User talk:Johnpacklambert

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

The old part of my talk page was moved to User talk:Johnpacklambert/Archive 1 , User talk:Johnpacklambert/Archive 2, User talk:Johnpacklambert/Archive 3 and User talk:Johnpacklambert/Archive 4

Contents

Letting you know[edit]

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

Categorization by place[edit]

Well, I don't agree that for most cases, a person is notable for where they are born, it is not defining and should not be done. However I also believe that there are a large number of editors who would not support that as a position and would fight the removal of these categories from people articles. Add to this mess the fact that for some places, the qualify sources don't actually provide the actual place and cases where their mother lived in one place and they came home there from the hospital but since that place did not have a hospital, they are born someplace all. It is all a mess. Vegaswikian (talk) 02:59, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Well, it is clear some editors fight the removals. Maybe we should try and get a compromise that says if it is clear that the person either never lived in that place or moved away when they were very young, that we will not categorize by it. I think a big issue is, should by place categories try to capture everyone who ever lived in the place, or be limited to those who have a defining connection to the place.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:34, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi, for info I've closed the withdrawn CfD's as requested but noted in each case that closure is pending an RfC (so no prejudice against renomination post-RFC or if RFC doesn't happen in a reasonable time). Have also posted a pointlessly tortured explanation of my rationale here. - Euryalus (talk) 00:49, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

September 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Bruce Bennett may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s and 1 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. 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:
  • [{Category:20th-century American male actors]]

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:50, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Kelly Junge, Jr. 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:
  • {

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:25, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Joe Howard (actor) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s and 1 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. 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:
  • | ''Crash Landing: The Rescue of Flight 232]'' (TV movie)
  • [{Category:20th-century American male actors]]

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:58, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Cats[edit]

I've removed the categories from the Tunechi user page as they shouldn't have been there in user space anyway. Apart from which, I'm still trying to work out if it is a he or a she. Kate Robyn suggests she, but 'he' is mostly used. Confusing. I'm contacting them to see what's going on with the page. Peridon (talk) 19:45, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Category:The Incredible Hulk (TV series)[edit]

Hi, please see Category talk:The Incredible Hulk (1977 TV series) and/or User talk:Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars#Category:The Incredible Hulk .28TV series.29 about using year. Thanks. --Musdan77 (talk) 02:32, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

October 2013[edit]

Carl Levin is a native of Detroit. He was born in Detroit. He served on Detroit's city council. So he is from Detroit. I should know and I am a Michigan resident. Steelbeard1 (talk) 14:56, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Laurence Lieberman 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:
  • [

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:20, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Willie Jae may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s and 1 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. 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:
  • to come out of retirement, and since signed a publishing deal with [[Jay-Z]]'s [[StarRoc]].<ref name="robertjrgraham.com"/<ref name="jamsphere.com"/><ref>http://voices.yahoo.com/from-
  • [{Category:American male singer-wongwriters]]

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:28, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Thailand/Siam[edit]

I am thinking all the years of Thailand before 1939 should be renamed to Siam, but I just wondered your opinion first as it will have to be a big nomination. Thanks. Tim! (talk) 07:21, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Please change your vote at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2013_October_2#Category:Video_games_featuring_female_protagonists becuse you were misinformed[edit]

"Almost all video games have female protagonists" is 100% false, these games are actually rare.

See, for example:

Etc. --Niemti (talk) 16:40, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

The current list (about 850 titles with articles on Wikipedia - out of tens of thousands game articles) is in fact pretty much definitive and there's not much more. I used the lists compiled by others as well as my own knowledge. Also this:

Not quite "so often", no? --Niemti (talk) 17:02, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

I answered you again. And no, characters (doesn't matter if playable or non-playable) are never protagonists unless they're actually protagonists (I mean, pretty obviously so?). --Niemti (talk) 10:11, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Jonathan Del Arco[edit]

There is a close paraphrase issue at Jonathan Del Arco. There appears to be no single editor who might be likely to undertake fixing this; I identified the editor with the most edits in 2012, and 2013; only the four of you, with two edits each met that low hurdle.

I outlined the issue at the talk page, my hope is that one or more of you will undertake to salvage the article.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 00:53, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Category:1960 establishments in the Federation of Malaya[edit]

Category:1960 establishments in the Federation of Malaya, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Tim! (talk) 19:47, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 10[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Randy Pangalila, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Dutch and Javanese (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) 10:52, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

"Not-notable for" category removals[edit]

Hi. Can you point to some actual guideline that supports your removal of people from categories they are "not notable" for, such as Category:Jeopardy! contestants? The category system traditionally does not work that way. If you grew up in a place, you are put in the "People from" category for it, regardless of whether you are famous for having grown up there. Same for what university you go to, and so forth. If we go down this route, many many category removals will have to be made. Take John McCain, for instance, which I am the main editor of. I can tell you that besides not being "notable" for being a Jeopardy contestant, he's also not notable for being a Baptists from the United States (he's not very religious) or for being a Commanders of the Order of Ouissam Alaouite (whatever that is) or for having attended Episcopal High School in Alexandria (he moved around a lot) or for his association with the International Republican Institute or for being a National Heroes of Georgia or for being a Recipients of the Air Medal (he's only famous for being shot down, not for the missions before that) or for Recipients of the Legion of Merit or Recipients of the Order of the Cross of Terra Mariana, 1st Class or Recipients of the Order of the Three Stars, 2nd Class or Sons of the American Revolution, among others.

Now some of the categories he really is "notable" for, including the political ones and Naval aviator and Vietnam War prisoners of war. But do you really propose to delete all the others? If so, where is the guideline telling all of us to start this big purge? If not, why pick on just Jeopardy? Wasted Time R (talk) 23:41, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

my impression is that the WP:defining criteria is applied more strictly in practice to jobs vs other things. It's the same reason we don't have hundreds of actors in the waiters category even tho they once did that job.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 03:24, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Gendered categories for actors[edit]

Why are you re-categorizing "actor" pages into "male actors" and "actresses"? Actor is an established and accepted gender-neutral term for that profession. Even the Wikipedia page for "actress" redirects to "actor". I don't see the need for explicitly creating new categories based on gender in this case. Funcrunch (talk) 06:52, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

I actually had read some of the background before you posted it on my talk page. But it is really necessary to have categories as specific and sparsely-populated as Category:Male actors from Fresno, California?? Funcrunch (talk) 20:47, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Category:Male actors in Tamil cinema[edit]

Category:Male actors in Tamil cinema, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Veera Dheera Sooran (talk) 16:00, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Apology[edit]

I'm sorry I jumped on you so hard at my talk page. I was frustrated by what I see as the glaring flaws in categorization, and I jumped to conclusions based on slanted media accounts. It won't happen again. Binksternet (talk) 15:23, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2013_October_25#Category:Rape_victims[edit]

