User talk:ThaddeusB

Welcome to my talk page! If you leave me a note here I will probably reply here, unless you specify otherwise or unless I feel it is important enough to "get your attention" via a reply on your talk page.

Please note: new text goes under old text on talk pages. Thank you!

Click here to leave me a new comment.

For older conversations, please see my archives: 2008 2009

Milltown

If I understand right, the Wisconsin wikiproject has decided to make towns that need disambiguation go by "___ (town), Wisconsin"; villages never have (village) in their name. I'm not a member of the project, but I'm going to ask a couple of project members to comment here. Nyttend (talk) 03:57, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

I already undid my changes before receiving this message, but any clarification would be fine. That said, it doesn't really make much sense to have the dab in the middle of the name. It should really be XXX, Wisconsin (town) or XXX, Wisconsin (village) to be consistent with normal disambiguation format. (Also, you are wrong as some of the villages do have (village) in their title). --ThaddeusB (talk) 04:35, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Nyttend is correct. If there's a village or city with the same name as a town, then the village or city gets the primary use. The town gets named ______ (town), Wisconsin. Hundreds of articles are done this way. It would be too much work to undo this without a strong reason to do it. There are very few villages with (village) in the name. For example, the village of Oregon is named Oregon, Wisconsin and the town of Oregon is named Oregon (town), Wisconsin. The political subdivisions of Wisconsin are so different that it got its own article. Towns in Wisconsin are different than many other states. They are the autonomous rural unincorporated areas between cities and villages. Royalbroil 04:41, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Yah, definitely unusual I started to move Millford to "fix" a disambiguation page, but when I realized that most of Wisconsin was like that I stopped & undid my change. Still, why disambiguate in the middle of the term instead of the end like normal? --ThaddeusB (talk) 04:50, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Good question. I don't remember help coming up with the naming convention. Royalbroil 12:19, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Users Royalbroil & Myttend are both correct concerning the naming convention.One comment: each Wisconsin town has an elected town board with a chair so town elections in Wisconsin are the norm unlike other states that just have townships only on paper for statistic reasons.Thank you-RFD (talk) 11:03, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Nationwide, the standard is to place (community type) before the statename if there are multiple places with the same name — like any other means of disambiguation for community names, we please the disambiguation before the statename. That's why we have Centerville, Gallia County, Ohio, rather than "Centerville, Ohio (Gallia County)". And as far as the (village) remaining — the only one I could find was Superior (village), Wisconsin. I'd guess that it's a special case, because there's also a city of Superior, Wisconsin (but it's not Superior (city), Wisconsin) and a town of Superior (town), Wisconsin. I suppose it's good that Marble Cliff isn't also named Columbus :-) Nyttend (talk) 14:39, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Re: HersfoldBot

It's coming; sorry, I haven't been around for the past month. You can expect the bot to be run later tonight or later this week. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 17:06, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Speedy delete of Genomic library redirect

Did you notice that I tried db-move on that page on May 25, and it was declined by the administrator, who told me to get consensus? Is this the correct procedure now, to put db-move back on the page? Agathman (talk) 17:13, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Now that consensus exists, I can't imagine it being declined again, so yes re-adding the template should work. If for some reason that is declined again, you'll have to list it at Wikipedia:Requested moves. --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:47, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

deletion to be completed

Thank you for welcoming me in Wikipedia. However, please note that I am not the creator of the two pages (Michele Trimarchi and Neuropsychophysiology), rather I have called outloud their deletion because of the reasons you finally determined (and others). This is why I am now proposing to delete the links to ISN on the present page of Neuropsychophysiology, 'cause it rebounds to a self-referential, blatant, unclear site of Michele Trimarchi ("a bad penny is always turning up", isn't it?). Thanking in advance for finishing the work ASAP, ---- PernillaPthor

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:PernillaPthor" —Preceding unsigned comment added by PernillaPthor (talk • contribs) 11:17, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Neuropsychophysiology" —Preceding unsigned comment added by PernillaPthor (talk • contribs) 17:55, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

FYI, I didn't add the delete template nor say anything about you being the creator - all I did is clean up the article. Now, there is no need to propose a change to the article as "Wikipedia is the encyclopedia anyone can edit." That said, the external link is does no harm and I see no reason to delete it. It points to an organization related to the topic at hand and the fact that it was originally added by a WP:COI editor is irrelevant. --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:53, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

California Farm Water Coalition

Could you point me to at least one non-trivial source you found on California Farm Water Coalition? I don't want to take it to AfD if it's notable, but I sure didn't see anything helpful in my search. Thanks! --Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:44, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

The main thing that shows their notability is that so many articles about water issues quote them as an authority. That said, here are two sources that would be sufficient to meet the GNG, in my opinion. (I'm sure there are others, these are just the first two I found:

• This article about a a brochure the put out that "caused quite a stir": [1].
• This one is about an ad campaign they did: [2]

ThaddeusB (talk) 00:59, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I'll hold off for a bit on the AfD, but I'm not convinced about the notability. Many lobbying groups make sure they are in every reporter's rolodex so that they can easily be quoted as an authority, but to me that's more of a passing mention / PR thing. (I know some will disagree on that, and I'm fine with it.) The Fresno Bee story looks like a possibility, but we'd really need to see the whole article (and I don't feel like ponying up the $3) -- the California Irrigation Institute is a competing group, and it's hard to tell from a single paragraph if the "stir" was real or just manufactured as a way to get their name in the paper. What I see of the ad campaign article looks like a PR piece, but again, it's hard to tell from a single paragraph, and we'd need to see the whole thing. (I've been burned before with incessant spam from the registration news sites, so I'll pass on that one.)

Thanks for the reply.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 13:25, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Radish Stew

I'm unclear on where Radish Stew has been transwikied to. Mind clueing me in? Thanks!--Fabrictramp | talk to me 16:19, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

b:Cookbook:Radish Stew - I cleaned it up after transwiki so may have to view to the history to confirm. Its unfortunate that the template doesn't allow a link to the transwikied page or I would have added one. --ThaddeusB (talk) 16:43, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I just looked in Wikibooks, not the cookbook section. Doh! (And yeah, a link would be super.) Thanks for the clue, :) --Fabrictramp | talk to me 16:51, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

MineWolf Systems

(For the record, I put the Prod tag before I registered)

Cheers for tidying up that article, it is indeed now a respectable stub and not a deletable article. Wikipedia needs more people like you patrolling the boring jobs. Prokhorovka (talk) 08:58, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Lisa Pin-Up

I note that most of the results here are either from 5 years back or are simply announcements/ticket sales notices for recent shows. With an admittedly quick glance, I don't see a single recent review or actual article. If you can find something, that's swell; I prodded it simply because this was an article made by her boyfriend that has remained without any mention of notability. I hope that you do follow up with improvement, 'cause otherwise I intend to wait a while and then bring it to AfD. Take care. --Human.v2.0 (talk) 00:43, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

First off, thank you for coming here instead of just sending it to AfD. I do plan to improve the article, but I can't say when exactly - hopefully within two weeks.

I assure you I found some actual sources or I wouldn't have de-prodded. Off the top of my head, I remember a couple RS calling her one of the countries most influential DJs or some such. I will definitely try & improve/source the article ASAP, but be patient with me as I have a lot to do. :)

P.S. A source being from 5 years ago is completely irrelevant. --ThaddeusB (talk) 00:50, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

True, but to try to verify notability it would certainly help to have some usable material from this half of the decade. ;) I'm not one of the much-feared "Deleationists", so I wouldn't have brought things to AfD immediately unless the one removing prod had a conflict of interest. I'm all for it being improved if that can acutally be done, I'm just not terribly interested in having a few non-tweaks like I've seen others do in the past just to avoid deletion (not a comparison to you, I should probably clarify. just a "historical reference" of sorts.). I tried finding something about her way back when it was created (I've had it on my watchlist it's whole existance), but I never did find much outside of PR statements and the like. --Human.v2.0 (talk) 01:00, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

AfD

At least one is open, see Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Northern_Sámi_Wikipedia. Fences and windows (talk) 18:16, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

p.s. I love Columbus, I visited last year. Fences and windows (talk) 20:32, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Estonia–Luxembourg relations

Hello, I've recently tried to restore this page to a version which can be improved upon (a non-protected, non-disambiguation page) and I wondered if I could get your opinion about whether it is currently up to the quality which we expect of every Wikipedia article. I would appreciate your comments on the article at User:Cdogsimmons/Estonia–Luxembourg relations on the talk page there, and further improvements that would get it closer to inclusion status are always welcome. Thanks.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 23:06, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

What to do before an earthquake.

