User talk:Bbb23

Unless otherwise requested, I will respond on this page. Please include links to pertinent page(s). Click New section on the top right to start a new topic.

Discussion at User talk:Theonesean#The League of Peace Foundation

You are invited to join the discussion at User talk:Theonesean#The League of Peace Foundation. theonesean 21:40, 5 October 2013 (UTC)Template:Z48

I'll try to get to this tomorrow. If I forget, feel free to remind me. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:16, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

I've looked into it, and think you and the tagger were perfectly correct. I'm one step short of thinking about G3... Peridon (talk) 13:27, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Can you advise

I thought A-7 was for something that was not notable. What would be the correct tag in this case? The page is for a totally unnoteworthy object as far as I can see.Antiqueight ^confer 16:04, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Jumping in, Twinkle has a good description of each tag and will automatically notify the creator. James^x12345 16:08, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

So it is impossible to tag for a thing to be unremarkable (using speedy deletion)?Antiqueight ^confer 16:25, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

A7 is for lack of indicated significance, but only for people and groups of people, named animals, stuff on the web, and organised events. So you can A7 the Church of the Electric Hamster (organisation) but not St Ethelfrock's Church (building), greathyaena.com but not the Hyaena browser, and Gertie the dancing alpaca but not Conia easteria (the newly discovered Easter rabbit species). All CSD categories are limited. Peridon (talk) 16:33, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

We're talking about Gateway Station (Aliens), a relatively silly article that unfortunately cannot be A7ed. A lot of editors tag entire films as A7s. Films cannot be speedied under A7. Sometimes, it's possible to delete them under G11, but one has to be careful that the article satisfies that category. Anyway, when something as silly as the station article is created and I have to decline the speedy, I will often take it to AfD as I did here. I thought of redirecting it to the movie article, but the station isn't even mentioned there, so it seemed pointless.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:41, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

And thank you for that Bbb23. I too looked at just adding the data to the movie article but it didn't seem to fit anywhere. I thought that since it was so un noteworthy it would be better to speedy it than AfD.Antiqueight ^confer 16:53, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

I understand the temptation to A7 something that seems so obviously non-notable, but it's just not permissible. I'm not sure what the original policy rationale was for limiting A7 in this way - haven't been around here long enough, and I don't feel like slogging through the history. It might be that the notability of certain categories of articles is too difficult to determine without discussion. Maybe one of my talk page stalkers knows.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:06, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

I think it's down to battles and compromises at the talk page of the Criteria for Speedy Deletion. It took quite a battle to get events in recently. The current one is new - A11 - for things made up one day (thought up by Johnny and Shaun to impress Jenny - who probably wasn't impressed anyway - and very obvious to any admin who's worked in CSD, and the majority of the taggers. There are those who would, I think, like to end CSD but realise that PROD and AfD just couldn't cope. It's an interesting page for anyone concerned at all with speedy deletion. It's not admin stuff only. The G13 (untouched AfC) battle went on for quite some time. Peridon (talk) 17:35, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

I guess I need to stay on top of things more. The A11 discussion isn't historical; it's now. Thanks for pointing it out.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:25, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Actually they should use...

... a site like this (there are many bad photos, I started creating my family tree, the work is incomplete). Your action was perfect. They impersonated Wiki Management US too. One thing I always say, if a user is puzzled and politely confesses that he can not understand things here, his critical errors might be ignored for sometime. I'm giving my own example, very foolish this and this you'll find the user (I) could not understand where to sign, how to talk etc, but simultaneously trying to learn things. I ask others to see these posts and foolish help requests and then ask to observe the improvement I have done in last two years from that point. One should not be ashamed to ask help or confess mistakes. But, if a user tries be over-smart or attempts to game the system by impersonating Wikimedia US, that is unacceptable. --Tito☸Dutta 18:59, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

I agree. If it was just incompetence or newness or good faith issues, that would be one thing, but there was too much deceit. And I still don't understand changing the name of the Indian municipality to Jose Silva. Thanks for your assistance.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:50, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

AN3

Hi. I've replied. I hope that is clear - if you need anything else, please let me know. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 19:40, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

I do, actually. Please see my response at AN3.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:49, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Replied. Again, please let me know if you need more. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 20:06, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Your last chance, Lugnuts.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:17, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Please update the article in question with details of it being released in Ireland on the 11th October, per this. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 13:48, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Uh, no.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:05, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Why not? Seems a reasonable request. Or can you point me to the policy that allows you to state a random length of time that a user can't edit an article for? Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 07:12, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

