User talk:Mrt3366/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 10

September 2012

Hello, I'm Sitush. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Talk:Caste that didn't seem very civil, so it has been removed. Wikipedia needs people like you and me to collaborate, so it’s one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. That's enough. And, no, I probably should not template you but the trolling and name-calling has to stop now. Sitush (talk) 14:14, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Ok, you have restored, I am going to find a friendly admin when I've sorted out some other stuff. Enjoy the break. - Sitush (talk) 14:22, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

And now you have struck out a small part, which is definitely disingenuous. Just revert the entire contribution, please, and start over. Concentrate on discussing improvements to the article rather than people. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 14:30, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I have struck out my edit and that's all it's going to be. You better talk with Fowler first about civility. And you know sitush, threatening people for disagreeing with you is absolutely unacceptable per WP:TALKNO. Do not remove or refactor my comment without my permission. You're free to report me but in the mean time do not edit my comments without letting me know first. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 14:33, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

"Concentrate on discussing improvements to the article rather than people." or "trolling and name-calling" - That applies for you and others too my dear. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 14:35, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

I have not threatened you. What I have done is assumed the outcome. And since you have acknowledged that you contribution was an attack (by striking some of it), I am on safe ground to remove in its entirety. Which I will do if you do not. Resorting to your usual wikilawyering is pointless. - Sitush (talk) 14:37, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

How civil sitush, I am touched. Keep this up and maybe your admin friends will be able to help you out, as opposed to me. Assume what????

"I am going to find a friendly admin..Enjoy the break" - this doesn't leave much room for any assumption. Friendly admin...to do what, huh? Why does he need to be friendly in the first place? Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 14:42, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

You ask me to take care of my indents here. Had you not noticed that you were the one who changed the indentation style? It is you who is at fault. Are you sure that you want to leave that message in there, attacking both me and Fowler? I won't be going to AIV because that is not the correct forum (something else you got wrong, although you seem to have removed it now), but I will be going somewhere. - Sitush (talk) 15:00, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

I asked you because you didn't properly indent and it seemed like you're replying to somebody else. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 15:06, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

I know what you thought. It was your fault. Tough shit. No more here: you are not dragging me into all your crap - I'm here to build an encyclopedia, not troll and attack. - Sitush (talk) 15:09, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

You know what I thought??? Are you a psychic now?
"It was your fault. Tough shit." — This won't do you any good man.
"I'm here to build an encyclopedia, not troll and attack" - nice then work on that objective instead of contradicting your words. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 15:21, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Sep 23

Your addition to Human rights abuses in Jammu and Kashmir has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text, or images borrowed from other websites, or printed material without a verifiable license; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. —SpacemanSpiff 07:35, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

I think you are referring to this diff. A section could be seen as a copy-vio, I admit.

I may rephrase them in my own words. Thank you for this cautioning I will be definitely more cautious. But I think you have removed more than that. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 07:46, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Reportedly, a group of Kashmiri terrorist element could perpetrate such crime because of the aide and patronization it received from Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). The chief perpetrators were the Jammu & Kashmir Liberation Front and the Hizbul Mujahideen. They got “trained and armed” by the ISI. Ethnic cleansing continued till a vast majority of the Kashmiri Pandits were evicted out of the valley after having suffered many ignominious and inhumane acts of violence, e.g. sexual assault on women, torture, extortion of property etc.<ref name=Rnews>{{cite news|title=23 years on, Kashmiri Pandits remain refugees in their own nation|url=http://www.rediff.com/news/column/kashmiri-pandits-remain-refugees-in-their-own-nation/20120119.htm|accessdate=15 September 2012|newspaper=Rediff News}}</ref> Some of the separatist leaders in Kashmir reject these allegations. The Indian government is endeavouring to reinstate the displaced Pandits in Kashmir. The remnants of Kashmiri Pandits have been living in the squalors in Jammu, but the most of them believe that, until this violence ceases to exist, returning to Kashmir is not an option.<ref name=BBCuk/>

Does this look okay now? Any external support will be appreciated. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 08:48, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

That's enough

The top of your talk says: "Welcome to my talk page, Please be civil" and when leaving a message it says: "Don't worry I am not going to bite you. Let's have a friendly chat." Does that seem a bit odd to you?

