User talk:Kkj11210

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


I need to delete the page becuase in Ranger page dosen't tell anything about archer. (talk) 13:58, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

@ Yes, that type of page is called a redirect. Please see WP:R. KJ «Click Here» 14:27, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

welcome page[edit]

Thanks for the message, I noticed the page you linked (Wikipedia:Welcoming_committee/Welcome_to_Wikipedia) has an enormous string of text about bangladesh breaking the tables, its hidden in some sort of template so I'm not sure how to fix it. Time circuit (talk) 00:11, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

@Time circuit: I'm not too sure either, but good job noticing. I suggest you post at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). KJ «Click Here» 03:41, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

May 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Sinking of the MV Sewol 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:
  • aspx?aid=2988909 |title=New updates made to total Sewol figures |publisher=[[JoongAng Ilbo]] |work=[[[JoongAng Ilbo#Korea JoongAng Daily|Korea JoongAng Daily]] |date=9 May 2014 |accessdate=20 May
  • April 2014 |language=Korean |trans_title=<Ferry capsizing> How's the rescue operations being held (Compiled}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Search Continues for Missing After South Korean Ferry Sinks|

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 06:26, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Biographies of living people[edit]

Hi, I noticed you tagged quite a few of Toolen's recently created pages as unreferenced biographies of living people. If you had looked at them, you'd see they are about people who were around in the 16th and 17th centuries - there is no way these people are still alive, so the nominations for deletion on the basis of BLP were inappropriate. I've tagged them as unreferenced, as I believe they are notable as rulers of Wallachia, even if the articles are VERY slight, and advised Toolen about references. But I thought I should mention that BLP is only applicable to LIVING people - and anyone who was alive before the 19th century is definitely not living now! :) Mabalu (talk) 11:08, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

@Mabalu: Sorry about that. I'll be more careful. KJ «Click Here» 11:12, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
You should have reverted yourself as well. I have removed the tags from Constantin Cantacuzino (kaymakam) and Mihnea III. Fram (talk) 11:27, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Model UN page[edit]


There are numerous errors on the MUN page, and before explaining a number of concerns, I would appreciate the common courtesy of not deleting all of my edits. In reverting to the previous version, very basic factual errors remain. The assertion that "Model United Nation conferences are always held in the English language"(referenced)is false. When I wrote a more nuanced sentence,one that makes intuitive and logical sense, that was deleted. I was also in the process of adding links to content related to Online Model United Nations (that was originally there before it was deleted in November 2013). If you have specific concerns about particular content that has been added, then please make specific note of that and we can discuss.

I've only spent a bit of time looking at the edit history, but the page now lacks significant information. My major concerns are

1. Only UNA-USA procedures are covered. Terminology is not universal but this is now lacking from the page. Previous edits have removed historical context and development. 2. The loooooonnnnnggggg list of UN agencies does not belong on the page. These are very rarely used as committees within MUN, and they serve no purpose to list them out. It was fair to delete these. 3. Material is improperly referenced (in so far as the content in the articles in not verified or false). The community needs to clean this up. 4. While I understand the need to verify actual MUN conferences on the Conference page is important, this list in woefully incomplete. There was a reference to THIMUN on this last year, and that has totally disappeared.

I'm not overly concerned about who edited the material out, but there is much that needs to be added back. Then, some selecting editing can take place.

Just for full disclosure, I am an educator, MUN Director, founder of the Online Program, now a THIMUN partner who I work closely with. I want to ensure that this page accurately reflects the diversity of the MUN community, and I think we need to work together to rebuild that. Ljmartin12 (talk) 12:36, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

@Limartin12: First of all, I appreciate you posting on my talk page. Allow me to make a couple of points, then go over your objections and edits. Firstly, the article, as I've mentioned on the article's talk page, was that there were no reliable sources, the range was too small, the article was unorganized, and that there are too many specific examples of different MUNs. I've rewritten the page to reflect those concerns and in the process, eliminated material that was viewed as advertising or did not have WP:RS. Now let's go over your objections.

1. Only UNA-USA procedures are covered This is a point that I fully agree with. I could not find any material about any other procedures, so I could only add UNA-USA's procedure, using the sources from the UNA-USA site, which is maintained by the United Nations Foundation. Please add procedures about other styles, providing that they are reliable sourced. Previous edits have removed historical context and development This is often because the historical context and development were not reliably cited as well as being mostly advertisements that did not contribute materially to the article. 2. This is agreeable. I've only kept the list since it was present in the previous version of the article, and I didn't really have a problem in keeping or removing the list. 3. As the editor who went over the entire article, I must disagree. Every statement is referenced using in-line citations. 4. The reference to THIMUN was probably written as an advertisement as well. Please add the conference if its importance is established through secondary sources.