Who will be handling the transfer to wikibooks?    7   ^{talk | Δ |}   04:41, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

I've already put in a request for transfer here --ThaddeusB (talk) 04:54, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Great, thanks.    7   ^{talk | Δ |}   04:58, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Jack Passion

I've seen others userfy similar autobiographies in the past, so I thought it was allowed, but go ahead and revert it if you want.--Sandor Clegane (talk) 20:27, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

I will seek guidance from those more knowledgeable than myself & get back to you. --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:28, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Explanation

A novice editor needs you to explain this, with helpful pointers, at Talk:Cross Enterprise Document Sharing (XDS). Uncle G (talk) 00:14, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. I normally watch-list all articles I deprod, but that one apparently didn't make my list. I can't blame the editor much for not being able to find sources. The article is about a specialized protocol used by health care providers. It is widely used, but if you don't know where to look you are unlikely to find anything searching for "XDS" on Google. I have pointed the editor to some good sources, so hopefully he will make some improvements on his own now. --ThaddeusB (talk) 04:58, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Kathryn Ellen Lilley

Thanks for cleaning up and adding the appropriate tags. I took great pride in never having caused an article to be deleted, but in this case I had a hard time justifying notability. Thanks to you my record remains unbroken. --Leifern (talk) 10:40, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Double redirects

I'm still in the process of making changes, & I hadn't yet gotten to double-redirects. Thank you for the help. It's more than a one person job if it's to get done in a reasonable amount of time. :) hmwithτ 14:52, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

No problem, I'm happy to help. There are far more of these redirects than I would have imagined. Thank goodness for AWB. :) --ThaddeusB (talk) 14:57, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

re: Fell (novel)

No problem, I actually wrote a most of the article on the book which comes before it (using my old account). And I've been meaning to create Fell for a while, but forgot about it. So when I went back to that article and saw the most recent edit adding Fell to the infobox, I followed it, and the article as you see it now is the result :). Keep up your good work - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 20:45, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

ongoing multiple de-PRODing question

Hello, I noticed you routinely de-PROD articles with comments like "will address sourcing conerns ASAP".[3][4][5] How often do you actually go back to do this? I note that such de-PRODs always seem to happen on or around the expiry date.

I see out of your past 5,000 article edits, you've removed PROD from 81 articles (just based on the subject lines). How many of the 81 did you go back and expand to meet notability concerns? Do you have some examples? rootology (C)(T) 23:27, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

PS: Kick ass work on the pandemic clean up!! I was meaning to move them around this weekend if no one else did. :) rootology (C)(T) 23:33, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

You are correct - I routinely deprod articles right at the end. This is because I go through almost every single prod that is about to expire and see if there is anything worth saving. I'd say the ones I deprod are about 5-10% of the total I look at. I believe that nearly every article I deprod could survive AfD if nominated (and several have). No one is perfect, so I am sure I made some errors too though.

I don't have an exact # that I've fixed, but I know it is far fewer than I'd like. :( Most do need work, but not necessarily every single one. If I had to guess, I'd say 1/3 of them I have done at least some work on, with only a few being expanded greatly. Thus far, my work has been more-or-less random with little regard to importance or when I deprodded.

A few days ago, I wrote a script to help me keep track of my de-PRODed articles so that I could start going back and fixing up some of the ones I neglected. The log is at User:ThaddeusB/PROD_Log. At the moment, it is only updated through the end of April, but I do think just about all of those have been brought up to minimum quality standards. I intend to add May to my list within the next couple days and then go back and start fixing up the ones I've previously missed (like I said, I've fixed some but it has been at random rather than systematically).

As far as specific examples go, off the top of my head Barbara McGuire was one of the first articles I improved, Alchimie Forever survived AfD nomination largely because of work I did on it during the process, Neuropsychophysiology was changed from lame self-promotional piece into a legit stub, and JC Brown was greatly changed from a legend written as fact to a (still very-incomplete) article about the legend's surrounding the mountain yesterday.

I know I should probably spend more time improve the things I de-prod, but it is hard when there is a steady stream of new things I want to check. Thus, any advice you have would be appreciated.

I hope that this thoroughly answers your questions, but feel free to ask follow up questions if any doubt remain. --ThaddeusB (talk) 00:22, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

P.S. I know there have been several SPAs/socks deprodding stuff recently, so hopefully I am not getting lumped into that group. I assure you my intentions are to save only articles on notable topics. --ThaddeusB (talk) 00:22, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

I've noticed this, too. I suggest that the best course of action is that if you've searched for and found sources, leading you to believe that the proposed deletion is erroneous, cite them in the article straightaway. That way, another editor can build upon your efforts instead of having to duplicate them. If you'd cited the sources that you found in Cross Enterprise Document Sharing straightaway, for example, another editor wouldn't have had to duplicate your searches. As it stands, you are imposing the burden of future work solely upon yourself, because you aren't adding to the encyclopaedia the results of the work that you have done so far. Uncle G (talk) 12:54, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Deletion message

Thanks for your useful message - will aim to follow that. Regards Eldumpo (talk) 09:45, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

FACT Software International Pte Ltd

On the AfD I saw that you suggested it be moved to the parent company Vedika Software, but from what I found, the company changed name from Vedika to Fact, and that's why the page is titled as such; quite obviously all the news refs are for Vedika. I don't know how this is normally handled, but I noted the name change aspect in the article when I was editing in the references. -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 16:17, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

I was basing my comment on articles like this which says "Vedika Software through its 100 per cent subsidiary company FACT Software International Pte Limited, Singapore, has become the first Indian company..." It may have also changed names at some point, I don't know for sure. --ThaddeusB (talk) 21:24, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I looked at their webpage and they seem to have changed their Indian name to Fact Solutions from Vedika, the ownership structure etc appears to be the same. Oh well. The only reason I got involved in editing this was the undue pressure on the author with the AfD creation, who has since disappeared! Thx for your response, I'll see what I can dig up to figure this out, maybe, despite being a deletionist, I can save one more article! I also made a redirect from the product page to the company page, as I didn't think that warranted a separate article, at least not right now. -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 21:59, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Richard Hyman

Hi, ThaddeusB. You can find the article in your userspace at User:ThaddeusB/Richard Hyman. There are certainly a lot of mentions of Hyman in news sources, but they all appear ancillary to his work with Verdict Research. It seems to me that, at the moment, those sources only merit his information be on the Verdict page. If you can find some independent RS which provides enough background to warrant a stand-alone bio for Hyman, than that would be great. Good luck. — CactusWriter | ^needles 04:59, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

dumb question?

Hey Thaddeus, I noticed your perfect installment of a speedy deletion warning (at User talk:Claude girardin). I've just proposed a speedy for another one of that editor's contributions, but of rhte life of me, I can't figure out how Template:Db-spam-notice works... Can you give a brother a hand and tell me what to copy and paste and what to fill in? Thanks! Drmies (talk) 21:08, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. I guess I should start reading the fine print at the bottom... ;) Drmies (talk) 21:26, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Notability

Is the notability calculation for the Iddo Netanyahu article that simple? Just go to Google News Archives? ShamWow (talk) 00:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, all notability calculations are judgment calls really. In my judgment he has sufficient coverage to warrant inclusion (not overwhelming, but enough). I pointed to the archives to show what I was talking about in a brief enough manner to fit into the edit summary. I didn't see any major changes that need to happen in the article (it is already sourced, decently written, etc.) so I didn't see any need to personally make improvements to the article. --ThaddeusB (talk) 00:22, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Christian/married userboxes

I note that we are both in the relatively small subset of Wikipedians who are both married and confessing Christians. I removed this information from my userpage some time ago, however, as it can lead to divisiveness, factionalism, and recruiting of people with particular faiths or lifestyles to vote in matters of common interest (and the perception of the same even when it has not taken place). I would encourage you to remove this information from your user page as well. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 19:15, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Kidomiyon

I made some fixes to that one, too. More to come. Bearian (talk) 21:56, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Five wits

On June 18, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Five wits, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 14:36, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

WebCite alternatives

Do you have an opinion on BackupUrl? – Quadell ^(talk) 22:51, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

I just took a look and did some poking around. Obviously they are just getting started as they don't have any real info, no TOS, etc. I doubt they have considered legal issues and they currently aren't honoring robots.txt exclusions or cache-control meta tags. Until they establish themselves, I wouldn't want to risk archiving something important there as they well may not last very long. --ThaddeusB (talk) 01:06, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Neuropsychophysiology

I understand that a previous prod was contested, but I can't find a link to any discussion as to on what grounds it was not deleted. Frankly, this appears to be an invented "field" with very little notability or advocates. Famousdog (talk) 08:42, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

The term has a good number of hits on both GScholar and regular Google, so at the very least it isn't something that someone invented just to describe their own work. --ThaddeusB (talk) 01:09, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Webcite archiving

Just thought I'd mention Talk:WebCite#Getting links to archive; I was surprised to see the twitter mentioning your bot, as I thought I was the only one running a bot to archive links (although I just do New Pages). --Gwern (contribs) 15:08 20 June 2009 (GMT)

oldprodfull bot

I would really like this bot to be created (or the task assigned to an existing bot). Wouldn't it be easiest to just have a bot note on the talk page of every prodded article that a prod was applied? (A simple matter of looking every so often to see where the prod and prod-nn are transcluded to, I think.) It might annoy the admins who have to delete the articles if no talk page existed prior to the bot creating the talk page, so perhaps the bot could just do this for articles that already have a talk page? This would capture most of the interesting cases, since articles that don't have talk pages tend to be young and, in my experience, more likely to deserve deletion. Abductive (talk) 07:25, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

The way it would work is capture the list of current articles with PROD tags on them periodically. Articles that disappear from the list and stay off for 24 hours (to prevent tagging articles where the tag was removed in vandalism) would be given an {{Oldprodfull}} tag unless they were deleted. --ThaddeusB (talk) 16:02, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Funny location

Can you check Bahal_(disambiguation)? Four cities linked there with the name Bahal were created a couple of days ago, I haven't been able to find anything about one of them in India, the Kenya one is on PROD for similar reasons. If there's anything at all to say these cities exist, I figured you might be able to find it. -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 07:52, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

I added a source for the India one. The Kenya one doesn't appear to actually exist. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:53, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Thx, somehow I couldn't find it, and to think I've actually been to the district. -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 23:41, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Journal compilation bot

Any update? (Also, you got a pretty long talk page which takes a bit of time to load, ever considered setting up automatic archives?) Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 00:38, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

The bot finished compiling the stats a couple days ago, but I was too busy to write the code to upload the data. Hopefully I will get that done today.