You breached WP:AGF and WP:CIVIL with me when I was just trying to divert you from a meltdown. You were rude and called me lazy for not rewriting copyvios I encounter. I can shrug that off.

But, now your edits have really crossed the line. The community rejected your plan and you won't let it go. You're dragging zillions of keystrokes onto back pages. You're being really nasty to my colleagues. Your "watch it" and "don't do that" comments are totally inappropriate. The whole tone of your edits chases others away and hurts the project. There's a long, long list of editors who have been angered. The common denominator is your edits.

So here's one for you: Don't do that. Be polite to others. Edit collegially. Trust the community. If you lose a crusade, drop it. Don't keep at it trying every trick in the book to get your way. Don't keep citing policies and guidelines if you're not going to follow them yourself, such as carrying on debates in edit summaries, templating regulars, etc.

Finally, take a good long look at how we treat each other around here, and follow suit. This demand for civility while being uncivil is total hipocrisy. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 15:12, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

"You breached WP:AGF and WP:CIVIL with me" — Anna, let me first apologize to you for being rude that day. Please forgive me for that contravention.
But, don't you see others equally intensely breaching civility? Don't you see any of the extenuating circumstances? You are upset because I called you lazy, albeit I remember it differently.

Have you talked to Sitush also who used gross language on my userpage and told me to "piss off" and then called me "troll" while threatening me on this page and his edit summaries? Isn't that a violation of WP:TALKNO? Have you talked to Fowler&fowler too who repeatedly insulted me and others on various talk-pages? Hence, I am wondering are you being impersonal and neutral here? See if you have a grudge or vendetta (for the lack of a better word) against me that's alright but don't use that to legitimize others' wrongdoing.

"Edit collegially." — I am trying to be as collegial as I can be at the moment. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 15:48, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

The large print giveth while the small print taketh away. You apologize, while in the same breath suggest a grudge or vendetta. Way to assume good faith. I'm speaking up for the reasons stated, and none other. You are hurting the project.

Saying that incivility by others justifies your incivility is a terrible argument. As long as you're uncivil and break the rules, you cannot complain about others. You just don't have a leg to stand on. Your conduct is indefensible. Don't you know that? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 16:01, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

"Saying that incivility by others justifies your incivility is a terrible argument." - yes, I agree and I am not trying to say that. All I am saying is, do you see none of what I have been faced with? It's a simple yes/no question.

"As long as you're uncivil and break the rules, you cannot complain about others" — but I am not trying to be uncivil now, not with you. Other guy calls me a troll and then you come out of the blue and ignore everything, rebuke me (for our only and not-so-recent conversation) in a tone which I don't particularly like, call me a hypocrite and then again you tell me to assume good faith? WOW!

And by the way, I didn't claim anything like "you have a grudge or vendetta" I simply reassured you "if you have a grudge or vendetta that's alright". Anyways, my apologies if you think I have not assumed good faith. But, I cannot keep on apologizing if you don't reciprocate by seeing the larger context. BTW, Sitush templated me first, reverted my legitimate comments first without my consent. Anyway, per WP:TTR, "templating the regular" is not a cardinal sin here :). Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 16:12, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Compare this with this. And note my comment in my first post here today. BTW, 73%, eh - I am quite pleased with that. - Sitush (talk) 16:50, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

@Sitush: I don't need to. That's irrelevant. And I was kind of wondering, what do you want to achieve with that comparison? Let me tell you something, Mr Sitush, respect is not automatic, respect is earned. I am not saying you're unworthy. I am simply summarizing my experience with you.

1. Have I called you a "troll"?
2. or ask you bullishly to "piss off" or
3. threatened you with something, anything?

And actions speak louder than words. Well you may have heard these cliches before but are you really paying attention? All these years of experience so far as it appears have not enabled you to discern civility from bluntness. All that experience has not taught you how to ask someone to do something politely as opposed to bullying and telling them to "piss off" or threatening them on their userpages.

