User talk:Mkativerata/Archive1

ACCC v Baxter Healthcare

I've rerated B, as to a non-lawyer it seems comprehensive and balanced. I'm not clear about the bolding in footnote 5, which seems to be produced by the template.--Grahame (talk) 13:29, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

WP:POLITICIAN

FYI: WP:POLITICIAN fixed to remove the anomaly discussed at AFD.

Details at Wikipedia talk:Notability (people)#WP:POLITICIAN_unintended_consequence. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:59, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Bun-sgoil Shlèite

Hi there - I disagree with suggesting the above article for deletion. The school is unique in being the only Gaelic medium primary school with an English medium unit, as the article states. Cheers Fishiehelper2 (talk) 21:23, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Rollback

I have granted rollback rights to your account; the reason for this is that after a review of some of your contributions, I believe you can be trusted to use rollback correctly, and for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck and thanks. JamieS93 22:48, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Autoreviewer

Hi Mkativerata, I just read one of your articles at newpage patrol, and noticed you've now created over 75 articles, and from what I can see you understand the importance of wp:BLP, so I'm marking your account as an wp:Autoreviewer. Well done and happy editing. ϢereSpielChequers 22:39, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Editor review

Hey, no problem :) Keep up the great work.  fetchcomms☛ 23:43, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Barnegat Fund Management

I commented at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2010_January_14#Barnegat_Fund_Management. I'm not sure whether the company is notable, although the New York Post article suggests that it might be. - Eastmain (talk) 01:00, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Olive branch

I've identified a number of Malaysian people stubs. perhaps you could tell me how notable they are? LibStar (talk) 04:14, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

• No worries - I can't of course definitively say if they're notable but I might be able to help. I've noticed a lot of garbage flying around wikipedia on Malaysian topics; the problem is a lot of the rubbish is about notable topics.--Mkativerata (talk) 04:29, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

here's some I found LibStar (talk) 06:03, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

• Chelsia Ng
• Yap Soon-Yeong

• Ng seems notable to me, it seems she's had roles (don't know if they're significant yet) on many TV shows. I'll have a more detailed look tomorrow and see if I can add some sources to the article. Yap doesn't look so promising, but it's more Qigong than Malaysia so I don't really know. The image used seems to be a blatant copyvio, which I'll tag for deletion. --Mkativerata (talk) 06:10, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

How to link to image files without displaying the image

When you want to insert an image into a page, you surround the filename with two brackets, like this:

[[File:Zinichthys jaws.png]]

But if you only want to link to the image, you have to "disable" the image by inserting a colon after the first pair of brackets:

[[:File:Zinichthys jaws.png]]

This little trick works for categories as well. Normally, if you want to include an article into a particular category, you just simply type a wikilink to that category. But if you want to link to the category itself, you must add a colon before the first letter of the link.

Best wishes, Soap ^Talk/_{Contributions} 01:45, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Aha, thank you!--Mkativerata (talk) 01:46, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Lim Kit Siang

Here Adherent of the Enlightenment 10.0 (talk) 12:16, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Article Rescue Squadron Newsletter

The Article Rescue Squadron Newsletter Issue 2 (January 2010) Previous issue | Next issue

Content

The community is currently

deciding whether

60,000

articles should be deleted.

background

• News items and announcements
• Contest

• Featured editor: Teeninvestor
• Featured administrator: WereSpielChequers

• Want ads
• Feature: FeydHuxtable: Search Techniques

DYK nomination of Master Saleem

Hello! Your submission of Master Saleem 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! Chanaka L (talk) 13:41, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

BLP Barnstar

		The BLP Barnstar
		For your recent work deprodding and adding sourcing to biographies of living persons, I award you the BLP Barnstar! Keep up the good work. –xenotalk 18:27, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Seconded. I keep seeing your name around, mentioning that you've fixed this or that article up. Awesome! Thanks for your efforts. ++Lar: t/c 03:33, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

I think everyone agree, you rock! Ikip 02:39, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Choate (law)

"Thanks for the warm hand." Bearian (talk) 04:16, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Privity in English law

Thanks for providing a review of this article; I have responded to your points on the GAC page. Can I ask if your legal background is in a non-England and Wales area? I was looking at getting our base article on Privity to a similar level, and it suffers somewhat from the absence of a worldwide perspective. Many thanks, Ironholds (talk) 19:38, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Excellent! I'll get a draft set up in my userspace and ping you; I've got some NZ and SA bits as well. Ironholds (talk) 20:10, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Just a quick ping that I've made the suggested amendments; not sure if you'd seen them. Thanks, Ironholds (talk) 13:57, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Woops, didn't see those; corrected. Ironholds (talk) 19:38, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar

In the future, you can move the article back to mainspace yourself. I am doing it now. Nice job :) Ikip 02:33, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Wow, what a great job. Thanks.