I rather not auto-archive my talk page, but I did go ahead and manually archive a bunch of older stuff today. Thanks for letting me know it was getting slow - I had no idea because it always loads fast for me.--ThaddeusB (talk) 16:13, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, well it was not painfully slow :P or anything like that.Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 17:04, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

I made a footer for the compilation {{JournalsPrevNext}}. The A1 subpage is set up like the "final product" should be (aka with all the templates, merged lists, sortable tables, etc...).Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 04:54, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

I saw; nicely done. --ThaddeusB (talk) 05:33, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

A new data dump is availible. That should prove useful.Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 22:04, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Any update?Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 03:08, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

I haven't made very many changes yet, but I will shortrly and will then will run the bot on the new dump. --ThaddeusB (talk) 03:13, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Cool.Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 04:49, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

College soccer players

Hi. I'm not willing to say that all college soccer players, male or female, are automatically not notable - of course they're not! However, the players nominated in the AfD are, in my eyes, clearly non notable. If they start a pro career, however, then I'd be willing to change my opinion. Warm regards, GiantSnowman 14:21, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Yep, I went back to all the artcles to see what had been improved, and unfortunately I still wasn't satisfied. Sorry. GiantSnowman 14:28, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Aha, so I see! I'll have a read and see if it makes me change my mind! Thanks, GiantSnowman 14:37, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jordan Angeli

Yes, I do feel some college players can be notable. For example, a college player that plays in the Olympics would be notable. And yes, I think that the criteria is sometimes wrong. But until the criteria changes, I have to go by it. Niteshift36 (talk) 14:22, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

• I've read the criteria. I know what it says. And the way I read it says she isn't notable. Sorry. Niteshift36 (talk) 14:31, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
  • As above, I don't believe someone can be notable just for playing college sports. If they appear in the Olympics or the senior national team, then yes, but these people haven't. пﮟოьεԻ 57 14:55, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
    • Pretty much. I really don't see how playing college soccer confers notability. пﮟოьεԻ 57 15:53, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Inre Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel Samonas

Take a look at Daniel Samonas. I only spent a short time, but there's more that can be done if kept. Any advise how your "weak" might be upgraded? Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 23:29, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

I like to see two good sources. Currently the Starry Constellation is the only one independent source that is actually about him. I imagine you can find another good source if you wade through the regular Google search results. --ThaddeusB (talk) 23:55, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Jordan Angeli & Co.

Do I think there are possibilities where college players can be notable? Of course. Before he played professionally, Archie Griffin won the Heisman Trophy twice ... the only person to ever do that. Much closer to "home", Kara Lang is the youngest player to receive a full appearance for Canada women's national soccer team, has healthy caps and goal totals, and is still only a redshirt junior at UCLA. Those are just a few examples of college players who would be considered notable.

Just because the players I have AFD'ed are among the best players in a non-professional, non-highest level of the game, at this particular moment in time does not make them notable. Do I agree with the "get in to 1 professional game for 1 minute = notable" rule while players like Angeli are deemed non-notable? Not really, but as it stands those are the rules as decided by Wikipedia users and are the rules we must abide by. Therefore, as I have noted above, I do feel college players may be notable, just not in this case. While I understand your point of view, I respectfully disagree and will therefore not be changing my vote. GauchoDude (talk) 04:17, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Any idea why WebCite is down?

I've never used it before, and for a few days now I've been trying to archive some links (older video game reviews seem to get lost fairly easily, and by my estimation these ones might have one-two years left before they're lost), but whenever I try to archive them (manually or with a bookmark), there's an internal error. Is this just me or is this happening to everyone? –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 23:22, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

They have been having periodic problems for about 3 weeks now. (It will go down for hours at a time, then come back for 1 hour and go down again.) I was told by the head of the organization that the problems are due too excessive server load and that they are in the process of upgrading their server to address the problems. --ThaddeusB (talk) 23:33, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Okay; thanks. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 23:45, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

No wonder their servers were having trouble. :) So is that a good thing (more visibility for WebCite because of wider use on Wikipedia) or a bad thing (temporary prevention of manual archiving and expensive sever upgrades)? Anyway, excellent work on the bot... is there any ETA for the on-request archiving of links on individual pages? That would be really nice to have so that you don't need to go through 30 links manually like I did on Ratchet & Clank: Going Commando. (Also, it might be of interest to you... I created {{MultiPageCiteArchive}} for things like multiple-page video game reviews. Not sure if the bot could do anything with it, but thought I'd mention it). –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 03:34, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

It would be difficult for the bot to know when to archive multiple pages, but I'll keep the idea in mind. As to archive-on-demand function, I have held off on doing it so far because of WebCite's problems and the resulting immense backlog. Once those issues are resolved I'll proceed with adding the feature, but right now its not worth my time since that would just increase the backlog even more. :) --ThaddeusB (talk) 22:18, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Okay; thanks. That makes sense. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 14:21, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Indonesian lists

Are not useful - fly by Indonesian editors grab stuff of webs sites dump them on english wikipedia in no logical order or context and indonesian spellings and format and never return to cleanup - also many Indonesian eds have limited english so lists are their way of leaving their mark - they never return to cleanup or fix up - if you need examples there are many - removing prods like that is contrary to the general consensus of active editors on the Indonesian project - partial lists of names are of no particular use to the encyclopedia specially when there is no sign of it being either corrected or improved SatuSuro 07:29, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments at the Afd - I have a very different opinion - such lists are open to a range of abuse in the Indonesian project and there is no inherent notability to a list of names without some form of check - for WP:V or WP:RS - SatuSuro 05:55, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Karađorđevo agreement

Please do something about Aradic-es' constant edit warring, I have already explained the name to him but he's too stubborn and continues with his childish nonsense. PRODUCER (talk) 13:19, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I have no special authority to do anything, but I will keep a closer eye on the article and try to reword things to more neutral phrasing when possible. --ThaddeusB (talk) 22:13, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Landscape Agency

I was going to put a CSD-A7 tag on the page when I noticed you had contested a previous tag. At the time you said you would speedily put up some reliable sources. That was more than a week ago. Just wondering... Capitalismojo (talk) 02:57, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, could you be more specific? What is the article's title? --ThaddeusB (talk) 03:43, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Never mind, I see now it is The Landscape Agency. I will see what I can do about sourcing it tomorrow. --ThaddeusB (talk) 03:46, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, sorry about not linking it. Also the creator is listed on the company's website as its web designer. I have put up the COI tag and warned the creator. Someone else has coatrack tagged it. I still think the article is corporate vanity spam but if you want to work on it I will leave it off the Spam noticeboard. Capitalismojo (talk) 15:32, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

I gave the article a severe cleanup today. Sources will follow tomorrow. --ThaddeusB (talk) 05:21, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Triumphant Institute of Management Education

An article that you have been involved in editing, Triumphant Institute of Management Education, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Triumphant Institute of Management Education. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Cybercobra (talk) 06:58, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Toddlers and Tiaras

Wasn't aware of that provision; thanks. Perhaps it can be better if you restart with the original text; here's the entire coding in the final edit before deletion. Could you add references before reposting? Nyttend (talk) 20:28, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

{{dated prod|concern = Non-notable tv show|month = June|day = 19|year = 2009|time = 21:45|timestamp = 20090619214538}} <!-- Do not use the "dated prod" template directly; the above line is generated by "subst:prod|reason" --> '''''Toddlers & Tiaras''''' is a [[reality television]] show produced in the United States about the child pageants. The show follows the child pageant contestants and their families through their daily lives as they prepare for pageants. The show airs on [[TLC (TV channel)|TLC]] since season 1. <ref>http://tlc.discovery.com/tv/toddlers-tiaras/toddlers-tiaras.html</ref> ==References== {{reflist}} {{uncategorized|date=May 2009}}

Trevor doerksen

I prodd'd the article Trevor doerksen on 3 June for being non-notable. On 10 June, you de-prodd'd it, with an edit summary of "contets prod - company is notable & doesn't have an article yet, so I will rewrite & move this page to be about the company rather than the individual ASAP." No other changes have been made to it since, by anyone. It sounds like we agree that the person isn't sufficiently notable, and that the article on him should go. Would you object if I took it to AFD? Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 01:43, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for coming here first. I will rewrite the article, as originally promised within 24 hours. Sorry I didn't get to it sooner. --ThaddeusB (talk) 02:23, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Discussing an issue

You're missing things because of your focus on me. You've jumped into the issue to defend the BAG without reviewing the entire issue-this makes it hard for wikipedia to correct errors: the defensiveness in the face of the most serious mistakes.

If you neutrally evaluated what happened you might contribute new insight into preventing this on wikipedia in the future. This is why I discuss the issue: I don't want this to happen on wikipedia again.

I can't respond any more to your posts, they would require me to repeat myself too much more than I already have: you're off target.

I'll assume you mean your apology in spite of your posts remaining and accept it. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 22:33, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Afghanistan's Next Top Model

Can you take a look? I unPRODDed with some refs, but I'm still not sure if it's the same show! -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 01:58, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

It appears to be a hoax. One source says only 4 contestants took part. The only source that lists names doesn't match anything in the article. The supposed winner's name doesn't even get a single hit on regular Google.

All the references date from October 2007, so it is possible the show expanded the next year or something; or that this is about some other show, but the most logical explanation is that it was a hoax article.

