User talk:ReaderofthePack/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 10

Alert!

Help is at hand. See This and contact Loginerupdated on his talk page. If it can be determined that the topic merits being an exception to the cautions at WP:NFF, it will be welcomed back to mainspace. But it will need to be much more comprehensive and far better sourced in order to survive before its Augist 2012 release. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 19:48, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Just learned that you have visted his page. Keep up the smiles. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 20:06, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

talk

Thanks for the wordy and quite kind post. Apologies for the error; Previous user didn't explain what the correct way of handling it was. --RichardMills65 (talk) 03:31, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

• Eh, no worries. (I was pretty verbose, huh?)Tokyogirl79 (talk) 03:36, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

a good start...

See my comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beauty and the Beast (2009 film). The 2009 and 2003 films were shot at different times, at different locations, and by different production companies. Only thing they share in common is the director... apparently selling his idea a second time. I do note that the earlier film has been retitled and think that this current one perhaps could be retitled... but it does have enough decent sources available to show independent notability. At the AFD you can see only a few of the many I found when my own google-foo kicked in. Good looking out. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 23:59, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Researcher's Barnstar

		Researcher's Barnstar
		I am both pleased and honored to present you with the Researcher's Barnstar in appreciation for your work in finding sources showing Beauty and the Beast (2009 film) as worthy enough for inclusion with Wikipedia as a separate article. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 00:04, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

I Survived BTK

Thanks for taking the time to respond. In response, I would like to inquire about your sources which lead you to believe that the film was released in Canada in 2007 and if you have any information on who supposedly distributed it. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.85.88.186 (talk) Caramelx129 08:13, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

• This link has 2007 marked as the date of release.[1] This link [2] is for a 2008 award, which are 99.9% of the time given out the year following the film's release. (So they can take all of the films released that year into consideration.) As far as who distributed it, I maybe the site would remember?Tokyogirl79 (talk) 08:23, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

A pedantic question

Hi, my apologies but I've a bit of a follow-up question for your !vote here. One issue I'd like clarification of is whether you think the murder itself, or Bart Whitaker, are notable. I'm honestly not sure, and I don't have enough experience with BLP1E to say. Any clarification would be greatly appreciated (but of course, feel free to decline if you're not sure yourself). Thanks, WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 19:13, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

I wanna thank you...

...for lighting the way. Encouraged by the sources you brought to the article and by those I brought to the AFD, the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beauty and the Beast (2009 film) was quickly closed as keep/withdrawn by the nominator. Perhaps he might look beyond current state and judge stubs a bit less harshly in the future. Anyway... the stub has now gone through a 21x expansion and become a C-class since its nomination. We have enough sources to expand it much further... but perhaps you might suggest an interesting and suitable DYK for such this film, by which we could draw in additional editor? Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 23:02, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Re: potential conflict of interest

Thank you for the information, Tokyogirl79. I'm new here so I didn't immediately know how to respond. Anyway, to address your very valid concerns I do not know any of the authors I have edited/created, although I admit do follow Nathan Farrugia on Twitter and I have subscribed to his blog. Despite this, I am trying to remain as neutral as possible. Your edits have helped greatly and I've continued to improve on my Wiki pages since then. It's actually been a fun challenge to strip away as many primary sources as possible. I'm still using primary sources for everyone's date of birth and place of birth, but I'm hoping that's permissible. Thank you again. Zippy2012 (talk) 14:56, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Konrath article

Why did you bother doing all that work on the J.A. Konrath article? He's a nobody. Are we to give full encyclopedia entries to every bad ebook writer who can't keep his mouth shut? That article is a perfect example of why Wikipedia will never be taken seriously. 174.91.6.120 (talk) 18:52, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