Here is how you prepare to move it back to mainspace: [1]

Then move it, using the move tab, removing everything but the name.

		The Article Rescue Barnstar
		The Rescue Barnstar is awarded to people who rescue articles from deletion. This can be independent of or in cooperation with the Article Rescue Squadron This barnstar is awarded to Mkativerata for finding extensive and exhaustive sources for Alex_McTaggart. Nice job! Ikip 02:38, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Every little bit helps, we just need more editors working on Category:Unreferenced BLPs, and on the Australia page too. Ikip 02:43, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Baxter

I am very interested in your FAC. The article has a very limited appeal. Most people would probably be bored reading it. The Nokian Tyre article is similar in this respect. I nominated that article for FAC but a person who made a lot of suggestions for the GA didn't think the Nokian Tyre article was ready for FA. I'll look at your article to see how an article which is very interesting to a only a few people is regarded in the FAC process.

In Australia, are judges called Smith J, Baker J, Kativerata J?

Have there been recent cases where this case was cited?

In Reaction to Judgement:Criticism, in some articles, a criticism section is forbidden. How about here?Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 00:43, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

• G'day there - thanks for the note. I'm sorry to see your nomination was withdrawn; I hope you'll be able to bring it back soon. My article is indeed very narrow. That's why I chose the topic for my first shot at a GA/FA: something limited in scope that I could dig my teeth into.
• Our judges are referred to as "Smith J" in shorthand. I don't think Baxter has been cited yet. While it stands for an important principle, it is a narrow principle that only seems to get litigated once a decade or so. --Mkativerata (talk) 19:35, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Altered speedy deletion rationale: 14 Siao

Hello Mkativerata. I am just letting you know that I deleted 14 Siao, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. — Coffee // have a cup // ark // 07:59, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

• I tagged it under A7 as A7 applies to groups. This was a page about a gang (ie a group) to which no credible claim of notability was made. So I think A7 applied. But G10 applies too, and that's what I've tagged the new version as. --Mkativerata (talk) 08:05, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
  • Both work, but I prefer that G-10 be used whenever it applies, as it's a much more strict CSD category, and allows admins to see WP:VOAs easily. — Coffee // have a cup // ark // 08:14, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
    • Indeed, normally I would tag G10 whenever it applied; I must have overlooked it here. Cheers--Mkativerata (talk) 08:17, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Election results table

Hi Mkativerata! Thank you for creating biography articles such as Hamim Samuri on Wikipedia. I've gone through some articles that you've created and noticed that the same mistake occur each time you create them, that is with the election results table column. I've fixed some of them including Hamim Samuri and Md Sirat Abu by deleting the unused column. I've tried to fix all of them but simply can't do it because there are too many. Hope that you can fix the rest for me. Thanks. Arteyu ? _{Blame it on me !} 23:28, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

• Hi there, I've put the spacing into the table intentionally as that is how its done for politician articles in the US that use the same table structure: see here and here for examples. I think the spacing breaks the table up between its column sections (govt and opposition). I'm not fussed either way but I don't think it requires a mass undo of anything that I've done or anything that you've changed. --Mkativerata (talk) 23:34, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
  • If it is to distinguish between the govt and the opposition, you should only put a column between the govt and the opposition, not at the end of the table. You can refer to here for example. Create a column at the end only if it needs reference. Arteyu ? _{Blame it on me !} 00:34, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
    • I'll keep the spaces in between columns but stop putting in spaces at the end of the table for new articles. However, I'm really not inclined to go back and change tables already there. I hope you understand that's just not a productive use of anyone's time. --Mkativerata (talk) 00:46, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
      • It's allright, I'll help you to do it when I've the time. Thanks anyway for creating those articles. Arteyu ? _{Blame it on me !} 01:05, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Harriton v Stephens

On February 1, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Harriton v Stephens, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 12:01, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Sharmen Sekaran