That said, the TV show the references point to is clearly notable. (Although it probably has a real name that is different than "Afganistan's Next Top Model", that title should be acceptable unless you can find a real one since that is what the English language sources dubbed it.) My advice would be to drop all the contestant info as unsourced and stick to what the sources say. --ThaddeusB (talk) 02:23, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

I just noticed the original version of the article accidentally included text copied from America's Next Top Model, Cycle 10, so it definitely was a hoax originally. I am cutting all the junk now. --ThaddeusB (talk) 02:29, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Argh. Thanks, I guess I should have looked more carefully. I guess there's another hoax in by the same author - Oceania's Next Top Model. It might be a candidate for G3, let me know what you think of that. -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 02:36, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

So tagged. Appears to also be a sock puppet issue since another editor actually created the Oceania one but the Afgan person edited it. The weird thing is that person also created Benelux' Next Top Model which appears to be a real show.

It is actually good that you goofed though because the show you found is pretty interesting and very worth including (IMO). --ThaddeusB (talk) 02:44, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, yeah, I found the refs interesting too, coverage in India is expected, but Australia, UK and US for this was a bit surprising. I think some clean up behind these two users is warranted, the entry on Balboa_Island,_Newport_Beach,_California is a bit absurd, I'll see what I can find and fix that. -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 02:55, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

An IP (Special:Contributions/71.138.119.143) also edited the Oceania article and is presumably the same person. I wouldn't try to hard to verify anything these three wrote since they have already shown themselves to not care much about being truthful. I have to get some work done now, but I'll check back in later, so let me know if any of the 3 still need checked up on. --ThaddeusB (talk) 03:01, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

I think I pretty much cleaned up, so we should be good now. -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 23:07, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

adding references

I need to add refereces to my page Neil Lazarus - but seem to get an error any simple directions for doing so - any suggestions? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.173.72.152 (talk) 12:26, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

For help on properly adding references see Help:Footnotes. You should know, however, that it isn't your article - no one owns articles on Wikipedia. --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:09, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Aster Data article (spam)

Hi Thaddeus,

The Aster article has been an eyesore for a year now and it has had a "commercial, written like an advertisement" designation for nearly that whole time.

The company itself is a typical startup with little to no proven record and most all of it's press is derived from press releases or paid analysts.

Let's send the message to the author (probably the companies' PR person) that they can't use WP for advertising and delete the page. They can (and should) rewrite it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.188.145.54 (talk) 16:16, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

My research indicates that the company is notable, as defined by Wikipedia and the current article doesn't qualify as blatant advertising. The article's problems can be solved via editing, so there is no need to delete it. --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:10, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

See revised page which includes minimal but sufficient context IMO. 67.188.145.54 (talk) 10:05, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

PAC bot

I use the online Sepkoski database. The only useful information it offers is the order, the generic name, and the time range of the subject. See here for an example that won't take all day to load. Abyssal (talk) 15:45, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Thing with the Paleodb is that it doesn't, in my experience, tend to have any more info than the Sepkoski database on the species included in the latter. I don't know of any other, unless this one counts. Thanks for taking an interest in this project. Abyssal (talk) 00:51, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

How are we going to proceed with this project? Abyssal (talk) 18:34, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Great template! For the see also section, are you sure you can't use the bot for some of that? The paleo db lists sister genera, they would be useful there. The morphology tab has diagnosis and measurement data that may be useful for the article. Also, you might want to rephrase "(Genus) were first identified by (scientist name) in (year)" to "(Genus) was first described by (scientist name) in (year)." IT would also be cool if the year linked to the corresponding article in this series. Maybe the collections tab would have something useful. Other than that, I'm really pleased. Thanks for your hard work! Abyssal (talk) 02:10, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

The only thing I think needs added manually to the See also section would be a link to the List of *higher order taxon* article for each major group. Abyssal (talk) 03:36, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Hey, just checking in and see how things are coming. Also, I was curious if a bot could, say, scan and extract information from a PDF the same way it would an online database. Later. Abyssal (talk) 21:23, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I uh, had no clue what was going on. Here are the Sepkoski abbreviations. Most of the start and end times are in the respective articles on the time periods. The Paleodb has info on the start and stop times of subepochs. I can't generate the higher order text until we pick out a taxon to use the bot on. There's no real way for me to anticipate any scientist whose name may be encountered by the bot. There are just too many of them, and I'm not an invertebrate specialist to know any of the big names, who probably only named a small minority anyway. For the see also list, all we need to list is the sister genera listed in the pbdb and the List of taxon article, which can be done as soon as we pick a taxon to work with. If I can assist in anyway please keep me posted. :D

By the way, maybe you should clarify exactly how this bot is going to work, just so I'm up to speed and not making moronic suggestions. Abyssal (talk) 03:46, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I have a PDF that is a list of every Trilobite genus named before 2003, plus their family, time period, authors, years, and a bibliography. I thought it would be useful when we work on the Trilobites. Abyssal (talk) 00:58, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

How goes things? Abyssal (talk) 15:47, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

I haven't had much chance to work on it yet, but I should be able to get to it within the next few days. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:33, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Have you noticed the number of articles on the front page? Considering that our bot could end up creating more than 20,000 articles (~5,000 trilobites + ~5,000 brachiopods + ~10,000 molluscs not to mention echinoderms, bryozoans and cnidarians), we have a very serious opportunity to be the Wikipedians that create article number three million, if we time this right. I estimate that the day that number of articles would be reached without our intervention to be at the very beginning of august. I think we should go for this. Maybe the second we see the article counter get within twenty thousand or so of the goal we let the bot do its thing and mass generate those articles. What an opportunity! Abyssal (talk) 18:32, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Hate to be that obnoxious guy that constantly harasses you, but, uh, how are things going? Anything I can do to help? Abyssal (talk) 15:30, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Glad to know I've not been a bother, and glad to hear about your progress. What did you think of my proposal for us to shoot for being the guys who make article 3 million? I think we have a shot, and it would certainly give us bragging rights. :P Abyssal (talk) 20:50, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Update, stat! :P Abyssal (talk) 14:20, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

You said before that you could use the prod, so here I am prodding. I'm curious about how you're progressing, you said before that you were on the verge of collecting the data. I've started working on the stub templates we're going to need to create. Do you still want me to collect the start and end dates of the time periods? Anything else I can help with? Abyssal (talk) 14:25, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Are you avoiding me? I've left several messages on your talk page but have yet to hear from you in over a week even though you've been very active. Abyssal (talk) 14:05, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

I'll take that as a yes, I suppose. o_0 Abyssal (talk) 15:18, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Update

Nice to see that you weren't just ignoring me. :D I know it's going to be a difficult fight, but I think we can win them over if we start small. Maybe they would allow us a trial-run to demo it? Say, create articles for Ciliophora, which would create about 30 articles. If something goes horribly horribly wrong, then we could catch the problem early, and correct the bot accordingly with little in the way of clean up.

Now two questions,

1. Do you want that PDF?
2. What do you need me to do to prepare us for the actual article creation?

Abyssal (talk) 22:44, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Lol. Ok. Abyssal (talk) 00:47, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Hey, Thad, just some random thoughts on our project:

I think we should start trying to distance ourselves from the anybot fiasco in advance of our request for bot approval to make things easier for us. What advantages does PACbot have over the anybot thing? I think we'd have more human involvement in the articles, since there are aspects we have to pick and choose by hand, like in the see also links, and we'd have to pick a stub category for the major groups by hand, and that sort of thing. Also, our bot won't have problems with security the way Anybot did with that webpage it was publicly accessible from. Maybe we could compile a list of the specific issues that happened with Anybot and write a corresponding list of corrections and precautions that will be present in PACbot? I believe that would go a long way in alleviating concerns from the BAG.

Also, could our bot be used to fill in data in a table with data gathered from our sources? Like say, go through the List of placoderms and automatically add in the authority, year, age and such? If you could get it to do that and it works, it may dispel any doubts the BAG might have about your ability to program a successful content generating robot before they're even brought up.

PS: Sorry for moving this, but you said you missed previous messages because the topic wasn't near the bottom of your page. Abyssal (talk) 21:15, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, that's great news. BTW, any comments on my thoughts above here? *points up* Abyssal (talk) 13:46, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Great, I'll get started on everything tomorrow. Abyssal (talk) 00:36, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

I've sent both the pdf and a copy of what I've completed so far of the txt file. Your feedback on the latter is requested. Abyssal (talk) 19:55, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the correction, I'll get a complete version to you tomorrow afternoon. I'd finish it tonight but my monitor's going bad and it's getting difficult to do anything on the computer because the screen is mysteriously blurring up. Abyssal (talk) 22:13, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

I've sent you the finished copy. Let me know what else I can do. Abyssal (talk) 01:40, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Not to nag, but if you need me to do anything very soon, please tell me, as I won't have internet access tomorrow. Abyssal (talk) 23:11, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

I'll get started on the "lists of" tonight for the taxa I already have. Hopefully I'll get it sent out to you tonight, but if not, Monday is the soonest I can get it to you. Abyssal (talk) 23:58, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Check your email. :) Abyssal (talk) 02:34, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Are we still using that page template? 'Cause if we are, we need the start and end times for the time periods, and I can get to work on that. If you get this before 10:30 AM, please reply immediately 'cause I have to leave for work. Thanks. :) Abyssal (talk) 13:09, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Hey, personal life is interfering with my ability to get all that geologic time info to you. Hopefully things will clear up. Sorry I haven't gotten all that to you yet. I'll hopefully create all the Lists that were marked with the *** in the txt file I sent you very soon. Also, can we look into being able to use the bot to fill in tables more seriously? I'm facing significant pressure from other paleo-contributors about my unfinished lists. Sorry for the delay. Abyssal (talk) 02:44, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll get to work on that. Abyssal (talk) 04:13, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Here's a big chunk of those lists that need filled:

• List of prehistoric starfish
• List of prehistoric barnacles
• List of crinoid genera
• List of prehistoric echinoids
• List of edrioasteroids
• List of graptolites
• List of prehistoric sea cucumbers
• List of hyoliths
• List of prehistoric malacostracans
• List of prehistoric brittle stars
• List of prehistoric ostracods
• List of prehistoric chitons
• List of prehistoric stylophorans

There are some more, but I have to hunt them up. Abyssal (talk) 20:17, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Great! Could you remind me what else you need from me for the page creation project? Abyssal (talk) 21:47, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Something like this --> {{sort|5|[[Middle Jurassic]]}}

With the number being the order of the epoch in the phanerozoic eon. EG: Early Cambrian= 1 Middle Cambrian = 2 etc. Abyssal (talk) 22:23, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

HellinaBucket

This is very much vandalism, and not only that, but HellinaBucket has been warned multiple times for making this exact same edit to this article.

