User talk:Mandsford: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 16:13, 1 June 2009

Welcome!

Hello, Mandsford, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! →Ollie (talk • contribs) 13:12, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gans

Thanks for the article. I am wondering if you by any chance know how the Hitz family was connected to the GANS family? --Markbenjamin (talk) 02:20, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Spurs-Suns rivalry

Please see the changes I made at Spurs-Suns rivalry and see if it now meets your approval. I added several sources about the rivalry, including a new section on how it spilled over into the coach's career as the Olympics coach. Sources include two by Associated Press writers and the San Diego Union-Tribune. I also added the latest chapter with sources from the past year's playoffs when the Spurs' use of the Hack-a-Shaq strategy reached a new level.--2008Olympian^chitchat 04:23, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Let's get out of here"

You article about the overuse of the line "Let's get out of here," while humorous, is unfortunately in violation of Wikipedia guidelines on original research. It appears you have compiled this list yourself, and have not cited sources from which you've drawn your list. I'm assuming much of it came from your personal movie-watching. If you can provide citations of documented sources for the various movies in which this line is used, that would likely bring this article into compliance. Otherwise, the article may face an article for deletion review process. Realkyhick 07:38, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(Response) I anticipated this, but it's not intended as a facetious article. (If I can get to the article again, I'll add the sources, which were from books and from imsdb.com, and I'll delete the M.L. Ford part); Coincidentally, I, too, am a real Kentucky hick, though I still live here.

The prevalence of "let's get out of here" is noted not just in the Guinness "Film Facts & Feats" book (Patrick Robertson, 1985), but on commentaries that go with films, such as DVD-TV on AMC. Did I sit and watch all these movies myself? Of course not. I referred to the Internet Movie Script Database (imsdb.com).

The research is no less original than the numerous articles about a TV episode from some new TV series. And don't get me started about how every other article seems to feature a cultural reference to "The Simpsons". Geez Louise, it's like I can't read about polyurethane without a note that says, "Bart says the word 'polyurethane' in Episode 7 of the 10th season". Please, let this one grow and be added to. LGOOH is fun for movie buffs. Mandsford 17:36, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, watching all those movies is not out of the question. Someone here probably has. :-) Yeah, I'm really tired of the individual articles for episodes of various series, with the possible exception of M*A*S*H (TV series).

The IMSDB database (which I'd never heard of until you mentioned - thanks!) would be a very credible source. Don't forget to give the full citation for that and other citations. You might also add a note on the talk page explaining the prior speedy deletion and how you've improved the second effort.

At least you had the good sense to stay in Kentucky, a/k/a "God's Country." Realkyhick 22:02, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OKAY, so how do I get my deleted page back? Do I have to write it all over again? Please let me know....

Yeah, the deletion policy is taken pretty seriously, if for no other reason we get so much absolute crap that gets posted on a minute-by-minute basis. It's probably not enforced evenly, but seeing as how this is pretty much an all-volunteer effort, that's to be expected.

I doubt you can get an admin to dig your old story out of the super-secret vault or wherever the heck deleted articles go for purgatory, so you'll probably have to write it again. (I'm not an admin.) When you do, before you save it, copy and paste the article text into Notepad and save a backup copy, just in case.

(By the way, whereabouts in the Commonwealth are you from? I understand if you're not comfortable saying, though. I'm originally from the Glasgow area.) Realkyhick 19:46, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Originally from Lexington, but for the last 20 years in Harlan. I've been through Barren Co. many times on the way to Warren Co. (see my next Wikipedia article, "adjacent counties that look like they should sound alike, but are pronounced differently")

Disambiguation

When you create a wikilink, could you please confirm that it links to the article to which you intend. For instance, you need to type [[The Birds (film)|The Birds]], as The Birds does not link to the article about the film. The JPS^{talk to me} 12:51, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Civility

Regarding your comments in the AfD for "Let's get out of here in film lore", please refrain from insulting other editors. Remaining civil and responding to the criticism of the article is more likely to achieve a goal which everyone is happy with than name-calling is. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 05:11, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Consider this your second warning regarding civility. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 22:44, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD comments

Advocating "Discuss" is redundant, given that AfD is in fact a discussion as to whether or not the article/s in question should be deleted. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 09:23, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Phyllis Crawford

Thanks for creating the article! While there is no "rename" function, there is a "move" link associated with every article. Using it moves the article (including the full edit history) over to the new title, and turns the current article into a redirect. Very handy. -- MisterHand 11:35, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just remember

Even if a user is vandalising, acting in bad faith and generally carrying on in manners unbecoming, descending to his/her level isn't the way to go. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 05:43, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

brilliant argument

on the Baldock Beer Disaster AfD. I just went there and said so, and I suggest what you ought to do now is to rewrite it as an article about a hoax, instead of just the italic heading, Remember, all the previous versions before it was caught will be in the page history. DGG 00:02, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well done, and now, it is considered OK to email the earlier people and say you greatly improved it, and please will they take another look. One of the reasons I liked that argument is that I realised I can use it regularly myself, not just about hoaxes, but for questioned articles on Wikipedia people. DGG 18:35, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently the rest of the world doesn't think it's so brilliant. When we argue to convince other people, they after all are the judge. The way to survive around here is to regard this as a laboratory where you don't always expect things will go right, or a microcosm where willful idiocy can be entertaining. DGG 20:00, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:DGG

Hi, I see you're posting messages for DGG on his userpage, but messages for users go on their talk page, not on the userpage. Go to User talk:DGG to leave DGG a message. Cheers, Mystytopia 18:50, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect of Let's get out of here!

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Let's get out of here!, by Graeme Bartlett (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Let's get out of here! is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Let's get out of here!, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Let's get out of here! itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 07:07, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

songs about...

Yes, I too have noticed the new trend in AfD and now I have quite a collection of these which is likely to grow faster than I can evaluate much less improve them. Still, I plan to reintroduce one or two of the endangered specie. Once I test the waters we'll see if its a complete waste of time to even bother. Cheers -MrFizyx 03:41, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

I redirected your user page here because it's rather annoying to see a redlink in someone's sig. Hope you don't mind. Kwsn^(Ni!) 18:59, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What is Your opinion about Red Army crimes?

What is Your opinion about Red Army crimes category and articles about military (comunistic or not) massacres? Where are You from?

Ttturbo 20:05, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

>>>Thanks. The day before there started the great discussion about war crimes in

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Red_army_crimes_in_Lithuania http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Red_army_crimes_in_Estonia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Red_Army_crimes_in_Georgia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Red_Army_crimes_in_Ukraine

Some slavians attacked me sharply, and some western users too, but there was some little support. Please express Your opinion in those voting for crimes deleting debates!

Ttturbo 20:53, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks. I need one more help - I've created the general article about a Red Army crimes, but my English is not fluent enough unfortunately.

Ttturbo 00:30, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Just wanted to say thanks for educating the nark who's trying to delete the articles I put up about the Iowa Pre-Flight football teams. The guy (I'll make him a male for this post) obviously doesn't know the first thing about college football, and he was ridiculously ignorant of the proof I shoved right under his nose (I gave him links to my sources, which clearly take down his argument). Several other users have also said "Duh!" and brought him up to speed, so I hope to see the proposal cancelled soon. Again, just a word of thanks. Michigan didn't beat Pre-Flight, and hopefully the Wikinerds won't either.

Common phrases

It is a very interesting concept, it looks to be the type of thing that would be perfect for Wikiversity. I'm going to be moving this week, but if you'd be interested in doing the transwiki, I'd be happy to userfy it for you. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 23:12, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since Chris S has stated he's going to take it to DRV, let him do that first. It'll probably be history-restored during the DRV anyway. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 06:20, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What I like

[http://tools.wikimedia.de/~interiot/cgi-bin/Tool1/wannabe_kate?username=corpx&site=en.wikipedia.org The postcount tool pretty much shows what I've contributed on. I mainly contribute to UT/sports related stuff and on some limited pc games Corpx 04:24, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Singapore companies

I agree with you that it's good to know who's where, but do you think a virtual office company that no longer exists is really a worthwhile addition to a list (it was a dispute regardingPacific Centennial Group that got me to that list)? You also assume that there's a limiting factor on the content of the list by size. If you look again, you will see there is not, so there's no reason some guy with a garage-based business couldn't put his company on there. In short, I think you make good points, and if the list adhered to those rules, I'd see no reason to delete it. However, it doesn't and the material is duplicated in two other places on WP to boot. MSJapan 05:53, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Iowa pre-flight

I don't know what happened. I'm not an admin, so I can't delete articles -- you might want to check the deletion log to find out who deleted it. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps)))} 16:52, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re. List of songs AfD

Hi dear Mansford! Regarding your comments at my talk page, well, the deletion process worked as it regularly does. Like you said yourself, there was a good number of arguments, which I pondered and gauged when analyzing the best way in which to close it. Not only I did read every comment in detail, but I also took the time to investigate further and read the whole debate at Deletion Review from late May. However, I disagree with you on your position that the debate was "abruptly halted"; as you know, these discussions usually last for 5 days. In this particular case, it remained open for a week; that is, substantially longer than a normal debate, which gave ample time for the community to express itself. As you also said, not only the comments endorsing the deletion of these articles more than tripled tho who sought to keep them, which is a vast proof of a clear consensus for this position in itself; but I also took note and valued every argument made in order to make my decision. You are of course entitled to disagree with me as the closing admin, as well as with every editor who expressed themselves in favor with this deletion, and I therefore encourage you to seek further debate at Deletion Review if you deem it necessary. Have a beautiful day, Phaedriel - 17:41, 4 July 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Songs About Mental Illness AfD

(copied from User talk:DESiegel) Actually, the vote was 5 to 3, if it's strictly numbers that we're going by. Read the debate again. Mandsford 16:13, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your expressed opinion was "Take down and Retool" which i can't interpret as a form of keep. Indeed it could have been counted as "userfy and delete" making the numbers 6 to 2. However, as I explained in the close, I went by considerably more than just the numbers. Do you think the close was in error? DES ^(talk) 16:21, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Turtles and tortoises

I am more than happy to review my deletion; the wiki-software does not retain in accessible form a log of deletions categorised by admin, so I will need to know the title of the article in question. I will then get back to you, either with an apology or an explanation. --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 19:32, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/History of the relationship of osteopathic and allopathic medicine in the United States

I've responded to another commenter, and I think it is relevant to your comment, as well. At any rate, thanks for your participation in the AfD. Antelan ^talk 03:23, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your input into keeping this article. The story of the acceptance of alternative medical therapies in the United States is very, very important. The article needs a lot of work . . . but deleting it. I just don't see the justification for that.OsteopathicFreak ^{T ?} 23:21, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

London Mail Processing Plant

Thanks for the comment and I feel better not bitter now, I had the same problem when they wanted to delete me Wayne Ray because they thought I wasn't notable but twice as many people came to my defense and they cowered away. I have saved it and I think I will put it in the Talk page on Commons on the article by the same name, which if you think about it, is so boring it should be deleted LOL but I am in the mood of information is important to someone out there, Cheers WayneRay 22:27, 12 July 2007 (UTC)WayneRay[reply]

Did you even read that there was already a catagory for the information and that the page was the fourth redundancy of the information, or do you make it a habit to be rude whereever you go? NobutoraTakeda 01:19, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Usually rude, but 80 percent not rude, just in dealing with people who have no connection to the series of article I am now scrapping, and deem anything other than the main article as useless. A cleanup tag would have been more polite WayneRay 13:24, 17 July 2007 (UTC)WayneRay[reply]

