User talk:Spartaz

Spartaz (talk • contribs • former admin: blocks • protects • deletions • rights • meta • local rights)

No longer an admin. Sorry I can't help with any questions about former admin actions but I'm happy for any other admin to act.

Talk Page Guidelines Rude &/or insulting posts will be removed without comment. I dislike talk-back templates and fragmented discussions. If I post on your page you may assume that I will watch for a response. If you post here I will assume the same and that you lost interest if you stop following the discussion.

Useful Links:

• New Page Patrol
• New pages Log - the bum bit
• Stub Types

Re: Thanks

No problem, I've also switched to semi-protection on User:Spartaz/table, the only other fully protected page in your userspace, hope that's okey. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 13:32, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Erb?

Hi Spartaz, I do hope you didn't drop your admin bit because of my comment. As noted (on my talk page) I just screwed up and certainly didn't mean to offend. I've been working 60-80 hour weeks and just am not where I should be. Hobit (talk) 20:16, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

• No. Not at all. You have mail. Spartaz ^Humbug! 02:46, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Two bickering editors

Well done, sir. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:59, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Bah Humbug....

.. er I mean happy new year to all my talk page watchers Spartaz ^Humbug! 20:47, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Kodiak Island UFO incident deletion

Hello, I re-visited the deletion process for the Kodiak Island UFO incident and since you were the person who approved the deletion of it, I was wondering if there was enough solid consensus to move forward with it? True, it's in the past and we will more than likely not see it again, but considering that the support and opposition was close to balanced, was it appropriate to delete it, rather than calling for no consensus? DarthBotto _talk•cont 09:32, 02 January 2012 (UTC)

• The consensus is that you need better sources then you had before, so if you want to move forward you need to find more references. See WP:GNG and WP:RS to get a feel for what we are looking for, Spartaz ^Humbug! 09:49, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Would you close Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aqib Khan please?

I improved the article. Nominator and sole delete vote reversed based upon the improvements. Seems a textbook speedy keep now... but for me to close as keep would be "in my interests". Needs an outsider. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 19:40, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

• Can't, I gave up my bit. Sorry. Spartaz ^Humbug! 02:49, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Someone else closed it. I was thinking WP:NAC. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 04:27, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
    • I have never been a fan of a NAC speedy close but I'm a bit puritan about it. Spartaz ^Humbug! 04:43, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Deletion review/Log/2011 December 25‎

Can you make head or tail of this? Unscillinating seems to be making comments to no one in particular; he references an editing restriction you handed down on him. The comments seem to be violating the spirit of the restriction if not the letter Purplebackpack89≈≈≈≈ 03:23, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

• Unscillinating isn't bothering me so no reason for it to bother you. What he is referring to was a threat to block him for persistently disrupting deletion discussions after they have closed by posting additional comments and arguments. Using the talk page to continue as discussion is perfectly fine in these circumstances but I already had my say and have no intention to respond. After all, it looks like the outcome will support my vote. Its a bit like you, where you can't let the other party have the last word and I think he has the same issue sometimes. You shouldn't really have posted in response because it only encourages him. Spartaz ^Humbug! 04:37, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Whoa...don't compare me to him. I don't ramble on endlessly Purplebackpack89≈≈≈≈ 04:44, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
    • Well I'll grant you that your arguments are more policy based but neither of you can let someone else have the final word. Spartaz ^Humbug! 06:35, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Concern about User

Hi, I am not upset and don't want to file a formal complaint but I do have a few concerns with user: Luciferwildcat. Today, while patrolling the new pages I noticed an article on an obscure language that was very poorly written, contained no citations and actually seemed to make the argument that the language was unnotable. Since I was a little quick with my CSD trigger finger, I decided to slow down and simply propose deletion. I sincerely felt that my action was justified. I then received a few posts on my wall from the author: Luciferwildcat telling me that I had no right to do what I did, that the tag was being taken down, and going on rants about certain things being instantly notable. I tried to tell the user they were being disrespectful and that my action wasn't a vendetta but rather simple maintenance. The article has since been improved and its notability confirmed so no problems there. I am just a little disturbed by Luciferwildcat's actions especially, the last post where they described my head as "delicious" , refereed to me as "baby" and signed off "love you." I know that you have had a history with this user so that is why I posted this message. I don't want any formal actions taken against them, I just don't believe these actions belong in a community such as wikipedia. I also would like to keep this situation low key but if that is not an option than please don't take any further action. I will save the posts on my talk page. Have a good day Zzaffuto118 (talk) 20:08, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

• I'm finding Luciferwildcat to be a challenging editor and they seem a little more resistant than most to feedback. The situation is complicated because Purplebackback and Luciferwildcat are like oil and water and rub against each other every time they interact. I'm going to monitor for a while but should this continue then we will gave to consider a more formal way of preventing disruption and that will require evidence. Thanks for letting me know about this. Spartaz ^Humbug! 16:54, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Muscat International Airport, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages BAA and Muscat (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) 11:24, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Per your recent involvement

You may be interested in this discussion on ANI. Toddst1 (talk) 23:20, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

And also, this one.  Unscintillating (talk) 04:20, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Even without a mop, you deserve this. ASCIIn2Bme (talk) 09:11, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

• Thank you but its a shame that neither party is listening. I fear I will be an admin again very shortly. Spartaz ^Humbug! 20:48, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
  • I might beat you to a dual block if they keep this up. FWIW, as you said above, in one respect the one is righter than the other, but it really doesn't matter. Drmies (talk) 22:04, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

ANI

I have responded on my talk page, I would appreciate it if you could clear some items up for me.LuciferWildCat (talk) 22:23, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

• Spartaz, please see my remarks there and tell LCW if I'm representing a consensus of editors there. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 22:51, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
• I'm done. I'm not going to block since I am too involved, but I won't oppose anymore. Drmies (talk) 19:29, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	For your opening sentence in this discussion. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:52, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

• Thank you. :-) Spartaz ^Humbug! 21:28, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Classic Judaism

In April, following this deletion discussion, you deleted this article. I had previously moved it to User:Rabroy's Userspace. I notice that he has now recreated the article by moving the userspace page into mainspace.

If you decide to redelete it, you might want to send a warning to Rabroy, so that he can preserve what he has done. He has invested considerable work in the essay. I mentioned it on his talk page, and also at the talk page of Project:Judaism

Thanks,

--Ravpapa (talk) 05:44, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Further your post of the speedy deletion notice, I have copied it to the userpage of the author of the article (not me - I had nothing to do with it!), User:Rabroy. Thanks for your speedy handling of this. --Ravpapa (talk) 12:56, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Sarah Hamilton-Byrne

I have made an entry on the AFD page for the above article, but I must confess I don't know what BLP1E means. Can you enlighten me?

Sardaka (talk) 09:02, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

• Please see WP:BLP1E and WP:ONEEVENT. Perhaps you can revisit your opinion after you read them? Thanks. Spartaz ^Humbug! 14:53, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Rescue Template

Hey; as you'll now see from the tag at the top, I'm closing this TfD. Please do not make any more edits to it. Ironholds (talk) 05:30, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

DRV

A notification that the Templates for Discussion discussion (oy, repetition) has been taken to a deletion review discussion. The Article Rescue Squadron was notified, and as notifications to previous involved parties isn't normal practise, I and a few ARS members agreed that, in the interests of transparency and fairness, we should let everyone know...hence this talkpage message ;).

If anyone has an issue with me sending these out, do drop me a note on my talkpage. Regards, Ironholds (talk) 10:24, 28 January 2012 (UTC)