Now let's look at your edits, as expressed here:

  • The Hague International Model United Nations: The second reference that you've established, [1], does not give us any information about the THIMUN rules of procedure, just the fact that the conferences are different. If you wish to illustrate the differences about the specific conferences a different section might be appropriate. The first source and the sentence can be established, but that's it
  • UN4MUN: You cannot reference the entire website as a source, and the site is not adequate as a source for itself anyway. Please use a secondary source that can establish the fact
  • Languages: The statement that you keep using as an example was referenced. If you look at the source provided, [2], published by the Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst German Academic Exchange Service, you would see the sentence 'The conference language is always English.' I am also aware that this is incorrect, but you cannot give a self-published sources as an example to establish this fact, seeing that there is sourced information that directly contradicts this statement. You must find a secondary and reliable source that states that there are MUN conferences which are not in English. The policy for Wikipedia is Verifiability, not Truth.
  • Online Model United Nations: You cannot possibly use a blog to reference facts (except in certain situations, which does not apply here), or the website itself. Please provide secondary, RS information for this.

With this in regard, I'm going to roll-back all the edits for now. Please add reliably sourced information, and please do not make outlinks unless it's the External Links section. Cheers. KJ «Click Here» 11:37, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

On Syngman Rhee[edit]

Hello! I think that it is cultural imperialism to denote South Koreans' name by U.S. style which writes family name back. Please add your comment to my comment in Talk:Syngman Rhee. Thank you.NiceDay (talk) 08:32, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Kindly stop vandalising.[edit]

What you had done repeatedly with family names Alempijević et al. is vandalising. As per Category:Redirects_from_surnames redirect "MAY be used" if there is only one person with that surname but only if s/he is well known under the surname alone. And even then it does NOT HAVE to be used. In the case of football players, they are certainly not famous enough (and neither is some minor politician being tried) to be considered an exclusive representative of the surname.

Family name is a separate entry from these individual people. Family names in various languages do have separate entries. Maybe the article about Ćesarević and Alempijević needs expounding to be a decent article on a family name, but it most certainly does not need to be vandalised with effacing it and redirecting, it is a valid entry as such.

@ Firstly, please WP:AGF and stop accusing me of vandalism, unless it fits the definition given in WP:VAN. Second of all, accusing me of 'vandalism' is not an adequate reason to revert the pages into a page which doesn't even fall under the category of a WP:DAB page. You quoted from Category:Redirects from surnames, so allow me to point out further quotes from the page
  • "A redirect from a surname may be used in cases where Wikipedia has only one biographical article of a person by a certain surname, or where one individual is ubiquitously known by that surname" - not, as you said, "if there is only one person with that surname but only if s/he is well known under the surname alone," but if there's one article on Wikipedia, which is a different matter.
  • "Many of these should probably be disambiguation pages." - I agree that the names may not be the exclusive representation of the surnames, but that doesn't mean that you can change the page from a non-redirect page when the page only has one valid redirect target. If you believe that there needs to be multiple redirect targets, please create a Disambiguation page, with the guidelines provided on WP:D. This is not a disambiguation page. Abramović, another Serbian surname, is a disambiguation page, because it has several entries, and it can follows your format. Apostolović, yet another Serbian surname, is a redirect page because, as far as the creator of the redirect was concerned, there was only one entry for the surname.
To sum it up, please only change the page formats when there are multiple Wikipedia entries on the same topic. I'll revert the changes in a short while, and please do not persist in changing pages to your format without good reason. KJ «Click Here» 00:16, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
kid, do you understand what the word "may" in English means? It does NOT mean "must". It means it could happen or not. It is better that it does not. Stop vandalising.
When I have time I will go through all Serbian family names that redirect to a single individual and remove that stupidity (forced redirect link) and design a brief description that eaxch of those is a family name, such as for e.g. the name "Smith" in English. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:56, 18 June 2014 (UTC)


Please ignore my previous comment. I now understand what you did. The redirect was not initially clear, but I see the relevance of quark confinement to color confinement. You were correct to revert it. (talk) 21:42, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

LED IPS[edit]

You did right but thought wrong that LED IPS would go to WP:RFD as delete... User:BBCLCD and I have been munching over what we should do about it now. Thank you for pointing in the right direction and we are taking it together it seems, slowly, to make the articles and thus WP better. Good pointer so just wanted to say thanks, probably doesn't sound like it. Si Trew (talk) 00:27, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 14 June[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:30, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Redirect Fall for You (album)[edit]

I've restored the redirect for now since the redirect seemed appropriate for now. Please change the page into either a WP:DAB page or a redirect when the album is released. If you have any questions or comments, please leave a message on my talk page. Thanks. KJ «Click Here» 00:05, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

I've reverted the page to my first deletion edit. I stated my reasoning on the talk page. There is no good reason that I can see for that redirect page to exist. If you can see a good reason, please state it, and if I agree I won't keep reverting it. I am not looking for an edit war, which is why I am taking it to the talk page. Mburrell (talk) 01:36, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Japan Automobile Research Institute[edit]

Hi, the redirection from JARI to "Transport in Japan" doesn't make any sense to me, absolutely no information (except for a link) about it. Should be better a blank page to get the people write articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:56, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

