User talk:And Adoil Descended

Welcome

Hello, And Adoil Descended! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! SudoGhost™ 02:00, 15 June 2011 (UTC) Getting Started The five pillars of Wikipedia • Tutorial • Your first article How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting Help Frequently Asked Questions New contributors' help page Where to: ask questions • make requests Request administrator attention Policies and Guidelines Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The Community Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Things to do Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism Miscellaneous Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Wikipedia:Glossary might help as well, it's essentially a list of Wikipedia terms, like AGF. Hope this helps. - SudoGhost™ 02:11, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

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

Logical punctuation

Hi, I just reverted a couple of your edits because Wikipedia uses logical punctuation. :) LadyofShalott 02:47, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/College of Journalism and Mass Communications (University of Nebraska–Lincoln)

Hello, And Adoil Descended. You have new messages at Trevj's talk page.
Message added -- Trevj (talk) 06:35, 30 May 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

RE: Signature in AfD

Hello, And Adoil Descended. You have new messages at First Light's talk page.
Message added -- Trevj (talk) 09:23, 30 May 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

CVUA

Hello, And Adoil Descended! The instructors at the Counter-Vandalism Unit Academy have seen your hard work reverting vandalism, and we would like to thank you. But do you want to go to the next level? Would you like to know how reverts, warnings, reports, blocks, and bans all come together to keep this Encyclopedia free from disruption? Then consider enrolling today! Electriccatfish2 (talk) 17:45, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Electriccatfish2 (talk) 17:45, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Good evening! My name is Achowat and I'm an instructor at the Counter-Vandalism Unit Academy. If you'll have me, I'd love to work with you to help you understand how we on Wikipedia handle vandalism. I've watchlisted this page, so feel free to respond here. Thank you, Achowat (talk) 20:15, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Achowat. Nice to meet you. So, how do we begin? And Adoil Descended (talk) 01:48, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Well, the first step is to read the various processes involved in the Four Steps. (Identify, Restore, Warn, Report). So take a few minutes and read WP:VAND, WP:REVERT, WP:WARN and WP:GAIV and if you have any questions, let me know. Achowat (talk) 14:03, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Question: what is this Twinkle that I've seen people mention? Is that some kind of a software program? And Adoil Descended (talk) 23:56, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Twinkle is a pop-up menu that can be activated under your options. When it is enabled and you press "TW", you get a pop-up menu that allows you to Welcome, Warn, or Report a user, plus many more options, such as CSD, PROD, and XFD tagging. Electriccatfish2 (talk) 01:02, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! And, if you don't mind my asking...why are you stalking my page? :) And Adoil Descended (talk) 01:51, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

All the Instructors have that nasty habit. It allows us to more quickly respond to your questions than if it were only me watchlisting it. How is your reading coming along? Achowat (talk)

I read the articles. Now what do we do? And Adoil Descended (talk) 23:53, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

The easiest thing to do is spend a few hours vandal patrolling this weekend, using Twinkle if that's what you feel comfortable with. On Monday (or, likely, Sunday night), I'll review those reverts and see if there are any concerns I have. And remember, use the "Rollback - Vandal" option in any situation where you would use the WP:Rollback feature if you had access to it. Achowat (talk) 16:11, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Ok, a few things. First, your vandalism reverts look good (in fact, there are situations where you might be assuming too much good faith, which is definitely the side to err on). The big thing that I'd like to see is more use of the warning templates. They serve three real purporses: they show vandals that we "know what they're up to", which scares a lot off; they allow the next anti-vandal to give a more stern warning; and they comprise the "sufficient warning" needed to block a true vandal at WP:AIV. Essentially, every time something is "vandalism" (ie, you would use Rollback on it) then there should be an accompanying template at that User/IP's talk page. Achowat (talk) 14:40, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback, Achowat! And Adoil Descended (talk) 00:35, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

It seems you've done no counter-vandalism work since my comment. Is everything ok? Is counter-vandalism still an area of focus for you? Achowat (talk) 15:32, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

