User talk:GRuban

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

Emochila page[edit]

Hi Mr. Ruban, Regarding the page Emochila that was recently deleted, I am hoping you can help me. i was working personally with you on that page, as you can see on the talk logs, and you helped me list the proper things for the page to be kept. In fact, you issued a Keep on the 16th of August, thank you. However, user PeterSymonds deleted the page about an hour later, and I don't know why?! I completely followed your directions, and the only other talk on the page that might have led to this, by someone who didn't even login (they only have an IP address) was saying that someone was deleting their messages, and that the page was written by an officer of the company. That's not true, i am not related to Emochila at all, and i certainly didn't delete anyone's talk on that page, or it would have been noted as me. Can you please relist the page? Kwintern (talk) 21:28, 17 August 2008 (UTC)kwintern

   ==Deletion review for Emochila==

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Emochila. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Kwintern (talk) 21:31, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

The Emochila article has come into question again, almost 9 months after you commented to keep it last August. Would you please offer your opinion on the matter again at Emochila's articles of deletion (second attempt)? Your input would be greatly appreciated.--76.105.144.161 (talk) 01:43, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Karl Josef Weinmair stub[edit]

Thanks for making the stub. Good job on finding the info about it. I was having a heck of a time trying to locate anything.--DBEndy 03:03, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Boot Hill wikilink fix[edit]

No worries. Thanks for the fix.--Azathar 03:36, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Good article[edit]

I just wanted to speak up and say good job on the Boot Hill (role-playing game) article. The Bearded One 22:25, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Adenture[edit]

Noticed your edit to Adventure, diff. I know you are probably new, but Wikipedia is not a dictionary so definitions like that don't go on disambiguation pages. There is already a link to wiktionary on that page. Wikipedia:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages) has more info about the style of disambigation pages.--Commander Keane 01:24, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Adventurer[edit]

Hiya! I'm sorry for putting that redirect back in. I found that page on my vandal patrols, and I made a snap judgment as to what was going on, and to me it looked as if a vandal was removing a redirect to put in an article, so I just went "Bye bye, vandal edits!" and reverted. Sorry about that! Mo0[talk] 20:00, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Kathy Lloyd[edit]

Hi! I removed the redlink a while back as she isn't particularly notable (nn = lazy shorthand for not notable) in her field. There's quite a few hits on her name as she's a nude model; there's always lots of hits for page 3 girls, porn stars etc because there's so many porn sites with the same content. But I may be wrong - if you think she's notable, by all means start an article. Regards Proto t c 23:50, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Barnstar[edit]

I Angelbo award you this Barnstar for your game and RPG related contributions

Angelbo 04:14, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Dungeons & Dragons[edit]

Hi. I apologise for the length of this post, but I think I'd like to request some assistance. You posted a question on my talk page, regarding my efforts in the Dungeons & Dragons category. I have answered that question, but have since come to my senses regarding the scope of my plans. A few days ago I stumbled onto the Wikipedia pages related to Dungeons & Dragons, and found them .. lacking. They lacked cohesion and content, above all, and while content needn't be my speciality in these matters, creation cohesion seemed feasable. All that was required, I thought, was that someone read every article, and then organise them. I have recategorised a number of articles, making the categorisation of the articles, in my view, much clearer.


What remains is much more daunting, and may require the creation of a WikiProject. I feel that a core of Dungeons & Dragons related articles should be established, covering general concepts such as character classes, armour class and hit points, which should have internally consistent style, and should avoid redirecting internally. Upon this framework, the other articles could be added. Such as articles pertaining to specific monsters in the Dungeons & Dragons worlds, or to specific continents and countries in different campaign settings.

When I started reading, I quickly identified a number of pages that I felt should exist, but were missing. Almost immediately, I found that a number of different articles refered directly to articles for specific character classes, such as cleric. But while the cleric article may mention Dungeons & Dragons, it seems to merely mention the concept, and probably won't grow into a fully detailed article. The creation of a new article seemed warranted. Similarly, the article on Rogue (character class) didn't exist, with most pages refering to the Thief (character class) article instead, which hardly seemed to cover the Dungeons & Dragons Rogue. Again, a new page should be created, but I concluded that it would be best to create articles for all base classes, to set them apart from game classes in Final Fantasy and other role-playing games. The same logic applies to general articles such as Magic-User, divine magic (vs. Arcane magic), which cover anything but relevant topics: They should be found and tagged, and possibly redirected or expanded.

I'll grant you that I haven't given much thought to the actual content of these class articles, mostly because I am not quite sure how much of the game mechanics may be explained through Wikipedia. But creating decent stubs is not a bad thing, I feel.

The more I think about it, the more the need for a forum of some type grows. Perhaps I will set up a WikiProject Dungeons & Dragons. Would you help/join? -- Ec5618 02:06, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Home and Away[edit]

Hi, you have voted in the afd for various Home&Away character articles. I have had a go at combining all the articles in a single article (which I admit still needs a lot of work). You can find it at Current Home and Away characters. I suggest we keep this article are either delete or re-direct the others. What do you think? Thanks, Evil Eye 13:03, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

RPG WikiProject[edit]

Hello, I'm toying with the idea of a WikiProject for roleplaying games. I see that you've edited RPG articles and I thought I should ask you what you think of the idea. Do you think it could be done and would you be interested in helping out? I'm a long-time reader, but I haven't hardly edited anything yet, so I would appreciate any ideas or suggestions you might have. I've talked a bit about it on my blog.

I don't want to start anything without following through, and I want to avoid starting something I can't finish. But a WikiProject would be a good way to coordinate efforts, and it would be easier to attract more people to improve RPG articles, don't you think? Jonas Karlsson 16:26, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

And now I've started it, after getting enough people interested. It's over here: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Role-playing_games. The project page is still a mess, but we'll get it up and running soon. Jonas Karlsson 12:51, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Marcelle Karp[edit]

Great job on the Marcelle Karp article! Thanks! – Quadell (talk) (bounties) 17:52, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

The Feminists[edit]

Thanks for your work on The Feminists, but it probably isn't the best choice to add an expansion request for to the Systematic Bias template. There just isn't more stuff on Google about them - I looked fairly extensively. The article is incomplete, but without off-web research, it's going to stay that way. I suspect there are more productive articles to expand to add to the CSB template. GRuban 16:51, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Do I understand you to be saying that CSB should only look into topics that are already well-covered on the Web? As one of the people who started CSB, I can say without qualification that one of the main goals of the project was to improve coverage in areas that are not well-covered on the web. That is precisely one of Wikipedia's systemic biases: if something is not already on the Web someplace, it tends to slip through our cracks. -- Jmabel | Talk 01:30, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
(suitably humbled and abashed) Well, um, no, your excellency, sir. This unworthy one was merely daring to suggest that other articles that are at least somewhat more covered on the Web might be more productive, in the sense that if we added them to the template, they would actually get expanded, while The Feminists, no matter how worthy, would quite possibly stay more or less the size it was until Ti-Grace Atkinson joined the Eagle Forum. But please forgive my presumption as youthful inexperience, your plenipotentiaryness, and I shall not speak of it again. Jmabel is always right. I will work harder. (pounds head on floor repeatedly, and backs away on his knees) GRuban 13:48, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm not going to ask you to apologize for the tone of that, but I am going to say that if you continue to address me in that tone, expect to make an enemy. I don't know about you, but probably a third of what I do is from print, and I doubt that I'm the only Wikipedian who still knows how to read a book. If you want to remove that particular request of mine from the template, fine. But if you want to argue that Wikipedia can become a first-rate general reference while writing only on topics that are already well-covered online, I think you are dead wrong. -- Jmabel | Talk 16:51, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
WikiThanks.png

Hi GRuban, I just wanted to drop you a line after seeing yet again CSB request that you've filled. It's appreciated. Cheers, BanyanTree 15:49, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the appreciation! It's, umm ... appreciated! GRuban 17:38, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Awzal[edit]

WikiThanks.png

Thanks for giving Muhammad Awzal a start! I think I put his name on the CSB request list somewhere in November or December and quite frankly I didn't expect something to come from it, at least not that soon. It's really great to see WP:CSB work! Keep it up, — mark 20:02, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the thanks! Unfortunately, I couldn't find much more about Muhammad Awzal than what I wrote, so someone else will have to do the expansion. GRuban 21:50, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Maybe you'd better try to ask for a help in Wikipedia:Translation_into_English. Vermondo 09:30, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I did. Looks like there are a number of Italian->English requests pending there, though, so it might take a while. I hope I'm not reduced to using the Google translation to work from. GRuban 12:50, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Mao Zedong[edit]

Hi, could you possibly re-edit the page? You still have one try left before you hit the 3Rs rule. It would also add support to our case against that guy if he reverts again. John Smith's 19:00, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

All righty. GRuban 19:10, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Alexa Dixon[edit]

Thank you for working on the aged requests page. There are a number of requests that probably don't actually deserve articles, such as Alexa Dixon. To keep them from being relisted the important thing is to remove them from the main request page, because it is from those pages that the list is regenerated each month. - SimonP 14:14, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Casca Rufio Longinius[edit]

Sure, no problems. On review of the page, it actually seems quite reasonable. At the time that I tagged it, it was somewhat confusing, and I didn't understand the apparent signifigance of the character. None the less you have made a good job of the article. Thanks for the great contribution. Bobby1011 00:46, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

More Liberty Dollar[edit]

After further research and reflection, I've come to believe that the Liberty Dollar entry should be merged with "Private currency" or "Community money" and redirected accordingly. This merge would help put this controversial topic into a broader context it desperately needs. Thank you for your participation. BrianGCrawfordMA 18:34, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Java/RMS[edit]

If you want to say "RMS doesn't program in Java," that's fine. The nonsequiteur and unfunny joke about the island of Java is nonencyclopedic. It doesn't particularly matter to me whether RMS put it there or not -- his puns are just as inappropriate in an encyclopedia as everyone else's (except, of course, for those in the pun article. :-) Nandesuka 06:05, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Psionics (role-playing game_s_)[edit]

Please, join me at Talk:Psionics (role-playing game) and help me to understand this page move. -Harmil 21:54, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

 : I'm going to be bold and move it back. The article is about Psi in all RPGs, not in one RPG, and most of Category:Role-playing game terms uses the plural. This is my one "revert", I won't continue a revert war without discussion, but I think this was just a well-meaning mistake by the mover. GRuban 22:15, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
I'm really sorry. I had thought you were the person who moved the page. Thanks for moving it back, and sorry for pestering you. -Harmil 22:21, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Muhammad Awzal[edit]

Thank you four your appreciation of the article I wrote on it.wiki. Unfortunately in this moment I'm quite busy and have no time to translate it into English. Anyway, I wrote a call for translators in the talk page of it.wiki and I hope you'll find someone who can help. Later on, I'll look at the English page, and if the work is not yet done, I'll consider translating the page myself. Good luck --Vermondo 16:42, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Reverted vandalism to my page[edit]

Hi there, thanks for sticking up for me. I have a very short memory. Have we met before? Cheers. PizzaMargherita 13:36, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

HI ja'! -- GRuban 13:51, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
LOL, I told you I have a short memory :D........ By the way, have we met before? PizzaMargherita 14:14, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Austin Purfleet hoax[edit]

Hi George. I've rolled back and reverted all their edits apart from the creation of the Tromlitz article. It was mostly manual work, but I think it needed doing! User:81.6.228.171 is also part of this nonsense, as is User:Chrisman66, although the latter has yet to do anything other than comment at the deletion page and create his own user page. Presumably these are all sock puppets of a single person with two much time on their hands. I've given them warnings (other than User:Chrisman66) that they'll be blocked if they carry on. Keep your eyes peeled! CLW 17:06, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

And a splendid tale, was Purfleet's. Will it be archived anywhere, or lost forever? I might write the book one day. --JamesMcFurlong 22:54, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

charities accused of ties to terrorism[edit]

I left a note for the guy who moved charities accused of ties to terrorism to charities accused of ties to terrorism.

