User talk:TBrandley/Archive 8

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
← Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 →

Contents

My user page

Hi everyone! I appear to have a problem on my user page, see the bottom. There are collapsible sections but there not connected as I would like, only the first is. Can anyway help me? Thanks, TBrandley 02:00, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

I think I fixed it. One too many closing </div> tags. That is what you meant? -- Patchy1 02:42, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
Yes, that was it. Thanks very much! TBrandley 02:45, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Sorry to bother again everyone, but is there a way my user page can be protected from editing by anyone other than me, as it is my user page, and administrators? It would be helpful and I'm not certainly right now. Thanks again, TBrandley 03:24, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

I'll try to get somebody to do it for you, if it is necessary. AutomaticStrikeout (TC) 03:26, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
Sure, thanks. TBrandley 03:28, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
Done here. AutomaticStrikeout (TC) 03:34, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
Full protection of your user page would prevent it from being edited by anyone except administrators (including yourself). Is that what you want? It isn't possible to protect the page so that only you and admins can edit it. The other option is to semi-protect it so that IP's and new editors can't edit it. Why do you want to protect it anyway? There doesn't seem to be any recent vandalism or anything. ‑Scottywong| spout _ 05:37, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, that is what I would like please. My user page's actual content is provided at User:TBrandley/PleaseDoNotEdit, so that would be fine. TBrandley 05:40, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
Ahh, ok. Didn't catch that. Done. ‑Scottywong| confess _ 05:42, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. TBrandley 05:50, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
  • If you also want technical protection, you could use something like User:TBrandley/userpage.css - similar to my approach. The only disadvantage is that you lose page previewing; however, using a userspace CSS or JS page as your userpage is fail-proof in terms of others' ability to edit it (except admins).--Jasper Deng (talk) 06:13, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
    • Thanks for the suggestion, but I am fine with the current setup, although if vandalism occurs at my user page's content entry, then I'll probably perform your idea. Happy Holidays, TBrandley 21:54, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Yay! You used my template! Merry Christmas! :) --Sue Rangell 03:34, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the warm wishes. TBrandley 03:37, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Happy holidays!

Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 04:23, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the warm wishes. TBrandley 04:26, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Till 05:17, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the warm wishes. TBrandley 05:19, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

ΛΧΣ21 05:46, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the warm wishes. TBrandley 15:52, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Lawyer seeks enlightenment

It is understandable how the "Computer Crime" Article was deleted, there is not enough people who love the law enough to go to great lengths for the purpose of teaching others. I am one of those individuals, been practicing for 30+ years and I am still finding driblets of fascinating stuff in ancient books of laws gone by.

I had hopes that the Article would be added to this esteemed site; my hope are not yet dashed, for I am the author of 17 volumes on The Construction of and Application of Civil, Constitutional, and Criminal Laws, alas, there may be something in my repertoire that I can add to this site. It would be an Honour to have one (1), just a single Article penned by me added to Wikipedia.

Thus, if not the Law, then maybe a smattering of History, from 680 BCE to perhaps 300 AD? Of course, it is law related, somewhat. As I have written on the subject so many times previously I believe that I may have an Article or two that will make the grade. Maybe in early 2013, you shall see another attempt at this Star, and if successful, the Star will be cherished for many years to come.

At that I shall close with this:

Have a Merry Christmas and a Very Happy New Year, we shall meet again.

-Thomas R. McKee

Birdymckee (talk) 12:39, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

The problem was not about the amount of people interested – see WP:USEFUL – but more about its notability and redundancy, which was actually the reasoning for its deletion at the articles for deletion discussion. Unfortunately, just because a subject is useful does not mean it should have an article in an encyclopedia. Feel free to create articles on notable subjects at Wikipedia, but subjects like those unfortunately are typically deleted. And, of course, merry Christmas to you as well. TBrandley 20:49, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Happy holidays!

Honningkager.jpg

Hello TBrandley: Thanks for all of your contributions to Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable holiday season! Northamerica1000(talk) 15:51, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Northamerica! Thanks for your contributions as well, and, thanks for the warm wishes. TBrandley 15:57, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Tito Dutta (talk) 15:54, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the warm wishes. TBrandley 15:58, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Xmas & Happy New Year

Johansen Viggo - Radosne Boże Narodzenie.jpg Merry Christmas
May this lovely Christmas season bring you delights in all possible forms. May you receive love in abundance and joy that lasts throughout this season. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year wishes to you and your loved ones! — Tomíca(T2ME) 11:36, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the warm wishes. TBrandley 22:36, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
And also here is the sandbox we should try the work. (you will be aware when you read the mail)Tomíca(T2ME) 22:58, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
Okay, however, the page appears to be non-existent. Are you planning on create it or do I help with its development? What is the current status? TBrandley 23:06, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks. Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year for you and for your family. Cheers, VítoR™  • (D) 23:58, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Your welcome. TBrandley 23:59, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Fuck ben zero CSD

Now that was quick! Cheers, and have a good Xmas Tonywalton Talk 02:33, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

No problem. TBrandley 02:35, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Template talk:WikiProject Canada

I am very surprised that people that are not even helping your new project have the balls to tell your group what they can and cant do ...very odd. I would say just move forward the way you and the group would like....you cant go wrong if your project is seen on 2 templates. Now about the project it's self......I make portals...like most of the Canada ones were I make a section just for project awareness. Can I help in making you one for your project - got some colors, articles, anything in mind if you would like one. Moxy (talk) 02:57, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Well, I believe that projects should be able to what they wish and specifically because this project covers both British Columbia and Washington, but they are all probably still contributing in good faith generally. In regards to the portals, I would love it if you could create a portal on the Okanagan region, it would also be beneficial for WikiProject Okanagan's banner, so we can replace the British Columbia portal with that. But if you do create a portal for the Okanagan, could you include both the Canadian Okanagan and American Okanogan regions, because they are all related to the Okanagan peoples, which is the main topic. Your help is greatly appreciated, and, of course, have a merry Christmas! TBrandley 03:28, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Another one just because :) Till 04:47, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
Of course, thanks, you too again! TBrandley 05:10, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Cookies for you!