FYI: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sharmen Sekaran. An IP removed your PROD so I sent it to AfD. Regards, Voceditenore (talk) 15:38, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Master Saleem

On February 2, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Master Saleem, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 06:01, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

My RfA

Hey, Mkativerata, I'd just like to notify that I've left a reply to your oppose at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Connormah. Please let me know if the page is on your watchlist, I I can avoid unnecessary notifications on your talk. Thanks for your input. Connormah (talk | contribs) 03:59, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Ghazali Shafie

On February 5, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ghazali Shafie, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 06:00, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Participation at my RfA

Thank you for taking the time to weigh in on my RfA. It was successful, in that the community's wish not to grant me the tools at this time was honored. I'm taking all the comments as constructive feedback and hope to become more valuable to the project as a result; I've also discovered several new areas in which to work. Because debating the merits of a candidate can be taxing on the heart and brain, I offer this kitten as a low-allergen, low-stress token of my appreciation. --otherlleft 14:32, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alfred Reeves

Hi there, you may be interested in commenting on this discussion. Thanks--TM 12:59, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Shahidan Kassim

On February 12, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Shahidan Kassim, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Jamie♥S93 06:00, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Final discussion for Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

Hello, I note that you have commented on the first phase of Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

As this RFC closes, there are two proposals being considered:

1. Proposal to Close This RfC
2. Alternate proposal to close this RFC: we don't need a whole new layer of bureaucracy

Your opinion on this is welcome. Okip 03:21, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Rephrasing words

Mkativerata, by all means do rephrase the words in some of the sentences in Malaysian articles if you have a any similar words. Normally in some instance we provide wiki links to the certain individuals or places that have their own articles as not to clutter up certain topics. But what your doing as in the Najib Tun Razak article is also good. Roman888 (talk) 07:26, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you also for your recent edits of the Perkasa article. But I would like to bring to your attention about issues such as copy-editing. Normally when issues such as copy-editing have been brought up to me, I would sit down with the editor concern and make the necessary changes. There is no need to bring up your concerns to the Wiki administrators, who will make unnecessary investigations on individuals and their last few hundred edits. That's my commentary on the issue at hand. Roman888 (talk) 06:58, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi there, I just wanted to clarify that the issues with the articles are not of copy-editing (the fixing and improving of prose) but copyright (use of other peoples' creative work without permission). I found and reverted two more examples today, on Bandar Mahkota Cheras and Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Lingam Video Clip (see the talk pages of each article for a full explanation). To deal with copyright contraventions often requires deleting active content, some of which may have been added months or years ago. That's why I went to an administrator here. --Mkativerata (talk) 20:32, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Regarding your messaging an administrator, I like to informed you a few things. I have already messaged the administrator and explain the situation to him. In my experience administrators here normally impede and try to do an investigation of the last 1000 posts by any editor they so choose. Their modus operandi is to removed the article by wholesale means and put up a copy-violation template. When you come across that article, it's looks totally mangled and destroyed after an administrator has gone through with it. Then if anyone tries to revert it or make the necessary changes that editor will be blocked, no matter if there was any good faith or intentions involved. I have already spoken to so many Wiki editors in the past and they told me that these actions are just a waste of time and effort. Right now I am actively involved with certain groups of editors who challenged deleting active content that has not gone through any sort of consensus or agreement, even those done by administrators because some of them are impartial to say the least. Roman888 (talk) 11:02, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Ollie

FYI: The version I deleted contained only "Ollie Richards is a 16 year old rugby player from Brighton." Cheers. —DoRD (?) (talk) 04:26, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Corruption in Ghana

There has been a suggestion to remove the contentious material from the article, and to start again from scratch. I have done that, so the article no longer has the issues that caused me to bring it to AfD - Corruption in Ghana. I am now quite content to close the AfD, though for that you would also need to strike your Delete !vote. Would you have a look at the article and see if you feel that it is now OK. SilkTork *^YES! 19:41, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

• I think I might have got in and added "or blank" to my !vote before your message here. Anyway, the article now looks significantly better! --Mkativerata (talk) 19:44, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
  • Yes, I just noticed your comment, so I have closed the AfD. The condition, of course, is that the article is appropriately rebuilt from scratch. Restoring the contentious material would bring the article back to AfD. Regards SilkTork *^YES! 19:47, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
    • Indeed, for that reason I have the page on my watchlist, as I'm sure do you. --Mkativerata (talk) 19:48, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Your question at WP:RFA

