Jump to content

User talk:Cirt: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
MiszaBot III (talk | contribs)
m Archiving 9 thread(s) (older than 7d) to User talk:Cirt/Archive 10.
Line 588: Line 588:


I'm not sure how to cite the omission but it's definitely not in the UK boxset. Perhaps you could buy a copy and check for yourself? <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Riksweeney|Riksweeney]] ([[User talk:Riksweeney|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Riksweeney|contribs]]) 07:10, 30 March 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
I'm not sure how to cite the omission but it's definitely not in the UK boxset. Perhaps you could buy a copy and check for yourself? <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Riksweeney|Riksweeney]] ([[User talk:Riksweeney|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Riksweeney|contribs]]) 07:10, 30 March 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== OTRS-related help ==

While deleting images in the subcategories of [[:Category:Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status]], I encountered [[:File:JimWilliamsAuthor.jpg]], which has a tag saying that OTRS received a permission email that was insufficient. Is it proper to delete images with insufficient OTRS emails without first recording the OTRS ticket number? I've never encountered this situation before, so I'm sorry to have to ask what might be a simple question. [[User:Nyttend|Nyttend]] ([[User talk:Nyttend|talk]]) 13:41, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Revision as of 13:41, 30 March 2010

WikiProject Good Articles: Open Tasks
This project identifies, organizes and improves good articles on Wikipedia.
AFD/TT-7T-2AFDOAIVRFUBUAA/CATRFPPPERCSDABFARFAC urgentsTFARGoogle Search
Requests for adminship and bureaucratship update
No current discussions. Recent RfAs, recent RfBs: (successful, unsuccessful)

Other neat portal ideas for longer term

  • Longer term ideas to think about from other portals:
  1. Events section, like: "On this day" e.g., Biography, Religion, United States; "Selected anniversaries" e.g., War; "Calendar" at Holidays. Interesting idea of "Month selected anniversaries", at Oregon.
  2. Model intro with some rotating images, after Portal:Oregon, Portal:Indiana, Portal:Iceland/Intro and Portal:Philosophy of science/Intro.
  3. Revamp DYK sections w/ free-use images, model after Portal:Criminal justice and Portal:Oregon.
  4. Portal palettes at User:RichardF/Palettes/Portals. Comparable color schemes can be developed from the various hue lists at User:RichardF/Palettes. Also see Portal:Box-header.
  5. If there are a lot of categories, then categories section to 2 columns, like in Portal:Indiana.
    Also take some time to check out style/formatting at Portal:Indiana Cirt (talk)

Note to self

independent reliable secondary sources

Cite templates
<ref>{{cite book| last =  | first =  | authorlink =  | coauthors =  | title =  | publisher =  | year =  | location =  | page =  | url =  | doi =  | id =    | isbn = }}</ref>

<ref>{{cite news| last =  | first =  | coauthors =  | title =  | work =  | language =  | publisher =  | page =  | date =  | url =  | accessdate =  }}</ref>

<ref>{{cite journal|last =| first=| authorlink=| coauthors=|title=|journal=|volume=|issue=|page=|publisher=|location = | date = | url = | doi = | id = | accessdate = }}</ref>

<ref>{{cite web| last =  | first =  | authorlink =  | coauthors =  | title =  | work =  | publisher =  | date =  | url =  | format =  | doi =  | accessdate =  }}</ref>
Citation model

The Simpsons (season 3)

Body text in-cite
<ref name="REFNAME">[[#LASTNAME|LASTNAME]], p. PAGENUMBER</ref>
References section

(reference template from WP:CIT)

*<cite id=LASTNAME>REFERENCE</cite>
Different model

See models at The General in His Labyrinth and Mario Vargas Llosa.

More info. Cirt (talk)

More at Wikipedia:Harvard citation template examples.

And Template talk:Harvard citation no brackets.

Cirt (talk)

Dispatch

Cirt, Awadewit suggested that you might be interested in writing a Signpost Dispatch article on Featured portals (the only area of featured content we haven't covered). Sample previous articles are at {{FCDW}}. We've covered:

None of them start out looking like that: if an editor initially just chunks in some text, many others chip in to tweak it up to Signpost standards. For example, someone wrote this, which Karanacs, Royalbroil and I turned into this, so if you just chunk in some text as a start, others can help finish it off. Another example, I put in this outline, and Karanacs brought it up to this. Other editors have written almost complete and clean Dispatches without much need for other editing. If you're interested, please weigh in and coordinate at WT:FCDW In case you're interested, you could just begin sandboxing something at WP:FCDW/Portals and pop over to WT:FCDW to leave a note when you're ready for others to help out. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:26, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Will mull this over and most likely draft something up. Cirt (talk) 11:54, 18 November 2108 (UTC)[reply]

Razzies progress

Cirt (talk)

Deadstar Assembly

I would like to see about bringing up for debate the un-deletion of this group, as they were proven notable and valid in the past, and can only provide even more proof to support the fact upon request. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talkcontribs) 17:43, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Things that are in the article such as their referenced inclusion on soundtracks for both movies and video games, as well as various third party articles dedicated about the group alone should qualify them. But just in case it is not, please let me know what else can be included to ensure their re-addition.

Just an outline regarding their status:

They are listed as a national touring act in both Pollstar and Ticketmaster.

