User talk:JohnCD

Thanks to all who took part in my RfA, which passed with 77 support, 1 oppose and 1 neutral votes. Special thanks go to JamieS93, Mentifisto and Tikiwont for their kind nomination and support. I am honoured by the trust and confidence that the community has placed in me. I have added myself to category:Wikipedia administrators open to recall, but I hope to wield the mop in such a way that we shall never meet there. -- JohnCD (talk) 22:32, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Messages before 1 Mar 08 are in Archive 1
Messages for March - July 08 are in Archive 2
Messages for August 08 - January 09 are in Archive 3
Messages for February - June 09 are in Archive 4
Messages from June 09 are in Archive 5

October 2009

7 Guys

i will hope that you will stop deleting the 7 guys page that i just created. We are a group at UMASS Dartmouth, that was created to Britten up everyone's days around the school due to a series of negative events. we are no differant than a band, or any other organization that it on this site, i dont understand why ours cant be noted on this site just as other organizations can be noted —Preceding unsigned comment added by Asinkus (talk • contribs) 19:47, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a notice-board or a social-networking site where anyone can write about themselves and their friends and their groups. To have an article, a club or group has to be notable, meaning that they have "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." Not many University clubs qualify, even old and well-established ones; I don't think a newly-formed group of seven students who "all set around eating pizza and watching NASCAR" makes the grade. More details in Notability (organizations and companies). Also, if you are writing about your own group, see the guideline on Conflict of Interest. JohnCD (talk) 20:06, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

I agree, That is A Stupid Idea, Posting A Stupid Notice. Create A Sub-Page in your userpage for that crud! Wikipedia isn't a Forum To Be Screwing Around in! Watch What You Do, Or It'll Bite in the butt later on. --The Demon Of The Wiki Sea, Razgriz 16:10, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Adminship

It looks like you've never had an RfA, which is surprising. Have you considered giving it a go? You have thorough experience, and are very good with communication and judging whether articles should be deleted or improved. Although I'm not totally familiar with your work, I've seen you around many times and I think I'd be willing to nominate. Let me know (reply here is fine). Best, JamieS93 22:24, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind words. I have taken a day to think about it, because I have recently turned down two approaches (1, 2) but they made me consider further. The problem I see is that, looking at the requirements in WP:GRFA, I fail the very first one: "Strong edit history with plenty of material contributions to Wikipedia articles." I have never been much interested in article writing, I think my total of articles actually started amounts to two stubs and even when I have improved something like a wrongly-flagged hoax or deletion candidate I have seldom gone beyond the "acceptably sourced stub" stage. I read with interest in this RfA Newyorkbrad's eloquent plea that if you trust someone with the tools you should be able to trust him not to use them where he doesn't have expertise; but the RfA still failed convincingly, and my feeling is that the RfA community still regards article writing experience as essential, and that a candidate who can't point to DYKs and GAs will fail. So my response is: cautious interest, but in the light of the above do you think I have a chance? JohnCD (talk) 23:00, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Hello John. Of course you have a chance. In my opinion you are one of our best new page patrollers and I highly value your clear and straightforward comments also at AfD. It would be absolutely beneficial for Wikipedia. You have my full support. --Vejvančický (talk) 09:59, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm glad that you've taken some time to think about it. I've already given that issue some thought, too, but IMO it's not a roadblock. I tend to hang around WP:RFA; article-writing is something that the community would like to see, but from my experience, it's not a deal-breaker. A few WikiGnomes who share your same sentiment of "not much of a new-content contributor" have been promoted lately. As long as the candidate is otherwise very keen on experience in particular areas (such as you are with NPP/deletion), RfA participants don't seem to mind it much. This is evident in some of the recent successful RfAs, e.g: 1, 2, 3. In my opinion, you have a strong chance of succeeding. Most RfAs get a couple of opposes, and you'll probably have a few users concerned with the lack of article writing or a few little concerns. But people tend to really appreciate candidates who patrol NewPages with a careful eye; replacing an attack page "G3" with G10, or adding sources to an article that was tagged as a hoax or A7. You're also great with communication. For those reasons, you're a strong candidate for adminship, and I'm confident that you would pass.