With that experience, you should know how to influence people with your neutrality, politeness. Alas! In my experience with you I have learned, your experience have made you think you're entitled to — I don't know — highly submissive and obsequious treatment with some special form of deference, maybe? I mean what will you have me do? Although experienced people deserve respectful treatment, they are not necessarily correct always. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 07:46, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

The ANI and the request for discretionary sanctions are both unfortunate and surprising. I thought all of us, including Fowler and AVC, had agreed on all major issues related to Talk:Caste. I will try to get in on the ANI discussion. Right now, I am finding it incredibly hard to keep up with all the parallel discussions on Talk:India and Talk:Caste. Btw, you should have unconditionally apologized to Anna Frodesiak long ago. Nobody deserves to be rebuked for giving friendly advice. :) Correct Knowledge^«৳alk» 13:27, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Better late than never, right? I have apologized twice above. BTW, I didn't rebuke her (I was admittedly rude to her), come on . I am the one who is getting grilled! Hahahaha...!! Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 13:33, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

That was free advice, I am not good at apologizing either ;). As long as I am giving free advice let me add, apology + excuse/shared blame almost never works. You have to take all the blame. That being said, it looks like I am going to comment on ANI sooner than I thought. I didn't think editors would try to pin it all on AVC. Yes, all of us share some of the blame for the mess we created, but AVC's conduct has been exemplary. I know you are being grilled, you've interacted with more admins in the last few days than I have in my entire stay here. Haha.. Correct Knowledge^«৳alk» 13:51, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Mrt3366: We're not here to debate this utter, utter, nonsense. Nobody's buying any of this, and nobody wants to carry it on. Remember why we are here. Please, disengage and get back to working on the encyclopedia. We all have better things to do. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 19:00, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

• Anna what is it exactly that you want?
  You here hurl allegations (about breaching WP:AGF and WP:CIVIL) without any diff or references except for our little conversation for which I have apologized. Now what do you want?
  What debate? What is going on here? You're starting to lose me.
  You told me that my "edits have really crossed the line." — What did you mean by that??
  What do you want me to do?
  What "nonsense" are you referring to?
  I don't understand why are you being so rude to me.
  "Be polite to others. Edit collegially." - I will, thank you for the advice.
  "Trust the community. If you lose a crusade, drop it." - what crusade???? I have apologized to you TWICE for being rude, but now you are confusing me. What do you want state clearly please. That is really enough now, Anna. If you have nothing specific to say to me then kindly leave me alone. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 06:55, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

"Nobody's buying any of this, and nobody wants to carry it on." — Nobody's buying any of what? Nobody wants to carry what on?? What are you saying? Really, what is your goal here? Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 07:09, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

• Overall, what Anna wants you to understand and to which I agree is that we are not here to fight with anybody but to improve the encyclopedia. So rather then sticking to one thing, better to move on and not to push further by being Uncivil. Some personal advise buddy; I've got few quotes in my mind which I always re call: 1.) Don't make any promises while you are happy, 2.) Don't take any decisions when you are sad and 3.) Don't say anything when you are angry. I'm not saying that you should not stand for what you believe but the way you've been doing at India, DR is frustrating others as well as not leading to anything really constructive. All the efforts are just not worth these and you can actually write one or two GAs by utilizing the time. The time you've dedicated to the conflicts, if used up for improving other poor article is much better and appreciated. That is what we need. Instead of improving near perfect articles, I'd love to see someone improving articles which are full of crap. Please consider the points I stated and think upon, + remember the 3 rules which I follow. The 3rd rule doesn't state that you've to sit back, but have to comment when cooled down and the reason is that "an angry person may do anything, even if it is inappropriate"; this also included becoming rude. Your contributions are valued and there is no damage done yet. I'd really not like to see an editor like you being blocked so please think twice before hitting the save button and stay miles away from anyone when you are angry. You can say what you want once you are cooled and that will be the exact thing you want and that will be liked by others. I also remember a quote that there are always 3 sides of a conflict, 1.) Your side 2.) The opponent's side and 3.) The right side. TheSpecialUser ^TSU 07:20, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

• "So rather then sticking to one thing, better to move on and not to push further by being Uncivil." - what made you think that I am "sticking to one thing" and being "uncivil"? That is what I want to know. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 07:32, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
• I like the quotes very much. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 07:34, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