Kekkonen at Hawaii gingerbread 2.jpg


Viriditas is wishing you Happy Holidays!    
Enjoy your cookies and have a great 2013!
Thanks, you also have a great Christmas! TBrandley 21:12, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Wikisanta.jpg Merry Christmas
Thank you for your wishes :) Have a merry Christmas too, Sofffie7 (talk) 18:36, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, you also have a great Christmas! TBrandley 21:12, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

From WP:AFC

Do make review manually at Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Redirects?--Pratyya (have a chat?) 13:46, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

No, I review using a script. TBrandley 21:12, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Hello TBrandley! Wishing you a very Happy Merry Christmas :) TheGeneralUser (talk) 13:47, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, you also have a great Christmas! TBrandley 21:12, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry christmas!

Thanks, you also have a great Christmas! TBrandley 21:12, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Quick note on a warning

Hey! Just a quick note, I am sure it was an accident, but, when adding warning to users talk pages please make sure that the user has not already been warned, as per User_talk:BlKlNl_BEACH_CHRISTMAS_PARTY. I know the username is a wee bit silly but all the same when I popped onto the user talk page only 3 edits had been made but magically there were 4 warning :) Merry Christmas! ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 22:03, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi there. Yeah, I reverted the edit, and another user must have reverted at the same time, I suppose that is why. In regards to the username, I believe it is an advertisement of the person's real life Christmas party, especially considering the user advertised it on article. Happy Christmas, ₮๒Я∆и∂レ∑ㄚ 23:30, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Reverted Edits

Hi. You reverted some edits (immediately, which I assume means you have a bot working of some sort). You see, I recently changed my username, from my real name to a new name that isn't associated with my real name. You see, I don't want my real name out there, if I can help it. So I checked those pages, of my real name, and there is a redirect there to my new account name. This is unfortunate because I want my new account name to be anonymous. But if someone googles my real name, finds my wikipedia page, and automatically is redirected to my new account name, well, that defeats the purpose.

So if you could kindly stop undoing my changes, that would be nice. Thank you. 209.197.142.199 (talk) 00:37, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I reverted your edits because you were editing under an IP address that was not the new account and it appears to be vandalism, as you are not logged in under the new account and you did not provide an edit summary. That is fine, I'll stop reverting your contributions to that page, but just keep that in mind. Merry Christmas, ₮๒Я∆и∂レ∑ㄚ 00:43, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello, I noticed you had used STiki to revert a few edits by user Davesewell on Joseph Darcey-Alden. The multiple edits did appear to have a net decrease in content, but it looks like it was mostly the removal of headers for blank sections. It's a new page and it looks like that user had just created it recently, so I'd assume it was a valid edit. I didn't revert your revert though. Sometimes STiki is almost too fast for my liking and I've made a few mistakes using it. Sharp-looking Peterbilt on your talk page! Amp71 (talk) 05:07, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Joe West

Hooray! Do I get to do the honors and add the GA icon or does somebody else do that? AutomaticStrikeout (TC) 20:48, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Typically, the good article reviewer will do that, not the nominator, but there is also a bot that handles it if the reviewer wishes. Do not worry about anything, I'll take care of all of it. Great work on your first good article, keep up the great work and feel free to show off on your user page, of course. TBrandley 20:57, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, although I believe the majority of the credit should go to Eric and Phightins! AutomaticStrikeout (TC) 20:59, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
No problem, but you did do lots of work and should be proud for that, so please go right ahead and show off. Anyways, looks like the GA bot already took care of some of it – I'm now done the rest. If they significantly contributed as well, perhaps they should show off on their respective pages. TBrandley 21:18, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
What templates are there to show off? Also, isn't there a GA barnstar I could give them? AutomaticStrikeout (TC) 21:19, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
Ah, yes of course. There are a number to choose from, including userboxes, such as {{User Good Articles}}, {{User Good Article}}, {{User GAarticleswritten}}, or such. Yes, though is also a barnstar, it is {{The Good Article Barnstar}}, feel free to give it out if you'd like. TBrandley 21:37, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
I did. Thanks again. AutomaticStrikeout (TC) 21:47, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
No problem, I like what you did at your user page, it is very cool placing your statistics under the top icons. Great work, it seems that you users are arguing over who was the top contributor, all of you are saying you were not, that is cool. Have a merry Christmas, TBrandley 22:00, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

List of Prime Ministers of Pakistan

Hi, any chance you could have a look at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Prime Ministers of Pakistan/archive1? Thanks, Zia Khan 13:26, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

RE: WP 1.0 bot assessment

Hi TBrandley: Thanks for the message! I've begun to work on rectifying the problem. It appears that you inadvertently never added it to the assessment category; I just did, and as such it will take the bot several hours to get to indexing it. I'll keep you posted. Cheers, and hope you've had a good holiday! —Theopolisme 14:37, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks very much for that, I look forward to obtaining statistics. Happy holidays to you as well, ₮๒Я∆и∂レ∑ㄚ 17:26, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
Both the on-wiki table and the toolserver-generated lists are now available. Let me know if I can ever do anything else for you! —Theopolisme 07:58, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
There was a typo in the Mid-importance category; I've resolved it. Might take a few hours for bot to reindex. —Theopolisme 19:41, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Everything should be working now. —Theopolisme 21:17, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Yes, everything appears to be working. Thanks for your assistance and I wish you a happy new year. TBrandley (what's up) 19:58, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

flc

Hello sir, would you you pls review Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of awards and nominations received by Priyanka Chopra/archive1, as I'm trying to take it to FA. Please, do because it would be a great help.—PKS:1142 · (TALK) 04:53, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

You've seen the light...