I blame him for the loss of the article's talk page. -- Geo Swan 13:41, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks![edit]

Thanks for the vote of confidence. -- Geo Swan 20:06, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Appreciation[edit]

I appreciated your comments regarding La Convivencia on my user talk page. I'm thinking it might be nice to start an Esperanza type of editor base called La Convivencia to really hit home the need for such a spirit. Netscott 20:16, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Geo Swan[edit]

You expressed interest in Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Geo Swan, and I think your view would be helpful since you edited Charities accused of ties to terrorism. KI 21:01, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

  • Oh, my. I hope my asking to be notified if there was an RFC didn't bring it into being. I commented, but I'm not at all sure it was what you had in mind. Please, de-escalate, sheathe your weapons, return your bombers to the launch bays. It's over. Please. Go edit Chad articles, I've read some you've written, they're quite well done, and as a WP:CSD member, I'm quite happy that someone is editing them, we need more articles on the third world. But please stop the litigation, it's simply not constructive. You want GS to leave you alone? I'm sure he will, as your RFA expires today. Done. No more. Please. -- GRuban 21:52, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, and an apology[edit]

Thanks for your help. I appreciate your attempts to remain neutral and talk sense to KI and I.

Yes, you were correct that, barring a last minute flood of supporters, KI's candidacy was almost certain to fail. But I reached different conclusions about whether there was reason to keep trying to state my concerns over their candidacy.

You were absolutely correct that I planned to stop talking about my concern about KI when his candidacy came to an end.

So, that apology. Later, on April 7th, I realized that although I remembered important talk page exchanges -- they had happened on my personal talk page. I was almost certainly completely mistaken about that

I was in the midst of acknowledging that mistake, when I was shocked to see he had filed a complaint against me on the Administrator's noticeboard. After two notes on their talk page, which I still consider were civil, triggered that unexpected escalation, it didn't feel safe to do what what I should have done -- acknowledged the mistake as early as I discovered it. I overlooked how the acknowledgement might concern you. Sorry. -- Geo Swan 01:47, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging for Image:CarolynLilipaly.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:CarolynLilipaly.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 11:21, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Your article, Lavastorm, was selected for DYK![edit]

Updated DYK query On December 25, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Lavastorm, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! ++Lar: t/c 09:13, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Engaruka[edit]

Thanks for creating Engaruka (now almost a year ago). I came across it while editing Sonjo language. Your work for WP:CSB is appreciated! — mark 14:06, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:BootHill.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:BootHill.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 13:49, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Image prior to policy... ShakespeareFan00 14:10, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Pigasus Awards[edit]

Wanted to let you know I nominated the Article for Deletion, since I see you created it. Horrorshowj 00:54, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:BeverleyTurner.jpg[edit]

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:BeverleyTurner.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MER-C 09:52, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Casca01.jpg[edit]

Warning sign This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Casca01.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted after seven days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 00:42, 29 August 2007 (UTC)


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Don Kingsborough.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Don Kingsborough.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:JusticeInc.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:JusticeInc.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 14:53, 2 January 2008 (UTC)


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:WorldsofWonder.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:WorldsofWonder.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 09:39, 21 January 2008 (UTC)


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Wow logo.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Wow logo.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 10:33, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Don Kingsborough.jpg)[edit]

Nuvola apps important blue.svg Thanks for uploading Image:Don Kingsborough.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 'image' 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 "Image" 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. BJBot (talk) 06:56, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Template:Non-free promotional discussion[edit]

Hello, GRuban. Since you recently contributed to the lively deletion discussion for Template:Non-free promotional, I thought I'd let you know that I've continued the discussion about this template at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content#Template:Non-free promotional. The result of the deletion discussion was to keep the template, but there are still some questions about whether the current template serves a useful purpose and how to prevent its misapplication. Please contribute to the discussion if you are interested. —Bkell (talk) 17:55, 27 January 2008 (UTC)


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:TrailOfTheGoldSpike.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:TrailOfTheGoldSpike.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 02:25, 12 February 2008 (UTC)


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Hitler's War Metagaming.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Hitler's War Metagaming.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 22:23, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Lands of Mystery.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Lands of Mystery.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 23:38, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:SteveLong.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:SteveLong.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:25, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:CatherineMcCord.jpg[edit]

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:CatherineMcCord.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rossrs (talk) 08:49, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:ToniFrissell.jpg[edit]

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:ToniFrissell.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Anrie (talk) 16:48, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Image:Wallace_tahnezh.jpg[edit]

I have tagged Image:Wallace_tahnezh.jpg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Some examples can be found at Wikipedia:Use rationale examples. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags/Non-free. Thank you. Kelly hi! 23:36, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Lisa_Fugard.jpg[edit]

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Lisa_Fugard.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rettetast (talk) 13:58, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Yet another barnstar![edit]

Many thanks! Much appreciated.  :) --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 18:44, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Removal of "academy award winning" from film article leads[edit]

Per WP:PEACOCK. Let the article show the reader, don't tell the reader. Also fringes on POV violation, showing an American bias. Tool2Die4 (talk) 17:22, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Ah. Then I think you have it wrong. Read the example in that very page:

Peacock term:

   * Brazil has a vigorous economy.

Better:

   * According to the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, Brazil has the ninth largest economy in the world by purchasing power parity (PPP)

We're not writing "The Godfather is a great movie". We're writing "The Godfather won the Academy Award". I think that's exactly what "show don't tell". I also don't agree that it shows an American bias - if we were writing about a movie that won a notable French Award, that would be equally appropriate to write in the lead. --GRuban (talk) 17:28, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

There probably needs to be a discussion about this then. I know for a fact I'm not the only one taking this view. See this and this. While I understand it's of the utmost importance to properly portray the obvious importance of a film that was won an Oscar, the term "award-winning" doesn't seem the least bit necessary, if the awards are properly established elsewhere in the article. And I know it isn't a valid argument but probably 50% of the pages I looked at (Best Picture Winners) did not contain the 'award-winning' note in the introductory line. You're obviously approaching this from a good faith stance, and know your Wiki-policy, so I'd be interested to hear how to move forward. Tool2Die4 (talk) 17:42, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Sounds reasonable to discuss the general case - do you have any suggestions as to where? But for the specific case, you'll notice in the article edits you link to, the Academy Award is mentioned in more detail later in the lead, and the second comment says as much. In The Godfather, you took out the only mention of the Academy Award in the lead. If you want to move it to a later sentence with more detail, that seems more reasonable. --GRuban (talk) 17:56, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
I added a sentence about the 3 Oscars in the intro. I will look for the proper place to ask for clarification regarding the issue at large. Tool2Die4 (talk) 18:05, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Take a look at this. Looks like there is a direct MoS reference. I understand what Jim Dunning is saying. I went back through the edits I made, and I think I've come to a good compromise. The issue is with having 'award-winning' or 'Academy Award-winning' in the intro sentence, which I think we've avoided now. All articles I edited now have at least a direct Oscar reference in the lead paragraph. I also understand his argument about Oscars being US-centric (which I had made note of in my first reply to you), but I guess that's a fight for another day. Tool2Die4 (talk) 20:05, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks![edit]

Solo Dios Sabe.jpg RfA: Many thanks
Many thanks for your participation in my recent request for adminship. I am impressed by the amount of thought that goes into people's contribution to the RfA process, and humbled that so many have chosen to trust me with this new responsibility. I step into this new role cautiously, but will do my very best to live up to your kind words and expectations, and to further the project of the encyclopedia. Again, thank you. --jbmurray (talkcontribs) 06:09, 18 May 2008 (UTC)


Fair use rationale for Image:Althea Flynt.gif[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Althea Flynt.gif. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 00:39, 21 May 2008 (UTC)


Fair use rationale for Image:Bond RPG Adventures.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Bond RPG Adventures.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 10:46, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Assata Shakur[edit]

As the FAC has failed, I have copied your comments to the talk page. Savidan 02:02, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I've re-read the NYT archives related to the article and substantially expanded it, with particular emphasis on other details about the trial and shootout. I hope that these have at least softened some of your issues with the article. Please give the shootout and trial sections a new read through and let me know where we stand. Savidan 04:52, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for taking the time to give thorough and specific comments. I think the article has improved greatly from your input. If you think that I have not resolved any of the issues you brought up you can reply in the embedded format and/or by starting a new section. Thanks again. Savidan 20:48, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
Could you restate your remaining comments (if any) in a new section? I think it's getting a bit hard to read. Savidan 23:33, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Sorry if I'm pestering you; if you don't have the time to list your remaining comments now thats fine. Could you just let me know if you have any issues remaining with the article? Thanks, Savidan 06:20, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Don't have as much time as the article deserves, no. I will say three things in general, though - 1) the article is much improved since the FAC - 2) if you're dying for my comments :-) take a look at the ones I've already written. I noticed that in a number of times I came back, you hadn't completely responded to the earlier ones, for example from the first batch one about the convictions of her rescuers, from the second batch one about using a spell checker, etc. 3) the fourth time I come back, I will likely have similar comments to the third time - read the whole thing over, find the the sentences that seem broken or out of place; put them in the right place. Good luck! --GRuban (talk) 12:36, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. I'll re-read your comments, but I guess at the end of the day no one call tell if your comment has been remedied except you. I have added information about the conviction of those you participated in her escape, for example; maybe it wasn't as much as you wanted, maybe you just haven't noticed. Anyway, thanks for all the time that you've put into the article already. Savidan 18:56, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
I have finished re-reading your comments and decided to renominate the article. Just a heads up. If you find yourself with more time, feel free to comment anew. Savidan 22:00, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Circle of Chalk[edit]

Fast, good work there, GRuban-- Thanks! Dekkappai (talk) 23:27, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Circle of Chalk[edit]

Updated DYK query On 1 June, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Circle of Chalk, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 14:34, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Masterpapers article[edit]

