User talk:Drmies: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 18:00, 26 September 2015

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40
41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50
51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60
61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70
71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80
81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90
91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100
101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110
111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120
121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130
131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140
141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149

Template:NoBracketBot

John J. Maalouf - Attorney

Hi Dr; it's 99, and I could use some help at this new bio. Headstrong WP:SPA is doing a little promo, with external links for buying the subject's book. I'm getting tired of reverting, and have taken this to the BLP board. By the way, hope all is well with you. Cheers, 2601:188:0:ABE6:B41B:4FC1:242D:5468 (talk) 21:44, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I see that JzG took care of your problem already, while I was making stuffed monkey heads. Yes, things are no better than last time. I trust you are the same. Bad people always fare well, a Dutch saying goes, which bodes nothing but ill for you and me. Drmies (talk) 23:01, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You sound absolutely dolorous, which is how I was last week. I do hope you soon transcend stuffing monkey heads, though I don't have a clue what that means. 2601:188:0:ABE6:B41B:4FC1:242D:5468 (talk) 23:44, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Revert

That material I re-added its not "random" go back through the page history.CombatMarshmallow (talk) 00:24, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I did--much farther than you. This is the yardstick. Drmies (talk) 00:27, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

whatever. Theres nothing incoherent about it. Also Controversial edits are supposed to be on the talk page. From what someone made a fuss about with me. However. I can tell by the "much further than you" there is no "contest". So if you are picking up an attitude don't even bother with it. I don't get emotionally charged.CombatMarshmallow (talk) 00:32, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're missing the point. The diff I gave was for the version of the article when it was promoted to FA. Drmies (talk) 02:02, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ok well the addition of that material hadn't and hasn't changed the status of the article being featured, so whats the point of supporting its removal when with all the editors that have and do contribute it reasonably denotes consensus. If "you" feel it doesn't make sense, why not re-write it to make it "coherent". Instead of helping to keep it erased. There is always something to learn. If you can share why it definitely wouldn't hurt. CombatMarshmallow (talk) 03:25, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That material was so completely out of whack that there is no way you can just fit it in. And I don't "feel" things--I argue them. I teach composition and stuff like that. I mean, look at your version. This is an article on a genre, a genre whose historical development is sketched over a few decades. In your version, look at the section "Recent trends: mid–late 2000s and 2010s", where one would expect--you guessed it--an overview of recent trends. And what we get is an opening paragraph of two sentences on metalcore, with an example of commercial success of one metalcore band mentioned. So far so good, but the second paragraph starts "Welsh band Bullet for My Valentine's third studio album Fever debuted at position number 3 on the Billboard 200 and number 1 on Billboard's Rock and Alternative charts, making it the band's most successful record to date." What on earth does that have to do with "Recent trends"? I'm going to assume that this band plays metalcore (it doesn't say it does), and that these charting albums fall in the "mid-late 2000s and 2010s" (it doesn't say that), and that "to date"--well, God know what that means. The sentence in no clear way relates to the topic of the section, and it's not even a good topic sentence for the rest of the paragraph, since the sentence is exclusively about one band's chart success.
So that's poor writing and poor paragraph construction. But the material you restored also controls the sentence "Other notable experiments include Asking Alexandria mixing Trance, this has led to an explosion of bands following this combination." First of all, that's clearly a comma splice there in the middle. Second, it's unverified, so why one experiment would be "notable" is anybody's guess. Also, I have no idea what "Asking Alexandria mixing Trance" means--a band mixes trance (a genre of music) with metalcore? or trance with heavy metal (the subject of the article? Or Asking Alexandria is a DJ who remixed music by a band called Trance? And then, which "combination" is being followed in this "explosion"? I listed three valid readings of the sentence, but maybe the combinations are found also in the previous (poor) sentence, "Bands like Motionless In White have experimented with Metalcore further by including Gothic Metal and Industrial Metal influences".
Now, if you remove all that nonsense, you get an opening paragraph on metalcore, followed by a paragraph that starts "Evolving even further from metalcore..."--that's a perfectly valid rhetorical progression, possibly worth of an FA article. With that nonsense, you get an incoherent collection of undated and unorganized factoids in sentences that don't pass basic grammatical muster. You see, it's not about "feeling". Drmies (talk) 15:56, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thats a great explanation. Thank You. I need a new coffee and to read it again and further reply. Thats not "my" version, its the version that was argued to me. I was kind of "debated" to by another editor who said the "making it the band's most successful record to date" and the like, where equal to "recent trends". No one agreed with me or him so I figured they were correct, at least on the page. It seemed like all those other groups mentioned where a continuation and variable of metalcore. So it seemed appropriate. CombatMarshmallow (talk) 19:52, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

CombatMarshmallow, thanks. This is the kind of thing we should do more of in Freshman Comp; I wish I had enough time in my literature classes to discuss principles of composition. There's a couple of metalheads here who know how to write. Look, I didn't think this was yours, right--I figured you got caught up in it, and that happens. What really needs to be done here is a comparison between that 2007 version and today's version, to see how it's been expanded, if that still makes sense, if the overall structure needs tweaking, and if (this happens frequently) new sources are properly templated and of high quality. What else happens often is editors stick info in (a name, a factoid) as if the following reference, which was already there, also verifies that new info. It's very tedious to have to check this, but it really needs to be done. Thanks again: we need editors with some passion, and you clearly have that. Drmies (talk) 20:21, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense. Thank You.CombatMarshmallow (talk) 21:31, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Vandal only account

Amin_İsgəndərli is basically a vandal only account. Since the users created account they have done nothing but vandalize Armenian related articles by continuously adding West Azerbaijan right after Armenia. It is nothing but propaganda and this user keeps adding it just like they did with Yerevan[1] on numerous occasions, History of Armenia[2] on numerous occasions, Urartu[3] and now Armenia[4]. I think a block should be issued as this is not a constructive user, they are just spreading propaganda. Thank You. Ninetoyadome (talk) 06:38, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Already taken care of by Materialscientist, a well-known fighter of propagandistic disruption. Well done MS--that's another $5 for you. Drmies (talk) 15:57, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

How to Kill a Mockingbird listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect How to Kill a Mockingbird. Since you had some involvement with the How to Kill a Mockingbird redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Lakun.patra (talk) 07:36, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lakun.patra, that discussion got shut down pretty quickly, and it was done so correctly. I hope the reasons given were convincing for you: this was just not a good nomination, and that HOWTO thing didn't make any sense--I think you probably didn't read the book or the whole of the article, but now you know what to do next time. All the best, Drmies (talk) 15:00, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Siege of Kapisa (2nd nomination)

Did you get my email? Doug Weller (talk) 14:38, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

RfD closure

Well, if you'd like to reciprocate, I've got some juicy ones for you. [I really should take a break from closing TfDs now. Which is no easy task in this unholy heat, by the way.] Alakzi (talk) 16:09, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm leaving Dr. Who alone, but I "closed" NNDB--I have no idea how to file that paperwork. Drmies (talk) 16:20, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- No worries; thank you. Let's see if we can get a bot-op to orphan it now. Alakzi (talk) 16:40, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I copied some code from somewhere else for that "temporarily inactive" one--I'm sure you'll check to see if I did it right. Let Kelapstick handle Dr. Who: he's a fan. Drmies (talk) 16:25, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Could you please undelete Template:NNDB? It has not been orphaned and currently a red link to it is displayed on each of the 1,000+ articles that contained it. Orphaning needs to be completed before the template is deleted. Example is Ayn Rand, which has the red link at the bottom. Thanks. ~ Rob^Talk 19:03, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - (talk page stalker) Wouldn't a bot to remove that template from the 1,000+ articles be a better option? I agree with the TfD discussion that there's no way NNDb can be considered a "reliable source"... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:21, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    - Hey, you all are the template editors--you're the clever ones. Make that bot and automate the whole damn process! I say we turn Alakzi into an admin and let them take care of it. Drmies (talk) 03:23, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      - I think that suggestion alone could start an ANI thread. Heh. For some reason, the transclusion count on NNDB has gone way down according to Alakzi. I had planned to run a bot, but maybe it won't be necessary. Did you happen to delete any redirects Drmies? That may explain it and would need to be undone to find all the transclusions. (Not accusing you of anything, just throwing out an idea since I can't make heads or tails of this). Ah, some digging through the logs revealed another admin deleted the redirect as per G8. I've recreated it to aid in finding and removing transclusions. I'll automate this and submit it as a bot task eventually. ~ Rob^Talk 04:40, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        Well, I should've thought of that. Alakzi (talk) 08:14, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Mind taking a look at this TfD and assessing consensus when you have time? It's beyond what a non-admin can do. I'll take care of any aspects beyond the closure itself. ~ Rob^Talk 01:21, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:BU Rob13, it's split exactly down the middle. If this were an article and there were no other concerns (BLP, for instance) I would choose merge since merging is a little bit of both (you can "merge" something out of existence) and it might just satisfy both groups. But in this case, I don't rightly know what "merge" means; I don't know what it means to merge one template into another. You really need a smarter person to settle this. Why don't you ask Trappist the Monk? They know stuff, and they have power. Sorry Rob--I hate to disappoint, but you don't want me closing this one. Drmies (talk) 01:34, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Probably wise not to close, then. For future reference, a template merge generally means that the functionality of the template facing deletion or redirection is first merged into the template that will replace it. In this case, it would mean some form of parameter to allow alternative formatting of a block quote. The deletes, on the other hand, are claiming that the functionality should not be merged because its use would be harmful. ~ Rob^Talk 02:44, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yep--impossible for me to decide what's wise. In the meantime I started a GA review, made some copy edits, wrote up a stub on a computer scientist, started an SPI and blocked a master and two puppets, did two mass-rollbacks and two mass-deletes, yakked a bit about football, made popcorn for the kids, and helped out an IP editor. See, there's fun to be had outside the world of templates. Drmies (talk) 02:48, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There sure is. Football is going especially well for me. I had Gronk on my fantasy team. ~ Rob^Talk 06:02, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

~~Tell what to do~~
Drmies, you mentioned (referring to this) that if someone tells you what to do you do it. Let's see. After walking your dog, review Jauchzet Gott in allen Landen, BWV 51 for GA. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:35, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You'll have to tell me to pass it. Drmies (talk) 00:30, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Pass it. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:32, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"the Alakzi cantata" is on the German Main page, DYK? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:56, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry Gerda--I'll get back to it ASAP. Drmies (talk) 16:39, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~Genndy Tartakovsky's SpongeBob SquarePants~~
~~Hello, could you please delete and SALT Genndy Tartakovsky's SpongeBob SquarePants.. It's been recreated three times now. Thanks, JMHamo (talk) 23:03, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]~~
Wizardman, don't you think it's time to revisit Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2013_February_12#WP:ANI_2.0? You're welcome to peruse my archives; there's plenty more. Drmies (talk) 23:14, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~This time I'm not asking anything,~~
...but sharing my disbelief. Have a look at this business. The times that I've fucked up and reverted wrongly or bestowed mistaken warnings, I've apologized as quickly as possible. I'm not holding my breath on this one [5]; [6]. Hope you're well, and done with monkey heads or whatnot. Cheers from old 99, 2601:188:0:ABE6:5DC5:559E:75C4:C241 (talk) 02:14, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you know. Reading is always more work than hitting revert. I'm fine, though I'd kill for a cigarette. I'd kill you if that would get me one. Stewed monkey heads were very tasty--recipe from Calvin's mom. Drmies (talk) 02:53, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Really, kill me for a smoke. That makes me feel oh so fuzzy about our virtual friendship. Never having fallen prey to the need for tobacco, I've no empathy for your difficulties. If, however, you voiced similar sentiments over chocolate, I'd understand. Enough. I'm waking in less than six hours, to take a train into NY and teach a group of wide-eyed students. 2601:188:0:ABE6:5DC5:559E:75C4:C241 (talk) 03:14, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You'd reconsider if you've tried smoking monkeys.--Mr Fink (talk) 03:15, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I bet you were never one of the cool kids in high school, 99. (I stayed away from monkeys.) Have a good night, and all the best tomorrow, fourteen years and a day later. Drmies (talk) 03:19, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Never been cool my whole life. But undeniably charismatic, and a tad irresistible to women folk. Take it easy. 2601:188:0:ABE6:5DC5:559E:75C4:C241 (talk) 03:23, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