One of the speedy deletion candidates you asked in your question at Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/SJK appears to instead be an external link. Was this a mistake? --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 20:38, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

• Oops, thanks for picking that up. The link was meant to be to an example article, which then contained the external link. Cheers --Mkativerata (talk) 20:41, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Review

If you could please take a few minutes to review my changes, it would be appreciated. User:Ctjf83/Sandbox CTJF83 chat 02:19, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

• Hi there, I'm only too happy to. Just that (a) I might not get to it for 24 hours or so; and (b) take User:Moonriddengirl's advice over mine (I notice you've asked her too). Cheers --Mkativerata (talk) 02:23, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
  • Ok, I figure asking 2 people wouldn't hurt. :) CTJF83 chat 02:24, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mian Kelly

Just a question about your response. Did you agree with WP:NOTINHERITED or no? I can't tell from your wording and I'm curious :) Thanks! avs5221 (talk) 02:46, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

• Yes I do; the subject doesn't appear notable in her own right. So I agree with you. Cheers --Mkativerata (talk) 15:55, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

I can't wait

		The Copyright Cleanup Barnstar
		For your incredible diligence in dealing with a persistent infringer, in detecting, reporting and remedying problems with the primary and multiple sock accounts. Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:37, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Glancing at ANI, I saw you had disclosed yet another sock. I'll just have to find a way to thank you again later; I need to express how impressed I am now. :) Fabulous work. Thank you. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:37, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! As they say where I come from, "straight to the pool room". --Mkativerata (talk) 15:55, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Teo Effi

Did you design the thing to come up with 0 G-hits? That's a very good CSD test question. Dlohcierekim 14:25, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Cheers, I designed it to be ambiguous on A7 but clear-cut on BLP issues. --Mkativerata (talk) 15:55, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

It may be the most finely honed razor I ever saw. Dlohcierekim 23:38, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Your reverting on BigDom's RfA

I assume that this revert of BigDom's comments on his own RfA was an accident? I reverted it with an edit summary about an accident! If this was not an accident, could you please explain why you removed his comments? Regards, -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 21:56, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

• How on earth did that happen? That's very strange. I can only assume I stumbled on the rollback button while trying to hit something else on my watchlist. Thanks for picking it up! --Mkativerata (talk) 21:58, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

It can be easily done! I used to sometimes do it when using my mobile phone - tapping rollback by mistake. It's why I don't have rollback on my alternative account (I never use this account on my mobile phone, or on public computers, since it's an admin account!) - that way, accidents can't happen. Anyway, no harm, no foul! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 22:01, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

I think I'm going to have to do something like that. I've got about 7 windows and 40 tabs open while I edit from work. --Mkativerata (talk) 22:01, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your message on my talk page, no harm done. -- BigDom 06:58, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you!

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For your tireless work upholding and implementing WP:POLITICIAN - it seems whenever I visit a nn-politician's deletion discussion, you're already there, saying what needs to be said. RayTalk 20:36, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks very much Ray, but primary credit should go to you for coming up with this proposal that the community seems to be implementing very consistently. --Mkativerata (talk) 20:46, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

How does this person qualify as notable?

I can't find anything in the notability guidelines for professors that Dr. Edward Costa qualifies under. There is nothing showing that anyone outside of his personal circle cares about his work. The award he recieved was not at the national or international level. There's nothing showing that his work is cited much. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:52, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

• Hi there. Speedy deletion under A7 does not require notability to be established. All that is required is that the article "makes an indication of importance or significance". This article did that by saying the subject received awards and wrote articles. If you feel the subject does not meet WP:PROF - and you may very well be right - you should definitely send it to WP:AFD. --Mkativerata (talk) 21:54, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Re: Admin?

Hi, Mkativerata. Thanks very much for your kind words; they mean a lot coming from someone I respect as much as I respect you. I'm very flattered. In response to your question, Hobit and I are actually planning to go forward with a RfA fairly soon; real life has gotten in the way until now, unfortunately. If you want to write up a co-nomination, I'd be honored. In any case, I predict that my RfA will go live by the end of the month. Best, A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 16:24, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

• Top stuff, I look forward to it! --Mkativerata (talk) 19:00, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Look familiar?