And as far as I know, there's no problems in your contribs, either. But if you decide to run, don't be surprised if you receive a few opposes/neutrals for random issues, which is common at RFA. I'm not gonna push the RFA idea on you; but do keep considering it. :) Best, JamieS93 13:53, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I will now take several days, probably a week, to think more about it, look at some past RfAs and decide what my case would be and whether I want to run. I will come back to you. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 14:44, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi again! I'm very glad to hear that. :) I'll create the RfA page on Sunday or so, and the co-noms can add themselves (no more than ~3 noms in total is good). From there you can answer the questions, and then accept the nomination on Monday or whenever you're ready to take the plunge. JamieS93 22:43, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

I've started the page. No rush, answer the questions whenever you have time (one or two co-nominations are welcome). I might tweak the nom statement, but the essence of it is there. Regards, JamieS93 15:53, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I will ask Mentifisto and Tikiwont whether they would like to co-nom. If you would like another example of finding potential in unpromising new articles, there is Tinkus Wistus which I found as six lines of unreferenced Spanish and rescued from an (erroneous) db-a2 tag. I will probably transclude some time tomorrow; I want to make my user page a little less austere first. JohnCD (talk) 22:23, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

FWIW, I would have liked to nominate you as well, I think you'd make a good admin. Don't worry about the article writing, I never wrote a single real article before my RFA and I still only had a few opposes because of that. By saving articles from SD and fixing stuff you have demonstrated imho that you know the value of content writing even if it's not your chosen field on Wikipedia. So good luck with your RFA :-) Regards SoWhy 13:37, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. Your hint here also helped to encourage me. JohnCD (talk) 15:02, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Hint? What hint? I have never seen no hint! SoWhy 15:11, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I've added a co-nomination. Feel free to do a have a look and point out anything misleading or unhelpful. Otherwise good luck.--Tikiwont (talk) 14:12, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

...and mine too. I'm sure you'll do well. :-) -- Mentifisto 18:37, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks folks. @ SoWhy: would it be fair enough if you just left a tl;dr support as a substitute for co-nomination? ;-) Nobody reads that blather at the top of the page, anyway... JamieS93 18:48, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Ah, don't you worry, I'm just as happy to support instead (although I would have loved to add John as a member to SWAT ;-)) Regards SoWhy 19:03, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

• I have transcluded: please (a) check that I have done it right (b) add the edit stats on the talk page - I haven't worked out how to do that. Thank you all again. JohnCD (talk) 19:45, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

• Everything looks good. I've posted your editing stats to the talkpage (either the nominator or some outsider adds those to the talkpage, usually). Best of luck, hope everything runs well. :) My quick advice would be, don't reply to opposers much unless you're clarifying something for their sake, and give the optional Qs some thought before answering them. Regards, JamieS93 20:10, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

• Thanks - excellent advice. JohnCD (talk) 22:38, 9

November 2009 (UTC)

November 2009

New Wave (album)

I have deleted the page just to make another one New Wave (The Auteurs album), to avoid ambiguities. I think it's quite better, the page New Wave (album) I've blanked can be deleted.

• Your message crossed with mine. A page shouldn't be deleted in these circumstance, because that loses the edit history of all the previous contributions. Better to edit it to improve it and, if you want to change the title, use the "move" button at the top. I have made the old page into a redirect to the new one. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 14:38, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

delete tag

dear John, I'm a professional concert player (xavier diaz-latorre). I've received a delete tag. A lot of my collegueas (like Jordi Savall or others) are in the wiki. My question is: why may I not be there? Thanks xavier —Preceding unsigned comment added by Laberintosingeniosos (talk • contribs) 21:01, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