• Maybe he's a nobody to you and maybe even I don't really see what all of his fuss is about, but that does NOT mean that we should refrain from adding sources to an article. Konrath has been quoted in multiple journals as well as having been reviewed in several independent and reliable sources, which shows notability per Wikipedia guidelines. I can't help but feel that you personally dislike Konrath. Outside of editing Wikipedia, there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. When you begin to edit an article that's when you need to leave personal biases at the door. Personal bias is NEVER a good reason to keep from improving an article or to suggest that it should be removed because you don't like the writer, don't agree with him, or think that he's overly vocal. As far as being less respected, I would think that Wikipedia would be taken less seriously for letting our personal feelings get in the way of improving an article or trying to rescue something from deletion. No offense meant, but he seems to pass notability guidelines and personal emotions should not stand in the way of editing. Also, please refrain from editing AfD discussions after they've been closed. If you have any issues with the results, feel free to bring it up at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Tokyogirl79 (talk) 19:04, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

• I don't have anything personal against him but based on what you've written above clearly you're letting emotion negatively affect your judgement. His being vocal isn't an argument against inclusion but apparently one for it. He writes a blog and contributes to others but that and the few mentions in legitimate non-blog media aren't enough to warrant an article on him. Should he have an entry when so many others of the same degree do not simply because he makes more noise? No. The inclusion of people like that does make Wikipedia look bad. It makes it seem amateur, a place where anyone can have an entry as long as they have a few sources for the details of their unremarkable career. 76.64.153.241 (talk) 01:22, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

• Well, you've got to see it from my point of view. I find enough sources to show that Konrath passes Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Not my guidelines, Wikipedia's. I get a note from someone saying that the article should be removed because they personally don't think that he's notable, that he's a bad writer, that he can't keep his mouth shut, etc. To me that comes across as you saying that the article should be removed because you personally don't like Konrath, which is against the spirit of Wikipedia. We don't remove articles because someone doesn't like them, nor do we remove them even if the article subject doesn't exactly fit the idea of a respected writer. If you have nothing against Konrath, then that's great- it just comes across to me like your reasons behind wanting the article to be deleted are more from a personal point of view than from a WP:AUTHOR POV. This is just the way Wikipedia works. If you can find enough coverage for someone over long enough periods of time, then yes- that would show notability per Wikipedia's guidelines. The thing is, if you have a problem with it then you should sign up with an account and take part in some of the discussions on the talk pages for notability for individual people. Coming onto my page and complaining doesn't accomplish anything, nor does vandalizing the AfD page. If you want the standards of Wikipedia to be changed to be more strict, then WP:BEBOLD and do something about it. Just make sure that you back up your ideas with something more that WP:IDONTLIKEIT because there are a lot of people who don't want things changed. Am I one of them? Sometimes. I happen to agree that some of the standards for notability are rather wide, but unless I am going to actively try to change something and complain about it in the forums that can actually do something about it, then my complaining is pretty meaningless. Seriously, rather than complaining on my talk page you should try going to Wikipedia talk:Notability (people) and try to start changing Wikipedia policies there. I'm glad that you feel that you can be vocal with me and I encourage that, but this just doesn't really accomplish much because I'm neither an admin nor someone that has the time to go about changing Wikipedia notability guidelines because stuff like that takes a lot of time. Tokyogirl79 (talk) 05:26, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thanks for the brownie! I appreciate it.

CyberGhostface (talk) 16:41, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 7

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Blackbriar (novel) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Young adult

The Spirit House (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Young adult

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:05, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

The Secret Footballer

Hi Tokyogirl, I have removed the speedy deletion tag from The Secret Footballer, being a contributor to the Guardian is enough of an assertion of importance to not qualify for speedy deletion, if you still think it should be deleted, feel free to take the article to AfD. Cheers, --kelapstick^(bainuu) 02:14, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Louis Tomlinson (2nd nomination)

The one person who's quite vocal there seems to be quite young and jumpy. I don't think whatever anyone says will really change the user's behavior. I'm no good at explaining stuff to kids; we might need someone who is good at that. Lynch7 18:49, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Christian Post

No, I don't think even the blogs section of Christian Post can generally be used per WP:SPS. The news there should be fine, of course. But this registration form implies that anyone can have a blog at CP. StAnselm (talk) 21:24, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

You know somethin' I don't?