They were featured in the following BIG MEDIA - Broadcast, Film, Video Games, Radio, Satellite Radio, Online Radio

Project Gotham Racing 3

"Picture This" Movie

MTVs Punk'd episode #301

MTVs Making The Video - Goo Goo Dolls

MTVs NEXT

they've Had Significant Radio Play Internationally. I can provide the Title Codes as assigned by ASCAP

Britain Norway USA Canda

FMQB # 5 Most Added with 46 Adds (Friday Morning Quarterback - FMQB.COM)

CMJ Loud Rock # 6 Most Added with 59 Adds

"Killing Myself Again" added to AOL Radio

"Killing Myself Again" added in Video Rotation on Much Music Channel —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talkcontribs)

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deadstar Assembly (2nd nomination). I would suggest working on a proposed draft version in a subpage of your userspace. Cirt (talk) 17:58, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not quite sure how to do that, is there any link you can point me in the direction of that would explain it to me? Also, it would seem the original debate was way off the mark with its claims on the criteria, as they successfully defended those points over a year ago as shown in the outline posted above (in fact they had to REMOVE some references as they were told they listed too many), and only have more coverage since then. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talkcontribs) 18:02, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You can work on it, at User:Elblots/Deadstar Assembly. Cirt (talk) 18:10, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I started, but would it be possible for you to copy over the old wiki page to this one so I can just work from that and add/reinstate the things that were on the article originally, as this would greatly expedite the process on both ends? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talkcontribs) 18:45, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for merging the old article with the new one. As you can see, I have added a few more valid references to the article. If you will please let me know what else needs to be done to prove notability I will make sure it gets done immediately. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talkcontribs) 19:10, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Most of those sources fail WP:RS, are not actually secondary sources, and/or fail WP:NOTE. Cirt (talk) 20:57, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see how extensive coverage specifically about the group in print magazines are not valid, especially when providing referenced links to the specific publications (even one with them on the COVER). And what of the inclusion of the band on soundtracks? (A Major video game title as referenced on its OFFICIAL web site, a motion picture that topped ratings with millions of viewers the night of its airing, MTV shows - as heard on the samples posted from their official sources). If i were to provide the ASCAP info of the groups radio play, would that assist? (I don't ever see those things posted on any other bands entry). The band have headlined their own national tours, as listed on ticketmaster and pollstar. They are also on multiple independent labels in various countries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.77.176.186 (talk) 22:04, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I would also point out that although not all articles listed are available by direct reference, they should still fall under valid status via wikipedias own Verifiability policy as listed here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Access_to_sources#Access_to_sources . All articles are referenced in a way that anyone with access to the archive can EASILY find them, although not directly via online sites (however MOST are), but issue and page #s are listed where applicable.