You violated WP:3RR. In exchange for not being blocked, you acknowledged the violation, promised to be more careful in the future, and promised not to edit the article for seven days from October 6. Now you want to edit the article by proxy and you're asking me, the administrator who arranged this, to be your proxy. When I refuse, you say it's "a reasonable request". I call that the epitome of chutzpah. I have nothing more to say about this except that if you violate the agreement, I'll block you.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:23, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I promised not to edit it (which I'm sticking to), so I thought it would only be polite to ask you to add that info, as you dictated the sanctions in the first place. Fine if you don't want to/are not capable of doing so, but please can you link me to the relevant policy of stating the timeline for not being able to edit an article. Many thanks. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 07:47, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello. I see you were active yesterday but you've not replied to my request of linking me to the policy in question. Please can you do so? Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 06:30, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

I already told you in my last comment I had nothing more to say.--Bbb23 (talk) 11:56, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

I think what I'm asking is a fair question - why are you being so unreasonable? Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 13:28, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Sir you have deleted my page New R. S. J. Public School Senior Secondary. Sir I request you to get it undelteted. I will be thankful to you. Pratham 09:55, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

That's not going to happen, sorry. In addition to the reason I deleted it (promotional), as @JohnCD: told you, it's also a copyright violation of the school's website.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:17, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi

00:11, 5 October 2013 Bbb23 (talk | contribs) deleted page Như Quỳnh (actress) (A7: No explanation of significance (real person/animal/organization/web content/organized event))

Hi. Did the stub before deletion fail to mention that vi:Như Quỳnh (diễn viên) is a government awarded/recognised People's Artist? With very plentiful sources in the vi.wp article any objection to recreating this? In ictu oculi (talk) 01:31, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

No, it didn't mention the Vietnamese wikipedia. You can recreate it if you like. I mean, it had only one brief sentence in the entire article.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:54, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Recreated, the wikidata link was still there and popped back. Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 03:18, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of page Valerie Loo

Hi there, it has come to my attention that you have deleted the page Valerie Loo and I would like to request for you to undo the deletion. Valerie is a young and budding Singaporean artiste and she has a growing influence among Singaporeans after her involvement in the television program Campus SuperStar (season 4). It is vital for her to have a wiki page for people to find out more about her. Some of the other contestants do have articles about themselves as well thus we see no reason as to why her page was marked for deletion even though it has even more adequate references cited about her. Please do consider undoing the deletion. It seems that it has been marked for deletion as it wasn't clearly stated enough about her significance in the Singapore music and online industry. We will be happy to make any changes to the article after the undoing of the deletion so as to improve the article. Thank you. Happyglenshades (talk) 03:10, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Who is "we", and who are User:Winstonbegone and User:Shanaisthecoolone?--Bbb23 (talk) 23:15, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

an issue to sort out

I have been issued a warning for my edits on the page Seeman (director) though i had provided highly reputable citations for the same...and pro-separatist content has been restored on the page..I had pinged SpacemanSpiff regarding the same and he asked me to take the matter to you...wonder if you would be able to help?!

Thank You none-the-less *cheers* Arlok2005 (talk) 19:23, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

I need a little more help. The warning was issued by a now-blocked user. Some of the material that user restored has been removed by @SpacemanSpiff:. What material do you think should still be removed from the article and why? Also, normally these kinds of issues are better discussed on the article Talk page, or if compelling WP:BLP violations, at WP:BLPN.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:31, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Bbb23, sorry for suggesting that you get in this mess without checking with you, but you are one of very few people who have done BLP cleanups on Indian bios recently. I'm hardpressed for wikitime now and therefore haven't been able to check the entire article, but there are likely some more issues there and in some of the linked articles like Nedumaran etc that I hope to get to over the next week or two unless they get cleaned up earlier. While the OP wasn't exactly clear on the problem, there are some issues related to what they said. I'd also asked Qwyrxian to keep an admin eye on the article. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 03:46, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

@SpacemanSpiff: I'm not sure I want to be known as an experienced person in this area. :-) I won't have time to look at it until the weekend at the earliest; I have too much on my plate and too little time on Wikipedia to clear it. I have a great deal of respect for Qwyrxian's knowledge and handling of these kinds of issues. He's incisive and deft. Hopefully, he'll tackle it.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:59, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

My eyes hurt now, but I think I got most of it out of the article (was primarily a lot of labeling not present in the sources) and primary sourcing of controversial statements as fact. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 05:08, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry; I know how that is. I blocked a new user yesterday and then began a clean-up of all the disruption they had caused in a very short space of time. I couldn't finish because I had to go to dinner. I'm now going to finish. Some of the stuff was truly mind-boggling.--Bbb23 (talk) 11:58, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Johnny Squeaky

