User talk:Arbitrarily0

Thanks

.. For pointing out and then helping me fix my slight whoopsy ( 'run away' would've been the usual response ) :) Thank you for joining the Wikipedia:Help Project, - you asked if there was anything you could help with ... my main task at the moment is finding all the help pages and tagging them with the banner - I see a section on your user page ( great style by the way) which must've been designed for me! Would the bot be suitable for this task and how easy is it to set up ? I'm hoping the project will provide a place to meet / home for all those kind editors in the various areas of the help system - I keep encountering all sorts of isolated groups, and some gnomes. The tagging is already starting to draw editors in (as you have just found!), but once the tagging is done we can get our bearings and then the fun can really begin :) L∴V 00:12, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Alright, I'll take a look at it as soon as I get a chance. Standby :) Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 13:39, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Well, it looks like AutoWikiBrowser (the client that the bot runs through) is currently not functioning with media wiki. As soon as it is up and running again, I'll start the automated tagging - hopefully it won't take too long for the new version to work. Sorry for the delay, I'll let you know when it's ready :( Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 13:35, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

It wasn't me - I didn't touch merely hinted at its existence! That's great - does that mean it is doable? There were over 300 pages and it would be a great relief to not have to do them all fully manually! Although the tagging process has been useful in getting a feel for the network of pages, I can get that grasp from a second pass though - double checking categories etc. ... cheers L∴V 19:17, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Really? You were on of my top suspects! Anyways, yes, I think it's very doable, but I'll know more once AWB is up and running again :) Cheers, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 02:16, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

I see the AWB is up again, I've lost track of where we were - what's the next step? Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 18:20, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for reminding me, I'll get right to it! Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 21:13, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

I'll get to it tomorrow, I promise! So sorry for the delay, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 01:41, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

No worries - its a favour ... not a duty ! Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 00:09, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Okay, well I finally got around to it - but I'm having trouble getting the bot to tag "Help talk" pages (normally it just tags talk pages). I'll look around though and see if I can find a fix. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 00:46, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Aarg! Sounds tricky - would it be best for me to return to manual tagging? Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 22:41, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I think so :-( I don't know how you were finding them before, but my suggestion would be to use this page - it appears that all of them are listed there. Again, sorry for the all that delay just to find out it wasn't possible. :( Let me know if there's something else I can do, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 22:48, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Never mind - we tried! Thanks for the link I'll add it to the project, I was using Search for all "prefix:Help:" pages as a number of help pages are in wikipedia namespace ! As for something else - I could do with a second opinion on the help project itself. All these banners may attract the quiter help pages editors, but is it inviting and does it provide the right tools for the job . Ok I'm working on scope first in tandem with tagging the banner, along the way I keep getting sidetracked by articles in dire need of attention. I am to get a mini guideline up and a possible help navbox. I hope I haven't inundated the project with too many ideas ! Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 23:27, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Good news - I've wangled it! I'm managing to get AWB tagging so I don't have to do it by hand after all! Ok can't attack the articles from the front, I'm just going in through 'links from page' or various categories, but that's also helping me pick up problem areas in the structure and get a better grok of it at the sametime... either that or its magic :) Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 03:11, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Hey

Hi there. I was just taking a look through your contributions, and I was curious if you'd like to consider running for adminship sometime in the future. You seem to have quite a bit of wiki-experience, so personally I feel you'd be a great admin. What do you think? –Juliancolton | ^Talk 19:40, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind words Julian! I'd be very willing to run for adminship sometime in the future. Maybe it would be wise to start with some admin coaching first? I had a few goals that I might like to wrap up as well (such as a GA or two) in the near future. Your thoughts on a time frame? You would know best! :D Thanks again, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 01:13, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Well, if you'd like to do coaching for a while, then sure. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:15, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Only if you'd think that would be the best route. In your honest opinion, knowing that I'd be willing to run for adminship, what would be the best course of action? Like I said before, you'd probably know better than I would :-) Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 01:34, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Alright. I've created User:Arbitrarily0/Admin, so go ahead and answer those questions if you get a chance. I'll then review your set of answers and base my decision off of that. Sound good? –Juliancolton | ^Talk 19:51, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Excellent! Judging by your answers, you seem to have fairly solid experience, and I'd be happy to nominate you for adminship whenever you're ready. Alternatively, we could proceed with the admin coaching, just to be sure. Your call. :) –Juliancolton | ^Talk 15:46, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Well, if you think I've got a shot then so be it. ;) What do you think of one week from today? - I've got some computer monitor issues that I'll have resolved by then. Sound like a plan? Thanks again! Arbitrarily0 ^(talk)

Sounds good! –Juliancolton | ^Talk 21:19, 22 October 2009 (UTC

I'm so sorry for the wait. I'm going to have to wait until tomorrow to write a nom... is that alright? –Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:50, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Arbitrarily0 – Good luck mate. :) –Juliancolton | ^Talk 02:12, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