Is there any update on this review? Info is being added every day that has been showing increased validity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talkcontribs) 19:00, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the cites used appear to not be from independent reliable secondary sources. Cirt (talk) 05:38, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As discussed in our original deletion review, the publications listed ARE in fact viable sources, not run by or associated with the group at all in any way shape or form. Maybe not US based, but magazines such as Zillo (which incidentally has been in rotation since 1992), De-Evolution, and Orkus are in large rotation in EU and the band has been featured extensively in them, several times in some cases...as referenced by the requirements of Wikipedia. I can post scans of the articles if that would help, but I was told last time that image scans of an article do not qualify as a valid reference source. Blog sites such as Blabbermouth.net are run by a MAJOR music label (in that particular case, "Roadrunner Records"), and as linked in the article, the group have gotten coverage on there on numerous occasions. The coverage in R.A.G. magazine is also non-trivial, but some argue about the validity of it as a source (as it is sometimes considered regional depending on which moderator reviews it...I've seen it go both ways). Again, all of these articles (ALL media mentions listed in fact, are properly referenced so it can be reviewed).
I also would like to know how the groups inclusion on 2 Major soundtracks do not qualify them? One is for a video game (Project Gotham Racing 3) that even lists the band on its official site, and the other is for a Major motion picture (Picture This) which also lists the band as a contributor of the soundtrack.
The band does also get national radio airplay, and as stated earlier I can provide the ASCAP data if required (but again, seeing how I've seen no other band on Wikipedia require such measures...I don't see why you'd need it).
Them being listed as a Premium member on Vampire Freaks is a status set by the site and the site alone. It can not be bought, and it can not be self made. Basically, the site agrees that the group is notable enough to be listed as premium by their standards. If you are not familiar with the site, its a Social site, similar to Myspace, geared directly for the Genre that Deadstar Assembly are associated with. Review the site yourself if you'd like, and you will find a list of bands, but only those verified by the community itself to be premium are listed as such.
Although not a media source, there is also a long list of major equipment companies that endorse the group. (again, each one referenced)
Their music videos are on rotation on various internet outlets such as AOL Radio, and also have thousands of views (and more than 1000 non-band submitted videos) on youtube and other hosting sites. A simple search will validate that.
They are globally distributed via various outlets (again, a simple search will validate that), as well as on all major online music sources in the US (Amazon, FYE, iTunes). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talkcontribs) 06:46, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry but the majority of sources are just links to things like myspace, youtube, and even other wikipedia articles - all inappropriate and fail WP:RS. Those all need to be removed. Cirt (talk) 14:26, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I shall remove the Myspace and Wiki entries, but those are very little in the scope of things. Dockyard, Pure, Zillo, Project Gotham Racing 3, Rimfrost, Darlklands, Orkus etc etc etc...are all notable sources, as has been discussed in our PREVIOUS deletion review. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talkcontribs) 16:18, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
All "offending" links have been removed par your request. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talkcontribs) 23:49, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any progress being made in this debate? If you would review the sources, I believe you will find them all notable (as was proven in the bands first review for deletion over a year ago). Not to mention their inclusion in soundtracks on top of it all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talkcontribs) 17:35, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Try formatting all of the citations, using citation templates listed here. That will make it easier to evaluate. Cirt (talk) 20:55, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Will get on this asap (most likely tomorrow). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.9.131.46 (talk) 17:47, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Still working on it, I'm trying to make sense over how that citation tag works... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talkcontribs) 02:35, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok...got a start on it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Elblots/Deadstar_Assembly#Media_coverage (if this isn't the correct way please let me know). As you can see they are valid sources (magazines, video game, movie, and TV). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talkcontribs) 05:32, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No. I meant format this section [1] with WP:CIT. Cirt (talk) 15:34, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ok..gotcha. Will update. One question I have however is that it seems that even when following the templates exactly how they are in the page you posted, it still doesn't link the article titles to their webpages (as I feel that would be helpful in proving notability). For example, the following shows up only as text where as if you look at the actual code, I have put all of the fields in according to the template. If you could fix this one so that I may go ahead and copy/paste it and apply it to the rest, that would be of great help...EXAMPLE: "Deadstar Assembly - Bizarr und intemsiv". Zillo. No. 05/2006. May 2006. pp. 12–18.
As you see..it only posted text and no link even when I included a URL in the code. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talkcontribs) 17:36, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You may wish to ask for more help, at WT:CIT. Cirt (talk) 17:37, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed and updated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talkcontribs) 17:26, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The References subsection does not have those cites formatted. I still see lots of bare links. I see inappropriate circular referencing to other Wikipedia articles. I see "citation needed" tags for wholly unsourced info. Cirt (talk) 17:33, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have removed all bare links as well as any links pointing to any other wikipedia entry. Let me know any other specific areas you see that aren't set up correctly, and if possible an explanation of why it isn't adequate. I thank you so much for your patience in this matter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talkcontribs) 19:19, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please format with WP:CIT, and please fill in as many fields as possible that you know of info for, in those cite templates. Cirt (talk) 19:30, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
all but 3 of the references are listed using WP:CIT as per your request. All available fields have been filled out as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talkcontribs) 19:56, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Wrong, I still see some that are just a link with a name, not enough information, and a few that are just bare links. Cirt (talk) 19:57, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This is where I am confused. I understand the part with the link with a name (I'll work on fixing that), but the bare links, although not all point to a direct article, they point to the place where either the article is listed/mentioned or where the band itself is listed/mentioned as part of the entire publication (not all publishers wish to make their articles free for web). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talkcontribs) 20:16, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Who wrote the article? Title of the article? Publisher? Date of publication? Page numbers? Cirt (talk) 20:18, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Thanks :) I had filled in the ones that I had off hand (as you see a few of them do have that info listed), but am going to contact the bands resources to fill in whatever extra data they can provide where missing. Sorry for the mess, it's a lot of info for me (a user) to learn regarding the policies of the site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talkcontribs) 20:29, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just a side note here while I wait for more details to fill into the cites: Not all articles list a writer, as can be seen from these scans: http://viewmorepics.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewImage&friendID=2081932&albumID=2858205&imageID=70670702 , http://viewmorepics.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewImage&friendID=2081932&albumID=2858205&imageID=70670704 , http://viewmorepics.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewImage&friendID=2081932&albumID=2858205&imageID=70670705 . I will however provide whichever info I can. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talkcontribs) 00:43, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As you can see, references 5-22 are fully sited (as much as possible with the information available), and I hope that is enough to begin the review for reinstatement. As for the rest, If I am unable to get the rest of the details, I will remove them as they don't meet the requirements of Wikipedia, just waiting to see if the details can be obtained or not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talkcontribs) 02:59, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Any way to get a status update on this entry? The references have been cited to the best they can be via what information is available, and I feel that with the various publications and soundtracks the band has been on, they pass the minimum criteria for inclusion on wiki. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talkcontribs) 14:38, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are mistaken. I am still seeing a lot of bare links and references with only a link and a name, not enough information for the cites. See my queries above about this, already. I said this before, above. I specifically named the various bits of information that is missing. -- Cirt (talk) 18:35, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Removed bare links. The only 3 that are still there..2 are the websites of the record labels the band are on, and the 3rd is a direct link to show proof of the bands inclusion on a soundtrack. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talkcontribs) 04:39, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, this does not look all that bad now. -- Cirt (talk) 01:30, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to hear it :) Let me know if there is any other things I need to fix. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talkcontribs) 16:18, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Article undelete request

Hello Cirt,

Page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Teechart

Coming late to the fray, apologies for missing the discussion at page review time. This is a request for re-activation of the page, I was referred to you when going through the channel at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review. I'm one of the team that authors the TeeChart library in question, so am naturally biased, please take a view in overall context.

