User talk:LFaraone

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from User talk:Firefoxman)
Jump to: navigation, search
If you leave a message here, I will reply on your talkpage. If I leave a message on your talkpage, I will be waiting for a response here. I am watching enough in the way of pages as it is. Exception: If a discussion involves more than two editors, it will continue on the page in which it was started, and {{tb}} will be used. Leave a new message.


If you need access to a Wikipedia article that has been deleted, ask me. If it's not a copyright violation, libel, or personal information, and has not been deleted as a suspected biographies of living persons violation, I will userfy the article for you.

Note that using the text to recreate any deleted article may automatically qualify them for speedy deletion, and copies of previously deleted content that are being used solely for long-term archival purposes may be subject to deletion as Wikipedia is not a free web host. The MediaWiki website has a list of wiki sites which may be used to host your content.


My PGP public key ID is 0xF9FDD506, expand for key:


Archive

Archives
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9
/Archive/10

Contents

[edit] Nomination for merging of Template:Di-no license

Template:Di-no license has been nominated for merging with Template:No copyright information. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. —Gh87 (talk) 23:37, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

[edit] You're invited! Wikimedia DC Annual Membership Meeting

DC Meetup 23 & Annual Membership Meeting

Wikimedia District of Columbia, the newest officially recognized chapter, is holding its Annual Membership Meeting at 1pm on Saturday, October 1, 2011 at the Tenley-Friendship Neighborhood Library.

Wikimedia DC.svg

Agenda items include:

  • election of the Board of Directors for the next two years
  • approval of a budget for the 2011-2012 fiscal year
  • report on the activities and accomplishments of the past year
  • social gathering afterwards at a nearby restaurant

Candidate nominations are open until 11:59pm EDT on Saturday, September 24. We encourage you to consider being a candidate. (see see candidate instructions)

The meeting is open to both the general public and members from within the DC-MD-VA-WV-DE region and beyond. We encourage everyone to attend!

You may join the chapter at the meeting or online.

Note: You can remove your name from the DC meetup invite list here. -- Message delivered by AudeBot, on behalf of User:Aude

[edit] DC-area Meetup, Saturday, October 8

National Archives Backstage Pass - Who should come? You should. Really.
US-NARA-Seal.svg You are invited to the National Archives in College Park for a special backstage pass and scanathon meetup with Archivist of the United States David Ferriero, on Saturday, October 8. Go behind the scenes and into the stacks at the National Archives, help digitize documents, and edit together! Free catered lunch provided! Dominic·t 16:18, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

[edit] New Page Patrol survey

NPPbarnstar.jpg

New page patrol – Survey Invitation

Hello LFaraone! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.

  • If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only.
  • If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.

Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.

You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

[edit] You're invited! Wikipedia Loves Libraries DC

Wikipedia Loves Libraries DC & edit-a-thon
MLK Library.jpg

Wikipedia Loves Libraries comes to DC on Saturday, November 5th, from 1-5pm, at the Martin Luther King Jr Memorial Library.

We will be holding an edit-a-thon, working together to improve Wikipedia content related to DC history, arts, civil rights, or whatever suits your interests. There may also be opportunities to help with scanning historic photos plus some swag!

You're invited and we hope to see you there!

RSVP + more details!

Note: You can remove your name from the DC meetup invite list here. -- Message delivered by AudeBot (talk) 18:52, 31 October 2011 (UTC), on behalf of User:Aude

[edit] Fine Art Edit-a-Thon & DC Meetup 26!

Fine Art Edit-a-Thon & Meetup - Who should come? You should. Really.
DcArtsLogo.png
 FINE ART EDIT-A-THON & DC MEETUP 26 is December 17! The Edit-a-Thon will cover fine art subjects from the Federal Art Project and the meet up will involve Wikipedians from the area as well as Wiki-loving GLAM professionals. You don't have to attend both to attend one (but we hope you do!) Click the link above and sign up & spread the word! See you there! SarahStierch (talk) 17:34, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

[edit] National Archives ExtravaSCANza

You are invited to the National Archives ExtravaSCANza, taking place every day next week from January 4–7, Wednesday to Saturday, in College Park, Maryland (Washington, DC metro area). Come help me cap off my stint as Wikipedian in Residence at the National Archives with one last success!

