User talk:Reconsider the static/Archive 2

Talkback

Hello, Reconsider the static. You have new messages at Valley2city's talk page.
Message added 05:54, 5 January 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Valley2city^‽ 05:54, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for taking care of that vandalism on my talk page, looks like the editor was pretty persistent. HistoryStudent113^{(talk to me)} 16:31, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank You!!! --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 11:53, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Rsrikanth05 has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Royall Advertising

I think the best course for this would be for those who know something about it to provide proper references that clearly establish notability. However User:Autumnthomas1 had made no edits since creating this, unless he is the IP who made this edit. If this is his idea of proper referencing, it won't fly. In the absence of someone willing to make a proper article out of this -- particularly willing to do the needed research in print archives, since it may not be available online, to find proper sources, a proposed deletion probably works.

I'm not clear if you are hoping to save this or to delete it or what. if you want to save it, all that is needed IMO is to find and properly cite references establishing minimal notability. DES ^(talk) 17:01, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

See more details at Talk:Royall Advertising#Awards DES ^(talk) 18:12, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

It is pretty clsoe to the line on notability one way or the other now. Maybe too close for Prod, which is after all suppsoed to be for clear cut cases. Maybe wait a bit, and see if there are further improvements. If not, put it up for AfD and get community consensus on the issue. DES ^(talk) 12:44, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Qatar University Library

I suspect that the topic is notable. I removed the copyvio and pov text from the article and turned it into a stub. - Eastmain (talk) 09:21, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for reverting my scriptblockers bad behaviour on the Talk:Database page. I really panicked for some seconds when everything was gone *g*
greetz Cari-Kira (talk) 02:19, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Burmese martial arts

I'm reverting all the Burmese martial arts articles back to my previous revisions. In their current state, the articles are poorly written and list the same citations which I know for a fact weren't always used as references. And please read some other martial arts articles to see what an infobox should look like.Morinae (talk) 09:37, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Accusations of bad faith in the Vivek Kundra article

Hi, I know you mean well, but I think you are exacerbating a problem in the Vivek Kundra article by making vague accusations of account abuse, ala Sock Puppets, single purpose accounts, and SPI (what is that?), without actually naming who it is you have a problem with. In my opinion, you are behaving in a passive aggressive way, and it is not even clear who you are upset with. Wikipedia has a process for dealing with account abuse, and I think it is better if you follow it. Wrongful assumption of bad faith is I think almost as damaging as actual bad faith.

Just in case you are worried about my account, and I really cannot tell from your comments who you are worried about, this is my only account and I have used it for all edits since I created it. I have made the effort to become an expert on the topic of Vivek Kundra, the Fed CIO office, and the 2 contentious issues that have troubled that article. That is a good thing. WP needs topic experts. I will no doubt one day become interested in a more rewarding article and turn my attention there. Seasoned editors should collaborate with topic experts because together they can write a better article than either could separately. Anyway, thanks for your work on the article, hope this helps. Truprint (talk) 00:23, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification of your comments. I understand your concern about account abuse, it is a frustrating problem. Truprint (talk) 07:26, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Re:AIV blocking policy

I guess every admin there has some philosophy, which is hard to express in a few words though - it would be easier to answer more specific questions. Materialscientist (talk) 09:21, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

On duration: there are several variables, which might explain the differences: (i) "static/dynamic" - there is no use blocking a hopping IP for long or to block it if there is no recent activity; (ii) shared/non-shared - shared are usually static, but can have positive contribs too, hard to tell who is editing any given moment. (iii) schools - those are rarely positive on WP (iv) character of edits, past blocks, warnings, who and how issues them, etc., etc. After all, deciding the length is not exact science and thus there are deviation even for the same admin. Materialscientist (talk) 09:45, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Jonathan King

Thanks for your welcome. I've just read Jonathan King's biography 65 My Life So Far and have made changes on his article based on the photographic evidence included therein - not on the text but on cuttings and clippings reproduced. As you are a recent editor could you check and see they are acceptable? I've explained each in Talk. I'm not a fan but the same age and feel Wikipedia should reflect the facts and not bias either for or against him.Aliceinsprings (talk) 09:22, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. All edits seem to have been reverted anyway. Someone clearly thinks all the articles carried in the book are forgeries! Aliceinsprings (talk) 16:55, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

For [1]. I hope that was the highlight of the IP's day. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 09:29, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

WP:FEED

Thanks for pitching in and helping out here! – ukexpat (talk) 17:58, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Grenades

SIR, As is clearly attested by Pollio's magnum opus De Bellum Civicum, the "fiery blast of the packed earth" figured prominently in the Civic Wars of the late Roman Republic. Kindly do not revert what is established fact. 168.122.13.212 (talk) 00:01, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

ANI

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic Wikipedia:Ani#Prod_edit_warring. Thank you. Toddst1 (talk) 14:17, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Relevant to that, I think you should read Wikipedia:Prod, specifically the part that says:

2. If any person objects to the deletion (usually by removing the {{prod}} tag), the proposal is aborted and may not be re-proposed.