I just blocked Mkativerata2 (talk · contribs), does the edit pattern look familiar to you? He copied your user page, which I deleted. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:17, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

• Thanks very much for this. I have a feeling that this is a sock of User:Roman888. I have been systematically removing his copyright violations from the mainspace in accordance with a CCI. I'd venture a guess that he is now impersonating my removal of copyvios to get rid of content that he doesn't like from pages relating to Gordon Ramsay. He's been involved in various editing disputes relating to Ramsay over time. All this is a guess of course, but given Roman888's history of copyvios and socking (and vandalising my talk page and reporting me to 3RR etc), it's the best I can come up with. Thank you very much for the block. --Mkativerata (talk) 06:22, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Could be. I recommend adding on to the SPI case you filed to see if a CU can locate any sleeper accounts. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:34, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

• I can't thank you enough for finally dealing with this guy. We've been plagued with his tendentious editing on the Ramsay show pages for ages. I finally archived everything, which brought it to a halt, but there may be a couple more possible socks he used to try to influence a consensus discussion. There also was an issue with him canvassing related to that discussion, so this action is long overdue. I'll gladly go back through the archive and dig up the ID's for the users we thought might be socks if you think it would be useful. Drmargi (talk) 07:33, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
  • That would be very useful thanks, we can throw any suspected socks into his next SPI request. Its interesting to know that the problems I've seen in WP:Wikiproject Malaysia - in our case copyvios, POV-pushing and edit-warring - have been replicated by problematic behavious elsewhere. I should say though that his confirmed socks have been very primitive efforts; I would not expect him to have conducted any particularly elaborate sockfarming. --Mkativerata (talk) 07:36, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

I'll get at it in the morning (it's 2:00 am here.) What you describe in terms of behavior pretty much captures him on Kitchen Nightmares and Ramsay's Kitchen Nightmares minus the copyvios. He was blindly determined to include updates on the status of the restaurants, despite arguments regarding anything from notability to how long one could reasonably expect Ramsay to be held accountable for their outcomes, if he ever could at all. His arguments were manipulative, tendentious, tangental to unrelated, highly uncivil and often irrational. Worse, every time the whole thing would die down, he'd post something inflammatory on the talk page, and attempt to stir up trouble yet again, often successfully. It was pretty obvious a couple of the one-shot comments came from users that might be socks; the intensity of his reaction seemed to confirm they were. If you need an extra eye to watch for him, I noticed some rather consistent error patterns in his writing that make him recognizable. Just let me know where I can be helpful. Drmargi (talk) 09:10, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

RaRa DRV -- Draft ready

You commented on the deletion review on RaRa. I have prepared a userspace draft, linked in that DRV discussion. I think it deals with the problem of insufficient sourcing. Your comments would be welcome. DES ^(talk) 07:28, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank You Again

		The Modest Barnstar
		For wasting time and energy in correcting all the copyright violations in Wikipedia. Get a life!

HonestAbe45 (talk) 23:56, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

• You're welcome! I'm truly flattered that someone would create an account just to give me a barnstar. --Mkativerata (talk) 00:04, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Hughes

Please do not put the controversial content back, I dispute its addition, please consider taking the discussion to the WP:BLPN to see what other editors think. Off2riorob (talk) 19:24, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

• I don't want to get involved in a revert war here so I've actually posted on BLP/N before you made your last revert. --Mkativerata (talk) 19:25, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Please don't alter my edits like that, it is not copy and pasted I have exposed the citations for viewing, the content as is desired to be added is required to be visible, thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 19:41, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

I've pasted a link to the last revision of the page before yours. When trying to present content from a previous version of an article so that others can see it, it makes no sense to copy-paste the content and place links to the sources below it. It can only be properly presented in its actual form: with inline citations. I'm a little annoyed that you ask me not to alter my edits when you have reverted mine without a talk page consensus. --Mkativerata (talk) 19:43, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Its a small comment with three citations, presenting them at the end of the comment is neither here or there. Please don't be annoyed, what about, me removing some controversial content from a living persons biography, disputed controversial content is better removed while discussion takes place. Off2riorob (talk) 19:52, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

No worries, but lets call this discussion here quits. We're both motivated by good objectives here so no reason to get into little scraps. --Mkativerata (talk) 19:56, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

About Mohamed Rahmat and Nur Jazlan Mohamed

Please you read these articles in Malay Wikipedia. In Mohamed bin Rahmat there is information that he comes from Javanese descent. Moreover, there are many Malays of Javanese descent in Johor. You must be aware about it as you are member of Malaysian WikiProject. --125.160.51.194 (talk) 06:06, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