Johnny Squeaky (talk · contribs) is continued to edit Soylent Green in evident violation of the consensus on the Talk page and without making any evident effort to gather consensus for their edit. As you warned them about this behavior before, it may be time to engage in stronger action. Please let me know if you have any questions. DonIago (talk) 04:28, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

I have no time right now. I left a brief note at WP:AN3.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:56, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

No problem. I saw that and added my own comment. DonIago (talk) 14:29, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

User:Turkishhistorian

• Turkishhistorian (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Hello Bbb. Just now I saw this edit on my watchlist, which shows User:Turkishistorian once again adding blog-sourced information to this article (from http://dodecad.blogspot.com). Since you'd previously warned Turkishistorian on his talk page about a possible block, perhaps you want to take a look. In this case Turkishistorian is making reference to a Google Doc generated by the anonymous owner of the Dodecad blog. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 15:02, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Craig James

The Google bomb was the most notable thing in his campaign. It's even on Wikipedia's entry for Google bomb. Mentioning it here, with sources, is not vandalism and is not even negative for Craig James so much as it is negative for Internet yahoos.

So if you could stop deleting it, that would be super. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 8.28.150.80 (talk) 22:42, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

I removed it again. I don't care what's in the Google Bomb article. This is in James's article, and it can't remain the way you did it. You cited to an unreliable puff piece (a blog of a magazine) that is clearly intended to be a humorous post. Even if the source were reliable, it doesn't support your assertion that the bomb was "notable", just that it happened. It has a distinctly WP:COATRACK aspect to it. If you want to include it, take it to the article talk page or to WP:BLPN.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:09, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Since the mere coverage of it proves that it was notable, I'll just keep undoing your edit, since your objections are without merit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 8.28.150.77 (talk) 16:01, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Lack of Specifics to your Criticism

Sir or Madame:

You have failed to cite WHAT in particular in my edits LACKS a source. There are plenty of sources throughout the article justifying the edits I made (LOOK at the links). Other edits are simply that a book is now published (before, the article said that something "will be published in July"...do you object to the idea that July has passed? Or do you object to the book being published, because you haven't bothered to look on Amazon?)

I do not appreciate my work being undone without ANY constructive criticism of WHAT is improper. Justify yourself or I will seek arbitration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ballroom Dancer 001 (talk • contribs) 23:21, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

If you ask me nicely, I'll help you. Otherwise, I won't. So far, you haven't. You're a new editor. The only edits you've made so far have been to Caroline Joan S. Picart. What's your interest in her? By the way, edit warring is a no-no at Wikipedia.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:26, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

You are clearly a little child. My "new-ness" is not logically relevant. My interest in Dr. Picart is not relevant to editing a Wikipedia page. You have no right to speak of "edit-wars" given that you refuse to answer questions about how to edit this properly. If you were an adult, you would address the specifics of my request; instead, you act like a child playing games. Her article will be edited for accuracy as opposed to your puerile behavior.

I'd recommend that you review Wikipedia's policies on personal attacks if you're going to continue to address editors in the manner you've just displayed. I'd also recommend that you review WP:OWN with regards to your claims that the article "will" be edited in any particular manner and look at the link Bbb provided to edit-warring. Put simply, I don't know what you're hoping to accomplish by addressing your fellow editors in such a manner. DonIago (talk) 05:53, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

why did u delete the page i created

why did u delete my page? There are plenty of sources — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dante20000 (talk • contribs) 01:32, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

• It didn't, and it didn't make credible claims of importance. It did mention her height, though. Drmies (talk) 02:43, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

I like your edit summary for the Wikipedia-article from 10 October: assuming these sources are reliable, they don't support the assertions... it is quite poetic. Soerfm (talk) 10:10, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Concise perhaps, but poetic? :-) Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:35, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

1RR

I literally don't see where I violated the 1RR. I don't see where I removed or restored content, whether whole or in part, more than 1 time in a period of 24 hours. I am not challenging your observation, I just literally don't see it. Sopher99 (talk) 18:15, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Here they are:

1. In this series of consecutive edits you mostly added new locations. However, you also changed material in two spots.
2. In these two consecutive edits you changed material.
3. In these three consecutive edits you changed material.
4. In this edit you removed a location by commenting it out and "contesting" it.
5. In these two consecutive edits you changed material.
6. In this edit you changed material.