"this isn't exactly a self-published book" - I've looked at Leadstart and they appear conventional. Have I missed something? (Currently can't even get into the site...) PS You can chuck Doritos at me any time. Peridon (talk) 13:25, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

• Lol, I was sort of being a little facetious when I said that. It looks like Leadstart is an actual publisher, but is one of the ones where they pick up the books and then do absolutely nothing with them publicity-wise, essentially making the author do all of the work as if they'd published them via CreateSpace.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 13:29, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

• That could perhaps explain why I couldn't find the book there, but there were some others listed (I think). Can't get into the site at all at the moment - not just a quick glitch, it's been inaccessible for me for some hours. I was suspicious when I deleted the first article in March and couldn't find anything at Leadstart, but surely they would at least put the book up on their site? Lulu and all the other usual suspects do that much for the aspiring writer, and with CreateSpace you're on Amazon (of course). Lulu are quite good in that respect, in fact. Oh now, look what I've just found: http://www.hotfrog.in/Products/Self-Publishing Well, well. "As the India's fastest growing book publishers we help authors to publish their manuscripts quickly." And another - http://in.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110107052911AAEZuXS Yahoo! Answers isn't a reliable source for answers, but it it a reliable source for questions? Peridon (talk) 15:12, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

• Not really- anyone can answer questions there, so many times questions can be outright wrong or used for promotional purposes. In this specific case though, this looks like the answerer really knows what they're talking about. Unfortunately I don't know if YA is really usable as a source or not. I've never really asked about it. You could certainly use it as fuel for the AfD, though.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 04:57, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Talkback from Allen4names

Hello, ReaderofthePack. You have new messages at Allen4names's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Charles Brokaw

When I redirected this name after closing the AfD, I was surprised to find five incoming links from film articles referring to this guy who has evidently been a redlink up to now, though on the basis of these references is probably as notable as the pseudonymous author. I have turned him back into a redlink at Charles Brokaw (actor) to encourage somebody to write his article. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 10:14, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Expewikiwriter

I've moved your investigation request here, since the user had the other name first, it appears we are supposed to add new requests under the old name. I've asked Moonriddengirl if there is some better way to do this. You'll see there is already an open CU request that includes the Nathan Ballard editors that has been there a week and was summarized and endorsed yesterday. Cheers, Valfontis (talk) 14:52, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

• Cool! Thanks- I wasn't sure if there was one or not. I thought I'd looked, but I guess I didn't look hard enough. Sorry about that!Tokyogirl79 (talk) 16:45, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

No worries. It is confusing! Valfontis (talk) 17:47, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

That book

Can you get into leadstartcorp.com or frogbooks.net? I just get as far as 'Connecting to...' and after a while, it times out. Been like that for days. Peridon (talk) 15:10, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Home Care Assistance

Responded to you there. 86.** IP (talk) 03:02, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Fifty Shades of Grey

Hello! Your submission of Fifty Shades of Grey 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! Imzadi 1979 → 01:49, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 25

Hi. When you recently edited Carolyn Lamm, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Washingtonian (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) 10:22, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Dunn

Thanks for the help with getting rid of all the Dunn content. It is rather annoying when people try to use Wikipedia as a mere promotional tool. (It's also kind of pathetic...I think my "favorite" edit of his was when he listed himself as a notable alum from his high school.)

Sure!