• (answered on his talk page) JohnCD (talk) 21:50, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

deletion article

Dear John, thank you for your explanations. Anyway, I consider, comparing my article to other colleagues which are already in wiki, that is correct enough. I can change the subjective areas, but I find other subjecitve areas in other biographies. The question is, that I'm member of Hesperion XXI (one of the most important early music group for spanish music in the world) which is leaded by Jordi Savall (in the wiki). I'm in the group since 1997. I was pupil of Hopkinson Smith (also in the wiki) and I'm professor myself in Esmuc (also in wiki) the University for music in Barcelona. I'm just mentioning a couple of my colleagues (the important ones), but there is a lot more which are not more releveant than myself. All those things are easily to find on the net. How should I give references? thank you Greetings

xavier∼∼∼∼ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Laberintosingeniosos (talk • contribs) 15:10, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Quote

That is a great quote. Joe Chill (talk) 19:29, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Pues

Hi John,

"Pues" is the past participle of the French verb "pouvoir" when the subject is feminine plural. I do not believe that redirecting Pues to the section of French conjugation about the verb it refers to contradicts Wikipedia's guideline stating that the project is not a dictionary, however I will gladly discuss the matter with you further if you disagree.

Neelix (talk) 14:33, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

• I'll think about it, and decide whether I want to raise a serious objection. One issue is - if you start down that track, where do you stop? Do we have articles/redirects for every French irregular verb form? And what about other languages - shouldn't we disambiguate Spanish pues? Even if an English-language encyclopedia should have these entries, they seem to me Wiktionary material, articles about words rather than about the things those words denote. JohnCD (talk) 14:51, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi John,

I understand what you're saying. I would not want to see disambiguation pages with entries which are simply verb forms in other languages. What do you think of turning the current internal redirects into soft redirects to Wiktionary?

Neelix (talk) 15:26, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Century of humiliation

G'day John, you may find this page relevant to your activities as a new page patroller. Cheers, ~ Riana ⁂ 03:38, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Ha! You did a brilliant job of deception - I was aware of the experiment and interested in it, but I never for a moment suspected that your article was part of it. I will comment on the relevant page. JohnCD (talk) 11:03, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Lowther Hills page

I have put up a page called Lowther Hills and it seems to work fine in many respects. However when I sent a link to a friend it would not open the page and if you put "Lowther Hills Wikipedia" into Google, Google can't find the page - so there would seem to be something weird going on. Can you help please? Scothill (talk) 22:22, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

I have just put "Lowther Hills Wikipedia" into Google and your page came up top. The link to send your friend is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lowther_Hills - that also works for me. Not sure why you are having problems? Regards, JohnCD (talk) 22:28, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi John sorry about that must be getting neurotic in my auld age - thanks again Scothill (talk) 06:38, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

GAcopyPaste

Thanks for that move - Guess I was a little brain dead. I've updated my links. --Teancum (talk) 19:39, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for saying hello, I will try and follow your advice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Organismluvva (talk • contribs) 14:49, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Google Scholar

I'm sorry, but I would not consider this a good academic guide. If I was studying at a good university and came up with that, I would be laughed at (rightly). Same goes for wikipedia, sadly. Surely the best guide would be to get hold of a lichen expert and ask them. The fact that the article author was a new editor "MacTroll" was hardly a point in their favour.--MacRusgail (talk) 13:46, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Given that the immediate problem is: here we have a new article, from a user with no track record and a dodgy username, that says "Andreaea regularis is a species of antarctic moss"; we very reasonably suspect a hoax; is it one? - a Google Scholar search, which turns up several papers about an antarctic moss of that name, is a good quick way to settle it. Granted the article is a very basic stub and might need a lichen expert to expand it, but at least we now know that it shouldn't be deleted. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 20:36, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Apologies, my last message came over a bit personal, which was not the intention. However, I am extremely sceptical about the use of online resources. Not only are they somewhat patchy (as I found with research for a talk I gave earlier this year), but they can be somewhat misleading. A lot of the best academic material online is "locked up" in subscriber sites as well, unfortunately. I also prefer to give "hard" references, because websites tend to have a very short shelf life, and many of them expire within a few years. Doubtless the ones in question here won't be around in ten, fifteen years time.--MacRusgail (talk) 15:21, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

New College Glasgow Article

John, Thanks for your extremely swift and welcome editing of my article. I am new to this and I have to say your changes make it read much better.