I saw my article about Masterpapers company has been deleted due to its 'blatant advertisement' of the company's services. You saw my article and I'm quite sure you didn't find any advertisement. I'm not so confident in such questions, but if Lucinor has ever had some experience with this company how could her/his opinion be neutral one? Regarding notability: he/she knows well (if he/she has had experience as she/he mentioned) that essay selling industry is really notable to write about because there are 'papers mills' as she/he said and they produce THOUSANDS of essays for students. This industry estimates millions of dollars and it IS NOTABLE TO TALK ABOUT! It's become the global-scale problem of fraud and such reports as Times etc. are really important to say about. Among such 'paper mills' masterpapers is a giant, thus I chose this company to write about: it's like McDonald's products among fast food. Essay selling DOES EXIST and it's worth saying due to its huge volumes of profits and services provided. Hope you'll change your mind soon Masterpapers (talk) 22:22, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Masterpapers ... it's not the advertisement, it's that there isn't much written about the company as such. The guideline is called Wikipedia:Notability, and usually boils down to "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject", and we didn't find such coveage. McDonalds, or Microsoft, or Miller Brewing, just to pick 3 Ms (or 3M for that matter!), get people not working for the company writing books, or at least newspaper and magazine articles, about them, not just "the fast food industry" or "the computer software industry" or "the alcoholic beverages industry". If you can show 2 articles, not press releases, and more than directory listings, about MasterPapers, rather than just "the essay selling industry", we will be glad to have an article on MasterPapers. --GRuban (talk) 00:13, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Argument from poor design[edit]

Hi -- as I explained on the talk page of that article, I did some research, and in every source I found, "dysteleological argument" was used to mean something different from what the article is about. Can you please provide a source that supports the change you made? Thanks. Looie496 (talk) 17:32, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Sure. Panda thumbs its nose at the dysteleological arguments of the atheist Stephen Jay Gould Dysteleology and Intelligent Design: If Only This Were a Spoof Bypassing the cracks: An amazing evolution-defying design in a tiny insect National Geographic Evolution Article Discusses Evidence that Supports Intelligent Design (Part III) Truth In Design: An Examination of the Teleological Argument ...
Your argument on the talk page doesn't actually contradict this usage, you realize, it's not "something different", it's just a more general case. One meaning of dysteleological was that the universe lacks purpose, which is interesting, but sort of meaningless - what can you compare the universe to, after all? This usage means that specific parts of the universe lack purpose, which seems much easier to argue about, since there are many alternatives. This is just a time when the special case has become an equally common or even more common usage than the general case, as is quite common among abstract philosophical terms. --GRuban (talk) 17:59, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Here's another, an abstract of a paper from Oxford: he Logic of Dysteleology Paul Nelson Biola University. If you want to write in the article that this is just one of multiple meanings of the word, fine. But that's not the same as saying the article should be deleted. --GRuban (talk) 18:09, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Here's more. [1]:

American Heritage Dictionary - Cite This Source - Share This dys·tel·e·ol·o·gy Audio Help (dĭs-těl'ē-ŏl'ə-jē, -tē'lē-) Pronunciation Key n.

  1. The doctrine of purposelessness in nature.
  2. Purposelessness in natural structures, as manifested by the existence of vestigial or nonfunctional organs or parts.

Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary Dysteleology Dys*te`le*ol"o*gy\, n. [Pref. dys- + teleology.] (Biol.) The doctrine of purposelessness; a term applied by Haeckel to that branch of physiology which treats of rudimentary organs, in view of their being useless to the life of the organism.

To the doctrine of dysteleology, or the denial of final causes, a proof of the real existence of such a thing as instinct must necessarily be fatal. --Word (Dynamic Sociology). Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of creationist museums‎[edit]

Consensus was in favour of deletion, so I closed it thus. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 13:17, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

There were two main reasons why I closed: The solid arguments WP:SALAT and WP:NOT#DIRECTORY. "Keep - but remove red links" isn't really a solid rationale; it didn't really address the two arguments above. The second keep was stronger, but again didn't really address the points above, and was more along the lines of WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. As We66er said, removing the redlinks would leave a list of five, which defeats the object of a "list". On the counter side of that argument, redlinks show potential for new articles, but when there are so many redlinks, there is no need for such a list. There were many items on the list, yet only a handful were referenced, and as another said, one of the organisations on that list had been deleted previously through AfD. The strongest keep therefore was WP:STAND, but that was struck as a result of misinterpretation. This is the full reason for my close. However, deleting admins don't generally say any more than "keep" or "delete" in their closing statement, unless 1) there is a specific reason for the delete and/or 2) it was a decision that could cause controversy. Generally the reasons for delete are ascertainable in the discussion itself. By the way, the text is at User:GRuban/deleted article for your review. Best, 13:57, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, done, I've been debating about what to do with it. I've temporarily restored the whole history to your userspace (User:GRuban/List of creationist museums‎) so you can work on it if needed. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 13:37, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Updated DYK query On 19 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Creation Evidence Museum, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Victuallers (talk) 20:18, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Creationist museums[edit]

Regarding Category:Creationist museums, I suggest you read WP:UNDUE. Many of your recent articles cast science in an incorrect light by citing poor sources promoting pseudoscientific claims. The fact that not a single person who runs one of these places is a not a scientist is not a coincidence. I don't know if you saw the Daily Show clip of Baugh actually comparing reality to The Flintstones, but you should. That interview also mentions the hunting.

I hope you revaluate how you present science. IE, it is not enough to call something "alleged." You must explain why it goes against 200 years of scientific progress and that it is not in the purview of real science. I hope you take this user seriously. A child searching the internet comes across this rubbish will get the wrong impression about how incorrect these people are.

A red flag is when you cited user:Jason Gastrich on one of the articles, His material is to be reverted per this decision here: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Jason Gastrich. Read this he has a "PhD" from the same diploma mill Carl Baugh, Bob Cornuke, etc got their degrees.

Check that decision again - I'm fairly sure it doesn't say what you think it says. It says nothing about us never being allowed to link to or mention him. It just says he isn't allowed to be an editor. So unless you're accusing me of being him... :-) --GRuban (talk) 15:11, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Teachers have a hard enough time trying to undo the pseudoscience of the likes of Kent Hovind and other professional misinformers. Let's not let wikipedia add to the problem. We66er (talk) 23:17, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Why not expand this List of natural history museums? Places such as Elgin Public Museum are much more interesting and significant than Baugh's double-wide lies. We66er (talk) 23:47, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm writing these articles for two reasons.
  1. One, because I'm fairly sure the idea of the Wikipedia is that it should be the sum of all human knowledge. And that doesn't just mean Wikipedia:The Truth; not just the parts of human knowledge that I personally like or agree with. If you check my user page, you'll see I'm a proud member of the Wikipedia: WikiProject Countering Systemic Bias; that's all about writing unpopular articles that yet deserve to be written. I'm not here to pitch their point of view, or any point of view, in fact - if you'll check my WP:CSB work on my page, you'll find a wide assortment of subjects, from American feminists, to Korean artists, to an African armed group. The overwhelming majority of Wikipedia editors are educated, scientific and technical, so favor evolution. But we're not just supposed to be "the sum of scientific knowledge". So these subjects need to be written about too. Someone needs to speak for those who have no voice.
  2. And, two, because you challenged me to. I never did a thing in this area until running across that AFD. If you had merely let the list be, I would have stopped there. Instead, you specifically challenged me to write these articles. So I did that, for five of them, and a category, not a couple, or three or four, as you seem to think. It took me about as many days. I can probably keep going at this rate. You seem to not like me creating these articles, but as long as you bring up more challenges, it's human nature to want to meet them. At this rate, I feel fairly sure I can. Are you sure you want that? All I want is my original goal, restoring the list that I came across in the AFD. The current place to decide that is the DRV, but there will be others - for example, if the decision is that the list needs more work before coming to main space, I feel fairly sure I can put in that work, and if that no list is called for, I feel fairly sure I can write a non-list article. Doubt me? Your call. --GRuban (talk) 14:22, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
The only problem I have, and at least one other editor has, is the wording in your articles promote anti-science, a violation of WP:DUE. You use unreliable sources to make ridiculous claims. That is something you didn't address in your response. We66er (talk) 18:36, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Glad to hear it's just wording. I'd be happy to work on that with you. I've been trying to use wording from the sources I find, and even adjust to wording you'd like better, but I'm sure there's always room to improve. --GRuban (talk) 15:05, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

(unindent) For example, you seem to have objected to 7 Wonders Museum. That's not a very big article, so it should be easy to analyze. Let's take it one sentence at a time, and see what needs work. If we can agree on one, presumably the others will be easier.

  1. The 7 Wonders Creation Museum, also 7 Wonders Museum of Mount St. Helens, is a museum and bookstore dedicated to creation science in Silverlake, Washington (or Toutle, Washington) near Mount St. Helens, United States. Presumably you have no objections there?
  2. Admission is free, and often accompanied by a guided tour of volcano sights.[1][2] Any objections?
  3. The two room museum was founded in 1998 by Lloyd and Doris Anderson, who live in a nearby house. Any ridiculous claims so far?
  4. Lloyd Anderson, born circa 1934, has a master's degree in theology from Dallas Theological Seminary, and is a retired former pastor; his wife Doris has worked as a registered nurse and journalist.[1][2][3] How about here?
  5. The 7 Wonders Museum takes its name from seven Mount St. Helens land features that changed in no more than a few years. Here?
  6. These, the museum owners say, disproves the more commonly accepted theories of archaeologists, geologists, paleontologists and other scientists that the Earth had to evolve over millions of years.[citation needed] Not sure what part you think needs citation. That the owners say so? That's the citation at the very next sentence (to a pulitzer-prize winning newspaper). That the other theories are commonly accepted? Something else?
  7. For example, the second wonder is the rapid formation of the Step and Loowit canyons in front of the volcano crater over five months in the 1980 eruption of Mount St. Helens.[1]
  8. The Andersons see the eruption as divine evidence for young earth creationism, and see their museum as a counterpoint to the many shops and visitors centers near Mount St. Helens conveying the secular view.[4]
  9. Scientific critics say the museum rejects any part of modern science that doesn't agree with its preconceived views, and misleads visitors by extrapolating very special geologic events into equivalence with much longer-term events.[2]

Issues?

List of natural history museums[edit]

"Why not expand this List of natural history museums?"