• By sticking to one thing, I mean something like this. In no ways I'm saying that it is your fault totally but there was a bit too much discussion (not only by you but few others also). Other productive things can be done during this like helping out a newcomer at an AFC (Trust me, they really become happy and it'd make their day! This is what I've always loved but unfortunately, don't get time for it till Nov mid). By uncivility, some comments there are little rude (If you'd make such comments to me, I'd feel bad and would discourage or make me angry). Though not intended, some of them sound rude. I can point if you want but try and find it. Have some drink, eat whatever you like, listen to your fav music and come back in a cool behavior (civil) which I've always seen in you whenever I interact with you. Going through the archives, you'd yourself realize that some comments could have been better. The situation might enrage anyone but if kept cool, it'd make difference :) And thanks for the quotes; just 15 but life has taught me enough to formulate them. TheSpecialUser ^TSU 07:52, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

• I like your idea and I am in. Teach me how to help out a newcomer at an AFC (sincere). I am definitely in. If this is what it will take to show that I am ready to move on, then so be it. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 08:08, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

• You are in no need of doing AFC if you don't like it as you do not need to prove anything. AFC was just an example but if you are interested, 1000+ submissions need reviews. There is also a script which helps you to review an article, send message to creator and other cleanup in just one click: Wikipedia:AFCH TheSpecialUser ^TSU 08:42, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

• I would very much like to learn how to help newbies on AFC. Give me more tips on how to review an article. I was sincere when I said it's time to move on. Please believe me. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 08:59, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

• Thats good and AFC is very very easy! First of all be sure that you have Wikipedia:AFCH in your js. As stated above, from the CAT, open a random submission and if you have the script installed, a new button will appear on the top of the page titled "review". Click on the button and you'll have 3 options; Accept or decline or comment. Select the appropriate option by looking through the article. Take care of things such as use of WP:RS, Neutrality and other things. If the article is sourced, is neutral and not like an ad or essay, then accept it. Once you do the reviews, you'll get the flow. Most of the submissions are not accepted as they are with issues such as lack of WP:RS (most common), not-neutral (second most common) and like an advert or essay (third most common). More details can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Reviewing_instructions and [1]. Cheers! TheSpecialUser ^TSU 09:08, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

TheSpecialUser: Thank you. You're aces in my book. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 15:21, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Mrt3366: In America back in the day this would all be called "hooey". Today, this situation is best decribed by the Xhosa word "mtnc*click*tngnonga" -- literally "hooey". So, please try to disengage, and spend your keystrokes in the mainspace. Thanks. Happy editing. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 15:21, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Anna: I hope my comment here doesn't invoke the feeling of self-refutation, but I am trying to spend my "keystrokes" on the mainspace. And, as you say Anna, I may lower my interaction levels. And FYI, I didn't and don't intend to be nasty to anyone.

TSU: Thanks man. It's cool . But my net conn. suuuuuuuucks . I can't even log in and out on will, you know. But, I definitely will continue to review and help other newbies whenever I can. I really like it. Thanx again.

Both of you keep in touch. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 16:03, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

That's great. Pleased to hear it. No hard feelings. Glad to see things are all settled. Happy editing. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 22:57, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

A bowl of strawberries for you!

:) Irondome (talk) 01:18, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

After all this time, now you remember me?? Hahahaha....Nice to see at least you remember my address . Cheers, Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 07:55, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

• Just been lost in wikiworld last couple months :) Sorry, here now Irondome (talk) 19:12, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Page Curation newsletter

Hey Mrt3366. I'm dropping you a note because you used to (or still do!) patrol new pages. This is just to let you know that we've deployed and developed Page Curation, which augments and supersedes Special:NewPages - there are a lot of interesting new features :). There's some help documentation here if you want to familiarise yourself with the system and start using it. If you find any bugs or have requests for new features, let us know here. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 12:46, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Llanfairpwll deletion

I have reverted your deletion on the Llanfairpwll article. Your deletion seemed very strange and I am just curious why you thought it necessary to delete the valid link to the Wikipedia Icelandic language version of the article, with a comment of 'unsourced/unexplained/redundant'? 21st CENTURY GREENSTUFF 13:32, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