...and changed your sig. Good for you buddy!  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 05:53, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. I figured I needed to go back to the regular generally. Happy new year to you. TBrandley (what's up) 19:58, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Featured list candidates/List of awards and nominations received by The Vampire Diaries

Hi Tate, you commented at the this FLC. All the concerns have been resolved. If you have time, then please cast a vote in support or opposition based on your findings, I would much appreciate it. The list has garnered several good (and resolved) reviews, but only two votes have been cast. Thanks and regards. — Bill william comptonTalk 06:45, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

As the article in question appears to be meet the featured list criteria, I am more than happy to support the nomination. Good work! TBrandley (what's up) 19:58, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Hey TBrandley! Wishing you a very happy New Year :) CURTAINTOAD! TALK! 09:26, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for the wishes, you also have a happy new year. TBrandley (what's up) 19:58, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Review

I now see where I clicked on. I actually wanted to mark the page as being reviewed positively but something went wrong. My apologies. Bermond (talk) 00:41, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

No problem, mistakes happen. I would have been more than happy to respond and understand, but there was not an explanation until now. Happy new year! TBrandley (what's up) 00:43, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
Happy new year to you too! :-) Bermond (talk) 00:48, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
Thank you. TBrandley (what's up) 00:49, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi there

Thanks for your message- No I removed this content because the user Carbuncle is trying to sabotage the article Amirite.com

The sockpuppet investigation was also started by him and I have already explained myself

Your request

Wikipedia Autopatrol.svg

Hi TBrandley, just wanted to let you know that I have added the autopatrolled right to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the patroller right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! Vejvančický (talk / contribs) 09:24, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

2013

Happy New Year 2013.jpg Have an enjoyable New Year!
Hello TBrandley: Thanks for all of your contributions to Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, Northamerica1000(talk) 15:21, 31 December 2012 (UTC)


Welcome to the 2013 WikiCup!

Hello TBrandley, and welcome to the 2013 WikiCup! Your submissions' page is here. The competition begins at midnight UTC. The first round will last until the end of February, at which point the top 64 scorers will advance to the second round. We will be in touch at the end of every month, and signups are going to remain open until the end of January; if you know of anyone else who may like to take part, please let them know! A few reminders:

  • The rules can be found here. There have been a few changes from last year, which are listed on that page. *Anything you submit must have been nominated and promoted in 2013, and you need to have completed significant work upon it in 2013. (The articles you review at good article reviews does not need to have been nominated in 2013, but you do need to have started the review in 2013.) We will be checking.
  • If you feel that another competitor is breaking the rules or abusing the competition in some way, please let a judge know. Please do not remove entries from the submissions' pages of others yourself. *Don't worry about calculating precisely how many points everything is worth. The bot will do that. The bot may occasionally get something wrong- let a judge know, or post on the WikiCup talk page if that happens.
  • Please try to be prompt in updating submissions' pages so that they can be double-checked.

Overall, however, don't worry, and have fun. It doesn't matter if you make the odd mistake; these things happen. Questions can be asked on the WikiCup talk page. Good luck! J Milburn and The ed17 18:17, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

GOCE 2012 Annual Report

Guild of Copy Editors 2012 Annual Report
Writing Magnifying.PNG

The GOCE has wrapped up another successful year of operations!

Our 2012 Annual Report is now ready for review.

– Your project coordinators: Torchiest, BDD, and Miniapolis

Sign up for the January drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 00:48, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Happy New Year 2013

200508-DSCN0455.JPG Happy New Year 2013
I wish you a Happy New Year for 2013 :-) AARONTALK 09:32, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the wishes, you also have a happy new year! TBrandley (what's up) 16:40, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2013 WikiCup

Hello, TBrandley, and welcome to the 2013 WikiCup! Your submissions' page is here. The first round will last until the end of February, at which point the top 64 scorers will advance to the second round. We will be in touch at the end of every month, and signups are going to remain open until the end of January; if you know of anyone else who may like to take part, please let them know! A few reminders:

  • The rules can be found here. There have been a few changes from last year, which are listed on that page.
  • Anything you submit must have been nominated and promoted in 2013, and you need to have completed significant work upon it in 2013. (The articles you review at good article reviews does not need to have been nominated in 2013, but you do need to have started and completed the review in 2013.) We will be checking.
  • If you feel that another competitor is breaking the rules or abusing the competition in some way, please let a judge know. Please do not remove entries from the submissions' pages of others yourself.
  • Don't worry about calculating precisely how many points everything is worth. The bot will do that. The bot may occasionally get something wrong- let a judge know, or post on the WikiCup talk page if that happens.
  • Please try to be prompt in updating submissions' pages so that they can be double-checked.