Part of backgrounder text used in undelete request: ".. TeeChart is a non-commercial and commercial programmer's charting library in existence since 1995. Widely acclaimed and offered to the Borland Delphi community since 1995 (as profit and non-profit) and with (amongst commercial products) a free charting library product to the .NET community since 2003 (see for example http://www.steema.com/download/other_projects). TeeChart has been used in professional and academic circles for many years. A quick Google search gives 154,000 hits, more, for example, than some other similar entity types with wikipedia page entries. Other examples of this entity type would be "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dundas_Data_Visualization,_Inc." (in this case a company) and "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusioncharts" (in this case a charting library). We are unsure of the deletion criteria in the face of the existence of the aforementioned pages and the relative search-engine hitcount. Deletion comments include "I can't find significant coverage for this company". TeeChart is not a company, it is a 'much-loved' charting library. .."

More info: TeeChart has had a Wikipedia presence in Catalan since 2005 (see http://ca.wikipedia.org/wiki/TeeChart). However TeeChart is primarily english language driven having formed part of Borland's (now Embarcadero) Delphi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borland_Delphi) since 1996 in both commercial and non-commercial IDEs. It has formed part of many hundreds, maybe thousands of student projects in its time. It would be useful to be able to put a reference-backgrounder on wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mmbcn (talkcontribs) 12:40, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest working on a proposed draft version, in a subpage of your userspace. Cirt (talk) 14:11, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, draft proposal at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mmbcn —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mmbcn (talkcontribs) 12:00, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please take a moment to read WP:NOTE. Does not seem to have enough secondary source coverage, that is independent sourcing. Cirt (talk) 16:30, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've added some reference links to independent information sources Mmbcn (talk) 15:02, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry but does not look like enough. Feel free to file WP:DRV. Cirt (talk) 15:22, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, just to be sure I've understood correctly. Do you suggest I add more references? I'm not experienced with new articles, approximately how many references do you think would be an acceptable number? With thanks. Mmbcn (talk) 15:44, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I would suggest expanding the content with more references, and formatting all the references used, using WP:CIT. Cirt (talk) 15:48, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I've added in more references using WP:CIT formats. Mmbcn (talk) 16:38, 19 March 2010 (UTC) I've corrected an erroneous link and tidied up format on outstanding references. I don't intend any further modifications for the moment. Any feedback appreciated. Mmbcn (talk) 12:38, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The page has no inline citations. Please read WP:CITE, and WP:LAYOUT. -- Cirt (talk) 16:08, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I've inlined most links, the overall appearance is somewhat neater. Any other points to go for? Thanks for your time. Mmbcn (talk) 00:18, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jokaroo

Hi, I saw you closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jokeroo. Note that Jokaroo is a copy of that article and it seems reasonable that the AfD applies to this article as well. Haakon (talk) 16:53, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, I'm one of the founders of Jokeroo, which was previously known as JokAroo. In previous discussions on Wikipedia, I released information showing that Jokeroo has over 150,000 members which constituted as a big enough website to be listed on Wikipedia, this was over 4 years ago. websites like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albino_Blacksheep, and ebaumsworld are considerably smaller then us and have wikipedia articles. You can verify the size of the site with Comscore, Alexa, or any 3rd party analytics. Let me know your thoughts or any questions you have so I can answer. Cpavlovski (talk) 06:41, 22 March 2010 (UTC) cpavlovski (talk) 02:40, 22 March 2010 (EST)[reply]
Feel free to work on a proposed draft version, within a subpage of your userspace. -- Cirt (talk) 16:07, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The last page we had was simple, stating our patents, our partnerships, and ownership. I believe that was a fairly good page. Thoughts? Cpavlovski (talk) cpavlovski (talk) 01:44, 25 March 2010 (EST) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.254.39.107 (talk)
Please read WP:NOTE, that is the standard. -- Cirt (talk) 04:20, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Open Platform as a Service

I believe the admin ruled to "keep" Open Platform as a Service yet you deleted it. Am I missing something? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.102.181.145 (talk) 03:07, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The consensus was to delete. -- Cirt (talk) 07:14, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I understand what it means when users write "keep." However, what does it mean that the Admin entered "result=keep" in the (non-visible) source notes? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.190.11.216 (talk) 02:35, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I do not know to what you are referring. The result was delete, not keep. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Open Platform as a Service. -- Cirt (talk) 16:32, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, the result was keep by the admin. You were the one who deleted the article. It was also relisted. Please undelete. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.190.11.216 (talk) 01:35, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Link please to this result you speak of? -- Cirt (talk) 04:37, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I can't link to it because you deleted it. It was in the source. Maybe you can pull up the history/changes? In the interim, please undelete in good faith. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.190.11.216 (talkcontribs)
It is not in the history. The decision was to delete. Please move on, or register an account on Wikipedia. Thanks. -- Cirt (talk) 16:07, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Wasn't "the decision" really "your decision?" Please show me the history or undelete. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.190.11.216 (talkcontribs)
Register an account on Wikipedia, and you could work on a proposed draft version, within a subpage of your userspace. -- Cirt (talk) 04:23, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I hope it doesn't bother you that i'm leaving you these messages. I'm sorry if it does. Let me know and i'll stop. But, um, another AfD. The nominator withdrew. SilverserenC 05:55, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am curious why you are coming to me in particular with this? -- Cirt (talk) 05:56, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
For some reason, nominators rarely actually close the AfD's once they withdraw and I don't feel comfortable with closing it myself. I'm not all that knowledgeable on the non-admin closure rules or how to do it correctly or well. As for why you, I skimmed down the list of closed AfD's and your name was one of those that came up most often, so...you win my undying AfD attention? ^_^; SilverserenC 06:06, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, -- Cirt (talk) 15:36, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I left you a message in case you didn't notice

Hi I left you a message on your commons talk page. Thank you MaenK.A.Talk 08:34, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I saw it there, thanks. -- Cirt (talk) 15:35, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image review?