HellinaBucket is a vandal. The HellinaBucket account was created to circumvent vandalism protections regarding this article specifically and possibly a couple other articles.

HellinaBucket has repeatedly, over many weeks, attempted to make the same changes to the Operation Repo article. HellinaBuckets actions have gotten the article protected at least once, and has almost gotten HellinaBucket permanently blocked.

The only reason that HellinaBucket was not permenetly blocked from editing is because he promised to not repeat his vandalism to the Operation Repo page, and because he promised to stop following my contributions.

Although maybe I should have requested a permanent block of HellinaBucket due to this edit, I chose to give HellinaBucket a "only warning" instead, since he seems to be attempting to make a good reputation for himself.

HellinaBucket is a vandal and has been since his conception. He existed before that as an anon IP vandal.

ThaddeusB, please research this issue further if you wish to be a part of solving it. Please pay particular attention to which edits HellinaBucket has made to Operation Repo, and to the portions of HellinaBucket's talk page that were deleted without being archived.VegKilla (talk) 06:45, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

P.S. The reason I have not edited very many articles in the last couple months is because of HellinaBucket. By practically only editing the Operation Repo article, I have been able to defend myself against Hellina. The fact that this is the only article I am editing is a symptom of the problems that Hellina has caused, and is in no way evidence that no one is watching my contributions. By editing only one page, I am defeating anyone watching my contributions, since there is nothing to watch. You're right "how can anyone watch my contributions if I'm not making any," but you missed the point which is the reason that I have stopped making contributions is because of this user (Hellina).VegKilla (talk) 07:08, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Will it never end?

Thank you for that defense. In the first conflict I was a complete idiot to him. I tried at one point to apoligize as plainly and painfully obvious I needed to do, I haven't seen or heard from him in almost 2 months and hope that I have proved I am not a vandal and work a lot for the advancement of Wikipedia. There is a Road, No Simple Highway (talk) 17:49, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Basically you have two good options: either walk away and let him have his preferred wording or seek a third opinion or other form of arbitration. To me two things are pretty clear: 1) this is a content dispute and 2) VegKilla has severely overreacted (probably because of previous bad blood between you two). --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:09, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Homeboy is on an extended Wiki-break, I regret how I started with him and really wish that he would reevaluate what I've done since. Either way the issue has petered out again (hopefully) and we will neve rhave to hear it again. Thanks for looking into things on it. There is a Road, No Simple Highway (talk) 15:33, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

regarding csd, we've had out chats about this and afd, I've read the criteria a few times and make some good calls but there are still times where I'm getting the messages from you or some other editors. Is there something that is sticking out that I'm missing? I hate making the wrong call but I'm human.Hell In A Bucket (talk) 13:45, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Chuchin

Something for you to look at. I think the page creator added the text in the article to avoid being A7ed again. I managed to find one ref which leads me to believe that he was notable (pre-internet Mexico), but I have serious doubts on the Tony award. Take a look? -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 22:06, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

I rewrote it to what is verifiable. The Witness story seems to be the only good source that is available online. However, it has plenty of material form which to write an article if one so choose. Given that Chuchin was clearly on an international tour and was supposedly the star attraction of the Royal Show, there is almost certainly more material available in contemporary newspapers - just not any that are currently available online. --ThaddeusB (talk) 17:12, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, that was the only thing I could find, and was unable to link it in as a ref because of the weird link format, so I put in the picture of the paper copy. As the page was A-7ed before and I couldn't find evidence of the Tony, I was thinking of PROD, but then I came across this resource and figured he must've definitely been notable to have a front page obit in a different continent, even if he was just visiting. -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 00:50, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

AFD thanks

I wanted to thank you for doing such a good job of giving the rationale in this AFD. It's hard to find yardsticks for this area, so the verboseness is very much appreciated. tedder (talk) 02:08, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Glad I could be of assistance. --ThaddeusB (talk) 16:28, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Hoax

Hi, a hoax page was created: Chaldean Syriac Assyrian Governance and I can't seem to stop the guy from re-creating it everytime. No such government or province exist, so its a bladant hoax. Iraqi (talk) 20:41, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Hello, I am not actually an admin so I can't take any direct action myself. I see it has already been tagged for speedy deletion as a hoax. If the article creator removes the tag, you can warn them and re-add the tag (but only if it is the article creator who removes it). If for some reason the speedy deletion is declined you can nominate it for deletion using WP:AfD. If the article is deleted and then recreated it can by tagged with {{db-g4}} and the offending user warned.

I hope that helps, but if you need further assistance let me know. --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:52, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks! :) -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:00, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: Your RfA/my notability question

Thank you for your kind words. Yes I will keep that in mind, thanks for the advice.Dave (talk) 00:53, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		I award this Barnstar to ThaddeusB for their great efforts in maintaining deletion quality standards and helping new users. --Hell In A Bucket (talk) 18:43, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the Barnstar! It is always very nice to know my efforts are appreciated. Thank you for taking the time to leave me this award. --ThaddeusB (talk) 05:31, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Wars_in_A_Song_of_Ice_and_Fire

An article you recently edited Wars_in_A_Song_of_Ice_and_Fire has been nominated for deletion. [6] -- The Red Pen of Doom 20:01, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Teashark

An article that you have been involved in editing, Teashark, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Teashark. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Cybercobra (talk) 21:23, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Prod template

Although the prod template was contested, it was contested by the creator of the page, and he did notgive any reasons. Trampboarding was a how-to, with no categories, references, or anything of the sort. There were no infoboxes or anything to show its notability whatsoever. If you do not object, I may nominate it for the AfD. All the best, Kayau (Talk to me! See what I've done! Sign my guestbook!) 00:11, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

PROD tags are purposely very easy to remove. No one is forbidden from removing them, including the creator, and no reason is required. The idea behind proposed deletion is that no one, including the article's creator, would object. If anyone does it has to be settled in the "usual way" - that is AfD.

The term does get a large # of Google hits and a few news hits, but notability is unclear (and, as you pointed out, the article as written is horrible). You are certainly welcome to send it to AfD. If you do send to AfD, I think it will probably be deleted but deletion isn't a certainty, and it might be possible to prove notability if someone put the effort into it. --ThaddeusB (talk) 00:21, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I dare say the creator of the page doesn't know how to do it - he's new. But I'm sure someone else will. I'll nominate it for the AfD very soon. All the best, Kayau (Talk to me! See what I've done! Sign my guestbook!) 10:20, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Household Hacker

If you were to rewrite HH to focus primarily on the onion video, it would definitely be a better article, but it still wouldn't have any sourcing about HH themselves, and it would likely be filled with original research in the not-too-distant future, since there just isn't that much out there about HH other than the primary source. But I guess that isn't for me to decide, so I'd probably change my vote to either weak delete or weak keep, but it would definitely depend on the article. RemoWilliams (talk) 05:55, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

P.S. -- I would definitely vote for a merge of the onion video material if we could find a good home for it. RemoWilliams (talk) 03:21, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

M S Ananth

Can you take a look? I contested PROD on a one line page and expanded. A second pair of eyes might help. cheers -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 04:48, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

IMO, he is probably notable, but I'd ask DGG to be sure as he is far more knowledgeable about academics than I am. In any case I've watch listed it in case it goes to AfD (which is, IMO, unlikely given the work you put in). --ThaddeusB (talk) 05:01, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

I think he passes WP:PROF #3 (elected Fellow Indian National Academy of Engineering) and also #6 as the highest appointed academic at IIT Madras. But I've never done an academic's page and didn't really think this one looked that good (I copied the format from David Eppstein), so was checking on that, and anything that an academic's page should generally have that I might have missed. I'll check with DGG too. Thx -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 05:14, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

You are correct, he definitely passes #6 at minimum, so notability is established. I've never done an academic page either so I'm afraid I can't be of much help in formatting. --ThaddeusB (talk) 05:17, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: Deleting PRODs

Thank you for your message, I have restored the requested articles. Let me know if there are any more. Plastikspork (talk) 16:04, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Keven Stammen

I have started a discussion of this article's merits here. John Kronenwetter (talk) 17:03, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Greenfinger

Hi Thaddeus. Sorry I thought I could solve that Green finger redirect with a prod tag as it didn't really need to go to the bother of an RfD. However I have just changed it to point to green fingers which is the most likely thing people will be seaarching for (even if it is a soft redirect to wiktionary). Could you please change Greenfinger to point to green fingers as well. I cannot do this as it is protected. I have put a request on the talk page and nobody has commented for well over a week now. If you do this can you please keep it protected so that the article cannot return. Polargeo (talk) 21:48, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh well looks like seresin was watching the page and has done the change. No worries, sorry to bother you. Thanks for the backup of my reply to the negative supporters in the JC RfB. Polargeo (talk) 21:56, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Can you take a look?