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2013_October_25#Category:Rape_victims. You are being notified since you participated in the last discussion. Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 15:31, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Neutral notice[edit]

This is a neutral notice that an RfC has been opened at an article which you have edited within the past year. It is at Talk:Clint Eastwood#8 children by 6 women. --Tenebrae (talk) 14:09, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Actors, male, Shakespearean[edit]

Hi; in the past month or so, you've created Category:Shakespearean male actors and Category:Male Shakespearean actors. I assume that these are the same thing? If so, which one should be deleted and which one do you want kept? Good Ol’factory (talk) 19:30, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

I emptied the one I didn't think we needed, but I lack a strong view on either form.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:16, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
OK, I will delete Category:Shakespearean male actors for now. Good Ol’factory (talk) 20:36, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

actors[edit]

FYI, I feel that gendering all actors cats below national level is excessive. I don't have time right now to start a nomination but wanted your thoughts - what is the limit of actors-gendered categories? Can't we have male/female at national level, then keep the rest ungendered?--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 00:15, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

I really don't see that working. The categories have developed in too large a way, and too few of them exist. Anyway, acting is a profession where everyone, in all ways in controlled by gender. Roles are by gender, awards are by gender, and we have consistently seen having the gender split upheld at all levels.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:03, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
If this were to be done, Obi-Wan Kenobi, it would involve thousands and thousands of articles covering male actors and actresses around the world. I think it would need to be a decision based on a RFC. At the least, it should involve an active discussion with regulars at Wikipedia:WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers. Those categories are most relevant to Editors who work on creating and maintaining actor bios and shouldn't be drastically changed without consultation from the Editors most impacted (or a deleted category will just continually be recreated). Liz Read! Talk! 16:11, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
Ok, then I'll start the discussion there. I think the whole thing smacks of overcategorization. Yes, gender is important for acting, but it doesn't mean that every single actor category should thus be gendered. We can easily set up simple category intersection at the top of any relevant pages to capture "nationality + actor + specific actor cat" + "nationality + actor + gender". --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 16:54, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Actors_and_Filmmakers#Simplifying_actor.2Factress_gendered_categories[edit]

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Actors_and_Filmmakers#Simplifying_actor.2Factress_gendered_categories. Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 17:27, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Politicians[edit]

Uh-oh: Category:Men in politics. - Biruitorul Talk 14:58, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Discussion at Category_talk:Women_and_death[edit]

You are invited to join the discussion at Category_talk:Women_and_death. Since you participated in a previous discussion about this category. Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 21:49, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Category:Populated places in the United States with Hispanic plurality populations[edit]

Category:Populated places in the United States with Hispanic plurality populations, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 08:37, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Categorizing women by occupation[edit]

Hi, John. You've written: "In the past I have mistakenly categorized people into only gender categories. I have tried to remedy this situation recently, such as by making sure that all the people in Category:American female film directors were also in Category:American film directors."

Was there any discussion about this? If this is to be done in this way, then I'm willing to recategorise all the Slovene women in the similar way. Thank you. --Eleassar my talk 08:21, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

tp stalker - yes, it was a massive forest fire that consumed at least a month of wiki-time - see American women novelists and associated cfds but it spread all over the wiki. In general women (or anyone) should never be ghettoized - to avoid this you can use the algorithm I developed which is linked on my user page.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 13:54, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Sergio Franchi[edit]

Hi John. Have you gotten a bee in your bonnet about recategorizing people? You have edited several categories on the Sergio Franchi page (including one which does not exist) from American to Italian. Because Sergio Franchi became a naturalized American in 1972, I believe that his initial categories were more correct. He became an AMERICAN 1972. I am reverting your edits. Thanks, Catherine.Cathlec (talk) 23:17, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Category:Actresses from the Bronx[edit]

Category:Actresses from the Bronx, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 00:07, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Category:Male actors from the Bronx[edit]

Category:Male actors from the Bronx, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 00:07, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Help?[edit]

I noticed that you made some previous edits to the 1800 Vending Wikipedia page. I'm working with this company to fix some misinformations that are still on the page as well as add some clarification to some items. Would you be willing to help me with this?

23.30.60.249 (talk) 22:35, 19 November 2013 (UTC)


Category:Reality television shows of Nigeria[edit]

Category:Reality television shows of Nigeria, which you created, has been nominated for renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 17:06, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 December 4#Category:African people of Arab descent[edit]

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2013_December_4#Category:African_people_of_Arab_descent. You are being notified since you participated in a previous discussion on a similar theme Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 21:25, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Jeff Sutherland for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jeff Sutherland 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/Jeff Sutherland 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. cherkash (talk) 18:50, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

An Inspirational Quote for You[edit]

Youngkitten.JPG

"Love, love me do

You know I love you
I'll always be true
So please, love me do
Whoa, love me do"

Winston Churchill


the artist formerly known as eric pickles (talk) 14:45, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

December 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Russell M. Nelson 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:
  • her [[M.Sc.]] from BYU in 1975, and her [[Ph.D.]] from the [[University of Calgary]] in 1984.<ref>[http://www.deseretnews.com/article/635197769/Elder-Nelson-marries-BYU-professor.html Carrie A.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:05, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Infobox Photo Discussion[edit]

Hi. Can you offer your opinion in this discussion regarding the better photo for an article Infobox? Thanks, and Happy Holidays. Nightscream (talk) 00:16, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 2[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Osborn, Detroit, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Head Start (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, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

January 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Henry Eyring 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:
  • there. She met Eyring while pursuing a doctorate at the [[University of Wisconsin]].<ref>[http://www.lds.org/ensign/1995/09/elder-henry-b-eyring-molded-by-defining-influences?lang=eng [[

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:57, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Renaming[edit]

Please see my proposal to speedily rename Category:British migrants to Mandatory Palestine to Category:British emigrants to Mandatory Palestine and Category:Lebanese emigrants Mandatory Palestine to Category:Lebanese emigrants to Mandatory Palestine Hugo999 (talk) 07:17, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Category:Alumni of St Cuthbert's College, Ushaw[edit]

Category:Alumni of St Cuthbert's College, Ushaw, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:13, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Descent, Expatriates, and Emigrants[edit]

As you seem to be an active user when it comes to categorization, I have a question regarding these diaspora categories. I was wondering if you could guide me how to categorise the right people into such categories. For example, there are three categories for Pakistani Americans: Category:American people of Pakistani descent, Category:Pakistani emigrants to the United States and Category:Pakistani expatriates in the United States. As I tend to spend a lot of time categoring, could you briefly explain to me the difference between these three categories and which person goes where? For example, which category does a US-born American citizen of Pakistani ancestry go? In which category does a Pakistani-born naturalised American citizen go? And in which category does a Pakistani citizen living in the U.S. go (I would say the expatriate category, but just to get the record right..)?.. Mar4d (talk) 15:45, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Johnpacklambert. You have new messages at Mar4d's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Mar4d (talk) 17:16, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Category:Film companies established in 1978[edit]

Category:Film companies established in 1978, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Tim! (talk) 20:22, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Categorisation of Anglican priests: RFC as followup to CFD[edit]

You contributed to the debate at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 November 2#Category:English_Anglican_priests, which I have closed today as "no consensus". (This notice is being sent all participants in that debate.)