And thanks for blocking some of the vandals at Central Tech. 2601:188:0:ABE6:5DC5:559E:75C4:C241 (talk) 03:27, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What?!?! (Hey, why doesn't this keyboard have an interrobang?!?!) You're a smoker? I'm shocked and dismayed, and dazed and confused (but those latter two probably don't have anything to do with this). But you'd kill for a cigarette, which may (or may not) mean you've quit....
Fourteen years and a day ago, I got the news from Howard Stern. (Yeah, I guess we all have our vices.) I was in a state of hypnopompia, and it took a while for my semi-conscious mind to grasp that what he was talking about was actually happening. Nothing's real until you see it on TV, so I turned it on, and there it was. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 13:09, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~If I had any I wouldn't have the desire to threaten to kill someone for some. Drmies (talk) 14:45, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]~~
~~Thank you~~
At the deletion discussion where you have contributed, I have used your rhetoric formulation, largely or fully, to support views held by myself and others. Thank you for "your formulation". --Burst of unj (talk) 11:37, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~MusicAngels~~
I appreciate your comments on the Birdman Talk page but if you go back and look at my original edits and if you look at the talk page, the second I made a tiny change he attacked me and reverted the change. Please understand when you look at this history how much MusicAngels escalates immediately! I made one or two changes and he immediately went onto the IP talk page and started bullying me. He will not allow any IP anywhere anytime to question his edits. Can someone please make him stop? 128.90.39.156 (talk) 17:37, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Someone, sure--but why did it take a week or more for you to start conversing in a more reasonable manner? You've not done anything to deescalate. Now, give me a diff of the edit you're talking about and I'll be glad to have a look. And consider logging in if in fact you do have an account. Drmies (talk) 00:30, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Have you seen what User:MusicAngels does when a person DOES log in that disagrees with him? The whole poetry page dustup made me quake in my boots. He goes and looks at an editor's profile and talk page and previous edits and analyzes them, hoping to out trolls and socks. He examines the editor, not the edits. It is because of editors like him that many more of us are using IPs.199.48.242.29 (talk) 18:11, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~User talk:2600:1006:B113:10F9:14E8:C473:9B00:7111~~
You rollbacked me on User talk:2600:1006:B113:10F9:14E8:C473:9B00:7111. Rollbacking is for obvious vandalism: you could have explained in an edit summary there, as I didn't realise I was doing anything wrong. I don't mind, I just thought I should say. Thanks, --Rubbish computer 00:25, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I explained on your talk page, in a message you just deleted. I wanted to get those warnings gone as soon as possible, since they were not correct. Instead of being warned for edit warring, the IP editor should have been praised for defending the BLP. But my apologies for rolling back; and I've thanked the IP editor. I'm sure they don't mind the warning. Drmies (talk) 00:28, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Good stuff, I'm glad to see it all worked out alright. Please don't be rude to me on my user talk. --Rubbish computer 00:33, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I had to laugh at this edit summary, though. --Rubbish computer 00:39, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Right. If you want to learn more about editing on Wikipedia, you could do worse than follow the lead of that IP editor, which is what I just did. They've been here for years and could probably teach me a thing or to. Sorry, don't know where I was rude. Drmies (talk) 00:41, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"It's always good to find the context and read the content" seemed patronising, but I am slightly paranoid and grouchy. I think you're a great admin though. The IP's immature edit summary suggests they're inexperienced, and they only started editing on September 9 as far as I can tell. --Rubbish computer 00:52, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds pretty factual to me... You see, I run into situations like this all the time. Yesterday's was this edit, and if you look at a. what the edit was and b. the history of that article, you will see why that revert of an IP editor was very unwise. A bit of further investigation revealed a whole bunch of vandalism, and the indefinite blocks of three vandalism-only accounts. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 01:10, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~You're right. Rubbish computer 10:44, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]~~
I've said worse than "rubbish disposal" in response to being templated. Alakzi (talk) 00:58, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Alakzi: No, actually it's an indicator of maturity, but I didn't want to sound insulting to them. --Rubbish computer 01:01, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Alakzi: I don't mean to sound like a miserable arse. --Rubbish computer 01:03, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You've got me laughing. I suddenly miss Britain. Alakzi (talk) 01:38, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~Something different~~
Sharonkaraa (talk) 13:45, 13 September 2015 (UTC)Sorry, I am completely new to this. Drmies has sent me messages telling me I am welcome to say why I want to add in the fact that this politician did not pay back his expenses. First of all, this is a fact and is based on a news article which was referenced. I'd like to know why Drmies felt it was ok to remove it. It was factual and referenced and I believe that people have a right to know when their elected officials do something they shouldn't.[reply]
Hello Sharonkaraa, thanks for the note--but Wikipedia isn't about some people's right to know something. For starters, none of them are my elected officials. And the problem here is that, sure it's referenced and all that, we're talking about really minor things. Up to 500 pounds? for most elected officials that's peanuts; they swindle more than that on their way from the office to the bathroom. And so it really looks like too much space is given to something that's of really minor importance, and the talk page is the place to discuss this. I'm pinging Bishonen here as well, since she may have a different opinion. But the bottomline is, as far as I'm concerned, that not everything that's verified is relevant and worthy of inclusion. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 16:19, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No, I agree entirely with Drmies. According to the source you cite, here, the sum in Yeo's case was ten pounds. You think the public has a right to not only know about that, but know about it in Yeo's biography? It's ridiculous. But take it to the talkpage if you disagree. Bishonen | talk 16:35, 15 September 2015 (UTC).[reply]
~~Disambig question~~
Any thoughts on how we should disabmig a notable person from someone who maybe isn't quite notable for an article, but almost notable enough that readers might be searching for them? Specifically there's an existing Emma Pierson who is different from a Stanford Grad/ Rhodes Scholar Emma Pierson who's written and been quoted in places like NY Times, Washington Post, The Atlantic. Do we add hatnote to a redlink, or just say this is not the ~~droid~~ person you are looking for? NE Ent 00:34, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting question. I ran into something like that a few days ago, but it was an obvious example of totally not noteworthy at all. I have no doubt that common usage is to not have a redlink in a hatnote, but you could try it and see if it words as an invitation, or if it's just another occasion for someone to be curt and roll back. Or you could write her up... Drmies (talk) 00:43, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Haha! Drmies (talk) 00:45, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Wait, you're seriously expecting the Ent to do "content"? And ruin my hard earned bad reputation?? Do you (and (talk page stalker) welcome to comment) think she's notable enough? NE Ent 00:59, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know. Why don't you look her up and add whatever else you can find? Drmies (talk) 01:04, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's an awful longwinded "yes." NE Ent

Well, you have a funny way of saying "thank you". Drmies (talk) 02:22, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ent, the other thing you can do is ping Rosiestep and say, hey, I got another little article here on a woman, Emma Pierson (computer scientist) who's working in computer science and does all kinds of cool analyses. Tug at her heartstrings, suggest that maybe for the Women project she should get this expanded and written up for DYK... Who knows, with Rosiestep that might work. That's what I'd try if I were you. Drmies (talk) 01:25, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~Zimmerman, yet again~~
[Special:Contributions/24.49.36.173 This anon editor] added a Classic Country wikilink to the WJEJ article. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this one out. Days after Zimmerman's favorite articles were indef-protected, he adds the same incorrect information to another Hagerstown-area radio station article (note: WICL and WLTF both serve the Hagerstown, MD area, as does WJEJ).
While this IP isn't owned by Comcast, Zimmerman's perfered ISP, he [Special:Contributions/24.170.254.249 has used an IP] by this company before. I think this is a clear DUCK sock. Blocks, page protection? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 04:35, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~Thanks, much appreciated. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 20:05, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]~~
~~"Loquacious"~~
~~Throwing down the glove (gauntlet..?)~~
I see you're childishly proud of having used the word loquacious in conversation.[7] Quite good for somebody whose biggest word is usually bacon, I suppose, but I recently used antepenultimate in a very natural and unforced way.[8] Let's see what you can do. Bishonen | talk 11:04, 13 September 2015 (UTC).[reply]
I wasn't childishly proud, Bisherella--I was adultly proud. "Antepenultimate" is, for a cunning linguist like me, an everyday word. See Trisyllabic laxing. (And this suggests to the clever reader, who knows that the first vowel in "trisyllabic" is the diphthong /aɪ/, when the word entered English.) Drmies (talk) 19:49, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Snobbery. Instead of trying to show off, like the two of you do, I always try to adjust to the level of the average reader here by using as few multisyllable words as possible, and avoiding everything that has even a hint of Greek or Latin in it. Thomas.W ^talk 11:14, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Pace, of course... ;) _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 11:17, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Innit just… Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 11:34, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'd comment but I'm too busy in real life planning a trip to Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch. NE Ent 14:49, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I can actually say that. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:57, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
When are you going, Kudpung? Drmies (talk) 19:49, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I've been. It's just up the road from me. Full of Liverpudlians, as is much of North Wales. Can you say it with a Scouse accent, Kudpung? - Sitush (talk) 20:00, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~This is a great venue for garrulous editors. I wouldn't diagnose it as Logorrhea, though.Anythingyouwant (talk) 16:46, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]~~
~~Twinkle~~
~~Hey, just wanted to get your opinion before I go any further, on my six TWINKLE edits so far, how have I done? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:48, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]~~
Looks fine Homer, well done. I blocked that one IP. Keep on rocking, Drmies (talk) 01:07, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'd drop that AfD if I were you. The guy's got like eight or nine books published with some of the best academic presses in the country, so chances are a quick JSTOR search will give you a dozen reviews of his work. Drmies (talk) 01:18, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I had actually forgotten about that AfD. There just wasn't enough sources available on the page, hence the AfD. Most of the time, an AfD will get people to update a page with plenty of sources and bring it up to "code", so to speak. I will take a look at it though. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 02:35, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The sources you added are enough to meet GNG and N in my eyes, even enough to pull down the Citiations template. With the addition of addition references, I withdrew the AfD. I would like to see some more work done on the article, because you are right, it is pretty boring. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 02:42, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sure thing. I just added some more. The article I thought was boring wasn't our article, it was the Hofmann article. I'm reading the Lycan article right now. I'll close the AfD, but leave the tag up--the article needs sources for his life and positions and all. Thanks Homer, Drmies (talk) 02:51, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the updated info and sources. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 23:32, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~CDDG Page~~
Dear Drmies,
What is the rationale behind deleting the CDDG page content. Can you please let me know how does it differ from USAID content? How is a promotional material when you can also find the content of the USAID page on their website. We worked hard to maintain this page and we are very proud of it as organization. You cannot just do that because you believe it is promotional. Of course our vision, mission and objectives are mentioned on the page besides the track record. Why is that considered promotional? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wissamraji (talk • contribs) 09:17, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Unless USAID is a Good or Featured Article, there's not much point in a comparison. (But I note that the USAID article has 68 references, whereas yours has none.) The content I removed wasn't neutral and lacked secondary sources, and in the absence of proper sourcing I can only conclude that it's the kind of information we should find in the brochure, not in an encyclopedic article. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 13:51, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Quoting from their Facebook page; "Democracy is the parent of Revolution: you give me a president and I will show you a country." Just got back from watching The President- odd coincidence. That quote is the deepest-dyed bollocks. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 20:18, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~Rememberance~~
Hi there Mies, remember this (please see here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Long-term_abuse/Best_known_for_IP),
just to let you know I have fallen prey to this whole shebang. I am beginning to seriously think the Quique Sánchez Flores article is haunted (three years ago, the Colombian punk, now this - supposedly - English person living in Chile), well they both can go and insult their families because I've had it up to here (points gently to top of head)!
Kind regards to you --84.90.219.128 (talk) 17:15, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. Yeah. I didn't study the entire history, but I started here, and I wish you hadn't reverted that edit. Their edit summary is, as so often, sub-par, but their edit was good, and I saw two later edits by registered accounts that reinstated their edit or part of their edit. Sorry. Look, I've disagreed with them on a couple of edits but in general their copy edits are among the best I've seen here, and they can teach me a thing or two (they may have taught me one already). Take it easy Vasco, Drmies (talk) 20:31, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You wish I had not reverted that edit, where they reinstated the redirects and removed my hard work in sourcing the honours section? Fair enough you lost me. Their preferred intro was not subsequently reinstated TWICE by registered users like you say, but ONCE (and not verbatim, it was more a mix between his preferred form and mine), and since then I have only made itty-bitty adjustments, like punctuation, and now I cannot edit altogether because page is protected. Furthermore, if you say their copyedit approach is top of the notch, who am I to disagree, I have only crossed paths with this person for one week or less so you obviously know much more than I do, but does that give them an excuse me to call me inept and a liar (inserting false/misleading info in intros DELIBERATELY)? Please answer that question. Also, is it me or did you tell them, four years ago, that their excellence in editing was overshadowed by their lack of empathy with fellow users (as shown here towards me https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:186.9.130.193, the message is written by ME to THEM, but I provided diffs with THEIR words)?
You take care there too. --84.90.219.128 (talk) 20:58, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I just looked at the lead. I see now that there's one or two references at the bottom of that edit, yes, but those could have been reinstated separately. (And the "second" correction by a registered account was this one.) Please don't ask me to explain why someone else said something--I don't know that, and it's not a fair question to ask me. I don't see any "liar" there, but I do see that in the one version they're at Getafe and in the other they're somewhere else, and if I understand it correctly they're not at Getafe. Vasco, I hope you're asking me stuff because you are interested in my opinion. You know by now that I don't always agree with everyone and that I intend to speak my mind, though I hope to be doing so in more diplomatic terms than the IP editor, whom indeed I have known for years. Frankly, I'm really tired of, on the one hand, defending their edits, which are frequently good, and on the other hand, defending their word choice in edit summaries, which is frequently bad. I don't know how I got to be in that position but it is not of my choosing. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 22:12, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Of course, kind fellow user, always interested in your opinion, and I apologize if I crossed the line ("...and it's not a fair question to ask me"), sincerely. I HONESTLY did not know that finishing the lead with one bit (in this case "...before signing with Getafe in 2015") meant the person currently worked with that organization, and this is why the former intro read he was the CURRENT coach of Watford, t'was removed, see if I care. The second intro adjustment, made by respected fellow User:Struway2, was made AFTER this situation, so I did not count it.
Have a happy one, from Portugal --84.90.219.128 (talk) 22:39, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You too, old friend. We had our first real day of fall here today; I didn't actually notice it until I discovered that the AC in the car, which is set at 70, was blowing warm air. Very strange, after six months of heat. May your olive harvest be rich, Drmies (talk) 23:14, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~Well, that's cosmos for you :) Fall is coming like a vengeance to Southern Portugal too... --84.90.219.128 (talk) 23:26, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]~~
~~I'll tell you what made my miserable existence a bit better: Raunio. I have my brother to thank for that. Drmies (talk) 23:33, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]~~
At least you're on speaking terms with the Best Known For IP; he still thinks I'm a total scumbag even though in terms of actual content I probably agree with him more often than not and about 90% of articles he touches have been left to rot. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 10:07, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know if we're still on speaking terms; I haven't spoken with them in quite a while. And obviously I don't like it when someone thinks that someone else is a scumbag when I know they're not--that's one of the problems with this relationship. Having to criticize and defend both sides in a dispute simultaneously gets on one's nerves. Drmies (talk) 16:15, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~Pistolplay’s new account~~
~~Pistolplay is created a new account name Pistolplay3 after two months. He/she focusing on mainly Maroon 5’s pages. 123.136.111.134 (talk) 04:40, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]~~
~~Why me? Why not let Darkwind do something useful for a change? Drmies (talk) 04:50, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]~~
~~request on ANI after user was blocked~~
Hi, you seem to be online now. I sent a follow-up request to the ANI Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Conflict_Resolution_-_Premature_Arbitration_Committee_Filing, as it is more than a little troubling having my name bandied about so much for something I little to nothing to do with. Buster7 and Gandydancer seem to be the ones the user had actual beef with anyway, as per their editwar. I don't know the process for pursuing my request or even what it's called; just that I've seen some vandals' edits get ghosted completely. It seems reasonable that this user enjoys reading their own lengthy screes and edits wikipedia (or "[their] own Talk Page") just to see them in print online. Thanks. JesseRafe (talk) 17:08, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your reply on the other page. I followed up there with the information that the blocked user is now Special:Contributions/65.189.198.128 and for reasons 10% due to both the time it would take me and 90% because of the onslaught of personal attacks and garbage using my name that would follow, I don't want to start an SPI on this user. Would someone else who has dealt with this misguided diatribe-inclined person please be interested in doing something about it? Blocks are for the user, not the account, correct? So even though this one hasn't done anything "wrong" (yet), it's unambiguous it's WBR again. JesseRafe (talk) 21:19, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, I can't see it that easily. They overlap on Bernie Sanders, sure, but their other edits are elsewhere, for both. Can you give me a few diffs that nail the case? Drmies (talk) 22:50, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The awkward sentence about Senator Sanders living on a kibbutz, which has been removed, explained in both edit summaries and on the Talk, Whiteboyrobot here and 65.189.198.128 here.