Overall, however, don't worry, and have fun. It doesn't matter if you make the odd mistake; these things happen. Questions can be asked on the WikiCup talk page. Good luck! J Milburn and The ed17 13:02, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

File mover

Hey TBrandley. I have noticed that you've performed several file moves that are not clearly covered by WP:FMV/W. I urge you to have extra care: files should only be moved when necessary, not because they can be under a new name that looks better. Cosmetic renames are (implicitly) not allowed in policy. — ΛΧΣ21 08:10, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Please be extremely careful with file moving - there is no room for mistakes and if you are still not sure how to use this right it may have to be removed. Take care, Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:45, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi. According to WP:FMV/W, if the uploader requests it be renamed it may be, but it also states "As a matter of principle it's best to leave all files with generally valid names at their locations, even if slightly better names may exist." Overall, if the uploader requests the file be renamed, it may be, but if another uninvolved editors requests a rename for a "nicer" looking title, then probably no. It is an easy concept to learn generally, and I do believe understand how to use this tool though — happy new year. TBrandley (what's up) 16:40, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
Hey! Yes, indeed the uploader has the legitimate right to request the file to be renamed, but this has to be done with a high level of discretion, taking into consideration why the uploader wants to rename the file and such. Although, it is generally accepted to rename by uploader request if the file is used in just a couple of pages; otherwise, it has to fall between the rest of the criteria. Also, purely cosmetic changes have to be denied (even if requested by the uploader) unless they are beneficial. I know you understand how to use the tool, and we all overlook the guidelines sometimes ;) — ΛΧΣ21 17:00, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Edmonton

In case you have forgoten, you need might want to close Talk:Edmonton/GA3 AIRcorn (talk) 10:57, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

I will be performing a review later today, thanks for letting me know. TBrandley (what's up) 16:40, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Just wondering about a question.

I have a question, if you are talking with a person on your talk page just regular talking, and you don't know its bad, will you get editing taken away? Because onWiktionary i did that and semperblotto took my editing away, without a warning to stop.please respond on my talk page.Venomxx (talk) 00:16, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

I replied there. TBrandley (what's up) 00:24, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

he did not suspend me. i checked the expiration date and it said; infiniteVenomxx (talk) 18:18, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Young cats.jpg

Forgot it, anyway, Happy New Year now!

Zia Khan 04:55, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the kitten, happy new year to you as well. TBrandley (what's up) 05:50, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

1950s.....

I'm done for now, had questions. No rush. [1] Dennis Brown - © Join WER 17:46, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Rape AFD

Please read the policy you used as your deletion rationale. In such cases, it is usually better to merge the information and redirect the person's name to the event article. Specifically advises to have an article on the event, and not the subject. also see Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#People_notable_for_only_one_event The general rule in many cases is to cover the event, not the person Gaijin42 (talk) 21:49, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

The point is the person in question is only notable for this one event, per WP:BLP1E, it is still regarding the person, especially considering you first sentence which is about the person itself. It is about her and the event, so that does apply. In addition, Wikipedia is not a newspaper, and hence should not cover these sort of topics. The policy itself states that "Wikipedia considers the enduring notability of persons and events. While news coverage can be useful source material for encyclopedic topics, most newsworthy events do not qualify for inclusion." You do not see article on event murder, rape, or crime that has occurred everywhere in the world. Please also remain civil in discussions like this. TBrandley (what's up) 22:02, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
I have restored my comment. per Wikipedia:Talk_page_guidelines#Others.27_comments Removing harmful posts, including personal attacks, trolling and vandalism. This generally does not extend to messages that are merely uncivil;. The article is about the event, not the person. Obviously the event focuses on the person, but none of the informatino is biographical, and is all in reference to the event. If you think the event does not pass WP:EVENT or WP:GNG, then make that argument (which I also believe will fail, as it has received significant attention, including international) but your given rationale 100% does not apply. Gaijin42 (talk) 22:13, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
TBrandley, you need to take a step back. Stating that you misunderstood the policy is not a personal attack. You were incorrect in your AFD nomination as Gaijin42 pointed out to you. We have a separate policy for events at WP:EVENT. If you still feel it is not notable, you should formulate an opinion based on that since BLP1E doesn't apply. Ryan Vesey 22:19, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ryan, I already did what you have suggested. Just above I claimed that the topic also does not pass WP:NOTNEWS, and, now, WP:EVENT. It would have significant coverage, but that does not make it suitable for an entry at Wikipedia. Go to your local newspaper, and you will find coverage on a number of events regarding this. They are simply normal events in real life. In regards to the civility issue, I am sure you would not be fond if an editor stated you clearly have no understanding of policies directly at you, so it is fairly uncivil. TBrandley (what's up) 22:28, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
TBrandley, you have not made any point about WP:EVENT at the AFD. There is nothing in my interpretation of WP:NOT#NEWSPAPER that leads me to believe that the article shouldn't exist. As for the uncivil edit, I do recognize that it was poorly stated; however, it was not worthy of a template or of removal. Ryan Vesey 22:39, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
Okay, fair enough, I will give you that, but now I just did note it at the articles for deletion discussion. WP:NOTNEWSPAPER states "Wikipedia considers the enduring notability of persons and events. While news coverage can be useful source material for encyclopedic topics, most newsworthy events do not qualify for inclusion", while WP:EVENT claims "Wedding announcements, obituaries, sports scores, crime logs, and other items that tend to get an exemption from newsworthiness discussions should be considered routine." In addition, WP:BLP1E, a similar page, will agree with my opinions; and that is a policy. WP:INDEPTH does tend to agree with you, though. I will also, however, admit I was acting in WP:RAPID when tagging the article for deletion, and therefore will also note my above concerns at the discussion page now. Thanks for the comments, and happy new year. TBrandley (what's up) 22:58, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Editing good articles

Hi. I'm just letting you know that I have reverted this edit. The article is a good article and was promoted as such by very senior reviewers. It has also had two peer reviews by editors extremely experienced in the FA process prior to being shortly nominated for FAC. I don't want to dampen your enthusiam for one instant, but please consider reviewing an article's history before taking your knife to such articles - many of which have been written and contributed to by editors with far more experience than you have. Such articles deserve more than drive-by BRD; this is not an expression of OWN but courtesy would expect a discussion with the regular editors. Take care, and all the best for 2013. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:45, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi there. That is fine and understandable, but I will probably try to gain a consensus at the article's talk page, and see what everyone can agree on. All the best to you for this year as well. TBrandley (what's up) 22:58, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

The Winter Walk at Anglesey Abbey - geograph.org.uk - 862583.jpg Best wishes for the New Year!
Wishing you and yours a joyous, healthful, and productive 2013!