All right - I'll take that as a challenge. :-). I'll start with Morro Bay State Park Museum of Natural History. Watch the red link turn blue. Hopefully it'll be a sign of us working together. --GRuban (talk) 19:50, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

DYK[edit]

Updated DYK query On 26 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mt. Blanco Fossil Museum, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Gatoclass (talk) 17:04, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: Allosaurus?[edit]

Allosaurus and Triceratops are genus names. Mastodon, cat and dog are common names. Mgiganteus1 (talk) 22:32, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of True Adventures[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

A tag has been placed on True Adventures requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a club, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guidelines for people and for organizations.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. — dαlus Contribs /Improve 07:47, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Restoring True Adventures[edit]

Best of luck in restoring True Adventures. Just in case you missed it, I've previously asked User:Gwen Gale to restore a number of the LARP articles she deleted, but she disagreed with my reasoning. Our discussion is here if you're curious. (I'm linking to the archive since Gwen archives aggressively; understandable given the traffic on her talk page.) I'm working on putting together arguments for WP:DRV reviews of several of the more notable LARP articles, but it's tiresome work and it may be a while. I'm trying to be careful to have a solid case, since multiple review requests will likely just leave admins with a bad impression about you. If you think True Adventures is ready for restoration and open a review at WP:DRV, please let me know and I'll provide what support I can. Thanks for your time! — Alan De Smet | Talk 22:50, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

All restored[edit]

I've restored them all, some things trump CSD A7 worries. All the best, Gwen Gale (talk) 06:40, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, appreciated! --GRuban (talk) 08:58, 9 September 2008 (UTC)


Lenin and the Jews[edit]

Most of the material was copied into other articles from the Lenin, not vice versa. This is a common practice amongst lazy editors and should not be used as an excuse to delete the original material. If you look at the edit history you will see that the Lenin and the Jews section grew incrementally over a period of years, it was not copied from another article. Lenin and the Bolsheviks policy towards the Jews was a radical departure from the previous history of Russia and the whole subject has a bearing on Lenin's harsh attitude towards the church mentioned elsewhere in the article. Lenin saw the Orthodox church as the prime mover behind the Black Hundreds who initiated pogroms against the Jews. The whole issue of anti-Semitic pogroms was a live issue during the Revolution, with the Reds warning that they were a manifestation of right-wing White terror and the Whites using them as an instrument of policy in actual pogroms and also vis-a-vis their proposed bloody mass pogrom of what they saw as a Jewish/Bolshevik government if they had ever captured Moscow (as per the reaction after the Paris Commune in 1871). White Anti-Semitism was a popular rallying standard for right-wing opponents of the Bolsheviks. Basically the Civil War was a stand off between the extreme right and the extreme left. The liberals didn't figure either in numbers or military strength. Ant-Semitism and anti-anti-Semitism it is an issue of a fundamental importance to the history of the time. Just out of interest do the deletionists think that in articles dealing with the history of the Third Reich that 'Hitler's attitude to the Jews' is an unimportant matter which should be relegated to a peripheral article. The Whites practised the same genocide against the Jews as Hitler. Lenin's attitude towards the Jews was therefore as important in historical terms as Hitler's attitude. Colin4C (talk) 19:05, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

RFC bot[edit]

Those are actually expiration dates, so naturally the newer ones will have future timestamps. --harej 19:11, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

The RFC bot removes the tags after 30 days. Also, there are still some issues to work out. --harej 21:12, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

D&D articles for Wikipedia 0.7[edit]

Hi there!  :)

As someone who's worked on D&D and/or RPG articles before, I'm inviting you to participate in our goal to both improve articles that have been selected to be placed in the next Wikipedia DVD release, as well as nominate more to be selected for this project. Please see the WikiProject D&D talk page for more details. :) BOZ (talk) 18:16, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Chihuahua[edit]

Note that the move broke the disambiguation page - the link to Chihuahua (state) now goes nowhere useful -- actually, that was me changing it from Chihuahua (Mexico) to Chihuahua (state) there on the dabpage while doing a spot of cleanup after the move; sorry. I should have checked instead of assuming that the drive-by editor who started this whole mess would at least have fixed her double redirects. Anyway, thanks for chiming in on the discussion although (and I still can't get my head around this) it appears to be a lost cause. Aille (talk) 20:30, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


Image source problem with Image:Don Kingsborough.jpg[edit]

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:Don Kingsborough.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 20:15, 28 September 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Angr 20:15, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

From http://www.lasertag.com.au/history.htm, but who owns the photo is not really relevant,

since we're using it under fair use, regardless of their copyright. We're using it despite anyone's ownership. --GRuban (talk)

DYK for American Student Assistance[edit]

Updated DYK query On 27 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article American Student Assistance, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Keep up the good work! ~ User:Ameliorate! (with the !) (talk) 04:50, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi[edit]

Good to see you here! It's been a long time! --Orlady (talk) 19:06, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Likewise! I've seen you about for a while, but you've been low key. Active, but quiet about it. Liftarn shows up more than you do.
I'm fairly low key here too... and don't think I've written a single tool! Bigger pond effect maybe?
Back at ODP, you were the definitive Meta peacemaker. Now people are calling you sarcastic and abrasive? I did a double take there! :-) --GRuban (talk) 19:48, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
I'm still at ODP, but less active. I've noticed liftarn here, but most of the familiar faces I come across here are probably since your time at ODP. I'm surprised to hear that you haven't written any tools here; I guess you're leaving that to the younger generation.
As for my reputation, I don't think I have changed much, but it's a different culture here. ODP has its drama, but the worse of dmoz drama is pretty tame compared with a typical day of wikidrama. I know that I have been sarcastic on occasion here, but I think that some of the complaints of bullying and abrasiveness are coming from people who are mistakenly identifying the behavior they see in the mirror as "Orlady." --Orlady (talk) 03:11, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

DYK for New Man[edit]

Updated DYK query On May 10, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article New Man, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Shubinator (talk) 01:59, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks[edit]

for the barnstar! –Juliancolton | Talk 01:49, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

David Copperfield photo[edit]

Hello, I do not understand what you meant by "room for both pictures". Do you mean that we can have 2 photos for David Copperfield? The only reason I replaced the current photo is because it is at least 15 years old and he no longer looks like that (hairstyle, clothing, etc.) so I wanted to post an updated photo. Did I not do it correctly? Please advise. TheMagicOfDC (talk) 15:43, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that was what I meant, we can have 2 photos of David Copperfield, that article is large enough, and both are free photos. I'm not sure why you think that one is 15 years old, though, the source for the picture said it was from 2007, though I guess that could have been a mistake by the source, some photo sites will happily give the upload date as the picture date. If you are quite sure that it is not from 2007, we can remove the date there. --GRuban (talk) 16:37, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Re: Proposed decision finding 14[edit]

Thanks for catching that. That was supposed to be under Scjessey, not Baseball Bugs. Dunno how I messed that up. Wizardman 15:50, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

List of celebrity and notable guest appearances in Doctor Who[edit]

There's a new AfD nomination for an article you've previously discussed. Please stop by to voice your opinions again. CzechOut | 11:45, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Bing starovoitova.png)[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Bing starovoitova.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 03:46, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

New Alan Roger Currie article[edit]

Thank you very much GRuban for your efforts and objectivity in this issue. Extremely appreciated. Chicago Smooth talk 14:08, 17 August 2009


alan roger currie afd[edit]

please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Alan_Roger_Currie_%282nd_nomination%29. it was recently deleted, and you voted either delete or keep, and it has since been recreated. i am messaging all previous voters to see if they wish to vote again. please do not take this as canvassing, as i have attempted to contact all voters Theserialcomma (talk) 07:13, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

File:Kathy_Keeton.gif[edit]

I have tagged File:Kathy_Keeton.gif as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Some examples can be found at Wikipedia:Use rationale examples. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags/Non-free. Thank you. Rettetast (talk) 17:27, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:A Frontier Nurse Rides Through the Rain.jpg[edit]

File:A Frontier Nurse Rides Through the Rain.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:A Frontier Nurse Rides Through the Rain.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:A Frontier Nurse Rides Through the Rain.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 18:38, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

List of creationist museums[edit]

I added the content from your "List of creationist museums" to the article Creationist museum. See what you think. Plazak (talk) 02:29, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2009-07-20/List of charities accused of ties to terrorism[edit]

It seems that our moderator is back from his wikibreak, can we begin to move forward on this case again? I dont consider this matter resolved and hope we can break the deadlock with input from outside sources. Thanks in advance. Bonewah (talk) 14:37, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

David Shankbone[edit]

User:GRuban/Shankbone. Thanks, Black Kite 00:32, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

If I may interject...shouldn't it be restored and moved rather than copied and pasted? It seems this may well be recreated at some point, so we should be mindful of GFDL.  Frank  |  talk  15:48, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

File:A Frontier Nurse Rides Through the Rain.jpg[edit]

Thats obviously not an photograph created by an employee of the U.S. federal government during this persons official duties - or? But thats what the PD reason is at the moment. The image is also not public domain because it comes from a LOC website, see their copyright. But why should this bee public domain? --Martin H. (talk) 23:00, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

I think I uploaded this back in 2006, when I didn't understand the LoC copyright issues. On consideration, I think you are right. This, and a few others, are probably not PD. I'll look through my other uploads at the time over the next few days. A number of similar photos by women photographers are work for the US Fed Govt, for Roosevelt era programs giving work to artists, but this doesn't seem to be one. Thanks for the reminder. --GRuban (talk) 02:46, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination[edit]

I commented at your DYK nomination here. On re-reading, my comment appears a bit terse; please let me know if my meaning is unclear. Thanks for submitting the article, Ucucha 20:52, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Biographies_of_living_people#View_by_MZMcBride[edit]

This is not a game of whack a mole? Oh right... LOL. Bearian (talk) 02:47, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar search rescue.png The Article Rescue Barnstar
I award you this barnstar for the rescue and referencing of Sue Fink, Susan Owens and Wallace Reyburn ϢereSpielChequers 15:45, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Discussion invitation[edit]

British Royalty Hi GRuban, I would like to invite you and anyone watching who shares an interest in moving forward constructively to a discussion about Biographies of Living People

New editors' lack of understanding of Wikipedia processes has resulted in thousands of BLPs being created over the last few years that do not meet BLP requirements. We are currently seeking constructive proposals on how to help newcomers better understand what is expected, and how to improve some 48,000 articles about living people as created by those 17,500 editors, through our proper cleanup, expansion, and sourcing.

These constructive proposals might then be considered by the community as a whole at Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people.

Please help us:

Ikip 05:06, 28 January 2010 (UTC) (refactored - thanks for your suggestion! hope to hear your comments!} Ikip 16:27, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Philip Lindholm[edit]

Hey, just to let you know that I've commented on the AfD debate for this. In summary, I think the article overdoes it a bit, but he might be notable. If you could give it another look that would be great. Quantpole (talk) 15:54, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Surprise[edit]

Socratic Barnstar.png The Socratic Barnstar
For your well phrased arguments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anders Blixt. Pcap ping 15:31, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Edit summary of the week award[edit]

This edit summary made my week. Thank you! Risker (talk) 21:54, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

I tremble in awe, but accept. After reading a certain paragraph of the proposed decision, I suggest the following formal symbol for the new award ... :-) --GRuban (talk) 22:24, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
RoastingMarshmallow.jpg

Since you asked for it[edit]

Emblem-very-very-evil.svg ArbCom ate my soul and all I got was this lousy userbox.


Oh and thanks for the spelling fix. Shell babelfish 23:00, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Your immortal soul[edit]

Please be advised that the Arbitration Committee has decided that you may retain your immortal soul, by a vote of 9 in favor and 3 opposed, with 2 abstaining. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 04:28, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

alexander mcqueen images[edit]

The fair-use one I removed because it should be deleted. There are a number of legit photos on flickr of mcqueen, and we just need to ask these photographers and get one to change the licensing. The others are clearly professional photos randomly posted to flickrstreams (low-res, and only pro photographers have the seats where they can get this angle). I haven't gotten around to nominating them for deletion, but since they're copyvios they shouldn't be in the article. Calliopejen1 (talk) 20:12, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Makes sense. I went back to Flickr and checked; three do seem to be noticeably different from the photographer's personal photos, I nominated them for speedy deletion at Commons. The last, however, is taken by a professional photographer, with the same camera he uses for his other pics. I'll fight to defend that one. --GRuban (talk) 20:48, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Final discussion for Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people[edit]

Hello, I note that you have commented on the first phase of Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

As this RFC closes, there are two proposals being considered:

  1. Proposal to Close This RfC
  2. Alternate proposal to close this RFC: we don't need a whole new layer of bureaucracy

Your opinion on this is welcome. Okip 02:18, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Your reply on Associated Press Reliable source[edit]

Hello GRuban, I have replied to help at the above. Thanks! Victor9876 (talk) 14:57, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Contention[edit]

I don't believe that all unsourced information is contentious; there are plenty of unsourced statements in BLPs that have not given rise to any contention. That is not the case for BLPs that are unsourced in their entirety, however: clearly those are contentious. Steve Smith (talk) 23:33, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Birthdate[edit]

Thank you, thank you, thank you for this. --Jezebel'sPonyoshhh 16:10, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome! I saw you asking at WP:RSN ... :-) --GRuban (talk) 17:54, 19 March 2010 (UTC)


Palatine Imperial Palace photo[edit]

Don't think that I can rotate it without "breaking " it. Feel free to rotate if you can do so safely. Laurel Lodged (talk) 13:46, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Adam Kontras[edit]

Thank you so much for your support in the argument for my latest article for deletion. Wikipedia has been a valuable resource for the establishment of my career, and has led to interviews and some notoriety. Once again, I thank you so much for your support. Adam kontras (talk) 19:27, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Nice finds[edit]

You made some nice finds in those sources for American City University. I'm impressed!