And still another question...sorry

I saw that you have account creator rights. How did you get that? I cannot find that anywhere. Also, my application for an account on the account creation interface is still pending. Any idea what's wrong? The Arbiter^★_★^★ 23:20, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Your request for access to the interface should be handled soon, at least by 48 hours. Once you've gained some experience with the interface, you can request account creator rights here. By the way, you're welcome to become an adoptee of mine, that way you won't feel guilty about asking questions :D Let me know how it goes, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 02:24, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm, it's been more than 48 hours. I'll give it a few more days. Oh no, I was thinking about beginning to adopt some users. Am I not ready? The Arbiter^★_★^★ 02:01, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, the adopter criteria can be found here, and you seem to meet all of those requirements (i.e. 600/500 edits). As long as you feel comfortable answering all sorts of Wikipedia-related questions, go for it. For me, it seems like I've learned more from my adoptees than they have from me! Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 15:38, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

By the way, when are you going to be nominated for adminship? You have my vote when it happens. The Arbiter^★_★^★ 02:08, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

:-) Thanks for the support! Juliancolton was planning to nominate me sometime in the next week I believe - so we'll see how it goes ;-) Cheers! Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 15:38, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

More adoptions...

Hi, You up for another adoptee? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Silver923 (talk • contribs) 17:19, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Sure, I'd be happy to. Feel free to ask any questions you come across. Cheers, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 17:34, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Want to be adopted :)

Hey, I hope you're not too full, but would you mind adopting me? I'm really new to this... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gammaraptor (talk • contribs) 01:32, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

No no, not at all. I'd be glad to adopt you! Let me know what I can help you with. Happy editing, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 02:19, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks :) Gammaraptor (talk) 16:51, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

I need a little help...

So how do you make your pages look like that... Gammaraptor (talk) 16:52, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Do you mean the formatting of my user page? Look through this discussion here, it should give you the general idea. I recommend experimenting with the different styles you see. Copy the source code of something you like and then make your own personal adjustments. Let me know if this doesn't make sense. Cheers, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 20:33, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Groan...

The fact that I don't have account creator rights frustrates me. They want people to reach the 6-a-day limit before getting the rights, but at the same time, I can't reach the limit if there are accounts I can't create that are too similar. The Arbiter^★_★^★ 00:53, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Patience friend! ;) More importantly than hitting the 'six-a-day' limit, the account creator rights-granting administrator wants to see that you are thoroughly experienced with the tool. It will take time to gain this experience, so have patience with it. I highly recommend that you join the team at #wikipedia-en-accounts ^connect, where you can collaborate with the other users and learn more about how the process works. I hope to see you there! Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 01:07, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Mmm...Ok, sorry, got a little worked up there. Yeah, that doesn't work for me...nothing happens when I click the IRC link. What can I do? Oh, by the way, good luck on the RfA! The Arbiter^★_★^★ 01:22, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate it! In order to join #wikipedia-en-accounts ^connect you'll need to download an IRC client (similar to an internet browser, accept for IRC). This will allow you to open the link. Help with using IRC with Wikipedia can be found here. Let me know how it goes, or if you need some more detailed instructions. Cheers, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 02:32, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar!!!

		The Guidance Barnstar
		Thanks for all the help you've given me these few months! I hope you don't mind a few more questions in the future! :) The Arbiter★★★ 00:20, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Don't worry, it's been no problem at all - keep the questions coming! Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 02:33, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, I actually have two questions. First of all, on the Account Creation Interface, how do you know when there is a new request? I have to keep refreshing the page. Also, with non-free use images, pictures for bands that are together and playing are not allowed, right? The Arbiter^★_★^★ 02:48, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Actually, there is an IRC bot at #wikipedia-en-accounts ^connect which notifies the channel whenever there is a new request - that way, you won't have to keep refreshing the page. To answer your second question, no, such a picture would not be allowed. Since the band is still together, it is assumed that a new, free picture would serve as a replacement. I hope this helps, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 14:12, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

The thing is, the band I am talking about is a band in which none of the identities of the members are known. In fact, no one knows who the individuals are, because they are hidden by their costumes. It is even rumored that there are Grammy winners among them, but no one knows who. The Arbiter^★_★^★ 23:56, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Very interesting ... :) I'd be happy to take a look at this if you'd like. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 02:46, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

The band is called Here Come the Mummies. Also, I downloaded mIRC, but I am still confused. Do I just go ahead and sign on to the channel? When I tried that, there was nobody there. The Arbiter^★_★^★ 22:46, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Okay, here's some . /install.html instructions for connecting. Remember, you have to connect to freenode before you can join #wikipedia-en-accounts ^connect. Let me know how it goes, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 23:06, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

By the way, something that is frustrating me, is that when it came to the Windows Police Pro article, I did most of the cleanup. However, I awarded a barnstar to another user who contributed somewhat to the article. I want the article rescue barnstar for that, but it wouldn't look good to award it to myself, would it? The Arbiter^★_★^★ 23:13, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Hey, the IRC worked! The Arbiter^★_★^★ 23:26, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

:) I'm glad you've gotten your IRC working. As far as the barnstar goes ... I suppose there's nothing stopping you from awarding yourself a barnstar, but it just won't mean the same thing. Try not to worry about how things look, just keep doing good work, and you'll be awarded in unexpected ways when you least expect them. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 23:29, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Congrats

Congratulations!