I have not been on this website that much since the 12th. And when I am online, I don't seem to find that much vandalism that I can revert. And when I do, it seems that other guys beat me to the Twinkle punch. And Adoil Descended (talk) 03:50, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, that can get disheartening. Perhaps it'd be wise to use the DefCon system ({{Vandalism information}}) which uses Huggle statistics to inform counter-vandals of a high level of reverts. It's not always 100% accurate, but it does a good job. Achowat (talk) 12:43, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

So I've gone over your contributions and it seems like you have a full handle on what is and is not Vandalism. I'm willing to graduate you out of the Academy today, but would you like me to "nominate you" at WP:PERM for the Rollback bit? I think it's quite clear you can be trusted with it. Achowat (talk) 14:07, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello again, Achowat. Thank you very much for graduating me from the Academy and for offering to "nominate" me at WP:PERM. I am flattered that you consider my efforts worthy of your attention and support. And Adoil Descended (talk) 17:52, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Go ahead and nominate yourself at WP:PERM and I'll add a Non-Admin Observation that I think you're ready. Achowat (talk) 18:15, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Done! Thank you, again, for being so nice to me. And Adoil Descended (talk) 18:25, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Lady Gaga and the Starlight Revue

Hello And Adoil Descended. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Lady Gaga and the Starlight Revue, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Source is under a compatible license. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 15:26, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for update, Malik! And Adoil Descended (talk) 16:05, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Also, Buzzme; there was enough context to identify the subject :). Context is "can you tell what the article is about?". If so, it shouldn't be tagged using that - although as a non-notable website it did meet A7. Ironholds (talk) 01:37, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

CVUA Graduate

	CVU Academy Graduate
	Having successfully completed the course of study and having successfully demonstrated the ability to Identify, Restore, Warn, and Report, it is my privilege now to declare you a Graduate of the Counter-Vandalism Unit's Academy. Do us all proud! Achowat (talk) 12:40, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

.

Sweet! :) And Adoil Descended (talk) 22:41, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blood Lad

Hey AAD. I (in a roundabout fashion) was asked to review Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blood Lad and your close of it. So, the first thing to bear in mind is that while non-admins can close AfDs, we don't necessarily encourage it except in very specific circumstances - namely when the outcome is beyond a shadow of a doubt. And on the shadow of a doubt front, it's always good to remember that closes are not nose-counts; the number of people voting "keep!" or "delete!" is secondary to the strength of their arguments and whether they have disproved counter-arguments. It's also secondary to whether their arguments are in line with policy and what Wikipedia requires of articles.

So, in this AfD we have people near-unanimously saying "keep"; that's fine. Always a good sign that it's appropriate for NAC :). However, as the last comment in the article pointed out, one of the sources is not independent and the other is (possibly) not reliable, and having a single independent, reliable source does not notability make. This argument should, I feel, have been taken into account in the closing, and the closing comment doesn't suggest it was :(.

Now, I'm not here to scream or rant at you, just to give you some advice on how AfDs (and non-admin closures) are treated and what the expectations are :). Hopefully that will be the end of it and we can all move forward - nobody expects editors to be perfect, just to learn from their mistakes (and lord knows I've made a lot). However, if you are feeling particularly WP:BOLD, you could undo your close and leave it for someone else - it's completely up to you. Thanks! Ironholds (talk) 14:12, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for bringing this to my attenion. And Adoil Descended (talk) 12:15, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

I had the same thought about your non-admin closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Opexa Therapeutics. It's true that I agreed with the "keep" outcome; I felt it was a "keep" because of additional sources I had added, and there was one other person who agreed with me. However, one delete nomination plus two "keep" opinions do not really add up to a consensus - at least not an obvious, beyond-a-shadow-of-doubt consensus such as Ironholds says is needed for a non-admin close. Personally I'm not an administrator, but I hang out at AfD a lot, and I don't think many admins would have closed this discussion with so little input; most want to see at least three concurring opinions before calling it a consensus. IMO that discussion needed another opinion or two, maybe a relisting if its seven days have run out.