This will be a casual working event in which Wikipedians are getting together to scan interesting documents at the National Archives related to a different theme each day—currently: spaceflight, women's suffrage, Chile, and battleships—for use on Wikipedia/Wikimedia Commons. The event is being held on multiple days, and in the evenings and weekend, so that as many locals and out-of-towners from nearby regions1 as possible can come. Please join us! Dominic·t 01:25, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

1 Wikipedians from DC, Baltimore, Philadelphia, Newark, New York City, and Pittsburgh have been invited.

 National Archives ExtravaSCANza.png

[edit] "IMP³rove"

Dear LFaraone, we assume that you deleted the article by mistake and ask wikipedia kindly to uppload it again ASAP! I could not identify any substantial reason for deleting the article. Especially after the article had been approved twice by NawlinWiki and User:Syrthiss. Last time I checked the discussion page of this article, there was positive feedback and the article was very positively ranked. Kind regards, Deborah12345 (talk) 08:32, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I replied to the user on their talkpage. Syrthiss (talk) 13:58, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Dear LFarone, I do know IMP³rove and use it. IMP³rove is a program to "Improve the Innovation Management Performance of Small and Medium Entrerprises (SME) with sustaining impact". It's been developed by a consortium initiated and funded by the European Commission. As one part of the project a tool has been developed to allow SME to compare their innovation management capabilities to others on an anonymous base, allowing them to improve their innovation management capability. So it is directly related to article about Innovation_management, Peter Drucker, etc. Unfortunately are some of the people who could contribute to the article busy with working with this set of methods and tools. Re: WP:CORP That there is a notable organization in the background can be seen if you visit the [Innova Homepage of the European Commission].

I would therefore also ask you to restore the page, to give us (the community) some more time to update it. Apologies for any non-conformances here and in the article, and me and mostly others are novice in writing at WP. Kind regards, --Lambdaoe (talk) 16:37, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

That's nice. I use it isn't really an argument that's useful in a deletion discussion. The article was deleted as a result of a deletion discussion; among other thigns it lacked third party sources independent from the organisation which created it, thus not meeting the general notability guideline or the product notability guidelines. LFaraone 17:29, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Ben Breedlove

So how are you going to handle the case where consensus is wrong? :) Good luck, people are going to be unhappy either way. Prodego talk 08:04, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Is the etiquette after a deletion process that the article is "safe" for at least a couple of months? Thanks for your reply.Petersontinam (talk) 17:54, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
In practice about a month is given at a minimum but there is no policy explicitly stating this. LFaraone 19:50, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
No. The consensus is that the consensus reached at AfD is safe until it changes. And how do we determine when it changes? Another AfD. There is no set duration for how long the consensus lasts. This is why we have idiocy like {{GNAA History}}.
I'm surprised nobody has taken this to DRV already. It's a good, uncontroversial close, and hopefully OTRS will no longer be deluged with spam. The change.org petition led to an e-mail being sent to OTRS with every signature, and that led to us developing a pre-canned response. Just a hunch, but I think this article won't be here next year: YouTube fads—even well-meaning ones—are just that, fads. —Tom Morris (talk) 18:28, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Granted. And its rather hard to determine how long a lack of consensus (which is what I closed it as) will last. As many people in the article suggested, it would be sensible to have another discussion in a short while once feelings die down and a more impartial analysis could be done. LFaraone 22:26, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Tom, let me start from the beginning to clarify on the Change.org petition. I'll try to make it as brief as possible- I looked up Ben Breedlove after seeing his video via a link from yahoo news. I came to Wikipedia because it was listed when I searched Ben. I saw the deletion warning and couldn't understand why it was there. I searched through the Wikipedia sight for hours, looking up deletion process and for a way to contact Wikipedia, to even send an email to anyone. The only place that had an email address was in job openings. I was strongly compelled to voice an opinion that this page needed to stay.
I went to Change.org and started a petition, my first to ever start. Throughout that petition, I was careful to state these facts-- 1. Sign if you agree that the Article falls within Wikipedia's guidelines; 2. Go to Wikipedia to see the discussion page if any questions; and 3. All places that I asked for help, I did state that the petition would not directly affect the decision- I said that it would help to show how relevant Ben is.
I stumbled across the deletion discussion page, but had no idea how to enter it or what to do. I figured out how to put an opinion there, and it did say that public opinion was welcome but would have no direct impact on the decision. After seeing what I thought were bad reasons for deletion, I created an account...I did not want to be anonymous. The hours and days of looking up Policy (When you are on one page, there are tens of links to other pages) made me learn more about Wikipedia itself and what it was. I interpreted policies the best that I could. When it was brought up on the discussion page that my petition was thought to be skewing things, I immediately stopped seeking out support for it. I also claimed on the discussion page that I had started the petition, was open and honest about it.
Wikipedia has been one of the most difficult things in my life to learn about. I don't believe that anyone can be proficient here in only a few days. While here I realized I wanted to be involved in this, really liked the thought of contributing and helping in some small way if I could learn HOW.
As far as the emails sent to Wikipedia of every signature, I did not realize that. I had tried to turn in the petition as a whole thing on Friday by guessing at email addresses to contact, and got lucky on one. I received a form response, and guessed at another address where I did recieve a reply saying that they were aware of the petition and did not need me to hand it in. Really, if you think about it, it could just as easily have been emails sent by individuals (outside of a petition) voicing their opinion on the article being deleted, and I bet there were many of those.
To sum it up- I, as one individual, did all that I could to try and stop an article from being deleted. I felt that strongly. And I believe that the correct thing was done in keeping it. Every day there are hundreds of thousands uploading his final video (9,816,530 to date) and every hour there are still thousands of messages being left in hundreds of places that he has changed their life. There are still 1,700,000 plus results when doing a search. Yes, many messages being left are from teenagers. But today's teenager is the next generation of Wikipedia Editor. And today's teenager needs all the inspiration they can get in a world full of immediate, ongoing, horrific and frightening news as well as online incivility. I respect that you think it is a fad, but I personally don't see it as that right now and I don't believe the extent of the media coverage, both then and still, would have happened if it was a fad. I also hope it isn't looked back on as one. But time will tell, and I'm grateful that this article has been given time. Sometimes, an event really does have an ongoing significant impact on society.
So that is my story of how I got here and the petition. I hope I am able to stay here and contribute to Wikipedia, as I find the concept amazing and feel I have something to give.Petersontinam (talk) 23:24, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Of course you're more than welcome to stay; I hope you didn't get the impression otherwise. However, the petition did create issues for Wikipedia; OTRS has a very limited staff and getting mass email campaigns only prevents us from effectively responding to issues the staff can take action on. LFaraone 23:30, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Dick's Classic Garage