Also note the days they edited (sorry I couldn't format this so clearly):
65.189.198.128 edited from 8/12 to 8/14

WhiteBoyRobot edited for the first time on 8/17 (on the WP backpages for first edit to boot, hmm)

65.189.198.128 edited from 8/26 to 9/5, forgetting maybe they made an account?

WhiteBoyRobot edited from 9/8 to 9/15 and then was blocked

65.189.198.128 resumes editing on 9/15 on an article previously edited by WBR, with a sentence previously added by WBR but removed. Seems far too convenient for me. Thanks! JesseRafe (talk) 03:23, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the kibbutz mention was 65.189.198.128's first edit (on Political positions article, not campaign article) and edit-warring to include it consisted of 4 out of 6 of the IP's first edits and the other two were just formatting on the kibbutz sentence. JesseRafe (talk) 03:33, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I saw that one--but sorry, it's not strong enough for me to block. The IP only reinstated part of the edit, that's one thing. Another thing is, as I said, the "other" articles each of them edited. In addition, they edit at very different times. That's not evidence of them not being the same, but it's certainly not evidence of them being the same. But let's see what happens when Whiteboyrobot comes back. Drmies (talk) 03:46, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~Something else~~
Hey I was a heavily active wikipedian for many years but inactive since 2009 -- just wanted to say I'm glad there are still a few good admins (such as yourself) running the place. Just thought i'd drop in and say that it is especially endearing since I felt like I helped build this place and worked on "gruntwork articles" that were actually beneficial and were currently substandard on core topics. I'm glad that somehow wikipedia is still able to have most of the non-contentious articles still relatively stable without battlegrounds which I thought would literally proliferate thanks to all the annoying bots which users began coding (and were given green lights by naive editors who couldn't see the obvious ill-intent) to help monitor and harass any new editors that encroach on articles that the botmaster leader has laid claim to.
Anyways just wanted to drop in and say that in my random perusings of nostalgic ANI discussions and then read some recent ones, that you deserve plenty of credit for your professionalism and maturity -- 2 things which I feel are inseparable from civility. All the bests! 128.227.40.220 (talk) 19:17, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, I appreciate it--thanks. Especially since I just looked at another battleground talk page, where mediation was asked for which will probably end up before ArbCom. Then again, we sometimes forget how much good stuff there is here. Thanks again, and take care of yourself. Keep popping back in. Drmies (talk) 19:22, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~Email~~

Hello, Drmies. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

~~- Neutralhomer • Talk • 21:45, 15 September 2015 (UTC)~~ [reply]

~~Bubba the Love Sponge Show~~
Am I being too strict at the AfD?
This is a "famous for being famous" situation. The article subject is a radio "shock jock"; his primary business is self-promotion. As a result, there's some news coverage in reliable sources. He verifiably did lots of silly or stupid stuff, mostly for PR purposes. Does that meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability? What do you think? How should this sort of thing be handled at WP:COIN? "Famous for being famous" cases come up regularly there, so it's a serious question. John Nagle (talk) 22:37, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I don't know. But "edit warring" and "famous for being famous" are, unfortunately, not reasons for deletion. I mean, these idiot YouTubers who video themselves watering their fucking plants, yeah. I looked at one article just now, about his contract and stuff, and that's good coverage from reliable sources. So if there's plenty of that, then your nomination is doomed (assuming that the closing admin will measure per the GNG).
Between you and me, and I don't think anyone is watching, I think you got a little pissed at that IP editor and took a more drastic step. Obviously Neutralhomer, whom I don't know from Virgil of course, disagreed. Tactically speaking, I think you should make friends with Homer and see if y'all can't get a better article out of it, but that's just me. As I said elsewhere, the IP was incorrect to revert you and will be blocked if they continue. You two should start by, on the talk page, hammering out whether that directory content is too much or not. And then the article should be improved. And the guy should be merged into the radio show article. That, as far as I can tell, is the best possible outcome, since my gut feeling is that the guy has gotten enough coverage to pass the GNG, as sad a statement about our world and Wikipedia as that is. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 22:47, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I would have no problem working with John on this. I believe we could make a better article out of it. I would be quite impartial because I don't listen to his (BTLS) show as I don't find him funny. So no "listener connection" there. If I did and found him funny, I don't know if I could be impartial. Kinda like I couldn't be impartial on the Pittsburgh Steelers article because I'm a Steelers fan (Go Steelers!). But yeah, If John wants, we can work on the article and maybe come up with something that isn't so promotional. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:54, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have no problem with that. Have a go at article cleanup. Merge, probably. "Famous for being famous" is a problem, but I have to agree that, in this case, self-promotion has probably been successful enough to meet Wikipedia's notability standards. I've said my piece on the AfD and will wait that out. The problem with the IP editor was lack of engagement - edit comments and talk page notes on both the IP and article talk page produced no response other than reverts.

This all started as a promotional editing complaint on WP:COIN that I was trying to resolve; I have no personal opinion about the article subject, but often take tasks from WP:COIN. In general, I've been taking the position that questionable notability plus promotion is a good reason to send something to AfD, and to strictly interpret the notability criteria. This stems from a discussion on WP:AN [9] where I was trying to get more guidance on what to do about the recent increase in promotional editing. I'm going out; last edit for today. John Nagle (talk) 23:13, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~A barnstar for you!~~

The Barnstar of Diligence

For your close of the MOS:IDENTITY clarification and RfC at Village Pump. You gave thorough consideration and due weight to the opinions expressed and demonstrated neutrality diligence in your explanation of your closure. Given the difficulty of the topic and the hundreds of comments, your closure deserves recognition. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 05:13, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I read your comment of course, your oppose to proposal 1--your opposition didn't carry the day, nor did proposal 3, but if you want to take all the credit for 4, you can, and that version got some support; I think it would have had more support if the discussion hadn't concerned an athlete. 4 struck me as very reasonable. I don't know who Vanamonde93 is, but their comment, "we cannot speak to how Caitlyn experienced gender back then, but Caitlyn did present the name "Bruce" to the world, and that's all we are saying, I believe", neatly combined a kind of intellectual modesty with pragmatism, and I do believe that, in writing an encyclopedia and coming up with guidelines on how to do it, pragmatism is a value to be cherished: how do we write up a complex world. This will all be solved 100 years from now, and we will find (well, we'll be dead of course) our language has changed as well as our attitudes. At that point, the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis will no doubt be revisited. Again, thanks. Good luck to all y'all figuring out the bigger issue of IDENTITY. Drmies (talk) 15:21, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Came by thanks to the ping. I'm just a passing stranger, Drmies, but it's good to be noticed. Thanks once again for your close, that must have been an epic undertaking. Vanamonde93 (talk) 17:58, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~Center for Development, Democracy and Governance~~
I changed my 'ting back to delete. I think it acts as a "middleman" between USAID and Christian forces in the area, so projects can be funded without direct contact with what might be perceived as anti-Israeli organisations. Dunno. Shrugs shoulders. Anybody got any ideas? Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 06:11, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~I was looking for my "delete" vote and then realized I had nominated it. The glories of old age. Sitush is feeling me, no doubt. Drmies (talk) 18:06, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]~~
~~Ask him for a neck massage while he's at it. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 18:42, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]~~
~~If you could do the honors~~
~~This — Preceding unsigned comment added by CorporateM (talk • contribs)~~
~~Done CorporateM. --kelapstick^(bainuu) 13:41, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]~~
~~Thanks K and M. Drmies (talk) 16:46, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]~~
~~French enlightenment experts needed~~
Doc, do you or any of your talkpage watchers have expertise and interest in Voltaire, Rousseau, Diderot etc? The articles have likely been infected with some POV/OR and outdated content and could use a more thorough check-up and treatment by some knowledgeable editors^{(metaphor fail)}. Abecedare (talk) 16:21, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well, if you need knowledge, I'd ask Eric Corbett, if he can tear himself away from his posh little hideout in Alderley Edge, an article that (a little birdie told me) needs his help. Drmies (talk) 16:48, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear. I've had dealings with that editor before. I'm going through the diffs on Voltaire and so far, well. Drmies (talk) 16:53, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Besides the talk page of Voltaire, another page where a discussion on this issue has taken place between me and Abecedare is the talk page of Bishonen: Request Soham321 (talk) 17:55, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Drmies, today i created a WP page on the second work on political affairs written by Rousseou: Constitutional Project for Corsica. Please compare this to the WP pages on the other two works on political affairs by Rousseou ( Considerations on the Government of Poland and The Social Contract) which have been composed by other wikipedians from the point of view of OR/POV, outdated sources, etc. Please also examine these two page related to Rousseau and Diderot which i created yesterday:Essay on the Life of Seneca and Letters on the Elements of Botany. I would genuinely appreciate your feedback.Soham321 (talk) 19:38, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~Interested in Kentucky?~~
Hi Dr, I've reported the user at COI, but Richmond, Kentucky has become the kind of linkfarm you're really good at cleaning out. I've already removed some of the most blatantly chamber of commerce crap, and think your gentle touch may be what's needed. Also, I confess there are sections I'm not sure about--do they stay or do they go, now? Cheers, 2601:188:0:ABE6:5DC5:559E:75C4:C241 (talk) 16:52, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Mrs. Drmies gave up asking for my gentle touch a long time ago. Drmies (talk) 16:53, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That made me laugh. Poor Mrs. Drmies. Reminds me what Robert Benchley said when asked if he and his wife, who had two children, enjoyed sex: "We tried it twice, and it worked both times." 2601:188:0:ABE6:5DC5:559E:75C4:C241 (talk) 21:09, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wait. That has to be the worst article in the world. It's all gossip and PR, a long list of things (movies? shows?) and accolades with no sources at all--nothing but jive. Drmies (talk) 17:48, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! There's another useless barnstar in your future. I know, because I haven't been able to redeem mine for so much as a red cent. 2601:188:0:ABE6:5DC5:559E:75C4:C241 (talk) 21:09, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
And thanks also for cleaning up Elvin Ng, which I hadn't bothered to read through, such was my determination to stanch the gag reflex. I only battled over the tip of that iceberg. 2601:188:0:ABE6:5DC5:559E:75C4:C241 (talk) 21:13, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~Why remove?~~
~~Hi can i know why you remove Elvin Ng's birth place? He is born in singapore. May i know what is wrong with that? Thanks Stellatyx (talk) 17:24, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]~~
(talk page watcher)Drmies did nothing of the sort. His birthplace is still there. The unnecessary flag icon hoever is not: as per WP:FLAGCRUFT I imagine. _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 17:43, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What User:Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi says. BTW, what on earth is going on in that article the last few weeks? Thanks, Drmies (talk) 17:45, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~You're a great admin~~
Sorry about before. I just wanted to say that you're a great administrator, and to thank you for your continuous contributions. Rubbish computer 17:53, 16 September 2015 (UTC) Rubbish computer 17:53, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~Thanks. It's all water under the bridge. Drmies (talk) 20:24, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]~~
~~Juan Carlos del Valle~~
Hi Dr, dropping this on your doorstep, but with no expectation that you work on it. More just to get this on the record, and perhaps your talk page stalkers will feel inclined to have at it. Another hagiography, this time intelligently written, if in the circumlocutions of the art world. Which is to say, quite a load of crap. And then there are all the promotional blurbs, always a good way to tie up an article. You see why Wikipedia gets me nuts. And while I'm at it....