So many people contributing redundant pages makes it okay? Thats not even close to being correct. There is a catagory that lists every single link that is listed on that page. Then each list is done by year. That means that a king who lives for 60 years is on 60 different lists, 60 different spots in the catagory, and 60 different places on the list that duplicates the catagory. It doesn't take much to realize that the pages need to be deleted and that they should be done solely by individual catagories done in a broader way than just year. NobutoraTakeda 01:26, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Look at this and tell me that there isn't a problem with redundancy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Lists_of_state_leaders_by_year "List of state leaders in 1 BC" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_leaders_by_year#First_century_BC "First century BC

1 "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_state_leaders_in_1_BC "Africa

   * Kush
        2. Natakamani, King of Kush (1 BC-AD 20)"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_state_leaders_in_1 "Africa

   * Kush - Natakamani, King of Kush (1 BC-AD 20)"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_state_leaders_in_2 "Africa

 * Kush - Natakamani, King of Kush (1 BC-AD 20)"

It goes on for 21 pages for just that one guy. NobutoraTakeda 01:31, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is not a quality answer that establishes Wikipedia as an Encyclopedia, but makes it just a redundant list of lists of lists. You have provided no answer to the fact that it could easily be replaced by a much more efficient set of catagories based on century and giving tags of those individuals who are part of those centuries, and those centuries are part of the larger catagory. That would make one set of list. Not 5000. NobutoraTakeda 01:50, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Irritates? The only thing irritating is people voting without realizing that there is a catagory also. Either one or the other should exist, not both. That is basic. Then there is the issue of needing the big page listing all the little pages, where most of the big page link to pages not made yet. The folks in that group bit off a lot more than they could chew when they could easily have organized it by century or, at least, decade. Normally I just satisfied myself with wandering as an IP and making changes to "random article"s. However, someone kept removing my prods so I had to go and register to make it something that can't just be dismissed. I believe its just as important to remove bad things as it is to add good things, just like legislatures should remove laws instead of just passing new ones. New things, even if good, add clutter over time. Housekeeping is a good thing. Redundancies and lists without any substantial information included are such things that I look for. And my name is not actually Nobutora Takeda. I chose that proxy name 15 years ago in honour of the legendary second to last "true" Samurai, the last being his son. I only wish that my surname was of such an important clan, and if so, I bet I could have made it as "notable" according to the standards that many chose to include people into Wikipedia. NobutoraTakeda 03:08, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If it is truly so difficult to make the list like that, wouldn't it be easier to make a list Leaders of 100 BC - 1 BC? NobutoraTakeda 03:20, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List_of_songs_about_masturbation is in it's 5th AfD

List_of_songs_about_masturbation is up for it's fifth AfD. You participated in an earlier one. If you wish to participate again, please go to Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_songs_about_masturbation_(5th_nomination) Lentower 03:17, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Minorities in Country Music

Hello - this article was deleted because it was an obvious copyvio of [1] (i.e. it largely consisted of material copy-pasted from that site). There was nothing wrong with the content, except for that one fact, which is enough for a speedy deletion (see WP:CSD, I believe it's the 11th rationale under "general"). There is nothing stopping anyone from creating an article there :-) ugen64 10:18, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Wrong attitude

Which AFD's do you object to? Sure, some of the closures are closed a couple of hours early, but are there any judgments that you think I made that were against consensus or unjustified? If there are any, please tell me any I will review them. Sr 13 21:18, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Young (gerontologist)

Greetings,

In regards to this AFD, you did ask for sources (which I provided) so perhaps you may wish to reconsider your vote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Robert_Young_%28gerontologist%29#Debate_Continues

Ultimately the issue in my mind is not 'vanity' but when articles are created for persons like Mary Ramsey Wood or William Coates and there is an assertion that the case is not true, then someone can Wikilink to my name for more information. Also, in the past researchers often debunked age claims, but then their work was forgotten about. As recently as the 1970's, the mainstream scientic community still believed that persons could live to '140' (i.e. National Geographic article by Alexander Leaf, 1973). Given that there is a long line of researchers from William Thoms to myself today working to debunk false age claims, and that like Mr. Thoms's contributions, my work has already tilted the public discourse towards skepticism, my reasoning for an 'autobiography' had more to do with providing a long line of research that showed that most claims to extraordinary age are false. I also created other articles such as Louis Epstein (supercentenarian tracker), as he was instrumental in the 1990's in the field. I find it ironic that so much controversy surrounds my article creation; it seems that most opposition comes from people, fair accusation or not, who were opposed to my debunking of the Mary Ramsey Wood case. Quite ironic, considering that Wood's 'assertion of notability' involved 15 minutes of fame a century ago, based on false information and a lack of anything more than 'yellow journalism.' I didn't provide a Guinness reference intitially because I didn't want to be 'pigeonholed', but seeing as that was an issue I did in fact add a few references on the discussion page.Ryoung122 17:31, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stroller history

I stand corrected on that article. I will undelete it. Sr 13 18:12, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An essay I've written

Hello. Though we are often on the opposite side of deletion debates, I thought you might want to read an essay I've written, found at User:Eyrian/IPC. I'd be interested to hear any feedback on its talk page. --Eyrian 15:14, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks very much for your comments. I moved them to the talk page, where I hope discussion can continue. --Eyrian 23:38, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your support for my list of Indian Women. moon 01:15, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/People_Known_By_One_Name

I responded to your comment there in case you're interested. Useight 04:27, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers

Thanks! And please have some from me here for now until, perhaps one day, we can have a good chat over a real drink. Cheers, --Irpen 03:15, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Scientologist celebrities

You are now rich! Maybe, did you get anybody placing five dollars bets with you? I know I wouldn't have! lol Mathmo ^Talk 01:21, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Eh, I was annoyed by the fact that a hoax had managed to stay undeleted for so long. Your request is not unreasonable, and I've implemented it. DS 12:32, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(Oh, and the reason I didn't reply earlier is because you left your first message on my userpage, not my talkpage, so I didn't see it until I checked your contribs.) DS 12:34, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of discussion: Guideline/policy governing lists

Given your extensive Wikipedia experience, I'd appreciate your input on the following:

User:Sidatio/Conversations/On list guidelines

Thank you in advance for any thoughts you may have on the topic. Sidatio 01:33, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NYU in popular culture

This article was recently deleted and I am submitting it for deletion review. As I see you supported keeping Yale in popular culture - an article almost exactly the same as NYU in popular culture - please support me in restoring this page. As the creator of the page I plan on bringing it to the level of Wikipedia in culture should it be restored. Please comment on the process here: Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2007_August_14#NYU_in_popular_culture. Your support is appreciated. Thanks. -- Noetic Sage 23:32, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A riddle in an enigma in a gallon of maple syrup

Hi Mandsford. Enjoyed your comments. CApitol3

SPQV! CApitol3 21:28, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spells in Harry potter

It is currently under a deletion review. Therequiembellishere 17:14, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Christianity Explored - request for advice.

Hi,

I noticed that Christianity Explored has been created and deleted twice - I think with two entirely separate articles - and I gather that the last to be deleted was a no-contest deletion as a spammy article with no assertion of notability. I haven't seen it of course, since it was deleted.

IMO Christianity Explored is notable and Wiki should have a good article about it ... but rather than leap in where Angels fear to tread (or fly?) I have created a personal sandbox page to draft something.

I would be grateful for your views - I am contacting all those who commented in the last deletion debate, as you will have seen the previous article.

The article is at [[2]]

Regards

Simon —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Springnuts (talk • contribs) 21:07:26, August 19, 2007 (UTC).

Thanks - I have the short version - can live with all this. Problem is that Christian sites are so darned polite - hard to stop them being hugely enthusiastic about things they agree with. But can edit out promotion I hope. I am confused by copyvio comment - short quotes are not copyvio; and that is all that I have copied - but perhaps you were pointing to possible rather than actual problems. Sometimes the back button gets you your conflicted edit material back. Regards Springnuts 22:25, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I took the puffery out - you were right it was promotion, even though it was someone else's promotion. Article now launched, so it may fly. Springnuts 09:02, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please edit away - of course! I too find it odd that Emmaus does not have an entry, however I guess it is the stumbling block that Christianity Explored fell over the first time - are there non-trivial and multiple sources which give information about it. Essentially they are used by different churches - the more hard line evangelical churches use Christianity Explored; more Anglo Catholic ones use Emmaus. Springnuts 08:02, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Are we nearly there yet equation

Hi there. Since you voted on this AfD, BillC and I have posted some further analysis of the whole "media equations" phenomenon - I was wondering if you'd mind having a look at it and commenting again at the AfD. Personally I don't think that a couple of days' press coverage during the silly season automatically makes something notable, especially when the exercise had more to do with getting publicity for Skoda than solving important mathematical problems. I wonder if I've done enough to persuade you? Best, Iain99 12:30, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sociolinguistics research in India

Hi, I just wanted to let you know that the Sociolinguistics research in India article has been substantially improved since you !voted in the AfD. If you have time to take a look and comment again on the AfD that'd be great. Thanks! --Zeborah 06:22, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to vote

Hello. The article Stereotypes of whites is being nominated for deletion. If you want, you could state your opinion here. Thank you. M.V.E.i. 21:09, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ANI thread I started

User Dannicali insulted both you and I in some AfDs and so, please see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Incivility_by_User:Dannycali. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 05:44, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD you commented on - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of portable software (2nd nomination)

Please take another look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of portable software (2nd nomination) when you can? You previously left a comment there. I have vastly edited the article in question, and left comments there on the AfD--you may wish to review the situation again in light of this. Thank you. • Lawrence Cohen 16:19, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mass deletion nominations for ethnic group lists

Hi,

I see you've commented on a number of these deletion discussions that have just come up for ethnic-group people lists. Having all of these come up at once is problematic, I think, so I left a message at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents see "Mass deletion nominations for List of [Ethnic Group X] Americans". You may want to follow that or even comment there. Noroton 00:29, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

September 2007

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Leuko 00:49, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not attack other editors. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Use of insults is not tollerated: see WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA. I will assume that its genesis is from frustration, but we need to keep civil and focus on the message and not attack the messenger. Some of your comments are reasonably interpreted as ethnic slurs or racist remarks as well and were reported to the notice board: WP:ANI#Ethnic_slurs.2C_personal_attacks.2C_and_incivility_by_User:Mandsford_in_afd_discussions. I will also assume that you meant no harm- but sarcasm and humor rarely come off in text and you should consider that more thoroughly before the next time you want to express them.

Carlossuarez46 06:00, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Conversation opener

Please revisit and cast a vote at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Conversation opener as the article has been revised. Thanks, Captain Zyrain 23:55, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just out of curiosity

Is participation in AfD discussions your main reason for using Wikipedia? Judging by this talk page, I would find it difficult to assume otherwise. — [ ric | opiaterein ] — 03:17, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't mean to seem like I was judging you as such. I just get tired of people who like the illusion of having power to get articles in which they have no interest deleted. It appears that people would rather delete articles that are messy or uninteresting to them than to do any work and help by making them better. — [ ric | opiaterein ] — 17:59, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And THAT'S why I stop at AfD so often. I've never nominated an article for deletion, on the theory that nobody forces me to read it, but some people seem to enjoy stomping someone else's sand castle. The next question would be, if I feel that way, why vote to delete anything at all... and I guess the way that I look at it, there are some standards of quality that have to be met. And not all articles are a good idea. If someone writes an article about "Britney Spears hairstyles" (hypothetically), I would go along with voting to delete that. It's hard for me to defend high quality material if I'm not willing to identify poor quality.