just a heads up, when you closed this AfD you missed the AfD tag on Dick's. I haven't removed in case it was deliberate. Heads up in case yu just missed it StarM 01:37, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rogue Clone

In case you haven't noticed, the only person who advocated "keep" in the AfD was the article's creator. Personally, I would have relisted it instead. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 20:05, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

I have come on the same errand. Please reconsider your close of this AfD.
  • The only person arguing for keep was the article author. At different times he used the signatures (unsigned) "Aliberti", "Frankie" and "Frank", but if you click on those you will see that they are all user Aliberti (talk). He was tinkering with his signature - not with intent to deceive, I'm sure, but it does give a misleading impression of multiple support.
  • His keep arguments are really no more than ILIKEIT and OTHERSTUFF, plus a wish that WP should be "a detailed database of published books", whereas Blanchardb and I both cited the relevant notability guideline, WP:NBOOK, and Blanchardb explained it at some length.
I think the AfD should have been closed as delete; alternatively, please re-list it, when I will add a note for the next closer to point out that all the keep voices are the same person. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 22:49, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
Er, sorry, I intended to delete this but for some reason must have pushed the wrong button. LFaraone 22:56, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
No worries, easy to do. Cheers, JohnCD (talk) 22:58, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
I stopped counting the number of bloopers I've made, so I wasn't worried about this one. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 23:50, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles for Creation Appeal

Articles for Creation urgently needs your help!
AFC-Logo.png

Articles for Creation is desperately short of reviewers! We are looking for urgent help, from experienced editors, in reviewing submissions in the pending submissions queue. Currently the are 367 submissions waiting to be reviewed.

Do you have what it takes?
  1. Are you familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines?
  2. Do you know what Wikipedia is and is not?
  3. Do you have a working knowledge of the Manual of Style, particularly article naming conventions?
  4. Are you autoconfirmed?
  5. Can you review submissions based on their individual merits?

If the answer to these questions is yes, then please read the reviewing instructions and donate a little of your time to helping tackle the backlog.

[edit] Inre AfD John Kerry VVAW Controversy

First, thank you for your recent attention to the AfD petition. It is a contentious subject and likely to remain so for the foreseeable future. As to your determination...

I believe I may have personally made a good faith error of fact as to the genesis of the original article. After a review of the talk page archives, while, IMHO, content that might be perceived as critical of Kerry and exculpatory or positive for the Swiftvets was always met with considerable opposition, I don't believe that the introduction of controversial Kerry/VVAW content may have ever reached a level of incorporation that might have inspired a fork to John Kerry VVAW controversy. Instead, that content had apparently been (though I haven't personally confirmed this) introduced and debated within the John Kerry article and the VVAW article. In light of that, I was about to strike my expressed preference of a merge specifically to Swift Boat Veterans for Truth to a simple Keep vote when I noted that you had closed the AfD.

In light of my position change and because my position was cited by other editors, I'm wondering if the AfD might be re-opened for a short period so as to accommodate my change in position...which may be influential in your AfD result determination? I simply want this all to be above board and am not very experienced in the AfD process.

Thanks for your consideration. JakeInJoisey (talk) 04:31, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

It's your call, LFaraone. Jake gave me a courtesy notice about this disucssion. Bearian (talk) 20:34, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
Eh, sure. I'm not really inclined to reopen AfD discussions, but this seems reasonable enough. I'll relist the discussion. LFaraone 03:47, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks very much for the accommodation. Regards. JakeInJoisey (talk) 05:14, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

FYI, I've just become aware that the AfD closure note is still affixed to the top of Talk:John Kerry VVAW controversy. I thought you might wish delete that pending an anticipated closure of the now-extended AfD. Thanks. JakeInJoisey (talk) 04:30, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:LFaraone&oldid=478196646"
Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Interaction
Toolbox
Print/export