Apart from the disagreement in that particular case, there seemed to be no broader agreement on how to categorise of Anglican priests. So I have opened a Requests for Comments discussion about it, at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Categories#RFC:_Categorisation_of_Anglican_priests, where your contribution would be welcome. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:32, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Category you created[edit]

Hello, have you decided what to do with this category: Category:American men's basketball players? It's just been sitting there.Hoops gza (talk) 19:39, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

It needs to be expanded. Unless people want to eliminate the women's category as well.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:57, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

We're talking about a gigantic category project here, thousands of articles. Perhaps it would be wise to do men's basketball players by state instead?Hoops gza (talk) 22:54, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

We have an entirely separate category tree for the various colleges at which both men (and women) played basketball. Jabari Parker is not a basketball player from North Carolina, he is from Illinois. He is also in Category:Duke Blue Devils men's basketball players. Michael Jordan is not from New York nor from Illinois, he is from North Carolina. By state would be pretty manageable, as we already have a "Basketball players by state" category tree.Hoops gza (talk) 22:25, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

  • Where someone is from is more complex than you seem to think. Also, if we are going to mix basketball players and location, why not where they actually play?John Pack Lambert (talk) 22:46, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Well I still have to say that I think by state is the way to go with this one. I don't think there is an ideal way with this one.Hoops gza (talk) 16:04, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Dail Jones[edit]

Just another question on how to categorise someone who is born in a different country and lives there for a long time, but never actually becomes a citizen of the host country. Any clue on how to categorise Dail Jones? He was born in 1944 in Karachi, British India and lived there till 1959 (well after Karachi became part of Pakistan) before leaving for New Zealand. Is the Category:New Zealand expatriates in Pakistan fine or should he be in Category:New Zealand emigrants to Pakistan? I am a bit confused as long-term residents are meant to go into the emigrants cat, but technically, he never really migrated to Pakistan, instead was just born there and spent childhood there. Mar4d (talk) 18:19, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

African American majority population categories being recreated[edit]

Hi, I was wondering if you were aware of the creation of these categories, despite this and other Cfd's with listify and delete results. Altairisfar (talk) 19:44, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Category:Populated places in the United States with Asian plurality populations[edit]

Category:Populated places in the United States with Asian plurality populations, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 20:58, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Category:Populated places in the United States with Middle Eastern plurality populations[edit]

Category:Populated places in the United States with Middle Eastern plurality populations, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 21:07, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 24[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited William Lambton, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Arthur Wellesley (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) 09:00, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 31[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Area code 313 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Inkster
Languages of Chitral (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Kalasha language

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:02, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Open Classroom Charter School of Salt Lake City[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Open Classroom Charter School of Salt Lake City has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable elementary school.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Bearian (talk) 23:20, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Ambassador categories[edit]

A quick question on categorisation of ambassadors/diplomats. Should non-resident ambassadors (i.e. accredited ambassadors) have their own category? For example, the Afghan ambassador to U.S. also serves as the accredited ambassador to Colombia and for that reason, the Category:Ambassadors of Afghanistan to Colombia exists. I have seen dozens of more categories like this one on non-resident ambassadors. I am just wondering if such categories should exist or not, because technically, accredited ambassadors/diplomats are not like resident ambassadors. Mar4d (talk) 09:33, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Category:Real estate companies established in 1988[edit]

Category:Real estate companies established in 1988, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Tim! (talk) 21:16, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 7[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Camilla Cobb, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John W. Young (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) 09:01, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

re The Great Grape Ape Show[edit]

Hi Johnpacklambert. So what's the deal here? Isn't he a fictional gorilla etc? --Herostratus (talk) 06:53, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 17[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bathsheba W. Smith, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Winter Quarters (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) 09:00, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

WP:OUTING[edit]

Please be careful about allegations, I removed your latest addition to WP:ANI and used revdelete to hide your edit. Whether true or not, we don't disclose private information that a person has not volunteered themselves, and often people can be blocked for doing so. -- Atama 00:06, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Stacy Blackman help[edit]

Thanks for your Neutral vote at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Stacy_Blackman. I still don't understand why it was deleted, but was wondering if you could help me edit it so that it addresses your concern: "we really need to cut the fluff about all the profiles she has received in various magazines". I thought that would be important for notability. I placed an archive at User:Artfog/Stacy_Blackman. Thanks —Artfog (talk) 19:16, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

About the American Theatre Hall of Fame inductees category...[edit]

Hi there. I saw your suggestion about deleting the American Theatre Hall of Fame inductees category (instead of changing the spelling of "theatre" to T-H-E-A-T-E-R). Do you propose creating a list of Theater Hall of Fame inductees page? Let me know what you think, and maybe I can help. Mr. Brain (talk) 02:49, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Mia Love[edit]

See her talk page. Savvyjack23 (talk) 08:39, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 10[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mia Love, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mike Lee (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) 09:00, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

March 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to John M. Madsen 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 1968 Madsen was sent to England as the first seminary teacher to work there.<ref>[http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865598690/LDS-Church-History-Symposium-presenter-tells-of-Global-

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:01, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Your AFD nomination for Margret Bird[edit]

Hello JPL. I think something has gone wonky with this AFD. The individual page for the AFD looks just fine Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Margaret Bird. But when I was looking at the March 15 recap page I noticed it just below this entry Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2014 March 15#Helen Marie Grant all on its lonesome without a section header or any of the info that is on the separate AFD. I refreshed my cache in case it was my computer then I poked around a little but I could not find any way to fix it. I thought I would let you know so that you can try a straighten things out. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 04:47, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 17[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of state leaders in 1811, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ahom (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) 08:59, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Your opinion please...[edit]

Since you weighed in at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mohammed Hameeduddin I felt the nominator lapsed from compliance with WP:BEFORE, and I considerably expanded Mohammed_Hameeduddin.

I know a lot of AFD regulars don't revisit articles, or discussions, after they first left an opinion. If you noticed the expansion, and it didn't alter your delete opinion, I'd be grateful for a brief note, saying so.