I hope you'll be !voting at the AfD, too. --Orlady (talk) 16:12, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Thank you for your referencing work on the article Herbert Schildt. Much appreciated, -- Cirt (talk) 05:30, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome! Glad to help. --GRuban (talk) 06:00, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Dell Schanze[edit]

This is an interesting case. The use of WP:BLPDEL was bold, but the deletion was appropriate per WP:BLP, WP:NOTSCANDAL, WP:ATP, and WP:BIO. Schanze is known (rather than "notable") for his annoying ads, which led to public attention to otherwise trivial events.

WP:BIO states, "The topic of an article should be notable, or "worthy of notice"; that is, "significant, interesting, or unusual enough to deserve attention or to be recorded."[1] Notable in the sense of being "famous", or "popular"—although not irrelevant—is secondary."

In my opinion, Schanze is not notable, only well-known in a limited geographical area because of poor journalistic standards there. --Ronz (talk) 16:10, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

We'll see, after I rewrite it. Personally, I never saw one of his ads, and am not planning to focus the article on his scandals. I did, however, read about a self made millionaire, daredevil, and candidate for multiple offices. That seems plenty significant, interesting, and unusual. --GRuban (talk) 16:13, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
I tried the same, but couldn't find a single, non-trivial reference that didn't include scandal mongering. --Ronz (talk) 17:25, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Oh, that's not the same thing. You can't find a single non-trivial reference about Bill Clinton or Richard Nixon or John Edwards or Mark Sanford or ...(what is it about politicians, anyway?) that doesn't include scandal mongering, but that doesn't mean we can't write a balanced article about them. I don't intend to focus on the scandals, but that's not the same as not mentioning them. --GRuban (talk) 17:57, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
I just wanted to give you some indication on my perspective, given the loss of the talk page discussions. I'm not sure what to make of your response. You realize it's nonsense, right? How is it compatible with BLP? --Ronz (talk) 18:57, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
If you think it's nonsense, we're talking past each other. Let me write the article, then, if it doesn't meet our standards, you can nominate it for deletion. Don't nominate it before I've written it. :-) --GRuban (talk) 19:08, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
No one is stopping you from creating the article. If you seriously believe your comment about scandal-mongering, then you're likely just wasting your time by using poor, even unacceptable, references. I think it would be helpful for you to explain what you mean, rather than dismissing my concerns. --Ronz (talk) 19:18, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
I'll write the article so it meets Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons, using references that meet Wikipedia:Reliable sources. That's what we're supposed to do, so I'll do it. That's spelled out in reasonable detail at those links. I don't know what what else you want me to explain. Oh, I'll also be using the humor of User:Baseball_Bugs, the wisdom of User:Newyorkbrad, the photography skills of User:Durova, and the kindness of User:Phaedriel.OK, that last is impossible for mere mortals, but I'll try. :-) --GRuban (talk) 19:31, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
LOL. Let me know if I can help.
While I agree that business success, bravado, and political aspirations can all be notable, I'm not sure if they are in his case. I'll wait and see what refs you choose and how you use them, especially in terms of WP:BIO. --Ronz (talk) 19:45, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Ready for your review before going live. See User:GRuban/Dell Schanze, and please comment (if short, here, if extensive, on the "article" talk page). --GRuban (talk) 08:15, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Userspace article[edit]

At a glance, I'd say absolutely not for the very reasons brought up before. No offense. You've obviously put a great deal of work into this. --Ronz (talk) 16:23, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

  • OK. I'll wait a bit to see if you have specific suggestions that will make you happier with the article, and if so, I'll see if I can implement them, so we can reach some sort of consensus. Otherwise, we'll have to go to the agree-to-disagree + mainspace + AFD route. I'd much prefer the consensus idea. --GRuban (talk) 16:29, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Given what I see just skimming it a bit, I'm for immediate deletion. If anyone provides evidence for keeping it, I'll look at it closer. --Ronz (talk) 16:34, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Can you be specific as to your reasons for deletion? --GRuban (talk) 16:40, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
I see you're active elsewhere, so I'll take that as a "no". A shame we can't at least try to come to a consensus, we seem like reasonable people. See you at the AFD, I guess. --GRuban (talk) 17:07, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
To expand a bit, I don't think the article begins to address most of the concerns brought up with past articles. Are any of the sources up to BLP standards? Certainly none of the few which I examined, and that's enough to require extensive changes, if not outright deletion per {{db-g10}} --Ronz (talk) 17:18, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
They're perfectly reliable sources - respectable newspapers, magazines, and television. Here, let's be specific. Pick one source, and explain why you don't think it meets WP:RS. I'll either agree, and remove or replace it, or will explain why I believe it does. --GRuban (talk) 17:22, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Did you participate in the past discussions or not? If you did, you should recall that WP:BLP requires more. --Ronz (talk) 17:31, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Nope, I didn't. The first time I saw this article was after it was deleted. Let's be specific. Please pick one source and point out what part of WP:BLP it doesn't meet. I'll either agree and ... --GRuban (talk) 18:00, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

It's deleted. How about you pick one source that doesn't have the problems mentioned in this discussion? That's what I was looking for. I didn't find one, but I stopped looking when I saw that the first few independent references were exactly the type that were cause for concern previously. --Ronz (talk) 18:07, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Specific sources[edit]

OK, let's go in the order I wrote it.

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dell_Schanze&oldid=369012282 The source there is VARBusiness, "a USA magazine covering Computer Applications... 20 years in print", which is being used to source business statistics, and the fact there was a dispute with the Better Business Bureau. For all this it seems to be a reliable source. Agree? --GRuban (talk) 19:22, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

To save time, I'll pretend that's good, though please do confirm. Next:

2. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dell_Schanze&direction=next&oldid=369012282 The source is "'Super Dell' files for mayor of Saratoga Springs", Donald W. Meyers, Salt Lake Tribune. From our article, "The Salt Lake Tribune is the largest-circulated daily newspaper in the U.S. city of Salt Lake City, Utah.... founded in 1871 ... circulation 128,000 daily ... [listed in the] 2007 Top 100 Daily Newspapers in the U.S. by Circulation ..." The words "tabloid", "rag", and "scandal-sheet" are conspicuous by their absence. When information was leaked to a tabloid, heads rolled. Good enough?

3. Same revision, third source is the State of Utah. A Wikipedia:primary source, but for sourcing a number, hopefully it'll do. Yes? --GRuban (talk) 19:38, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Are you going to address WP:BLP issues at all? --Ronz (talk) 20:26, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
I certainly hope so. (Unless you mean "no negative material"; but BLP doesn't say that.) "In a nutshell', WP:BLP says "Material about living persons must be written with the greatest care and attention to verifiability, neutrality, and avoiding original research." I did my best to do that. Of course, I may be missing something as the author, a fresh pair of eyes may well see something I don't, so I welcome your help. Neutrality seems to be the hardest, since it's an opinion; verifiability and avoiding original research I'm quite sure I did, neutrality I can only do my best at. HJ seems to say it's slanted, but hasn't said where yet; since I wrote it, I may be missing where, and how to unslant, but I'm perfectly willing to look. If that's your objection, please say what, where, and how to fix it, and I'll try to adjust. But what issue do you mean, specifically? --GRuban (talk) 20:33, 20 June 2010 (UTC)


I guess you're standing by your statement, "You can't find a single non-trivial reference about Bill Clinton or Richard Nixon or John Edwards or Mark Sanford or ...(what is it about politicians, anyway?) that doesn't include scandal mongering." I don't believe that such viewpoint is compatible with WP:BLP. --Ronz (talk) 20:38, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
I'm sorry, that's out of left field. Or at least, I don't understand how to respond to it constructively. Do you have a specific objection to a specific item in the article? We don't have to talk similes about Clinton or Nixon any more, we have the real article. I'd really like to address any specific issues you have with the real article in question. Please, pretend I can't read your mind. Show me. --GRuban (talk) 20:50, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Sorry. I'm trying to stick to what I see as the main problem. Let me try to explain:
I wrote earlier (above), "If you seriously believe your comment about scandal-mongering, then you're likely just wasting your time by using poor, even unacceptable, references. I think it would be helpful for you to explain what you mean, rather than dismissing my concerns."
You never explained your meaning, but instead went ahead and created a new article.
I'd forgotten the details from this and the other discussions when I went to review your new article. I read through the first section and checked the references. I then read the discussion above to remind myself of the details, and gave you my first comment [2].
While I didn't realize you hadn't been involved in the work on the previous version, you've seen and participated in all the discussions that I've linked at the article talk page. I believe that these discussions give you some perspective about concerns from others, all similar to my own.
I'm saying you've not addressed the concerns from the previous article. Instead, you've ignored them. When I asked, "How about you pick one source that doesn't have the problems mentioned in this discussion? " I was asking for a source without scandal-mongering. --Ronz (talk) 21:11, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Ah. Thanks, now I understand. You believe that WP:BLP forbids the use of sources with scandal-mongering. Correct? Before we go further, can you say yes or no to that question, and then say which of the 3 I've listed is a source with scandal-mongering? --GRuban (talk) 21:30, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Nope. I believe you're ignoring the problems that resulted in the previous version being deleted. I believe you're standing by your statement, "You can't find a single non-trivial reference about Bill Clinton or Richard Nixon or John Edwards or Mark Sanford or ...(what is it about politicians, anyway?) that doesn't include scandal mongering." I believe the first two sources you list above should not be used in the manner that you've done in the final version of your article, and that they're poor sources that probably should not be used at all. --Ronz (talk) 22:45, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and endorsed the DRV, trying to make clear the problem we've been discussing. I appreciate the time you've spent discussing this with me. I wish the relevant policies and guidelines were more clear on these issues. --Ronz (talk) 17:11, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

File:A_Mysterious_Presence;_Macrophotography_of_Plants.jpg[edit]

I have tagged File:A_Mysterious_Presence;_Macrophotography_of_Plants.jpg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Some examples can be found at Wikipedia:Use rationale examples. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags/Non-free. Thank you. Melesse (talk) 03:31, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

May 2010[edit]