The answer to poor quality articles isn't deleting them, or else half of wiki probably wouldn't exist. Things generally aren't so nice to look at when they start off. So considering the Romanian profanity article, it definitely looks like crap now, but I've been planning on de-shitifying it when I have time. Romanians (especially young ones) are pretty fond of using words that can't be found in dictionaries, so I think deleting the list, however shit it is now, isn't going to prove useful to those who are interested in the subject, or planning on visiting that area of Europe. — [ ric | opiaterein ] — 00:41, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hah, that's part of what I was referring to, was those ridiculously long sentences that you might hear once in your life. Those need to go for sure. I guess now that it's been transwiki-ed it's not a big deal. Looks like most of the vote is pretty one-sided, so I guess I'll just take myself back to wiktionary. — [ ric | opiaterein ] — 16:11, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD discussions are an important clean-up tool IMO. I'm glad Mansford participates so much in them :) ;) Bulldog123 20:18, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

relisting

The article was re-done amid debate, so I'd like to see what people think of the rewritten article rather than just base a consensus determination on the earlier commentators who hadn't benefit of the re-write. Frankly, personally on this article, I couldn't give a crap if it stays or goes but I think when there's a major re-write that purports to address the reasons many people found fault with the article that those people and others should be given an opportunity to comment (again). Cheers, Carlossuarez46 23:57, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hi, there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot 01:41, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Timeline VfD

Is there a way to ensure more debate on the article in question? I think I will strike my delete vote if this is being done 'under the radar' in any way. -- User:RyanFreisling @ 14:04, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Christians (3rd nomination)

Just seen your comment. I'm fairly new to editing WP but my impression is that this guy is POV Pushing, and I'm not sure that's appropriate here. How many bites of the cherry is he allowed? --Rodhullandemu 15:54, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comments; actually his persistence does not seem to be doing him any favours since I don't see anyone changing their minds. In Greece, this is a criminal offence of "proselytising"! --Rodhullandemu 16:16, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments

I did not find the following comments ([3][4]) very kind; I viewed these as a violation of WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA. I was quite insulted as my dad has been a Los Angeles Kings season ticket holder since 1980 and I've been attending games my whole life, literally (since 1990) and I was insulted when you declared that I knew nothing about hockey. Ksy92003(talk) 02:00, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

14th century AH

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of 14th century AH, and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: 13th century AH. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot 01:24, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD on Human chemistry

Hi there, the article has been changed substantially since your vote so you might want to have another look at the new version. All the best Tim Vickers 16:04, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. The Human chemistry article has now been merged with material from Human molecule, but strong concerns are still being expressed in the deletion discussion that you might want to consider. Tim Vickers 17:08, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Citrus King

I just get a little weary of how he spouts gibberish in one AFD after another that rarely if ever rises above the level of "let's keep it, it's neat" and almost never actually addresses the merits of the nomination. What's scary is he claims to be a teacher, and this is the level of logic and argumentation he brings. I feel sorry for his students. Otto4711 17:44, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Otto here. RobJ1981 13:35, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reconsider Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Panocracy (2nd nomination)

Hey boss, I posted an opinion on merging panocracy with panarchy and would like to know what you think about it. Thanks. Jwiley80 16:56, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bible and Qur'an

Hi, I noticed that you have kept a copy of User:Mandsford/Similarities between the Bible and the Qur'an, so I pasted a copy of User:Mandsford/Differences between the Bible and the Qur'an as a subpage of your user page too, assuming you might want to work on rescuing them both. - Fayenatic (talk) 08:15, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not move articles into your userspace in the future. Instead, copy them. It is less disruptive that way. Yahel Guhan 06:05, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've started Biblical narratives and the Qur'an, which I hope should follow WP:PSTS, WP:POV, and WP:NOR. You might be interested. Jheald 13:58, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bilbo

Nice work expanding Theodore G. Bilbo. He was a large character in state and national politics for a couple of decades and eserves a full entry. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 22:31, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

what editing war?

you mention an editing war in the religiosity and intelligence afd discussion. please look closer. i see no signs of this. i have edited frequently, respectfully, asking opinions constantly. what makes you think it is an editing war? i have not reverted others' edits. within the bounds of respect of others, there appears to be no hope for the article. could you please explain what you think makes your accusation/ inference appropriate?WotherspoonSmith 10:39, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

you describe me as "someone who took a great deal of interest in an article, didn't appear to agree with the direction that others were taking it, and then stopped taking an interest in it and nominated it for deletion." The only changes others were taking it was to delete large sections which were original research or POV. i agreed, and joined in. Tell me again how i didn't appear to agree with the direction that others were taking it? it is currently reverted (not by me) to where i left it months ago. rather than GO ALONG WITH the direction others were taking it again by reverting to the scaled back version, i sought clarification of its existence by requesting an AFD. please read the history again, and revise your accusation if you feel this is an accurate recount of recent events.WotherspoonSmith 12:09, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarifying this Mandsford. Sorry if i carried on - this is my first AfD.WotherspoonSmith 02:10, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfDs, German & Japanese Envoys etc

I couldn't get this to work. Was there a problem with it? --Rodhullandemu (talk - contribs) 01:56, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'll have another go. Maybe I misread the instructions. --Rodhullandemu (talk - contribs) 02:02, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks Mandsford i realise that you didn't mean anything by it. I just thought that it would be useful, anyway, its nice to know that there are some nice people around. Thank you. (Hamilton365 23:03, 4 November 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Nazism & Roman Catholic Church

If you are unaware of the links between the Roman Catholic Church, European anti-Semitism and the Nazis and Fascists, you need to do a lot more reading, particularly about the Ustase, Croatia, and the fact that the Third Reich was the most Catholic government in Germany's history and the fact that the Church refused to excommunicate a singly Nazi or fascist from Herr Hitler on down, before, during and after the Holocaust, including Joseph Goebbels, Heinrich Himmler, Klaus Barbie, etc. Don't buy into the nonsense that the Nazis were atheists or occultists. Cure your lack of insight on this important issue. Yours, Ibid et al 12:03, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NBC Blue

I saw the "BNC" footnote...quite curious! You wonder if someone was pulling someone's leg. As to your other contribution, the list of programmes, keep in mind that the section you put it in was specifically for the 1943-1945 era, i.e., after the sale to Noble and before the change to ABC. Your list (worthy as it may be) doesn't belong in this period, because you're focusing (so far) on the early NBC Blue period.

I suggest you strike the section, for the moment, but when you have a representative 1927-1945 list, add it as a *separate* section, sort of an appendix toward the end, so as not to impede the text flow. What you have really is an appendix of a listing of shows, you see. Eric O. Costello 00:04, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NBC Red/Prehistory of Radio

(Reposting, since I think I bollixed the posting originally.)

In my view, you may get a separate NBC Red page deleted, on the (arguable) grounds that the NBC page itself covers the history of the Red Network. One can go back and forth on that, whether the NBC page provides sufficient detail on the 1926-1951 period, but there is that kind of a risk.

I would point out, however, that there really isn't all that much, especially in the way of advertising literature and the like, on the pre-1926 (i.e., pre-NBC) era of radio, the "prehistory" of radio, or for the first five years (i.e., 1926-1931) of the network period. Very few programmes survive from this era (there's a URL I can give you on that), so most of what survives is the stuff you find in newspapers (like what you've been working on with the schedule), and assorted ephemera. For example, I recently acquired a little booklet called "The Yo-Ho Song by the Happy Wonder Bakers," showing a vocal quartet in front of an NBC microphone, all dressed up in baker's togs (even hats!). It's dated 1929, and was done for a show that was sponsored by Continental Baking. If you look at the Stoopnagle and Budd entry on Wiki, you'll see a photograph (autographed!) of the comedy duo holding a very early model "Columbia" (i.e., CBS) microphone. Digging around on the net will produce a few amazing photos of when CBS experimented with television broadcasting in 1930-1 (!).

An article on the first decade of radio, 1921-1931, covers ground that really hasn't been heavily explored in other articles, and has much potential if you can find examples of pamphlets, postcards and the like to illustrate the article. (I have a modest number of these items from this era, won on eBay.) Why not turn your work from NBC Blue into something brand-new? Eric O. Costello 14:22, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of List of how the average Wikipedia reader is currently moving

Thanks for the comment, I am more amused than anything about the discussion. Sure the title is ridiculous, but that's no reason to delete it. The thing I really don't understand is how it even could be considered original research, the synthesis/information argument also makes no sense, as the sections are clearly unified as forms of motion which are constantly occurring to every human. As you suggest I have no intention of letting the information go away. I plan on merging it with Motion (physics) as Colonel Warden suggests and as I had already thought of (it's the only page I linked this article directly to). Not sure if I should wait for the vote to call for deletion or just to blank the page, end the discussion, and then wait a couple days and repost in a slightly altered form on Motion (physics). What do you suggest? I have never been involved in deletion discussions or processes before. Earthdirt 13:53, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NBC Red/NBC Blue

Well, as I said before, I think you ought to finish the 1927 -1943 (1945?) list of programs, and *then* post them. In thinking about it, it might be a very long appendix with not a whole lot of explanatory text (at this point in time), so you could, I think, create a separate page (e.g. "NBC Blue Network Programming"), and then simply create a brief appendix at the end of the Blue Network article, noting: "For a listing of NBC Blue/Blue Network programming from 1927 to 1943 (or 1945), see the entry..." This would have the advantage of allowing you to shape and mold the entry as you develop it, but still accomplish the goal I think you had in mind: giving the reader of the main article a notion of specifics as to programming. And if you are delving into radio listings, keep an eye out for advertisements to spice up the listings.

Query if it is possible to duplicate the kinds of programming grids you see on the ABC, CBS and NBC pages for current programming. If you put, say, 20 of these up, and then started filling them in as you find information, that would not only present it in a graphically appealing manner, but might make it easier for you to figure out where you're missing data.

One reason I wonder about NBC Red is that NBC Red, if I'm not mistaken, redirects to the main NBC page. You should probably prepare yourself for some Wiki guardian deciding sua sponte that the page is duplicative. (Given the dominant nature of NBC Red between 1927 and 1948, it probably *should* have its own page, but Wiki guardians often overlook subtleties.)

Eric O. Costello 20:07, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An NBC Red Source

It may be difficult, but if you can snag a copy of "Alice in Sponsor-Land," you may find it quite enjoyable. This was a promotional book put out by NBC in early 1941, and it's a generously illustrated look at the NBC Red schedule at that time. It's alluded to in the Blue Network article, and the OGC link is in the bibliography. Eric O. Costello 00:31, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Man(dsford)!

u r right..(BTW don't need your endorsing of my wiki-contributions). I had a fracas regarding the Hamites with this Afrocentric/Afrocentrist guy I forgot his name, he's very iffy very cocky for a reason BTW just poke fun at him nothing personal or racial. Anyway...Thanx for the 'keep it' stuff...There is this new NyLon The Independent reference I just found and added (see message board). they're popping up like popcorn...As I said, if they do delete NyLon it won't be my personal loss but wiki's. ok big words.. All right then man.. Regards from Lon. Apostolos Margaritis 16:42, 13 November 2007 (UTC) ("that person")[reply]

Edit conflict

There was an edit conflict on the Orgonophila article dicussion. Yes, I had to give praise where praise was due, as well.:O) FlowerpotmaN·(t) 03:31, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Articles in foreign languages

I think it's more common that an article will turn up here in a foreign language because the original contributor doesn't know English well enough to write about it in that language, rather than "because someone thought it would be fun to post in" whichever language it is. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 06:04, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Allegations

I think you are a bit confused about these AFDs, which is fine! An IP account "corrected" the AFD tag, setting up a new AFD [5] while the original one (with the spelling errors) [6]is still ongoing. Shoy can't close the original AFD or delete the article since he is not an admin, but he did close the second one since it was a duplicate. It looks certain that the article will be deleted shortly, but in the meantime it is not appropriate to blank the article page. I hope that helps clear up a few things! --Slp1 (talk) 22:40, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Steal This Look! (or, NBC Red Schedules)

For laughs, I went to one of my sources and sorted out the NBC Red Schedule as it was around April 1, 1941 (I think Burns & Allen's show got cancelled right after this). Anyway, here's a chart/template for NBC Red's schedule.