Please accept a belated thank you for the well wishes upon my retirement as FAC delegate, and apologies for the false alarm of my first—and hopefully last—retirement; the well wishes extended me were most kind, but I decided to return, re-committed, when another blocked sock was revealed as one of the factors aggravating the FA pages this year.

Maintaining standards in featured content requires vigilance, dedication and knowledge of people like you, who are needed; reviews are always welcome at FAC, FAR and TFA requests. Somehow, somehow we never ever seem to do nothin' completely nice and easy, but here's hoping that 2013 will see a peaceful road ahead and a return to the quality and comaraderie that defines the FA process, with the help of many dedicated Wikipedians!

SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:49, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the wishes, you also have a wonderful new year and 2013. TBrandley (what's up) 22:58, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Talk:1950s American automobile culture/GA1

I think I am done with this round. I've left talk page notes to all those portals, letting them decide if it should be included. I don't mind at all, I just don't want to thrust it if it is inappropriate, and I'm not familiar enough with each of those portals to decide on my own. I've delinked shopping mall. I think a discussion on whether to make it a MAIN of the primary article can be held at a different time, depending on whether it gets expanded or not, but isn't needed for now. This means all your points have been addressed. Not sure if you found new ones, but I'm ready when you are. Again, no rush, I'm working a lot of hours, we all have real lives, too. Thanks again. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 22:28, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

While I agree with your choice to clarify with the portal contributors first, I would myself include it, but it is not really that important, but perhaps useful, so it is fine. The shopping mall delink is good, as I noted that everyone probably knows what a shopping mall is, thus a WP:OVERLINK violation. In regards to the article's promotion and real life, I provide some further comments soon, while in the real life, I currently have a bit of time off school for a while, so I will have time on my hands to read over the article in question again. Happy new year, TBrandley (what's up) 02:49, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
No rush. I just haven't been through the process before, it is a learning experience for me, one of many that I need to experience to be an effective admin. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 15:44, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
I went ahead and just added them. This is just new ground, I've not added portals to articles before, had to find the right template to even do so (which was pretty easy once I did it). Dennis Brown - © Join WER 15:56, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
I certainly believe you make an effective administrator, and, in regards to the portals, okay, thanks for letting me know. It is just a learning experience generally, but it becomes pretty easy soon after though. TBrandley (what's up) 16:42, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
I was a gnome who also did a fair amount of mediation and AFD work pre-bit but only had 19 marginal articles at the time. I'm just trying to round out my experiences. Since we are here to create content for readers to read, I think I need to understand the perspective of the people who are heavy content creators, and this is part of that. I expect to try to get this to FA, which is a way to learn about that whole part of the encyclopedia, from the regular editor's point of view. Getting this to FA will be a tall hill to climb for me, personally. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 16:48, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
I usually attempt to be both ways, by performing gnome tasks and article creation, development, and expansion. So, lucky I am, according to my edit statistics, that seems to have worked out for me, as almost 50 percent of my contributions are to articles, while the remaining contributions are generally to gnome tasks now. That works out. Featured article nominations is a good idea, but you will probably need some copy-edits, and maybe a peer review first. It is perhaps expected to be perfect almost. TBrandley (what's up) 17:04, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
Oh yeah, I will need assistence, some expansion and lots of additional work. It is a long term goal, I'm not in a hurry. I started it, got a DYK, hopefully soon a GA, and I want to walk it all the way through FA in whatever time it takes. That is the learning experience part for me, complete package in one article. I can't see even trying until late summer. Dennis Brown - © Join WER 21:34, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
There are some really good copyeditors, some of which are listed at Wikipedia:Peer review/volunteers, that can really help an article be performed to featured article status. I do not believe, though, that it will take under late summer, it could probably be done quicker, depending on the time on your hands, and such. I have now passed the article in question to good status. Great work, Dennis and those who helped you! A bot should place the good article icon on the entry in a moment here. TBrandley (what's up) 05:17, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Edmonton/GA3

Hey T. There's been progress on Edmonton, do you mind taking a look? Best, The Interior (Talk) 22:55, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Done. TBrandley (what's up) 23:00, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
See the page for more updates, thanks. The Interior (Talk) 19:48, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Fisher Int

FISHING company??????? <8-) Peridon (talk) 16:38, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Broken Sword 1 FAC

Hi, Brandley! I know this is the third time I'm reminding you about this, but it's been a long time since you've left comments at the FAC or since I last messaged you... so, could you please take a look again? :) Best, --Khanassassin 21:06, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

There were concerns I left at the featured article nomination a while ago, and they have not been replied to. TBrandley (what's up) 21:19, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but I can't seem to find any of your comments I haven't responded to... --Khanassassin 12:50, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
There have since been addressed, I'll leave some further comments relatively soon. TBrandley (what's up) 01:57, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. :) --Khanassassin 20:13, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Homme by David Beckham

Will you be getting to this review anytime soon? The weekend is almost up, and I won't have much time this week to work on it.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 02:04, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi there. Sorry I could not review it sooner, but I will attempt to review some time this week. TBrandley (what's up) 02:01, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Just need you to take another look.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 23:03, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Our old friend, Joe West

Hello, and thanks for your review. I have a quick question: How do I remove the (umpire) from the IMDB link? AutomaticStrikeout (TC) 01:17, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi there. In order to do that, you must add the title you would like to show on the article under a seperate parameter with no name. See the template documentation for further details. Best, TBrandley (what's up) 02:01, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. I have a few other concerns, which I will address later. AutomaticStrikeout (TC) 02:06, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