It is my great pleasure to inform you that your Request for Adminship has closed successfully and you are now an administrator! Useful Links: • Administrators' reading list • Administrators' how-to guide • • Administrator's Noticeboard • Administrator's Noticeboard for Incidents • Administrator's Noticeboard for 3RR • IRC admin channel (#wikipedia-en-admins connect) Your admin logs: • blocks • deletions • moves • protects • uploads •

— Rlevse • Talk • 03:43, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Yay! Good luck and welcome. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:44, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I enjoyed Chess tournament. Gratz! - Dank (push to talk) 03:52, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks all! I really appreciate it! Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 20:45, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Don't lose your t-shirt. :p –Katerenka ^☆ 09:46, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry I missed it, but please accept these belated congratulations along with this snazzy shirt. :) –Katerenka ^☆ 09:46, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Katerenka! I needed a new shirt! Best regards to you, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 14:42, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh dude, I didnt know your RFA was running. It was late when I discovered it today. You know I would definitely supported or even co-nominated. Anyways belated congratulations and keep up the good work -- Tinu Cherian - 09:05, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks a lot Tinu! No problem at all - I look forward to doing more work with you in the future! Thanks again, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 14:01, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Hey, congratulations! A8UDI 22:10, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks A8UDI! :) Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 22:18, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Kwai Nyu

Ah, I see you're very new to the business of deleting articles. Congratulations!

The proponents of "Kwai Nyu" seem rather persistent. I think it would be a good idea not only to delete (as you did) but also to salt (which I don't think you did): doing so could well save time in the future -- Hoary (talk) 03:33, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Well done! (Next, WP:STAKETHRUHEART.) -- Hoary (talk) 03:45, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, and sorry about that - I should have seen to do that. Now what about WP:STAKETHRUHEART? :D Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 03:52, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

No, no: if it had been re-created perhaps four times you should have salted it; but as it was, it was borderliney (or so I think, without actually bothering to look up the rules) and a matter of discretion. ¶ WP:STAKETHRUHEART is yours to write! -- Hoary (talk) 04:03, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Ohh, ever-cunning Hoary. :) I think I'll start with WP:Crawl Into A Corner and Die. Well, at least you've got me on my toes now: thanks for that! Cheers, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 04:07, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Please relist my Techno bass article!

I did not make up the name of that sub-genre of electro music called Techno bass at will! That name has been around since the early and mid-nineties! It is true that I created the article AND I have created a website called Technobass.net - but these items are homages to the sub-genre of music that was around before me! I am friends with Aux 88 who are the ones who made up the term. They are known as one of the original creators of the style and their music has had a massive influence on electro music.

HEre are some more articles to prove it - these are from independent sources:

http://www.detroittechnomilitia.com/main/content/view/122/169/

"Now it was time for him to focus and channel his energy into POSATRONIX, and Direct Beat was certainly behind him. Bj reached into his bag of tricks and pulled out a record call "Shake it". Little did he know, this would go on to be a Detroit Classic as well. He would later record some of the " POSATRONIX" catalog on Direct Beat with such records as: DANZ, NIGHT VISION, 142 mph and a host of other POSATRONIX material. He would then later release "CONDOR" (The Auxmen) and "The Hubble: Posatronix Mix" on "Puzzlebox Records". Bj also gave a sample of what’s to come on the release of "POSATRONIX 2010". Credited as one of the pioneers of the Detroit Electro Techno Bass movement, William (Bj) Smith continues to amaze us with a unique sound of his own. "

http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=77:7231

Techno Bass genre - Mostly a phenomenon in Detroit (the techno side) and Miami (the bass side), Techno Bass is a fusion of electro, bass music, and techno with spartan production values and a retro atmosphere. In Detroit, the fraternal 430 West and Direct Beat labels are the home to the best techno bass acts (AUX 88, DJ Di'jital, Will Web, Octave One, Wild Planet) as well as the crucial compilation Techno Bass: The Mission.

http://www.amazon.com/Techno-Bass-Mission-Various-Artists/dp/B000009OCE

http://www.cooljunkie.com/forum/philly-junkies/98268-aux-88-bio.html

"DIRECT FROM DETROIT AN AUX 88 live performance PUZZLEBOX . SUBMERGE . DIRECT BEAT

Since forming in 1993, Detroit-based electro-techno group AUX 88 have spearheaded a '90s-style rewrite of the breakbeat electro-funk of the early Motor City sound. Often referred to as techno bass, the style integrates elements of early Detroit and New York electro, Miami-born bass music, and the dark, gritty analog edge of Detroit techno. Funkshun is honored to welcome the Auxmen, Keith ‘K-1’ Tucker and Tommy Hamilton, to Philadelphia for the first time. Their new self-titled album is being released this Fall on Submerge Recordings.