Santhigiri and Karunakara Guru are up at AfD. I"m sure that the former is notable enough for an article and am cleaning up the page and adding refs. I'm not sure if the latter is notable enough for an article or better for a merge. I found about 109 (up from this morning) newspieces for the former and 44 for the latter using vanilla gnews search. Not all are significant, many are trivial, but I've found enough to support notability for the Ashram. cheers. -SpacemanSpiff^{Calvin‡Hobbes} 03:38, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict) If anything the guru is more notable than the organization. He died 10 years ago and India's daily newspapers are still covering him today. The Indian gov't recently named a building after him and more. (See my !vote on the AfD). Both are WAY more notable than most topics that pass AfD here and to delete either of them would be woeful western bias. Google news archives for India appear to only go back to ~2000 and English isn't the primary language of India so there is certainly coverage in Hindu, Tamil, and possibly other languages as well (not to mention coverage during the guru's 70 year life & the organizations 40 year history) --ThaddeusB (talk) 04:21, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I didn't go through his Gnews as well as I did the Ashram's. Glad I asked you :) cheers -SpacemanSpiff^{Calvin‡Hobbes} 04:17, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

• I rewrote Santhigiri, changing it to an article about the ashram, from the ashram's philosophy. I've referenced all content except the vision/philosophy. Can you take a look and let me know if this is an ok article for interested people to work off of now? A fresh pair of eyes would help. Also, can you check for sources for Kalakkad S Ramanarayana Iyer? I've tried, I also checked with Phil Bridger, but neither of us have been able to come up with anything to deprod; I've heard of and heard him growing up, so I kinda know that he's notable, but I can't find anything to show that he is. cheers -SpacemanSpiff^{Calvin‡Hobbes} 07:10, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

From the few brief mentions I could find, he does appear to be notable, but there just aren't any sources available online to write a biography from. The only things I found that could possibly save the article are two awards which may or may not be notable achievements:

• http://www.musicacademymadras.in/musicians_musicologists.php
• http://books.google.com/books?id=5wgFAQAAIAAJ&q=Kalakkad+Ramanarayana&dq=Kalakkad+Ramanarayana

If either of those awards are notable, it would be possible to justify keeping the article as a stub until more sources surface. However, what you really need is access to contemporary newspaper accounts/magazine articles about him, which simply aren't available online. You might be able to find some of India's larger newspapers on microfilm at a large public library. If you can figure out his Hindi/Malayalam/Bengali name, a search for that might also yield some new sources. --ThaddeusB (talk) 17:46, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

The TTK awards/Music academy awards are pretty discriminatory and strict, but it's not a "high profile" award; everyone in Madras knows that only the best would really get it, but I don't think it's every been documented. He also received a Kalaimamani award (I couldn't find RS references for it) from the Govt of Tamil Nadu; this award used to be very discriminatory before, but in the early 2000s, a couple of years, about 100+ people were awarded it as part of a political gimmick. Bridger was saying that even if that's the case, it should at least count as notable as WP:PORNBIO awards! I can't for the life of me, find a single news reference for the award, although here's a trivial mention where they use the title. His Tamil name would be காளக்காடு ராமநாராயண அய்யர் or காலக்காடு ராமநாராயண அய்யர். Nothing on those searches either. If it might help you better, general naming structure (until my generation) in Tamilnadu =Place name, father's name, person's name, caste name; which means that Kalakkad S Ramanarayana Iyer = Kalakkad - place, S=father's name initial, Ramanarayana= his name, Iyer=caste. I'll probably use the Kalaimamani as a ref and dePROD, maybe then if it goes to AfD someone else might be able to find something. I can't access film/hard copies of news papers since I now live in CA. cheers. -SpacemanSpiff^{Calvin‡Hobbes} 18:05, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

I knew you were in CA form your profile page, and I did actually mean you might be able to find some info a large public library here. :) The Times of India, for example, is actually held by a number of libraries in California: [7]. Of course I have no idea how far back their archives go. You can look up OCLC #s for specific microform archives here - although it is kind of a pain since every paper has dozens of different archives. The OCLC# might help track down specific archive chunks that you need using Woldcat.org (if you have patience). Note that ICON's own search only contains 5 associated libraries and so would be of no use to you directly for figuring out where to find something. --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:33, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

If by chance you leave near UC Berkley, they appear to have quite a few Microform archives of interest. --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:40, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Ah, ok. Santa Clara county libraries do carry the ToI, so I'll check to see if any have the microfilm archives. Berkeley is a drive away, so I'll probably check it out when I go there next. Indian newspaper trivia: ToI generally has good coverage of northern and western India, The Hindu for southern India, Indian Express/New Indian Express for western and southern India and Telegraph for eastern India. Of course, having grown up reading the Hindu, I prefer it to any other source. cheers. -SpacemanSpiff^{Calvin‡Hobbes} 21:03, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Webcite edit filter

Regarding the webcite linkrot issue, you might request an edit filter (previously known as an "abuse filter") to give users that edit to remove those links a message about the problem and ask them to either update the links or not remove them, or whatever. What do you think?--chaser (talk) 04:00, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

I think it is an excellent suggestion and have made the request --ThaddeusB (talk) 05:08, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

accident with lea salonga's page

hello. i am a very new user and i made a slight accident with lea salonga's page by deleting the picture because i tried putting a newer, better one. what i didn't know was that it wouldn't upload it because i have to have higher wikipedia status, but it would still delete the picture. i was wondering, if you have the right of uploading pictures, because you uploaded her last one, if you could edit the page so that this picture: http://www.pep.ph/images/guide/1a743b089.jpg would be the new picture? if you disagree, then please just change it to the original picture you uploaded in the first place. thank you and i deeply am sorry for this misunderstanding. Pinaypower94 (talk) 11:42, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

I have restore the original picture. Image uploads are currently disabled due to performance problems, but should be reinstated in the next few days. Feel free to upload your picture then. I can't do it myself because I don't know the correct licensing of the picture. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:57, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

List of Ilyushin Il-14 incidents edits

Removal of PROD was done by an IP without consultation with Ospalh and without serious explanation (instruction says clearly: please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page). For me it was kind of vandalism. That editor didn't considered basic fact: this list was copied from a Aviation Safety website. It can be considered as copyright violation and IMHO this list should be removed. You can say that he proposed merging with original article. I was that person who moved it from Ilyushin Il-14 to separate article. Such lists are moved out of articles to keep both clear and readable. Description of my edit was default one, of course it should be better. Regards, Piotr Mikołajski (talk) 17:16, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree that the material is best handled in its current location, but it is not a copy of the website in question. It contains most of the same information but not the same wording, formatting, etc. Facts can't be copyrighted, only the presentation of them, so its not a copyvio.

As to the PROD removal, while an explanation is recommended, none is actually required. furthermore, the IP did provide one - namely that they recommended a merge instead of deletion. Disagreeing with the merge proposal was not a valid reason to restore the PROD. --ThaddeusB (talk) 17:39, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Attack page?

I've got a funny feeling about Prem dattan. It looks like a borderline attack and I'd like to tag as such, even otherwise, at least an A7. The stuff about who he didn't marry or who his sons aren't etc, looks like some practical joke at the least. It's been out there for a month and just prodded, but my funny feeling wants it to leave WP ASAP. -SpacemanSpiff^{Calvin‡Hobbes} 18:58, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I can't tell what the heck the person who made it was trying to do. I'm not sure if it is a vanity page or a hoax or what, but clearly there is no one notable by this name. The "didn't marry..." thing is quite bizarre and the page also states he is a member of the "Democratic party" which as near as I can tell has no distinct meaning in India. I think it could probably be deleted under A7, but I don't think it is an obvious enough hoax for G3 or obvious enough attack page for G10. I would leave the prod in tact just in case the reviewing admin thinks "is a Tamil developer and politician in Tamil Nadu, India" counts as a claim to importance. In any case, the PROD is unlikely to be contested as the page's author has only made 8 live edits - 6 on May 7th and 2 on June 17th. --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:15, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Ok, tagged as A-7 with an elaborate edit summary for the reviewing admin. I've left the PROD in place, just didn't feel like leaving the page out there for too long. It has a few views outside of the edit days, so it's likely a practical joke. -SpacemanSpiff^{Calvin‡Hobbes} 19:27, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Gone already :) --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:58, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

PokerTracker

I have O.K.ed your changes.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 20:51, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I finished up your talk page changes look for the project tags. Also, make sure to update Wikipedia:Good articles/recent.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:59, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I meant to update the WikiProject tags, but I guess it slipped my mind. Thanks. --ThaddeusB (talk) 23:48, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the barnstar. I hate hoaxers most of all. TheJazzDalek (talk) 02:02, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Strongholds of A Song of Ice and Fire - nom for deletion

An article you have contributed to has been nominated for deletion. -- The Red Pen of Doom 17:31, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

contested prod - Chris Mavinga

So how do I get this nominated for a delete, given he fails WP:ATH? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.234.167.78 (talk) 19:39, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Penketh High school basketball team