@ It looks like JARI is getting a moderate amount of views for a redirect as seen here, so I'm inclined to keep the redirect to the most appropriate target, which is the Transport in Japan article. If you can expand the redirect into a stand-alone article, please feel free to do so, but please be noted that blanking the page is not tantamount to a deletion and that a blank page will still show up as a blue link. If you believe that the redirect should be deleted, please bring it up at WP:RFD. Thanks. KJ «Click Here» 05:16, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

American Cinema Editors Awards[edit]

Hello! I had deleted the links for the 2006 and 2013 American Cinema Editors Awards, because they really shouldn't redirect to articles for awards from a different year. I went ahead and fixed them again, to point to American Cinema Editors for the time being, until the 2006 and 2013 articles can be created. Fortdj33 (talk) 12:05, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

This is the last time I am going to tell you: Stop vandalising and stop disturbing me[edit]

Family names are a valid article. Each family name in every language can be an article. Instead of your Serbophobic (and therefore racist, since you are apparently Korean, at least that is what you claim) vandalism edits, go and do something useful like making wiki articles for Korean family names. Most certainly do not ever again take the liberty to tell me what to do, because you have neither right nor authority to do that and your snotty and inappropriate comments are unwelcome.

Eventually, as I have already replied at the ludicrous discussion you started -- where, BTW, no one took your side -- I will create longer pages for each individual family name when I have time. They will be full articles in their own right. For now, leave the Serbian family names alone and do not input vandalism redirects to specific people. People are people and they have their own article and names are names and they have their own articles AS NAMES, not as incidental necessity for redirection.

Further your comparison with the family name "Hitler" is absolutely abhorrent, as all people who had that family name have changed it after WW II, so that family name does indeed relate to only a single person. And even so, it would still be possible to write an article about the family name as such, but it's not my interest, so I won't do it. However, writing such an article would be legitimate and such an article could exist as a wikipedia article.

On the links that you have been posting on my page (and which I am going to delete, because they are unnecessary on may talk page) it says VERY CLEARLY: "MAY" and NOT "MUST". Are you really incapable of comprehending the difference between the two? If you are, stop editing Wikipedia altogether because all your edits are likely to be violation of rules.

And, I repeat: do not come to scribble nonsense on my wall again. I have nothing to tell you that I haven't told you three times already and I do not want your inconsequential silly musings on my wall. Go away!! (talk) 17:33, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Christian Walker[edit]

Deletion should not be a problem. There is no blurb on the re-direct target (such as Tim Alderson, Michael Almanzar). The person who created the re-direct didn't add the blurb for unknown reasons. His name being listed is not a good enough reason for a re-direct.--Yankees10 23:24, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

@Yankees10: Well, I'm inclined to agree. The closest I can find in WP:POFRED is about subtopics, so it might or might not fit the bill. In any case, I don't think any of the CSD criterion is appropriate, so I suggest RfD for the process. KJ «Click Here» 23:51, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
Would it change your opinion change at all if I tell you that I am currently writing the article right now? There won't be a re-direct anymore--Yankees10 23:57, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
@Yankees10:Sounds good, but why don't we just keep the redirect until the article is finished? No sense in leaving a page blank, after all. KJ «Click Here» 00:27, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
I completed the article. Just waiting for the deletion now. Can you re-add the speedy deletion tag?--Yankees10 00:34, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
@Yankees10: In that case, why don't you just replace the contents? You can just remove the redirect. KJ «Click Here» 00:36, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
If i'm going to write the article I prefer I get "credit" for it by my name being the first one there. It's silly I know but I prefer not doing other peoples work.--Yankees10 00:38, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
@Yankees10: I'm sorry, but if that's the case, then I won't be able to aid you in the deletion. I won't act in further efforts to delete the article, but I highly suggest just adding the content. KJ «Click Here» 00:44, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Don't know what the big deal is, but alright.--Yankees10 00:47, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Please Kkj11210 to support the publication of article about Ramil Garifullin on Wikipedia.[edit] Ramil Garifullin known personality in Russia thanks to extensive publications in the major media and a variety of books.Earlier article about Ramil Garifullina in Russian Wikipedia has been removed due to political motives, because of the publication of negative article about Edward Snowdon (in RBC)-This was proven when discussing article (Ramil Garifullin) in Russian Wikipedia. Article about Garifullin (Russian Wikipedia), which was in Russian Wikipedia four years has been deleted on the day of publication of the article about Snowden 16.07.2014. Information can be found in the discussion of removed Article. Duo Fedor Babkin -Akim Dubrow is a longtime opponents of Ramil Garifullin. Akim Dubrow repeatedly insulted Ramil Garifullina online, although he apologized for them. Publication of article about Ramil Garifullina - a political issue. By importance in the Russian Wikipedia Ramil Garifullin adequate, but was removed from - for political reasons and arbitrariness administrator. All links will present later. Duo Fedor Babkin -Akim Dubrow opinion is subjectively.The Duo Akim Dubrow-Fedor Babkin has repeatedly initiated destruction of famous Russian people from Wikipedia. Akim Dubrow been punished by blocking for insults and arbitrary behavior on the Wiki. Please administrators and authors to support the publication of article about Ramil Garifullin on Wikipedia.Irek Minnullin (talk) 20:48, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