As you can see, that's six.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:28, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

I don't understand this. Any edit "changes material" in some way. Are they all to be considered "reverts"? I thought reverts were when you "undid" someone else's edit, completely. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:51, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Technically, the only edit that doesn't count as a revert is the addition of material (brand new - not restoring something that had earlier been removed). That said, administrators have some discretion on how strictly the definition of a revert is applied in a given case, but a straight undo clearly is not the only thing that counts.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:57, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Bbb23, could we get your attention on edits on the same topic by the same user upon the restriction lifted? It was not me (among others) this time to clean up the mess this particular user is causing to this template/article. I would like to ask for your opinion (post 2nd 1RR warning) on the last 24h edits by this particular user. Thank you.Ariskar (talk) 02:37, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm about to go off-wiki and won't be able to look at it today. If it's not resolved by tomorrow, feel free to remind me.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:39, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Your post is not very clear, but if you're speaking of AOnline, they have been blocked. If you're referring to a different editor, I'm not sure who it is.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:49, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

My apologies, the post was relevant to AOnline (multiple reverts, 1 1RR warning to date) and Sopher99 (7 edits changing content in 2h after restriction lifted, 2 1RR warnings to date).Ariskar (talk) 12:47, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Maybe you can give me some diffs.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:55, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Syrian topic intervention

First of all Bbb23, thank you for intervening to this topic. A lot of edit warring was going on. I have reported this incident violation last night on article. I do not understand why I am on the warned user list, however I am fine with it. I try to abide the rules, made no more than 1 reverts per 24h and my only double edit was for template fix of my previous one (m). My edits were documented, referenced and discussed as per the topics raised in the relevant talk page. I will continue to contribute in a good faith manner. As a fairly new WP editor, if I did not go by the editing policy and did something wrong, I apologise and would like to ask you to point me to it, for future (avoidance) reference. RegardsAriskar (talk) 20:12, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

@Ariskar: you made three reverts today, one at 12:22, one at 14:15, and two consecutive edits the last of which was at 14:47. All times are UTC.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:20, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Indeed this is true. I have made the 12:22 revert, an edit badly done to restore removed content, which was uncuccessful (mistake in the code) and I had to make 2 minor edits later to fix it. My apologies if this counts as a second revert. It was technically an edit, however I see your point. I have also warned and discussed in a constructive manner edits previously with one counterpart AOnline on his talk page. Regards and I guess end of discussion.Ariskar (talk) 20:34, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

A bowl of strawberries for you!

For deleting Terry Tang and Siraj Awad within 10 minutes of my tagging them. Thanks. --Jakob (Scream about the things I've broken) 00:02, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, it's nice to know they're still in season. Where's the shortbread and the whipped cream?--Bbb23 (talk) 00:08, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Sandeep Maheshwari

This page should not be speedily deleted because... (All the copyright content has been removed and only reliable sources of wikipedia has been provoded,its an important article with so many relaible sources ,provided for that).. first see the article contents and discuss on talk page . dont delete it directly ,prsuming that it will be promotional again. just see the article first. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nitishkumartn (talk • contribs) 15:26, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Don't recreate the page unless you eliminate the blatantly promotional material.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:45, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

blatantly promotional material,if any have been removed now--Nitishkumartn (talk) 15:58, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Deleted my page on T.S.Raghavendran

I had mentioned in the Talk that the article is yet to be updated completely. Did you not read that? It isn't a promotion. The books are about a philosophy. Also he is Limca Book Record holder, its all yet to be added. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amru92 (talk • contribs) 16:38, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Articles are not supposed to be "finished" after being moved to mainspace. If you want to work on them, do so in your sandbox or create a subpage for the article in your user space. The article was incredibly promotional. It would be better for you to use WP:AFC so you can get feedback about a proposed article from more experienced editors.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:55, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of SARAVANAN ENGIRA SURYA.

If I have to agree to the Wiki definition of a 'spam' then could you kindly advise me how to create a page for a to-be-released-Indian-movie under the "Upcoming Movie" category (to be released in a regional Language). Kindly be specific and do not jus redirect to a generic FAQ page pls! Your help and guidance would be much appreciated. Thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Funtoontalkies (talk • contribs) 16:49, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

I suggest you submit a proposed article through WP:AFC so you get some feedback as to how to create an article that will be encyclopedic and meet notability guidelines.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:38, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for your level head. Per a suggestion at the drama page, note: [1] Montanabw^(talk) 17:39, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Your striking your comments is appreciated.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:42, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

My point still stands, but I phrased it inelegantly. Redacted and rephrased. I think NH is right and would support that proposal, but not sure if I want to engage in the new round of drama yet. (sigh) Montanabw^(talk) 17:45, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

I understand, but there is nothing wrong with your expressing an opinion; it was the manner in which it was expressed that was objectionable. The substantive disagreement can, of course, continue, theoretically ad infinitum, as often happens at Wikipedia - or at least it sometimes seems like forever.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:04, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