Hello Tokyo Girl,

Thank you for the info' given just now re- the discussion going on. After a stormy introduction to each other, I would like to believe that we may now be friends. How about you? Cheers, Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 17:30, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

• Hey, no problem - I absolutely have no problem with becoming friends here on Wikipedia! After all, I saw in your edit history that you've worked on the James Rollins articles and hey, anyone who is a fan of Rollins has got to have some pretty good taste! Tokyogirl79 (talk) 03:42, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Well done! Seen the result on the Charles Brokaw redirect. It was what you wanted, wasn't it? Knew we had some things in common. I have read all the Sigma Force novels in chronological order and looking forward to the next. Devil Colony did not get published here till early 2012. Also read more than half of the "stand- alone" books, eespecially liked Amazonia and Ice Hunt. How about you? Best wishes, Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 23:13, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

• I have to say that Amazonia is one of my favorites as well! There's just something about ruins in the middle of a jungle that's so exciting! I'm also a big fan of Scott Sigler (most of his books are free in their podcast formats), Douglas Preston & Lincoln Child, and Andy McDermott. I'm pretty much of the persuasion that as long as a book contains historical mysteries and people shooting at each other, I'm probably going to like it. XD Tokyogirl79 (talk) 03:34, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

I was glad to receive your list of authors the other day. Always good to have some recommendations. Here's one for you that I have just discovered. I am currently reading the 2010 novel, THE DEATH INSTINCT by JED RUBENFELD. Very good style, excellent English, gripping story. I shall certainly try to get hold of his first novel. He is an American lawyer/author and lives in New Haven, Connecticut. This is his second book. His first, called "The Interpretation of Murder" held the number 1 slot in the Sunday Times chart for seven weeks. They are published here in the UK by HEADLINE REVIEW, which is an Hatchette UK Company. Kind regards, -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 12:38, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

AFD Sharepoint

I will take a look at it later and try assist as much as i can my initial look at it and google searchs might mean it will be hard but i will assist the new editors where i can, but i can give completely gartantees to time just now, since my wife is about 40 weeks pregnant and could go into labour any time form now until 2 weeks away--Andrewcrawford (talk - contrib) 13:09, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Remember Alice Walsh?

This was a hoax. Glad to know that we handled it correctly. :)
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► 21:59, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

• That's a little irritating, to be honest. I understand the idea behind it, but really... it's a waste of our time for them to continually do this. Unless they're going to be removing this stuff after the semester is over, this is pretty much the equivalent of vandalizing a page. Yeesh, they should just block the entire campus from editing if this is what they're going to do. Like the article said, there's not a lot of us left and we don't have time for one professor's cute little idea to troll the internet.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 06:22, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Chyren Selin, Nostradamus and other nonsense

Hi Tokyogirl, mmm, not sure we're getting anywhere trying to persuade this guy ... not sure rational explanation is exactly his thing ;-} (maybe it only encourages him) ..... Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:26, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for saving The Dead Fathers Club

I just wanted to extend a warm and hearty thank you for saving The Dead Fathers Club. This was part of a school project done by a student in my class who did his very best but did not properly document on the talk page (as required by the assignment...) the fact that it was a part of the project. His sandbox, which has some good articles cited, is here. Again, thank you so much. I'm glad his new article landed in such good hands. I'll keep it on my watchlist and continue working on improving it this summer. Best, Roseclearfield (talk) 15:02, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

'Paranormalcy'

Hi. I restored the citation you removed per WP:BLP. It may not be Time magazine but the interview cites direct statements from the person discussed in the article. -- James26 (talk) 20:16, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

I agree. It's certainly not School Library Journal or anything. But I'm not using it as a source of news or review -- I was just using it to cite a statement on the author's part. If I've read things correctly, I don't think there's anything wrong with that unless the site carries a poor reputation. -- James26 (talk) 04:29, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Alex De Pase

Hello Tokyogirl79. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Alex De Pase, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: I do not think this is now promotional enough in tone for WP:CSD#G11. there may be promotional intent, but that's another matter. Let the AfD take care of it. Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 17:22, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

File:ELJamesAuthorPhoto.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:ELJamesAuthorPhoto.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Fixer23 (talk) 08:52, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

inre Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tomie: Re-birth

My sense is that the nominator did not feel accepted reliable genre sources were unsuitable, and that his search for sourcing for this Japanese film was perhaps limited to English sources only. You were wise to point out that we likely have Japanese sources, and I have thus begun improvements to the stub he nominated. While like any film from a series, it deserves mention in the film series article, I belive that as a start class, it serves the project to allow it to remain as a separate article and be improved over time and through regular editing. Best, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 17:54, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for revisiting the article and the discussion. Best, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 19:08, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Luka Magnotta AFD4