Together, in 1985 accompanied by Anthony Horton, Tucker and Hamilton formed RX-7. RX-7 was a live band that performed inspired cover versions of Cybotron and Model 500 tracks.It wasn't so much that they were trying to break new ground by playing live-they knew no other way. MIDI and sequencers were virtually unheard of; especially to two east side Detroit boys who simply had a love for the music. Tucker, an avid sci-fi fan started to buy older models of analog gear and pursue sending out demo tapes to various local Detroit Techno labels. He received a response from Metroplex Records; Juan Atkins label, and signed as Frequency. Under this alias, Tucker recorded such tracks as, "Television, Frequency Express,” and “New Jack House." On the track "New Jack House," Darren Muhammad of Adrenalin M.O.D. did the vocals and Juan Atkins did the mixes. Tucker learned a lot from his experiences with Metroplex Records

In September of 1992, while working on new tracks for Metroplex Records, Tucker received a visit from Tommy Hamilton. They brought their experiences together to form AUX-88, and found that their music talents had matured since the early 1980's. Using their Detroit Techno background, the two quickly accumulated a mass of new tracks together, as well as individually.

The reunification of Tom Tom and Tucker found that their time apart had done them both good. With a renewed sense of purpose, they put together a fusion of styles and added Anthony Horton and vocalist Andrea Gilmore to become...Sight Beyond Sight. SBS was soon signed to 430 West Records. While SBS enjoyed a degree of success, Tom Tom and Tucker made the decision to continue with the bass heavy techno they had began with some time earlier. 1993 saw this return to their roots as the birth of Aux 88.

As Aux took off, SBS was put on hold and the other members went to work on individual projects. Then, as if to acknowledge the move, Aux 88 released "My A.U.X. Mind" which went on to become a Detroit classic. Putting the icing on the cake, Aux 88 joined up with Mad Mike Banks to perform with Juan Atkins as Model 500 on the 10th anniversary of his label, Metroplex. However, the evolution of Aux 88 was not over. In 1995, desiring to do more experimental tracks, Tucker went solo and created his own label called Puzzlebox inspired by close friend Anthony Shakir.

Tom didn't miss a beat. Reuniting with BJ (Posatronix) former dancer, Aux 88 went on to release the full length CD, "Man or Machine." Touring both the US and Europe, and with video airplay on MTV's AMP, Aux 88 began the process of turning on the planet on to their techno/bass/dance fusion. Still, it was not enough. Aux had already made a name for itself via live performances. As individuals who had been deep in the scene long before recording music, they knew they had to take it to the next level. Acting on a tip from another recording artist on 430 West, Octave One, Tom met up with the young DJ Di'jital.

Already established in the Detroit underground scene, Di'jital joined the Aux 88 live show. As Aux played live, Di'jital mixed an array of music. The effect was that of an electrified old school hip hop show. It isn't accidental. Aux 88 is one of the few who remember that techno has its roots in the hip-hop of pioneers like Afrika Bambaataa, Planet Patrol and Newcleus. If anyone mistakes their live show as a scaled down electronic hip hop oriented Parliament show, well, you're not too far off the mark. After the success of "Man or Machine," BJ left to explore other musical realms while Tom Tom went on to record "Xeo-Genetic," the last Aux offering on Direct Beat records. The Album received two Detroit Music awards for Best Artist and Best Recording.

2002 saw what seemed to be a return of aux 88 as the Auxmen to close out the 2002 Detroit Electronic Music Festival. Tucker was asked to close out the festival on the main stage with a history of techno. Seeing and knowing that the only group to pull it off was Aux88, Tucker elected to change the name to the Auxmen and perform with all members of aux88. Unfortunately Tom was not available to perform, but instead sparked some releases that fueled the now current return of Aux88 to the electro scene exclusively on Puzzlebox Records. New LP coming entitled AUX88.

I choose to promote this term for this style of music and work to document it's REAL history on the internet (including wikipedia) because "electro" music is such a broad term to refer to the many sub-genres that exist today. THere are MANY styles of electro music and they vary greatly. It is not sufficient to call all styles of electro music this one term. Techno bass music first developed in the early nineties in Detroit and has spread across the world and has now grown to encompass the musical styles of hundreds of artists across the globe! It is true that I started the website TechnoBass.net - but the website merely exists as a music community that is comprised of hundreds of people who either produce or enjoy the style of music we call "Techno Bass".

Please, re-list my page! If you need anymore information or articles from ,me let me know and I will find more. I am not speaking merely for myself, but for a large group of musicians who identify their music's identity with this sub-genre. There are many other wikipedia articles that are still linking to this page - and those links were created by other people because they recognized this sub-genre as legitimate.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,

Starrie Williamson Starriebird (talk) 16:35, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Starrie, thanks for your note. There doesn't seem to be much doubt that the sub-genre techno bass exists. However, in the past AfD, it was determined that there weren't enough reliable secondary sources to make an article out of it. My suggestion is to rewrite the article at User:Starriebird/Techno Bass, incorporating all of your sources. Judging by how it looks, we'll decide where to go from there. If you want, I'll restore the old article here. Cheers, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 20:40, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, please restore the article and I will work on it. Thank you very much! Starriebird (talk) 21:40, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I believe I misspoke. Since the article was deleted via AfD, you're best bet is to follow through the processes at deletion review. At deletion review you'll need to prove that "significant new information has come to light since a deletion and the information in the deleted article would be useful to write a new article." Just make your case there as you did here, if you think it's appropriate, and best of luck to you! Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 23:27, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Closed page move