@Irek Minnullin: In any case, accusing actions of having a political basis is pointless. What I suggest doing is rewrite the article to demonstrate the alleged notability, using a WP:NPOV supported by WP:RS. Also, you might be accused of WP:CANVASS, so you can ask for help, but you want to avoid adding a mass of information to an unrelated user's pages, like what you did here. KJ «Click Here» 23:39, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

July 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Sinking of the MV Sewol may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"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:
  • korea-national-psyche/ |title=Ferry disaster's toll on South Korea's national psyche |publisher=[[Turner Broadcasting System] |work=[[CNN]] |date=27 April 2014 |accessdate=3 July 2014}}</ref>
  • sewol-ferry-explainer/ |title=South Korea's Sewol ferry disaster: The challenge ahead |publisher=[[Turner Broadcasting System] |work=[[CNN]] |date=18 April 2014 |accessdate=3 July 2014}}</ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:55, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

RE: History of North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University[edit]

Thanks for the revert of my unintentional edit. I thought i had blanked a page from my sandbox which still had the original draft that I authored. In the future I will be more careful, and not have so many tabs open on my browser when cleaning out my sandboxes :-) --Educatedblkman1914 (talk) 03:31, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

@Educatedblkman1914: Alright, sounds good. KJ «Click Here» 04:45, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Phi Eta Mu[edit]

The fraternity phi eta mu it's not phi sigma alpha. That fraternity is antagonist to ours. They use the redirect from the title of "phi eta mu" because they don't want to us have a page in Wikipedia. We exhortate that yu leave the page in blank with only the "Phi Eta Mu" title to us edit the content. Our fraternity it's the first and oldest in Puerto Rico and it's the first and oldest of its kind in America. Please leave the changes in blank and the revert the changes of another person because they (phi sigma alpha) began this changes for bad reasons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jcastro521 (talkcontribs) 11:25, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

@Jcastro521: According to the history page, the article never had any substantial content in the first place. That said, I can't find any indication that the redirect is appropriate, besides that it was first established as a redirect, so I have to agree that the subjects are different. If you wish to delete the redirect, I suggest you bring it up at WP:RFD. A better idea is to just add substantial content yourself, following WP:CONPOL. Thanks. KJ «Click Here» 22:26, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Recently removed content from Waldorf Astoria[edit]

Hello Kkj11210,

There certainly is a connection between the Waldorf Astoria New York and the Waldorf Astoria. However the first one is a single property, the first of its kind, while an issue about the second one should represent a whole brand (featuring dozens of properties). Please reconsider having in mind: True: Waldorf Astoria NY is Waldorf Astoria False: Waldorf Astoria is Waldorf Astoria NY

Thank you for your time! Valgetova (talk) 21:08, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

@Valgetova: In this case, it looks like the Waldorf Astoria NY is the most notable property of the Waldorf Astoria hotels, at least at the time of creating the redirect. However, the redirect may be contestable, but only if a stand-alone article is to be created at the Waldorf Astoria place, which looks possible. But please be noted that blanking the redirect is not tantamount to a deletion request, and that deletion discussions for redirects should be placed in WP:RFD. If you wish to add new material to create a new article, feel free to replace the redirect with substantial content. Thanks. KJ «Click Here» 22:20, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Steve Frick[edit]

Deleted the redirect. The Steve Frick who played professional soccer (an old schoolmate of mine) is not the same person as the astronaut of the same name. I hope I edited it in the correct manner this time. Thanks! (talk) 03:03, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

@ Please be noted that blanking the article isn't tantamount as a deletion request. If you wish to delete the redirects, you should either nominate it under one of the criterion of WP:CSD or place the discussion at WP:RFD. In this case, I think the multiple entries on Wikipedia (if there are) would warrant a creation of a WP:DAB page. If there isn't another entry on Wikipedia with the same name, then there really won't be reason to change the current redirect. Thanks. KJ «Click Here» 22:23, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

This is the first time I have ever tried to make a correction in Wikipedia, and I must not know how to do it correctly. I apologize. It's not a big deal to me, it's not someone I know very well, I was just trying to make it accurate. I followed a link about the old Canton Invaders soccer team ( for Steve Frick and it went to the page of the Astronaut of that name. They are NOT the same person. That's all. (talk) 16:19, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

AK Plaza[edit]

Noooo! When I suggested "move" - I meant "Move" - not "cut and paste" - that's not allowed - it loses the attribution that has to be assigned to all the past editors. You can have as many draft pages as you like in your user space so...

  1. Article is properly moved to User:Kkj11210/AK Plaza
  2. User:Kkj11210/sandbox restored to eliminate the "cut and paste"

You now have two draft articles :-) Ronhjones  (Talk) 20:16, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

@Ronhjones: Ah, sorry about that. I just assumed that the article might be deleted in the near future, so I cut-and-pasted it. Sorry. KJ «Click Here» 21:57, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
No problem. Most things are reversible. Best to sort it out now than later, where it would take more effort. Ronhjones  (Talk) 23:01, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
This help request has been answered. If you need more help, place a new {{help me}} request on this page followed by your questions, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Regarding Fleurop page redirection[edit]

Fleurop's wikipedia page is redirected to Interflora. I need your help so that I can remove the redirection and post the information about Fleurop. Please help!