• Hi there, and thanks for your note. On en.wiki we can't insert information about a person unless it is verified by a source. Do you have any sources (English or Malay) saying that Tok Mat is of Javanese descent? If so I'd be happy to include them. --Mkativerata (talk) 06:40, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

Dropping by to say thank you for the national merit award. Just wanted to let you know that I really, really appreciate it. Thank you again. (: Arteyu ? _{Blame it on me !} 07:51, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

• No worries - thanks to you because it's wonderful that such a widely viewed Malaysia article is up to GA status. Looking at the GA review you've obviously done a heap of hard work. --Mkativerata (talk) 23:05, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

RFA

I have responded to your questions at my RFA, and look forward to your response.--SKATER ^Speak. 03:53, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

• Thanks Skater - I don't have a response to your answer or a support/oppose at the moment; I asked that question because you nominated CSD as an area of interest. I wish you all the best of luck - you're a great editor. --Mkativerata (talk) 03:18, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much.--SKATER ^Speak. 03:53, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

There should be an RfA Barnstar

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For your regular AfD and CSD questions at Request for Adminship, together with associated examples, the answers to which never fail to be enlightening. The balance between scrutiny and over-scrutiny is a tough one and you always seem to get it right. DustFormsWords (talk) 06:15, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

• Wow, thank you very much! I had been thinking my questions had been getting a little too tough but it's nice to know someone likes them. By the way, I'm intrigued by the why element to your question... --Mkativerata (talk) 06:20, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

• I'd love to chat about it once the nominee has answered it but rest assured that it's not because I have any particular position to push. Remind me after an answer goes up. - DustFormsWords (talk) 06:22, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

• Will do! I have a theory about the why but nothing more than that... --Mkativerata (talk) 06:26, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Victoria University of Wellington Debating Society

Thanks for the note about the above, despite what looks like a comprehensive article, it is, as you point out, totally run referenced and with a quick look on Google appears not to have anything like 'significant coverage'. Normally I think it is best to try a merge and # REDIRECT before a AfD if a suitable recipient page can be found. The obvious one here, I think would be Victoria University of Wellington Students' Association, however that is not without it's own issues.

I will tag the page notable and propose the merge and see what comments it gets.

If you disagree, please do say so !.

Regards

Codf1977 (talk) 07:30, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

• Thanks very much, I will pay a visit to the merge page! Great work with these articles. --Mkativerata (talk) 07:34, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Richard Lamb

Hello, Mkativerata. As an American totally unfamiliar with non American football, I have to say that one utterly confused me. I'd have probably prodded as I would have read it as asserting some significance, though not clearly meeting WP:ATHLETE or WP:GNG. Or I might have passed entirely due to my ignorance of the area. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 14:05, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

• Cheers, I think it would have been fine if the candidate said "pass" for that reason. What I might do to improve it is wikilink the team to show that it is actually professional. --Mkativerata (talk) 18:58, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Thomas M. Ashe

H Mkativerata. My question is, why doesn't Thomas M. Ashe meet the politicians requirements? He is an elected official from the third largest city in Massachusetts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tashe8694 (talk • contribs) 22:14, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

• Hi there. The notability requirements under WP:POLITICIAN generally don't allow local-level politicians to be included on wikipedia. Very few local councillors have articles. There are exceptions of course, for local politicians who get significant news coverage. In Thomas Ashe's case, it was decided at a deletion discussion that he didn't meet WP:POLITICIAN. I think this is correct for two reasons: first, Springfield is not a particularly large metropolitan area which makes Ashe not particularly notable; and secondly, there wasn't evidence of significant news coverage of Ashe. There is a way that you can appeal a decision to delete an article - deletion review - but I think an appeal against this deletion would be unlikely to succeed unless you could put forward substantial evidence that Ashe has received significant coverage in reliable sources. If you think you can do this, I'd be happy to help.--Mkativerata (talk) 04:01, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Seriously...... look at your wikipedias own article for this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Springfield,_Massachusetts_metropolitan_area —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.112.234.48 (talk) 19:39, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Al-Kateb v Godwin

Since you wrote an Australian law FA recently, I was wondering if you were well-versed with this article, because it lacks sources badly YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 06:13, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