Can you do a merge of this to Penketh High school? I'm not sure of the merge process, and there appears to be way too much content on this page for me to figure out what's worth merging, especially given that I don't understand the context of high school basketball. I didn't want to just do a blind redirect instead. cheers -SpacemanSpiff^{Calvin‡Hobbes} 02:11, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

 Done - there was very little of actual use there. A merge is simple to properly document:

1. Note where the material is being merged in the edit summary ("merging useful content to Destination")
2. Add {{R from merge}} to the newly redirected page
3. When completing the merge note where it was merged from in the eidt summary ("merging in content from Source")

Splits, however, are a bit more complicated to properly document. --ThaddeusB (talk) 05:36, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Perfect, thx. I once tried to do a merge reading through WP:Merge and still haven't completed it! I'm just surprised that no one has PRODded or AfDed the page yet, so I'll get to it today or tomorrow. -SpacemanSpiff^{Calvin‡Hobbes} 05:43, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Webcite

Proposal: Maybe providers with appearantly stable websites shouldn't be webcite'd for the time being, e.g. the BBC website, nytimes.com, ... which AFAIK widespread used as sources, until the problems are settled. I also see the need to webcite links to geocities.com ASAP since Yahoo announced that they will close it later this year. --Matthiasb (talk) 13:33, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Skipping even the most common sources would have very little effect on the total links waiting to be archived. However, I do agree the geocities.com is very pressing at this point and plan to start on archiving every geocities link very shortly. --ThaddeusB (talk) 02:39, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Karađorđevo

Sorry for edit warning. Also I did not known the rules for spliting the article. As for name, there are more names of Karađorđevo meeting that agreement on the net (I wrote about it onto the article discussion [8]

Okun and Ashdown witnested about Tudjman desire of annexation of the territories of BiH populated with one of the constitutive nations (BiH Croats) and did not say anything about Karađorđevo. Tudjman was also a member of international conference in London where changes and internal structure of BiH border was discused. Mesić and Bilandžić changed theirs statment numerous times. And part about Marković is taken out of Sebian nationalistic site.
"Greater Croatia map" is a sham. And part in the ICTY section shows the accusation part about Herzeg Bosnia. Not sentence, just accusation part. With no link to Karađorđevo.
I did not find were the user Producer found the quote that the "Graz agreement was basicly Karađorđevo part 2". Or where those someone links that to eather Tudjman or Milošević, as it was basicly a peace treaty in the country torn by war. And in the mean time between Karađorđevo and Graz Croats and Serbs were in the very blood war.
So basicly a collection of misinterpretations and unchecked data. If you'd like to help, I'd like to ask you to go through the article part by part and verificate it. Let user producer put his own arguments about any part. And we'll discuss it. In the mean time I don't think that disputed parts should be in the article, or at least that they should be removed when the discussion ends (and we'll need a timeline for that, because it is nobody interest for this to last forever). Proposed discussion:

• Name of the article (I think I've proven my point here)
• Backround (policy of Franjo Tuđman's discussed here are those after this meeting and in the war time. It does not speaks anything about serbian policy (Srebrenica, and everything similar to it) and Croato-Serbian war (wich was looming on the horizont).
• ICTY (false greater Croatia map, indicements, no defense side, no links of Herzeg Bosnia to Karađorđevo, no quotes, is this a personal conclusion?)
• Testimonies-internal: Stjepan Mesić (changed his statments few times), Dušan Bilandžić (also), Ante Marković (qoute from Serbian nationalistic site)
• Testimonies-foreign: Herbert Okun (no link to Karađorđevo, just intension that Serbia and Croatia annex BiH substates, of which borders were discussed in international conference in London to "mother countries"), Paddy Ashdown (no link to Karađorđevo also, just a napkin in which the guy wrote the names himself and wich shows borders similar to Federation-RS division lines).
• Graz agreement (sources for Karađorđevo part to conclusion? Peace treaty and previous battles between Cro and Serb not mentioned?)

Can you help that we can have a fair (and im hoping time limited) discussion ?--Čeha (razgovor) 09:18, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Adminship

Hi, ThaddeusB. I've always seen you around the wiki as a well tempered, mature, and reasonable editor. A few minutes ago, I thought "why isn't he an admin"? You seem like the perfect candidate for the job. And as such, I would like to ask: Would you like to run for RfA? I would be honored to nominate you. (X! · talk)  · @254  ·  05:05, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the consideration. I have been considering self-nominating for a while now, and was actually planning on doing so shortly. As such I will gladly accept the nomination.

I know I do not have a perfect record (I have occasionally been unnecessarily harsh), but I do always try to to keep a cool head. When I have offended someone, I have always apologized. (See: Wikipedia talk:Bots/Requests for approval for the most recent example of what I'm talking about.) I always try to reason with people whenever possible. I doubt there would be many objections based on my temperament.

I have a wide variety of experience and have done a lot of reading on policy. I have a good handle on policy and have applied it to article writing, but I am not primarily an article writer. That is to say, I have worked on a number of articles (and I'd like to think my writing is pretty good), but my primary contributions are in other areas. I know a few people will oppose for this reason, and I am fine with that.

My biggest weakness is that I tend underestimate the amount of time I need to get stuff done and/or over promise. For example, I have been reviewing nearly every expiring PROD for months. I average ~5 dePRODs a day and the majority I say something like "contest prod - subject is notable because ... - will source/cleanup article ASAP." Unfortunately, I can't really fix every article I say that I will within a reasonable time frame. I have done at least some work on ~50%, but in a somewhat random fashion. That means that some I've dePRODed recently are fixed, while others I did months ago remain untouched. (I have tried to do the worst offenders immediately though.) I hope to get somewhat better caught up when I have some time off work. I don't know if this would cause objections or not.

However, I do think my judgment on notability is pretty good, as most of the dePRODs that were sent to AfD have been kept. Obviously, most the things I "save" are fairly marginal so it would presumably require good judgment to pick out the notable ones, while letting the others go.

I am about to head to bed, but if you want to nominate me in spite of my flaws I will accept in the morning. --ThaddeusB (talk) 05:29, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree with X!. Your work on prodded articles is incredible. I would strongly support. Plastikspork (talk) 05:32, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Seconded. I'd be happy to support or even co-nom you. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 05:33, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the words of support guys. I do try hard to do a good job here, and our words of support really mean a lot to me. :) --ThaddeusB (talk) 05:41, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

You have my supprt too. I appreciate the work you do here and the help you have given me. You would make a fine addition to the sysops.Hell In A Bucket (talk) 13:16, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

RFA

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/ThaddeusB

You have been nominated. By me!Hell In A Bucket (talk) 13:28, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Thank you very much, I really appreciate it. Unfortunately, you had a slightly typo in my name. It looks like X! started one last night - Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/ThaddeusB - you are welcome to copy your nomination statement there and be a co-nom. After you have done that you'll probably want to {{csd-g7}} or redirect the typo page.

Julian also expressed interest in co-noming & X! left it unfinished so he could do so. As such, I will wait until he has had a chance to also write a co-nom statement before I accept. --ThaddeusB (talk) 13:42, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

I think X! beat you by a few hours and placed a nomination at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/ThaddeusB. Sorry. You might want to CSD yours. -- Soap ^Talk/_{Contributions} 13:39, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Oops, it's csd tagged.Hell In A Bucket (talk) 13:50, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Given the recent discussion, it's probably best to keep the co-noms to a minimum. A strong support vote is probably just as helpful (my 2 pence). Plastikspork (talk) 15:39, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. I will leave it up to Juliancolton what he wants to do, and will proceed from there after he's had a chance to co-nom or decline to co-nom. It doesn't make any difference to me what he decides, but I certainly want to give him the chance since he expressed interest in doing so. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:46, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. I think a co-nom is fine, but I would just avoid more than one co-nom to avoid accusations of WP:CABAL. Plastikspork (talk) 16:01, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Alright, I've added a co-nomination. X! told me he'll be out most of the day, so feel free to answer the questions and transclude the nomination when you're ready. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 16:27, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

It is open. Let the madness begin: Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/ThaddeusB --ThaddeusB (talk) 16:58, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, unless you go mad within the next couple days, looks like you'll be pushing a shiny new mop by this time next week. Good luck. :) –Juliancolton | ^Talk 05:53, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

FWIW, in the oppose reply to Pedro, you said "I few this", you meant "I view this". tedder (talk) 05:58, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Gauri Malla

Hello!!!

Nice work over this article!! Well done... Best Wishes for your RfA.

Regards!!

Hitro talk 17:36, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Re:The Trashwomen

Hello. Can I just check whether it is appropriate to include the edit history since it was by and large a rewrite after it was (in my view without adequate consensus and not in keeping with the deletion 'rules') deleted at AfD? It was restored to my userspace so that I could use what was there before as a starting point. If yes, then I'll go down the db-g7 route. Thanks.--Michig (talk) 19:58, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Ok. Have requested g7 deletion. Thanks for your diligence.--Michig (talk) 20:24, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Presidential Conscience

Since I directed the film, I thought it would be cool to post it on Wikipedia, but I guess that's not to be. Whenever I got to see HOW I can fix the whole deletion thing, the site has little answers to my questions. If there is any way I can keep Presidential Conscience up on wikipedia, let me know as soon as possible. Thank you for your time.