You don't really need an admin for that - but since I'm here anyway...
As far as I can tell, "Fleurop" is a trading name of Interflora, so the redirect is probably correct - information about Fleurop should be added to the Interflora article, rather than as a standalone. However, from a purely technical standpoint, if you search for "Fleurop" in the Search bar, you'll be taken to the Interflora page with a small link just below the title saying Redirected from Fleurop. Click on the link there, and you'll be taken to the redirect page, which you can edit like any other article - just remove the text saying #REDIRECT [[Interflora]] and the page becomes directly accessible again. Yunshui  13:13, 11 July 2014 (UTC)


How can I edit protected pages? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cuampatuan (talkcontribs) 17:34, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

@Cuampatuan: It depends on the level of protection. Full protected pages can only be edited by administrators, so it's better making an edit request on the talk page. Semi-protected pages can be edited by any autoconfirmed users, or an edit request can be made on the talk page. For more information, you may wish to see WP:PP

Talk:BRP Alberto Navarette (PG-394)[edit]

The only thing I was trying to do was get the name of the article corrected because of another editors mistake in naming the article. I do not understand all of the mechanisms for doing this and any editing that I did was IN GOOD FAITH. I DO NOT wish for the article the be nominated for deletion as it is now named properly. Cuprum17 (talk) 18:11, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Please remove the REDIRECT[edit]

you removed a redirect on the page called The Longford Trust. I thought the best way to move the Draft Article to the Main Space was to remove the redirect and rename the Draft or move it. Please help: it will all make sense if you just took a minute to look, rather than just freak out as there has been a deletion. Or maybe you are just a bot? Psychetube 21:57, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

@Psychetube: If you want to move a draft into namespace (which, I'm assuming is Draft:The Longford Trust), removing the redirect wouldn't do anything. If you wish to go through the AfC procedure, you should wait until your draft is accepted, then just copy-and-paste your draft into the proper name. Blanking the redirect would just leave an empty page with no purpose. As for accusing me of being a bot, well... KJ Discuss? 23:34, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Breaking nCr (or NCr)[edit]

   Tnx. Re nCr, truth to tell, it never occurred to me that i needed to test from that direction, and it seemed so logical to put such directives at the top (just as many other directives go at the top or bottom). Unless you're sure that putting it at the bottom will still break the Rdr, i'll do some sandbox tests and hopefully be in a position to accomplish that goal without breaking anything this time. Do you know that after the Rdr call, or after a type-of-Rdr template, won't work either? (Responding here is fine.)
--Jerzyt 18:57, 26 & 23:27, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

   Just on the chance that it's more amusing than annoying to you, i've had further reflections about what my so-called thot process might have been:
   "It's an eff'ing Rdr, who ever heard of testing a Rdr? What could possibly go wrong in coding an Rdr?"
   Even more reasonable thots, that did not take place:
   "Do you recall testing with a space between the # and the R, so that the Rdr is broken & the preview reveals (even within the interminable chain of wiki-engine releases that were so annoying for neglecting to provide a real preview feature for Rdrs) whether you spelled the '{{R from ...' template correctly?"
   "Do you recall putting a space before "#REDIRECT" once, just for the quantum of further insight that it might give about what was different about processing of Rdrs vs. other wiki-constructs?"
   "Do you recall deciding it was best to assume that Rdrs were processed by coding done by someone who really didn't have any idea of what the preview code provides?"
--00:59, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
   OK, a sadder and a wiser editor, i'm pretty confident that i can get the effect i was hoping for without doing any damage. I'm probably going to be much better at testing the live change than i would have been if i'd tried it further than before, and if i'm still wrong i should manage to correct for it promptly; i'd also be grateful to hear about it (and, as before, to have you again intervene if somehow i foul it up again) -- if you can see a problem that i can't yet foresee and i don't immediately recognize it by (perish the thot!) still being too dense to figure out myself. It always seems easy to figure out abstract things -- including how to look for problems, but there's nothing quite as effective as actually being there when "the [real] rubber meets the [actual critical stretch of] road.
   Thanks again,
--Jerzyt 04:01, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

G2 Article[edit]

Hi Kkj11210. 100% my mistake. I strongly encourage you (and any other user) to refer to me as "User:Mister Stoopid-Head" if I make that kind of basic error ever again Face-smile.svg! Mister Stoopid-Head AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 12:31, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Rani Bilashmoni Govt. Boys' High School[edit]

I added two cites and removed your prod. Bearian (talk) 16:21, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

@Bearian:Alright, it looks good. KJ Discuss? 23:40, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Removing redirect[edit]

Hi, thanks for message re removal of redirect: it was done in error so thanks for repairing. I'm not a Wikipedia expert so get things wrong sometimes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whatkatydid (talkcontribs) 22:23, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

@Whatkatydid: No problem. Just for further reference, you want to finish your messages on talk pages by adding your signature by using this markup ~~~~ KJ Discuss? 12:52, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Larry Augustin[edit]