Thanks Geo Swan (talk) 18:19, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2014_March_25#Category:Rapists[edit]

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2014_March_25#Category:Rapists. Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 20:36, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Holy Land during Byzantine rule[edit]

Information.svg

Category:Holy Land during Byzantine rule has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. You are encouraged to join the discussion on the Categories for discussion page. GreyShark (dibra) 17:28, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hunter Bryce[edit]

Since you contributed to or were otherwise involved in the above discussion, you may or may not wish to comment on the following discussion Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2014_April_2#Hunter_Bryce which concerns a redirect created immediately after the discussion. I am leaving the same neutral note to everyone who edited the above AFD. Thank you. Spartaz Humbug! 13:57, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 6[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Albany Movement (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Charles Ware
Charles "Charlie" Ware (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Robert Woodruff

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:54, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:1917 in the Palestinian territories[edit]

Information.svg

Category:1917 in the Palestinian territories has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. You are encouraged to join the discussion on the Categories for discussion page. GreyShark (dibra) 17:21, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

See also my nomination of another Syrian category at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 April 6#Category:1920s in Syria.GreyShark (dibra) 17:21, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Cfd closure[edit]

The above discussion is closed. I'm not placing it for automatic depopulation in order to give time for manual depopulation, if wanted. - jc37 22:11, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Collegiate discourse[edit]

I'm not writing this a warning, just a hopefully friendly note at this point. Strong, policy-supported and reference-supported debate is of course welcome at CfD, like any discussion page.

As you've been around for awhile, I'll merely leave it to you to consider whether such comments as were on that page (not merely that discussion) were appropriate collegiate discourse.

As such, no need for a response.

I wish you well. - jc37 00:03, 23 April 2014 (UTC)


4th-century Israel[edit]

I been accused enough of being an anti-Semite for trying to enforce even normal policies on Israel and Jewish sections, that I do not think I was out of line. The people out of line were those who ignored the clear consensus, decided in multiple discussions, that Israel was founded in 1948 and using the term for anything before that is anachronistic.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:44, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

    • The discussion still strikes me as radical pro-Israel factions forcing their will be majority rule with no regard for existing policies or historical reality.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:45, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
      • The people who were out-of-line were those who claimed we were "trying to make Wikipedia into a PLO encyclopedia", when in fact we were seeking to recognize the fact that there was no state of Israel in the 4th-century. We did not propose a Palestine name at all, so that was the unjustified attack, and they never backed down or apologized.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:54, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

I understand your concern, but try to comment on the content, not the contributor, and if you find you need to comment concerning a contributor, try to avoid applying labels to a person.

Which I think you understand, as you did decide to strike some of your comments. - jc37 00:56, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

  • "Other stuff exists" is not a valid argument. The fact that you gave weight to the junk opposition built on that is very disturbing.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:48, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

That is a separate thing. and I'll happily clarify my close.

In this case my point was that both sides were using the OTHERSTUFF argeuement. "otherstuff is being cleaned up" vs. "otherstuff is not". - jc37 00:56, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

  • No we weren't. We were using the argument that there is no Israel in the 4th or 6th century, and cited previous precedents of discussions to show this was the agreed consensus. The other side refused to consider actual discussion of category policy. They also made false claims, that were refuted, but they never bothered to admit they were making un-true claims. Lastly, they ignored the fact that Israel is a special case, a country that embraces a clear ethnic group as its founding group, that was clearly not in the majority in the area at the time of these categories. Of course, saying that truth somehow makes me a stooge of the PLO. Which is just plain rubbish claims. I will speak just as loudly in favor of Israel to refuse the right of return as long as Czech can, as anyone else, and would say that Ukraines main problem is they did not learn the lesson of Sudentenland and ethnically cleans the Crimea.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:01, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Outing accusation[edit]

I've replied on my talk page. I assume you are referring to User:Schlafly who is Roger Schafly, as he makes clear there - also see his talk page and its archives. Throwing around accusations like that without checking is never a good idea, nor is making personal attacks as you did. Dougweller (talk) 07:23, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your support. I commented on his page. Roger (talk) 22:36, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Charles T. Rubin[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Charles T. Rubin 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 person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content or organised event, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Baffle gab1978 (talk) 01:46, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Brian Vala Nahed for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Brian Vala Nahed 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/Brian Vala Nahed 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. ♥ Solarra ♥ ♪ Talk ♪ ߷ ♀ Contribs ♀ 05:42, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Lino Alvarez[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Lino Alvarez has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Lack of sources independent of the subject. Noted primarily for being a high-ranking Mormon and all the sources are church publications

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. pbp 05:43, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Lino Alvarez for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lino Alvarez 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/Lino Alvarez 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. pbp 15:06, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

About your Amanda Filipacchi comments.[edit]

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

RfC[edit]

This is a neutral notice to someone who has edited Desireé Cousteau that there is a Request for Comment there. --Tenebrae (talk) 01:21, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of H. Smith Broadbent for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article H. Smith Broadbent 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/H. Smith Broadbent 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. Boleyn (talk) 05:54, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Category:Ethnic Armenian boxers[edit]

Category:Ethnic Armenian boxers, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. SFB 11:46, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Precious again[edit]

Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg

categories
Thank you for articles on people, studies and universities, for taking care of ancestries, and for tirelessly helping with categories, people and orchestras, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:27, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

A year ago, you were the 502nd recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:03, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of George B. Handley[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article George B. Handley has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. pbp 15:25, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

LDS General Authority articles[edit]

First off, get over yourself: this isn't about you. I nominate LDS-related articles because of their quality, not on their authorship. I don't even bother looking to see who wrote them when I delete them. If Jimbo had written them in that quality, I would still want them deleted.

Secondly, it's perfectly acceptable to nominate articles for deletion one or two at a time. And there IS a consensus that articles like this should be deleted. The consensus is GNG, which requires independent source. In each discussion, a majority agreed with my interpretation of GNG, you and Stokes essentially argued that GNG should be ignored and LDS sources be used to establish notability of an LDS official. Both in the particular discussions, and in the abstract, there is consensus that GNG should be upheld. So it's counterproductive to refight the battle.