The Editor's Barnstar

For expertly paring the promotional crap from articles. 2601:188:0:ABE6:5DC5:559E:75C4:C241 (talk) 02:53, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
We aim to please. Yeah, that was pretty bad. But you know how painters are... vain... Drmies (talk) 05:01, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
So I'm told. Muchas gracias. 2601:188:0:ABE6:5DC5:559E:75C4:C241 (talk) 10:56, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~Resurrecting Rodleen~~
As per https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Tokyogirl79 - you are the one who closed the discussion for the deletion of the Article of Rodleen Getsic and we would like this page to be restored. To begin, please send me a copy of her article and all links, references, and footnotes that were on it. We have begun a discussion on the https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion and on Tokyo Girl's page / obviously wiki has rules we don't exactly know how to play but we are doing our best.
WikiGurrrL
User:WikiGurrrL From Wikipedia, the free
~~Ordinance (LDS Church)~~
~~FYI - as you have an interest in this article, please note that I have raised Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ordinance (LDS Church). RichardOSmith (talk) 09:06, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]~~
~~YGM~~

Hello, Drmies. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

~~— Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 15:42, 17 September 2015 (UTC)~~ [reply]

~~I do? Drmies (talk) 15:53, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]~~
You sure do. At least I hope you do, because as soon as I sent it I realized I forgot to click "send me a copy" :) --— Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 16:30, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It just came in. Yeah, I don't need to be reminded of that hate site--I just blocked someone who tweeted about it. Some people are really vain. Drmies (talk) 16:35, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~this person is edit warring at Heavy Metal Music page and re-adding what you had removed~~
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/RyanTQuinn, here in the history https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Heavy_metal_music&action=history This editor currently edit warring RyanTQuinn Bullet For My Valentine section was removed this editor re-added it twice despite me showing him the revert thread here on your talk page. Thanks for Your Time.CombatMarshmallow (talk) 17:22, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This claim is nonsense. CombartMarshamallow installed a poor blurry image that he personally took of a little known band by the name Hogans Heroes, a band that get 2000 views on this site. He is closely linked to the subject. I could care less about Bullet for My Valentine. What is clear however, from VH1 where they are listed among the main acts, and from their Billboard chart success which I cited, is they belong in the article. Killswitch Engage who are listed have less chart success with their albums peaking in the 20s. VH1 and Billboard are reliable sources and aren't slanted by personal tastes.RyanTQuinn (talk) 20:47, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Here we go again. I reverted you because you insert a statement in the middle of a paragraph that has nothing whatsoever to do with whatever surrounds it. I don't care about this Hogan's Heroes bands one way or the other. What you need to understand is that for the average reader who is not an expert on metal your statement is irrelevant--that reader doesn't even know that Bullet For My Valentine (stupid name, by the way) is a metalcore band. I mean, I assume they are, right? It doesn't say that. Nor does it say that this Billboard charting is meaningful. Debuting on no. 4 is good? That's extraordinary for a metal band? or a metalcore band? These are the kinds of things you need to explain--since the sentence before it does explain that kind of stuff about the bands it lists. Drmies (talk) 22:05, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Drmies, I think you should stick a picture of Limp Bizkit there, because nothing screams "my frathouse is gonna rock out to metalcore tonight" more loudly than Fred Durst. Tarc (talk) 19:59, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'll get right on it, Tarc. Frats--did we really need Trump to tell us what's wrong with America? Also, I'm totally sticking it to the man, dude. Watch me refuse to conform. Drmies (talk) 23:09, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Just so you know, Limp Bizkit is nu metal, not metalcore. Not sure if that means anything here. — Confession0791 ^talk 21:22, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This editor is doing the same edits RyanTQuinn (talk and is also canvassing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:OnBeyondZebrax#Heavy_metal_edits_by_CombatMarshmallow and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Binksternet#Heavy_metal_edits_by_CombatMarshmallow, None of them found consensus or accuracy, removed sources and is now arguing the fact of what the band is or isn't. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Heavy_metal_music&oldid=681801343&diff=prev without a clue what they really are. Its crazy over there. 5 of us reverted the POV bullet for valentine edits, and they are still happening. CombatMarshmallow (talk) 16:58, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~PewDiePie~~
Your edits on the PewDiePie article are of course welcomed but they are pretty disruptive and dissmissive. You're removing a bunch of legitimate information that is sourced, you're dismissing the subject writing him off saying "we're talking about a YouTuber". Since when did somebody's career make them inelligble to be polarziing? Aside from this you took away the information in the lead that details how he entered his career on YouTube. You made all of these major deconstructive edits without first discussing them on the talk page and on top of this you're making the article outdated. PewDiePie has 10 billion+ views and nearly 40 million subscribers, yet you're edits on the lead have reverted that information to show that he has 8 billion views and 34 million subscribers. Some of your edits do improve the article, but on the other hand some of them dismiss important information about the subject. I'm going to be restoring some of the information, although some information I do agree can be left out.Soulbust (talk) 20:01, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for welcoming the edits you reverted--that lead looks awful. Are you the person sticking in dangling modifiers like "personally" followed by a bunch of chit-chat about him and his girlfriend? In the lead? Yeah, the guy is a YouTuber, so phraseology like "PewDiePie's public image is heavily documented and polarising" is completely over the top. You could start by not overusing adverbs anymore, but more generally I think you should have a look at WP:GAR, because that, I think, is the next step. Drmies (talk) 22:16, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~Warning~~
Drmies; with regard to the discussion directly above↑, please consider this an only warning: If you are making any edits that disparage, mock, or in any way lessen the enormous talent that is PewDiePie, my young daughter will lose her shit and the amicable relationship we have enjoyed to date could well be strained beyond repair.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:25, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Drmies, don't listen to her. She has an obvious COI. Besides, you can disparage anyone you like in popular culture as long as I've never heard of them, which encompasses a very wide range of subjects. Is this what's called pew vandalism?--Bbb23 (talk) 20:34, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Why don't the two of you just edit the article? Y'all are mondaymorningquarterbacking, and my game is Saturday evening. Drmies (talk) 22:19, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmmm. That sounds suspiciously like work. I'll just leave you to it.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:21, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~Thanks For The Protection~~
Thanks for protecting List of fictional wolves from that IP-hopping vandal. I also recommend page-protecting List of fictional cats in animation, too, as it's also one of the vandal's targets as per its MO of insisting that Disney's Pete is a wolf, and not a cat.--Mr Fink (talk) 01:42, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~Sure thing. Why do we even have articles like that? Drmies (talk) 01:50, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]~~
~~We are an encyclopedia of "everything," after all.--Mr Fink (talk) 02:18, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]~~
~~Nice work on island6~~
Thankful for your edits to Island6. I took a stab at it as well, and it is now down to half its original size, mostly as a result of removing the promotional language and excessive detail. Shocker:it is starting to look like a neutral and independent Wikipedia article!New Media Theorist (talk) 22:58, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ha, yes. You probably saw I left a note somewhere saying I'd done that before; I appreciate your involvement. I don't know what to do about that COIN, but if no admin throws blocks around (and it doesn't look likely) we'll just have to stay at it. Drmies (talk) 01:26, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~More of the same~~
I am sorry to bother you again, but could you spare some of your time to have a look at the talk page of the article Ghouta chemical attack (section: Revert)? I have the feeling that Volunteer Marek and My very best wishes would like me to stop editing. Volunteer Marek: "since you got topic banned from one article you came over here to continue your WP:BATTLEGROUND, obviously stalking other editors." My very best wishes: "I would strongly advise you to stop editing highly controversial subjects", for example. All this while reverting all edits I make, like at Human rights in Ukraine (see Revision history). I would very much appreciate your opinion as a non involved, neutral party who is nonetheless aware of the misunderstanding between these two editors and me. Againstdisinformation (talk) 00:08, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
How did you wind up at that article anyway? You've never edited it before. Volunteer Marek 04:16, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You see! You and MVBW keep saying that I am 'stalking' you, but each time I make an edit on whatever page, you intervene one way or the other. This is intolerable. It is precisely what Lute88 did before you, to make me lose my temper. I hope this is not your aim. As for the article, you very well know that I am interested in all articles which contain inaccuracies since, I confess, I have an agenda: ridding WP of disinformation. It's not my fault if you happen to have edited a great deal of them. Finally, if I remember correctly, there was an article containing BLP violation which you had never edited before I did. Againstdisinformation (talk) 14:58, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You come here to talk smack about me behind my back and then act faux outraged that I have the audacity to make a comment. Please. Volunteer Marek 15:02, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Againstdisinformation. You tell: I have an agenda: ridding WP of disinformation. Here are all your edits in article namespace. Which your edits do you see as "ridding WP of disinformation"? I do not see any such edits. My very best wishes (talk) 18:30, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Moreover, you are inseparable. When you see VM, MVBW is never very far away. Will you now both stop acting childishly? It's obvious to anyone that you are after me and not the reverse. Stop harassing me, full stop. Againstdisinformation (talk) 19:49, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Asking to explain your self-admitted "agenda" in WP is not harassment. BTW, I responded here because you complained about me on a talk page of an administrator. And please, do explain: what is your "agenda"? As about alleged wikistalking, sorry, but it was you who followed VM here, it was you who followed Lute88 here, and it was you who followed me here and here. My very best wishes (talk) 21:35, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
MVBW, I told you clearly enough what my agenda was, in a nutshell, it is to cut the crap out. The problem with you two is that you are unable to participate calmly and constructively in a debate. You prefer name-calling over addressing the arguments of your opponent. You accuse me of stalking you when I don't give a damn about your editing activity. When I make a comment on a talk page, you "strongly" advise me not to edit controversial articles, as if the article was your own private property. What I propose to you is this; either, in the future, we discuss content and only content, or we abstain from any interaction whatsoever. And no MVBW, I didn't ask Drmies because she is an admin but rather because she knows the situation and can't be accused to be biased in my favour. Againstdisinformation (talk) 23:17, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
When you pick a username like "Against Disinformation" it tends to rub people the wrong way. You look like you have come here to push an agenda different from Wikipedia's. You look non-neutral. Jehochman ^Talk 00:16, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You have a point Jehochman, that was a mistake I have almost immediately regretted. I made that unfortunate choice because I was outraged by an article whose tone was not exactly as formal as one would expect from en encyclopedia, to put it mildly. However, I expect people who disagree with me to address the issues, not my username. Againstdisinformation (talk) 00:50, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Fine, but you should request a different username to make your time here more pleasant. How about a historical person, a favorite hobby, or something that doesn't suggest any particular agenda. Why start every interaction here on the wrong foot? People do look at usernames and make assumptions. Much easier to change yours than to change everybody's built in biases. Jehochman ^Talk 02:15, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Your advice is sound and I might follow it. However, I fear that some editors would be more than happy to use this as another tool against me. They might say "you know, 'newusername' is none other than the 'infamous' Againstdisinformation". In a surprisingly short time, I have managed to attract serious animosity by editing on sensitive issues. Againstdisinformation (talk) 03:44, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Jehochman, thanks for weighing in. Anyone who doesn't listen to you is a fool. Againstdisinformation, I am loath to get involved with yet another content/POV discussion. Let's just say I have no opinion until I get a decent kickback. Marek, tough weekend. Tough weekend. Drmies (talk) 01:28, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, at least for us it was expected. Volunteer Marek 01:32, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Drmies, could you suggest someone else? I came to you precisely because, even though you you seem to entertain friendly relations with VM and you have a less than positive opinion on my editing, you had the fairness to back me on substance in an issue where common sense was on my side. This is to be commended. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Againstdisinformation (talk • contribs) 22:08, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Look, that's a mess. I am not about to go plowing through every edit to figure out every detail. The whole "that lies behind" sentence is in terrible English. Adding "Pulitzer prize-winning" is also bad writing. After that back and forth where neither User:Volunteer Marek nor User:My very best wishes look good (sorry Marek, you know I call 'em as I see 'em) there's a ton more stuff--mediation. That's the way. I'm not a mediator: I'm bad at it, I hate doing it, I don't have the time or the energy to do it. I know what you want--you want to clean up Russia's reputation. I know what Marek and Wishes want--to stop you from editing [those articles]. Marek, if that's what you want you need to start that elsewhere: not on talk pages of articles or well-meaning but impotent admins. It's a matter for ANI, really, because you want a topic ban, and don't tell me you don't. So take it there--that's fair, and you might win your case easily. But in the meantime, as long as you don't do that, you and Wishes are going to have to stop doing all this personal shit. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 23:21, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Eh, I don't necessarily want them banned. While I think they're a nuisance and I can't think of a single productive edit they've made, their value added to the encyclopedia is not sufficiently negative to bother to report'em. I just made the observation that if they continue in this manner, sooner or later they will get banned or topic banned or something, probably over something that has nothing to do with me. Unless they get bored first. Which I believe is an observation you made yourself awhile back. Volunteer Marek 23:41, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Neither looks good... Well, I certainly would not tell this about VM, but I am definitely not helping and wasting my time here, and this should stop. Good catch! I should do something about this. My very best wishes (talk) 02:23, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well, if y'all really feel that way, and now that mediation is in full swing on that talk page, I'm sure we'll see less of the same. RTR everyone, Drmies (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Drmies: I am sorry, I gave you the wrong article, we have disputes on more than one. The one you should have a look at is Human rights in Ukraine, here you can see who is doing the stalking and who displays a clear bias. VM, could you please stop speaking about me in this tone of superiority? Againstdisinformation (talk) 05:56, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~My thoughts~~
~~@Drmies. If you want to know what I really think, I would rather not talk about anything or anyone specific, but make a few very general comments:~~
I realize that "difficult" mediations serve their purpose: people are talking rather than fighting by reverting each other on pages. However, this is an extremely time-inefficient procedure. This is usually waste of time in cases when someone "in minority" is trying to POV-push their position by (mis)using mediators to their advantage. In a case of really serious disagreements someone "in minority" must simply walk away, and this is the only time-efficient way of solving such disputes. Who exactly happened to be in minority is frequently obvious. These are usually people who argue for a disproportional inclusion of a minority view.