Hey Cirt. I saw that you're also an administrator at Wikimedia Commons, and wondered if you could do me a favor? I have a DYK nom out there right now with a picture of Andy Samberg, but I was just told that the picture requires review at Wikimedia commons. I was told an admin could review it for me and was wondering if you could take a look sometime shortly, before the DYK runs out? Thanks! — Hunter Kahn 12:07, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tricky, would need some way to get in touch with Isla Fisher to confirm that it is User talk:Ibanez RYM. -- Cirt (talk) 15:35, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Futurepop

Hi Cirt, when you recently closed this RfP you semi-protected Electronic body music, but not Futurepop which was also part of the request. As you can see, the IP's revert war hasn't let up one bit on that article. Would you mind semi-protecting Futurepop as well? Thanks. --IllaZilla (talk) 16:41, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 16:42, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tough Mudder

Can you please explain why you deleted the Tough Mudder page? All the information was accurate and cited. What can be done about this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dolphintastic (talkcontribs) 17:51, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tough mudder. -- Cirt (talk) 17:52, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ghost Wars

I just noticed protection on Ghost is due to run out soon. I started an RfC on the talk page on what seemed to be the most contentious issue, whether Ghosts were pseudoscience. The consensus seems to be that they are not, although this is not unanimous. Is there a way to get someone neutral to close the RfC with a summary / conclusion, and only then remove the edit protection? I am not neutral, since I think the whole argument is ridiculous, and that this should just be a lighthearted article about superstitions and spooks, Halloween and haunted houses. Thanks, Aymatth2 (talk) 19:18, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You could post to WP:AN for a previously-uninvolved admin to close the RFC. -- Cirt (talk) 19:53, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks - I've done that. Aymatth2 (talk) 20:04, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD Discussion. Yet another withdrawn nomination. *hugs* Thanks again. SilverserenC 20:49, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are other deletes other than the nom. -- Cirt (talk) 20:52, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, is that how it works? It has to be unanimous when the nom is withdrawn? Alright, i'll remember that. Sorry for bothering you. SilverserenC 21:11, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Truce

I feel as if we may have gotten off on the wrong foot. I saw your opposition to me being a sighted editor on Wnews and I don't think you are aware of what kind of work I'm really involved in. Supporting Ash was incidental in my efforts to oppose censorship of Wikipedia. I supported Ash in restoring Carigan but also told him the article wasn't ready yet. I continued to support him through DRV because I believed the subject was notable. I know now that DRV wasn't necessary and accomplished very little. I would like to have a discussion to clear the air either on a dedicated userpage or off-wiki. Thanks! - Stillwaterising (talk) 21:12, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the gesture. I guess I was taken aback by your vociferous support for a user who was advocating restoration of unsourced and poorly sourced material on a WP:BLP, and yourself also supporting this behavior. -- Cirt (talk) 21:13, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'll chalk it up to naivety of the Afd/DRV process and a sincere belief that what I was doing was right. I don't think it caused any harm, it was similar to a nuisance lawsuit done for embarrassment and to publicly air dirty laundry. I wish you had explained your closing decision when I first asked you to. You did eventually after the DRV was started and I think you came to a reasonable conclusion but did not leave any remarks previously except "the result was delete." I think this could have been avoided with better communication. I also think a standard needs to be set by closer similar to our legal system where the judge publicly explains how he came to his decision. - Stillwaterising (talk) 22:44, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not call me a sockpuppet

Please do not call me a sockpuppet - it is untrue and therefore rude [2]

But in the spirit of comity - I am giving you this barnstar. I had originally given it to myself after I made the edit at "The Next Three Days" [3], but now I don't think I'll enjoy looking at it very much.

The WikiProject Films Award
I, Uncle Uncle Uncle , hereby award Cirt the WikiProject Films Award for his/her valued contibutions to WikiProject Films.
Awarded Uncle uncle uncle 19:31, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Uncle uncle uncle 22:32, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Pooktre

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Pooktre. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pooktre (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:09, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK Tom Cruise Purple

Please join the discussion here. Materialscientist (talk) 01:26, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for Conspiracy Journalism

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Conspiracy Journalism. 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. Jettparmer (talk) 02:14, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's not dead yet...

Please see Stuck on Planet Earth. I think it must have been moved and then recreated with the old capitalization. Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 03:17, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cirt? See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stuck on planet earth, which you closed as delete... Delicious carbuncle (talk) 13:25, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. Thanks. -- Cirt (talk) 14:49, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dalek

I've finally finished updating and polishing all the citations in Dalek, and I've made a start on trimming the trivia and rewriting the sections which used to be full of one-sentence paragraphs (most notably the "Music" section). Could you take a look at the article and let me know how it's looking to you, and what if anything still needs work to get it through FAR? Thanks. —Josiah Rowe (talkcontribs) 08:24, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I commented there. -- Cirt (talk) 21:27, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Tom Cruise Purple

Updated DYK query On March 24, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Tom Cruise Purple, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 12:04, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! -- Cirt (talk) 21:27, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, can you take a second look here? Josiah Rowe has improved the article quite a bit. Dabomb87 (talk) 12:50, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, -- Cirt (talk) 15:00, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why the delation of My Jewel?