Thirdly, complaining about me to third-parties is unproductive. If you're going to complain about me, complain to me. Or do it on a general noticeboard. And please don't use words like vexatious because they are inaccurate. pbp 20:55, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

  • In the Kevin S. Hamilton discussion, which I did not even particpate in, 4 people opposed deletion, and counting you, 3 supported it. That is not a majority in favor of deletion by any means.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:06, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
    • Dude, no admin is going to count a keep vote that ignores policy as a keep vote. You and Stokes are arguing that GNG should be ignored, and that general authorities should be kept even if no reliable sources are found. That is something I cannot abide by. I cannot abide by it regardless of who created the article: you, Stokes, or anyone else. pbp 21:12, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
      • We disagree with your overly narrow interpretation of "reliable source" which has a tendency to favor cetain views and sideline others. Your constant antagonistic voice, calling for the ignoring of "Latter-day Saint sources" is also highly objectionable, and suggests that Latter-day Saints should be treated as a marginzalized and non-noticable people. It is the type of privaleging of certain forms of sources that many people have said prevents Wikipedia from being what it truly seeks to be.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:16, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
        • You're going too far if you call me "antagonistic" just because I call the rules as written. ("Vexatious" was also too far). The general principle behind GNG requiring independent sources is that there are biases in the other direction too; people have felt articles sourced mostly from the organizations people belong too tend to exaggerate those peoples' achievements and downplay their failures. I never said you can't use LDS sources, just that you can't use them to meet the GNG bar. But there are reasons for not using LDS sources; there's I believe a whole article, a well-sourced one, on the dubiousness of LDS sources. Articles are always better if they include sources not associated with the topic to support their primary claims. pbp 21:26, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
  • The calling of LDS sources as "dubious" is another example of the bigotry that is at the heart of PBP attacks on LDS articles.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:30, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
Another misused loaded word bordering on a personal attack. pbp 21:35, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
Why are you focusing on LDS articles, PBP? Given your hostility to John, it would be hard not to see this whole deletion process as personal. Liz Read! Talk! 21:58, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
To be fair to PBP, I am clearly not the only Wikipedia editor he hates and wants to drive off the project.John Pack Lambert (talk) 22:03, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
Nor am I the only person who dislikes you, JPL. @Liz:, the reason I've nominated a number of LDS general authorities for deletion is because I believe them to not be adequately sourced enough to pass GNG. I have nominated articles and categories for deletion that have not been created by him, so to say it's personal is a stretch. If JPL considers all LDS articles, including those he did not create, to be his domain, we've got some serious OWNership issues on his part. pbp 01:16, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
  • What is an attack is to claim that all of "x-religion sources" are "dubious". No one has quesitoned any of the statments about the biographical details of Vinson, or the other slew of General Authroties you have nominated for deletion. Even if they had, that would not support your attempts to dismiss a whole set of sources out of hand. To make things worse, this in many ways seems like fighting a poxy war. The real goal of the "Dubious" claim is to slant aritcles of unquesitoned notability in a certain way. I have seen far too much of that slanting in wikipedia, to have anything but revulsion to the "dubious" claim in any location. Beyond this, the mention of "LDS sources" is undefined enough to make it useable as a bait and switch. We are never sure what you mean, so we can never be sure when a source moves beyond that.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:56, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
  • The fact that PBP claims "Being LDS and being black are not analogous" shows that he recognizes the bigrotry in his attacks, but thinks anti-LDS bigotry is OK. The fact of the matter is, that both race and religion are protected by the Civil Right Act, so in fact the analogy works. Attempts to exclude sources on racial, religious or other similar grounds are all equally objectionable. In this case it may at times be more an issue of tone than content, but the tone chosen has clearly been objectioanble and bigoted. I am not the one who has gone around claiming that a whole set of potential sources should be excluded on a grounds that is discriminatory based on the Civil Rights Act. I have also not been the one making flase claims of no sources.John Pack Lambert (talk) 22:01, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
The problem, JPL, is by your logic, we could have an article on a basketball player based solely on quotes from his agent and coach. And I am fully comfortable saying that LDS sources do not pass muster as much as those of other religions; other scholars agree with me on that, out of concerns of transparency of the sources. Even the sources from other religions are not in and of themselves enough in today's day and age to create articles that pass GNG. pbp 01:16, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
To lump all sources from a given religion together is to show your continued bigotry. I am glad you are finally admitting your deep seated hate for the Latter-day Saints and the materials they produce. Your tone continues to be combative and cdondescending, and to show no respect for anyone else. To compare Church produced sources to those of an agent does not work. The Ensign and Church News are not under the control of the people involved in these articles. The people are highlighted in articles in these sources because in the view of the editors all general authorities are important and notable. Considering that there are lots and lots of articles on Catholic bishops that have only a website that focuses solely on covering the Catholic hierachy as their souirces, and in fact they lack anything approaching the indepth biographical articles we have in the case of LDS General Autorities, your claims about the current state of religious articles do not stand up to any amount of scrutiny.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:27, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Since PBP has openly admitted to disliking me, he should probably give up on his crusade against me. Also, contrary to what he believes, people do not have to be popular to edit wikipedia.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:28, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
OMG, for the fourth time, this is about the articles, not about you! And stop throwing around weasel words pbp 23:41, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Your clearly bigoted attacks on sources created by Latter-day Saints do not mesh with these claims.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:43, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
You're hyperbolizing at this point, and using a lot of weasel words. Why are you ONLY complaining about me? Other editors agree with my position. Why aren't you complaining to THEM. I'm done talking to you. I'm off to find more poorly sourced articles and nominate them for deletion. pbp 00:02, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Larry Y. Wilson for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Larry Y. Wilson 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/Larry Y. Wilson 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. pbp 00:13, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Views on Prod Deletion[edit]

I still am of the opinion the creation of the Prod deletion method was unwise. It allows deletion to occur without enough discussion of the merits of the case.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:18, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Given that any removal of at least WP:PROD results in it not applying, I don't see fault in that. What I do see fault in is it's WP:BITEY and maybe that's why it works. Create what you think is a good article, get it PROD'd, just leave Wikipedia because of it, and you're long gone to contest the PROD and it gets deleted. However, that's the nature of CSD as well. Tutelary (talk) 02:22, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
I think a lot of things on Wikipedia have a tendency to scare off all except the truly thick skinned. Either that, or people who are especially good at lobbing complaints about the behavior of others. I really think that Wikipedia editors would be most helped by in-person advice from live people on how to start. I remember my first article creation got shot down almost immediately (although more because I had not developed enough sources than because the person was not notable). My second article also was put to AfD, but that one survived, because people who have served as a president of a significant academic institution generally do. The fact that Bruce C. Hafen might not even be most notable for being president of Ricks College, made the article even more likely to survive.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:37, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Maybe Hafen never did get nominated for deletion. I thought the article had, but I did not see it in there. I may also be misremembering it as the second article I created.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:45, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
I think what you're talking about is the IRC chat, which I actively lurk in. Tutelary (talk) 02:48, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
  • I am not sure what the IRC chat is. I looked again, and I was right that immediately after creation, the article on Bruce C. Hafen faced a speedy deletion nomination. Of course, the fact that it lacked sources did not help. Although to be fair I had a history professor who I remember explicitly telling us that Encyclopedia Articles do not have sources in them. When I started with Wikipedia I didn't realize the same rules that apply to other encyclopedia's don't apply here. We lack respected editors, for the most part, so we need to show sources, especially after all the hoaxes. The first article I created was on Phoebe Woodruff, who still lacks a seperate article, but I later figured out a way to provide more indepth coverage of her in the article on her husband, Wilford Woodruff. In fact, I am 90% sure what it says of her there is more than was ever said in the seperate article I created on her.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:54, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