The IP

I would be careful about labeling his edits as vandalism (his most recent one was certainly not). It might be better to answer his questions and explain to him why what he is doing is wrong. AutomaticStrikeout (TC) 03:11, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

I would argue that all of the contributions made by the IP address are vandalism. Please see the edits that were made by them. All of them were either vandalizing a person's user page, or removing valid content from articles, while I am sure there is more. TBrandley (what's up) 03:16, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I would agree that their edits aren't improving the encyclopedia at all. But it wouldn't hurt to explain why. I can talk to them if you would like. AutomaticStrikeout (TC) 03:18, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
I do not really believe that is necessary, but I will try myself based on my experience. The IP knows that they are doing the encyclopedia wrong, though, I would suggest. Best, TBrandley (what's up) 03:20, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
I am the IP you guys are talking about I would like to say that some of my posts on the User talk:Webclient101 talk page were not vandalism. I know I did I some bad things but I'm starting over — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.54.17.249 (talk) 03:22, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
That is good to hear, thanks. I provide you some further advice on your talk page. TBrandley (what's up) 03:28, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Agriculture in ancient Africa

Can I ask why you supposedly unreviewed Agriculture in ancient Africa? I say supposedly because the CSD is still on the page. Grammarxxx (What'd I do this time?) 15:38, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

The problem is if the creator removes the speedy deletion tag, then the article will still be patrolled and it will remain unchecked for references, structure, style, and such, while it can has a chance of staying in the namespace, rather than deleted, as it was supposed to be perhaps by an administrator. You may wish to see the article namespace checklist for speedy deletion. Best, TBrandley (what's up) 15:43, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

Tireless Contributor Barnstar Hires.gif The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
For all your hard and tireless contributions to Wikipedia. JayJayWhat did I do? 22:19, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the barnstar, it is much appreciated. TBrandley (what's up) 16:58, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

An invitation for you!

Featured article collaboration.svg
Hello, TBrandley. You're invited to join WikiProject Today's article for improvement. If you're interested in participating, please add your name to the list of members. Happy editing! Northamerica1000(talk) 02:01, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
I will probably participate in the WikiProject relatively soon, but at a later time. TBrandley (what's up) 16:58, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Odd edit summary

Mis-click in a drop-down menu or something? (I've never used Huggle.) LadyofShalott 04:48, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm still curious about what happened here. LadyofShalott 13:48, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, the edit summary was incorrect, but the IP was still appropriately warned. Best, TBrandley (what's up) 16:47, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Rob Thrasher Page

Sorry I went about it the wrong way! I would like to help maintain the integrity of Wikipedia and thus recommend that the page in question be considered for deletion. Would you be able to implement that? Luna Bars 4 Lyfe (talk) 18:18, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

No problem, but you should consider taking a look at articles for deletion or proposed deletion, as instructions given at those pages, but I can submit a nomination for you if you would like through one of the processes. Best, TBrandley (what's up) 18:22, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

User talk:5.12.194.138

Just to let you know, this IP seems to have done mischief in several other wikiprojects, see http://toolserver.org/~luxo/contributions/contributions.php?user=5.12.194.138&blocks=true . Pretty sure the changes to Spanish WP were vandalism as well. Richiez (talk) 22:56, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

The user should probably be reported at the administrator noticeboard or invention against vandalism at all relevant projects, although other related encyclopedias may deal with the concerns in their language; the user has already been blocked at the Italian Wikipedia. Best, TBrandley (what's up) 23:00, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
Not really. In the case of much cross-wiki vandalism, a global block can be requested at m:Steward requests/global. A steward has now globally blocked it (see log).--Jasper Deng (talk) 23:04, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know. TBrandley (what's up) 23:06, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

October to December 2012 Milhist Peer, A-class and FAC reviews

Wiki-stripe1.svg Military history reviewers' award
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your good work helping with the WikiProject's Peer, A-Class and Featured Article reviews for the period Oct–Dec 2012, I hereby award you this Military history WikiProject Reviewers' award. AustralianRupert (talk) 10:09, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste {{WPMILHIST Review alerts}} to your user space

Edgar

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, TBrandley. You have new messages at Talk:Edmonton/GA3.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

The Interior (Talk) 23:26, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Multiple comments

Having looked through your contributions after your recent created RfC, I see a good faith misunderstanding of the purpose and mechanisms of Wikipedia.

  1. Your RfC at WT:PLACE, although well-intended, appears to be an attempt to override the recently closed, but (then) still on the talk page, consensus to retain WP:USPLACE. Unless modified to exempt WP:USPLACE and other existing place conventions, (as was attempted by some, but rejected by B2C), it will be closed as a duplicate. If you don't return to clarify your intent, the RfC will serve no useful purpose.
  2. Categories are not covered by AFC. I would move to merge all your recently created BBC presenter categories, but I don't have time to investigate whether all of them are too small or not a defining characteristic of their members.
  3. Your signature is weird. (The guideline here are essays that signatures should be helpful, and that links should be visible.) That would not be bad in itself, but it's difficult to tell which part of your name links where. If you add color or font changes, to give some hint as to which parts of your name link where, it would be helpful. I see your signature here is nicely colored (or coloured), but the one at the RfC was not. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 14:21, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
    • The support for alternatives to the current USPLACE guideline was far too strong in the last RfC to claim consensus support for the status quo. Discussion continues, as is normal. So is having another, broader, RfC, which proposes bringing consistency to place naming for all countries in a unified manner, not just the US. I applaud your efforts, TBrandley, and urge you to join the discussion you started.