--86.165.63.206 (talk) 20:13, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

New College Glasgow Article

I'm just showing how much of a newbie I am. I tried to sign without being logged in. thanks again for you improvements to my article.

--Wastededucation (talk) 20:16, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

• (answered on his talk page) JohnCD (talk) 20:31, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

WJ Souza

Good idea, the article incubator was a useful creation :) Thanks for moving it!-- fetchcomms☛ 23:18, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Persistent subtle vandalism

Hello John, You are on my watch list from long ago, and I know you to regularly counter vandalism. User 82.23.187.195[1] appears to make frequent subtle unsourced changes to data, height, birth date, etc. Are you in a position to do anything about him? or what should I do? regards Autodidactyl (talk) 18:25, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

• That's a nasty one. I see another user has just warned him about needing sources. It will be a tedious job to go back through his edits and see whether there is any reliable source for the figures he has changed; if enough of them are demonstrably false, IMO that would be grounds for reverting everything he has done and issuing a strong warning so that he can be blocked if he persists. The steady pattern of the edits suggests this is a static IP. I shall not have time to do that for a day or two - if you have time, you could do some checking and keep a list of the results. I'll also do some when I have time and check back with you. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 18:56, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

His edits are consistently clever, a combination of a good change with (often) a small piece of embedded subtle vandalism. All the way back, so many. Regards. Autodidactyl (talk) 07:51, 18 November 2009 (UTC) (PS, this was serendipity, not just an induction test for new admins :) )

You are now an admin

I'm pleased to inform you that I have closed your RFA as successful, and that you are now an administrator. The community has seen it fit to entrust you with the tools, and I hope that you will use them according to this trust and to your own potential. If you'd like to test your mop out, you can head to New Admin School. Should you have any questions, do not hesitate to ask me or a fellow administrator. Cheers, bibliomaniac15 22:36, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

• Thank you very much: I will be over to New Admin School first thing tomorrow! JohnCD (talk) 22:38, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

• Congrats! I'm not the youngest anymore! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 22:55, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

• My genuine congratulations, John. I knew you'd pass well, but I didn't quite guess it would go this well! Let me know if you have questions, and enjoy the new mop! \o/ JamieS93 23:18, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

• Whatever I expected, it certainly wasn't 77-1-1 ! Thanks again for your encouragement and nomination: expect me knocking on your door for advice which end to hold the mop. JohnCD (talk) 23:53, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Gratz, and thanks for your great CSD work. - Dank (push to talk) 23:51, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Yep, I knew it. :-P -- Mentifisto 00:06, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Not surprised that you got the mop but I'm really glad to see it go through! I'm not even surprised that it was almost unanimous. -- Atama頭 01:22, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Silly me, I forgot your shirt. SoWhy 10:44, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Atama - see you in New Admin School soon where, as your senior by four days, I shall be in a position to tell you off for running in the corridors or shouting. JohnCD (talk) 11:09, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Eek, don't jinx me! But I hope to see you there, thanks. :) -- Atama頭 17:18, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I can only echo those comments above. Congratulations, I am sure you will do fine If you need any help, you can ask me at any time as well. Regards SoWhy 10:37, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, and thanks also for WP:10CSD and WP:A7M which I constantly recommend to inexperienced NPP-ers - just been doing that again. JohnCD (talk) 11:34, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Ahh, you are too kind. I'll recommend it to Amalthea that he makes an honory member of SWAT? Regards SoWhy 12:03, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