You closed this the other day. Considering that the only argument to keep the current title (that it happens to be her current working name) is far weaker than the argument to move, what was your rationale for closing as no consensus? Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 13:55, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Chris. I have been using the rationale "no consensus for move" to close debates where the result is "no consensus" and "page not moved" ("no consensus for move" was intended to be a catch-all for "no consensus closures" and "not done closures"). In other words, I didn't mean to close as 'no consensus', just as 'it won't be moved'. Judging by your concerns, it seems like this wasn't the correct approach, since the rationale is apparently misleading. I've fixed my rationale on the discussion you mentioned, and will revisit my other closures soon. Is this okay? Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 16:26, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

I think you've misunderstood. From what did you draw your conclusion that the page was not to be moved? Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 17:14, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Ugh, clearly I need more sleep: looking back, my rationale for closing as I did was disjointed to begin with. I've gone ahead and relisted the discussion, as well as added my support. I'm terribly sorry about all this, and I hope the issue is fixed now. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 17:36, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Excellent. Thanks. By the way, congrats on adminship. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 23:38, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

No problem at all, sorry again for the confusion. While were at it (and now that I've had some rest), can I ask your opinion on something? Is there any problems with using "no consensus for move" as a closure rationale for both 'no consensus' and 'not moved' closures? Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 01:48, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

"No consensus, defaulting to no move" might be clearer. That's usually the way I've seen it phrased at AfD. In general I'm in favour of closing admins leaving a summary sentence explaining their rationale: obviously this takes more time though. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 07:49, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Alright, thanks a lot for your input Chris. Sorry again for all that confusion, cheers! Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 15:49, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Mr. Snuffleupagus

Hi, Arbitrarily0. Why did you close the move discussion on Talk:Aloysius Snuffleupagus while discussion was still ongoing? Powers ^T 14:40, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Powers, my mistake - I passed over the discussion too quickly. I've relisted it for you. Hopefully there will be a better response this time around. Again, my sincere apologies, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 16:39, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I appreciate your response. Powers ^T 16:55, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

No problem at all, thanks for letting me know of this. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 17:38, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Adopt?

I'm not all that new, but I could definitely use some help. I can use WP:HG pretty well, and I use WP:POPUP, WP:TW, and WP:FRIENDLY pretty well, too. I just need some help with creating articles and . . . not all that much else. I'm pretty active on IRC, too. Thanks! Saebjorn! 17:47, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I'd be happy to adopt you! Let me know where you'd like to start. Is there a certain topic you might like to try to write your first article on? Cheers, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 18:07, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Request

Hey Arbitrarily0, hope that you are well. Would you mind flipping the confirmed user right on my account? I'm helping on the GA review of World War II and have some aesthetic changes in the spelling style to make, but can't do to its being semi-protected. Thanks much. :) GwenNovak ^{talk to my master} 22:23, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

I'd be glad to for you! Here you go! Good luck with everything, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 22:32, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks very much! :) GwenNovak ^{talk to my master} 22:33, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Anytime! Cheers, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 22:34, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

You Know My Name (Look Up the Number)

Regarding your move of " You Know My Name (Look Up the Number)", we do not name articles based solely on the typography of the single cover; we name articles based first on WP naming conventions. There's no reason to ignore WP conventions for this single, and I've moved it back. — John Cardinal (talk) 01:33, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

No offense taken. A certain user requested this, and I mistakenly followed through. We'll open up a requested move discussion on the talk page if this happens to come up again. Cheers, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 01:55, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

A question about Huggle

Huggle is giving me some issues. When I use it, web pages pop up in my browser for things like antispamsniper, Cybersitter 11, and even National Geographic Kids! What's that all about? The Arbiter^★_★^★ 17:12, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Curious. Well you did the right thing by asking here, because it's beyond me. Hopefully someone else knows what the problem is. Sorry I couldn't help more, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 17:58, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Re: Sargus

Hi, I am writing to you in regards to the deletion of the page I created about Sargus. This is the second time it is deleted. The first time it was deleted because the info I wrote was seen as perhaps a promotion to the man. This time around you said I failed to explain the importance of this individual, which I find outrageous, as he is so well known in our community (people in the spiritual world, mentalism, paranormal activities), than it just answers your question by itself. There are thousands of people interested in finding out about him, as he does not advertise on internet, so those lucky enough to have attended some of his sessions decide to get together and put something in writing to the rest of the world and we are told we do not explain the importance of this man. One other important information would be that he has done 16 sessions this year only to capacity crowds of over 12000 people each time, do you still ask yourself what is the importance of this man?

I look forward to your response, thank you for your time.

Regards

John Harloff (jonharloff@rocketmail.com) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnharloff (talk • contribs) 20:32, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Greetings John! On Wikipedia, "a person is presumed to be notable if he or she has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject." Do you know of any reliable secondary sources about this person? Unfortunately, it isn't enough to say that this person is notable in your community, unless you can verify this through reliable sourcing. I hope this helps, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 14:24, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Jeylina Ever

I have not had luck with this artist! Angelinasweet (talk) 14:29, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Aye. Yes, the articles for deletion discussion (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeylina Ever) determined that this person didn't meet Wikipedia's notability criteria for creative professionals. If you're looking to create another article, consider looking through the requested articles for ideas. Cheers, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 14:43, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

If I created the article again but with the references under the name of his previous life as a man? Does the French national media are valid?Angelinasweet (talk) 15:49, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