AfD note[edit]

Hi there. It would probably be helpful to the closers of AfD debates if you indicate Keep or Delete rather than "Oppose," which is ambiguous. best, —Tim /// Carrite (talk) 17:05, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

missing past general authorities[edit]

You asked at my talk page for me to get back to you about past general authority persons of the L.D.S. I have access to news lit search that I'll use to make a list for you, when i have time. Follow up with me in a few weeks if i don't get back to you. --doncram 13:12, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Running lit search again, this time on "Morman" and ("general authority" or "general authorities"), yielding 3,422 hits in major U.S. newspapers. Found a good general article about emeritus general authorities, listing them, will email you a PDF file of this. Also about hits:

  1. Henry D. Taylor has LA Times obit
  2. Marion G. Romney has LA Times obit and Chicago Tribune obit
  3. Ted E. Brewerton
  4. Paul H. Dunn covered in Chicago Tribune, for admitting fabrications involving baseball and war service(??)
  5. B. H. Roberts, "Wikipedia's Mormon Wars" Deseret News covers Wikipedia editing about Roberts' article in Wikipedia
  6. Gordon B. Hinckley, longish NYTimes article about him, with photo of him, July 4, 1994
  7. Bruce R. McConkie or Bruce McConkie, Chicago Tribune obit

too many to go through all.

Limiting search further to "Morman" and "obituary" and ("general authority" or "general authorities") yields 102 hits

  1. N. Eldon Tanner, Boston Globe obit
  2. H. Verlan Anderson
  3. Legrand Richards, then the oldest general authority died,
  4. William Bangerter, Deseret News obit, 2010
  5. Charles Gibbs, Deseret News obit, 2005
  6. "Congressman Del Clawson Dies at 78", Washington Post, was an LDS bishop
  7. Pittsburgh Post - Gazette [Pittsburgh, Pa] 29 July 1998: B-6. ...Dixon Oaks, 65, the wife of Mormon general authority Dallin H. Oaks, July 14 in...
  8. Victor Lee Brown, in St. Petersburg Times: "VICTOR LEE BROWN, 81, the Mormon Church's 10th presiding bishop and an emeritus general authority of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, died Tuesday in Salt Lake City of cancer. Bishop Brown served more than four years as a member of the faith's First Quorum of the Seventy after earlier having been in the Presiding Bishopric of the church for 24 years - 13 as presiding bishop. He stepped down from duties in church administration in 1989." [St. Petersburg, Fla] 28 Mar 1996: 4.A.

Some hits were on persons already listed here, and some hits not relevant at all. Stopping for now to see which of the above are bluelinks vs. redlinks. --doncram 01:28, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

And I see only the William Bangerter is a redlink, others are bluelinks. But the Boston Globe obit would be a good source to add to the N. Eldon Tanner article, i note. --doncram 01:46, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
  1. Clinton L. Cutler: CLINTON L. CUTLER: Mormon Official

Clinton L. Cutler, 64, a member of the Mormon Church's Second Quorum of the Seventy, died of cancer April 9 at his home in Salt Lake City. He was named to the quorum, one of the church's tiers of authority, in 1990. He was first counselor in the General Presidency of the Sunday School and an assistant executive director of the Family History Department of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints." The Washington Post Company Apr 11, 1994

  1. Sterling W. Sill, Wash Post obit
  2. Neal Maxwell, 78, a member of one of the highest ranking bodies of the Mormon Church: the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints; July 21, in Salt Lake City, of leukemia. --Chicago Tribune
  3. Samuel Woolley Taylor SAMUEL WOOLLEY TAYLOR, 90, author of Flubber and The Absent-Minded Professor and known by some as the "Mark Twain of Mormondom," died Friday in Provo, Utah. He was known for Family Kingdom, the story of his father, John W. Taylor, father to three dozen children and husband to six wives who was dropped from the church's Quorum of Twelve Apostles for having plural wives after the church had abandoned the practice. Other Mormon works included Nightfall at Nauvoo, The Rocky Mountain Empire and Heaven Knows Why! -- St. Petersburg Times
  4. D. Arthur Haycock Washington Post: D. ARTHUR HAYCOCK: Church Official. D. Arthur Haycock, 77, former secretary to five presidents of the Mormon Church, died Feb. 25 in Salt Lake City after surgery for a heart ailment. He was a temple and mission president for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. He was elected secretary-treasurer of the church-owned Deseret News Publishing Co. in 1958 and retired in 1986.

Maybe not so easy to find articles to create. --doncram 01:46, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

But the Haycock article is tagged for notability and sources, while adding the Washington Post reference would help address. That article was "DEATHS: [FINAL Edition] The Washington Post (pre-1997 Fulltext) [Washington, D.C] 28 Feb 1994: d04. ". --doncram 01:48, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Relatedly,

Mail-message-new.svg
Hello, Johnpacklambert. Please check your email – you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{YGM}} template.

--doncram 01:57, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of John M. Madsen for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John M. Madsen 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/John M. Madsen 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. pbp 15:59, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Johnpacklambert. You have new messages at Ashanda's talk page.
Message added 07:33, 1 July 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Ashanda (talk) 07:33, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Johnpacklambert. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Royal descendants of John William Friso.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

- Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 11:49, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Category:Group of 88[edit]

I see that you have re-added "Category:Group of 88" to some biographies. You also added to some new members to that category. Based on your comments here, you seem to be pursuing some kind of political agenda rather than working to improve categorization. I don't wish to get into an edit war over this, so can I ask that you remove the category until the deletion discussion is finished? Thank you. Nigel Pap (talk) 13:17, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Please see this discussion on ANI. This is obviously about more than just categories for you. Nigel Pap (talk) 20:23, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Group of 88[edit]

I removed The categories from a number of articles. All of those which don't actually mention that group. It presents to me a BLP issue. A Scarlet Letter is exactly what your language has suggested that it is meant to be. I understand and respect your position. But that isn't relevant. Wikipedia isn't the place for it. Perhaps you could create a blog to advocate for this as you personally feel appropriate.Serialjoepsycho (talk) 02:32, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