ROFL!!!!!!! "I'm An Admin and All i Get is An Crappy T-Shirt?" That is Very Funny! --The Demon Of The Wiki Sea, Razgriz 16:12, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Restore my article

There was nothing attacking in that article, i was making it about my friend and he was watching me do it. Please restore it, i am just going to rewrite it if you dont. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevind1234 (talk • contribs) 17:09, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

• (replied on his talk page) JohnCD (talk) 17:27, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Nyctohylophobia

Just in case you're not actually looking, I've put a reference on the page you want to delete, and some comments on my talk page. Well done on becoming an admin, by the way. --06SmithG (talk) 17:12, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

• Replied on his talk page. Summary: The Book of Uselss Information is not a convincing RS, and the article is still a dic-def; I doubt there's anything substantial to say about the phobia as opposed to the word; but he has a week, and is allowed to dePROD. JohnCD (talk) 18:00, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

First day with the mop - haven't managed to please everyone

You dnt know anything man, except deleting and deleting , You even dnt know the the meaning of volunteer. I if are so much frustrated delete all the pages related o any company , and then I will believe that You are really doing your job. Else F... U —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.164.133.132 (talk) 10:57, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

• first dissatisfied customer, and I don't even know what article he means. JohnCD (talk) 22:37, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

194.242.148.91 and Nunthorpe School

Hi John, congratulations on your recent adminship and thanks for your swift action on this user and Nunthorpe School. I remain slightly concerned that the potentially-libellous comments remain in the page history; however I am not even sure that I am right to be concerned, and I don't think this issue was addressed before the report was removed automatically from AIV. Do you think there is still a problem here, or is it too trivial to worry about? I feel as if I've exhausted what I can do over this and should now leave it to others to follow up, or not. Please feel free to tell me to shut up if I'm talking nonsense. Cheers, DBaK (talk) 12:18, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

No, you're not talking nonsense at all; you have sent me back to re-read WP:Oversight. I knew that was only for use in extreme cases, but looking at the list in the "Policy" section, a new item 5. "Vandalism" seems to me to cover this, and I will request suppression of those edits and see what they say. Thanks for raising it. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 12:33, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Brilliant, thanks very much for your help. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 12:44, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Oversight replied "Done. Thanks for bringing this to our attention!" If you look at the page history, you'll see those edits are now inaccessible. Thanks again for raising it. JohnCD (talk) 14:57, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Wow, that's really excellent - many thanks. I was worried I was being a bit of a hysteric on someone else's behalf, but I know I wouldn't have liked it if it were me, my kids etc - so, thank you very much for taking it forward and getting it sorted out so satisfactorily. Best wishes, DBaK (talk) 15:42, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

AIV and User:Alex_george2001

Thanks for your message, John. At first I was hesitant as well, i.e. I only issued User:Alex_george2001 a simple level 2 message that his article did not satisfy Wikipedia standards, but then I noticed that this editor had actually been warned before by antiuser, together with the second speedy deletion notice on his talk page and so I turned my warning to a "final". That and the fact that all these notices AND your explanation right below my warning did not seem to work, made me report Alex_george2001. Let's hope that he now takes some time to wait until his band has gained credits and notability. Cheers, De728631 (talk) 21:55, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Paul-André Fortier

Very well; I understand. It was a copy-vio and I tagged it accordingly now.-- fetchcomms☛ 22:13, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Np, I figured as much.-- fetchcomms☛ 22:14, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

User:Tröte

Hi John, you have blocked this vandalism account, that used my name from german wikipedia. I'm sysop at german wikipedia (see de:Benutzer:Tröte and User:Troete is my account here. Would you please delete the userpage and the usertalk of the vandal User:Tröte, that links on my german account? I think, this vandal is just a revenge of someone I blocked on german wikipedia. Thank you very much. Greetings, --Troete (talk) 11:37, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

 Done Regards, JohnCD (talk) 11:55, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Deletion discussion