All the issues that were raised were addressed. I'd like to know the reason for deletion. AxelKratel (talk) 16:58, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you could work on a draft version, within a subpage of your userspace. -- Cirt (talk) 21:26, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Aaron Saxton, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aaron Saxton. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. The-Pope (talk) 17:34, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notice, -- Cirt (talk) 21:27, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hello

I would like to ask your opinion about the format that should be used for the localities from Romania where Hungarian has co-official status (where at least 20% of the population speaks Hungarian)


Variant 1. Romanian_Name (Hungarian: Hungarian_Name)
Variant 2. Romanian_Name (Hungarian: Hungarian_Name)
Variant 3. Romanian_Name or Hungarian_Name (Romanian: Romanian_Name; Hungarian: Hungarian_Name)
Variant 4. Romanian_Name(Romanian) or Hungarian_Name(Hungarian)

There are used different formats on different articles and I think it should exist a standard format used for all of them, in order not to create mess. Can you pls. reccomend one of them?


Thanks in advance for your answer (Umumu (talk) 22:04, 24 March 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Just a random, drive-by comment, but I think Variant 4 offers the best format for neutral presentation. We deal with similar things with Japan-related articles all the time (with Japanese and English being the languages in question most of the time). ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 04:33, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW, I think the above notice was spammed onto a bunch of user talk pages. -- Cirt (talk) 04:34, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I sent it to several admins because I wanted to get opinions from experienced persons on wikipedia, I am new and I didn't know very well where I should have posted that. Sorry if you consider it a "spam"(Umumu (talk) 05:51, 26 March 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Semi-protection

With all due respect, what different does 2 Weeks make? Jayy008 (talk) 00:07, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Time for editors to clean up the page and properly source and improve it. -- Cirt (talk) 00:51, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The page is clean, it was protected, but as soon as it was unproteced the same level of vandalism occurred, I proposed it being protected until July (for the buzz to die down) like with Christina Aguilera's "Keeps Gettin' Better" no vandalism has occurred now it's been unportected, was protected for a long time. Jayy008 (talk) 01:13, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Let us see what happens after the protection expires. -- Cirt (talk) 01:16, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

Hey there! Sorry for the confusion, but I am simply reformatting the references so that they are consistent, contain no blank fields, use the proper templates, etc. I went ahead and reverted to my edited version, then completed additional formatting. Hope that makes sense. --Another Believer (Talk) 03:34, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I feel confident with my citation capabilities, but I will leave the article alone if you feel I am stepping on your toes. --Another Believer (Talk) 03:41, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Cannabis Portal
Go for it! I do not think any one is maintaining it, or has even looked at or worked on the site in forever. :) --Another Believer (Talk) 03:52, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am not deleting any references--I think the external link was being counted as a reference, when it does not need to be in a template format. --Another Believer (Talk) 04:10, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, just give me one sec to correct the situation. Thank you. --Another Believer (Talk) 04:12, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, calm down... I think the problem is that two references are both called "medical"... I did NOT delete a reference, one is just being confused for the other. Chill out, man! :p --Another Believer (Talk) 04:15, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have not removed any sources. If you control+F (or search for the text of) "Daily News", you will see the reference still exists. It just happens to also be named "medical", along with another reference. Seriously, I know what I am doing, but this back and forth isn't even worth my time. I will leave the article alone, even though I am just trying to get it looking as best as possible. While this is too stressful to deal with after a long day of work, I do still welcome you to the WikiProject and hope this hasn't irritated you to the point of not contributing in other ways. Best wishes! --Another Believer (Talk) 04:18, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:External_links#How_to_link. --Another Believer (Talk) 04:20, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Suit yourself. Best wishes! --Another Believer (Talk) 04:22, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note
  • Inappropriate use of Twinkle [4]
  • Page blanking from talk page [5]
  • Removing concerns regarding cite removal from article [6]

-- Cirt (talk) 04:31, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cirt, I too want to apologize for yesterday. I think this conflict was simply a case of two experienced editors working on an article at the same time and getting frustrated with one another in the process. When using Twinkle, my intentions were simply to re-apply the edits I made so that I could correct the problems--not to ignore your comments or requests. I did learn from this situation as far as how to better discuss changes to an article in the future. I respect your contributions to Wikipedia, and hope that our conflict does not deter you from continuing to contribute to Wikipedia, WikiProject Cannabis, etc. Thanks again for your comments, and best wishes! --Another Believer (Talk) 16:20, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering if you could look at this an offer an opinion. - Stillwaterising (talk) 16:15, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, would rather not. Perhaps I could close it at some point later. -- Cirt (talk) 17:27, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I wonder if you could consider yourself truely neutral considering I'm a primary contributor? - Stillwaterising (talk) 13:01, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Nod, in that case, might be best to avoid participating, in either regard, especially since you asked me to, in a post to my talk page. -- Cirt (talk) 18:51, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

April 2010 GAN backlog elimination drive

WikiProject Good Articles will be running a GAN backlog elimination drive for the entire month of April. The goal of this drive is to bring the number of outstanding Good Article nominations down to below 200. This will help editors in restoring confidence to the GAN process as well as actively improving, polishing, and rewarding good content. If you are interested in participating in the drive, please place your name here. Awards will be given out to those who review certain numbers of GANs as well as to those who review the most. Hope we can see you in April.

MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 17:23, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

The first article which you protected was not due to dispute but vandal who created account solely for the purpose of adding that (incorrect name to the account). There is no justification for its entry, not a content dispute but a POV pushing of name that does not belong there. Similar fictitious Azerbaijani names have been added to other geographic articles of other Monestaries and Toponyms and town names, etc... I am not sure why you protected it on the POV/Vandalized version. I suspect both articles need to have the name removed and protected, since that person has violated 3rr's and now sockpuppets with an IP.

TheKillerNite (talk) 18:11, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest trying out talk page discussion. -- Cirt (talk) 18:22, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You know, I do not appreciate your ignorance of the situation. If you actually look at the talk page you are suggesting for me to look at, there is a person continuing blabbering about territorial integrity and ignoring any discussion as to why it is inappropriate to include a fictitious name for a monastery in the language of the country who only performed bombing runs on them 15 years ago, and now claims as "its" through irrelevant names. Similar attempts to attack other articles, most prominently Gandzasar Monastery have been reverted and protected by administrators. I suggest you to be more considerate and not ignorantly protect pov/vandalized versions of articles.TheKillerNite (talk) 01:07, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you cannot resolve the issue on the talk page, I would recommend WP:Dispute resolution, such as WP:3O or WP:RFC. -- Cirt (talk) 01:10, 26 March 2010 (UTC
I genuinely appreciate your ignorance and apathy to resolve the issue, failing to perform your administrative duties.TheKillerNite (talk) 03:54, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Your rude tone is not one that would encourage others to get involved. -- Cirt (talk) 04:03, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your AE request concerning Pieter Kuiper

Hello. Please see my question at WP:AE#Comments by others about the request concerning Pieter Kuiper. Thanks,  Sandstein  22:23, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you fix these references? - They go to a site selling fleshlights.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_of_Canada reference number 3 and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_peoples_of_the_Americas reference number 101


Keep your fork, there's pie was nice enough to fix one such problem, but I don't want to pester him or her with more of them.

Thanks! Uncle uncle uncle 21:56, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Could you be more specific? -- Cirt (talk) 21:59, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sure - clicking on reference number 3 at the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_of_Canada - specifically here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_of_Canada#cite_note-cultural_influences-2 takes you to a page with text: "People who visit this site are also looking for: is fleshlight realistic, fleshlight giftcards, original lady fleshlight male masturbation, muscle fleshlight jack off, flesh light free videos, fleshlight clips masturbate, how to make your own homemade fleshlight, fleshlight sitelpk, how does fleshlight feel, fleshlight sales, my fleshlight movie, fleshjack, fleshlight ribbed review, fleshlight cheep, wiki fleshlight, gay flesh lights, cumming in fleshlight, fleshlight super ribbed sleeve, fleshlight changes, fleshlight can."

The reference for Indigenous peoples of the Americas is similar.

Uncle uncle uncle 22:06, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please remove them yourself then. -- Cirt (talk) 22:07, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'll see if user:Keep your fork, there's pie will do it - he or she was nice enough to do one of them and I didn't want to pester him or her with the others. Do you know anyone else who could do it? Is there an edit request page for reporting issues that should be fixed?

Thanks, Uncle uncle uncle 22:16, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can edit the pages yourself. -- Cirt (talk) 22:21, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think that the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Articles_with_broken_or_outdated_citations "{{citations broken}}" template is what I can use - but the template doesn't seem to have a place to show which citation is outdated. "Articles with citations that are broken because the external links are defunct or outdated, belong in this category." Uncle uncle uncle 22:43, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hrm, I suggest you try WP:Help desk. -- Cirt (talk) 22:44, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'll see what works - thanks. Uncle uncle uncle 22:57, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for box on the ear

An editor has asked for a deletion review of box on the ear. 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. Philly jawn (talk) 02:37, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for article protection

Thanks for this edit on Maria Anastacia Keogh[7]. Now I can sleep peacefully. Smile. Piano non troppo (talk) 09:54, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are most welcome. :) -- Cirt (talk) 04:15, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DyK

{{trout}}

For letting File:Luna damas-romanas.jpg get on the main page for over an hour unprotected. βcommand 12:32, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I thought a bot takes care of those tasks these days. -- Cirt (talk) 17:48, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There was at one point but its been down for ages. βcommand 00:18, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Not worth a "trout", you could have just politely informed me of that fact. -- Cirt (talk) 04:14, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Help

About a week ago, you blocked IP 71.60.108.14 from vandalizing Days of our Lives related articles. Now he/she is back at it, adding ridiculous unsourced wrong speculation to many, for example Adrienne Johnson Kiriakis. Your assistance is again required to put a stop to this. Thank you very much. Rm994 (talk) 15:14, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Best to post it to WP:AIV. -- Cirt (talk) 04:14, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When I did that, they told me it was a content dispute. I disagree. It's someone adding unsourced wrong information to many articles, as well violating the biographies of living persons policy. Thanks. Rm994 (talk) 04:27, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, try WP:ANI. -- Cirt (talk) 04:30, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thank you :) Rm994 (talk) 16:04, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Marriage Ref

