User talk:Czarkoff

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This user prefers to be notified by Notifications. Please use {{ping}} or {{replyto}} when you reply to this user. No talkback messages are needed.

ANI case for Netoholic[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

RfD nominations[edit]

I noticed that you nominated Am I Wrong CD 2 for RfD by hand, rather than using Twinkle. By itself, this is fine, but you didn't follow the instructions correctly when you did so. They were recently changed to require the content of the redirect to be passed as a parameter to the RfD template, rather than being placed under it. Jackmcbarn (talk) 21:44, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

@Jackmcbarn: AFAIK it matters only for templates. This redirect is not supposed to be transcluded, so there is no practical difference. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talktrack) 21:52, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Speedy appeals[edit]

How am I supposed to appeal a bad speedy if the discussions are closed before discussion can start?

ovin to oven is unquestionably plausible so the speedy is bad. WhisperToMe (talk) 01:09, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

@WhisperToMe: I never saw this redirect: it was deleted an 8 AM, I just procedurally closed two RfD when saw redlinks instead of redirects. FWIW the very idea of speedy deletion is that no discussion is needed. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talktrack) 03:16, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
The very point of my nominarions was that speedy deletion was wrongly used and therefore must be cancelled here and therefore the people who do speedies need to make note of this. Please see: Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2012 January 11#Nortwest Airways WhisperToMe (talk) 10:04, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
@WhisperToMe: So you intentionally nominated non-existing redirects? That is plain wrong – WP:RFD is for discussion of redirects, and redlinks are out of its scope. Use WP:DRV instead. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talktrack) 10:19, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
That strategy was what I did with Nortwest Airways two ydears ago. Ill try DRV but consider what happened two years ago with the other one. If the speedy process was used inappropriately and somebody uses RfD to restore the article, let the process happen. Bureaucracy for the sake of Bureaucracy doomed Citizendium WhisperToMe (talk) 10:41, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
@WhisperToMe: So for you declining misplaced requests is "Bureaucracy for the sake of Bureaucracy"? Why did you not start that discussion at Talk:Wikipedia then? Really, rules are their to bring at least some order, and chaotic nature of Wikipedia is already damaging it enough, so, please, don't add to this chaos. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talktrack) 12:48, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
The rules were broken when those articles were speedied. There is a reason those rules are in place, to prevent inappropriate deletions that people are unable to fight. The Nortwest request from two years ago was dealt with appropriately. It was NOT speedy closed. Again, Ill do DRV. WhisperToMe (talk) 13:22, 26 July 2014 (UTC)