Good Morning John! I recently posted my bio http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaughan_lazar and was immediately deleted for reasons of "Copyright Infringement". I am Vaughan Lazar, and I am also the founder, owner et al for Pizza Fusion which hold the trademarks and rights to the source. What additional information would you like from me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.68.183.221 (talk) 12:34, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

I will reply on your talk page at User talk:Vaughanz, but it will be a few hours before I have time. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 12:57, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Edwin Raja

So what should I do? Should I only remove the link of edwinraja.com? Cause I don't need that as well, it's already on Google's #1 for Edwin Raja. Or I couldn't submit that article though? I'm new and really confuse here, too many links, sorry.

Owh by the way John, I recently register here because I want to put information about my self. If it's restricted, you can safely delete my account, no problem. Thanks anyway —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iwingmusic (talk • contribs) 23:34, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

How Do I Retire

Hi I was just wondering how to retire my account at Wikipedia. Nothing against the website or any thing. I just do not like being a member. Sorry if I offended you and the website it is a great place. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zalar (talk • contribs) 01:06, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

• There isn't really a way to retire; user accounts don't get deleted. If you no longer want to contribute, just walk away and stop using your account. Then you have the option to come back if you ever want to; but if you don't, no problem. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 09:44, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Well?!!!

Well John, you're very fast on deletion but not fast enough on answering questions! You didn't answer my questions. You think we're nothing right? You think we only want to drive traffic to our self right? Because sort of sites did answer like you on certain problem. "You need Faceboook not Wiki", "You need Bebo not Wiki", "Wiki is not for you", "You blablabla", "Wiki blablabla". So why don't you recruit workers to do anything you want instead of offering anyone to register with all good words of benefits? You're not informative as an admin. You only tell sort of words with large of links. Maybe you should give us example of writing not just theoretical words. Am I wrong? Look, I just got lost here, no heart feeling. And I just say what I think it's right. Sorry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iwingmusic (talk • contribs) 11:02, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Everyone here is a volunteer, and has other things to do, like sleep: your first message above was at 23:34 my time, and I had gone to bed. You say there that you registered "because I want to put information about my self"; but that is not what Wikipedia is for - it is a collaborative project to build an encyclopedia, and although anyone can edit there are rules about what subjects are suitable. As I explained on your talk page, subjects for articles have to be notable, and people are discouraged from writing articles about themselves. I didn't mention Facebook or Bebo, but those are examples of the sort of site where you can post information about yourself. I'm sorry if a lot of my advice consists of links to Wikipedia guidelines, but so many new articles come in - more than one a minute - that there is not time to write everything out in full each time. Read some of the advice in the Welcome paragraph on your talk page, to learn more about Wikipedia. If you want to stay and be a contributor, you could put some information about yourself on your user-page. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 17:32, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Ok thank you very much John. You're kind. You didn't mention Facebook or Bebo in my talkpage, I read it in some answers to users. It's up to you to say like that but consider that user could write here with a non standard or confusing tags, don't they know about those sites? Do you have to explain about those sites to them? Lol!. By the way yes my message was 23:34 but it was on 20 November 2009, and you answered Zalar on 21 November 2009, would like to say sorry? lol! Hope success be with you John. Regard. IwingMusic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iwingmusic (talk • contribs) 11:02, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

You are perhaps right that we could do more to explain to new users what Wikipedia is for and what it is not for before they write an article; we are keen for everyone to start to contribute, but then they are disappointed when it turns out their articles are not suitable. And yes, you are right, I did not reply to you as soon as I could on the 21st; I started, but then I got distracted by other business. My apologies. Best wishes, JohnCD (talk) 15:42, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

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

I'm satisfied with your answer now John. I'm sorry, I'll try to learn more next time I want to write again. I have putted four "tilde" characters and it worked, lol! Regards. Iwingmusic (talk) 16:13, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Question

You have moved the article Hakeem sulaimon to the user page of the article creator. The article he created was obviously about himself. Should autobiographies of unremarkable persons as a rule be moved to the editor's user page rather than be deleted? Amsaim (talk) 21:13, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