Returning comedies are in red; new comedies are in pink; returning dramas are in green; new dramas are in blue; returning reality shows are in yellow; new reality shows are in gold; news programming is in brown; sports programming is in purple.

All times are Eastern and Pacific (subtract one hour for Central and Mountain time).

	7:00 PM	7:30 PM	8:00 PM	8:30 PM	9:00 PM	9:30 PM	10:00 PM	10:30 PM
Sunday	Jack Benny	Fitch Bandwagon	Chase & Sanborn	One Man’s Family	Manhattan Merry Go Round	Album of Familiar Music	Hour of Charm
Monday	Fred Waring/Local	Burns & Allen	Bell Telephone Hour	Voice of Firestone	Dr. I.Q.	Brown & Williamson Show Boat	Carnation Contented Hour
Tuesday	Fred Waring/Local	Local/Kaltenborn	Johnnie Presents	Horace Heidt’s Treasure Chest	Battle of the Sexes	Fibber McGee & Molly	Bob Hope Pepsodent Show	Brown & Williamson Dog House
Wednesday	Waring/Local	Cavalcade of America	Jergens-Woodbury	Brown & Williamson Plantation Party	Eddie Cantor	Mr. District Attorney	Kay Kyser
Thursday	Waring/Local	Cugat/Kaltenborn	Maxwell House	Aldrich Family	Bell Telephone Hour	Kraft Music Hall		Sealtest Show
Friday	Waring/Local	Alec Templeton	Cities Service Concert	Information Please	Waltz Time	Everyman’s Theatre	Wings of Destiny
Saturday	Local	Local/Kaltenborn	Knickerbocker Playhouse	Truth or Consequences	National Barn Dance		Uncle Ezra

Happy Thanksgiving!

I just wanted to wish my fellow Wikipedians a Happy Thanksgiving! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 17:04, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Jackson

Hello, Please consider visiting WP:RFD#Presidency redirects if you are interested in getting the Presidency of Andrew Jackson redirect deleted. Thanks =) --MosheA (talk) 00:32, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mickey Rooney

Hi. I have been working on tabling filmographies for the WP project and came across this article. I saw that you had added quite a bit of information that was cited. The problem I am having is that I have no idea whatsoever where this is from. Your reference says "Current Biography" but it would really need a book/article title, author, etc. If you would let me know what it is, I would be happy to update the references. Thank you. Wildhartlivie 03:45, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Query re NBC Red

At what point would you be interested in some suggested text changes in the article? I'm asking, of course, rather than going ahead and making them. The changes would be largely in the nature of organization and presentation of the material, not necessarily changes in substance. Eric O. Costello 01:36, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Jill Morgenthaler

An article that you have been involved in editing, Jill Morgenthaler, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jill Morgenthaler. Thank you. I was the nominator for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steve Jagla as well. Toddst1 17:08, 4 December 2007 (UTC) [reply]

NBC Red wipe

There's something to be said for your argument, since strictly speaking, it's not a program guide for current/future broadcasts. I would try to locate an administrator (perhaps someone you've gotten along with from previous work) and try to get it reversed. Look on my talk section, and you might get the name of a chap who helped reverse some picture deletions until I could fix the (c) status. Eric O. Costello (talk) 23:06, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm the one who yanked the listings. By definition, it does violate the WP:NOT guidelines. Is there something I've missed in my interpretation? --Mhking (talk) 23:30, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd direct your attention to this text from the WP:NOT guidelines. "Directories, directory entries, electronic program guide, or a resource for conducting business. For example, an article on a radio station generally should not list upcoming events, current promotions, phone numbers, current schedules, etc., although mention of major events, promotions or historically significant programme lists and schedules (such as the annual United States network television schedules) may be acceptable. Furthermore, the Talk pages associated with an article are for talking about the article, not for conducting the business of the topic of the article. Wikipedia is not the yellow pages." (emphasis mine) Note the specific reference to annual US network television schedules, which would be a close parallel to this, the annual schedules of NBC Red during a historic period, 1926-1952. These schedules would not, obviously, list upcoming events, current promotions, or current schedules. I would argue that the WP:NOT guidelines have a specific carve-out for the kind of thing NBC Red had. Eric O. Costello (talk) 01:35, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. I'm not trying to be a hardass, by any stretch of the imagination. And that being the case, I'll do what I can to help, though I'm not a genius when it comes to constructing the WP-style tables. --Mhking (talk) 02:12, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Joyeux Noël

I just want to wish my fellow Wikipedians a Merry Christmas! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 21:52, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your college football articles

I've noticed you've created several college football articles. First off, they are great articles and great contributions to the encyclopedia. Just a couple things. Per WP:CAPS, please make sure that only the first word of the article title is capitalized (unless the other word(s) are proper). I have moved several articles recently, such as 1975 College Football Season was moved to 1975 college football season. Lastly, I do not know if you are a member of the college football WikiProject, but our goal is to increase the coverage of college football-related articles on Wikipedia. In the future, when you create articles related to college football, it would be MUCH appreciated if you could add the WikiProject banner to the article's talk page. To do this, just go to the article's talk page and add {{WikiProject College football}}. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask me or the members of the WikiProject. Thank you.↔NMajdan•talk 20:45, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the reason its not 1975 NCAA Division I FBS football season is because the league didn't split to multiple divisions until 1978 I believe.↔NMajdan•talk 02:27, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hope you're not too mad at me, but I've opened up a discussion on renaming your college football articles to the format that you said you didn't like. As the creator of those articles, I'd really appreciate your input. The discussion is located at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football#Season naming convention.↔NMajdan•talk 20:40, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not 100% sure, but shouldn't it be like 1976 NCAA Division I football season instead of 1976 college football season? I mean, since it's 1986 NCAA Division I-A football season instead of 1986 college football season… ––Bender235 (talk) 22:25, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, just realized that there is a discussion on this topic ongoing. ––Bender235 (talk) 22:27, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisting AFDs

I see the other day I relisted three AFDs which all closed within a short period after relisting. I saw your comments, and I must apologise for any distress caused. I personally didn't see any consensus and was reluctant to close them. Once again, apologies. With kind regards, Rudget . 20:16, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Louis Armstrong

"Bunk Jones"? Who was he? I've never come across the name. ...Might this be some mangled reference to Bunk Johnson? -- Infrogmation (talk) 18:35, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bunk Johnson was not "Jones"; I've never heard him called that. "Dago Tony's Tonk" is correct (as to what locals called the establishment; I imagine the legal name was somewhat different) it is mentioned by a number of musicians and regulars of that era. ("Tonk" for a bar with music was fairly common in local slang.) Some of the early published jazz works in the '40s and '50s had some problems with names. I see you've already changed it to "Bunk Johnson", that seems to be the person who was meant. Thanks. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 23:53, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks ...

... for the compliment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marlboro School. Best, Noroton (talk) 02:43, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Librarian extremely appreciative of the significance

re: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marlboro School And thanks to you also for your comments & suggestions. Maplethelibrarian (talk) 00:06, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of mayors of Davenport, Iowa

Hi, I decided to create a History of Davenport, Iowa page, something you had suggested. If you would take another look at the AfD and see the new page, you might want to update your vote, and that might make it (a bit) easier for the closing admin. Thanks! Noroton (talk) 20:41, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Blackwell's Worst Formatted AfD

Please note how you left AfD/Mr. Blackwell's Ten Worst Dressed Women - 1990s. You need to use the preview button, or at least to look at a page after you have editted it and then use the page history and an undo link if something such as this happens. —SlamDiego_←T 15:29, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AAFL

Thanks, FINALLY I get a comment on some of my work lol. If you go to [7] you can see why I used white. THey didn't show any picutres so I had to go by the colors that showed up on the background image of the helmet. Thanks, alot AAFL!!! lol. --Cra sh U nderride 04:32, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ice-9 fusion

Would you consider re-evaluating your vote on WP:Articles for deletion/Ice-nine fusion? I've recently done a fair amount of work on the strangelet page to ensure that the topic is covered properly there. Dark Formal (talk) 03:10, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_claims_made_by_Zeitgeist%2C_the_Movie#List_of_claims_made_by_Zeitgeist.2C_the_Movie

I would appreciate it if you would remove or strike out most of the comment you made to Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_claims_made_by_Zeitgeist,_the_Movie#List_of_claims_made_by_Zeitgeist.2C_the_Movie.

You have created a personal attack against me, and your story about me having changes reverted from the Zeitgeist, the Movie article are simply lies that you made up.

I like the Zeitgeist movie, and I think that there is a good chance that everything it says is true.

Please review these edits I have made to the Zeitgeist, the Movie article, and you will see that I have made only neutral and constructive edits, and that none of my edits attempted to discredit the film. In fact, with this edit I attempted to make the article more neutral.

VegKilla (talk) 09:39, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cultural references of Chuck (TV series)

Hey, could you add a Comment, Merge, Delete, or Keep to your comment (probably Comment) on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cultural references of Chuck (TV series), or delete altogether. The comment doesn't really help with the discussion on whether to delete the article or not. Thanks. ~QuasiAbstract (talk/contrib) 09:49, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help Odyssey

Your help with this draft would be most welcome! Dreadstar † 08:38, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Plus, proof people planning proms pronounce prom problems "promblems"

Thank you for this :D Xavexgoem (talk) 23:28, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

College of Idaho

The College of Idaho was renamed to Albertson in 1991, it did not have that name at the time of its founding in 1891. I have no idea what school you are calling "Albertson" in 1930 college football season. --Orlady (talk) 03:39, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

After looking at http://www.shrpsports.com/cf/teamseas.php?link=Y&team=Albertson&season=1930 , my guess is that the owners of that website converted all historical records for the College of Idaho to "Albertson", since that was the name the college used recently. There's plenty of RS information indicating that the Albertson name was used only from 1991 to 2007. --Orlady (talk) 03:45, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tōon-ryū

The original nominator posted his rationale here, please reconsider your "keep". Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 02:54, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

==Wikipedia: Deletion Review re Same-sex Marriage Mandsford - thanks for the tip to pursue the deletion review. I did some talking with krimpet and he agreed to restore the page. I still plan to continue the edits as suggested (the Mass decision has some nice language why procreation isn't a factor). --Greg Aharonian (talk) 21 February 2008 —Preceding comment was added at 00:57, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Black concert T-shirt reference

Thanks for adding the reference. With offline sources, it is helpful to include a relevant quote. Could you add this if possible? The {{Cite book}} template makes this fairly easy and ensures a standardized format.