Hi, your input is requested at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Luka Magnotta (4th nomination), per your previous comments at the third AFD. Regards, -Stevertigo (t | c) 03:50, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Researcher's Barnstar

		Researcher's Barnstar
		I am both pleased and honored to present you with the Researcher's Barnstar in appreciation for your superb work in finding sources showing Tapped (documentary) as a topic notable enough for en.Wikipedia, and your understanding that notability is not dependent upon truth or lack, but is based upon coverage in reliable sources. Good job! Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 19:05, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

speedy deletion of Duotrope

As best I can tell, less than four hours went by between the time you nominated Duotrope for speedy deletion and the time you deleted it. That seems too speedy to me. I protested to one of the people on the list of people to protest to, but never heard back, so I'm contacting you directly.

Duotrope is a resource used by many writers. It is stable and has been around for a long time. Forty-four Wikipedia pages mention it. Your deletion has left a large number of red links. Here is an article about it: http://www.storysouth.com/comment/2006/08/duotropes_digest_an_interestin.html I respectfully request that you reconsider and restore the article.

Rick Norwood (talk) 12:39, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

• I'm actually not one of the people who can delete pages or restore them. I can nominate them for speedy deletion but that's about the extent of my abilities. As far as reasons to restore an article, you have to show notability per reliable sources, which I was unable to find. The source you provided is a blog entry, which cannot always be used as a reliable source. I notice that it does have a Wikipedia entry, but having an entry doesn't always guarantee that it's a usable source. There's a lot of sites on here that have entries that do not warrant them. Part of the issue I see with the article for storySouth is that it uses a lot of primary links to stories. Those stories might be notable in themselves, but that does not extend notability to storySouth and to be honest, should be avoided at all costs. (Primary links are only supposed to be used when the claims can be linked through reliable second-party sources, meaning that it should be largely unnecessary to link to them.) I'll have to go through and clean the article up and see if I can properly source it. In general blogs are not considered to be reliable sources unless they're by a notable person or someone who is considered to be such a complete authority that they're quoted repeatedly in scholarly journals, reliable sources, and/or books of the same type. As far as the redlinks and mentions go, being mentioned in other articles doesn't exactly bestow notability either. The notability of the subject of those articles (if there is notability) does not extend to Duotrope. (WP:NOTINHERITED) If the powers that be choose not to restore it, then all that means is that we remove the redlinks and if you so choose, work on a copy of the article in your userspace until you can show that the website has received enough coverage through reliable sources per Wikipedia to warrant re-adding. I must warn you, it must be a reliable source per WP:RS and it must be in-depth coverage. This means that you can't use blog entries, trivial mentions, press releases, or anything that would be considered WP:PRIMARY. If you have any questions over what might be considered a reliable source, feel free to ask myself or anyone on the Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 13:44, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

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

Stephen! ^Coming... 14:10, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the information. When I logged on at 8 AM on the morning of the 16th, I found your nomination for speedy deletion, and the article was gone, so I had no opportunity to discuss the subject before the article was removed. Is there any way to find out who deleted it, and request an extension to locate additional sources? Rick Norwood (talk) 12:08, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. I'll get in touch with Mike7. Rick Norwood (talk) 12:02, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

inre Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Agents of Secret Stuff (2010)

I have no idea what kind of shape the two previous versions were that had those two versions deleted,[3][4] but the current version... though it started off as pretty crappy,[5] has gone through some improvements.[6] What was nominated as a 93-word unsourced stub, is now somwhat better than when I found it. You are invited to revisit the article, and the above deletion discussion. Best, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 23:25, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

inre Smiley (2012 film)

I have myself performed some work on the article (as you might have noticed). And while a fair case could be made for a return to mainspace, it could result in an AFD and tussle between those who believe WP:NFF is a policy and those that understand that guideline does allow exceptions. I think if we wait a 4 to 6 weeks before returning it, the pre-release publcicity will give us more sources and thus allow a stronger case to be made for its return. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 21:17, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