• Yes - see WP:Userfication#Main user page userfication. It's not mandatory, but as long the autobio is reasonably straightforward and suitable for a user page - not wildly promotional or too much of a detailed CV - it is a rather less WP:BITEy way of dealing with a non-notable new user than just zapping it and telling him he's NN. There is a template {{Nn-userfy}} you can put on the author's talk page, but I don't much like it and have developed a form of words of my own, which you can see on his talk page. Mind you, nearly all these people have only come here to write about themselves: I keep a list of ones I have userfied like this, and I once checked back over the last 50, and just 3 had many any further edits that were not about themselves. I still think it's worthwhile in suitable cases. If you do it, remember to put {{db-r2}} on the redirect that gets left behind. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 21:26, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the info. Amsaim (talk) 21:29, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Help... vandal on the loose.

Help! Can you block 202.70.50.180 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)? He's been vandalizing pages by inserting some misinformation into articles. Please respond ASAP. Sorry if I have to disturb you. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 09:34, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

•  Done - 31 hours, as this IP has no previous blocks. Report to AIV again if it resumes. JohnCD (talk) 09:40, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for catching the guy. He has been troubling me as well as other users for almost two years now because he is using the same MO that I mentioned. And he almost always evades any block because he uses different addresses in different ranges. And he always ignores any warnings and messages sent to him. Here are the following addresses he had used from the 202.70.50.* range (particularly 202.70.50.0/24) alone:

• 202.70.50.23 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 202.70.50.88 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 202.70.50.181 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 202.70.50.169 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) - This was used yesterday.

Could you do a soft rangeblock on the 202.70.50.0/24? Thanks. BTW, if you want, I can list the other address he had used to see how extensive his vandalism and evasion has come.- 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 09:51, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

I don't think a short-term range block would do much good - he seems to use one IP for a day and then another a few days later; and long-term range blocks are discouraged. As you will see at the top of this page, I am a very new admin; I will ask a second opinion from Black Kite, who I see blocked one of these yesterday. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 10:06, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, I asked him about what I've said, but he didn't respond. I don't know why. But thanks; I'll try to take this matter somewhere else. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 10:09, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

He didn't respond because he was asleep - he's on UTC time :) Looking at the contributions from that range, there are very few useful recent contributions - they almost all come from the vandal, and so I have softblocked the range, account creation enabled, for 3 months. Black Kite 10:52, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Anyway, I've also filed a report on WP:AN/I on what to the vandal has done, as well as some links to archives on previous reports on him, either by me or by NeoChaosX to show how far back his vandalism had troubled people. You can give your input there. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 11:17, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

De-tagging of Phiale of Megara

Hi, just for clarification and to avoid misunderstanding: When you de-speedied Phiale of Megara, I take it your remark that the quoted text was legitimate fair use was referring only to the latest version of the article, with only the brief quotation in the footnote? If that's what you meant, I have no quarrel with it. I don't know if you noticed, my original tagging was about an earlier version, prior to cleanup/stubbing-down, when there was much more copied material and a lack of proper attribution. If your remark about fair use was meant to refer to that, then indeed I'd find it quite problematic. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:15, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

• Yes, my remark was indeed about the current version. I was going to send you a message explaining my de-tagging, but then I realised from the history that the version you tagged was a real copyvio and that it was only Cunard's stubbing that had made the article acceptable. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 14:33, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Okay, thanks for clarifying. I've now got hold of the full original paper by O'Neil and I'm going to expand and correct the article on that basis, so all will be good. Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:51, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Taakatism

Sorry to question an admin's decisions, but putting this in the article incubator is rather a waste of time. The "religion" is patently made up; you don't need to go any further than this. Ironholds (talk) 15:05, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, just saw your talkpage message. Ignore me! :). Ironholds (talk) 15:06, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