      P.S. I like your signature and had no problems figuring what links to use. --Born2cycle (talk) 17:01, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

I will attempt to join the discussion at the request for comment, but for what its worth, categories are actually covered by articles for deletion – see WP:AFC/C. I have updated my signature since I started my proposal and agree the links from my signature were somewhat misleading at that time. I appreciate the constructive criticism. TBrandley (what's up) 23:36, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
My mistake on AfC/C. I don't think those categories should have been created, but I'll have to think about whether to propose them for merger to Category:BBC presenters (hmmm, that should be there, at least as a container category). As for your signature, if you change the font on the "and" or italicize it, I would consider it excellent. As it stands, it's still a little confusing. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 00:58, 16 January 2013 (UTC)


Jerome, Arizona

Hi, TBrandley. Your initial concerns at GAN have been (I hope) addressed. Please let me/us know if you have any additional concerns. Thanks! --Another Believer (Talk) 21:51, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Fossil Hill Middle School

I think the other editor in this is a student at the school, and if that is the case, he sure has a lot of potential! Once he gets the hang of what belongs here and what doesn't, I think we have a potentially great editor here. He wrote great and referenced everything, just not to reliable sources. If you are so inclined, a nice note on his talk page might be motivating for him. I already left him a version of the one I left at the article talk page. Thanks! Gtwfan52 (talk) 05:54, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

I certainly agree, and would suggest inviting the user to relevant projects and the Teahouse, which has hosts who can help newer editors with potential; leaving a note and praise at their user talk page would be helpful and useful. Best, TBrandley (what's up) 10:35, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Grey's Anatomy

Hey, how are you? Could you offer your opinion at Talk:Grey's Anatomy#Sequence box? Apparently "principal author" is an offensive term, even though dozens of respected users such as Ruhrfisch use it to describe an article they primarily wrote. TRLIJC19 (talkcontribs) 15:59, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I am good. I will attempt to provide an opinion in a neutral, civil matter. TBrandley (what's up) 00:25, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Subscription required?

Hey TBrandley, can you go to this link and see if you can read the article? I need to know if I need to use {{subscription required}} or not. Ryan Vesey 23:34, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I can see the whole article. Cheers. —Torchiest talkedits 23:55, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
I should have realized that, it turns out, I wasn't even logged in when I read it. Thanks for checking. Ryan Vesey 00:14, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

On another note, I haven't finished updating the article yet (I'll be nominating it for DYK soon), but would you be willing to do a pre-GA nomination review. Also, I believe there's a lot more information in Russian than there is in English. Could the inability to use the Russian language sources hurt it's ability to become a GA? Ryan Vesey 00:14, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I can see the whole article as well, so the {{subscription required}} should not be necessary. I am willing to do a good article review before the official nomination, when you would like. In regards to the Russian information, that should not be a problem to become a good article, as they are still appropriate, reliable sources and an editor could easily use Google Translate to obtain a rough idea as to what the references look like; in addition, we assume good faith, thus I would not worry about it. TBrandley (what's up) 00:25, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
The problem here is that they exist and I can't use them since I don't know Russian. I could attempt to use Google Translate, but I believe it's usually better for the person who initially adds the information to know the language. Ryan Vesey 01:56, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Why not request assistance from one of our Russian specialists? TBrandley (what's up) 02:04, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, I've contacted Maryana and Mishae. I just wrote my lead, can you look at it and tell me what you think? I've never been much of a lead writer. Ryan Vesey 16:41, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
It seems good, but I do have linking concerns with Moscow, as it is linked in the third sentence, but not the previous sentence. In addition, removing the second redundant "was" in the latter sentence would perhaps be a good idea. TBrandley (what's up) 23:08, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Jerome, Arizona/GA1

No pressure, just a friendly reminder! --Another Believer (Talk) 20:12, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Gamelan

Closing it as a speedy keep may have been appropriate.

However, your close be revised to clarify that the user essay "AfD is not clean up" is not a guideline and is certainly not policy.

Policies include reliable sources and verifiability, for example.

I would suggest something NPOV like "there are reliable sources available for improving the article so that it complies with Wikipedia policies", and possibly "several authors commended the user essay 'AfD is not cleanup' as relevant for their position". Kiefer.Wolfowitz 00:17, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

I closed the debate on the basis that there is a clear consensus to keep the article per its reliable sources that make the subject notable and verifiable. My comment relating to the entry's cleanup was a general statement, because the discussions are used for a page's deletion. If you would like the article to be improved, please see articles for improvement. Your alternative suggestion would also be acceptable. TBrandley (what's up) 00:29, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Please review recent edits to the article. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:30, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. TBrandley (what's up) 00:32, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Transclusion

Hi Tate, I want to transclude episode lists from different seasons of a series, without including the (short) summaries. Do you know how to do that? Thanks and regards! — Bill william comptonTalk 15:40, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

To transclude the episode lists, you must place the <onlyinclude> coding around the season articles of the television series you are referring to and use the {{episode list}} template, which should make the short summaries disappear automatically on the episode list itself. See the template documentation for further information. TBrandley (what's up) 00:00, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks again! — Bill william comptonTalk 03:45, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Beat me to a revert via Huggle!

Since there is no WikiLove function in Huggle, I can only say thanks! Cheers, Kevin12xd (talk) (contribs) 01:27, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Your welcome. TBrandley (what's up) 02:37, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Northside Elementary School

I don't know about speedy redirect.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 16:15, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Well, it is installed in the articles for deletion script, and the closure seemed to be non-controversial. I may be incorrect and am not certain, but it, in my opinion, is deemed appropriate. TBrandley (what's up) 00:05, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for your help at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Northside Elementary School. I have three other similar articles that I listed under PROD -- maybe that was the wrong thing to do?
There's also this one that has content, perhaps an M&R is appropriate -- Rudder Middle School?
What do you think? Can you give me some guidance? Woodshed (talk) 01:39, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
All of those school articles should probably be merged into their respective school district pages. Proposed deletion is never a bad idea, but in this case, that would probably be the best idea, just to merge and redirect the contents yourself, as this essay suggests and is well-established. TBrandley (what's up) 01:45, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Edgar?