• That's kind of what I was thinking as well... I didn't want it to get deleted just as it was moved to the mainspace again.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 03:37, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, ReaderofthePack. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Guardians of Ga'hoole: The Burning.
Message added 18:19, 25 July 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

We didn't copy Wikia, Wikia copied us. Michaelzeng7 (talk) 18:19, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Personality Plus

Please don't redirect an article that's the subject of an open AfD - that falls under the "must not be blanked" caution on the AfD tag. (As a note, I've closed the AfD with the redirect). Thanks. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 01:25, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

• Only problem is, I've seen tons of people do this before in the past (myself included) without anyone saying that it counted as blanking the page. I'm not saying that I am absolutely right, just that I've seen people do this for years without being told this.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 03:25, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Luis Felipe Lomelí

"All that he wants is another baby, he's gone tomorrow boy"!♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:05, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, well you did a fair too!♦ Dr. Blofeld

Articles created by User:CAMiller62

Over at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Daisy Chain (historical novel) you suggested that somebody should look into other articles created by User:CAMiller62. I am not an admin, but that has never stopped me before. Here, it lists only four:

1. The_Daisy_Chain_(historical_novel)
2. UmbrellaBank.com
3. Bill_Conner
4. University_of_the_Virgin_Islands_Research_and_Technology_Park

I have proposed the first for AfD, you have {{Proposed deletion}}'ed the second. Bill Conner looks notable to me. I am not sure about the fourth, but am not going to lose sleep about a university technology park. (If you wish to respond then please do so here.) HairyWombat 21:51, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Banshee Legend

In the AFD you said "This isn't a slur against the spirit world"... it's a good thing, too, because the spirit world has ways of getting back that we don't even want to think about!— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 13:29, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Re:Maquedasahag

Hello, sorry for the delay, I do not usually use my English user. As for your request, of course that helped. One suggestion: you can write me on my talk in Spanish so you can answer quickly, no matter what you do not know Spanish very well. After all, I do not know much English and I use Google. Greetings from Sahagun City.--Maquedasahag (talk) 03:21, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Nick Stone Missions

Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 16:03, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Administrators' noticeboard

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Statυs (talk) 13:41, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Cookie

I hereby present to you this cookie, just cause.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 17:30, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

back to you....

Addressed issues, fixed references, and feel it actually may be ready enough now for mainspace. When you referred the author to me (another well meaning newcomer caught in the Article Wizard trap), I took his article out of mainspace and placed back in his sandbox for work without the pressure of needing "immediate improvement else face deletion". Tone has been neutralized. Any "seeming" pov is directly atributed to sources. I found the topic itself has been covered in numerous books since 1964, and had made a spalsh of sorts back then. More, it was re-released 40 years later and meets several points of WP:NF#Other evidence of notability. AS you were the one who referred me, I now invite you to User:TheWriteGuy2/sandbox/Parable (film) for a re-evaluation. If you think it now has a better for survival chances, please move it to article space, alert the author, and ping me so I can correct the talk page and set the proper categories. Thanks, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 03:42, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Paige Clark

Hi, I saw that you put Paige Clark up for CSD. I don't know if you noticed, but it had been put up for CSD twice previously, and those had been removed. Anyhow, that's probably what will happen to yours as well, which is why I started the AFD. Feel free to put in your thoughts at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paige Clark. Dori ☾Talk ☯ Contribs☽ 05:00, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, ReaderofthePack. You have new messages at DoriSmith's talk page.
Message added 12:33, 16 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

GregJackP Boomer! 12:33, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Tim Clark (author)

Hi, thanks for your editing work on the various pages. Just regarding the Tim Clark page, I hope you read my note on the talk page. JoshuSasori (talk) 06:54, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 19

Hi. When you recently edited One on One (novel), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Print (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) 04:53, 19 August 2012 (UTC)