Knowing subjects of your editing in depth is really important. This is the reason admins (or anyone else) should not interfere in content disputes on the subjects they do not really know.

Obvious trolls are obvious. If admins do not block them on spot, they can not expect from other contributors to continue working productively in the project (no, I do not mean myself because I do not work productively here). My very best wishes (talk) 13:22, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Some obvious trolls are obvious to everyone, others are only obvious to those with decent content knowledge. Yes, those procedures are frequently inefficient, if by "inefficient" is meant "using up a hell of a lot of time and resources". (I think this is why we got rid of WP:RFC/U--where a complaint also was that the outcomes of such processes were advisory. I disagreed and disagree still.) But if the alternative is constant edit warring and bickering, there may be even more disruption. Your second item is precisely the reason (well, one of them) why I am loath to get involved with y'all's conflict(s). The thing is though that I think it is always better to try and discuss these things matter-of-factly. If you're right, you can establish that without talking down to your opponent, though that's difficult since your opponent is of course automatically wrong. But I can't block Againstdisinformation on the spot, not even off the spot, because I found that in at least one case they had a point--I know you disagree with that, but I don't disagree with me, and so I wasn't going to block over their behavior in that particular case. ANI is an awful place to have to visit, and I've been there more than once in discussions that went nowhere, but we have nothing better right now, besides time-consuming mediation, frequently derailed, and of course ArbCom. But I really don't want to be in a project where all important matters are decided by an ArbCom. The most helpful venue we have, I believe, is the RfC, where consensus is established and editorial behavior can be measured. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 14:09, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry to interfere, but if MVBW wants me "blocked on the spot" he has to give a good reason, not use weasel words like "anything or anyone specific", or "obvious trolls are obvious". I would like to dispel the misconception that I am pro-Russian, as I am often accused to be. I simply can't accept demonstrably false statements, Like those on the Anna P. article or on Yulia Tymoshenko (ergo, I am paid by the Kremlin, a statement considered a "snippy remark" ). If you have a look at my editing history, you will see that I am also pro-Gaddafi and pro-Ahmadinejad. Well, if I read a false statement about Hitler, I would instantly turn "pro-Hitler". Some find this disgusting, I take pride in it. Lies are unjustifiable, even about the worst tyrants. Just have a look at Human rights in Ukraine where, after deleting all unpleasant facts, Lute88 inserted a number of flattering and unsourced comments, like "Human rights situation greatly improved in the aftermath of the Euromaidan revolution in 2014." The point is that all this propagandizing will not have the effect expected by its authors, while being very detrimental to Wikipedia's credibility. You are certainly aware that Wikipedia is no longer considered a reliable source in Academia. My sole purpose in editing has been to restore some of its credibility. Againstdisinformation (talk) 23:40, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What kind of "false statement" was there on the Anna P. article exactly? Thanks for reminding me that I need to go back to that and restore info which is in every single source on the subject. Volunteer Marek 00:13, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You will find that difficult, the page has been protected by Callanec. Anyway, you have my very best wishes. Againstdisinformation (talk) 02:51, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ordinance (LDS Church)~~
I'm sorry you've got caught up in this! Jgstokes's personal attacks and, now, accusations of sockpuppetry have gone far enough. I have raised the issue at WP:AN/I. RichardOSmith (talk) 10:29, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~Requesting for a Movie Article~~
Hey There,
Can I Make The article "Wave In My Hometown" As an movie article. I will not add any website name but I'll add cast names and I promise that cast name will be not linked.
Thank You. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wave In My Hometown (talk • contribs) 13:22, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) Don't know if you're aware of this, Doctor, but I was looking at the user creation log before, and I noticed this account was blocked just after posting the above. Promotional username, soft block. Also their unblock request has been declined because they're believed to be evading a block on a previous account. But they may be well-meaning for all that, I couldn't say. Bishonen | talk 20:00, 19 September 2015 (UTC).[reply]
Thanks Bishonen. You may have seen my Facebook pictures--I was away from the keyboard, from WiFi, even from football for the weekend. Drmies (talk) 01:23, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~Of only passing importance~~
~~So, Professor, avez-vous une opinion sur le quarterback? Tiderolls 04:32, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]~~
"Passing"? As in, "Go long!"? Softlavender (talk) 06:27, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Dammit...I didn't consider the double entendre. Tiderolls 07:48, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
LOL. I honestly thot it was intentional. Anyway, sorry for your loss -- one TD away! .... Softlavender (talk) 07:54, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, no. Didn't watch. My buddy kept texting me updates, long after I fell asleep. He's in serious need of grief counseling--I gather Coker had a bad game. No, Tide, I got no advice here. I had no faith in Blake Sims and look how wrong I was. Drmies (talk) 01:22, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~Nothing against Sims, but he had Amaury Cooper. The Coker kid tried his best, I'm sure. The kids never laid down. Tiderolls 02:06, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]~~
~~Heads up~~
I just wanted to let you know that a user has recreated the talk page to Locations of College GameDay (football) page. I tagged it for speedy deletion because it has no reason to exist without it's dependent page.--Nascar king 15:08, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I got it, Professor. Tiderolls 15:38, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Tide. Rough day. Missed the game last night--terrible WiFi in DeSoto State Park, but man Little River Canyon is beautiful. This is not a bad state we live in. Thanks again, Drmies (talk) 01:21, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~slap on the wrist?~~
Re [10]; I was tempted to give them a barnstar for best laugh I've had on Wikipedia in a long time, but I guess that'd be pointy or incivil or some such thing. NE Ent 01:59, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ent, you're so active again these days. Can't figure out if that's good or bad. I mean, I think it's good for us, but I hope it's not because you lost a job or a ministry or something like that. Drmies (talk) 02:06, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Although I am not an administrator, I am presumptuous enough to advise all and sundry to refrain from handing out sarcastic barnstars. It gets editors with thin skins all riled up. Except for Drmies. He is the exception since he has an actual sense of humor, plus a thick skin. Hey, Drmies, I am going to save up that "two cents isn't worth a dime" line. It reminded me of the "old days" when I could buy a Coney Island hot dog, French Fries and a Coke for 99 cents, which I could earn by peddling "underground newspapers" outside a movie theater during movie changing time. Memories! Look for incoming barnstars, buddy. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:15, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cullen, sometimes words hurt me too. Ha, the old days--we've been playing Tom Waits in the car, Rain Dogs. Ever listen to "Cemetery Polka"? Drmies (talk) 14:10, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I never heard it until just now. It seems all those people were real Waits relatives, according to the annotated lyrics with commentary by Waits. Wowzers! Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:45, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for that! Oh, Raindogs is a treat, as is Swordfishtrombones. Drmies (talk) 19:18, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My favorite track on Raindogs is "Gun Street Girl" for its midnight blues atmosphere and black humor. Around the time of that release Waits told an annoying interviewer that the best way to listen to music was on a broken speaker halfway down the block. What a character! Binksternet (talk) 20:34, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hard to tell whether or not the speakers are broken when Tom "sings" but I like it anyway. Hello, Binksternet! Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:40, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tom is an acquired taste, for sure, a taste which I acquired in 1985 or '86, when I knew I had found one of the real deals. At that time I went back and looked up his previous work, falling in love with "Burma-Shave" and "Somewhere", two very different vehicles for his scratchy pipes. Cheers, mate! Binksternet (talk) 23:32, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~SPECTRE has been quiescent, so MI6 has me on light duty. Actually I'm way over budget on wiki-time and willing be playing catch up in real life. NE Ent 02:12, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]~~
~~I have no idea where to put this.~~
Sorry to bother you, if it is a bother. I added this information to the metalcore article and to heavy metal. Binksternet (talk claimed I "work for the company" and is telling me I can't edit without asking via a warning. Cant a person just create an article that they understand and put them where they rightfully belong without being accused. Ive been accused of creating stuff after it took hours of searches on google. He claimed they were mad at "google" or something I have no idea. Unreal. Hogan's Heroes,^[1]^[2]^[3]^[4]^[5]^[6] Earth Crisis, and Integrity.
Meanwhile https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/OnBeyondZebrax&offset=&limit=500&target=OnBeyondZebrax created the Deena Weinstein article https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Deena_Weinstein&action=history and adds Deena Weinstein everywhere possible including at Heavy Metal music page and he doesn't issue a warning there but gives me one claiming I am part of some company. Thank you for your time, maybe you can direct me where to report this.CombatMarshmallow (talk) 06:10, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ 1948–1999 Muze, Inc. Hogan's Heroes. "Pop Artists Beginning with 'Hod'", Phonolog, 1999, p. 1. No. 7-278B Section 207.