The problem is that the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeylina Ever came to the conclusion that Jeylina Ever just didn't have enough secondary source coverage to have his/her own article. The gender tense used probably won't affect how the article stands up to notability. Let me know if this doesn't answer your question. Cheers, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 17:45, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Old Adelaide Family

Hi, I was wondering if you could have a quick look at this [page]. It's somewhere between an article and a category. I would like to nominate it for deletion as I think there's zero evidence to support the existence of such a family. I prodded the page but the creator reminded me that there's no need for it to meet notability requirements since it's technically a category. Can you kindly advise as to how I should proceed? Regards Hazir (talk) 04:02, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Hazir! I'm not familiar with the "Old Adelaide Family", but my recommendation is for you to bring your issues up at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion. This will create an open discussion about the category, and should solve any problems. Try following the instructions here to list the category. Good luck! Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 22:37, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again!

Hey, thanks again for all the help you given me. I now have five adoptees to help! Pretty much gives me something to do, huh? The Arbiter^★_★^★ 23:30, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

No problem at all! I'm happy to help. I'm glad to hear you have some adoptees - remember, if you ever get stumped just give me a ring! Happy editing, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 00:56, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

tough decision

You have made a tough decision about Micheale Salahi. Now that the biographical article is kept, perhaps the gatecrashing article is too much repetition for now? If the gatecrashing event turns into firing of Secret Service bigwigs and continued references to the event, particularly if a special name is given, like Balloon Boy, then the article can be written. Is this logic reasonable? Or should there be no consideration of whether or not there's a biography when deciding the event article? Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 01:42, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Just a note on Michaele Salahi

Don't worry, not objecting to your close, even though I voted delete! I think the close is reasonable, based on the discussion, but it does seem like your closing argument is more like a !vote than a summary of the discussion. I understand it must be very difficult closing contentious AfDs, and people have been asking for more explanation of the reasons recently. If you had said that the 'Keeps' had the stronger arguments then that would probably be fine and not particularly contentious. I've seen a few DRV discussions on the basis of the closing admin using a 'casting vote' rather than assessment, and if DRV can be avoided then that's only a good thing as far as I am concerned! Quantpole (talk) 14:03, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

• I agree. I !voted keep and agree with the content of your summary, but it was too much like a !vote. Next time focus on the debate itself and your evaluation of it. Best of luck! Hobit (talk) 21:07, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you both for your comments. It wasn't my intention to make it appear like a !vote, but I can definitely see how it would look this way. I'm guessing it would be too late to make an alteration to the closing statement at this point, no? Cheers, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 02:36, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

People do, and you could, but I'd suggest you just leave it. Best of luck to you! Hobit (talk) 22:47, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi, no offence, but I think what you've done here is to give your opinion as to how BLP1E ought to be interpreted. That's fine - BLP1E is something that's open to various interpretations. However, giving an opinion as to one policy is not what a closer is there to do. You are there to interpret the consensus of the discussion and as someone who didn't participate, I certainly don't think your views reflect that consensus. (Indeed you appear not to have commented on what the consensus was at all.) Personally, I find the article unacceptable for inclusion and I think the genuine concerns in the debate reflect that. I'm asking you to reconsider your closing. I'm probably going to seek a deletion review on this, but I thought I'd let you respond first.--Scott Mac (Doc) 15:28, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Greetings Scott Mac! No offense taken! I'm not sure what to say, except that my only intention in closure was to derive consensus, and clearly my rationale didn't do a near justice in explaining myself. But whether in the closure or the rationale itself - yes, I definitely made a mistake here. However, at this point, I feel it's too late to change the closure, no? Too much discussion has already resulted. BLP1E is something that will likely need modifying (in one way or another) in the future, and this is a good example to bring those issues up with. Therefore I encourage you (please!) to bring this to deletion review, it's too much for just one person like me to decide on. Looking forward to hearing back from you, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 15:48, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the understanding answer. I've placed it at Wikipedia:Deletion review#Michaele_Salahi. Thanks.--Scott Mac (Doc) 16:22, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I don't know if it's proper but if it is would you mind making a statement there about this? I also read your close the way the others did, like an iVote. Thanks for being so honest and understanding about the concerns here. It's nice to see the kind of responses you give. Have a good one, --CrohnieGal^Talk 17:03, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks both of you. Crohnie: I just decided to make a brief apology at the review (here). Cheers, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 21:32, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Kudos for the way you've taken the criticism. Most people here tend to dig in their heels and defend the indefensible when criticised. You've had the grace to review your action, admit your mistakes and learn from them - admirable qualities all.--Scott Mac (Doc) 21:49, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

I want you to know that you are a class act. You don't need to apologize any further though. Mistakes happen to all of us, just learn from it, which I think you really have. I really needed to see an administrator/editor handle things in this way. You have my total respect, thank you and continue your good work, --CrohnieGal^Talk 11:44, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