You're welcome. The only hard part was to figure out where to say something, there was so much complaining all over the entire discussion page. There were any number of places where I could have pretty much said the same thing I did. Sergecross73 (talk) 16:09, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that is understandable. -- Cirt (talk) 04:14, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Request

Hello Cirt. Can you userfy the deleted articles Dungeon Demo into User:White Shadows/Radiohead demos for me? I'm thinking about getting all of these deleted/redirected demos into one properly sourced article. Thanks!--White Shadows you're breaking up 18:50, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The same goes with Shindig Demo and Woodworm Demo.--White Shadows you're breaking up 18:52, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 19:01, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you ;)--White Shadows you're breaking up 19:12, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You are welcome. -- Cirt (talk) 19:15, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Battlefield Earth screenwriter apologises

Well worth a read! [8] Let's figure out how to work it into our article... -- ChrisO (talk) 07:44, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reactivate article on David C. Lewis (Spiritual Teacher)

I missed the discussion on deleting the article on David C. Lewis (Spiritual Teacher). I am requesting that this article be reactivated so I can improve its content and bring it up to standard regarding the requirements for notability. David C. Lewis has many accomplishments that were not sourced or even mentioned. I can rectify this shortcoming. --Ketuwatcher (talk) 13:16, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest you work on a draft proposed version to argue for WP:NOTE, within a subpage of your userspace. -- Cirt (talk) 16:47, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Where can I find the text of the David C. Lewis article that was deleted? --Ketuwatcher (talk) 18:34, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, now at User:Ketuwatcher/David C. Lewis (Spiritual Teacher). -- Cirt (talk) 18:37, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Self-replicating machines

Thanks for putting a semi-protect on Self-replicating machine - that's a good call because the article keeps getting changed by socks of banned User:Fraberj. But were you aware that you protected it just a couple of minutes after one of those IP's reverted it back to the "bad" version of the content?

I know it's only semi-protected, so I could fix this myself - but I didn't want to do that if you had deliberately intended to choose that version.

I would recommend rolling back to the last version by Daedalus969.

Thanks for looking into this sorry mess. SteveBaker (talk) 13:32, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can fix it. -- Cirt (talk) 16:47, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Hello, I was wandering if you could help me This user has gone through all of Mariah Carey's articles and inflating all the sales to unrealistic levels, it's annoying having to go through and deflate them after, I've left around 10 warnings, can you issue a block please, thanks. Jayy008 (talk) 16:28, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please, use WP:AIV for this. -- Cirt (talk) 16:48, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the tip! can you tell me why it's "red" when it's reported and says (page does not exsist) is that something I've done? Because all of them are the same Jayy008 (talk) 16:59, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Done it, thanks in advance. Jayy008 (talk) 17:07, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Free Speech, "The People’s Darling Privilege"

Updated DYK query On March 29, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Free Speech, "The People’s Darling Privilege", which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 22:46, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Kate Kennedy Club

Dear Cirt, I write with reference to your recent deletion of the article on The Kate Kennedy Club. This is an article that I would greatly like to see restored in the light of the significance of The Kate Kennedy Club and its activities. The Kate Kennedy Club is renowned as one of the most exclusive gentlemen's clubs in the world, and is referenced in several published books, many other Wikipedia articles, and many articles that have featured in national press. One only has to type the club's name into Google to see its significance in Scotland as a steward of one of the UK's greatest processions, its worldwide reputation as a gentlemen's club, and it's reputation as one of the most active student club's in St Andrews. The Kate Kennedy Club exists to preserve the Kate Kennedy Procession which dates back to the 15th century. This Procession remains a key feature of the calendar of both the town and University of St Andrews as a result of the Kate Kennedy Club. Furthermore, the club remains committed to its three aims, and is one of the most active clubs at the University of St Andrews. This is highlighted by the many events that the club organises for the benefit of the St Andrews student population including the two biggest balls in the country. Furthermore, the club is renowned as for its charitable works, giving away approximately £15,000 to charity every year, Finally, The Kate Kennedy Club is renowned as one of the most exclusive gentlemen's clubs in the world (according to wikipedia, among other sources!). Numerous other gentlemen's clubs and societies have articles devoted to them on Wikipedia - eg. the Pitt Club, The 16' Club, the The Strafford Club etc. I see this as a positive thing in the light of the interest they attract, but so many of these club's have considerably less history and are also considerably less active than The Kate Kennedy Club. All of this goes to show that The Kate Kennedy club is more than significant enough and attracts enough interest to merit its restoration on Wikipedia. Many more secondary sources can be added to the article to add to its credibility and further verify it, and I do hope that this can be done after its restoration. I look forward to discussing this issue with you further, and seeing the articles restoration soon. Sincerely. Rdg22 (talk) 23:56, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Family Guy Terminator Parody

Hi,

I'm not sure how to cite the omission but it's definitely not in the UK boxset. Perhaps you could buy a copy and check for yourself? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Riksweeney (talkcontribs) 07:10, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

While deleting images in the subcategories of Category:Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status, I encountered File:JimWilliamsAuthor.jpg, which has a tag saying that OTRS received a permission email that was insufficient. Is it proper to delete images with insufficient OTRS emails without first recording the OTRS ticket number? I've never encountered this situation before, so I'm sorry to have to ask what might be a simple question. Nyttend (talk) 13:41, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]