^ Hand in Glove. "Metalcore". 2015-08-11. Retrieved 2015-09-18. Metalcore (or metallic hardcore) is a fusion genre blending extreme metal and hardcore punk. The name is a portmanteau of the names of the two genres, which is known as metallic hardcore distinguished by its emphasis on breakdowns, which are slow, intense passages that are used for moshing. Pioneering bands, such as Hogan's Heroes, Avenged Sevenfold, Earth Crisis, Deadguy, Hatebreed, Bury Your Dead and Integrity, lean more towards beatdown hardcore, whereas latter bands - Killswitch Engage, Bullet For My Valentine, Parkway Drive and Blood Has Been Shed- lean more towards extreme metal. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help)

^ Amazon.ca. "THE ORIGIN & HISTORY OF METALCORE MUSIC". 2015-08-11. Retrieved 2015-09-18. Metalcore or metallic core is an extensive fusion genre that is a blend of extreme metal and hardcore punk. Metalcore music puts its emphasis on breakdowns, which are intense, slow passages that are conducive to slamdancing or moshing. Early bands like Hogan's Heroes, Integrity, and Earth Crisis were distinctly into hardcore punk, while later bands like Underoath, All That Remains, The Devil Wears Prada, Killswitch Engage, Trivium, Bullet for My Valentine, and As I Lay Dying has a strong inclination towards metal. Sepultura and Pantera influenced later bands and the additional advancement of metalcore. Subgenres include mathcore, deathcore, and melodic metalcore. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help)

^ Music Nectar. "Metalcore". 2015. Retrieved 2015-09-19. Metalcore is a fusion genre which combines hardcore ethics and heavier hardcore music with heavy metal elements. Heavy metal-hardcore punk hybrids arose in the mid-1980s and would also radicalize the innovations of hardcore as the two genres and their ideologies intertwined noticeably, resulting in two main genres one being metalcore. The term has been used to refer to bands that were not purely hardcore nor purely metal such as pioneering bands Earth Crisis, Integrity and Hogan's Heroes. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help)

^ prezi. "History of Metalcore". 2015-05-01. Retrieved 2015-09-10. The Pioneers of a New Age (early 1990's) Hogan's Heroes (2 Albums Shown - Built To Last and Self Titled) (Attempting to evolve the sound even further - Replaced punk style vocals with screaming vocals) - Earth Crisis - (photo shown) (Attempting to evolve the sound even further - Replaced punk style vocals with screaming vocals) - Transcript of The History of Metalcore The Pioneers of a New Age, Hogan's Heroes, On the Brink of Commercial Success, Keep Calm and Wait for The Breakdown, - Characterized by a slower, heavier beat than that of the rest of the song, The Dawn of Metalcore, - Agnostic Front and Suicidal Tendencies began experimenting with different genres, The History of Metalcore (1980's-1990's) - Thrash Metal - Punk - Hardcore (Speed) (Harsh Vocals) (Aggression) Metalcore - Containing mainly the drums and a chugging rhythm from the guitars (Melody + Breakdowns) Breakdown Example - Earth Crisis ( Early 1990's) - Attempting to evolve the sound even further - Replaced punk style vocals with screaming vocals (Hogan's Heroes) (1990's - 2000's) In the late 90's Metalcore had finally gained a massive following, Century Media Records, Metal Blade Records, Rosters full of Metalcore bands, Inches away from reaching commercial success, (Tim Lambesis, As I Lay Dying), New Millennium, New Trends, (Early 2000's) - Heavily influenced by Swedish Death Metal, (The Jester's Dance, In Flames), (Agnostic Front) - Began incorporating melodic influences, Led to the creation of…, Killswitch Engage, Atreyu, All That Remains, Killswitch Engage, Formed:Westfield, Massachusetts, U.S. from:1999, Members: Jesse Leach (Vocals), Mike D'Antonio (Bass), Joel Stroetzel, Adam Dutkiewicz (Guitars), Justin Folley (Drums) Features: Melodic guitar riffs, double bass drum patterns, dual-guitar harmonies and, breakdowns - Their Record "The End of Heartache" peaked at #21 of the bilboard 200, selling 38,000 copies in the first week. - The album sold more than 500,000 copies - Nominated "Best Metal Performance" for the 47th Grammy Awards. (The End of Heartache, Killswitch Engage), Atreyu From: Orange County, California, U.S. (1998-2011, 2014- Present), Formed:1998 Members: Alex Varkatzas (vocals), Dan Jacobs (lead guitar), Travis Miguel (rhythm guitar), Marc Mcknight (bass), Brandon Saller (drums, vocals), Studio Albums: Suicide Notes and Butterfly Kisses (2002), The Curse (2004), A Death Grip on Yesterday (2006), Lead Sails Paper Anchor (2007), Congregation of the Damned (2009), Lip Gloss And Black, Atreyu (2002), All That Remains, From: Springfield, Massachusetts (2000 - Present), Formed: 2000, Members: Phillip Labonte (Vocals), Oli Herbert, Mike Martin (Guitars), Jeanne Sagan (Bass), Jason Costa (Drums), Top 3 Studio Albums: The Fall of Ideals (2006), Overcome (2008), For We are Many (2010), Six (Instrumental), All That Remains (2006), Moshing - Style of dance where participants push and slam into each other. -Originated in the 1980's, in Washington D.C. during the Hardcore movement., Circle Pits, Wall of Death - The Present State of Metalcore - New generations of kids attempt to simplify the genre - Abusing Metalcore's strengths, abusing them and, watering them down (Ex. Breakdowns) - Abuse of Studio Techniques (Ex. Auto-Tune), Making the once golden genre sound: - Generic - Repetitive - Mediocre - Lifeless - Fake - Over Produced - Unnecessarily low-tuned guitars, (Do you even Djent?), The "Djent Stick", (19 seconds, Profiting Off of Religion - Making money off of the middle-upper class market - Faking a Christian Faith in order to be accepted into households - Changed their lyrics to appeal to the Christian demographic, One in ten Christian bands we toured with were actually Christian bands. Tim Lambesis, AP Magazine. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help)

^ General-Books. "Hardcore punk". 2014. Retrieved 2015-09-10. Metalcore is a fusion genre which combines hardcore ethics and heavier hardcore music with heavy metal elements. Heavy metal-hardcore punk hybrids arose in the mid-1980s and would also radicalize the innovations of hardcore as the two genres and their ideologies intertwined noticeably, resulting in two main genres one being metalcore. The term has been used to refer to bands that were not purely hardcore nor purely metal such as pioneering bands Earth Crisis, Integrity and Hogan's Heroes. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help)

Hey, I don't have time right now for everything, but I left a note for Binksternet. Perhaps Bink was talking about this? What I can say about that, right off the bat, is that it doesn't look like a reliable source to me. And "pioneering" claims need very rigorous sourcing. If the other sources aren't better, then we may have a sourcing problem. Drmies (talk) 14:17, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Drmies. Thank You So Much for Helping. Really. In that instance I searched some key words and it said what it said, I went to the page, and it wasn't there- being he talked about "way back machine" I figured Id click "cache". That is what I saw when clicking cache. I used about two caches and the others aren't. They go to real dot com websites so I figured they are fine. Please continue to help. It needs help. Also, Im not angry or mad at bink. It is disappointing if anything. I did Honest Searches. The bands first release was recorded a year before the very next two groups in the genre. I would expect to find something as a result and I did. Sorry if I wrote that here its just that after spending some hours backing things up, like a truth, its not what I expected and if anything I thought he would have written me something saying good job for finding sources and that its all he wanted me to do was have more sources. I would have said Thank You and been on to other things.CombatMarshmallow (talk) 14:41, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Now this editor shows up https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hogan%27s_Heroes_(album)&action=history to a page never edited before to revert me twice, I reverted Once gives me a warning about "edit warring". I did 1 Revert. CombatMarshmallow (talk) 15:15, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~YouTube copyvio and edit-warring~~
Drmies, CombatMarshmallow is repeatedly adding to Hogan's Heroes (album), via his own account and possibly also with an IP sock, a YouTube channel which is obviously neither the band's nor the record label's. He is edit-warring over it as well (I left a warning on his TP). There are all kinds of things wrong with this picture: The edit-warring, the copyvio, the possible IP socking, the repeated claim that the channel is the band's even though every video on the channel was uploaded only one week ago, and the statement added to the channel itself only two days ago, apparently by CombatMarshmallow himself (apparently it is his personal YouTube channel, which raises all kinds of other problems): "THIS IS AN OFFICIAL BAND PAGE RUN AND ALL CONTENT UPLOADED BY HOGAN'S HEROES as per wikipedia Request". -- Softlavender (talk) 15:27, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Not even going to entertain this. I don't have a "sock". This stuff is not what should be on your talk page. Im going to keep it on my talk page in the discussion. The proper steps will get things on the right track. CombatMarshmallow (talk) 15:55, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, but since it's here I have to entertain this. Sorry, CombatM, but I don't see evidence that this is an official channel--for such links, the burden is rather on you to prove that. And without pointing fingers, I don't see the IPv6 edit warring (I assume we're talking about 2601:84:302:B450:307C:D5A2:1588:CD35?), but editing while logged out can be very problematic. Drmies (talk) 16:59, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, its no problem. How are you. It was stated that the pages had to have a message on it. The page says what it does, the page says it was created in 2011. The page is official. Just because the message is recent doesn't mean its not real. Which really isn't for anyone to judge against the youtube statement. Liability is now on the page. Since its been there since 2011 with the same content since at least 2012 its fact to say nothing is happening against it. This other editor "coincidentally" showed up to revert me, I reverted 1 time, they reverted again and then posted a warning about edit warring. Someone I never had any wiki interaction with what so ever. The most warnings Ive gotten are since bink has gone out of his way to try and block me. His aggravation started here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Binksternet#Heavy_metal_music maybe earlier. I am going to end up re-adding the link. It furthers the article. I want to with you or somewheres else or with you and somewheres else go through each reference 1 by 1. Time to move forward. I didnt create any, of those references, there is also a serious mistake that was made and it basically proves bink is going after Hogan's Heroes. CombatMarshmallow (talk) 20:42, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you may not like what I have to say about these sources...and what I have to say is based on WP:RS, which is essential reading.
1. If Phonolog is Phonolog, then what you have is a kind of directory which can only establish basic things like dates and such. 2. Handinglove is not an acceptable source, as far as I can see--it's a blog, a zine, whatever you want to call it. 3. This is...I don't know what it is. A streaming radio app for sale on Amazon? The text is probably supplied by the makers of the app. Not a reliable source. 4. MusicNectar appears to be a place where you can buy music--not a reliable source. 5. A Prezi by someone called Matthew Granger. I don't know who that is, but even if they were a renowned expert, Prezis are not typically things we cite since they are self-published. 6. "Hardcore Punk" at general-books.net is another strange thing. I think it's the text of a book published on the website of an online bookseller. I think. But what is the book? Who wrote it? Who published it? Then we discover that the whole thing is simply a copy of our article Hardcore punk, but without the footnotes or references and without attribution.
In other words, I'm sorry, CombatMarshmallow, but none of these will stand up. What you need to use for Wikipedia articles are things that meet the requirements of WP:RS. And when in doubt, ask at the noticeboard, WP:RSN. Best, Drmies (talk) 22:19, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You know, I actually have no problem with that. If you can, how do we know Hand in Glove is a blog or a zine they have a .com? Phonolog is Phonolog I used for the POP artist section, dates and the bands name. Yes thats some kind of radio app. I saw a bio there and went with it. MusicNectar is something I never heard of until I found the page. I have no idea who Matthew Granger is but I read its a site for people who do professional presentations. Its also cool to see on the album in counter clockwise the two Hogan's Heroes albums, though the third should be there, and also that one "plays". So figured Id use it. Its still cool and I may download it. general-books.net is just something I found. I have no idea what it is. CombatMarshmallow (talk) 22:51, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You look for things like editorial statements, board of editors, "About us", that sort of thing, and make a judgment based on what you find. If there's nothing there, that's not a good sign. Prezi isn't just for professional presentations--it's for everyone, including students in my freshman writing and junior business writing classes. And general-books.net is a Wikipedia mirror. They probably have a page on Heavy metal as well, where you'll find your own writing reproduced. Drmies (talk) 23:08, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Also as far as you know, is it ok to re-add the link. The page says what it says that was the only requirement. Requirement met. Thanks for the link. I may be followed there as some editors have made many of their edits everyday based on my edits. So someone emailing another editor and the stuff that happens I wonder about getting an unbiased opinion. However In his effort to erase the band, edits everything except a source for the band Integrity, in which their reference that states in it Hogan's Heroes are a pioneer. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Metalcore&curid=636692&diff=682200621&oldid=682189358 "Rv... Google docs is an unreliable source -- any kind of doctoring can be done to such uploaded documents." Another is https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Heavy_metal_music&curid=13869&diff=682201843&oldid=682199091 "removing Hogan's Heroes. COI problems with this user, persistent promotion of the band, using unreliable self-uploaded documents and other unreliable sources." Apparently you have noticed, I didnt "self-load" any of that. Nor do I have the know-how or the time to do so. I don't "promote" I add things where they rightfully go. If the world didnt agree how would I have found those sources. I don't have conflict of interest I edit accurately. Well anyhow as this draws to a close I Greatly, Greatly appreciate you taking the time to explain some stuff and having an unbiased opinion. (I typed all this an hour ago but forgot to post it as I got company) Thats Really Really, very helpful. Hope you have a Marvelous day, when you get a chance to reply Ill read it. Also my bet is integrity source will now be removed. This source says "Seminal in skate punk and Metal" http://www.mtv.com/artists/hogans-heroes Metal equals crossover thrash, metalcore, and metallic hardcore, as per the bands page. Bink said MTV is a reliable source. One of the best the band has. CombatMarshmallow (talk) 00:41, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I would not re-add that YouTube link. And I don't accept MTV.com as an acceptable sources. If it can't be found in real publications, it's probably not worth adding. Drmies (talk) 00:53, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Metal Music Archives http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/artist/hogans-heroes . says formed in 1984 The band was seminal in the development of metallic hardcore, skatepunk, metalcore and crossover thrash^[1] The opening statement is original. Have only utilized the original statement which in full states "Hogan's Heroes was a hardcore punk band from New Jersey, formed in 1984. The band was seminal in the development of metallic hardcore, skatepunk, metalcore and crossover thrash." statement has never been on wikipedia or on the web. Metal Music Archives administrator original evaluation.CombatMarshmallow (talk) 04:21, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Metal Music Archives. "Hogan's Heroes". 2015-07-28. Retrieved 2015-09-21. "formed in 1984. The band was seminal in the development of metallic hardcore, skatepunk, metalcore and crossover thrash