Please refrain from removing image deletion notices from images you have uploaded unless you have addressed the noted concern. You need to provide a license tag for any image you upload, regardless of whether the file is free or non-free. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:27, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Dell Schanze[edit]

I'm afraid I've deleted that article because the individual appears to be marginally notable at best and almost the entire article, while sourced, dealt with very negative aspects for which he isn't notable, thus I felt I was obliged to remove it per WP:BLP. If you want the source code, I can email it to you on the promise that you won;t repost it on here. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:03, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I believe you'll find the individual is perfectly Wikipedia:Notable, and the negative aspects are in proportion to their contribution to his notability. He's a self-made multi-millionaire, a daredevil, and a regular candidate for important office, including the Libertarian party nominee for governor, and the sources that took note of all this were quite extensive. A much worse version survived the only AFD it faced with a keep, and I rewrote the article from scratch since then. If you believe it doesn't meet our tougher standards since, fine, that's cause for another AFD, but not for a speedy deletion. You'll notice another admin was just about to decline the speedy tag; in most WP:DRVs not being an obvious speedy is taken as grounds for restoration and at least AFD. --GRuban (talk) 18:13, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Just to let you know that I closed the deletion review as endorsing the deletion of the Schanze article. I suspect a second attempt will meet with the same problems: not very famous and reporting wholly negative. The moral, I suppose, is something like "do not piss off the jerks who write newspapers or they will make you look stupid". If you want the text, please let me know. Angus McLellan (Talk) 23:49, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Why[edit]

Why tell him to stop digging? If people want to support him, fine, but let's not kid ourselves about what he's about.--Cube lurker (talk) 14:10, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Because he's a good guy. He's under tremendous stress, which is affecting his judgment; imagine how you'd feel if people were publicly discussing firing you from your job. He clearly values Wikipedia, I don't think this is any less valuable to him than their job is to most people. That's what he's about. and why am I telling him? Because I think he is a good guy, and a net asset. I would not touch the area he works in with a ten foot pole; but someone does have to. Because he does, I, and most of us, don't have to. That's worth a lot. --GRuban (talk) 14:19, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks![edit]

Thank for for the star and kind words. Herostratus (talk) 02:48, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

re Meetup[edit]

Thanks! Hope you all had a good time. See you next time I hope! Herostratus (talk) 03:26, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Andre/i/y/j Stepanov[edit]

Nice work on the diplomat, and I agree that he seems notable. I still believe that the pages need to be temporarily deleted, to sort out the mess that has been left behind, but otherwise you are correct. The full explanation of what I believe needs to be done can be found at the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard thread. Regards, WFC (talk) 04:55, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm not 100% sure what is needed here, have asked a Q at WP:AN. Once I'm clear on what is desired, then I will make the necessary changes. Mjroots (talk) 07:49, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Eido Shimano dispute[edit]

Hi G- I appreciated your support on my proposed changes to the Shimano page. However, I have been meeting with steep opposition, especially from user Slp1 who now has started a BLP entry saying there was unanimous consensus against my changes - which is clearly untrue, as you are my witness. Would you mind giving your two cents at WP:BLP/N#Eido_Tai_Shimano. I even made changes sense that I felt better improved the passage and added greater clarity, accuracy and readability.Tao2911 (talk) 22:54, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Thank you, for your comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daryl Wine Bar and Restaurant. I happen to agree with you, the coverage received from WP:RS secondary sources is indeed both "national" and "regional", not simply "local", and have started a discussion of The New York Times being distinguished as a "regional" versus "local" source, at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#The_New_York_Times_a_.22local.22_source.3F. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 16:24, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

(Not asking you to comment at the WP:RSN thread, just wanted to get some clarity regarding the source, The New York Times.) Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 17:21, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
Cirt please see WP:CANVASS regarding inappropriate notification -- "Posting messages to groups of users selected on the basis of their known opinions – for example, sending notifications only to those who supported a particular viewpoint in a previous discussion, or who state on their user page (e.g. through a userbox or user category) that they hold a particular opinion ("votestacking")". That one message contains all the information needed to deduce this to be inappropriate by that standard.Griswaldo (talk) 17:26, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
In this case it's all right, I actually got to the AFD from seeing the RSN post. :-) --GRuban (talk) 17:31, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

VPC[edit]

— raekyT 23:38, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

You might find this wp:dab discussion interesting[edit]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Disambiguation#Agree_on_the_goal_and_all_else_should_follow   Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 00:55, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

File:Courage comes in the four year size.jpg listed for deletion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Courage comes in the four year size.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. howcheng {chat} 18:26, 20 September 2010 (UTC) howcheng {chat} 18:26, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Pending changes/Straw poll on interim usage[edit]

Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:34, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:General Green Pea.gif[edit]

Copyright-problem.svg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:General Green Pea.gif. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:56, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Down With The King.jpg[edit]

Copyright-problem.svg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Down With The King.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:14, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Feng Shui RPG Cover.jpg[edit]

Copyright-problem.svg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Feng Shui RPG Cover.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 01:03, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Avraham Shmulevich[edit]

As a contributor to this article (and to its previous AFD back in 2006), you may be interested to know I have renominated it for deletion. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Avraham Shmulevich (2nd nomination). Robofish (talk) 03:35, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Marvin Breckinridge broadcasting.jpg[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Marvin Breckinridge broadcasting.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --Kelly hi! 03:34, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Trying to implement your suggestion for Okanagan Valley (wine)[edit]

Hey GRuban, another editor and I are trying to implement your suggestion from the RN board about having a line that mentions the Sonoran in the Okanagan and the dissenting views. This other editor has put up a proposed wording here Talk:Okanagan_Valley_(wine_region)#Desert_Issue_Compromise with Skookum offering up an alternative wording. If you're interested would you be willing to take a look at the proposed wording and offer your view? Though, if you're sick of this whole fiasco, I certainly understand. :) AgneCheese/Wine 06:04, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Autopatrolled[edit]

Wikipedia Autopatrolled.svg

Hello, this is just to let you know that I have granted you the "autopatrolled" permission. This won't affect your editing, it just automatically marks any page you create as patrolled, benefiting new page patrollers. Please remember:

  • This permission does not give you any special status or authority
  • Submission of inappropriate material may lead to its removal
  • You may wish to display the {{Autopatrolled}} top icon and/or the {{User wikipedia/autopatrolled}} userbox on your user page
  • If, for any reason, you decide you do not want the permission, let me know and I can remove it
If you have any questions about the permission, don't hesitate to ask. Otherwise, happy editing! Acalamari 11:23, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Tree shaping[edit]

There is a proposed Topic Ban for Blackash and Slowart on Tree shaping related articles at the Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents As you have had some involvement with these editors in question, you may wish to comment. Blackash have a chat 00:57, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

George Hugh Niederauer[edit]

Thanks for the image. That article has been needing one for a while. Best regards, - Alvincura (talk) 17:20, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome! --GRuban (talk) 20:59, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Research survey invitation[edit]

Greetings GRuban-

My name is Randall Livingstone, and I am a doctoral student at the University of Oregon, studying digital media and online community. I am posting to invite you to participate in my research study exploring the work of Wikipedia editors who are members of WikiProject: Countering Systemic Bias. The online survey should take 20 to 25 minutes to complete and can be found here:

https://oregon.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_cSHzuwaQovaZ6ss

Your responses will help online communication researchers like me to better understand the collaborations, challenges, and purposeful work of Wikipedia editors like you. In addition, at the end of the survey you will have the opportunity to express your interest in a follow-up online interview with the researcher.

This research project has been reviewed and approved by the Wikimedia Research Committee as well as the Office for Protection of Human Subjects at the University of Oregon. For a detailed description of the project, please visit its Meta page. This survey is voluntary, and your confidentiality will be protected. You will have the choice of using your Wikipedia User Name during the research or creating a unique pseudonym. You may skip any question you choose, and you may withdraw at any time. By completing the survey, you are providing consent to participate in the research.

If you have any questions about the study, please contact me via my Talk Page (UOJComm) or via email. My faculty advisor is Dr. Ryan Light. If you have any questions regarding your rights as a research participant, please contact the Office for Protection of Human Subjects at the University of Oregon.

Thank you very much.

Sincerely,

Randall Livingstone School of Journalism & Communication University of Oregon UOJComm (talk) 04:00, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Mother and Child.gif[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Mother and Child.gif. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. 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 any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:46, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Moritatensänger an der Drehorgel.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Moritatensänger an der Drehorgel.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. 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 any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:54, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Alexandra Govere[edit]

No prob. I did try to look through the sources when I first found it, and tried looking for sources elsewhere too. It's not like a take any pleasure one way or another in deleting an article, and others find sources for it, that's fine by me. When I am informed good sources exist for it, I sometimes exhibit an almost addictive tendency to improve the article myself, as a kind of personal project. But thanks for the compliment. It was very nice of you. :-) Nightscream (talk) 20:06, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Linda McMahon[edit]

Hey, I got your message, and yes, there are multiple sources. I didn't follow the noticeboard and I'm sorry, I know you were at work trying to resolve the issue. Ok now, there are a lot of references saying she signed Owen Hart's contract: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/06/22/politics/main6607909.shtml http://www.journalinquirer.com/articles/2010/09/03/page_one/doc4c80f1564e99e965394771.txt http://www.ctmirror.org/sites/default/files/documents/Complaint.pdf

her congressional testimony is pretty good, because it asks her a lot of contract related questions. it could be better, because most of what she did was deflect questions about the company's drug policy http://blogs.courant.com/capitol_watch/Linda%20McMahon%27s%20congressional%20testimony.pdf

she inserted the death clause into wrestler contracts, a hot button issue during her 2010 race: http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/2010-10-18-adwatch18_ST_N.htm

I know there's more out there, but it is not that easy to find. --Screwball23 talk 15:27, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

pic request[edit]

Hi - please see contact details which may be a good place to request a picture release. (out an about Off2riorob) - Avoidours49 (talk) 18:01, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks - I didn't see that. Emailed request. --GRuban (talk) 19:08, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Charles Kushner[edit]

Thank you for the improvements you made to the article. It's my hope that the two editors warring over the extremely peripheral Wilda Diaz will now go back where they came from. You made wikipedia better today. Major props. David in DC (talk) 14:57, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Philip A. Payton, Jr.[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 00:07, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

AFD[edit]

Please comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jonathon Sharkey (5th nomination). Thanks! SOXROX (talk) 04:14, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Excessive groundless noms[edit]

I've left a warning at User_talk:Dkchana. --Lexein (talk) 23:58, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

But you didn't weigh on his other deletion nominations? I found a number of sources for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unidentified (2nd nomination) and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Me & You, Us, Forever.--GRuban (talk) 12:58, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
We do what we can. I have now applied my avoirdupois to the scales of justice. --Lexein (talk) 21:53, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
There were others so prodded and others similarly nominated. Time for a large scale fish fry. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 00:59, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
Barnstar of Humour3.png The Barnstar of Good Humor
Thank you for the good sense and the shared smile. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 01:04, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

You eyes, please[edit]

I've just completed a 22X expansion of Umbrage (film) and would appreciate another set of eyes to go through it to check for typos and such. If you have the time. More though, I wish some input on a possible DYK to share this article on Main page. Any suggestions? Thanks, Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 04:10, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Made a couple of tweaks. As commented on the article talk page, I think the review section is too long; I shortened it a bit, but I believe more should be done. For DYK - how about:
... that Umbrage is a vampire film that doesn't use the word "vampire" throughout its duration? --GRuban (talk) 14:16, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
I went over the article several times, trying to think of a hook. I like that!
... that Umbrage is a vampire film that never mentions the word "vampire"?
(don't forget film title italics) --Lexein (talk) 15:24, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

RE :OUTING[edit]

Gruban, Ihear you, however, the user in questions has never stated that's there name. Per WP:OUTING:

Posting another editor's personal information is harassment, unless that person voluntarily had posted his or her own information, or links to such information, on Wikipedia. Personal information includes legal name, date of birth, identification numbers, home or workplace address.....

