User talk:Sphilbrick/Archive 28

You're invited: Ada Lovelace, STEM women edit-a-thon at Harvard

U.S. Ada Lovelace Day 2012 edit-a-thon, Harvard University - You are invited!

Now in its fourth year, Ada Lovelace Day is an international celebration of women in science, technology, engineering, mathematics (STEM), and related fields. Participants from around New England are invited to gather together at Harvard Law School to edit and create Wikipedia entries on women who have made significant contributions to the STEM fields. Register to attend or sign up to participate remotely - visit this page to do either. 00:44, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Talkback 3dimen

Hello, Sphilbrick. You have new messages at 3dimen's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

First time, hope this is correct usage. 3dimen (talk) 05:24, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:NCAA Banner 1982.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:NCAA Banner 1982.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 08:44, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

I deleted it.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 11:48, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Requesting permission to print a photo

Hello Sphilbrick—

I apologize if this isn't the most efficient way to reach you, but I was having trouble finding an alternative. I work for the Appraisal Institute, an Illinois Not-for-Profit. We educate current and aspiring appraisers in the methods, techniques, standards, and ethics of real estate appraisal. Among the variety of materials we publish is the Appraisal Journal, a quarterly peer-reviewed journal focusing on particular property types and their appraisal challenges. For the Fall 2012 issue, we are running a feature on accessory dwelling units, and I found a photo of the Simsbury Historical Society carriage house that would be an excellent example to show our readers.

The Appraisal Journal has a circulation of nearly 20,000 appraisers and potential appraisers across the United States. Your photo will appear on the cover of the Fall 2012 issue exactly as it does in the original (except for resizing). I see that the photo is free to be licensed under the Creative Commons license, but I would be happy to give you specific photo credit, if you could let me know what language to include in the credit. I will also send you a PDF of the cover once it is complete and a printed copy of the Appraisal Journal if you would like.

Please send me an e-mail at

<redact>

to finalize any details or if you have any questions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.208.196.2 (talk) 16:33, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for contacting me. Yes, you can use it, although you don't need my permission. The most common route for permission requests is through OTRS (don't worry, if you don't know what that is). It is common enough that there is a canned answer, which I will reproduce below.

In principle all Wikipedia text is subject to the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License and can be used free of charge for any purpose. A specific permission for use is not necessary, as long as the license conditions are observed. Some text is also available under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL).

Images are identified as being subject to any of several licenses. Therefore it is advisable to check the image information page for the source and/or licensing information. Clicking on the image will lead you to the image information page. Most images are usually free to use as long as you give the proper credits and follow the terms of the license indicated on the image description page.

For more information please see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Copyrights and https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Reusing_content_outside_Wikimedia

If the licensing conditions of one image do not suit you, it may be possible to contact the author of that image for alternate conditions. See in the description page if the author's name is present.

Please note: Neither the Wikimedia Foundation, nor the authors of articles on Wikimedia sites, nor the volunteers answering on this channel provide legal advice. It is your responsibility, if you intend to reuse content from Wikimedia sites, to determine how the licenses of the content that we host apply to your intended uses.

I have couple meetings coming up shortly, but I will respond to the email address later today.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 16:46, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Redact what?

The comment he objected to was an offhand slang term for dying, "kicked it", which he claims indicates a personal bias towards Oxford. (For the record I have a personal bias against aristocracy in general, but no more so for Oxford than for any other member of that blood-sucking class of useless twits.) The blasphemous expletive, which I used to indicate the ridiculousness of his accusation, is irrelevant to the issue. Tom Reedy (talk) 15:51, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