Toddst1 (talk) 14:20, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Toddst1, the issue I see here is that based on the IP edit summaries, it's pretty clear that the editor was being WP:POINTy by removing the prods. This, I believe is one of the few grounds where restoring the prod nomination is acceptable. —Farix (t | c) 14:37, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Policy does not say that the objection needs to be reasoned. Just that it has to happen. Once it does, the article should be brought to AFD instead. It's far too easy to justify re-prodding by simply denouncing the contesting user as being POINTy or disruptive which is why WP:PROD explicitly does not require the edit to be good-faith. Regards SoWhy 15:36, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

According to WP:CONTESTED, the exception to the rule is if "removals that are clearly not an objection to deletion, such as page blanking or obvious vandalism". Given the nonsensical nature of the edit summaries, it is obvious that there is no clear objection and that the person is simply being disruptive. Also the subsequent actions of the IP is typical of trolling behaviour; being intentionally disruptive and then acting indignant and trying to game the system when confronted.-Reconsider! 04:31, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Article banners

Hello. The Priceline (Australia) article has two banners. Since the issues raised by the banners have now been addressed, is it possible to remove them? Smallworldsocial (talk) 03:32, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Issue 1: Promotional undertone - the article is written objectively and all information is verifiable against reliable sources. Which specific parts of the article are you referring to?

Issue 2: Section 'Change of logo and brand refresh' - this section highlights the Company's recent branding transition. The logo is of historical significance in terms of design and brand notoriety. If this heading is of concern, it can be removed and the logos placed in the 'Marketing' section. There are examples of other company articles that have sections devoted to the change of a historic logo. See: marketing of Marks & Spencer

Section 'Products' - there are examples of other company articles that have provided a comprehensive list of consumer products. See: consumer brands of Johnson & Johnson Smallworldsocial (talk) 04:44, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks but still unclear?

Thank you for taking the time to comment on my request for review for User:Weemz/Enviralment and for providing me with other areas to look into. However I'm still unclear as to what needs to be changed, if anything, on my submission. Has it been rejected? Still being looked over? Being new I'm a still a little unclear on the whole submission process. Any guidance or help on this would be greatly appreciated. Thank you --Weemz (talk) 19:32, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Cheers for reverting the vandalism on my user page. Have a good day! — AustralianRupert (talk) 11:57, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Teaching Writing in the United States

Thank you for editing my page.I am an educator, I use Wikipedia frequently and noticed that Wikipedia seemed to need more articles on education. This is my first shot. I appreciate any and all feedback.Diana Leddy (talk) 12:00, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for all the time you have put into my article, it is much improved and I am learning by studying your changes.Diana Leddy (talk) 00:00, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

I was wondering what I still need to do to get the the "New Unreviewed Article" template removed from my page.The page has been up since February 7; it has been edited (and improved) by several people and I have followed all the suggestions given (no further comments have been made this week). How does the process work from here? Thanks!Diana Leddy (talk) 19:14, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

I will continue to work on it. As a first time contributor, it was very helpful to have your guidance- thanks!Diana Leddy (talk) 00:15, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion rationale of Greg's Number

Hi, you requested it be deleted as patent nonsense. However, the words were clear. The G1 criterion is limited to garbage like "asoiu asflknoweirf kljwe", not something that may meet a more general definition of nonsense. I did delete it on the G3 vandalism criterion. LadyofShalott 01:39, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

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

Kennington (UK Parliament constituency)

The information deleted from the Kennington page is election boxes with no information on the results added. They should remain off the page until someone has the data to hand to add. 88.211.192.151 (talk) 10:50, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

EKD

What do you mean with corrected translation? Evangelical Church in Central Germany is just the perfect translation and in line with the largest Lutheran church body in the USA (Evangelical Lutheran Church in America). You also may look here http://www.oikoumene.org/en/member-churches/regions/europe/germany.html --Mk4711 (talk) 10:58, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

User talk:Lala2ff

Why would anybody assume good faith for this edit? It's clearly intentional vandalism. And there is no requirement to issue low-level warnings, as backed by multiple ANI threads. 67.180.84.239 (talk) 07:01, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

In such a strong case, the appropriate template would have been {{uw-vandalism4im}}, rather than {{uw-vandalism4}}. "Final" looks kind of silly without previous warnings to back it up.   — Jeff G. ツ 07:04, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Editor Review: done