• I'd be happy to take a crack; I am quite familiar with the case and have access to all the secondary sources I would need. I'd noticed that article before and suspected it could get FAR'd. I've just started on a new FA prospect today but I'm happy to put that on hold for Al-Kateb. I think the lack of sourcing is less of a problem than what in my view is a bit lot of OR creep. The article appears to me to undertake a lot of interpretation of the judgement. The judgement is, in most respects, a primary source. Dealing with that concern would mean quite radical changes to the article, which for an existing FA might be controversial. It looks like the creator of the article is still active - is he interested in working on it? --Mkativerata (talk) 06:21, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Were you referring to the 116 of the constitution? Well unless it gets FARed it isn't going to die any quicker than any other article. I don't know anything about law but able to get some of the easy stuff from the official report, so maybe for a law person it might be very easy. Bainer isn't very active anymore, more or less inactive, 300 edits in the last 9 months. His article Dietrich v The Queen was on FAR same time last year and he was too busy and some of us amateurs had to patch it up; if there are bits missing there we probably missed it as I think Ctrl-F and finding matching words was how it might have been done YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 06:53, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

I see you cited a book by Robert Garran in that book. Another Bainer FA that needs repairs (worried about the dominance of the autobiog, as they are usually self-serving) YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 06:55, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes, section 116 is the project. Early days yet but I've got a load of good sources. I'll look around to see what sources I can get on Al-Kateb. Probably a lot. The end result might be a substantial trimming of the judgment section because that's where the over-reliance on primary sources is.--Mkativerata (talk) 06:58, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Your ANI Report

I have replied to your accusations in the ANI report which I felt are unwarranted. You can keep on going about that individual which you have a grudge against which has nothing to do with me. Golongong (talk) 07:01, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

• Thanks for letting me know. It's on my watchlist. --Mkativerata (talk) 07:02, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

I've added a comment on the ANI, and a bit of evidence that should help make the sock case. Still working my way through the KN and RKN discussions, which has proven to be a bit of a Herculian task. Drmargi (talk) 07:22, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

User:CarloNordo is now adding a hang on template to an article Golongong created. Account first edited only two hours after the roman888 sock was blocked, and immediately set up a userpage suggesting knowledge of Wikipedia, including Malaysian WP tags and edited articles on that topic. Not any ducking yet, but possibly one to just keep an eye on. SGGH ^ping! 16:06, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks very much, I'll keep and eye on this one. I agree this isn't quite quacking yet - no obvious copyvios for instance. But the "autoreviewer" userbox he originally put on his userpage is a little suspicious; it seems he's copied my userboxes (which he has done before). It is probably time for another SPI because there have been 5 or 6 socks since the last one. --Mkativerata (talk) 18:07, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Would you drop a note on my talk page when you're ready for the SPI? I've got several pieces of potential evidence, and a couple possible socks to add to it. Drmargi (talk) 18:13, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks very much - I will try to put one up tomorrow as his socking is starting to ramp up again and it would be good to flush out some sleepers. --Mkativerata (talk) 18:15, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Great! I've got one that's almost certainly him, and three that are at the very least another user and two socks, plus a couple IP's of interest. Drmargi (talk) 18:21, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

New one worth a peek: User:CoralRosie. I have a long history (as do several others) with a user named Rosie1989 and her sock, CoralBay, both of whom are blocked for sockpuppetry and edit warring. It thought this was her with a new sock at first, until I looked at the user page, and read a couple edit summaries. There's a little something about Rosie and Coral Bay our socking friend clearly isn't aware of, given the nature of his edit summaries, and this user's page has a whiff of Roman about it. To quote our friend above, it's not quacking just yet, but i think I saw a couple ducks fly by. Drmargi (talk) 19:16, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

• Thanks - I've never seen Roman cite the MOS before, but I'll keep an eye on that account. --Mkativerata (talk) 19:22, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

I can't recall whether I have or not, but the use of elaborate edit summaries and the curious confluence of two old user ID's don't jive. I'm watching it, too. Drmargi (talk) 20:09, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Update: never mind this one. This is most likely someone else with an issue all his own. I was probably right about the ducks, but mistook the flock. Drmargi (talk) 01:24, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Speeling errar

That wasn't a speeling errar, that was a tpying error. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:51, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

• Quitr right6! --Mkativerata (talk) 17:58, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

DYK for New Economic Model

On 3 April, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article New Economic Model, which you recently nominated. If you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 06:03, 3 April 2010 (UTC)