Thanks again. / edg ☺ ☭ 02:21, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another One Bites the Dust (1998 Song)

The reason I put the article for deletion was because it was already mentioned in the article of the original Queen song. There is no need for another article when it is already mentioned clearly, despite the fact that it may have different lyrics. It is still a cover. That was all I was trying to say. Thanks.--Kodster (talk) 15:56, 23 February 2008 (UTC)The Kodster[reply]

Another One Bites the Dust Deletion

Interesting point. However, many of Weird Al's songs were hits in their own rights as well. I understand where you are coming from, but I believe that the song shares the same title, pays royalties to Queen (?) (not sure, but I would assume that), and even shares the "Queen" name on its album cover. I believe that, despite it being a hit in its own right, it is still a cover, and should be deleted accordingly. Try to correspond with the others who posted on the deletion page. See what they have to say. I am going to ask them as well. Feel free to tell me on my talk page. Thanks! Kodster (talk) 16:25, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfDs

I notice you're weighing in on a lot of my AfDs. Sorry if I seem overzealous. I haven't really gotten involved in AfDs before. I just wish to prune some non-notable genealogy articles. --Michael White^T·C 14:05, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

marijuana

This how-to guide for growing marijuana in a garden makes for a tastier version, since it uses steaks instead of stakes. Mandsford (talk) 16:26, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

I didn't notice this till 1 minute ago when i was reading the AFD's. But man.. This HAS to be one of the best lines i read this week XD. Excirial^{(Talk,Contribs)} 21:40, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roy Leep (2nd nomination)

I've sort of provided a reason for deletion here. The IP that tried to list this article had previously placed an A7 tag on Roy Leep (twice), so apparently the IP editor thinks that said person is not notable. Does that count? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 05:05, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Laughs are a wonderful thing

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		For making me laugh at two afds below TRAVELLINGCARI^{My story}_{Tell me yours} 21:50, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Drainage Channel and Spice Girls

a thanks to the wrong person is entirely acceptable given how many times it took me to get that to work! And I have no idea why it's a barnstar so I won't spoil the surprise. I just enjoy that one, and it's so appropriate for your recent comments TRAVELLINGCARI^{My story}_{Tell me yours} 22:03, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Measurement_causes_collapse. {smile}! --Pmedema (talk) 19:19, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A note on football seasons

I see you're working on articles on collegiate football seasons from the early 1900s. I monitor the "What Links Here" page for "Dartmouth University", changing links to "Dartmouth University" to links to "Dartmouth College" (because the university existed from 1817-1819, but virtually everyone intends the College). I've disambiguated it at 1912 college football season and 1925 college football season, and so I just thought I'd drop you a line now and ask you to link to Dartmouth College rather than "Dartmouth University" in the future, as it would make things a lot easier for me.

Thanks! Dylan (talk) 20:13, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A hand in the bush

The article has been redone so I'm inviting people who voted in this AfD to review it. If they change their votes then I probably will withdraw the nom, but I'd rather have the voters look at it again. JuJube (talk) 23:24, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Smallville

I figure this is the best place to continue this discussion, since it's more show related than Wiki related. The next "new" episode will be this Thursday, March 13. But, it's going to be old school Smallville, with a "freak of the week" type feel, though the freak will be Pete, so to speak. As far as the timeline goes, that thing is so out of wack it isn't clear what's going on. They only mention certain things, and leave out a lot of others, while at the same time tying other things together that were never tied together in the show. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 00:24, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It won't be an article, because there is an injunction in place against the deleting and/or creating of episode articles, or character articles. As for episode articles for Smallville, they're all but completely gone. The only "episode" related articles for the show are Pilot (Smallville), Smallville (season 1) (and season 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7). Only two characters have articles: Chloe Sullivan and Lionel Luthor, and I'm making plans to turn the 7 list of characters articles into a single article that covers all the series regulars and the recurring guest stars. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 01:07, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of assault rifles AfD

I have hastily knocked together a sample treatment of an alternative format for the aforementioned page and posted it to the article's talk page. As you have weighed in on the previous version, I would invite your comments on the alternate I am proposing. Do you think this would make the page more worth keeping? Is it worth the effort to redo the whole page? Is the whole concept a lost cause? Inquiring minds want to know. OlenWhitaker • ^{talk to me} or _don't • ♣ ♥ ♠ ♦ 20:28, 12 March 2008 (UTC) 20:28, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for your comment, on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ahmed Adnan Muhammad Ajam. I've responded to the comparisons between the Guantanamo captives, and regular felons before. I took the liberty of asking readers who thought your comparison was a good one to look at User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/Guantanamo captives aren't felons and aren't POWs.

I know I am not perfect. So I try to make a real attempt to fully understand the points of those who disagree with me. I would really appreciate it if you would read the counter-arguments to your comparison, and tell me whether you disagree with them -- and if so where you disagree with them.

If you can take the time to do so feel free to respond here, on my talk page, on the {{afd}}, or at the bottom of the sub-page where I saved the original dialogue.

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 22:13, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate you taking the further time to review those other documents. I appreciate you taking the time to leave a civil, meaninfgul reply on the {{afd}}. Thanks again. Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 17:02, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Under construction

Could you help me make my list of countries whose flag has a star page Under construction? im quite new and i was wondering if you could help me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bezuidenhout (talk • contribs) 18:50, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rolling Hills Middle School

Hi, I wonder if you would consider a merge/redirect !vote now I have written a page on the school district, please? TerriersFan (talk) 16:35, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of African American Greek & Fraternal Organizations

The checkuser case Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/SexyNupe2000 showed that the creator of the article was not related to any banned user. [16] 150.210.176.106 (talk) 22:59, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Still smiling about as serious a topic as Soviet support for Iran during the Iran-Iraq War

I do appreciate the advice to avoid "dirty rotten Commies". To the best of my knowledge, I only once met an active Communist intelligence agent, something I did not know at the time I met her at a party. Later on, her status was revealed in the press. "James Bond Movie Adversary" would be more appropriate than "dirty rotten."

As you've gathered, I made a mistake and put out a draft, far too early. I can only say I was tired and not thinking. It's one thing to put out early drafts when there's a general understanding, among editors on the subject, that getting drafts out for comment is useful. In as POV a context as this, it was clearly unwise.

Howard C. Berkowitz (talk) 04:59, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Army Fortresses in Japan proper

Thank you for your interest in List of Army Fortresses in Japan. Please review Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Army Fortresses in Japan proper I have made an attempt to find references for the article and could find nothing to support the assertions made. Consensus is leading to keep and improve, but I am not seeing where improve is an option. If I am mistaken and there are references available please add them to the article. Jeepday (talk) 16:00, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of companies of Pakistan (2nd_nomination)

Hi since you commented on the previous Afd you might be interested that I have re-opened the Afd. -- BpEps - t@lk 21:16, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

African pope

I have revised the article extensively since you commented in the AFD, and invite you to reconsider. --Dhartung | Talk 09:11, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help

Thanks for your help on the AfD discussion for Louis Bozon. It was kept. I really appreciate it. Chris (talk) 20:19, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My Mother is a Tractor : Deletion

Hi Mandsford. I know I cannot stand in the way of a tidal wave of wiki opinion but just wanted to add some notes for you.

I'm originally from Australia but have not lived there for 8 years, hence those edits are the work of whoever - but not me. Upon checking Qworty's link I see they were added on June 6, 2006 - one of the busiest weeks of my year (exam week in Shanghai).
It may be self-published but, if you follow the Amazon sales, it's usually only outsold by "Learning to Bow" in the pantheon of 'JET' books.
Notability does not seem to matter much to Indiana University and Dokkyo University who utilise it as a standard text in courses WP:BK - Point 4
It's archived by both the National Diet Libary (Japan) and Library and Archives (Canada) WP:BK#Threshold_standards
This book has been independently reviewed by Japan Visitor, The Crazy Japan Times, Rocky Mountain JETAA and Rough Guide Japan WP:BK - Point 1
As for personal non-nobility that's not in question here, and neither would I ever assert it - although some have alluded to it. FYI I have had other work published in major media such as The Japan Times, Shanghai Daily, Fukuoka-Now, Asia! and Voyage.
Lastly if anyone have ever written a book one would realise the path of 'vanity press' is much easier one to tread than the continual slog of agents and publishing houses. Qworty obviously doesn't like POD/"Vanity Press' Talk:Trafford_Publishing and has deleted all other references without waiting for judgement here, so one must presume deletion a fait accompli

Given the last point I have therefore saved a copy now as a last hurrah, expecting the worst. Good evening and good luck. —Preceding comment added by Nklar (talk • contribs) 15:46, 01 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

I have proposed a merger of the articles for the three middle schools of the Palo Alto Unified School District into the main article for the district. Discussion is here. I'm notifying everyone who was involved in the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jane Lathrop Stanford Middle School. Thanks, Darkspots (talk) 14:38, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/March 23, 2004

Hi Mandsford - the March 23 article is covered by a larger discussion that's been going on at Wikipedia talk:Centralized discussion/Removal of many individual date articles. Thought you might like to have a look at that before the AfD discussion goes any further. Grutness...wha? 02:09, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Historical revisionism (revisionists)

Need your advise. I'm not sure how to proceed. The confusion certainly was not my intent. There are two pages - wish to merge them - & preserve the old talk page. With a mere List all's OK regarding Copyright. Please advise. --Ludvikus (talk) 21:31, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Poe's law (2nd nomination)

Your comment made me laugh, thanks. -- Earle Martin [^t/_c] 23:55, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding AFD Military controveries

Hi, I read on the AFD on military controversies that you saved a copy of the article; is there some way I could get a copy of it or could you post it on my talk page so I could save it? Or maybe you know a way to access a deleted article? Anyhow, thanks, Rhetth (talk) 20:45, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Regarding the "keep" vote on Val Verde. I was feeling like the Lone Ranger for a minute. Niteshift36 (talk) 23:44, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help Me!

Hey Mandsford! You wrote a sweet comment about my new page Indiana Jones and the Saucer Men from Mars and I totally appreciate! Anyway, there's this group of dorks who have teamed together to try and delete it. I'm new to the Wikiworld (I use to do a little editing here and there, goof around, and I'll admit I broke a lot of rules, but I'm totally reformed now, and totally addicted) and I don't know anybody. I tried to post a call for help on the lesbian community page but this one dork deleted right away.... he's following my every move! Anyway, I was hoping that there was some way of making people aware of my new page (I've been working on it 24/7 and I'm totally proud of it). I don't want to influence anyone's decision, but it's gotten much better since you last saw it. So, I don't know but if there's anything I can do. The Saucer Men need our help! Thanks! Jules Dipolemoment (talk) 22:24, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Above message left by a blocked sockpuppet. Please see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:JTWoodsworth_-_misleading_user_page_and_sockpuppetry. Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 23:30, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Top 10 best selling cars in Britain

I'm cross-posting at the talk pages of the participants at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Top 10 best selling cars in Britain. After the article was deleted, I requested that it be userfied so that I could attempt to improve it. I've now made some small alterations, which are explained in greater detail at User talk:DeLarge/Top 10 best selling cars in Britain. Basically, I've flipped the page so that the latest years are at the bottom (to make the TOC more intuitively navigable), and converted the 2005-2007 data into tables which now include precise sales figures.

The work done so far was quite labour-intensive, so before I commit more time to this, I'd appreciate any feedback to say whether it's worthwhile continuing with the years prior to 2005. Thanks in advance for any comments you can offer. Regards, --DeLarge (talk) 23:47, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries

Hello! Just as a suggestion, could you please be sure to use edit summaries, even as simple as showing whether or not you're making a keep or delete argument in an AfD? Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 00:40, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Thank you for the comments about the Soviet Famine. If you have a chance, the discussion is ongoing here [[17]].

Thanks, Horlo (talk) 09:20, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A test case

I invite you to nominate a couple of articles that I have written, such as Street v. New York and Guiles v. Marineau for deletion. Would be an interesting test case to gauge consensus for the proposition that having "an article about every single published opinion that is handed down by the United States Supreme Court" or by a United States Court of Appeals is "not a good idea for a project." Please put {{talkback}} on my user talk page when replying. Thanks. 69.140.152.55 (talk) 03:04, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles Walker (checkers player)

Could you please take another look at this article? I have added a number of references and I think the article is in much better shape now. Thanks Nsk92 (talk) 03:11, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Independence Day!

As you are a nice Wikipedian, I just wanted to wish you a happy Independence Day! And if you are not an American, then have a happy day and a wonderful weekend anyway! :) Your friend and colleague, --Happy Independence Day! Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 00:43, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Allegations of apartheid deletion notification

Some time ago, you participated in a deletion discussion concerning Allegations of Chinese apartheid. I thought you might like to know that the parent article, Allegations of apartheid, was recently nominated for deletion. Given that many of the issues that have been raised are essentially the same as those on the article on which you commented earlier, you may have a view on whether Allegations of apartheid should be kept or deleted. If you wish to contribute to the discussion, please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Allegations of apartheid (fifth nomination). -- ChrisO (talk) 17:42, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shugden.