Don't know if you got my last one, but just a note that Talk:Edmonton/GA3 is ready for final review. Best, The Interior (Talk) 01:46, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

I did, thanks for letting me know. I will probably review the article again within the next couple of days. TBrandley (what's up) 07:51, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Superb!

This one was superb! Matching emoticons! --Tito Dutta (talk) 07:46, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, they are very good emoticons, but they do not believe on Wikipedia, which you are obviously aware of. TBrandley (what's up) 07:51, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phase2 International

You didn't close this correctly. Phase 2 International doesn't have anything to do with English Opening. Perhaps you were thinking of Halibut gambit? Quale (talk) 06:36, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, I was thinking of another articles for deletion debate. TBrandley (what's up) 06:39, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your willingness to provide a review for Ed, Edd n Eddy (season 2), I'd really appreciate it. :) --Khanassassin 15:40, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

I will attempt to review in the next few days. TBrandley (what's up) 17:34, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks again. :) --Khanassassin 12:20, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Pre-GA nom review

Do you think you could do a pre-GA nomination review of Botik of Peter the Great? I believe I'm done with major changes. Ryan Vesey 18:18, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Of course, based on my reading, there are only a couple of quick concerns that need to be addressed: "and a single mast and" remove one of those "and" terms, "Discovery and history under Peter the Great" I would start with a simpler header, such as just "Discovery", ":42", well, what is that?, a proposed citation or number perhaps. That page should get through the good article process easily. TBrandley (what's up) 19:47, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll try to reword it and list it soon. the :42 is a page number. I know there's another citation format some people use, but I've never learned it and I'm not much of a fan. I initially had two sections, a discovery one, and a history under Peter the Great, should I split them again? On another note, I've never considered the FA process, after a GA nom, is this in the range of articles that could even be introduced there? I had actually been planning to have this article become my first FA, but it's been a long time since I've been able to work on it. Ryan Vesey 20:08, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Okay, thanks for letting me know. Yes, it can still obtain featured article status, if it is comprehensive for its subject. TBrandley (what's up) 21:06, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Can you double list an article in GA categories? Transport would be a possibility, but I believe "Royalty, nobility and heraldry" as a subsection of History is more applicable. Ryan Vesey 20:21, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) No. It should be listed only under one category. Otherwise, the bot will count it twice. Cheers! — ΛΧΣ21 21:51, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
It looks like Hahc21 already explained it to you, thanks. Good luck with the nomination. TBrandley (what's up) 23:03, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, I added it to the royalty... section. How does it know how many reviews I did? Is there a list somewhere? Ryan Vesey 23:53, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
There is a bot, GA bot (talk · contribs), which finds all of the pages created by an editor which contain "GA" in its title and maintains a list at User:GA bot/Stats. I believe this feature was only added recently, but it does seem to be useful in my opinion. TBrandley (what's up) 23:57, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

"Unrequired" GAN

I don't mean to bug you, but the GA for "Unrequited" has been on hold for nearly a month now. Are there any issues I need to work on?--Gen. Quon (Talk) 23:12, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

I am very sorry, I completely forgot about the review, but now that I am aware again, I will review within the next couple days. TBrandley (what's up) 01:02, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
Haha, no problem. Just thought I'd check!--Gen. Quon (Talk) 03:33, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
I believe I have addressed all the issues. Thanks for the review!--Gen. Quon (Talk) 03:37, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Army One

I believe you closure as Keep to be inappropriate as seven days had not passed pbp 03:29, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

I closed the debate on the basis that the discussion was regarding a merger rather than deletion, and proposed mergers is the appropriate venue to do so; there was no further arguments for deletion and is was clear the subject passes significant coverage requirements in reliable sources so the article could be kept or merged. Please discuss merging the article at its talk page, using the proposed merger process. TBrandley (what's up) 03:35, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Where was it clear that those topics had significant coverage? There wasn't significant coverage in the article, nor was additional coverage linked in the AfD. And how exactly does it pass the guidelines for WP:NAC? I urge you to re-read the NAC guidelines before making additional NACs. Generally speaking, you need to wait the full seven days before NACing. A number of your recent NACs appear to be improper. pbp 03:42, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
I appropriate the constructive criticism, but please note that WP:NAC is not a guideline or policy, but rather an essay which contains the opinions of some Wikipedia contributors. The actual guideline is located at WP:NACD and there does not appear to be anything against my closure there. Nothing seems to be against my action at the essay either, however, but I could be missing something. I realize that you are suppose to wait seven days typically, but in some situations, discussions are permitted to be closed earlier, and most of my keep closures recently were actually either housekeeping, speedy, or snow keeps. TBrandley (what's up) 03:51, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
  • This close was also quite a few hours premature as well.--Jasper Deng (talk) 04:19, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
    • Well, my computer states that the debate was opened seven days, so I closed it. TBrandley (what's up) 04:28, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
      • You also have to check which time of the day it was. I have my computer set to the time zone you use, and it clearly shows a difference of less than 7 days.--Jasper Deng (talk) 04:32, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Tbrandley, NACs, while permitted under strictly limited circumstances, are never a very good idea because there are often too many mistakes. Hovering with a finger on the trigger to beat the admin to the 7 day deadline is often a sign of over-enthusiasm rather than one of being particularly helpful. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:33, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice, Kudupung. I will probably just refrain from making non-admin closures unless it is general housekeeping. TBrandley (what's up) 22:59, 29 January 2013 (UTC)