  • The membership is sourced and supported by the text of the Group of 88 article. What should be done is adding relavant text to the other articles, not removing applicable categories.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:42, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
serialjoe, you should not empty categories under discussion for deletion - please read CFD guidelines. Better to let the category be filled with valid members - if it's deleted which seems likely, then it will be removed by a bot. If it's kept, then it wouldn't make sense to only have on some articles. Being a member of that group is not itself a BLP violation and they willingly joined it.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 02:51, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Actually missed the part of the banner that said not to remove anything before I did it. It was certainly unintentional. I came here to explain the removal. In the unlikely event that this doesn't get deleted I would have removed them none the less. Lee D. Baker that information was removed per BLP. I agree with that logic. Again judging by what you've said your primary reasoning is Advocacy. If it's not in the article because of BLP it shouldn't be hanging below the article. If you wish add the categories back, please do. I do apologize for missing the policy but it was a good faith mistake.Serialjoepsycho (talk) 03:20, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi John, potentially you could be a very valuable contributor to this important topic and thanks for your efforts. Your passion is a great thing but it seems you're letting it get the better of you occasionally (no doubt not helped by others deleting notable material not to mention your legitimate concern about COI editors). Can I suggest you maybe strike/amend some of your more emotive comments in the category discussion in order to prove to everyone that you understand what and what isn't useful? (such as part of your first sentence there). Thanks.--Shakehandsman (talk) 05:45, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for that, no need to go overboard though! 90% of what you said was excellent and you came across as much better informed than most people are on the subject.--Shakehandsman (talk) 06:07, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Johnpacklambert, please furnish an an actual quotation from the original newspaper ad that justifies your repeated charges that the so-called Group of 88 prejudged the guilt of the accused. The follow-up letter signed by most of them said, ""We reject all attempts to try the case outside the courts, and stand firmly by the principle of the presumption of innocence". Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:52, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
I see that you posted a link to a copy of the original ad at ANI. Reading that ad, I find no statement that prejudges the guilt of the lacrosse players. Do you? I am hoping that you will withdraw all such claims you've made. Mischaracterizing the contents of that ad seems to be a cottage industry. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:51, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
  • The whole spirit of the ad prejudices the guilt of the Lacrosse players, and encourages those that have called for punishment, including castration.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:13, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
  • In addition the attempts to call "ultra conservative" those who have attacked the Group of 88 ignores that KC Johnson, the main force behind both the Durham-in-Wonderland blog and a co-author of Until Proven Innocent, one of the main books on the subject, is an admitted two-time supported of Obama. This in no way makes him sound ultra-conservative. As in most cases, this one does not easily fall within a simplistic conservative/liberal division of thought.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:21, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

July 2014[edit]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

  1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
  2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Drmies (talk) 03:49, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 04:00, 14 July 2014 (UTC)


Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Eve Shelnutt may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s and 1 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. 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:
  • [{Category:American women poets]]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:30, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Topic ban[edit]

Based on the WP:discretionary sanctions in force on all WP:BLP content, and in light of the recent complaints about you violating the rules of neutrality on biographies of living persons, as for example with these edits: [1][2], I am topic-banning you from all edits and discussions regarding the so-called Duke lacrosse case, the so-called Group of 88, and persons related to these, for an indefinite period of time. This sanction will be logged at WP:Editing restrictions. Fut.Perf. 08:42, 14 July 2014 (UTC)


In his infinite wisdom, User:John has closed the discussion without further sanction. To clarify here, I agree with Fut. Perf.'s actions and I would strongly advise you to avoid topic areas (typically BLP areas) where you have strong personal feelings. In all honesty, it is the same advice I give everyone and follow myself. I don't want to see you end up with a BLP topic ban, but that is where it is headed if this kind of thing is repeated. I recommend working on articles that have zero BLP content whatsoever for a couple of months, let the fury die down, and just get back into building the encyclopedia in that way for a while. There is plenty to work on, plenty of good to be done outside of BLP. You don't need temptation, and some in the community don't need more ammunition. Dennis Brown |  | WER 14:39, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Mormon sources[edit]

If you know any good older sources, preferably PD of course relating to "Mormonism," let me know. Over at wikisource both the Book of Mormon and the Pearl of Great Price are already there although not yet proofread/verified, and I've nominated A dictionary of the Book of Mormon as a possible proofread of the month. Any other PD sources which could be used for article development here I should be able to get to by next month, when I finish the book I'm working on. John Carter (talk) 17:30, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I think the Doctrine and Covenants is a valuable source. The current version is at https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament?lang=eng . Old versions presumably are PD. --Orlady (talk) 17:51, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Doctrine and Covenants is a good source. That is the best link. This is the scripture most altered by the 2013 revisions, although they are with few exceptions alterations in the introductory material and additions of explanatory notes to the Official Declarations. They do not have much doctrinal impact, but they give the passages more full and at times more accurate historical context.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:54, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Would the older PD versions still be worthwhile additions to commons and wikisource? John Carter (talk) 19:19, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Your AN/I complaint[edit]

JPL, you may have missed my advice to you here. Regards, JoeSperrazza (talk) 18:36, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of David B. Honey for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article David B. Honey 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/David B. Honey 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. Clarityfiend (talk) 04:04, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Dean Allemang[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Dean Allemang has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

no evidence of notability

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Deb (talk) 13:01, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Advocacy[edit]

in AfD discussion: Category:Advocates of good provision of education for both sexes you stated We avoid "advocates" categories in almost all cases. I just wondered whether you would care to comment on terminologies that you would not avoid or whether you could help by sourcing this claim. Gregkaye (talk) 16:09, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

AFD heads up[edit]

Thanks for posting the note on the People's Choice AFD. Clearly it was the right thing to do. – S. Rich (talk) 17:12, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Help me bring back the article on Brianne Siddall[edit]

hey, i know that you participated in the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brianne Siddall discussion, and you said that: but find better sources, and if that is not done in 6 months or so, reopen the debate. In almost all cases better sources exist for people who have had notable roles in multiple shows, we just need to find them and i feel the same thing, which is why i'm here for that reason to ask you for your help on bringing the article back, so that it won't end up being deleted again, here's a link to the draft that i started, so take a look and see how you think the process is going so far: Draft:Brianne Siddall. I hope you help me with this article, so will you help me? :-) Norozco1 (talk) 22:49, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Your change to Joan Juliet Buck's category[edit]

Thanks for the intro to the gender-specific category, but you didn't need to remove it from the general. It smacks of sexism. Please read this article. thanks--Aichik (talk) 23:17, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

In response to your reply:
Not really. You yourself on your talk page admit "In the past I have mistakenly categorized people into only gender categories. I have tried to remedy this situation recently, such as by making sure that all the people in Category:American female film directors were also in Category:American film directors." So being cautious, and I'm sorry you believe the Salon article is knee-jerk and horribly researched. That's your opinion.--Aichik (talk) 00:21, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
Every single article on the matter was knee-jerk, horribly written, and created by people who had never spent the time to figure out how Wikipedia categories really worked.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:22, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