Larry Augustin can be many people. To use Wikipedia for publicity or gain is not good. Erasing my article on my uncle Larry Augustin was not good either. For he just passed away on the 7th. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:55, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

@ Please read WP:YFA. KJ Discuss? 22:12, 12 August 2014 (UTC)


Dear User; I see you have just reverted my blanking out of the Chumathang redirect (as it was incorrect) and informed me how to do this properly. Thank you for this, but unfortunately, in the process, you also blanked out all the notes I had made on the village of Chumathang which I had spent hours assembling. is there any way of recovering this information so I can insert it 9with a number of photos) after the redirect is removed? I would be extremely grateful if you could help me with this. it is very discouraging to see all that work destroyed. I know I should have used a "sandbox" first - which is my fault. Many thanks, John Hill (talk) 00:39, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

@John Hill: Okay, so I'm assuming that you were adding new material to the page when I reverted your blanking, and so you were unable to save the page and lost the material. In this case, you might wish to go to the previous page (by pressing the arrow on your browser) to see if the browser had 'cached' the data. The method will work with Chrome, but I'm not certain about other browsers. If you cannot find your text with this method, then you should probably consider your data lost and work on it from the beginning. KJ Discuss? 00:49, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
Yes, you are correct - everything was wiped. I guess I will have to start all over again but I am pretty devastated as I spent hours getting the article to that point. By the way the WP:RfD page says:"NOTE: if you just want to replace an unprotected redirect with an article, you do not need to list it here. Turning redirects into articles is wholly encouraged. Be bold." So, I am naturally feeling upset. No hard feelings, though, I am sure you did it all in good faith. Sincerely John Hill (talk) 01:00, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
@John Hill: For further reference, you may wish to use the Template:Under construction to avoid accidental reverts. KJ Discuss? 01:03, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Chumathang listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]


An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Chumathang. Since you had some involvement with the Chumathang redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Safiel (talk) 03:36, 13 August 2014 (UTC)


Hello. I made a quick check since I hadn't seen your user name on DR/N before, and found that you're new, and that the case involving me is probably your first case on DR/N, so I thought I'd let you know that my obvious aversion to the DR/N-case has nothing to do with you, and that you shouldn't let it discourage you, you just happened to stumble across a case that is doomed from the start. I spend most of my time on WP preserving articles, ranging from reverting silly vandalism to fighting groups of users POV-pushing in contentious subject areas, with a focus on the POV-pushing, so I've been dragged to both DR/N and WP:ANI a number of times, cases where none of my "opponents" so far have managed to get any support for their views. Cases like this, and users who think that "the encyclopaedia than anyone can edit" means that they're free to do whatever they want here, bring out the grumpy side in me, though, but you shouldn't interpret that as me feeling any aversion towards DR/N as such, or you as a DR/N volunteer. Just thought I'd let you know. Cheers. Thomas.W talk 18:17, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Lee Hyo-jeong[edit]

Lee Hyo-jeong is just one of the actress in the film Chunhyang (2000 film). By re-directing Lee Hyo-jeong to Chunhyang (2000 film), we are saying Lee Hyo-Jeong is the same/equivalent as Chunhyang (2000 film), which it is not--Jjaey (talk) 03:51, 17 August 2014 (UTC).

@Jjaey: Redirects aren't only used for topics which are considered the same. In this case, it looks like the actress lacks notability beyond the participation in the movie, and that's why a search for her name would redirect there. If you can demonstrate WP:N, then you are free to make a stand-alone article about the actress. If you think the redirect should be deleted, you should bring it up at WP:RFD, but I doubt that consensus will come to delete. KJ Discuss? 06:15, 17 August 2014 (UTC)


Hi, I'm just curious, how did my starting edit at Oscar Harris show up on your computer? "new page patrol" or As a "too short" stub or something? Cheers In ictu oculi (talk) 02:58, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

@In ictu oculi: Special:ShortPages, actually. I patrol there for speedy deletion candidates and unexplained blanking. KJ Discuss? 03:16, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
Interesting, haven't seen that before. Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 03:18, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

August 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to AK Plaza 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:
  • of notability or substantial content. The page should be deleted to move the former page (located [] to be moved into this title]}}

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:17, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to AK Plaza 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:
  • 판정승 |publisher=MONEYTODAY |date=July 22, 2010 |accessdate=August 25, 2014 |language=Korean |trasn)title=Lotte Hotel 'Duty-free shop fight' declared winner to Sila}}</ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:19, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

initial summary of case from kirin viewpoint[edit]

Hello KJ, What you are counting as me explaining my view point? I did not make a 5 point attack on kirin. I donot understand how that is okay to be posted just because kirin has an account and I choose to not register.

