your message to me about adding a reference for the Rani Durgavati page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bkrish68 (talk • contribs) 03:58, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

As User:Celestra already pointed: the page is not protected and you simply can add the reference and change the article. I simply asked that I cannot verify the facts o the book and asked if you know if it has an ISBN number. Regards, mabdul 03:46, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Oh In the case you didn't found our last conversation, it is now archived at User talk:Mabdul/Archive 6#Rani Durgavati, because this page would getting too long after a short time. Regards, mabdul 03:49, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

RFA

WilliamH (talk) 21:06, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the nomination. Of course I accept ;) mabdul 03:34, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

It's not going to affect my vote as I know you'd make a great admin - I did think you were one, but canvassing in the quit message on IRC? That is quite simply the stupidest thing you could have done as this is suddenly an "anti-IRC RFA". I wish you luck, and hope you haven't punctured your own spacehopper! Worm^TT · (talk) 08:01, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

In fact, you may want to consider a withdrawal before too much more pile on. I would be honoured to co-nominate you in the future. Worm^TT · (talk) 10:17, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the offer. I'm not fully sure if I want (and if, when) to withdrawn. There is nothing to say more at this time except I did make a big mistake. mabdul 00:33, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

You are coping with the whole week much better than I would have. My suggestion of withdrawal appears to have been premature - I hope you keep on coping! Worm^TT · (talk) 08:24, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Please have a look at MindTouch move discussion

I'm trying to gain consensus over page move in this discussion, but nobody showed up yet. Could you please have a look at it? — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 11:31, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Help us develop better software!

Thanks to all of you for commenting on the NOINDEX RfC :). It's always great to be able to field questions like these to the community; it's genuinely the highlight of my work! The NOINDEX idea sprung from our New Page Triage discussion; we're developing a new patrolling interface for new articles, and we want your input like never before :). So if you haven't already seen it, please go there, take a look at the screenshots and mockups and ideas, and add any comments or suggestions you might have to the talkpage. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 16:43, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Mabdul. You have new messages at Nathan2055's talk page.
Message added 18:55, 30 March 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Got someone with a COI wanting to pass an article. Could you come give your opinion? Oh, and btw, congrats on the admin nomination! Nathan2055^talk 18:55, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

RFA

In your rfa,What do you mean with irc is more legere? Wictionary is not helpful.129.2.65.60 (talk) 04:44, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

RFA closure

Hello Mabdul, I'm sorry to inform you that I have closed your RFA as unsuccessful. I arrived at this result based on community concerns related to your activities on IRC and during April 1st. People felt that actions you took in those settings evidenced immaturity and were likely to conflict with the expectations the community has for administrators to be capable of complex and sensitive discretionary decisions. However, I should also note that many commentors did view your administrative potential positively and there was overwhelming approval of your contributions to the project as an editor. I would suggest that your review the feedback in the RFA and consider running in some months after reflection on how you can better handle borderline situations that could result in controversy. Thank you again for your edits to the project. MBisanz ^talk 14:35, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Spend a few months just keeping your nose clean, contribute like you've been, and your next RFA will be a home dunk! Sorry that I could support you this time, I really am. The work you've been doing is great, and from my math, most people weren't even upset at the "Canvassing" (which, to my wit, it wasn't). People were opposing because of something like "He should have known that people would be upset about the canvassing". If I don't see a Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Mabdul 2 by September, we might have some WikiDrama . But please, whatever you do, don't stop contributing like you have been. Cheers! Achowat (talk) 15:33, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks MBisanz, I already thought this after reading the AN thread linked in one of my Questions.

Thanks also to you Achowat, a fail RfA is not a reason to stop contributing to Wikipedia for me. Adminship is only a set of additional tools and not the reason why I'm contributing here and I think nobody should contributing here only for adminship. mabdul 10:18, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Mabdul, please do focus on "judgement" as you move forward - I literally banged my head on my desk when - in the middle of all kinds of concerns about your judgement - you then made a very public "joke" about something that is considered to be extremely serious in Wikipedia world these days. Proving someone's judgement concerns to be correct really didn't do you too many favours. Please keep up the good level of conributions - show people better judgement because you can guarantee these issues will be raised next time; you'll want to have a handful of excellent examples to cover your butt (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 17:30, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Hey, I know your RfA failed because of a silly quit message, and an April Fools' joke, but don't let it get you down! Try again in the future, because you have the potential. Have this and feel better. Best, Rcsprinter (tell me stuff) 14:53, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

• I second this, you didn't deserve any of the nasty remarks that were made. You are an excellent editor and I for one will be glad to support you in any future RfA. --Mrmatiko (talk) 15:18, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
• Same here. RfA standards seem highly variable, so don't let this particularly harsh event colour your future plans. Josh Parris 22:58, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
• RfA standards are living up to their poor reputation. Sorry to see you didn't make it.Smallman12q (talk) 23:22, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Also a big thank to you all. @Josh thanks for your analyze of my CSD/AfD results. I would have thought that somebody would/could have !opposed me because of my AfD results. mabdul 10:24, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

A small gift...

Sorry about the incident at the RfA. I honestly believe that those guys overreacted to your IRC quit message, and a simple April Fool's joke didn't do any harm. Anyway, here's a kitten, hope you make it next time!

Nathan2055^talk 22:04, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Cute! Now I have another 6 lifes. XD mabdul 10:27, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Sorry Mabdul

Sorry they don't have Pretzels and Beer in Wiki-Love.  :- ) DCS 04:26, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I had my beer yesterday and my "Bretzel" (German for Pretzel) is lying next to me waiting for its end. ;) mabdul 10:26, 3 April 2012 (UTC)