A notice for you[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.--Aichik (talk) 00:33, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Delete Happy[edit]

You are something else. I've been watching all the pages you wish to delete. My page including T.R. Threston are verifiable and notable. I am asking for page protection or some type of blocking. --WJRockford (talk) 18:46, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

If anyone, including the article creator, removes a proposed deletion/dated tag from an article, do not replace it, even if the tag was apparently removed in bad faith. Which I have done. You are trying to delete out of spite. T.R. Threston meets all criteria for verifiable sources and notability. --WJRockford (talk) 19:10, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

T.R. Threston is solid with verifiable souces. Take your ego trip somewhere else. {{Deprod} --AustralianThreston (talk) 19:20, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

I'd like to know how someone with verifiable, credible THIRD party references and sources be deleted when they meet all other notability criteria. Re: John J. Threston and T.R. Threston These parties are listed in newspapers, books, annual reports and even in a Congressional report! --AustralianThreston (talk) 19:58, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Update (I thought you'd like to know:
"T.R. Threston" is a HOAX! All right already, she does have an elaborate facebook-page, Twitter account, mentioning in annual report of whatever club of travel writers, all uploaded from somewhere, non-valid ISBN and very dodgy, but now finally there is proof that "T.R. Threston" is completely made up! Not even her photoes ar real! That photo from her facebook-"fan" page? Fake! The one from her wordpress page? Fake! Her Twitter? All are fake! You are asking for proof? Well ... lets take the pic from her facebook-fan page for a minute and compare it to this photo of Jessica Alba at Toronto Film Festival 2007. Please not the people in the background ... of course she COULD have asked those who were in the background of Jessica Alba back then, to come join her at exactly the same place to take that photo with exactly the same clothings she might have borrowed them froom Jessica Alba, since she knows all the celebs!), and damn: the same figure, - theoretically, - but ... naaah ... that one is photoshopped! (^_^) LagondaDK (talk) 20:19, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

WikiDefender Barnstar Hires.png The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
The Defender of the Wiki is awarded to those who have gone above and beyond to prevent Wikipedia from being used for fraudulent purposes. PhilKnight (talk) 13:07, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

AfD[edit]

On Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carmelita Little Turtle‎, it is getting difficult to confirm whether this person passes WP:GNG or not, given that we had far better articles than this one and they had more than just 1 or 2 'mention'. Have a view? Debate was relisted yesterday. OccultZone (TalkContributionsLog) 07:14, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Seljuq historians[edit]

Just now I saw your comment on CfD Seljuq historians. According to the rules you're right with your comment, of course. Question out of curiosity: what is the rationale behind this rule, with this exception for larger established trees? After all, the problem that small categories require (unnecessary) extra navigation to find related articles isn't any different in larger established trees as compared to any other trees. (Btw the problem of small categories in a larger tree is even much bigger in the Category:Proposed public transport tree where most categories only contain one or two childcats and no single articles at all. It wouldn't surprise me if there are more categories than articles in this tree and I really find it strange that this must stay as is.) Marcocapelle (talk) 18:20, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks![edit]

Hi John. Just wanted to say thanks for this edit. Some time ago I went through the relevant categories and tried to ensure that any immigrant from the USSR was in the Soviet category, but one or two editors have insisted on labelling them as Ukrainian/Molodovan etc. I believe there is quite a problem with original research in this area, as anyone who was born in, say, Baku, during the Soviet era is labelled as an Azeri Jew or immigrant, when the reality is that they were probably Russian Jews who had moved there. But anyway, your edits to try and clean this up are much appreciated. Cheers, Number 57 08:40, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 30[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nancy Jenkins, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cameron Brown. 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) 09:23, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Koichi Aoyagi for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Koichi Aoyagi 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/Koichi Aoyagi 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. pbp 02:20, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

AfD[edit]

Hi. Your comments in Tarik Shah seem to me to be equally valid for the singer Rojda. I would like to see your input also there. Thanks and regards. --Why should I have a User Name? (talk) 19:19, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Category question[edit]

JPL, I need a second opinion: do you think this category is appropriate: Category:Gator Football Ring of Honor? There are only five recipients of the honor to date, the award is mentioned in all five bio articles, and it is described at length in the Florida Gators football article -- which includes a list of the recipients. There are no similar categories for team-level (e.g., University of Florida Athletic Hall of Fame) or conference-level (e.g., All-Southeastern Conference) honors or awards. Without being able to put my finger on a specific category guideline, this category strikes me as the odd man out. Thoughts? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 20:15, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

The Espionage Act of 1917[edit]

I ran into a funny category issue, and I thought, In the spirit of collegiality, I'd ask what your take on it would be.

We have two categories, a parent cat for all people charged, Category:Persons charged under the Espionage Act of 1917 and a sub-cat for those who were both charged and convicted, Category:Persons convicted under the Espionage Act of 1917.

I tried to tidy, but another editor said that articles should be doubled-up in every category, parent and sub-cat, so that readers can find them no matter where they look. What do you think? __ E L A Q U E A T E 23:37, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Category:1959 establishments in Upper Volta[edit]

I'm seeking to move Category:1959 establishments in Upper Volta back from the August 2013 discussion by you. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 23:24, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Adrián Ochoa for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Adrián Ochoa 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/Adrián Ochoa 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. pbp 03:27, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Belle Knox AFD #2[edit]

The second AFD for Belle Knox has been overturned and relisted. As you commented on the original AFD, you may wish to comment on this one as well. As there have been developments and sources created since the time of the original AFD, please review to see if your comments/!vote are the same or may have changed. Gaijin42 (talk)

Nomination of Carlos H. Amado for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Carlos H. Amado 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/Carlos H. Amado 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. pbp 03:52, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Category:Latter Day Saint actors[edit]

Category:Latter Day Saint actors, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. pbp 04:14, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Gordon Wagner (economist) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gordon Wagner (economist) 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/Gordon Wagner (economist) 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. bender235 (talk) 05:53, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Alielahi[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Alielahi has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not notable.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Philafrenzy (talk) 14:42, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Per G. Malm for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Per G. Malm 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/Per G. Malm 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. pbp 00:45, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

November 2014[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm Purplebackpack89. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Per G. Malm that didn't seem very civil, so it has been removed. Wikipedia needs people like you and me to collaborate, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. pbp 15:09, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Category:American female rock singer-songwriters[edit]

Category:American female rock singer-songwriters, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Courcelles 17:09, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Category:American female pop singer-songwriters[edit]

Category:American female pop singer-songwriters, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Courcelles 17:11, 23 November 2014 (UTC)