I have done an editor review for you at Wikipedia:Editor review/Reconsider the static/Archive 2. Perhaps you could consider doing a review of another editor? It takes a bit of time (reviews can take anywhere from about 15 minutes up to 2 hours, depending on how many contributions the editor has made, where they have contributed, etc). The ones marked with a * are those editors who have not been reviewed yet — if you want to review one of these, make sure you remove the asterisks in the parts indicated! If you have not done a review before, you might feel more comfortable giving a second review to an editor — this will show you an example of a review that has been done, and show you the kinds of things that can be commented on. I hope that you find the review useful. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions about it. Regards, -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 19:37, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Prod to AfD

I saw that you nominated Skye englert for Prod. I have restored the tag after repeated removals. Shadowjams procedurally nominated it for AFD. Feel free to add your explanation at that page. I have already replied. Thanks! ^Avicenna_sis @ 09:56, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Re:Almost Famous

I don't know. Did you read the content? Its basically random, unless facts. Besides, Cultural references aren't nessessary in movie articles. Ex: American Beauty. GamerPro64 (talk) 00:52, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Athabasca University

Hey, I saw the tag you placed on this article about the style/tone. I was wondering if I could get the 411 on that since nothing was left on the article's talk page. Thanks! --Me-123567-Me (talk) 04:10, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi!

Hello Reconsider the static, Narutolovehinata5 has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

You're pretty good at New Page Patrol ;) Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 10:13, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

FYI

you might want to check on this Adam Gyorgy. I noticed you tagged the AFD and was taken off by author. I'll re-place it once I don't need a conflect, I got my own stuff going on. But It does'nt look like it meets anything to un-tagg. Hey let me what happens. Mlpearc MESSAGE 23:31, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

• If I'm wrong i do apologize, but I feel I'm correct on this one. Also no discussion on talk page Mlpearc MESSAGE 23:37, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

• No problem, my bad on the tag title. I just noticed the editor removed it, Did'nt look right so I replaced it (I guess the wrong tag). Anyway I knew nothing about your edits with the user but I new something was wrong, so I replaced "A" tag. And wanted to give you a "headsup" Mlpearc MESSAGE 04:28, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Assyrian Fascism

Dear Reconsider the static,
I would like to thank you for your input on the article. This article might not be neutral; however, is it possible to write an article about Nazi Fascists (for example) without being biased? Does that mean we shouldn't write about the atrocities committed by such fascists?
Again, thank you for your time and your input.
Best Regards, --Tisqupnaia2010 (talk) 08:16, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your welcome message

Reconsider the static:

I just wish to say thank you very much for the new user welcome message you left to me. If there is something you will like to recommend on the articles I created (only one so far :) ) and edited, I will be very happy to hear.

I notice a lot of articles that relates to somewhat detailed Meteorology articles will probably require clarification, and I will look forward in editing it.

Anyway, I just wish to step by and say thank you again.

Have a good day Scchan (talk) 06:07, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Not a living person

Hi, you added a "biography of living person" tag to John T. Windrim, who, in fact, has been dead since 1934.--BillFlis (talk) 14:48, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Feedback for Specialised Articles

Hello, thanks very much for your welcome message. I have written a short article about a political theory called Curvilinear Disparity. It is actually a fairly straightforward theory with a complex sounding name. I noticed that it is not yet covered on Wikipedia although it is fairly frequently included in comparative politics syllabi in Universities. I requested feedback a few days ago but there has been no response so far. I am not impatient about this, but I do recognise that it is a somewhat specialised topic, so should I perhaps ask over at the politics section also or is that unnecessary? Eoinjones (talk) 11:14, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Ok that's fine, thanks for your time, it is my first time posting an article and I had been encouraged to seek feedback before going live so I wanted to go through the correct channels.

Apologies!

Sorry about that accidental revert. Huggle is acting up my end, sorry! Mouse Nightshirt | talk 14:00, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi & congrats!

Hi, I've seen you around on your anti-vandalism rounds. I'd like you to accept this as a sign of your efforts. If you want a more diverse choice, see User: Deagle_AP/Fire Team Alpha. It's a personal project of mine. Keep it up! Deagle_AP (talk) 05:47, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

FTAThis user is persistent in the fight against vandalism. Hence, the user has been entrusted with membership into Wikipedia's Fire Team Alpha.

Speedy tags

Thank you grabed the wrong ones Mlpearc MESSAGE 07:23, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

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

Deagle_AP (talk) 13:14, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks...