It was nice to return from a walk and find it resolved, thank you, let's do content (and there was an infobox already, lovely) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:17, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Taking a walk sounds lovely, Gerda. I'm a big fan of walks and hikes (walks where I live and hikes on vacations).--Bbb23 (talk) 15:04, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

So true about ad infinitum. Phooey on that. Montanabw^(talk) 17:38, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Anugoonj

sir why havee u deleted the article it is one of hte biggst fest of india and one should no of it !! it is from the state goverment of delhi(capital of india ) >> ? what else you want to know ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrRAWATJI (talk • contribs) 18:58, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

@MrRAWATJI: Please don't just re-create pages that were deleted without addressing the issues that led to their deletion. @Bbb23: It's back; can you delete it again? Jackmcbarn (talk) 19:34, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

It was deleted again by another admin while I was off-wiki. Not necessary to ping me on my own talk page, Jack, although, as usual, I appreciate your help.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:58, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

The ping of you was actually for MrRAWATJI's benefit, to make it clear the second sentence wasn't intended for him. Jackmcbarn (talk) 18:29, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Your advice

I need some advice whether we can include 1970 Syrian Corrective Revolution under the umbrella of Syrian civil war sanctions: on one hand it is clearly having to do with the modern Syrian government topics - the formation of modern Baathist party leadership under Assad family; but on the other hand it is quiet far away in the past and not directly has to do with the Syrian civil war; finally, if we go by ARBPIA-based guidelines - it would be included as a closely related topic. At first i did put the Syrian sanctions notice on the talk page, but now i'm not sure (so in the meanwhile i removed it).

Any way, there is currently a very aggressive editing there by some user [2], which made this article blocked twice by an administrator within a week. The question is - do you think 1RR of Syrian sanctions should apply to that article? If so, then the aggressive editor should be warned/blocked for 1RR.GreyShark (dibra) 21:24, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

I don't think the article should be subject to Syrian civil war general sanctions. It's too remote, even broadly construed.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:21, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. In this regard, i think we should set a defined place to discuss such issues. I guess Talk:Syrian civil war/General sanctions is not proper, since it is not a regular talk page. Taking the topic every time to AN:RFC is too inconsistent and using user/administrator talk page is too unofficial. What would you suggest?GreyShark (dibra) 16:58, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

David Butts

You deleted the page for David Butts. The creator was still working on the page and has references to verify notability. Can you please restore the page? --Another Believer _(Talk) 22:47, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

No, but if the creator wants me to WP:USERFY it, I will.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:50, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Yes, please. Thanks. --Another Believer _(Talk) 22:53, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Sorry to be fussy, but you're not the creator. If you want me to userfy it to your user space, I will. If the editor who created it wants me to userfy it to their user space (and asks me to do so), I will.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:55, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

I submitted the request on behalf of users here at the Portland arts edit-athon. --Another Believer _(Talk) 00:19, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Yes, please userfy it to the contributor's space. Hobsonlane (talk) 23:47, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Likewise for another article we were working on at the same Arts edit-athon in Portland: wiki/Mad_Dog_Garage Hobsonlane (talk) 00:18, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Why were these 2 pages deleted without giving the contributors (there were 3 contributors to these 2 articles) time to address your concern? How can we improve it so it will not be summarily deleted when we resubmit it? Hobsonlane (talk) 23:48, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

I've userfied both articles to Hobsonlane's user space, e.g., User:Hobsonlane/Mad Dog Garage (the other one is the same but with David Butts). If you want to avoid deletion, make sure the article is not speedy deletable before you create it in article space.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:25, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Complex infinity

Hi, I see you have speedily deleted Complex infinity. I do not know what the previous contents was, but redirect to Infinity#Complex_analysis would be appropriate. Jmath666 (talk) 03:51, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

The page had a bizarre history. Back in 2006, it was created as a redirect to Riemann sphere. It looked to me like a good faith creation, but Riemann sphere never uses the term "complex infinity", so it wasn't clear it would make sense to anyone (I'm not a mathemetician). Then, recently, it looked like it was vandalized. An editor tagged it as nonsense, an often poor choice as a CSD tag. Obviously, the tagging editor hadn't looked at the history. I was going to restore the redirect, but for reasons I cannot explain, I had trouble doing so. Finally, given all the bizarre circumstances, I deleted it as an implausible redirect - not ideal, but at the same time, not a great loss in my view.