"Kicked it" was rude, but I'd never ask anyone to redact that. Any editor who can't deal with that isn't going to make it here. OTOH, Jesus fucking Christ" did nothing to advance the argument,and gives the editor a thin reed to argue that conduct is an issue. You could remove that reed easily.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 16:01, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm worried my point may not be clear, so I'll try again. If I thought the expression were a violation of policy, I would have redacted it myself. I don't think it is a violation of policy, but it clearly offended an editor. The editor in question is making a number of ridiculous arguments, and it is quite fair to characterize the arguments thusly. However, I fear that a general disdain for the editors arguments is manifesting itself as a disdain for the editor. That line should not be crossed. It was crossed with the labeling of the section. I think carving off the section was a brilliant idea; while the choice of section name was less brilliant. I would find it easier to respond to the editor if I could say" all your arguments are ridiculous, knock it off" but you muddy the waters. I changed the section name, but I won't redact the expletive. I hoped you would.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 16:22, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

I really fail to see how "kicked it" could be construed as an insult, or even rude, except to someone who considers Oxford an object of religious devotion. It's consistent with a conversational style. As to the other, I'll change it to "H". Tom Reedy (talk) 16:24, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank-you. --SPhilbrick(Talk) 16:30, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Edward de Vere

Thank you very much again, User SPhilbrick. I really appreciate your kind advice concerning Tom Reedy, and I have already followed it. Please have a look on my recent editings on the Talk page of "Edward de Vere" and on WP:ANI. Best wishes, --Zbrnajsem (talk) 20:19, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank-you. I'm well aware that people can hold strong opinions, and that can spiral, especially if strong language is used. I appreciate that two of the involved parties have both agreed to cut back some of the stronger language. I don't pretend for a second that everything is resolved, but perhaps now we can settle down to a reasonable debate.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 20:33, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Re: Thanks

Your welcome. I was actually planning on promoting the nomination to the set of hooks I just finished building, but reconsidered after I noticed what a nice looking article you had put together and that the article had an image with a free license. No promises that the hook will land in a lead slot, but at least it still has a chance.

For future reference, the easy way to add an image to a nomination after it is already created is to find another nomination with an image and copy the three line HTML block containing that nomination's image into your nomination (the <div> tag surrounding the image controls the image placement). Then all you need to do is update the image name and image description. --Allen3 ^talk 20:12, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. In fact, I was heading in that direction, looking for another example so I could steal copy, but something came up. I do understand that having an image doesn't guarantee it will be the DYK with an image, but at least it now has a shot.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 20:16, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Maclean game refuge

Just saw that you tracked down that article I pointed out - thanks! 198.228.201.159 (talk) 03:37, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it was both interesting and helpful. Thanks.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 12:09, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Marcel Leroux citation table

Thanx for your work on that citation table. It looks like a lot of work, even if done in Excel. I can't imagine that my clumsy cutting and pasting preserved tabs very well. --Africangenesis (talk) 14:19, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

It wasn't too much work, but I feared that the original looked like a sea of text.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 15:33, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Me too, and made sure it was at the end. take care. --Africangenesis (talk) 04:39, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Tara VanDerveer

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:01, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Tara VanDerveer DYK

		The Running Man Barnstar
		Before you got to work, the article on a coach of the stature of VanDerveer was the next thing to a stub?? And now, the DYK aside, it's GA-level at least? Very well done. Ravenswing 02:02, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes very nice solid work on the article. --Erp (talk) 03:03, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you, very appreciated.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 12:50, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Incivility

Me? Baiting? Are you serious?!?! I think you will find I did not instigate the "fuck off" comment. Malleus posted the first comment which was addressed to me. Malleus had little reason to join in yet he posted a arrogant comment. He then responded with an unnecessary use of profanity which should not be condoned on Wikipedia under any circumstances.

"Seems like you learned nothing from the pig's ear you made of that MediaCityUK article Stevo. And so far as the content of the Architecture article goes, this is the top, so behave yourself"