About deleting my article

I made the article "Peter Ezewuiro" because he is a proffesional gamer that I know through a site called Allisbrawl.com . When I saw that proffesional gamers like Ken Hoang had a article here, I thought, Hey, why don't I make Peter a article here! Can you please let me make the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Axis1036 (talk • contribs) 21:51, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

• (answered on his talk page) JohnCD (talk) 22:29, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Watch these videos for proof

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r2XGUawI_f0

and

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTJzlKHxA78

Those videos are the closest to how he plays those games right now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Axis1036 (talk • contribs) 22:33, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

• What are those supposed to prove? Youtube is not a reliable source, but anyway, what have computer-game clips called "Street Fighter 3-Akuma(peze1999) vs Ryu(Kareem)" and "Peter (Falco) vs (Luigi) Lee" got to do with proving that someone called Peter Ezewuiro is notable enough to have an article in Wikipedia? JohnCD (talk) 22:40, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Leopard flying Leopard

Hi there, and thanks for blocking Leopard flying Leopard, but could you also please move Hello flying Hello back to Hello, I don't seem to be able to, I'm guessing because I'm not an admin. Best, - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 10:04, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

•  Done Regards, JohnCD (talk) 10:07, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

??

You deleted my page about the band Telacasters. I feel there was no reason for this. I'd like to hear an explanation. I put a lot of time into that page and now its gone without warning. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Justinbivona (talk • contribs) 01:23, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

I am sorry you put a lot of work into the article, but it didn't go without warning - it was not deleted until 23 November, but it was first tagged for speedy deletion at 06:57 on 20 November, and a warning notice placed on your talk page at the same time which explained the reason: that it didn't meet Wikipedia's requirements for what a band needs to have achieved to have an article, explained at Notability (music), in particular the section Criteria for musicians and ensembles. JohnCD (talk) 11:39, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

It was marked for speedy deletion a minute after the article was first was created, and there was no information on the band yet. I went on to finish and complete the article and it met Wikipedia's requirements. I feel the article was wrongfully removed. Could you please undo your deletion? Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Justinbivona (talk • contribs) 20:30, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

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

Exocious

Hello John I see your point, I just need some time to re-create my article .... thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Edoizzi (talk • contribs) 17:21, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

The article has now been nominated under the Articles for Deletion procedure, which normally takes seven days during which you can continue to work on it: but before you put much effort into it, please read again the guidelines I linked from the article talk page, and also that on Verifiability which requires confirmation from an independent reliable source: "If no reliable, third-party sources can be found for an article topic, Wikipedia should not have an article on it." JohnCD (talk) 17:57, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Engine (boogie-rock band) related articles

Hi, there are some articles related to the Engine (boogie-rock band) article you recently incubated per the AFD discussion. I was wondering if instead of prodding or AFDing these related articles, maybe it would be better to move them to sub-pages of the incubated article at Wikipedia:Article Incubator/Engine (boogie-rock band)? The articles in question are Well Oiled (album), Autowreck (album), Live At Kent 1988, and Engine - Live As Yer Like (Video). I can't see any of them surviving prod/AFD, but they might be worth keeping around while the incubation work is on-going. --Muchness (talk) 18:38, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Jubing_Kristianto

Hi John, it's me again. Hope you well. I wonder if you control wiki for Indonesia too. I accidentally found article about my kind friend here. How would tell about that? Regards. Iwingmusic (talk) 21:09, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Wow! I just saw that so many articles from Indonesia that doesn't meet the criteria of wiki. Who controls this? I confuse, again... Regards. Iwingmusic (talk) 21:32, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Each Wikipedia is independent and has its own rules and standards. I don't know anything about Wikipedia bahasa Indonesia, you would have to find someone there to ask - probably they have something like our WP:Help desk.

You don't need to put a "talkback" tag here when you leave me a message - it is used to tell someone there is a message for him on another page - I shall now put one on your talk page to tell you there is a message for you here. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 21:45, 24 November 2009 (UTC)