Your redirect is more obviously plausible to a lay person. Why don't you create it yourself? I could do so, but it makes more sense for you to do it than me. Let me know if you have any problems or questions.--Bbb23 (talk) 10:05, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

I agree that Infinity#Complex_analysis is a better redirect (that place explains well how this infinity fits on the Riemann sphere). I made that redirect myself now. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 18:03, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Luispedros

The sports bios he's writing are poor, but actually look to be notable, and I'm seeing a number of constructive edits. I think this is an editor who is here to build, but doesn't know how we work, hence the edit warring. However, his comment of "فارسی متوجه میشید برادر؟ " made here looks to translate as "English maid found a brother" - perhaps an insult or personal attack? We need a Farsi-speaker to explain to him how we work and try and nip this in the bud. GiantSnowman 15:00, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

My Google translate came up with something even less comprehensible. Luis had changed it from English to Farsi. The English said something about "subversive". I don't know any Farsi speakers here. The reporter at AN3 is Iranian, but I don't think the two see eye to eye (heh). Did you look at the content merits of the battle itself? I don't normally get into content much when evaluating EW reports, but because both parties are warring ... Thanks for helping out.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:23, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

It's not a content dispite per se - it's basiaclly aesthetics. One editor likes it looking one way, the other like it looking another way. Both have violated and both should be blocked and told to take it to the article talk page. GiantSnowman 15:28, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Both were warring but neither breached WP:3RR. In any event, Mark protected the article, so there won't be any blocks for now. Thanks again.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:40, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Washington Redskins

Thanks for undoing the last of the blocked user's edits. I was wary of doing it myself because I didn't want to violate 3RR. Appreciate your assistance. 1995hoo (talk) 18:17, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

No problem. I figured you were reluctant to undo it again. I rarely pick a version, but the edits in this case were arguably vandalism.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:23, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, considering that the banned user simply copied-and-pasted text and included reference numbers without the references themselves, I think it would be hard to argue it wasn't vandalism. Either way, thanks for the assistance. Much appreciated. Hopefully it won't all start up again next week! 1995hoo (talk) 19:56, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Slavic Chorale

Excuse me, you deleted the page without allowing me the chance to contest the deletion nomination or improve the page. Can you please restore the page, so I can provide the needed information? --Sanya3 (talk) 20:08, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

I was going to offer to WP:USERFY it for you, but I see you've already created it in your user space (Sanya3/Slavic Chorale). I've removed the A7 tag from it, though.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:47, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Syrian Civil War 1RR violation

• User:Blade-of-the-South (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Ghouta chemical attack (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Hi, I think this (following [3] and [4] in the last 24 hours) violates both the spirit and the letter of the Syrian Civil War sanctions. When you get a chance, can you please follow up with the user? I will notify Blade shortly that I posted this here. VQuakr (talk) 04:47, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi thanks for the heads up VQuakr. I can see why you might think the above but I did a lot of work which you changed en mass here [5] And I thought it was good material, which we had been talking about esp as the new editor Swawa came in with those points of his. This started when you edited out again en masse discussed edits that Swawa bought up and I put in. Here. [6]. I put them back in again and you changed it back again. I did some thinking. I was tempted to just revert, but took a leaf from what you did with your one edit removing mulitple disparate lines. (I can see how you removed all this material is a way to circumvent the one revert rule). I saw you had some points and reworked some of the material back in.

You seem to have issues with Swawa refs. On talk I suggested you take issue with a ref you dont think is reliable on the appropriate forum, rather than delete it without discussion. Please re read Podiaebbas comments in the 'Secret US intel' thread about refs. The two editors here and myself all hold the same view. You dont agree with us and keep changing the edits back. Its frustrating. Blade-of-the-South (talk) 07:02, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi Blade, I do not want to get into an extended discussion between us on Bbb23's talk page (I am happy to do that civilly on either of our talk pages), but I do take issue with two things you say here. 1st, making smaller numbers of complex edits is more my style, while you prefer to use a series of smaller edits. One style is not better than the other, and this is why revert rules count chronologically contiguous edits as a single edit. My combining several changes into one edit was not an attempt to "circumvent" anything. 2nd, my edit did indeed remove some material (thus counting as a revert in the context of 1RR), but it was not a simple click of an undo button. I only changed things that were problemmatic per WP:BRD, as opposed to "nuking" everything you did. Kind regards! VQuakr (talk) 18:55, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi VQuakr I didnt know about the chronologically contiguous edits as a single edit.Someone put some thought into that rule. Accepted. Yes it would be kinda annoying to see this chatter on your talk page. Sorry this happened Bbb23. Blade-of-the-South (talk) 20:50, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

@VQuakr: Do you still need any assistance from me?--Bbb23 (talk) 23:51, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I think Blade-of-the-South's continuing activity at Ghouta chemical attack constitutes POV-pushing and edit warring. Due to the additional layer of complexity resulting from the relevant sanctions, I thought it made more sense to bring it to your attention rather than a noticeboard. I can take it to EW/N if you prefer. VQuakr (talk) 23:59, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