Explain to me how that belittling comment is not "baiting"? I think you really need to look at conversation again. And Smithers vs "fuck off" is no comparison. I said that because I felt Malleus had little reason to butt in with a arrogant and irritating comment. Stevo1000 (talk) 23:20, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Here's the difference. The comment of Malleus, while strong, was a comment on content. Your response was not a comment on the article, but a shot at a contributor. I trust you are familiar with WP:NPA, where it says "Comment on content, not on the contributor." Malleus's response, while strongly worded, wasn't a personal attack, but a strong version of "stop that". I agree with you that there is no comparison, but not in the way you think. Your response was a personal attack. His was not. I don't like his choice of words, either in the first comment or the second, but that's a personal taste, not a policy conclusion. Your response was a violation of policy. --SPhilbrick(Talk) 10:45, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Malleus started it with a belittling designed to bait. I suppose you condone editors using profanity? How civil - it sets a great example. Two wrongs don't make a right. Stevo1000 (talk) 13:22, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

I haven't condoned using profanity, so your supposition is not based upon anything I have posted. I've said, more than once, that I do not like it. However, I find it difficult to make a strong case against MF when you start it. His comment to you was a comment on an article. Acceptable. Your response was a comment on an editor. Not acceptable. You appear to have convinced yourself that MF started it. While he posted first to you, his post was within policy. You were the first to violate policy. That distinction is critical. If you choose to respond again, please address that point, as it is the crux of the matter.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 13:41, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Obviously there is a difference of opinion. I think you're wrong for letting another editor use profanity and you think I'm wrong for saying Smithers. Malleus has told editors to fuck off before and driven other editors to the point of irritation. Any editor could have 1 edit, 100 edits, 1000 edits, 10000 edits or 100000+ edits - but that does not give him/her permission to use profanity against other editors. Simply saying an abrasive editor is still on here because he/she has contributed much to Wikipedia does not excuse such behaviour. To me it seems a rule for one, a rule for another it seems. My concern is that you condone that sort of behaviour which is quite worrying considering you're an admin. Stevo1000 (talk) 18:07, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Stevo, there is no "rule" against using profanity. You can look at the current civility RfC for a confirmation of that. There are rules against things like copyright violations and personal attacks, though. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:19, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, this is now twice you stated that I condone something. The first time with no evidence, the second time after I specifically said I did not. If you would like to make a point, you should try supporting it with evidence, if you have some, or stop saying it if it is false. Second, I specifically asked you to address the important distinction I made, you did not. I'm happy to have a discussion on this issue, but if you pointedly ignore my requests, then we aren't discussing. If you address either issue, I will respond, if you post without responding to either, I will remove as non-responsive. This is an important subject, and I would love to discuss it further, but I want to make progress, not simply read statements which ignore my polite requests. Just in case my earlier points weren't clear enough:

1. Condone means to Approve or Accept. I don't approve. As for accept, it isn't against policy, so my only tool is to let him know I don't approve, which I have done.
2. Malleus's less than ideal language was directed at Conduct, which is allowed. The first person to use language directed at an editor was you. Your edit violated policy, his did not. Please comment.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 18:54, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

You said truth (copyright violation - is not Internet Freedom)