My bad, you're right it was deleted in error. 168.97.133.244 placed it and in the edit summary it was tagged with "nonsense characters" and also "fo:Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch" — this honestly seemed indistinguishable from the pranks which preceded this in STiki. But you did well by reverting me. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 14:00, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

ROFL - I take it you don't speak Welsh then? 21st CENTURY GREENSTUFF 14:51, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Yep, road signs must take up 50% of the transportation budget in Wales. :) --‖ Ebyabe ^talk - Border Town ‖ 15:05, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Margaret and Mary Shelton, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Henry Carey, Henry Norris and William Stafford (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) 12:35, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

September 2012 Indian Economic Policy Changes

Comment by Indoscope (talk · contribs) at 15:29, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Regarding the article which I had created earlier 'September 2012 Indian Economic Policy Changes'. These policy changes were an important milestone event in the political history of India. The events are still unfolding with more policy changes expected. I had drawn the information from sources for which I had provided reference. Kindly let me know specifically which portion of the article sounded like primary source or opinion to you so that I can review. If you feel that some citation was needed then kindly add citation needed tag. Let me know we can discuss your reservations.

Indoscope (talk) 15:29, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

This submission doesn't provide sufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject matter. Please read WP:GNG, WP:TITLE and WP:UNDUE. Please see the guide to writing better articles for information on how-to better format your submission. And The subject matter may itself be due for a merger with Economy of India.
But you're free to re-submit it of course. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 17:03, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Dispute tag to Kashmir Conflict

Please point out to which part is not resolved. The language is what you edited. You had a problem with the old version and you changed it. So, I do not see where the dispute still is. Point out exactly what part of the section you have a dispute with. Otherwise, stop adding back the dispute tag. Killbillsbrowser (talk) 20:16, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Read

1. The edit summary of my last revert.
2. The Archives
   -and-
   
3. The section itself.

Ask DS if he says it's okay to remove the tag, I won't mind removing it myself. He knows about the subject more than me.

P.S. It's nothing personal. However, I would appreciate if you kept discussions about articles limited to article talk pages and not take them to my userpage, that way more input could be mustered. Thank you. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 07:12, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

If you restore the tag you need to explain in a new section on the talk page why you think in is needed. Darkness Shines (talk) 13:30, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Anthony Wile

Just wondering why you moved Anthony Wile from Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Anthony Wile? The sources in the article are awful, either primary sources, blogs, a Wikipedia article, or otherwise not about the subject. None of the sources show any notability for the subject, and unless there's something about to be added to the article or some sources I'm somehow missing, the article is looking at a WP:PROD or WP:AFD. - SudoGhost 20:24, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

I saw the submission and deemed that the subject was notable enough to merit an article. BTW, A google search returns 92,000 hits and I didn't know that it's not a matter to take into consideration. Now, if you say that the references are all awful, then that's your opinion I respect that. However, I think that, although some references are poxy, some are useful. But you are free to nominate it for deletion. The article needs work, I admit. The guy who submitted the article for creation could probably help us (I will talk to GatorHalcon and see that the issue is resolved otherwise I'll remedy it by either adding sources or by nominating it for deletion myself). Cheers, Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 08:22, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I have left a note on GatorHalcon's talk page. Let's see how it goes from there. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 08:43, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Update

Much of the unsourced and unreliable claims have been pruned now. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 09:45, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

WP:GNG - this is heading to AfD. The guy is clearly a self-publicising nutjob/fringe player. I'll try to save it but, honestly, the chances are very slim. Alarm bells should really have been screaming at the start, but stuff happens :( Can anyone find instances where he has been on mainstream TV/newspapers? That would be the potential saving grace. - Sitush (talk) 10:07, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

I will search for it. Do these links help? Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 10:10, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Fringe websites, mostly self-published etc? Not really. - Sitush (talk) 10:18, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Ahem. - Sitush (talk) 10:20, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

I have sent it to AfD - Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Anthony_Wile. - Sitush (talk) 10:32, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

User:GatorHalcon

FYI: User talk:GatorHalcon#Your recent contributions Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:14, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Jago punjabi