ARBCC followup

Hi, Thanks for the formal warming to DigbyDalton FYI see followup post at ANI NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 15:56, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Possible return of AnddoX

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/ServiceGhost&offset=&limit=500&target=ServiceGhost

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/AnddoX&offset=&limit=500&target=AnddoX

Same articles (Ninja Gaiden, Zelda and Metal Gear games), same kind of edits (particularily telling is the replacement of Ayane's infobox image, which was Anndo X obsession), created few weeks after AnddoX was indef banned. --Niemti (talk) 16:56, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Also F-Zero, Splinter Cell and Bayonetta games, etc. Absolutely AnddoX. --Niemti (talk) 17:05, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

There was considerable evidence to block ServiceGhost based on timing (they created the account shortly after the CU was performed), same articles, and style. However, the clincher was User:198.91.223.178. Back on April 2, the IP made this edit and signed themselves as User:SOCOM Warrior, a confirmed puppet of AnddoX. On April 13, the IP made this edit on ServiceGhost's talk page thanking a user for the Welcome template. On September 22, ServiceGhost replaced the IP's sig with their own in this edit.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:26, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

ghouta

Is there a particular reason why you have put that message on my page? I'm aware its a contested area and don't really need reminding. have I transgressed some line? Sayerslle (talk) 01:00, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Yes, you violated WP:1RR at Ghouta chemical attack. I noticed it when I was evaluating the reverts of another editor. I chose to warn you rather than block you. Please be more careful.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:06, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Right - I was oblivious, - the UN report section was bothering me , unbalanced looking, and I didn't notice. Will take more care. Sayerslle (talk) 01:17, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Film Fan

Can you please check the users Sock puppet investigation archive please? Sohambanerjee1998 10:13, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

I reverted your edits there. You need to reopen it properly. I don't have time to look at it right now as I have to go to work. You could ask another SPI clerk how to go about if if you wish.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:04, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Please provide me to a link where I can understand how to reopen it properly. Sohambanerjee1998 13:24, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

I'd be happy to help you, but I think filing an SPI is not the way to go unless it were to continue. It looks to me like Film Fan was using that IP (which is a proxy server, although not an open proxy server) to make that one edit to your talk page. The previous edits by that IP address appear to have nothing to do with Film Fan. I would talk to @Diannaa: the blocking administrator, about it and allow her to decide what action is appropriate. That would be much more efficient.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:43, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

@Sohambanerjee1998: I agree this is Film Fan, but since it's a dynamic IP and other people are using the range, a range block is not appropriate. Blocking the individual IP is not appropriate either, as it looks like he is assigned a new IP each time he turns on his computer, and the edit is already a day old. Please let me know on my talk page next time he edits as an IP, though unfortunately we are all in totally different time zones so it's difficult to take prompt action. I will keep a record off-wiki of the various IPs used in case we need them for future reference. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:03, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

@Diannaa:, yes absolutely. His IP is not a static one but a Dynamic, I understood it the time I opened the IP's talk and contributions. Otherwise I would have taken prompt action but my internet connection is a bit problematic so I cannot pursue it even though I want to. Sohambanerjee1998 06:59, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

@Diannaa:, but he is already blocked so for this Sock-puppetry and block avoiding tendency a ban is in the making, right? He is an editor with tremendous possibilities so in my opinion we should give him another chance. Sohambanerjee1998 07:05, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

His use of two different IPs at Talk:Titash Ekti Nadir Naam#Requested move is a much more serious infraction than socking to post some advice on your talk page. At Titash Ekti Nadir Naam, he was socking to undermine the process of consensus - he was attempting to appear to be several people in an attempt to sway the outcome of a move discussion. Combined with the edit warring to try to override local consensus as to which film posters should be used and his demeaning approach to communication, his behaviour demonstrates that he does not presently have the cooperative attitude so necessary to successfully fit into the Wiki community without disrupting other people's enjoyment of editing here. Hopefully he can and will change, and can re-join the editing community at some point in the future. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:04, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

The feelings mutual. Sohambanerjee1998 15:25, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

I posted that message because I forgot about the email user feature and your edits were utterly silly. Nothing wrong with that. I hate it when editors make it about them instead of the content. The other accusations are bullshit but I don't care because I have much better things to do with my life than contribute to Wikipedia. Diannaa, you are too power-hungry and take yourself too seriously. Bye. 82.132.214.244 (talk) 15:31, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Black Tulip

Thank you for your kind tips. However, please do not remove "controversy" section of this page as it is well documented that MPEG protested the producer of this film. Thank you for your anticipated cooperation.-- Dunforget (talk) 00:48, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

