- 1 Upcoming Saturday events - March 1: Harlem History Editathon and March 8: NYU Law Editathon
- 2 Deletion review for Hummingbird Heartbeat
- 3 DRV
- 4 Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!
- 5 The Weight of Chains 2
- 6 Allameh Tabatabai Management School
- 7 Too bright
- 8 2 AFDs that may not have been "filed" properly - can you help?
- 9 Peavey electronics eorporation listed at Redirects for discussion
- 10 Restoring State of the Future?
- 11 Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2015 April 4#Convoy of Hope
- 12 Newspapers.com check-in
Upcoming Saturday events - March 1: Harlem History Editathon and March 8: NYU Law Editathon
|Upcoming Saturday events - March 1: Harlem History Editathon and March 8: NYU Law Editathon|
You are invited to join upcoming Wikipedia "Editathons", where both experienced and new Wikipedia editors will collaboratively improve articles on a selected theme, on the following two Saturdays in March:
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by removing your name from this list.)
Deletion review for Hummingbird Heartbeat
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Hummingbird Heartbeat. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review.
Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!
-- 22:14, Monday, April 20, 2015 (UTC)
|Say Hello to the World||An Invitation to Earth||Small Changes, Big Impact||The Neutral Point of View||The Veil of Verifiability||The Civility Code||Looking Good Together|
The Weight of Chains 2
Dear Roy, Please don't delete the page for "Allameh Tabatabai Management School", I posted a note on the talk page of that article, the name of this school changed several times and so, you can't find many information about itin english on the web. User: shj369 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shj369 (talk • contribs) 19:59, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
- The article was deleted by a consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Allameh Tabatabai Management School. It wasn't my decision, I just carried out the consensus formed by the people discussing the article. -- RoySmith (talk) 21:36, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
Hey Roy: You should change the chili pepper image on your user page to something else, because it's too bright. It's like I have to put on sunglasses whenever I view your user page. What's up with that? North America1000 03:03, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
- Have you clicked on the Rogue-o-meter link? -- RoySmith (talk) 11:40, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
- The checkboxes don't work...North America1000 12:56, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
2 AFDs that may not have been "filed" properly - can you help?
Hi! I see you sometimes work on closing AFDs and was wondering if you could help me out with a possible syntax problem (I don't even know if that's the right terminology). Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Day & Night (EP) and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Black Eyes (EP) have a weird format at WP:KO-DEL and I actually can't find them at all at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2015 March 27, so I think there may have been a mistake during the "filing" process (it wasn't me). Would you mind taking a look and possibly fixing whatever might be broken? I don't know the normal process in a case like this. Many thanks for any help! Shinyang-i (talk) 01:24, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Day & Night (EP) – Fixed and transcluded to the 2015 April 2 log page
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Black Eyes (EP) – Fixed and transcluded to the 2015 April 2 log page
- – North America1000 02:17, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
Peavey electronics eorporation listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Peavey electronics eorporation. Since you had some involvement with the Peavey electronics eorporation redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 18:27, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
Restoring State of the Future?
Somebody contacted me, and apparently also @Sphilbrick:, by email this morning, requesting that I restore State of the Future. In general, such conversations are better on-wiki. If it was you, please ping me here so we can discuss it. Thanks -- RoySmith (talk) 13:47, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
- Oh, never mind. I see this goes with the thread at User_talk:Sphilbrick#Restoration_of_the_deleted_article. I'll respond there. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:51, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
At Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2015 April 4#Convoy of Hope, Nick-D (talk · contribs) and Stifle (talk · contribs) supported deletion, while Thincat (talk · contribs), Stalwart111 (talk · contribs), FreeRangeFrog (talk · contribs), and I believed the draft could be used if an established editor (I) took responsibility for it.
Your closing statement "It's possible that the topic is OK, but not this draft, by this editor. Based on that, I'm going to let the salting stand" does not reflect the consensus in the discussion. Please either unsalt the article or strike that portion of your close so an admin at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection can unsalt it. This will allow me to move BeenAroundAWhile (talk · contribs)'s draft User:BeenAroundAWhile/Sandbox4 to Convoy of Hope. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:52, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
- Hi Roy, your reading certainly reflects initial consensus - not sure that you saw that it was the same editors who later came back and agreed on a way forward, not a different group. Perhaps a couple of us should have struck our initial bolded !votes but we didn't actually change our views (per see), we just agreed on alternate (compromise) path. Any chance you'd be willing to remove protection on that basis? St★lwart111 00:14, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
- I have amending my closing statement. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:17, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
- Not sure that actually helps much. Most of those who advocated for retention of protection then formally or informally change their view to support the compromise solution outlined by Cunard. Most of the support for protection was based on BAAW's original comment, which was later clarified and (mostly) accepted. At least two of those who participated are admins but it seems overly bureaucratic to seek their help to overturn something you accept you might have "erred" in closing. Do we really need this at WP:AN to find an uninvolved admin? St★lwart111 03:30, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
- I thought no consensus was OK (I would have entirely disregarded the nominator's opinion as being too conflicted). There is always a problem with how to treat earlier unchanged !votes when there is a radical change during a discussion. Also, in this case, as recently, we are left wondering about the salting and what DRV thought about it, if it was a matter for DRV at all. I satisfied myself that Convoy of Hope is rather definitely notable (though I'd never heard of it) so in many ways we "should" have an article but the problem is how to start. I was willing to support Cunard's offer. Thincat (talk) 11:00, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
- I'm finding it difficult to fully separate my clerical task of summarizing the discussion from my own feelings. I think it would be useful to have an uninvolved admin make the final decision. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:58, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have a one-year subscription to Newspapers.com through the Wikipedia Library. This is a brief update, to remind you about that access:
- Please make sure that you can still log in to your Newspapers.com account. If you are having trouble let me know.
- Remember, if you find this source useful for your Wikipedia work, to include citations with links on Wikipedia. Links to partner resources are one of the few ways we can demonstrate usage and demand for accounts to our partners. The greater the linkage, the greater the likelihood a useful partnership will be renewed. Also, keep in mind that part of Newspapers.com is open access via the clipping function. Clippings allow you to identify particular articles, extract them from the original full sheet newspaper, and share them through unique URLs. Wikipedia users who click on a clipping link in your citation list will be able to access that particular article, and the full page of the paper if they come from the clipping, without needing to subscribe to Newspapers.com. For more information about how to use clippings, see http://www.newspapers.com/basics/#h-clips .
- Do you write unusual articles using this partner's sources? Did access to this source create new opportunities for you in the Wikipedia community? If you have a unique story to share about your contributions, let me know and we can set up an opportunity for you to write a blog post about your work with one of our partner's resources.
Finally, we would greatly appreciate it if you filled out this short survey. Your input will help us to facilitate this particular partnership, and to discover what other partnerships and services the Wikipedia Library can offer.
- To be honest, I was never able to take advantage of this. It's been a while, so I've gotten some of the details, but I went to their website, attempted to follow the instructions I was given to set up an account, and never managed to activate it. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:53, 14 April 2015 (UTC)