Hi. I've declined your A7 on that as it's a ceremony. While the main part of A7 involves people or animals (companies, underwater knitting circles, Mrs Thingy at No 49 or Charlie the tightrope walking hyaena), ceremonies aren't there. I've tagged it unreferenced, but if it really offends you, I'd suggest prod. Peridon (talk) 10:51, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Why would it offend me. You did well. Cheers, Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 10:52, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan Bukit Jelutong

I've removed the speedy deletion tag on Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan Bukit Jelutong because educational institutions are exempt from A7. Hack (talk) 10:57, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

I would have PRODed it, had you not done so before me. Thanks I will prod more and csd less in future. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 11:00, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Not a problem - I've done the same thing myself. Hack (talk) 14:52, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

New Page Patrolling

Hi Mrt3366. Thank you fort patrolling new pages. This is an important task and although it doesn't need a user right (yet), we need to ensure that it gets done as accurately as possible. I noticed you patrolled Nikolaos dimitriadis but only added maintenance tags. This page was a blatant autobiogréaphy written by a clearly non notable person and I have deleted it per CSD A7. For more information and essential reading, please see WP:NPP and WP:DELETION and if you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask me on my talk page. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk)

I entirely agree with your comment. The thing is, I was going to nominate it for speedy deletion but hesitated because of the consecutive declination of my other CSDs (e.g. [2], [3]). Hope you understand. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 12:45, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Mrt3366. You have new messages at Peridon's talk page.
Message added 12:15, 1 October 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Peridon (talk) 12:15, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Congratulations from STiki!

	The Anti-Vandalism + STiki Barnstar
	Congratulations, Mrt3366! You're receiving this barnstar because you recently crossed the 1,000 classification threshold using STiki. We thank you both for your contributions to Wikipedia at-large and your use of the tool. We hope you continue your ascent up the leaderboard and stay in touch at the talk page. Thank you and keep up the good work! West.andrew.g (talk) 15:29, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Mrt3366 likes this.

Nice! I am honored. Thank you for your kind appreciation. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 15:40, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Pnivne

Hello Mrt3366. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Pnivne, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: villages do not fall under a7. settlements tend to be notable. Thank you. SmartSE (talk) 16:35, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

I think I am gathering the fact that nothing of my interest is covered by A7. Just kidding. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 16:52, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Astrological aspect (Hindu Astrology)

Sir, I have revised this article with the assistance of User:Huon that I had initially posted and which you had suggested could be merged with the existing article – Hindu astrology. In this context I am to submit that the said article touches upon the salient features rather superficially, in case what I have written is to be merged then the entire article Hindu astrology would require a great deal of re-working. I still believe this particular part of Hindu astrology deserves a separate page. I am to request you to re-review this page. I might have erred in language and presentation, if so, kindly help me improve this article. Thanks.Soni Ruchi (talk) 06:53, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

I see you've re-submitted the draft. Let's wait and see if other reviewers share your view that this particular part of Hindu astrology deserves a separate page or not. I've done my bit. I can certainly help you improve the page (though I am not certain how) but don't think it's necessary for me to re-review the page (i.e. accept the submission). The whole point of AFC is to create those articles only who will remain in wikipedia namespace at least for a certain amount of time (i.e. may not be deleted in the near future). Yours, in my view, doesn't pass that test as yet.
P.S. This is nothing personal. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 07:51, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Stub tags

Comment by PamD (talk · contribs) at 15:22, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

As Utilisateur:P'tit Ju/monobook.css was obviously a page in the wrong place, there was nothing to be gained by adding {{stub}} to it - just a waste of time for stub-sorters! Another time, please don't. Thanks. PamD 15:22, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

PamD 15:22, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

New Page Patrolling

Hi Mrt3366. Thank you for patrolling new pages. This is an important task and although it doesn't need a user right (yet), we need to ensure that it gets done as accurately as possible. I noticed you patrolled Jim Mulligan but only added maintenance tags. This page was an unsourced Biography of a Living person. For more information and essential reading, please see WP:NPP and WP:BLPPROD and if you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask me on my talk page. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:29, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

I would have proded it eventually. I was mulling over the nomination. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 09:41, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