You get the idea. If the user doesn't say there name, we can any assumnptions, even if we think it's obvious It's outing. @-Kosh► Talk to the VorlonsMoon Base Alpha-@ 18:36, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Then you should probably repeat on Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#BLP_mess where the outing is continued, no? --GRuban (talk) 21:54, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi, this message is to let you know about disambiguation links you've recently created. A link to a disambiguation page is almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. For more information, see the FAQ or drop a line at the DPL WikiProject.

James Jones Literary Society (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
was linked to William Morrow

Any suggestions for improving this automated tool are welcome. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:10, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Writer-in-Residence redirect[edit]

Hello -- I had already asked about this, see User_talk:Elonka#Writer-in-Residence_vs_Writer_in_residence for the discussion. Cusop Dingle (talk) 19:42, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! That looks like agreement. I implemented it. --GRuban (talk) 20:07, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Appreciation[edit]

My grateful thanks to you, GRuban, for your understanding, astuteness and compassion.

Regards,

Davina.R (talk) 14:52, 28 November 2011 (UTC) Davina.R

Governing hierarchy and structure of WP[edit]

Hi GRuban:

You commented earlier upon this proposed addition to the page Wikipedia outlining the formal structure of WP. Since your comments, a number of further changes have been suggested and implemented. Could you take another look at this proposal and comment further? Thanks for your assistance. Brews ohare (talk) 20:36, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Reliable sources[edit]

You are being quoted as being in favour of including a quote from Yeong E. Kim based on a fringe unpublished non-peer reviewed paper. Perhaps you would like to comment on why you think it has due weight. Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Few_body_systems IRWolfie- (talk) 16:29, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Just to let you know that I refer to the RS/N discussion on Yeong E. Kim in the arbcom case against me. See Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#POVbrigand. As you also took a significant part in that discussion, maybe you should glance over if I misrepresented you. --POVbrigand (talk) 11:44, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Commented there. Gee, seems like Cold Fusion is controversial. Who would have thought. --GRuban (talk) 19:24, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
It is heart warming for me to read your assessment of my work (and the frustration it sometimes causes). Thank you for that.
Case closed, unfortunately no uninvolved admin cared to comment. It looks like even in an Arbcom case the uninvolved editors shun the topic. --POVbrigand (talk) 08:30, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
You're welcome. I would, however, urge you to take some of the criticism into account as well. Even though most of their comments were unfounded, some of them should be noted. It is admittedly difficult to be civil all the time, but it is an important goal to strive for. --GRuban (talk) 15:37, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Formal organization ( revised and updated)[edit]

A revised version of WP:Formal organization is proposed for inclusion in the article Wikipedia and a RfC is posted. It is found here. Can you kindly take a look at this request for comment?

Thank you in advance. Brews ohare (talk) 17:47, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar[edit]

It really was a weighty decision, and I'm just glad I was able to arrive at the correct choice. I'm glad someone appreciated my hard work! ;) ♠PMC(talk) 20:30, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Herta Feely[edit]

Orlady (talk) 16:03, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Sarah's Choice for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sarah's Choice is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sarah's Choice (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 22:18, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Dispute resolution survey[edit]

Peace dove.svg

Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite


Hello GRuban. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released.

Please click HERE to participate.
Many thanks in advance for your comments and thoughts.


You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 23:09, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Elizabeth Catlett.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Elizabeth Catlett.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 03:57, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Good point. I was more naive about permissions then, and assumed that encouragement to download was the same as a license, which I now understand it isn't. I'll write the photographer. --GRuban (talk) 17:51, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

You're invited! New England Wikimedia General Meeting[edit]

Wikimedia New England logo.svg
New England Wikimedia General Meeting

The New England Wikimedia General Meeting will be a large-scale meetup of all Wikimedians (and friends) from the New England area in order to discuss regional coordination and possible formalization of our community (i.e., a chapter). Come hang out with other Wikimedians, learn more about ongoing activities, and help plan for the future!
Potential topics:
Sunday, April 22
1:30 PM – 4:30 PM
Conference Room C06, Johnson Building,
Boston Public Library—Central Library
700 Boylston St., Boston MA 02116
Please sign up here: Wikipedia:Meetup/New England!

Message delivered by Dominic at 09:11, 11 April 2012 (UTC). Note: You can remove your name from this meetup invite list here.

Your HighBeam account is ready![edit]

Good news! You now have access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research. Here's what you need to know:

  • Your account activation code has been emailed to your Wikipedia email address.
    • Only 407 of 444 codes were successfully delivered; most failed because email was simply not set up (You can set it in Special:Preferences).
    • If you did not receive a code but were on the approved list, add your name to this section and we'll try again.
  • The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code.
  • To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1; 2) You’ll see the first page of a two-page registration. 3) Put in an email address and set up a password. (Use a different email address if you signed up for a free trial previously); 4) Click “Continue” to reach the second page of registration; 5) Input your basic information; 6) Input the activation code; 7) Click “Finish”. Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive.
  • If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
  • A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate
  • HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
  • Show off your HighBeam access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/highbeam_userbox}} on your userpage
  • When the 1-year period is up, check applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi t | c 20:43, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Lane McCotter briefing Wolfowitz.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Lane McCotter briefing Wolfowitz.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 03:56, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Chris Lintott[edit]

Much appreciated, thank you. Chrislintott (talk) 07:26, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:RWRPG.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:RWRPG.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. 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 any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:28, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Is your comment at RSN on a matter being misinterpreted?[edit]

If you get a chance, could you take a look at Talk:Alpha Phi#What was actually said at RSN. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 18:15, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, that was quick. Dougweller (talk) 13:24, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

The Olive Branch: A Dispute Resolution Newsletter (Issue #1)[edit]

Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.

Steven Zhang's Fellowship Slideshow

In this issue:

  • Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
  • Research: The most recent DR data
  • Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
  • Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
  • DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
  • Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
  • Proposal: It's time to close the Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts noticeboard. Agree or disagree?
Read the entire first edition of The Olive Branch -->

--The Olive Branch 19:04, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

The Olive Branch: A Dispute Resolution Newsletter (Issue #2)[edit]

To add your named to the newsletter delivery list, please sign up here

This edition The Olive Branch is focusing on a 2nd dispute resolution RfC. Two significant proposals have been made. Below we describe the background and recent progress and detail those proposals. Please review them and follow the link at the bottom to comment at the RfC. We need your input!

Please share your thoughts at the RfC.

--The Olive Branch 18:41, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

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

U.S. Ada Lovelace Day 2012 edit-a-thon, Harvard University - You are invited!
Ada Lovelace color.svg
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.
00:21, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Information[edit]

I noticed your username commenting at an Arbcom discussion regarding civility. An effort is underway that would likely benifit if your views were included. I hope you will append regards at: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Civility enforcement/Questionnaire Thank you for considering this request. My76Strat (talk) 10:02, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Reply[edit]

We're talking about different articles. You're talking about the 9/11 article, I'm talking about the collapse of the World Trade Center. The one small positive contribution that my appeal to ArbCom resulted in was to have a "see also" link put into the collapse article [3]. But it remains true that Wikipedia does not want to be place where one can go to be actually informed about the content and status of the alternative theories about 9/11. (Many readers of the collapse article are seeking information to help them decide whether one or another conspiracy theory is right, or just partly right, about some particular fact. They now meet an article that pretends those theories, and a great many facts that the theories cite, sometimes entirely correctly, don't exist. So their questions remain unanswered and their quest continues, often needlessly.) It's an editorial line that has been determined by consensus. So long as it stands, I've got nothing to contribute. And I'm not allowed to contribute, anyway.--Thomas B (talk) 09:44, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

SVG OTRS[edit]

You have new messages Hey, GRuban. You have new messages at Shep's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing or tnulling the template.

ShepTalk 04:12, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 4[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Murder of Deanna Cremin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page WGBH (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) 16:38, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Project for RfA nominators[edit]

As one of the supporters of a related proposal in the 2013 RfC on RfA reform, you are invited to join the new WikiProject for RfA nominators. Please come and help shape this initiative. Regards, Espresso Addict (talk) 21:38, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 11[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Braco (gazer), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Serbian (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) 12:13, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Sinister gingers[edit]

Well said! Pburka (talk) 23:47, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Better source request for File:El Hadj M'Hamed El Anka plays the Oud.jpg[edit]

Thanks for your upload to Wikipedia:

You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the copyright status of the image because the source is incomplete. Please consider clarifying the exact source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact Web page where you found the image, rather than only giving the source domain or the URL of the image file itself. Please update the image description with a URL that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page or me at my talk page. Thank you. Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 21:15, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

File:El Hadj M'Hamed El Anka plays the Oud.jpg missing description details[edit]

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as:

is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 12:27, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Discussion notice[edit]

You participated in the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (people)#RFC-birth date format conformity when used to disambiguate so I thought you might want to comment at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (people)#Birth date format conformity .28second round.29.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:06, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Health & Morals of Apprentices Act 1802[edit]

Thanks for adding an image to this article! :) I didn't even think of adding images to an 'Act' article before you added one. Thanks very much! Staceydolxx (talk) 21:04, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome - but if I may say so, your image was even better. --GRuban (talk) 01:27, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Miss America, 1945 Bess Myerson Cover.jpg)[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svg Thanks for uploading File:Miss America, 1945 Bess Myerson Cover.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 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. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:13, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Crotchety[edit]

[As she has remarked so often :] Bishonen always tetchy, difficult personality! Better leave problems and admin tools to easy-going laid-back Bishzilla! bishzilla ROARR!! 17:46, 31 May 2013 (UTC).