Well it boils down to - there aren't any admins who are interested enough in spending the time to work with the group of editors who continue to war over the group of pages, which have been warred over for five years. In your case, you aren't interested enough to even read the nomination. Therefore, as JW says, better to delete it than to try to fix it. (20040302 (talk) 14:23, 14 July 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Notability of 2008 Oregon Ducks football team

Thank you for your concerns on the notability of 2008 Oregon Ducks football team. The Wikipedia:WikiProject College football welcomes discussions and collaboration on issues surrounding college football. You can read and discuss notability issues of college football at the College Football Notability essay.

The College Football project considers notability discussions of existing articles in the project a priority. While the project maintains in good faith that the article does indeed meet notability standards, we will begin additional work to improve the article in question through addressing specific concerns, providing more details, and supplying stronger sources as much as is appropriate. In return, we ask that you consider our essay on notability. If you feel an article needs a specific improvement, please feel free to make those changes yourself.--Paul McDonald (talk) 18:15, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fox Valley Bible Church

Wow, what a thought out response. Why the (bad word) aren't you an admin yet? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Chirps•Clams•Chowder)} 22:41, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By my count, you are the 49th person to mistake me for an admin. Maybe that's a good sign. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Chirps•Clams•Chowder)} 02:46, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You don't have to be an admin to close AfDs, you just have to be admin to delete the pages. I think that some people can still keep their sense of humor while admins -- User:Soxred93 and User:Tony Fox for instance. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Chirps•Clams•Chowder)} 02:49, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Racial Separatism vs Racial Supremacy

I've closed this debate as redirect, however I recognize that you made a strong argument for an outright delete. Under the circumstances, I think the easiest way to resolve the situation would be to list at redirects for discussion.--PhilKnight (talk) 20:34, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Auld Glesgae Grin

have added better sources, and a different question at the AfD for Glasgow smile. Vizjim (talk) 23:36, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Username translation

Hi! Just as a quick note, my username means "pumpkin" king, not "citrus". --Happy editing! Sincerely, Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 00:53, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fag stag article rewritten

Hi, I've rewritten fag stag and would appreciate you revisiting Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fag stag to see if concerns have been sufficiently addressed. Thank you. Banjeboi 02:20, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blood fetish afd

"I had a friend who got sexually aroused whenever he rode a roller coaster, and he couldn't wait to get off."... I lol'd. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells• Otter chirps • HELP!)} 18:22, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD

Contact me when it happens so we can work on the article together! Frank | talk 15:38, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Diverse Harmony article rewritten

Hi, I've rewritten the article and invite you to revisit Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Diverse Harmony to see if your concerns have been addressed. Banjeboi 23:55, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ə

Just so I don't clutter up the AfD, I just want to tell you that Special:Contributions/Carlossuarez46 has been creating 1000s of stubs that use the Azeri script (which isn't against the rules, I think, and better anyway), and changing them all would be a huge task. As for his being an editor of long standing, when I remonstrated with him about the lack of sourcing and possible unverifiability of two of the thousands of these stubs, he accused me of being disruptive. Phlegm Rooster (talk) 22:07, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- Redirects will be made, as has been discussed with numerous editors. Use of the "Ə" is per the relevant wikipedia naming convention. And by the way further sources for the village up for deletion have been found. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:06, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion/Getmyhomesvalue.com

Your comments are cracking me up. I must admit, I'm a little apprehensive myself! justinfr (talk) 02:29, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm inviting your comment

Here (and also, if possible, here?) $\sim$ Justmeherenow ( ) 05:13, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2081 (film)

Since you !voted in this AfD the author has added a reference to the Moving Picture Institute which helps to confirm that the film exists but to my mind does not help with notability because the MPI are not independent - they funded the film. I have added a longer comment to the AfD debate, and this note is to invite you to revisit it in case you wish to change your !vote. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 21:07, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Special comment

I think you missed the point; the subject has been covered independently in reliable sources. Hope this helps. /Blaxthos ( t / c ) 01:47, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note. You know I'm pretty much for narrowing the scope of Wikipedia, and you know I'm really against most list articles. I'm a little uneasy with your assertion that anyone who votes "keep" is trying to "pay homage" to Keith Olbermann. In this particular case, I believe the article should stay because: (1) Some special comments are inherently notable -- some have been the subject of independent coverage in reliable sources; (2) Special Comments are entities unto themselves (not, as you suggest, something like "Tim Russert's most wry observations"); (3) WP:LIST specifically deals with this situation, where categorizing information in a list article (especially when some are notable, and all are subsets of an inherently notable subject) is a Good Thing(tm). Anyway, hope this hasn't resulted in an hard feelings or a loss of respect. I'm sure we'll fall on the same side of the line in 99% of our AFD encounters. :-) Cheers! /Blaxthos ( t / c ) 22:44, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If anything, it's more a content fork of Countdown with Keith Olbermann than it is of Keith Olbermann's biography. I'm going to do some more research, but I know the actual Special Comment segment in the show has been covered in reliable sources and it may warrant an article in its own right. If that were the case, the content here would be better served as an in-article list there. Anyway, I look forward to sparring with you there too. Just kidding. ;-) /Blaxthos ( t / c ) 00:55, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

South Ossetia Eurovision AfD

Nice work ;-) Best, tomasz. 08:36, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NPA

You have been reprimanded here for your comment in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bongolesia. I have to agree with MMurphy - there is no excuse for personal attacks on any editor at any time. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 10:54, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Line of succession to the Choctaw throne AfD

Line of succession to the Choctaw throne looks more like the work of some relatively young or immature person who does not understand that Wikipedia has quality standards rather than a hoax or practical joke. Imagine if a ditzy Hollywood starlet created an article about her dog. Same principle. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 18:41, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bruce Block

As you pointed out, sourcing was easy enough... and I am myself surprised it had not previously been done. I went ahead and improved the articlr per WP:MOS, wikifying it, cleaning it up, and adding cites and sources reliable within his field to show both his notability past AGT and within his peer group. I think it's okay now. Any suggestions? Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 07:37, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for showing me the way to look. AGT is really no longer a indicatior of notability as it often does not show talent so much as simple outrageousness. Block's laying on a bed of nails while David Hasselhof stands on top of him is entertaining, but by itself not truely notable. However, you helped me go beyond that to source his notability in his field and recognition by his peers. Regards, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 18:11, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aw, shucks.... Your comments were perhaps just "harsh" enough to motivate without being mean. If the sources did not exist, the article would not have survived. I take pleasure in (no offense intended) finding that which a nom may not have. Sometims I am successful... sometimes I am not. In either case, Wiki gets improved. Thanks for the nod and smile. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 00:06, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you look at my document, and advise?

Could you look at THIS and advise if I am preparing it correctly, as I have never done such before. Thank you. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 17:39, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because fine work deserves praise

		The Original Barnstar
		In celebration of your contributions to expanding and improving the character and content of Wikipedia. Keep up the great work! Ecoleetage (talk) 02:26, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CBS Radio

I found your list of cbs radio show subpage to this page on a "what links here" to a redlink for Joyce Jordan, M.D.. I am also working on golden age radio, and have started the franchise Casey, Crime Photographer as a full blown media franchise. It of course aired on CBS throughout its run. I am also in process of documenting Gertrude Warner, whichis how I got to Joy Jordan. :-)

I just thought I would share that information for you and your projects.--K3vin (talk) 00:00, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Casey

I cannot believe how many names that show had. But the major references, I am using, list the show as Casey, Crime Photographer aka, the others. But I am not all that fussy about redirects from other names. As long as someone can put them in and get to whatthey want - all is well.

Somewhere in my mrs basil e frankweiler style files, I have a link to a site with pdfs of the old radio listings published in most of the major us papers. That would be very helpful for your project. I too was looking for saomethin you describe doing. I became fascinated by the WJSV complete broadcast day, and wanted to create similar time capsule style broadcast playlists utilizing the plethora of streaming sites out there. Stay in touch. --K3vin (talk) 00:27, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cough

Regional differences and dialects in Indian English (AfD discussion)

Uncle G (talk) 16:53, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American Airlines Flight 268

I'm somewhat unclear why you think the continued operation of Seatac-JFK flights is a relevant factor to the AFD discussion. Has there been a history of airlines abandoning routes as the pass/fail criterion in AFD?LeadSongDog (talk) 17:59, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not trying to "twist it around", I'm trying to understand what you said. LeadSongDog (talk) 21:02, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the explanation, you've made it quite clear. While I seem to take a different perspective than yours on what is a serious incident (I'd prefer to use the NTSB or ICAO definitions), I am more troubled by the arbitrary approach that seems to be prevailing in these AFD discussions on incident articles. Would you be willing to help improve the criteria stated at WP:AVIMOS#NOTE?LeadSongDog (talk) 04:44, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the observations. Yes, in flight medical emergencies are an interesting case. Unless the emergency results from the aviation operations then it doesn't count as an "incident". I've worked on a couple of articles of the borderline sort, such as Aerolíneas Argentinas Flight 386. There was one article on a case that went to the US Supreme Court to determine if it was an accident or not when cabin crew refused oxygen to an asthmatic on a smoking flight and he died.

Of course the court case alone made it notable.LeadSongDog (talk) 18:21, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

UK

Yes I did go to uk, for graduate school, in 1992-1993 and earned an MSc as opposed to my intended PhD. But it was all my choice. But I stuck around and have lived here now more than 15 years, --K3vin (talk) 07:27, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not cool

Your tendency for being pedantic to an almost absurd level is curtailing relevant articles and denying people free speech on what was supposed to be the 'free encyclopaedia that anyone can edit'.

And you know what's even less cool? Making a brave remark but doing it anonymously. What's this guy afraid of? At least when I make a smartass comment, I don't worry about adding my screen name. Mandsford (talk) 13:33, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're Not Sorry

This song has now charted at #11 on the Hot 100. You might want to reconsider your comments in the afd. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 19:30, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Languages in Star Wars

Hello! I have found a reliable encyclopedic source that can be used to reference that article. Please note this diff. I hope that helps! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 20:52, 10 November 2008 (UTC

User:A Nobody#List of editors who have agreed with my arguments or made other nice observations

Congratulations! You have made my list! :) Best, --A Nobody^{My talk} 17:02, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

talkback regarding afd

Hello, Mandsford. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Who Framed Roger Rabbit characters.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Alexnia (talk) 18:14, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Panther athletics

Just wanted to say, "Nicely and thoughtfully said!" DoubleBlue (Talk) 03:56, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

silly date article

Well, why don't you take his advice and boldly merge? Tony (talk) 00:05, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd already commented on the closer's user talk page about it. Seems that every thime these sort of articles come up they're closed as "no consensus, keep". Half of the similar day articles for 2003 have been surreptitiously merged, however, and I doubt there'd be any complaints if we someone did the same here. Grutness...wha? 00:46, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: your message here: You didn't need to file this DRV, and in fact DRV was the completely wrong forum. "No consensus" in AfD means "no consensus to delete", nothing more, nothing less. Merges, redirects, keeps, rewrites, etc. can all still be discussed or boldly done in the usual way, which involves neither AfD nor DRV. DHowell (talk) 01:06, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edit conflicts...