For sections, it was not to be misleading or bias. I made the section to have less to scroll up and down. I will let you do it fromnow on. I do appreciate your help. This has been ongoing and is tiring. (talk) 01:55, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

@ I apologize if I appeared biased. The decision was not regarding the existence of accounts, but due to the fact that you have already given a 'Dispute overview' in your point of view. There are personal attacks on both sides in the opening statements, but please ignore any personal attacks that have been made (or may be made in the future) during the discussion. I understand about the section titling; it was just a technical thing. If you feel too tired about the issue, maybe try to take it less personally and reach an agreeable consensus. Regards. KJ Discuss? 02:09, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
No no you dont appear bias. other editos do feel those with accounts are more important, I dont get that feeling from you. I just did not see why and do not see why kirin was allowed 5 points to attack me. I guess the requst for DRN is where I presented my side in the dispute overview section, right. (talk) 02:25, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
My "5 point attack" a.k.a. "Summary of dispute by Kirin13", had only the first point regarding any user issues. The only reason I included that was because of IP's statement "got her friend to block me". It was not a personal attack, only a response to IP's comment. If he doesn't want to bring up his blocks, he shouldn't bring them up first. IP has now twice responded to collapsed sections – he's gotten the 'final say', so no idea what he's complaining about. Furthermore IP has made a number of personal attacks, particularly that I've used coercion on Metheglyn and that DeltaQuad and I are socks of each other. Both assertions absolutely false. Using an idiom, IP should 'put up or shut up' – either go to ANI to report coercion and SPI to report socking or desist. Kirin13 (talk) 04:30, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

all the options kirin says no and kirin has the books[edit]

quote : User Kirin, do you disagree that the sources mentioned (books, blog, interviews, pictures) are adequate as sources, secondary or primary, for the homebirths? KJ Discuss? 05:24, 23 August 2014 (UTC

Blog cannot be used. Reading WP:BLOGS, "Never use self-published sources as third-party sources about living people, even if the author is an expert, well-known professional researcher, or writer." He's failed to give any citation for any of the other information. I'm not going to search the several hundred pages of the books or watch the 100+ episodes. If he claims it's there, he must be able to provide an actual citation. Unless he's spoken with Ellie/Lily, he cannot say where they got their info, but that's irrelevant since the blog cannot be used. Kirin13 (talk) 05:43, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Putting aside the blog for now, common practice in Wikipedia when an editor cannot access the book is to WP:AGF and assume that the material is included in the book that is being sourced, unless there is material that directly contradicts it. With that, is it agreeable that the material can be sourced? User 65, it will still be better if you can give the exact quotes/location of the material, if possible. KJ Discuss? 10:17, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

I have access to the books. Feel free to give me the chapters or pages. Kirin13 (talk) 17:03, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

KJ, do you see how no matter what kirin is unaccepting. The duggar family sanctions the blog and give interviews, still kirin says no. The duggars go on tv and advocate homebirths still kirin says no. Now kirin is saying that I am saying kirin must read hunndreds of pages and watch 100 episodes. When did I say for several hundred pages to be read and episodes to be watched ? All this time Kirin has had the book, look in the index for the source, work together. Instead kirin is against. (talk) 02:22, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Also, why is it that the disputed section gets to remain in article instead of being deleted until consensus is reached like I have seen done on other articles? (talk) 02:22, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

@ Before I reply, please be noted that writing about content here, to the DR/N volunteers' talk page is highly discouraged and I will not comment on user conduct or on the content. I will suggest that you make that suggestion to the user; i.e. 'look in the index for the source, work together,' in his talk page or the DRN page, preferably the latter. Regarding the disputed section, I thought that the question was concerning the information being added to the article, so that would have no bearing, and I don't have the power to enforce a particular course of action anyhow. KJ Discuss? 02:41, 24 August 2014 (UTC)


the airline has moved to Higuerote


"Information icon Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Click 4 support. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism. Thank you. KJ Discuss? 14:03, 25 August 2014 (UTC)" Nope. Check the page history.

I added a pretty detailed explanation of what was wrong with the page some time ago, and it was removed (more than once, if I recall correctly) by another user (presumably an "employee" of that company given their other edits). I'll revert it to the version with that explanation. Cheers.

@ OK. To start, you cannot put your own opinion on the article or blank it, for that matter. Commentary like this edit goes to the talk page of the article, which would be would have been Talk:Click 4 support, but never mind that, the article is deleted now. For further reference,
  • As a general rule, don't WP:BLANK articles
  • If you wish to continue editing on Wikipedia, I would highly suggest reading Wikipedia's policies and guidelines in editing and asking other users for help if you're not sure what to do.
  • Don't keep reverting to your preferred version if it is reverted. Discuss the changes with the reverting editor.

We hope you continue to edit on Wikipedia, and be assured that we will help you as much as we can. KJ Discuss? 14:16, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Korean reliable sources[edit]

Just to let you know, I created Wikipedia:WikiProject Korea/Reliable sources. Should I keep the headings as "Allowed and Questionable", changed it to "Reliable and Unreliable" or a combination of both? Jaewon [Talk] 16:35, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

@Jay2kx: How about considered reliable and considered unreliable? And you might want to add a description/justification of each source. KJ Discuss? 22:20, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
That's even better, I'll change it to that and add descriptions to each source. Thanks. Jaewon [Talk] 00:15, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
@Jay2kx: Alrighty, I'll try to add sources and give justification (or the lack thereof) whenever I can. KJ Discuss? 01:15, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
Alright, thanks. I added descriptions to the sources so you can check to see if anything needs rewording. Jaewon [Talk] 01:30, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 27[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited AK Plaza, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lotte. 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) 08:58, 27 August 2014 (UTC)


Have you noticed these templates?