... for the chocolate! Best way to start the day! :) --BelovedFreak 09:43, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Well thankyou; that's very kind.--BelovedFreak 09:56, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Enochlophobia

It was a valid article, albeit with a slightly misleading edit summary. {{Sonia|talk|simple}} 07:30, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

My bad, my immediate reaction was that it was a hoax. I've should've done a search before jumping to conclusions.-Reconsider! 07:38, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

That's fine. It's been re-speedied for something else now... I would have liked to keep it. :P {{Sonia|talk|simple}} 07:40, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Hello. I think that you've judged rather the edit summary than the article's content :) --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 08:41, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Well it was actually the title, as it reminded me of Enoch Powell. It didn't seem like a plausible condition. -Reconsider! 12:36, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Al-Mazar, Jenin

Hi, thank for your note on Al-Mazar, Jenin. I just started expanding it, as I saw Guerin had written a lot about the place. And you might be interested to know that the article has now been nominated for DYK, Cheers, Huldra (talk) 19:41, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Youvan Deletion

Please see my talk page and recent edit on Youvan. Bridgettttttte (talk) 16:29, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

• Sorry, new to this, maybe on the article's discussion page. Anyway, it's under the article's history. Bridgettttttte (talk) 16:32, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

THANKS FOR WELCOME

Hi Reconsider, Thank you for the welcome note! I appreciate it. I have created my first page and put up the draft at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:CHrabbit/Draft_Hsu_Dau-lin If you have time to take a look I would much appreciate comments. I am not sure if (or how) to flag it as a stub when it first goes up, how many categories I should list, and whether (or how) to include a biography infobox. Thank you!--CHrabbit (talk) 12:48, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Album article/user

The user u reverted on the Raymond v. Raymond article has been vandalizing the page, removing and replacing sourced material. I have discussed his issues on the article's talk page but I think I am dealing with some fan of the album. (Article's history of the edits can be of use aswell) I dont want to cross the line with reverting anymore so I am asking for your help with this matter. Dan56 (talk) 19:42, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Good lookin out. Dan56 (talk) 19:09, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Comment on editor review

An editor is allowed to have multiple reviews and that is generally also the best thing for the user. I do not in anyway consider myself the expert in reviewing, but most of the ER's never get done, so I figure something is better than nothing. So please, feel free to do a full review of Deagle AP. Your comments are much appreciated. PrincessofLlyr ^{royal court} 12:51, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Er, what do you mean by a 'meeting' exactly? Deagle_AP (talk) 06:15, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Reconsider the static. You have new messages at Deagle AP's talk page.
Message added 11:16, 13 May 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Deagle_AP (talk) 11:16, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

I am adding reference material back

give me little lime. sorry--Juckfew (talk) 05:51, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the help on Hsu Dau-lin.

Thank you for answering the question on my Hsu Dau-lin draft page. I was travelling for work and just got back. I've now moved the page to main space. I figured I should probably have a redirect page from "Dau-lin Hsu" and "Xu Daolin" but wasn't sure if I needed to make those on my user page first and then move or if it is possible to create those pages directly? Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by CHrabbit (talk • contribs) 15:44, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Message above on Hsu Dau-lin

Oops, I forgot to sign my message a minute ago. Sorry!!!CHrabbit (talk) 15:47, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome :)

Hello Reconsider the static

Thanks for your welcome message. I am enjoying contributing to Wikipedia immensely.

Best Regards JembanaJembana (talk) 06:48, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Amén

Hey please help me with the article "Amén". It is an important band in Peru. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sunlight14 (talk • contribs) 12:31, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Hello, Thanks for the walm welcome to Wikipedia, hopefully I can get started on some articles and editing! AndrewMerrell (talk) 14:06, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for helping me out on Khaled K. El-Hamedi, and just to let you know i'm not a native speaker of English and this is my first edit , so i'll need all the help that i can get .... Thanks again . --Sami70 (talk) 11:03, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: 9/11 Mosque

Hello Reconsider the static, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of 9/11 Mosque - a page you tagged - because: Structures aren't eligible for A7, and the mosque seems to meet WP:GNG. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. decltype (talk) 13:40, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Hmm I used the tag under the assumption that it could be viewed as an 'organization'. I still think that it should be deleted, per WP:NOTCRYSTAL. -Reconsider! 14:05, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, perhaps. I can see the argument for not having an article about a not-yet-built building, but AfD would be the venue to discuss that. decltype (talk) 14:11, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Editor Review (Susfele)

Hi! I'm sorry I didn't drop by earlier and thank you for taking the time to review my editing practices. I was getting a little antsy, not really knowing if I were on the right track, and I found your review reassuring. Thank you. --Susfele (talk) 01:37, 31 May 2010 (UTC)