I've just had six edit conflicts in a row with you at August 2003... perhaps it would have been better to wait until I'd finished integrating everything? I might just leave the rest too you, because it's a huge pain trying to refactor everything (and then wait five minutes to see it load, since I'm on dial-up!) Grutness...wha? 02:38, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

S'alright - and sorry if i sounded pissed off :) It was just simpler to do the redirects and copying over at the same time, saving an edit. I think it's pretty much done now - good work :) Grutness...wha? 02:53, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Date articles

Thank you! I also find you to be a person who consistently makes good sense at AfD, even when we don't agree. In this case I definitely do agree, and I'll be joining the review discussion. Thanks for the heads-up! AlexTiefling (talk) 10:01, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus exists for merging. I recommend merging the articles and then taking the redirects to AfD in a couple of months. There is enough precedent for this. -- Mufka ^(u) ^(t) ^(c) 17:33, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Civility

Please don't make personal attacks on other editors, like you did at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bugs' Bunny. You've been warned before. Reyk _YO! 01:04, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I came here to warn you, but I see it's already been done. I redacted some of it for you. This sort of thing is uniformly counterproductive. DGG (talk) 04:06, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia: Articles for deletion/Paolo Gislimberti

Please check out the recommendation I've made on this one - a WP precedent for a similar circumstance. This appallingly unfortunate F1 race marshal originally had his own named article before it was Merged and Redirected some time late last year (if my memory serves me). Just thought you might find it interesting/useful. Incidentally, the footage of this accident was at one time one of the most poured over on You Tube (alas) - its still there but I must emphasize it is disturbing. BTW, it's much better now but Mr Plutonium27 snoring beside me on the sofa here usta do marshal duties at Group B rallies in the 80s - he says basically the duties of the fire marshal there and then was to provide some cushion between the chassis and the upcoming tree. Anyway, hope this helps. All the best, Plutonium27 (talk) 02:31, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD

Inre this diff. I tend to agree... but my sense is that if this article had come forward 2 years ago, it would have been likely accepted as notable unchallenged... and with notability not being temporary, it would not have this year been nrought to AfD for not having continued press coverage. That being said... someone from got on IMDB this year, so I am presuming that the writer director is hoping for distribution or festivals. Luckily, their website has both email and phone contact informations... so I will write or call and find out what I can and see how any new news might be best incorporated. Thanks for the supportive comments on my talk page. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 22:34, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gardner Loulan

diff Ah man... now I gotta research a BLP. Okay. Fair enough. I have the time today to do some comparisons, some digging, and some writing. And as of 2 minutes ago I have not heard back from OFP production, but their last communication explicitly said they'd like having their film in a wiki article, even after I explained in detail that Wiki is not for advertising and anything written must be well sourced. Balls in their court. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 19:30, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well.... surprise of surprises.. take a look HERE and see the marvelous reliable sources with which I cam work. And since the OFP article is copied in a sandbox, I'll be able to use its sources as well. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 00:31, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Have begun initial layout for Gardner Loulan. The OFP article survived as a no-consensus default to keep, so I continued with Gardner LoulanGardner and will keep up on OFP. Actually, the Gardner article is only a few more sources and tweaks away from being moved to mainpage. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 01:52, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done If you think it is sourced enough (chuckle), I'll move it to mainspace. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 02:55, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and moved it already, as his notability is WELL established. I have requested a delete of the workpage. I have added his wikilink to the article OFP page. Fun stuff. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 03:17, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why so hostile?

In regards to your rude commends on the AfD for the Chicago:1968 article, why have you deliberately violated Wikipedia's rules regarding civility? Clearly you have done this sort of thing in the past as there are warnings above on this very page. Please reconsider your words before you type them. It seems you are doing more harm than good with some of your responses. Supermarc (talk) 17:59, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Thanksgiving!

I just wanted to wish those Wikipedians who have been nice enough to give me a barnstar or smile at me, supportive enough to agree with me, etc., a Happy Thanksgiving! Sincerely, --Happy Thanksgiving! Sincerely, A Nobody^{My talk} 02:24, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of mythological objects

Could you please expand on which parts you think are copied from that outside website? A few random tests got me no results and if it is indeed largely a copy, I want to delete it speedily per G12. - Mgm|^(talk) 22:19, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re to comment on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/July 29 in rail transport

As Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/July 29 in rail transport was closed now, here's the reply to your comment to my !vote: My !vote was purely based on the simple principle of the burden of evidence. The person asking for deletion has to bring reasons from the policy and/or guidelines that back up deletion. If those reasons are not good enough or incorrectly used, like they were here, the only outcome is not to change anything, in this case to keep the article. My !vote was just the logical conclusion of this fact. As the closing admin stated correctly, the question of how to order information effectively should be discussed within the relevant WikiProject and not just deleted per AfD. Regards So Why 22:34, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

July 29 in rail transport

I just want to let you know that the July 29 in rail transport ended in a no consensus. I am currently disputing that decision atWikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2008 December 3. If you wish to speak your opinion of the result of the AfD, please do so at the Deletion Review. Thanks for your opinion in the discussion. Tavix (talk) 00:48, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

I am blocking you for 24 hours for making this comment despite being warned about incivility. Nick-D (talk) 07:35, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First I was told that the block expires at "07:35, 5 December 2008." OK, fair enough. It did. Then I edited for awhile, and then I got this message: The other user was blocked by Nick-D for the following reason (see our blocking policy): Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "Mandsford". The reason given for Mandsford's block is: "Incivility". This block has been set to expire: 01:29, 6 December 2008. I don't get it.

Mandsford (talk) 23:55, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion/Devon & Somerset Gliding Club

I've not been on Wikipedia for sometime. I've come back to add more information to this article. Unfortunately for reasons I DO understand it was recently redirected to Broadhembury.

Michellecrisp said "it has no real assertion of notability as a prominent club." But they didn't expand on their resoning, I can't see what that descision was based on. I believe it does have notability as a prominent club, certainly in the South West as it's the largest club in that area with members from Yeovil, Barnstaple and Plymouth (60 miles away).

Totnesmartin said "all I could find on this was a single newpaper article and loads of mentions on directories, tourism sites etc." There are several articles on the BBC website: "A bird's eye view of Broadhembury" "News - England - Glider crash inquiry starts", not a great example :(

There are several articles on the www.thisiswesternmorningnews.co.uk: "Glider pilot Ron is flying high" "Still sporty into their 90s" "Flying free on the wings of dreams"

I'm sure there are more, just more time searching is all that is required!

Peterkingiron said "Merge to Broadhembury where the club is located (and presumably has an airfield for launching gliders). This is usually the best solution for articles of local facilities." While that seems resonable, it's 2 miles away as the crow flies but by road it's nearer 5! The club is located on a small airfield and not at Broadhembury

I would like to continue adding to the original article as time allows. In your opinion, what is the minimum standard the article should meet to ensure it doesn't get deleted again? Thanks hrf (talk) 23:48, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the laugh!

Thanks for the laugh at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of national parks of Dominica (2nd nomination) :) Grutness...wha? 00:49, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas

A Nobody^{My talk} is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

--A Nobody^{My talk} 02:22, 25 December 2008 (UTC) [reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/13th parallel north

I'd have expressed amusement in the discussion, but I'm curious as to how many people will spot that one comment buried in a series of otherwise largely identical discussions, and I didn't want to make it stand out by drawing attention to it. ☺ Uncle G (talk) 00:58, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy

I think this is a better solution to the problem. Latin American revolutions (disambiguation). I know we've just come off a merger discussion, but I was WP:BOLD about it. :-) The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick^t 15:10, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So Latin American revolutions redirects to Latin American revolutions (disambiguation) from which readers can then decide what they want to see. The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick^t 15:13, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Great, glad you are in favour. Incidentally, I think that Latin American wars of independence is a bit problematic given that Brazil "revolutioned" :-) without a war. Can you think of a title which would avoid this issue? e.g.

Decolonization in Latin America
Decolonization of Latin America
Independence movements of Latin America
Independence movements in Latin America
Latin American independence movements
Latin American independence
Latin American decolonization

I think my preferred ones might be "Decolonization of Latin America" and "Latin American independence"

The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick^t 16:23, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

January 7 Oakland riots

Hi, I speedy keep the article per WP:SNOW, "where it is absolutely obvious that no other outcome other than keep is possible." The task of merging doesn't require an AfD discussion, WP:BEFORE. --J.Mundo (talk) 15:52, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article was merge by another user. If you think my decision was wrong, you can ask an administrator to reopen the discussion (WP:DPR#NAC). --J.Mundo (talk) 17:48, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete articles

I appreciate your comments on the articles I nominated for deletion. How could/should I go about nominating a bunch of players in a single request, as you suggest? Timneu22 (talk) 15:35, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter William Wade

Thanks for keeping your cool. You're much better at this than I am. Drmies (talk) 04:26, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Biscuits and gravy

RE: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Riverside High School (Launceston), FWIW you had me convinced. Jerry delusional ¤ kangaroo 01:35, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sausage bread

You might want to consider the redirect I suggested in this debate. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:56, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A centralised discussion which may interest you

Hi. You may be interested in a centralised discussion on the subject of "lists of unusual things" to be found here. SP-KP (talk) 17:36, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Capture of the Green River Killer

I invite you to revisit the article and the Afd. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 04:23, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Milky Way 2

I loved your response. Drmies (talk) 22:31, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mr. Pibb in popular culture

While you voted to delete, your comment actually promotes covering material elsewhere (which is actually a merge). According to Wikipedia:Merge and delete these are incompatible. Please drop by the discussion again consider reconsidering. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:20, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of top Telugu-language films

Could you please expand your argument with a comment on my nom statement, rather than Lugnuts' faulty assumption. I said it was a copy of part of an existing Teluga list with a POV problem. Your comment didn't address that at all. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:39, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

wow, nice talk page

Perhaps it's time to start an archive? OlEnglish (talk) 02:51, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If there was anything worth keeping, sure. Maybe I can just erase this and start fresh. Mandsford (talk) 05:07, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Every instance where Mr. Pibb has been mentioned on television

For my part, I liked (an agreed with) your comments in the deletion debate. I saw where someone responded to it with "WP:CIVIL please" and I can say that he's wrong. WP:CIVIL does not apply to statements made about an article, or to arguments, or to a line of thought. It does apply, of course, to statements directed toward a specific individual, such as calling someone "a big crybaby" in response to something they've just written, or saying "What the hell are you talking about", etc. There is no bar against humor (or, for those British people "humour") in discussions about the quality of what's on Wikipedia. Don't let someone's self-righteous comments deter you from speaking your mind. Mandsford (talk) 17:13, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your encouraging comments. But honestly, snitty, saracstic remarks are a form of aggression that certainly violates WP:CIVIL even if they represent a valid position. While this sort of humo(u)r can artfully executed, and even help illustrate a position, 95% of the time such comments are not at all helpful, and just fuel drama. I was being blunt and aggressive, and the exact same things could have been said in a polite tone, so in my opinion the WP:CIVIL comment was justfied.

Thanks for writing. I do appreciate occasionally hearing editors who aren't big crybabies. I still wish Wyeth would send me my meds on time, but at least something good came from this. / edg ☺ ☭ 17:52, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative to notability

Hello! I am working on an objective alternate to notability in my userspace. Please read User:A Nobody/Inclusion guidelines and offer any suggestions on its talk page, which I will consider for revision purposes. If you do not do so, no worries, but if you wish to help, it is appreciated. Best, --A Nobody^{My talk} 01:55, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What ever happened to being WP:CIVIL?

HEY NOW! You said, this appears to have been pieced together by people who buy a VHS, DVD, Blu-Ray, etc. everytime the "Disney vault" opens. How rude. Sure, I'll admit that I own more than one copy of a specific title in two different formats, but that's only because I didn't remember that I already had it buried in the back of the DVD cabinet, unopened. (seriously though - you're right. And it was a funny line to boot. [insert smiley face here]) SpikeJones (talk) 15:08, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Smile!