I have reported your edits to WP:BLPN. At the rate you are going on both articles, you are headed for a block if you persist.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:58, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Cousin Terio

Cousin Terio is signifigant and the article does not deserve to be deleted. Terio is insanely popular. Do a google search for him and you will see. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mathgenious989 (talk • contribs) 01:48, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Infobox photo consensus discussion

Hi. Can you offer your opinion on which photo would be better for the Rebecca Housel Infobox in this discussion? If you are unable to, I understand; you don't have to reply to this message. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 03:36, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Unblock request of CenterforIsraelEducation

Hello Bbb23. CenterforIsraelEducation (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), whom you have blocked, is requesting to be unblocked. The request for unblock is on hold while waiting for a comment from you. Regards, Miniapolis 21:32, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

No obligation

Hi Bbb, if you should feel like playing sleuth to a complicated piece of original research, I've started the ball rolling at the BLP noticeboard regarding MS Mikhail Lermontov and Richard Prebble. I'm calling it quits for the day, but there's a lot of investigative journalism here, and it's not easy to separate reliable sources from an agenda. Anyway, there's no expectation that you dig into this any time soon, if at all, but you're very good at this sort of thing, and there may be talk page stalkers who take an interest as well. All that said, consider this is an opportunity to say hello, more than an attempt to complicate your life. I hope you're well. Cheers, JNW (talk) 00:21, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

A little more help requested please

Hi, in the SSCS talk page I am trying to understand why people are picking and chosing some categories to bury in sub cats of subcats but not others. I feel like I am being personally insulted and targeted for comment rather than having the issue addressed. Could you please take a look and see if I'm crazy. I'm not trying to bait or fight, just understand why favorable cats are kept and unfavorable ones are buried in subcats. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Sea_Shepherd_Conservation_Society#.22Eco-terrorism.22 I have asked the user a number of times to stop focusing on me but to address the issue of content I am trying to get at. 76.112.8.146 (talk) 18:35, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

You've never actually mentioned "favorable" and 'unfavorable" cats or asked that question. You just asked why specific cats are hidden and others aren't. "Favorable" cats aren't necessarily kept in the article. Category:Sea Shepherd Conservation Society is a member of Category:Animal rights movement, Category:Conservation organisations, Category:Environmental organizations based in Washington (state), Category:Fisheries organizations, Category:International environmental organizations and Category:Wikipedia categories named after environmental organizations, all of which you'd probably regard to be favorable. --AussieLegend (✉) 18:50, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Let's keep this on the article talk page. I've added a comment there pinging an administrator who is very familiar with categorization policies/guidelines. She hasn't edited today, so I'm not sure when she'll respond, but hopefully she can express her opinion when she gets to it.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:55, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Discussion at User talk:Martha Johnson

I wrote the material you removed based on an interview I did with Martha Johnson. Why was it taken down. If you need citation, I can provide it. I am new to this and could use help, not removing my material. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aaronbadgley (talk • contribs) 21:52, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Amazon Eve

I am an inexperienced content provider. May I respectfully ask why the link to Harper's Bazaar was deleted? This was quite a coup for Eve. Any advice you care to share will be appreciated. BTW, is there an easy way to insert my name and the timestamp? Thank you, in advance, for your assistance. User:Greenwayfriend 21:47 19 October 2013 (ET) —Preceding undated comment added 01:49, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm not going to be able to discuss this with you until tomorrow as I have to go off-wiki. I also reverted your later change as well, sorry. These things must be discussed as what you're doing is controversial and it's a controversial article. As for inserting your name, you can either type in four tildes or, depending on what interface you're using, there may be a little pencil above the edit box that you can click on that puts in two hyphens and four tildes (see WP:SIGN).--Bbb23 (talk) 03:21, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

@Greenwayfriend: You'll need to find some prose about Eve from Harper's Bazaar, not just pictures, and then find a way to weave it into the article, rather than just cite to a picture and a video in sentence fragments.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:47, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation. I found the signature button. I set up my notifications to send me an email. The address looks right and I checked junk. Any ideas? Again, I appreciate your helping me with the most basic stuff. My signature generated a talk link. I don't use my talk. --Greenwayfriend (talk) 13:20, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

I suggest you read NPOV

I, in turn, suggest that you familiarize yourself with Wikipedia policy, because it is quite obviously a violation of any number of content policies to categorize an organization under a category that more-or-less directly states that the organization is guilty of terrorism. There is no "consensus" issue to be raised here. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 03:33, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Ansaldo STS

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ansaldo_STS Please leave the revisions from 10/17/2013 (originally) and again on 10/21/2013. The company reorganized recently. The information is factual and can be verified.