DRV Outcome

I have closed the DRV as overturn to no-consensus. You deserve credit for taking on a difficult AFD close where I know many experienced admins would fear to close the original AFD on the grounds that it was bound to go to a nasty DRV - which it did. The calm way you handled the pressure does, in my opinion, reflect extremely well on your qualities and augers well for your future admin career, but I hope you will not mind my suggesting that this kind of AFD is not for the fainthearted and that, should the opportunity arise again soon to close a similar discussion, you think long and hard about whether you feel brave enough to go through this again! Still, it could be worse, I had an admin RFC against me in my very first week as an admin so your welcome into the ranks has been relatively painless bn comparison. (plus I bet I get flack for the DRV close too). Spartaz ^Humbug! 10:47, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your note Spartaz. I take very kindly your suggestion, but I suppose somebody has to take the flack for closing controversial AfD's. This time it was my turn, and maybe it will be again in the future. Although they're not to be embraced, DRV's aren't so terrible anyways, as long as you go in smiling :) Thanks again, and for taking the time to close that DRV, cheers! Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 21:52, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

New student

Hello Arbitrarily0, I was instructed to seek an adoptor and found you on the list of willing to adopt. I don't know anything, so I will be a good student. My article right now is on the Biewer Terrier. Some one keeps changing the information and its getting old. Thank you for your time. --Zarina1 (talk) 16:44, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi Zarina1, I'd be happy to adopt you. For starters, I've noticed the article has been proposed for deletion. If you disagree with this, simply remove the tag and continue your work, remembering to add reliable sources. Cheers, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 01:23, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Merry Christmas, Arbitrarily0! At this time of year, I would like to extend seasons greetings to the Wikipedians I have interacted with in the past year on Wikipedia. I wish you a wonderful holiday season! The Arbiter★★★

Happy holidays to you too! Thanks for the nice note! Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 02:02, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Quick Question?

Hey, I just want to ask a quick question in hope of a reply... How do I use the twinkle tool and what exactly does it do/can I do with it? --A.Daniels (talk) 02:45, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi Little Danno, to install Twinkle, follow the instructions here. After you've done that, and you've bypassed your cache, you will be able to perform any of the functions listed here. Some of these functions include having CSD, XfD, PROD, RPP, and user warning tabs. You'll be able to investigate these features more once you've installed Twinkle. Good luck! Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 16:21, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much :D I'll be sure to make sure I read what to do before attempting so :) --A.Daniels (talk) 02:44, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Article: Lenny Numbers

Reasons for deletion? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Absolutelegend (talk • contribs) 00:26, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi Absolutelengend! Could you provide a link to the 'Lenny numbers' you are talking about? There seems to be histories at both Lenny numbers and Lenny Numbers, but neither was deleted by me. Let me know how I can help, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 21:37, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

George Bradt page

Just noticed that the page on George Bradt (me) has been re-tagged for possible deletion. There was a whole discussion around this in November and you closed the discussion with a Keep decision. During that discussion others modified the article to put in more references. Given my clear COI, I'm refraining from touching this page. How does this work? Do we need to re-open the discussion or does the November decision still stand? Gbradt (talk) 19:28, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this up George. I've removed the tags that I thought have been addressed, and will wait to see if there is any disagreement. I really appreciate the fact that you're refraining from editing the article - that takes care of any COI issues. It is unlikely that it will be relisted for deletion, since the last AfD decided keep with a unanimous vote. Thanks again for letting me know, cheers! Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 20:14, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I've added a refimprove tag to encourage the addition of more reliable sources. Just to clarify, this tag doesn't have anything to do with deletion, it just aims to point out where the article can be improved. Happy holidays, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 23:30, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. Seems like a good resolution - and a good prod for further improvements. Gbradt (talk) 19:45, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

No problem! Cheers, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 21:28, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Nerd Football Person

Heya :) I have subsequently researched Wikipedia's and been linked a page that specific said about what sort of page you can and cannot create. I stand corrected hehe I guess I was a bit confused by the 'blatent hoax' thing. Ah well, Hope you had a very Merry Christmas! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thealohaboy (talk • contribs) 21:49, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, and you too! Happy holidays, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 03:38, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Invictus (Daniel Gray album)

I tagged Invictus (Daniel Gray album) as a {{db-a9}}. That criteria states:

This page may meet Wikipedia’s criteria for speedy deletion as an article about a musical recording that does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject, and where the artist's article has never existed or has been deleted.

You removed the tag with an edit summary of "declined speedy deletion A9: artist's article has previously existed."

Yes, the article Daniel Gray (Entertainer) existed, and was deleted. That's why I tagged the album's page as being an article about a recording where the artist's article… has been deleted.

What I don't understand is why you removed the CSD tag with an edit summary that agreed with the CSD. I'd appreciate it if you could explain this to me. Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 00:02, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Ouch, please give me a half second to choke down my pride :) Thanks for letting me know! Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 02:42, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

All's well that ends well, right? Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 05:40, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

No doubt! Thanks again, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 19:28, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

why did you delete ken kelln?

I know when I first posted (within a few hours), there was several good points on how I hadn't adequately expressed the notability... I can make it more wordsmithier or something... Ken is a pioneer and innovator in his field, and highly recognized, more than meeting the criteria for biography notability!