No harm done, since my hunch is it would have eventually gotten those additional "keep" comments. This is just a friendly comment - intended as helpful feedback, particularly if you are doing non-admin closures in preparation for a run for administrator (and I encourage you to think about that). Thanks for helping Wikipedia! --MelanieN (talk) 14:51, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for sharing your comments. I have noticed articles being deleted from the AfD pages with only two or three calls for their removal, and I figured that the same standard could apply with preserving articles. Or maybe I was being a little too bold? In any event, I do not believe that the initial reason for deletion retained its relevance in view of your wonderful additions, which is what Ironman alluded to in his earlier comment about "beyond-a-shadow-of-doubt" reasoning for a non-admin closure. But, then again, he only turns up here to tell me what I'm doing wrong! :P But thank you for taking the time to discuss this. I don't get many visitors, so anyone coming here is always welcomed! :) And Adoil Descended (talk) 00:36, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

I have noticed articles being deleted from the AfD pages with only two or three calls for their removal, and I figured that the same standard could apply with preserving articles. There's a difference between "three votes for delete (counting the nominator's), none for keep" and "one vote for delete (the nominator's), two for keep." The first is consensus; the second is not IMO. But as I said: no harm, no foul. Do keep on closing discussions, you're helping Wikipedia. And as always at Wikipedia, if anyone disagrees, they'll let you know! 0;-D (P.S. If Ironholds has adopted you, you're in good hands.) --MelanieN (talk) 14:01, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, Melanie, I wish that you and Ironman gave pep talks to other people on this website. I came back from a holiday break and I just took a look at the recently closed AfDs and I found three non-admin closures that did not follow any of the guidelines that you prescribed: [1], [2] and [3]. This website's unofficial rule seems to be "Every man for himself!" And Adoil Descended (talk) 01:31, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Hey there

I noticed you have put a deletion notice on Lumber Avenue by accident. Its okay, I have removed it so do not worry. Cheers. --Kijoorete-Bahnhof (talk) 23:47, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

It was no accident, and the article is now the subject of an AfD discussion. And Adoil Descended (talk) 23:49, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

For relatively new articles and such, may I suggest wp:speedy deletion? Uses less resources (admin time) Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 00:58, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Jim! You may want to take a look at what I did - I put a Prod tag on Lumber Avenue, but the editor who created that article removed it. So, I took it AfD. I decided to take the other two articles that he created to AfD, because I thought he might remove any Speedy Delete or Prod tags. I just wanted confirmation that my opinion of those articles was correct. In any event, there turned out to be a funny surprise: the editor in question was unmasked as a sockpuppet! So, it all worked out in the end. :) And Adoil Descended (talk) 22:19, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Also recognize that "speedy deletion" means anything less than 7 days ... there's no rush. dangerouspanda 12:44, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Seven days = speedy? Hmmmm. :/ And Adoil Descended (talk) 00:46, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Page Curation newsletter

Hey And Adoil Descended. I'm dropping you a note because you used to patrol new pages. This is just to let you know that we've deployed and developed Page Curation, which augments and supersedes Special:NewPages - there are a lot of interesting new features if you want to get back into the swing of patrolling :). There's some help documentation here if you want to familiarise yourself with the system and start using it. If you find any bugs or have requests for new features, let us know here. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 12:11, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested: Dfgtj

Hello And Adoil Descended. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Dfgtj, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: This is not patent nonsense. G1 only applies to content such as "th453wt3h2srhwrth". However, I have re-tagged it as a G3. Thank you. --v/r Electric Catfish (talk) 17:54, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Aha. Obviously, I need to tighten my G-string. :) And Adoil Descended (talk) 17:56, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Wicked Walking Tours

it has a link. --Cake102992 (talk) 12:58, 12 October 2012 (UTC)