A Nobody^{My talk} has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend, Go on smile! Cheers, and Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Random appreciation

Just a note to let you know that your sense of humor hasn't gone unnoticed. :D Themfromspace (talk) 04:18, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In my Father's house are many mansions...

Hey, the last place I expected to see John 14:2 was Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_mansions. Thank you bringing the Daily Devotional to Articles of Deletion! You made me feel at home. :) Pastor Theo (talk) 12:36, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Saint Patrick’s Day!

On behalf of the Wikipedia:Kindness Campaign, we just want to spread Wikipedia:WikiLove by wishing you a Happy Saint Patrick’s Day! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 15:36, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of TV affiliates

The AfD was closed as keep! Thank you for your support. I can now feel free to work on this without feeling like I am wasting my time. DHowell (talk) 03:33, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Venetian Blind Man

What a coincidence. I ran into the same guy, but it was at the Home Depot. He gets around!--Buster7 (talk) 11:34, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fictional character IQs

Hello! Just to give you a heads up, the subject of intelligence of fictional characters is something covered in scholarly sources, such as Patricia M. Puccinelli's Yardsticks: retarded characters and their roles in fiction (P. Lang, 1995). Anyway, I believe the article can be dramatically revised to be about the intelligence of fictional characters as depicted in fiction and as such believe that we can use some of the verifiable information from that article for that purpose. Again, what I propose is an article based entirely on such secondary sources as Puccinelli's mentioned above and that only lists those IQs of characters also verified in other secondary sources. Please reconsider for this one so that we use what we can from it for these purposes and as you know I do tend to follow up my ideas for such rewrites and only make requests such as this one when I really think there's something salvageable. Thank you for time and consideration. Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 22:34, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Other religion Afds

Thanks for your help with the Christianity in Haiti article. I invite you to help with all of the other articles that user: andyjsmith has requested for deletion, all on the same grounds: Hinduism and science, Buddhism and the body, Taoism and death, and Islam and civil rights. I don't doubt that he'll soon try to nominate Jewish clothing as well, given that he seems intent on attacking every article related to me and a project that I encouraged students to participate in. Thanks!Vote Cthulhu (talk) 23:56, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FYI I've already cleaned up Jewish clothing. andy (talk) 07:35, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Quick note

Hello, Mandsford! Hey, I am in the process of (hopefully) addressing your concerns concerning an article. Please reconsider based on where I am heading. I hope all has been well with you! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 18:17, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ferris Beuller's Day Off in popular culture merge discussion

Informing everyone who participated in the AFD for Ferris Beuller's Day Off in popular culture that a merge discussion is now underway concerning the same material. Please share your comments here Dream Focus 04:09, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question

I posted a question for you in the AfD discussion of Armenian wedding log. LadyofShalott ^Weave 19:36, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for Bosnia and Herzegovina–Malta relations

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Bosnia and Herzegovina–Malta relations. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedy-deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Nick-D (talk) 06:38, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What is a Groubani?

In this comment you used the word "Groubani" -- what is a Groubani? Geo Swan (talk) 16:09, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply. That explains why you used it in the {{afd}} for Bosnia's relations with Malta.

And I think you are implying that the consensus on these is getting close to crystalizing that they should go, if they don't cite any references that suggest there is anything remarkble about that particular tuple? I'll assume I have understood you correctly if I don't hear back from you.

Thanks! Geo Swan (talk)

Happy Easter!

On behalf of the Kindness campaign, I just wanted to wish my fellow Wikipedians a Happy Easter! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 06:59, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A deletion review discussion you may wish to contribute to.

Hi. I've listed two deleted articles at Wikipedia:Deletion_review, following the discussion on "lists of unusual things" which took place earlier in the year. As a contributor to that discussion, you might be interested in expressing an opinion on whether the two deleted articles should be restored. SP-KP (talk) 15:40, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: e-mail

Yeah, that sounds like a good plan; he'd probably take a message from you with more equanimity than from me. And yes, there's nothing wrong with starting anew, provided the old account (together with its administrative powers) aren't used again. - Biruitorul ^Talk 15:00, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is odd; my only hunch is that it's this individual. - Biruitorul ^Talk 21:32, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wily Fox

I'm not The Wily Fox, nor can I even locate such an account. I've just been a combination of busy and depressed about the project. WilyD 15:06, 20 April 2009 (UTC) ... must not ... assume bad faith ... or talk ... like William Shatner ... Seriously, though, I am a little creeped out. WilyD 15:57, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nicaragua–South Ossetia relations

I am surprised that you voted "Keep" for this article, based upon solely on the single event of Nicaragua's act of recognition. There is no actual relationship established yet, just talk of the desire to explore establishing relations via Moscow some time in the future. According to WP:N, single events are insufficient to establish notability. Martintg (talk) 01:16, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But there was only one single event, the act of recognition. How that was achieved we don't know, perhaps via a Russian intermediary. What else do you realistically expect to find in the sources in regard to their relationship? News items on trade relations between these two countries. Cultural exchanges perhaps? My reading of the available sources indicates nothing has actually happened, or even discussed yet, just the desire to discuss in the future!! If we are going to retain articles on the basis of future potential (which to my mind is engaging in OR), then there are plenty of articles that you voted "delete" where it was demonstrated that active negotiations on treaties and trade agreements where ongoing. Martintg (talk) 01:52, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Articles for deletion/Argentina–Pakistan relations

Hey, judging by your talk page you seem to spend rather a lot of time lurking around AfD! Anyway, regarding this nomination, I just wanted to say thanks for your support- it's nice that someone has my back. This whole article rescue business isn't relayy my area but no- one else was jumping to save it and it's a perfectly notable topic (as I've proven). I wonder if you would be averse to lending a hand? I'm doing what I can but it could benefit from another pair of eyes! Thanks again, HJMitchell You rang? 19:51, 30 April 2009 (UTC) [reply]

Hello, Mandsford. You have new messages at HJ Mitchell's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

1 more! HJMitchell You rang? 00:08, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

and another! HJMitchell You rang? 12:17, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

primary schools and grouping nominations

Regarding this; is it possible to group nominations together? When I was nomming them, I knew it looked a little WP:POINTish to nom so many, but I felt it was the right call to make if there was one school, so it was the right call to make if there were tons of schools too. Just didn't know/think about grouping them in some way. tedder (talk) 17:13, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/W. F. Hewitt Public School

Next time you merge, could you please include the references (or potential references from the EL section)? I'd rather not see mergers mid-discussion because they don't yet have consensus and could potentially cause a whole lot of cleanup if the decision eventually ends up different. - Mgm|^(talk) 18:02, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

District article.

I wasn't saying you can't edit the district article, I'm just saying that merging mid-discussion is a bad idea, just as moving a page mid-discussion is discouraged. - Mgm|^(talk) 07:46, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A Thank you

Hi, there. I wanted to thank you for your suggestion to "keep" the article on Jonathan Hay (publicist). I have been desperately trying to keep this article from being deleted. I feel it was nominated hastly and the people who are suggesting it to be removed are not fully comprehending the resources stated, etc. (to put it nicely). So, thank you much for making your very helpful point about the article here Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jonathan Hay (publicist) and for your suggestion in favor. Much respect to you for that.--Jklein212 (talk) 07:51, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Dear Mandsford, I really appreciated your comment here [18]. And I appreciate your efforts to. the whole bilateral AfD is attracting people that say keep or delete at every one without supplying any good reasons. or the whole "wait for discussion to end" people. Some of these X-Y relations are plainly non notable, yet people still want to keep them for the sake of it. others, and I commend your sources searches, some AfDs are probably more debatable, that's what's AfDs are for. LibStar (talk) 02:52, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I fully endorse LibStar's comment - thank you. - Biruitorul ^Talk 03:36, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I thought I'd just chime in here and say I agree with the gents above. A lot of these articles are crap, and should be deleted, but some are worth keeping. I seem to spend a lot of my time disagreeing with these guys, but I can agree with them here! It's good to have editors you can trust to actually bother to check for references before nominating or voting! HJMitchell You rang? 16:33, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

Deletion of Bilateral relation pages despite ongoing merging effort Ed Fitzgerald _{t / c} 08:23, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Azerbaijan–Romania relations

Nice work on finding sources! Saves me a bit of work! Now then, let's see if I can't turn it into a half decent article. I seem to spend as much time at AfD as you these days! It's always good when you can find something that's actually worth the time of day amongst all the crap- as unlikely as it is that the creator gave a monkies whether Azerbaijan and Romania actually had relations! Good to be working with you again! HJMitchell You rang? 16:44, 14 May 2009 (UTC) [reply]

Hello, Mandsford. You have new messages at HJ Mitchell's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

(sorry- I like to keep them together)

Rescue

Take a look and see what you think! Surely 11 separate refs to several independent news agencies is enough to establish notability! It certainly beats the two sentences that were there in the first place! HJMitchell You rang? 00:29, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

MASH vote

thank you for voting, please consider examining the other nominations at AfD for MASH episodes. ThuranX (talk) 00:33, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1909

Nice articles but please don't forget to categorize them. Uncategorized articles are hard to find. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 13:56, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Black Knight

Is back at AfD. It seems to me it needs some clean up and expansion. Perhaps Black Knight (Arthurian legend) which is itself an unsourced stub should be merged in? Anyway, as you participated in the last AfD I was curious what your thoughts are. ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:43, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of fictional narcissists

Thank you for your advice, it's well taken. If the AfD results in deletion then I will of course move the list to my userspace until I can find sources for it or something because I think the article has merit. --Dominus Noster (talk) 15:01, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mandsford, I have a strong suspicion that this user is a sockpuppet of blocked user Jupiter Optimus Maximus (aka Illustrious One, aka YourLord). The contribution history seems very similar to me, with similar patterns (unreferenced psychoanalysis of fictional characters, adding categories related to such). His first contribution being List of fictional narcissists fits JOM's MO to a T, and I'm not in the least surprised to see that the list is populated entirely by JOM's favorite characters (they are all articles that he used to edit war on over fictional foo categories...Category:Fictional narcissists not surprisingly among them). Also he identifies as being from Chester, England, and all of JOM's previous IPs trace to the same general area (Manchester, Liverpool, & Chester, which are adjacent to each other). There's enough of a similarity here for me to consider opening up a SPI, but I thought I'd ask for second opinions first, and you seem to be close to the issue with regard to the AfD. --IllaZilla (talk) 21:57, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments on the above are welcome at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/YourLord. --IllaZilla (talk) 23:24, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of fictional vehicles

Couldn't find the energy to comment at this AfD, but you deserve some recognition for the "fictional camel that used to be a vehicle …" line! pablo_hablo. 22:45, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Win cash monies on Wikipedia internet website

You can send it to me care of New College, Oxford, OX1 3BN, UK. Olaf Davis (talk) 07:19, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AFD

Could you suggest any way to improve the list? Or would you think it'd better be scrapped anyway? Montemonte (talk) 18:06, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. But I don't even have any idea which user pages I shall work on, and how I can re-package the idea of that list. Montemonte (talk) 00:00, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can you help add references to Moldova–Spain relations and New Zealand – Pakistan relations. Thanks. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 16:30, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Moldova–Spain relations

Can you help add references to Moldova–Spain relations? --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 16:13, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 1,305: / Line 1,305: @@
 Can you help add references to [[Moldova–Spain relations]] and [[New Zealand – Pakistan relations]]. Thanks. --[[User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )|Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )]] ([[User talk:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )|talk]]) 16:30, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
+== Moldova–Spain relations ==
+Can you help add references to [[Moldova–Spain relations]]? --[[User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )|Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )]] ([[User talk:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )|talk]]) 16:13, 1 June 2009 (UTC)