-Erril13 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Erril13 (talk • contribs) 01:33, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

User:MichaelQSchmidt/sandbox/Black Noon

Orgiginal one-liner gone. Working on new article. All I have been able to confirm is cast and that it has been re-airing on major stations from 1971 through at least 1979. Also found it now released on DVD. Might find DVD reviews. Still digging. MichaelQSchmidt (talk) 02:51, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Funny business

Can you take a look at Balivada Kantha Rao and Kondal Rao Munagala. Someone has moved a page from one to the other and then back, and now both pages exist, but the correct one Kantha Rao doesn't have the correct history, while the fake one has the entire history. Do you know what to do in this case? And of course, in the meanwhile, the two pages have grown independently too, thereby getting on new history. Is it possible to transfer only a certain portion of the history, or is it possible to move the second page to a similar name and delete the redirect, and then merge the secondb with the first? Or is it ok to just delete the second page? -SpacemanSpiff^{Calvin‡Hobbes} 05:53, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

It appears that this edit was a copy and paste move from here, so the history is definitely broken. As near as I can tell they grew independently after that point. It is hard to spot problem edits, though, since the older versions don't show show file size.

A history can be selectively merged (by an admin), but we need to figure out what needs saved and what just needs deleted. The Kondal article has the oldest history, which needs saved. However, the Balivanda article has more information. Complicating matter further, you say Kondal is the more correct title 9and I have no reason to doubt you). So I guess there are a two questions that need answered:

1. Is there anything currently in Kondal that isn't covered in Balivanda?
2. Are there any edits other than the initial one named above where info was copied & pasted from one article to the other?

Let me know, ThaddeusB (talk) 18:58, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

My reading of this was a bit different. Balivada Kantha Rao existed initially, and with this was moved to Kondal Rao Munagala, then with this someone restored the original content back on to the original page. It looks to be that this guy Kondal Rao was too lazy, wanted to make a name for himself as a poet and decided to use the page of a Sahitya Akademi Award winner as a template, but instead moved the entire page. I don't know how these kind of people ever find Wikipedia, and I'm not too happy they do! But either ways, the Balivada guy is notable, the Kondal guy isn't, but the original history of the page is in the Kondal article. I don't mind just deleting both, and then I can create a new one page for Balivada if that'll make matters easier. It'll be a stub with worldcat info, but the Sahitya award is available via ref from The Hindu. cheers -SpacemanSpiff^{Calvin‡Hobbes} 19:32, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Yah the article was moved around a few times - but the history is also moved when done properly. The edit that broke the proper attribution chain was a copy and past move of the content originally at Balivada back to Balivada if that makes sense. If there is nothing of value at Kondal Rao it can be fixed just be merging the premove history back to its original location. Obviously, I can't do that myself currently, but it looks like I might gain that ability in 5 days. :) --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:43, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Given that this scam has been around for over two years, another five days should hardly matter. I'll lose my senses if I try to explain this absurdity to one more person! cheers -SpacemanSpiff^{Calvin‡Hobbes} 21:53, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chimp attack

I should like to apologise for my error which you pointed out in this AfD discussion. I made a slip in typing my comment: I knew full well that it was not you that had made the edits I referred to, and did not intend to accuse you of doing so. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:14, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the apology, it is accepted in full. No hard feelings whatsoever. --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:04, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

British Expertise

Thanks for rescuing that article. Let's be frank, it should not have been nominated for deletion anyway. There are countless articles that could be though - Doctor Who episode articles, or minor league footballers (written in unexpurgated glory) DinosaursLoveExistence (talk) 13:28, 24 July 2009 (UTC).

You're welcome. I assume what happened is that the nominator thought "there are no sources, I can find anything searching for a generic phrase like 'British Expertise', and I've never heard of it so its probably not notable." Clearly it is actually notable, but if you get the chance added some sources to the article would improve its quality greatly. --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:03, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

RFA

Hi ThaddeusB. I have added a question in your RFA. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/ThaddeusB&diff=303874711&oldid=303868093.

There are several very controversial articles under Biography of Living Persons as well as in other religious topics. Usually in controversial topics you will see alot of edit-warring and other disputes. I would like to know how you would resolve such issues in controversial articles as an administrator? Radiantenergy (talk) 13:35, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to ask a question. I have answered it as best I could, but feel free to ask a followup if I didn't explain myself as well as you would have liked. --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:42, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Howard House (Seattle)

I will go along with your assessment; I will not send it to AfD. Bearian (talk) 03:33, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

I appreciate that. The less time I spend defended stuff at AfD, the more time I have to make actual improvements to articles. --ThaddeusB (talk) 04:29, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Transwiki

Hi! In light of the recent events I think it might be a good time to make a new project proposal at councils and organise a project which concentrates on trasferring content from other wikipedias but in a may which is much more efficient and can done with no community concerns. If I make a proposal in a day or two can you comment as I feel we both share the same view that it is important to transfer content from other wikipedias but done adequately as part of a project coordination. The ideal is a bot which can run through categories on a different wikipedia and extract any main information from an article and create it on english wikipedia with a reference. I know the community expresses an extreme indifference to automation in regards to content but if programmed correctly bots can do things much more consistently and efficiently than us. The idea is not that the bot writes the articles, the idea is that it draws up missing lists of articles from other wikipedia in the project space, members of a group check them for notability and then the bot is assigned to blue link them in the best possible way without community concerns and which adheres to our policies. The ultimate ideal of cause would be bot which can translate whole articles into English but as we know present, google translate is far from perfect. If it is somehow perfected in the future see google toolbar the new translation thing they have going then I think it would be possible to instantly translate articles but would need to be proof read. But at present I think something which can extracts some basic facts and reference them is most needed. The concern by the community is likely to be about the mass creation of missing articles started without full content and may cause concerns about the amount of work it will take to develop and maintain them. Personally I think arguments against the creation of new content "because they might be vandalised" is an invalid one. There are enough people who use wikipedia honestly to make it work. It might be difficult to programme a bot I don't know but the first phase would be to use a bot to draw up lists of missing articles by wikipedia in the project space. I am thinking maybe a taskforce of the missing encyclopedic articles project. Something like Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/Transwiki/de/Politicians etc etc. We'd need a bot to be able to run off categories on other wikipedias and list them on here in the workspace. So it could generate lists from a diversity of topics and wikipedias such as Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/Transwiki/nl/Writers etc. DO you follow? Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 08:40, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Certainly, that sounds great. Funny thing is that I've been looking for absolutely ages for a decent bot operator who is interested in content and willing to run. Your skills would be greatly needed to cleanup existing articles too. We have a whole set of municipalities of Colombia and Brazil which have just been dumped. As much as it seems I like creating new short stubs a lot of my time is spent cleaning up and refencing articles on districts and municipalities across the world. It took me a weke and half to add 500 references to the Vietnam districts and add infoboxes because nobody would help run a bot!! I believe for new articles there is a minimum requirement. As long as they have a bit of info and are immediately expandable it would be greatly appreciated I'm sure. Righteo then I'll make a proposal Monday and I've spent time trying to salvage several gundred of these stubs. The thing is a vast proportion of them contian the same references to the Bavarian Landtag and German National Library meaning of course the generation of such articles could be done effecitvely with a bot. Very glad to meet you and I hope we keep in good contact. Sorry if I come across badly at ANI and AFD discussions but I'm sure you understand the frustrations.

I certainly do understand the frustration. It is no fun at all to spend hours/days working on something just to have it deleted again. That whole thread was a mess with a lot of people (on both sides) acting poorly. I certainly won't hold anything said there against you (or anyone else). --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:42, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

In regards to a project on this I would propose somethign along the lines of Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/Transwiki. The first task would be to create sections of the new project related to content on the different wikipedia. Then the bot would raid the categories on other wikipedia for various topics and list the articles missing from these categories. The ones that we already have maybe can be moved manually or the bot could by pass them. So eventually we'd have a directory of missing articles organised by each wikipedia and neatly by topic/sub topic so we know exactly what is missing. Inevitably the task is a tremendous one to do so which only a bot could achieve but I am certain that a bot is able to be programmed to copy categories from the other wikipedias and insert them into lists in the project space. Once we have that done or are happy with the missinglists for one topic maybe then the bot can be programmed to start the missing articles, a lot of related categories use similar sources etc so that should make it easier at least. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 20:34, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

That sounds like a perfectly reasonable and is probably the best way to proceed. i will support such efforts fully. --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:46, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Thankyou. Yes the thing was that we've had a great deal of experiemce of evne the stubbiest of articles being expanded like this so it kind of propels me to generate more because I believe they will be expanded. I could almost guarantee that if that editor had come across a red link he would not have started that article. It would satill be sitting as a red link. So while I don't endorse the creation of poorly referenced sub stubs (which is why I want a bot and project) I do think that it is worth creating stubs. Thats what motivates me is the many articles I've created I've seen expanded into real good articles. Even stubs like Xinjiang Medical University has ended up being good! Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 20:46, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Dr. Blofeld, the idea of a place to store machine-translated articles en masse from other Wikipedias away from namespace is a great one, if it can carry across wiki formatting and references. Good plan! It would need willing editors to copy-edit and improve sourcing if necessary, so give me a reminder if and when you've got the project going. We need to pilfer as much as we can from the other Wikipedias. Fences&Windows 00:04, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

apology

I am way to quick to make bad judgments and I feel quite bad about this. I was quite hostile, saying "no way you will get my support." This was a very idiotic thing to say and it really was not necessary to be so kind to me. I did have a legitimate reason but it was so silly of me to oppose based off that. You are truly a great friend for one to have. Good luck to you, Pzrmd (talk) 20:05, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Because I posted a question about it

... on your RfA, relating to your response to a question regarding just this issue. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 03:09, 26 July 2009 (UTC)