~~Revert~~
Drmies, I have no problem with you reverting me at all, you were Bold, I reverted, you really should have discussed, but that's not really relevant anyway. Anyhow, to answer you question, the hatted edit shows a pattern, it shows GregJackP doing the same thing to JordanGero that he did to RJensen. This shows that his behavior , as discussed over at AN is not limited to one user, like I said, it shows a pattern and I'm convinced that it's relevant, however, I won't revert you, but would instead ask that you unhat that add-in to the discussion.KoshVorlon 16:27, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Kosh, the hatted content only shows a pattern if one looks very carefully at the individual edits, adds them up, and comes to a conclusion. Without explanation it's nothing but raw data which distracts from the discussion--Guy didn't even say "these edits by person X are troubling in that they suggest a pattern of [insert disruption] in the topic area of..." Too many ANI threads are led off-track, with nothing decided, because of side issues. If something is not explicitly linked as relevant to the main discussion, it can be hatted; note also that one other editor said something very much like that. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 16:38, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You're saying what I said, that they do show a pattern, so we agree. I also (hear) see what you're saying quite clearly, that you don't want the discussion lead off-track. No problem. KoshVorlon 16:45, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No, I'm not saying that--I'm saying that something like that should have been said... Drmies (talk) 17:01, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~Reply~~
Thank you for thinking of me to provide input as a Commons admin, I really appreciate your kind thoughts to value my advice.
However unfortunately I don't have the time in life right now to wade into that particular area.
I wish you the best of luck resolving the situation,
— Cirt (talk) 15:55, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~Sure thing Cirt--thanks. Drmies (talk) 17:16, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]~~
~~Grammar crap again~~
Hi Drmies, I need your language expertise, please. In these edits there were numerous capitalization changes made to sections of Disneyland's Haunted Mansion. Should words like foyer, seance area, endless hallway, attic, portrait corridor, conservatory, grand hall, hall of mirrors be capitalized? Much love, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:01, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~Dear God NO. Drmies (talk) 21:08, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]~~
Can you help me through the logic? If (god forbid) we had to attend a business conference, the boring seminar might be held in the Vermont Room at the Marriott. Should that be the Vermont room instead? On The Love Boat, did Isaac serve drinks on the Lido Deck, or more properly on the Lido deck? While I understand that a conservatory is a run of the mill room in a fancy mansion like a bathroom is, (please don't take a dump in the conservatory) do we treat it differently because it's Disney's Haunted Mansion's proprietary Conservatory? What if we're talking about something that only this house has, like an endless hallway? Thx Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:46, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Probably should go with what their publications say. BTW, there's an excellent 3.75-hour biography of Walt Dinesy on PBS.org right now, viewable online through October 12. Warts and all. I found it fascinating -- stayed up till 5 AM watching it. Softlavender (talk) 05:21, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure that everything Disney does is proprietary and to them would require capitalization, but it's not clear to me why we would capitalize common nouns like "attic" simply because that's what their publications say. ? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:57, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Look, this is not grammar, of course, but style. Which doesn't mean we fight less over it. It's best to take this up with an MOS regular. Folks like Ealdgyth and Eric Corbett know the MOS inside and out. Honestly, whenever I look at it one way I think the other way is best, and vice versa. Drmies (talk) 00:27, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know it "inside and out".... I just know a few parts of it that I have to use often. I actually do not "get" the silly capitalization rules we have - they go too far towards "no caps" for my training and outlook. It's just wrong to write "Norman conquest of England" - it's a named event - it should be "Norman Conquest of England". Frankly, a large section of the folks who frequent the MOS pages are just ... anal and a PITA. They scream bloody murder if a page has "local consensus" that differs from the MOS - but in all honesty, the MOS regulars are classic example of a "Local consensus"... heh. Ealdgyth - Talk 00:39, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well, Cyphoidbomb, Put That In Your Pipe AND Smoke It... Thank you Ealdgyth. Drmies (talk) 02:15, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I would look at the capitalization on similar theme park and theme-park derivative articles, especially those that have been well curated. For one thing, the capitalization helps the reader recognize a specific specialty-ride or specialty-room or specialty-structure of a theme park, as opposed to a generic room ("attic"), structure, building, ride, or item. There are obviously arguments pro and con each way -- however if the capitalization aids the reader's comprehension and navigation in a longish article or paragraph, then I think it's a good idea, especially since each item in question does not have its own call-out section with subheading. Meanwhile I've now got "It's a Small World" playing in my head. Thanks a LOT, people. Softlavender (talk) 04:14, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~American Ninja Warrior removal of content~~
Hi, Drmies. I've recently seen your multiple recent revisions of American Ninja Warrior (season 6) and American Ninja Warrior (season 7), two pages I have created. On the season 6 talk page, you say that you removed entire sections of "trivia" and "play-by-plays". I disagree. I'll agree with you somewhat with the removal of city qualifying, but removing the finals is uncalled for. If you call these sections such things, then why are the completely unreferenced sections of the Judge Cuts through Finale of season ten of America's Got Talent allowed to stay? It's essentially play-by-plays as well. The finalist, outcome, and time, for ANW are the same as the act, result, and outcome for AGT - both are unreferenced trivia. I can find links to sources stating all results for qaulifying, finals, and more, if you would kindly undo your revisions. ArcticGriffin (talk) 00:45, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I appreciate the note. First of all, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS applies. If you wish to compare, compare to a decent article--an FA or a GA. The article you point at is, well, not a good article--and even though it seems like an exercise is pop culture trivia with the lifespan of, well, a television season, it was infinitely better than those Ninja articles (one of them had two references--two). Now, I don't mind if you restore some of the information, but you have to realize that we're talking about a television show, not about something where those who come already have some kind of notability (the Olympics are an example of that). The "failed veterans" or whatever they are have no notability so there's no Wiki-legitimate reason to single them out. There can be no valid reason, besides looking at the example of other atrocious articles, of listing every individual participant and color-coding where they failed and on which obstacle and with which time. Unless, of course, we believe that Wikipedia, rather than an encyclopedia of knowledge, should be a compendium of trivia. So, if you wish to verify, do it with secondary sources, proper ones, sources that discuss the topic rather than just list or rehash factoids. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 00:52, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
All of the Ninja Warrior articles were split from the main American Ninja Warrior article into separate seasons, so I primarily took the exact information and pasted it onto the separate article. The unreferenced information on there has been on Wikipedia for years, and nothing has been done about it. That's why there is so little references. I agree with you that the city qualifying should not be included and I also agree with you that the color-coding has gone a bit too far. I will look for proper secondary sources. Thanks. ArcticGriffin (talk) 11:49, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I see; thanks. There have been problems there before; there was some edit warring in the past to keep other trivial content in--a list of lists of obstacles or something like that. ArcticGriffin, the best thing to do is to go to WP:FA and see if there is a show or something that has a Featured Article. That is the kind of comparison that's valid, and it can be quite helpful. As for the color coding, this is a hobby horse of mine and of editors like Alakzi--see WP:COLOR for the ins and outs. Drmies (talk) 14:06, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~Wish you were here ?~~
~~Jaswant Thada (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)~~
It makes unattributed aesthetic judgements, conveys subjective impressions, and addresses the reader directly in the second person. It's also today's Bing Desktop picture and so what some people might be looking up today. Enjoy. ☺ Uncle G (talk) 18:28, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oh, I've gone and spoilt it. The "mulch-tiered gardens" are now stripped of their mulch. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 18:42, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]~~
~~?!?!~~
My friend, what is it with me and some South American users? Maybe I was a ruthless dictator à la Augusto Pinochet or Alfredo Stroessner in another life...
Please, if you can, have an input at this page, in the message titled "Mauricio Pinilla", an assertive but polite message to this user about the article Nolito received the reply "Pues consigue info de sus estadisticas don trabajador esforzado pff." (Well go and find his stats, Mr. hard worker pls). I said there was no need to insult, he replied "...sé feliz con tu nolito nomás" (be happy with YOUR Nolito, that is all).
After User:MYS77 kindly jumped in and showed him some sources about what he had been doing wrong, the reply was "A llorar a la FIFA par de putos jajaja a la otra llama a tu mamá para que te defienda" (Go cry to FIFA lousy punks ahahahah, the other calls HER mommy to defend HER).
What on earth is this? Attentively --84.90.219.128 (talk) 02:40, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~Hi there, how are you? Should I start an ANI or you'll deal with this? Thanks, MYS 77 ^✉ 02:42, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]~~
~~Just bad manners, that's all. No, MYS, this isn't ANI-worthy. I left a note. In English. Drmies (talk) 03:24, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]~~
~~I doubt "mucho" he knows any English, but if need be i'll provide translation for EVERY word I wrote there. Sorry for any inconvenience. --84.90.219.128 (talk) 03:27, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]~~
Y have come to warn you that I have lost it upon seeing this human waste response ("Oh, so beautiful a pair when is the marriage ahahah block me this Brazilian guy and your fucking mother" "Sácate los 7" I don't know what it means, "probably" another insult). I immediately regretted it and reverted myself, but notify you that you can block me if you see it fit.
Apologies again to you, kind sir. Also, block or no block (I won't budge if it happens, I promise), could you please drop in your opinion at WP:FOOTY (message titled "Doubt")? I'm a bit at a loss, to put it mildly. --84.90.219.128 (talk) 08:55, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~Postmortem~~
Hi Drmies, can't say I wasn't warned, but heartened by having actually received more support !votes than 9 of the 15 successful RfAs this year, many unexpected (sunk by the percentages, but few surprises), I'm opening up a few threads with various individuals (starting with the !supports such as yourself, though will probably discuss with selected !opposes later once the mercurochrome quits stinging) to discuss the outcome and assess the feedback. I do want to take another run at this, and as I cannot see myself - or any dedicated content editor - avoiding all dramas (after all, Mustang is still not GA yet); I'd like to discuss an alternative way forward perhaps on-wiki or, probably preferably, via email. Let me know if you would be willing to offer some feedback. Montanabw^(talk) 03:39, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Montana--I'd be lying if I said I didn't see it coming. I haven't seen the final numbers, but you clearly had a lot of support. I don't know if I can be of much help, and typically my advice is boring: listen to Bishonen, that's usually it. Oh, gotta go. Drmies (talk) 04:04, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I figured it would take a couple of runs to get there, I'm not crushed. Plus, I had 128 supports, which was actually more than 9 of the 15 successful RfAs this year, so I'm actually heartened. Also, I've hit the big time [11] and have been identified as in your camp, so sorry, man! In for a dime, in for a dollar! Unfortunately, Bish seems to have determined that one particular incident as deemed me forever an untouchable, which is a bummer because she's generally a pretty savvy player and I like her. I was pretty stunned by her response at the case in point and am still puzzled that it carried so much weight, given the totality of the circumstances. Montanabw^(talk) 05:44, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~Proposed deletion of Jim Semonik~~