Heh. I was wondering if you'd notice. :-). Carry on, oh scourge of evildoers and defender of innocent. (Or the other way around.) --GRuban (talk) 17:56, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
Other way around is feisty Darwinbish! darwinbish BITE 18:26, 31 May 2013 (UTC).

thanks for the irony and the spellcheck[edit]

Been a long time since I wrote that passage, thanks for the edit, and the chuckle.Skookum1 (talk) 08:35, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Maybe "sarcasm" is better than "irony", but still worth the chuckle.Skookum1 (talk) 08:37, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
You're welcome, oh great Wiki-Sasquatch! --GRuban (talk) 08:54, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Need your opinion on a BLP matter[edit]

Hi. Can you offer your thoughts in this discussion? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 15:12, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

2nd Annual Wikimedia New England General Meeting[edit]

You are invited to the 2nd Annual Wikimedia New England General Meeting, on 20 July 2013 in Boston! We will be talking about the future of the chapter, including GLAM, Wiki Loves Monuments, and where we want to take our chapter in the future! EdwardsBot (talk) 10:03, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Peace Barnstar Hires.png The Barnstar of Diplomacy
Thank you for such a practical choice on the C shell article. Msnicki (talk) 22:06, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
Aw, shucks, thanks. :-) --GRuban (talk) 23:08, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

August 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to The Debut may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • 2011}} became associated with the project, and the film was able to garner a grant from NAATA ([[National Asian American Telecommunications Association]). The filmmakers were able to set up the

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:49, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, BracketBot! --GRuban (talk) 17:16, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Your nomination for WP:LAME[edit]

Has been acted on. I hope you don't mind that I plagiarized borrowed your wording to writing this entry. -- llywrch (talk) 18:35, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Heh. Thanks - I feel so proud to have contributed. Or maybe ashamed for the Wikipedia. Is it possible to feel both? Surely there's a German word for that emotion. --GRuban (talk) 14:01, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
I don't know the German word, but the English word would be "conflicted". You know you're an established editor when that describes how you feel about Wikipedia.--llywrch (talk) 15:57, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

When God Writes Your Love Story[edit]

Hi George,

Because you have been involved in discussions surrounding the When God Writes Your Love Story article, I thought that you should be notified of the article's current featured article review. Any constructive comments you would be willing to provide there would be greatly appreciated.

Neelix (talk) 19:46, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, but I see the review has been closed rather quickly and dramatically. I imagine jps will renom in a few months, and this time won't be as quick to offend everyone within sight, so it might be useful to try to address some of the issues as best as possible. --GRuban (talk) 13:54, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Kosh[edit]

I just noticed Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Statement_by_GRuban. I don't know whether you saw User_talk:Fluffernutter#Please_consider_shortening_block_Withdraw_request, but it sounds like it when you talk about editors trying to support and backing off. Kosh didn't help himself with the poorly thought out post at Commons, or where-ever it was.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 19:58, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Yes, that was one of the examples I was referring to. So it goes. --GRuban (talk) 21:06, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter[edit]

Books and Bytes

Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013

Eurasian Eagle-Owl Maurice van Bruggen.JPG

by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs)

Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...

New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian

Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.

New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??

New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges

News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY

Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions

New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration

Read the full newsletter

Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 20:16, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 20[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cerrie Burnell, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Metro and Scholastic (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) 09:05, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Cerrie Burnell[edit]

I see you found the reason and dabbed to links. Thanks. Vegaswikian (talk) 06:37, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Cold Fusion revisited[edit]

Hi GRuban,

remember when you gave me support in my struggle not to get banned for editing cold fusion ? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement/Archive109#POVbrigand)

Thank you again for representing the situation simply the way it was.

You might like this news article in the wall street journal "Market Watch": http://www.marketwatch.com/story/cyclone-power-technologies-adds-renowned-nuclear-physicist-dr-yeong-kim-to-its-technical-advisory-team-2013-12-03

btw, a bit later they got me banned anyhow. So stuff wikipedia :-) It is just so very very sad that all those rules/policies don't mean a thing when people want to kick you off the project so they can keep their POV up.

Cheers, POVBrigand --POVbrigand (talk) 23:13, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Hrr. Here? Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement/Archive117#POVbrigand? The ban does seem a bit strict for one incident of WP:POINT. But it's not as if you have completely clean hands, and there is a specifically stated way to get it lifted, and, well - editing with the explicit intention to either promote or oppose a particular point of view is not a good idea. That's not really what we're supposed to be about. We're supposed to document the world's knowledge, not really "the parts of it that agree with my worldview". So, while I am sorry for your ban, it's not hopeless, and they did have some reasoning behind it. --GRuban (talk) 02:58, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
No problem, I know that my intentions have always been fully in line with wikipedia's NPOV principles. I might have slipped here and there sometimes, but that is why we are supposed to help each other on this project, to get that sorted out. However, when I started to edit that contagious topic, I walked into a minefield and I was not prepared for that. Simple factual statements were dismissed as "polite POV pushing" and once the decision has been made that your reasoning cannot be tolerated anymore, it's just a matter of time until they find a mishap that they will present to the boards.
But I didn't come here to wail, really. I just wanted to show you that Yeong E. Kim, which I had to work ridiculously hard for to get him mentioned in an article, is now hired by real companies that want to know more about the topic. --POVbrigand (talk) 08:38, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library Survey[edit]

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi t | c 14:58, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

gun control rfc[edit]

As you were involved in a previous discussion on this topic, I am notifying you of a new RFC on this topic. Talk:Gun_control#Authoritarianism_and_gun_control_RFCGaijin42 (talk) 16:30, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

New England Wikipedia Day @ MIT: Saturday Jan 18[edit]

NE Meetup #4: January 18 at MIT Building 5
Wikimedia New England logo.svg

Dear Fellow Wikimedian,

You have been invited to the New England Wikimedians 2014 kick-off party and Wikipedia Day Celebration at Building Five on the Massachusetts Institute of Technology campus on Saturday, January 18th, from 3-5 PM. Afterwards, we will be holding an informal dinner at a local restaurant. If you are curious to join us, please do so, as we are always looking for people to come and give their opinion! Finally, be sure to RSVP here if you're interested.

I hope to see you there! Kevin Rutherford (talk)

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by removing your name from this list.)

Notice of a discussion that may be of interest to you[edit]

There is a Split proposal discussion on the Gun politics in the U.S. talk page that may be of interest to you. Lightbreather (talk) 04:40, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

WP Countering Systemic Bias in the Signpost[edit]

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Countering Systemic Bias for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. –Mabeenot (talk) 00:59, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

You're invited: Women's History Edit-a-thons in Massachusetts this March[edit]

Women's History Edit-a-thons in Massachusetts this March - You are invited!
We Can Edit.jpg
New England Wikimedians is excited to announce a series of Wikipedia edit-a-thons that will be taking place at colleges and universities throughout Massachusetts as part of Wikiwomen's History Month from March 1 - March 31. We encourage you to join in an edit-a-thon near you, or to participate remotely if you are unable to attend in person (for the full list of articles, click here). Events are currently planned for the cities/towns of Boston, Northampton, South Hadley, and Cambridge. Further information on dates and locations can be found on our user group page.
Questions? Contact Girona7 (talk)

Notification of automated file description generation[edit]

Your upload of File:BW-Shoshong.PNG or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:57, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 7[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Micro-inequity, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Gyp and Sinister (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) 09:02, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Not in this case though, DPL bot, as those disambiguation pages also describe the words in question. --GRuban (talk) 16:04, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

April 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Elizabeth Truss may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • "A field day for the Tory old guard"], by Andy McSmith, ''[[The Independent]]'', 16 November 2009]</ref><ref>[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/6525668/Liz-Truss-won-seat-from-

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 11:14, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

You're invited![edit]

NE Meetup #5: April 19th at Clover Food Lab in Kendall Square
Wikimedia New England logo.svg

Dear Fellow Wikimedian,

New England Wikimedians would like to invite you to the April 2014 meeting, which will be a small-scale meetup of all interested Wikimedians from the New England area. We will socialize, review regional events from the beginning of the year, look ahead to regional events of 2014, and discuss other things of interest to the group. Be sure to RSVP here if you're interested.

Also, if you haven't done so already, please consider signing up for our mailing list and connect with us on Facebook and Twitter.

We hope to see you there!

Kevin Rutherford (talk) and Maia Weinstock (talk)

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by removing your name from this list.)

Notice of RfC and request for participation[edit]

There is an RfC in which your participation would be greatly appreciated:

Thank you. --Lightbreather (talk) 15:06, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Edit-a-thon invite[edit]

Notice of RfC 2 and request for participation[edit]

There is an RfC on the Gun politics in the U.S. talk page which may be of interest to editors who participated in "RfC: Remove Nazi gun control argument?" on the Gun control talk page.

Thank you. --Lightbreather (talk) 22:32, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Just an FYI: I moved your vote from the Threaded discussion section to the Survey section [4] of this RfC. Lightbreather (talk) 17:08, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. Didn't realize it was in the wrong place. --GRuban (talk) 17:10, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Adrianne Wadewitz Memorial edit-a-thons[edit]

Adrianne Wadewitz edit-a-thons in Southern New England
Wikimania 2012 portrait 102 by ragesoss, 2012-07-13.JPG

As you may have already heard, the Wikipedia community lost an invaluable member of the community last month. Adrianne Wadewitz was a feminist scholar of 18th-Century British literature, and a prolific editor of the site. As part of a worldwide series of tributes, New England Wikimedians, in conjunction with local institutions of higher learning, have created three edit-a-thons that will be occurring in May and June. The events are as follows:

We hope that you will be able to join us, whether you are an experienced editor or are using Wikipedia for the first time.

If you have any questions, please leave a message at Kevin Rutherford's talk page. You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by removing your name from this list.

The Toleration Act 1688[edit]

Hello. I've noticed your recent edit relating to this Act. The short title of this Act was given by the Statute Law Revision Act 1948. If this Act was cited as the Toleration Act 1689 in a legal document, that document would on the face of it be legally invalid. If the Act was in fact passed in 1689 that would on the face of it be irrelevant, because Parliament has on the face of it only decreed that this Act may be cited as "the Toleration Act 1688" and has not on the face of it authorised its citation by any other name, and what Parliament says in that respect is final ("parliamentary sovereignty"). Please bear in mind also that "short title" is a legal term of art, and the field "short title" in the infobox should certainly give the official one, and not a name that private persons have invented (no matter how much of an improvement it is on the real short title), because that is not a short title. Thank you. James500 (talk) 06:12, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

My edit was based on the simple fact that the article is called Act of Toleration 1689. If you think it should be named differently, we should move it to the correct title. We should not have it titled Act of Toleration 1689 but referred to as The Toleration Act 1688 in the text, that's just silly. --GRuban (talk) 03:31, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

ANI[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:Useitorloseit_and_Ta-Nehisi_Coates_-_request_for_topic_ban. Thank you. Gamaliel (talk) 22:11, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

New England Wikimedians summer events![edit]

Upcoming events hosted by New England Wikimedians!

After many months of doubt, nature has finally warmed up and summer is almost here! The New England Wikimedians user group have planned some upcoming events. This includes some unique and interesting events to those who are interested:

Although we also aren't hosting this year's Wikimania, we would like to let you know that Wikimania this year will be occurring in London in August:

If you have any questions, please leave a message at Kevin Rutherford's talk page. You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by removing your name from this list.

New England Wikimedians summer events![edit]

Upcoming events hosted by New England Wikimedians!

After many months of doubt, nature has finally warmed up and summer is almost here! The New England Wikimedians user group have planned some upcoming events. This includes some unique and interesting events to those who are interested:

Although we also aren't hosting this year's Wikimania, we would like to let you know that Wikimania this year will be occurring in London in August:

If you have any questions, please leave a message at Kevin Rutherford's talk page. You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by removing your name from this list.

June 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Midge Decter may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • in a 1980 essay for ''[[Commentary (magazine)|Commentary]]'' entitled "The Boys on the Beach."<ref>[http://www.commentarymagazine.com/article/the-boys-on-the-beach/ "The Boys on the Beach", by Midge

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:39, 27 June 2014 (UTC)