A long sequence of posts I don't fully understand
padding
Hello. You said truth - some time ago (I was wrong). We discussed topic: Internet Freedom (and I was sure - it is about copyright). This is about human rights mainly. I found this here: http://vk.com/wall54619837_1003 (the official group of the Commissioner for Human Rights in Russia). His website: http://ombudsmanrf.org - with link to this official group (what do you think on this issue)? - 2.92.30.38 (talk) 11:55, 18 October 2012 (UTC). I don't read Russian, and my tools for translation are not available at the moment. Will look when I return home.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 12:53, 18 October 2012 (UTC) Okey. And bot: http://translate.google.com (Google). Thank you! - 2.92.30.38 (talk) 13:14, 18 October 2012 (UTC). Yes, I've used that a lot, but I prefer the automatic translation in Chrome, not available to me now.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 14:17, 18 October 2012 (UTC) OK, I see that someone has nominated Jimbo for the Hall of Shame, with no explanation of the reasons. Please do not bother providing reasons, I don't have the time or interest.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 19:55, 19 October 2012 (UTC) Hello. You right in some sense. Admin of Russian Wikipedia: http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Участник:Carn (has the big blame). He is already in the Hall (as and the Founder). Only the personal revenge is the reason of the bad situation. Carn quarreled with webmaster Archive. Till this Carn even suggested to him write the whole article about the great-grandson of the baron (Sergey Bulichyov - Сергей Булычёв). Info on the great-grandson was added in the section about famous people Dorogobug (town-motherland of Sergey). This was editing of Carn personally. Daughter of the professor Яков Юдельсон wished restore contribution of father - old man got award: http://www.rg.ru/2006/01/17/nagradi-dok.html (from the president of Russia). But his Honer must be restored (very badly - create damage for such people). I have no relation to the Hall (but - I say: you can save Honor of Jimbo Wales). How? Restore topic about Sergey Bulichyov (you can make roll back of all changes of Carn on this issue - including). And Jimbo will leave bloody murderer in the Hall of Shame. Will be free of the such "Honor". If you are agree - I can give you the simple scheme: to implement the great support in relation of the Founder of Wikipedia (several of the important and logical links mainly) ????? If you do not want help to him - is your right. In the social network Vkontakte everyone knows about different events. Jimbo already in the official group of the UN there: http://vk.com/unwebsiteinrussian - http://vk.com/wall-40572745_208 (Vkontakte almost as like Facebook). Facebook is the prototype of Vkontakte (Russian Facebook). Nearly milliard of users. And please forbid block me for every such bad human (otherwise - we can not to do something useful for Jimbo - by clear reason: must be the dialogue for interaction). Thank you! - 89.179.94.196 (talk) 19:01, 27 October 2012 (UTC). Hello. About help for: the Creator of Wikipedia and the Honoured doctor Яков Борисович Юдельсон (please click this link). Thanks ! http://translate.google.com - 95.29.18.185 (talk) 21:00, 28 October 2012 (UTC). Carn added: Bulichyov (+) is famous human at Дорогобуж (great-grandson of baron Ungern). http://translate.google.com - 2.93.98.175 (talk) 13:15, 29 October 2012 (UTC). Contribution of the professor Юдельсон was approved on best level. The most competent administrator of Ru Wikipedia - Yaroslav Blanter (made the such approval): Версия 09:54, 6 марта 2011 and Версия 08:10, 7 марта 2011. Currently, he is not user of Wikipedia, but this fact has no meaning, because the competence is actual in any time. Personal page of the former administrator - not exists in Russian Wikipedia by him own will (reasons: О5 and У1. Decision of Yaroslav in many times more dear, than opinion of any admin in Russian Wikipedia. Someone have doubts in the competence of two professors (Yaroslav Blanter and Яков Юдельсон) - very bad thing for reputation in any scope. Such people rarely make mistakes (they are very clever). Thus, the useful contribution of the professor needs to be restored: this section must be displayed so. Permission to use the photos can be found in the independent source (big number of photos - including). This source can be used as the additional reference (<r e f>). Here you can see how Carn suggests to create the whole article (the great-grandson of the baron Ungern is the hero of this article). This is displayed as: Булычёв, Сергей Викторович. Please note: Nobody will suggest for Carn correct the mistakes (because he already got needed notification earlier). Alex Spade also got the notification (and RU Wikipedia got the notification). What