• Hi Mrt3366. Thank you for patrolling new pages. This is an important task and although it doesn't need a user right (yet), we need to ensure that it gets done as accurately as possible. I noticed you tagged Andre Y A for speedy deletion per WP:A7. I'm just letting you know that I have deleted the page as WP:A1 (Short article without enough context to identify the subject). For more information and essential reading, please see WP:NPP and WP:DELETION and if you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask me on my talk page. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:38, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

• Okay. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 09:41, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

• Hi Mrt3366. Thank you for patrolling new pages. This is an important task and although it doesn't need a user right (yet), we need to ensure that it gets done as accurately as possible. I noticed you tagged Zakaria abdikarim for speedy deletion per WP:G3. I'm just letting you know that the page should have been tagged as WP:G10 (Attack page or negative unsourced BLP). For more information and essential reading, please see WP:NPP and WP:DELETION and if you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask me on my talk page. Thanks.

What's the difference. That page got deleted three times and unhelpful re-creation of deleted pages can be seen as vandalism. Hence, it seemed like a blatant case of vandalism. That page read "Zakaria_abdikarim su-cks d-cks" or something like it, I don't remember. Well maybe he does like to suck dicks, who knows ? Maybe he is indeed a homosexual and it won't be seen as an attack page. The fact of the matter is, the page should have been deleted and it finally was deleted. Cheers,

P.S. I should request you to kindly comment under one heading and not create multiple headers about new page patrolling. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 14:15, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Angie Malone wheelchair curler page

Comment by Aberdeencashew (talk · contribs) at 20:28, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi Mike, you reviewed a page of mine and made three comments. 3. was external links in main content page, this was voice interviews with BBC etc and I thought they would be allowed in the main content page but I'll put them in the references? is that ok? 2. was reliable secondary sources, all sources are reliable and most of the information on the page is available on other wiki pages using the same sources, what can I do about this? 1. is structure, can yopu explain this please as I thought the structure was fine. Many thanks

Aberdeencashew (talk) 20:28, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I've got to admit, Mrt, that I do not understand your issue with reliable sources - they seem just fine to me. Yes, there was a problem with the way the citations were done (I've fixed it, and I will turn them into non-barelinks using WP:Reflinks when it goes live). I think that the creator has also done some work and while there is more that needs doing, assuming that there are no copyright issues and the article does not already exist, I think it is good enough to pass. I've seen a lot worse.

FWIW, I am prepared to work with the creator if they want to develop the thing (or other articles). They have got the right idea here, I feel. - Sitush (talk) 21:08, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

I was just doing my job as a reviewer. I didn't mean to discourage anybody. Reliable sources are indispensable in an wiki-article. I didn't think the article had a good structure. External links were on the main-space used — I think — as sources. These were the reasons for declination. We want the article's to be in decent/workable forms when they are created through AFC. We review the pages before they are created lest we need to clean the mess after they are created without a good review. I am not heartless, I understand the efforts the creator has put in. I am willing to re-review the page if it is re-submitted. Yes, the sources now look better. But the structure is still a concern for me. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 06:58, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

• Structure: Check the article about Michael phelps it has 22 separate sections consistent with different phases of his life, achievements. I am not saying the article you're creating has to be exactly the same in structure, it doesn't need to be as diversified as the Michael phelps article at first but a well-structured article catches the eye. You don't need to re-write the whole article but at least re-organize the content if you can. Don't worry and don't take offense to the declination. It may be created sooner than you think. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 07:16, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

• I am sorry but you are being unreasonable regarding structure. We discourage short sections, which would be inevitable because the article itself is short. You are asking the creator to square a circle here. If the ELs were in the body then that is a problem. However, if the ELs were in the body because they were sources then that is NOT a problem and, indeed, is normal because they are not ELs but rather sources. As I see it, the only significant problems were (a) the refs were not integrated as footnotes and (b) it could have used some wikilinks (which the reviewer could have added in about 10 seconds, just to provide an example for the creator). Everything else was minor. You were right to decline, but your reasons were peculiar to me.