I think these are not needed. Jaewon [Talk] 17:58, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

@Jay2kx: Why do you think so? KJ Discuss? 22:52, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
All the table templates are the headers of a table, it would of been different if it was made differently. The infobox is okay but how much weight does winning on Music Bank (TV series) and M! Countdown hold? I feel like it's basically like having your music video ranked #1 on Total Request Live. Jaewon [Talk] 23:35, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
@Jay2kx: Well, I'm not too sure about the templates. I think the general rule is that if they're in use, then we can keep them unless it can be merged. As for the Music Bank and M! Countdown, it's more like being ranked on the Billboard than Total Request Live, so it has some merit. KJ Discuss? 00:45, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
Well, I'll keep an eye on them since the creator is adding them to pages and who knows if a random person might afd it at anytime. Jaewon [Talk] 02:10, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
@Jay2kx: I'm Keaclamviectot, creator of four templates you think they are not needed. :First, I will talk about Template:Infobox K-pop artist awards. Of course, it is similar with Template:Infobox musician awards, because I used almost code from that template, but I also added Music program awards box, and slimmed the original code (removed some awards and add some ones). I don't say my template is better than the original template, but it is more suitable for K-pop artists.
Now, I talk about three table templates. When I use them in pages, I have reduced a lot of unnecessary code (align center). And you said, they are not needed?
If you are afraid of security of them, don't be worry. I will look after them, you have my words. Sincerely. Ke ac lam viec tot (talk) 17:06, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

September 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Sinking of the MV Sewol 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:
  • Cause" /> 45 degrees to the right,<ref name="NPR 0518" /> made between 8:48 and 8:49&nbsp;a.m. ([[Korean Standard Time|KST]],<ref name="NPR 0418">{{cite news |url=

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 06:47, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

'Occupied Ulster'[edit]

Hi. You restored my removal of the redirect from Occupied Ulster to Northern Ireland, probably automatically. It is pretty offensive to refer to Northern Ireland as 'occupied'; also I note there are no pages on Wikipedia which link to Occupied Ulster (except now, of course, our mutual talk pages). The user who made the original redirect has since been deleted as a sockpuppet.

The redirect should be removed; I am therefore reverting your edit and would appreciate it being left alone or the page deleted. (talk) 11:45, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

@ First, please be noted that blanking the page is not tantamount to a deletion request. For a redirect, I would have recommended that you nominate the page at WP:RFD, which has been done at this point. Just for further reference, being offensive is not a reason to delete the redirect as Wikipedia is not censored. Regards. KJ Discuss? 14:59, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Regarding request for undeletion of a deleted category page (Parks in Bhubaneswar) under CSD#A3[edit]

It appears that a category page by the name "Parks in Bhubaneswar", added by me, was first tagged for speedy deletion and then got deleted because of the CSD#A3 guideline. The reason why I did not add any content in the page is just simple which is, at that time, I didn't have time back then to continue editing WP. I, like most others, have other things to do also. So, when I returned to add the content to the page after one day, i.e today, I found out that it got Speedily deleted. So, now, I wish if I will be allowed to add content to the same page after its undeletion. Thanks. Rishidigital1055 (talk) 14:54, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

@Rishidigital1055: If you have enough material to create the Wikipedia page following policies and guidelines, feel free to create another article with the same name, along with the content. However, please be noted that creating blank pages or 'fill-in' pages are not allowed in Wikipedia. Although I did nominate the page under speedy deletion, I am not the administrator who deleted the page. In case that the article actually had content that you wish to retrieve, you want to contact the deleting administrator as seen here. Just for further reference, you might wish to read WP:YFA and use the WP:AFC process to ensure your article is not speedily deleted. KJ Discuss? 15:13, 2 September 2014 (UTC)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Kkj11210. You have new messages at SantiLak's talk page.
Message added 02:45, 12 September 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

SantiLak (talk) 02:45, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Delete Alliance_Global_Group[edit]

That page was deleted by MusikAnimal. it is been recreated by wikipedia editor.

  • this company is not a notable company
  • the cited sources don't belong to any one popular media.
  • the editor payed for this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Baxzius (talkcontribs) 10:43, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Delete Alliance_Global_Group[edit]

That page was deleted by MusikAnimal. it is been recreated by wikipedia editor.

  • this company is not a notable company
  • the cited sources don't belong to any one popular media.
  • the editor payed for this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Baxzius (talkcontribs) 10:54, 17 September 2014 (UTC)


Regarding your reversion of my effort to stop the incorrect redirection of Panalba to Famotidine, Panalba has no relationship to Famotidine. (See,, and How might this situation be corrected? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lilienfeld (talkcontribs) 00:50, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

@Lilienfeld: Please bring it up at WP:RFD. KJ Discuss? 01:13, 22 September 2014 (UTC)