is means? They must implement command of administrator of English Wikipedia. Or: English administrator can restore contribution of the professor personaly. Without this - nothing will be changed else millions years. I got the instruction - to focus attention on these details. My right to act on behalf - is placed on the page of the community: "Medicine: violation of a Law (Медицина: нарушение Закона)". See there my IP address: (2.93.98.175). Thank you! http://translate.google.com - 2.93.98.175 (talk) 20:33, 29 October 2012 (UTC). NOBODY UNDERSTOOD FULLY THE EXISTING SITUATION: See the article: United Nations. Click External links. Click link with text: United Nations official homepage (top in External links). When you are already on the start page of the UN - need click link: Добро пожаловать (Russian section of the UN). In Russian section of the UN you can click to button Vkontakte (with the letter "В") - from right of the page and under the phrase: Cоциальные сети (Social network - by Russian). Do not fall in faint (when you will see). When somebody does not respect Human rights (he is contained in the Hall of Shame on legal grounds). I can help to all parties of this conflict (I wait). But nobody will wait long time in accordance with the instructions from the moderator of the community. Организация Объединенных Наций (ООН) Welcome to the United Nations and Организация Объединенных Наций (ООН) - Top P.S. SPhilbrick, I can self take all actions (the contribution of the professor needs to be restored - his high competence in the same time). But - when I will have guarantee (protection of illegal actions from admins of Russian Wikipedia). Illegal actions in our case: rollback and blocking. Okey? Fun fact: on this stage is implemented the restoration of reputation of two professors (Яков Юдельсон and Yaroslav Blanter). Thanks! And I ask again: Okey? Or other method .. - 95.29.18.155 (talk) 11:49, 30 October 2012 (UTC). Because exist Human rights violations - see: http://www.un.org/ru (click the button "В" on the main page of the United Nations RU - from right). And see else better after clicking the button "В". All violators are in the UN database (this means). - 2.94.80.100 (talk) 20:40, 31 October 2012 (UTC). http://ru.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D0%9E%D0%B1%D1%81%D1%83%D0%B6%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5:%D0%A3%D0%BD%D0%B3%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%BD-%D0%A8%D1%82%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%BD%D0%B1%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B3,_%D0%A0%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%B0%D0%BD_%D0%A4%D1%91%D0%B4%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87_%D1%84%D0%BE%D0%BD&action=history Please protect all actions (Mouse - vandal) in known context. En admin higher than RU in any case. Mouse does not give even create topic on talk page. Make rollback of him and explain (please). 2.94.226.60 (talk) 13:00, 2 November 2012 (UTC). If you normal human - help. When I try make rollback - nothing good (because I am not admin). Mause violates rules of any Wikipedia (new facts on talk page). When of any Wikipedia - you easy can make warning for violator (independently of jurisdiction). Anarchy must be stoped. Please help. A thank you! 2.94.226.60 (talk) 14:02, 2 November 2012 (UTC), Sorry, your link goes to another Wikipedia, presumably Russian. I have no admin authority there, and no knowledge of the language, so I cannot even get up to speed on the issue.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 14:33, 2 November 2012 (UTC) Because Honor of the professor we can not restore in Russian jurisdiction, I ask you let us make this in English Wikipedia. Best part of contribution of the professor - editing in the article about baron Ungern (was approved from the side of other professor - Blanter). Currently not exist of any doubts: info is real absolutely (new facts were known not long time ago). And addition of info for the article on English Wikipedia - will make the independence of jurisdictions in several times better. In the Russian article not exists info (great-grandson of Roman von Ungern-Sternberg). But in the English article exists the such useful info. This can be displayed so (on English language). We give help not for Sergey Bulichyov (great-grandson). For the professor (even 2 professors). See: permissions archive new facts status of the professor Яков Борисович Юдельсон. Approval): Версия 09:54, 6 марта 2011 and Версия 08:10, 7 марта 2011 from Yaroslav Blanter. All troubles for Wikipedia in the Hall with the murderer in top of the topic will be deleted. Moderator of the community gave the promise: Russian admins of Wikipedia are violators only. All bad links in social networks will be deleted also. Okey? Thank you! -2.94.226.60 (talk) 00:14, 3 November 2012 (UTC).