Treesforourchildren (talk) 14:48, 30 December 2009 (UTC)Treesforourchildren

Hi Treesforourchildren! Consensus made at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ken Kelln was to delete the article because it lacked notability. As Glenfarclas stated, he's "not individually notable apart from his company". With the exception of your !vote, there were none in support of keeping the article. Can you prove that he meets the notability guideline for people? Let me know, cheers! Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 16:37, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Hey Aritrarily0... I believe that the notability was proved with my edits AFTER the request-to-deletes were made (dec.23)... Ken HAS won a notable award by an assoication of geoscientists and engineers, as well as long been seen as a leader in his field. He runs the second-oldest solar company in CANADA. And in 1984, thanks to his efforts Saskatchewan was a world leader in passive solar (I am seeking a reference for this before I edit it).

Do the new references NOT prove this??? Treesforourchildren (talk) 07:59, 2 January 2010 (UTC)Treesforourchildren

Adopt me!!!

Hey! I'd love to learn the ins and outs of Wikipedia, especially when it comes to the deletion process, Wikipedia policies, how to spot vandalism, and basically how to become more involved. mrmewe (talk) 21:41, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Great! I'm glad to see you have enthusiasm about the project - I'd be happy to adopt you. Let me know of any specific questions or goals you'd like to start with. Cheers, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 22:53, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

• First, I see that a lot of ppl have formated their user pages to have "email me" links, etc... How do you do that? Also, how do I patrol for vandals? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrmewe (talk • contribs) 22:59, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

A good way to figure out a userpage design is to copy the source code of a design you like, and then modify it to fit you. Is there a specific userpage that I can help you model yours off of? To start vandalism patrolling, consider looking into Special:RecentChanges. Once there, you can use the undo feature to revert vandalism. Let me know if you need more specifics. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 23:06, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

I like how you have the header at the top of the user page. I also like when people have a lot of creative badges on the right hand side of the page... And also, how do you make the icon for your username so it shows up whenever you sign something? mrmewe 00:10, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Okay, well for my user page, check out the discussion here (and then click [edit] to view the source) - that should give you an idea of how mine works. By creative badges do you mean userboxes? If so, try reading about them here, and let me know if I can help with them. For your signature (which is created by typing "~~~~" (remember to do this after all comments to discussions)), you can edit it at your preferences (at the signature area). Let me know if you want help customizing yours. I hope this helps you, cheers! Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 02:20, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

When you're trolling for vandalism how do you make sure multiple editors don't warn somebody on the same post? mrmewe 14:51, 31 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrmewe (talk • contribs)

Hi Mrmewe, by 'trolling' I hope you mean patrolling (because trolling is something I recommend you avoid) :) Normally the editor who reverted the edit will also be the one to warn the editor. Does that make sense? Also, remember to sign your posts on discussion pages, like this one, with "~~~~". Cheers, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 15:11, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Requesting adoption

Hello! I was looking for someone with a lot of Wikipedia-related experience to adopt me. I'm fairly competent technically already, so I've been able to figure a lot of the basics out by myself. My primary concern will be of a dispute resolution/disciplinary nature as I originally made a Wikipedia account to try to bring balance to an extremely heated and politicized topic. In the short time I've had an account (about 2 days) my talk page has already started filling up, one of the people in particular is rather notorious on Wikipedia as an admin who abuses his position and edits articles in a biased manner, and who is often (and currently) a named party in ARBCOMs.

I'm not hoping for someone to personally intercede on my behalf in the event this person or any from his 'camp' steps over the line, so please do not mistake this adoption request as admin shopping, but I am anticipating the need for quite a bit of advice in the near future as I'm not the type of person to shy away from conflict when I know people are treating me unfairly - quite the contrary it makes me all the more determined to stick to my guns and dig in even deeper.

The effort and time I've been putting forth to familiarize myself with Wikipedia in order to contribute to this specific set of highly politicized and somewhat hijacked articles, have introduced me to the Wikipedia community which was unknown to me before as a casual user/reader. I do have a hope that I can stick around far into the future and contribute to articles dealing with a wide variety of subjects, especially those articles which are more friendly and less politically heated by nature.

Also, I apologize for having jumped the gun and adding my name to your list of the Adoptees, I misread and thought it was a list of people seeking adoption, I removed my name when I realized my error. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, +-Adam.T.Historian (talk) 01:45, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi Adam, I like seeing that you've taken an interest in the wiki, and I would be glad to adopt you. I'll be happy to give you all the advice I can, just let me know. Don't worry, I've added you back to my list, and updated your userbox. Happy editing, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 16:24, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Great! Thanks a lot for your time, patience, and general selflessness in your ongoing pursuit to share knowledge with newer users. +-Adam.T.Historian (talk) 19:17, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Bot task request

As suggested at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Death#Automatically tagging certain categories, please tag the talk page of all existent categories listed at Wikipedia:People by year/Reports/All death categories with {{WikiProject Death}}. --Geniac (talk) 02:52, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Sure thing, I responded back here. Cheers, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 16:56, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

re Close vs. relist

I relisted, as there was a new concern brought up about whether those new sources introduced were reliable/secondary/independent enough to go towards notability - and I thought it could have been useful to have a bit more input after that comment. However, I have no objection to your close - and I agree with your assessment of the consensus. :) No worries, Cirt (talk) 18:53, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Again, no worries. :P Cirt (talk) 19:06, 1 January 2010 (UTC)