  Anyways, we'll all move on and hopefully no harm has been done. - Sitush (talk) 07:34, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

• Yes we discourage short sections but that article won't exactly be having short sections if it were to consist only 2/3 sections about career, life and so forth. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 11:01, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

• I've just removed some copyvio from it - can't spot any more. Since there is actually no sourced background info, aside from a passing mention of her suffering from breast cancer, there can be no "Life" section. It is all about her career, which is just dandy. It is a stub/starter but nothing wrong with that. - Sitush (talk) 11:10, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

• The subject's career is mesmerizing, I know. Okay, if you think the article can be created and vouch for it, I will reconsider my previous decision. You may tell her to re-submit the draft if she wants and others may also review it. I am willing to give it some more thought than I had previously given it, albeit I expect a little more compassion towards my initial trepidation. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 11:26, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi Mike and Sitush, first may I say many thanks to both of you for your help, advice and contributions to the page. I am very new to this and of course did not get things spot on at first attempt. The page does look far better now and I hope is acceptable. I had thought it would be useful to get the basic page up then make additions, for example there should be links to other wiki pages - Frank Duffy, Aileen Neilson, Tom Killin, Micheal McCreadie, World Wheelchair Curling Championships and so on. I also thought a photograph of Angie Malone and maybe a table showing medals won would look good and give an overview of career acheivements but I didn't want to try too much all at once. Again many thanks for your help and I would welcome any further advice. Being new to this, I hope I've sent this message correctly and it reaches both of you. Aberdeencashew (talk) 12:10, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

It's what we're here to do. If you need any technical or subject-related help, any at all, just let me know and I will see what I can do to help you. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 14:48, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I've resubmitted the page, I hope that once it's up and I get a bit more practice my submissions will be better. Aberdeencashew (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:51, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Singh Rashmi

I'd be happy to move Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Singh Rashmi to the mainspace. It's looks passable. What do you think? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 07:19, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Actually, I can't seem to access a lot of the refs. More than half of the ones I can see are not so great. Maybe the others are better. You decide. Best wishes and keep up the good work. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 07:21, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict)At a cursory glance it does look passable, albeit I don't understand what's going on. I thought the submission was Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Rashmi Singh which Sitush, Ananyaprasad and I have been working on for quite some time now (including the reliability of the sources). Can we merge the two?? I think that would certainly be helpful. We formed a coalition, I gather . Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 07:26, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Duplicate

I just formatted Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Singh Rashmi only to discover you've all been working on Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Rashmi Singh. It's always best to zap one. So, which is the master? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 07:25, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

I should say the latter has more credibility and just about same amount of content. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 07:28, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

I am mulling over the prospect of moving that one to the mainspace. What do you say? Are you up for this? Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 07:30, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Sure, if you feel the refs are strong enough. I would definitely use the most updated content, with the most updated formatting, if you can cobble the two together. If you move it to the mainspace, then try to clean up the duplicate situation. If you delay, then just copy paste one to the other. No need for merge here. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 07:35, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

But one way or the other, please solve the duplicate problem. You can use redirect or zap one with {{db-g6}} Anna Frodesiak (talk) 07:36, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict)I am going to redirect it. That will be quick. Nevertheless, you may {{db-g6}} it if you deem it necessary. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 07:44, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

• thanks all for helping me out. Kindly zap one which you feel like. Actually I myself wanted to do on which the 'review thing' wasn't coming i.e. 'Singh Rashmi' but being a new editor wasn't able to. Please solve the duplicate issue. Thanks once againAnanyaprasad (talk) 07:41, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Don't mention it. Wikipedia is a collaborative process. I told you. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 07:44, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

 Done Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 07:47, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Oh, crap. I was just tarting up the one that you felt was better, Mrt. I still believe that it is. - Sitush (talk) 07:59, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I see you have redirected to that one. All's good, and I've finished fiddling with it. - Sitush (talk) 08:01, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Well done. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 08:02, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

This one User:Ananyaprasad/sandbox looks to be in better shape. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 08:03, 5 October 2012 (UTC) Consider copying the infobox and books section and lede etc. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 08:04, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Sitush:
Damn, you know how to make your edits count. You took 13 edits to touch the submission up which you could have done in 1 (pun intended). Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 08:06, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Deliberate. Doing it this way means that each edit summary counts: you can explain every detail, which is particularly useful for newbies. - Sitush (talk) 08:08, 5 October 2012 (UTC)