I'm not going to be able to help you, sorry.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 12:33, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

• Other sources exist (but this is not main thing). Because second option even better and simplier: Jimbo Wales has to personally and publically apologize for the insult in relation of the professor - Яков Борисович Юдельсон (and for the illegal blocking) on the Russian Wikipedia. Okey? - 2.92.88.103 (talk) 15:20, 3 November 2012 (UTC).

• Many messages which you got here - are not from people with the needed authority. They nothing know about many things (info in different contexts). Small number of the obligations - are nonsence. Because Jimbo Wales and admins must change rules of Wikipedia in accordance with a Law (of any jurisdiction which is represented on Wikipedia). International legislation - also. It is great trouble for him (he wants use separate jurisdictions and in the same time he focuses attention on the law of Florida). When he wants use separate jurisdiction - he must respect legislation of relevant countries (hundreds countries). A large number of them does not let to insult people and block them by the local rules. Thus, he must select (it is great trouble - I know). When Jimbo writes that Florida is the God - this means: Jimbo is owner of the wiki System (Wikipedias on all languages must respect words of the its Founder). Because not owner has no right say: Florida is God. Owners of the System must carry the responsibility in this case and double standarts .... (respect of a large number of legislations - is reality and nothing more). Such message like this - is not simply so (like template - the more so). Jimbo has chance find public response soon. All rules of Wikipedia must respect Human rights (reputation of any professor or of the UK government - 0,0000000000000000001% from 100%). - 2.92.88.185 (talk) 19:54, 4 November 2012 (UTC).

Oppose

Thank you for your look at this with an open mind and voicing oppose to the main stream! People like you make me stay, to be continued, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:42, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

typo fix

Please review [1] -- think you meant MF. Nobody Ent 16:12, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes, thanks. Weird, as the "C" isn't close to the "M". Not sure how it happened.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 16:44, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Tricia McLaughlin

Hi, this was an article you deleted in December 2011. I feel like the move was unduly harsh, that the copyright-violating link could've been taken out and the article remain. Will you let me restart it without the Vimeo link?--Aichikawa (talk) 01:05, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Please feel free to start over.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 01:24, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks----Aichikawa (talk) 15:29, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Sphilbrick. You have new messages at Steven Zhang's talk page.
Message added 21:41, 24 October 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Steven Zhang ^{Help resolve disputes!} 21:41, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Sally Season

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Sally Season. Viriditas (talk) 07:51, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Your speedy deletion

You did not respond to my discussion on the talk page, pointing you and others to the discussion of the similar category.

Why did you label it an "attack page". Kiefer.Wolfowitz 17:01, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Let's try acting like grownups.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 17:02, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm not the little boy throwing the board off the table....

Please respond on the talk page of the category, without the uncivilities: Again, why did you cut short the community discussion? The parallel category is under discussion and the characterization of it as an attack page has been disputed. Nominate it for a proper deletion, if you want, but respect the community discussion. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 17:06, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Not interested. If you recreate, I won't touch it again, but I don't see this as productive.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 17:21, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Many people don't like the populated category, but even ScottMacDonald (finally) has agreed to respect the community discussion. I would ask that you let that discussion run its course, as a courtesy. Of course, you or another editor is welcome to nominate it for a standard deletion (not speedy, given that many experienced administrators have disputed the speedy deletion as improper).

My question is: If you regard that phrase as being an attack, why haven't you sanctioned/warned/complained to AGK---its author? Kiefer.Wolfowitz 17:34, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Good grief, this is not worth the time. When I am working on potential speedies, I have a routine, developed form hundreds of examples. In almost all cases, I make sure the author has been notified, as I think it is quite rude to delete something and not let the author know. On many occasions, I have declined to carry out a CSD, and asked the editor proposing it to make sure they notify the author. Early on, I did this for all cases, but I quickly learned that it is a waste of time with attack pages. I've probably deleted a 100. In every single other case, it was a drive by, and a notification, or warning, is a waste of time. So now, when I see a possible attack page, identified in red, for especially speedy action, I read it to ensure that there is something negative (which there was) and delete it and move on.

So I missed one. I'm happy with my weighing of type I and Type II errors I'm not about to spend five minutes research on the next 100 attack pages in case it came form a regular and some tut-tutting is warranted. In the meantime, the OTRS request for permissions queue has reached 474 and I have better things to do with my time.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 17:45, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply, which does explain things. Keep up the good work. (I should have overlooked the "behave like adults" edit description, and not replied in kind---or unkind.) Regards, Kiefer.Wolfowitz 17:57, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

My apologies for the snippy reply. I shouldn't be under stress, as I am on vacation, but I seem to have a bigger pile of things to do than when I'm working.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 18:03, 25 October 2012 (UTC)