~~The article Jim Semonik has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:~~
~~So he made a few recordings, and got a couple of mentions in a couple of local newspapers and on a few websites of little significance... No real evidence of notability.~~
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 13:48, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hey JamesBWatson, you know this evolved from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Electronic Saviors Volume 2: Recurrence (2nd nomination), right? David Gerard, Torchiest, I'll ping you both in case you want to save the article--you two were the keep voters in that discussion. JBW, I think this would be the first thing I created that gets deleted. There's a first time for everything. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 13:58, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, no, I didn't realise it came out of that discussion. Your message on my talk page came while I was away from home, without internet access, and by the time I found it, the AfD had already been closed, and I decided to just let it go, even though I still thought it should be deleted. I saw the other article today, and without remembering the other one nominated it for deletion. Well, I still think the subject doesn't satisfy the notability guidelines, but since two previous discussions on a closely related article have failed to reach a consensus to delete, ~~I'll reluctantly withdraw my nomination.~~

Incidentally, are you sure you are happy to ping two editors on the grounds that they argued for "keep", while not pinging Me5000, who argued for deletion? On the face of it, I can't see how that isn't canvassing. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 14:17, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote that about withdrawing my nomination thinking it was an AfD, but since it's a PROD, I'll just leave it, and see whether anyone else (including you) wants to contest it.

Again, my comment about "canvassing" was made thinking it was AfD, not PROD. I did think it very surprising that you would do anything so much like canvassing for an AfD, not what I would expect of you, and evidently I was right about that. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 14:23, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sure thing. Yeah, I saw Me5000's comment and considered pinging them, but I figured they wouldn't be very interested in saving the article, which here means, first of all, deprodding it. Note that I didn't deprod--it's one of those BLPs I'm really not so sure about and I created the stub only to move the AfD forward. Drmies (talk) 15:39, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, there's "a first time for everything", but this isn't it. Even if we ignore pages you created and then deleted yourself, and trivia such as a redirect which was deleted to make way for a move, you created the article Cristina Pumplun and the redirect 100-watt head, both of which have been deleted. That's a pretty low rate of deletion, out of 1101 creations in article space, but it isn't zero. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 14:37, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Pumplun was deleted? Ah, interesting. Have a look at the contributions of 117.215.192.105--it's an Indian troll. SpacemanSpiff probably knows them; it's the same a-hole as 117.213.23.147. They PRODded a couple of things I did, and never notified me. I'm bringing that one back. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 15:15, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Aye, this is that Psthomas who we blocked for copyvios and what not. I thought he went inactive as he stopped doing this nonsense around my creations, but maybe it's time to check that out. —SpacemanSpiff 15:34, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well, they were quite busy. Gene93k dePRODded one of them, SusunW another. Drmies (talk) 15:39, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
As for Semonik that led to this discovery, it's been PRODded and dePRODded about ten days ago, so I don't think it's eligible for PROD now unless we consider that the old PROD is by a blocked user in violation of their block. —SpacemanSpiff 15:53, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I've de-prodded per SMS's comment. Drmies, I doubt anyone would object to your undeletion of Cristina Pumplun, as undeleting prodded articles upon request is pretty standard. But if you're worried about "involvement", I can undelete if you want. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:03, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Jim Semonik - Thanks, Floquenbeam. I didn't notice the earlier PROD. It helps to have edit summaries.

Cristina Pumplun - I have restored the article and de-PRODDed it. The PROD was purely disruptive. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 16:08, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you all. Hey, sometimes I feel real good about the Wikipedia community--that is, sometimes it actually feels like a community. Drmies (talk) 16:15, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. Everything worked itself out before I had a chance to reply. Can't tell if I'm pleased or disappointed. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 17:28, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~Headache~~
If you are interested, I could use some help dealing with Galerie Gmurzynska and the various users fighting with each other all the time. Two discussions on my Talk page might provide some guidance: first one and second one. Besides, you're a good person content-wise to deal with the article. You know more about the visual arts than I do, and I have no doubt you speak much better German (a lot of German sources).--Bbb23 (talk) 16:55, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well, that's another fine mess. I have a suggestion: to block both editors. Hardblock--which may take care of the Lord as well. They are both practically SPAs, and appear to have insurmountable COIs with that particular article. Drmies (talk) 17:59, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~You around right now?~~
~~--Floquenbeam (talk) 17:50, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]~~
For a moment, yes. Drmies (talk) 17:54, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Gots to go, Floq--lunch time. Hungry. You can always call me on my cell. Drmies (talk) 18:08, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I got pulled away from WP myself. I'm trying to recall if it was you who had a reasonable relationship with Diego Grez. I know somebody I know does. --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:36, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Pretty sure it's you. I'm shooting you an email. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:19, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
YGM. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:25, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~Passing through Probably a bit late now, but I think H. J. Mitchell has had a fair bit to do with Diego. 220 of ^Borg 12:34, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]~~
~~An account?~~
~~Thank you, Drmies, for this [12]. But you already knew I'm 99, and were having fun with me. Cheers, 2601:188:0:ABE6:899F:E582:7736:44B6 (talk) 20:59, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]~~
And crap, I can't leave the desk for a few hours without somehow getting cut off and receiving a new IP. Must be the country squirrels chewing through cables, or some such. 2601:188:0:ABE6:899F:E582:7736:44B6 (talk) 20:59, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Of course I knew. Can't you stay out of trouble? Is this your Falstaffian nature? Drmies (talk) 22:23, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~consider this~~
There is a concerted effort by Anglade haters to remove him from the article. They are manipulating Wikipedia. First, they removed his movie credit then they remove his very pertinent account, which other language Wikipedias have.
Also there is not consensus to do this. Other editors have chimed in but Pincrete and another editor zealously guards the article as their own. Other editors that share my view include Tough Sailor Ouch, Mezigue (9 Sept), F117IS (22 Sept), etc.
A better way would be for there to be other Wikipedia editors to chime in, not just the article owners Pincrete and that other editor. Moreoever, those editors frequently revert what I add, not discuss and modify.
Your threat is very harmful to Wikipedia because you, as an administrator, are becoming the owner of the article since you are both an involved party and an administrator. Nobody goes against an administrator, myself included.
I ask that you allow a way to mediate, such as a RFC or another way. Please suggest a way. I propose 3 choices, the stable version that existed for 3 weeks, my shortened version, and the gutted version proposed by the owners of the article. Sandra opposed to terrorism (talk) 23:18, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Also consider that you are installing fear even though there is no consensus for you to do so. See your own comment...I've had enough of this. The ANI thread isn't attracting helpful attention; I've warned the editor on their talk page. ANI sometimes offers good suggestions, but not this time, and if this continues a block will be the necessary result. Drmies (talk) 22:22, 25 September 2015 (UTC)......See it was on ANI and no other of the 2,000 administrator feels the way you do. So please stop scaring me. Instead, I have constructively made a RFC to seek neutral comments. See my RFC on the Thalys talk page. My proposal is the best and very reasonable. Sandra opposed to terrorism (talk) 23:39, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Sandra, I don't care much for this "installing fear" language. When a person is told to stop disruptive behavior, they're not being bullied: they're being told to stop their disruptive behavior. Your opponents have taken up plenty of time and space on the talk page and explained their edits in edit summaries, so the claim that they're not discussing edits is prima facie ludicrous, as is the claim that I would be involved per WP:INVOLVED. You may have made a constructive RfC, and that's great--that is, as I suggested, a proper way for you to continue to engage with and attempt to improve the article. Conspiracy theories such as editors having an agenda to keep this or that person out of the article do not impress me. Finally, it is my job as an administrator to make sure that normal editing processes are not hindered, which was what you were doing--and you were essentially "installing fear" with your obstructionist behavior, if you want me to use that kind of language. That none of the other admins spoke up is hardly a reason to discredit what I think is proper here, but you are, of course, welcome to try that case on ANI. In the meantime, though, you must stop disrupting that article. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 00:32, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure if I should, but I must provide my voice here in regards to Sandra's laughable comments:
1) None of us, I repeat, NONE OF US have some sort of anti-Anglade bias fueling our edits, nor is there an effort to remove him from the article (otherwise, everything that has to do with him would be completely deleted and not specific tidbits of information). I, for one, had no idea he existed before the attack occurred (how could I, anyway? I don't watch French films). But we have removed his movie credit because it is completely irrelevant, and then his account because it was making the section too blocky with its many quotes (a basic summary can also work fine in describing events). Just because the foreign-language versions of Wikipedia have that information doesn't mean the English one should too. Now that you mention it, I think such information has to be removed from those versions too due to relevance. Also, there is NO EFFORT to manipulate Wikipedia; you are making an overstatement and embarrassing yourself.
2) Yes, there was consensus established. Pincrete said that the discussion had been going on for a week now, which gave you PLENTY of time to chime in. And if these mentioned editors do share your view, as you say, why have they not chimed in with their input? It would've certainly helped your argument. Just because you have people who share your views doesn't mean it's an excuse to having this info stay.
3) You can't expect other editors in Wikipedia beyond the ones actively participating to chime in. Personal lives and preferences tend to get in the way, and it's something that can't be remedied. As for the reversions, there WERE discussions about the edits in the talk page, and the consensus was that those pieces of information HAD to be removed.
Versus001 (talk) 01:42, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~Better to have the conversation here I think...~~
As I indicated in the ANI thread, I am uncomfortable with formally lifting the IBAN. Call it irrational, call it emotional, call it assuming bad faith, whatever, but I'm just not ready to do it yet. The best offer I can make right now is to promise I won't object or go running to ANI if good faith, productive, non-POINTy edits with civil editsums are made on articles that I've worked on, such as Evergreen Game - regardless of who makes them. And by productive I mean actually improving the article not just restoring one's own text.
For example I removed some text from Wayward Queen Attack as unsourced (here as well), not knowing or caring who wrote it originally. IHTS is welcome to re-add any or all material I have removed if he gives a source; simply restoring the text on the grounds that I am not "allowed" to remove it due to IBAN would be POINTy and unproductive. (BTW that article should probably be deleted - any chess opening with 50 names has notability issues - but that's another matter). MaxBrowne (talk) 06:56, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Drmies. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
~~Request of restauring "All-Africa Games sports"~~
Hi, I put on first a request to you as an administrator who deleted the page All-Africa Games sports. I created the page since a few days, maybe one day after, a request of deletion was put on Wikipedia, reason is that the article does not introduce any additional or relevant information. At this time the article was poor however i puted a template of "article need expand" and some days after I worked hardly to expand the article. But the article was deleted by vote yes, but as an administrator, u can see if it's correct to delete or no the article. All multisports competitions have similar articles (Olympic sports, European Games sports, Asian Games sports, Pan American Games sports ...etc), I think All-Africa Games can have the same article. Thank u to read me and best regards. --Fayçal.09 (talk) 17:53, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~mail~~

Hello, Drmies. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

[1] 1948–1999 Muze, Inc. Hogan's Heroes. "Pop Artists Beginning with 'Hod'", Phonolog, 1999, p. 1. No. 7-278B Section 207.

[“Metalcore"-2] Hand in Glove. "Metalcore". 2015-08-11. Retrieved 2015-09-18. Metalcore (or metallic hardcore) is a fusion genre blending extreme metal and hardcore punk. The name is a portmanteau of the names of the two genres, which is known as metallic hardcore distinguished by its emphasis on breakdowns, which are slow, intense passages that are used for moshing. Pioneering bands, such as Hogan's Heroes, Avenged Sevenfold, Earth Crisis, Deadguy, Hatebreed, Bury Your Dead and Integrity, lean more towards beatdown hardcore, whereas latter bands - Killswitch Engage, Bullet For My Valentine, Parkway Drive and Blood Has Been Shed- lean more towards extreme metal. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help)

[“Metalcore-3] Amazon.ca. "THE ORIGIN & HISTORY OF METALCORE MUSIC". 2015-08-11. Retrieved 2015-09-18. Metalcore or metallic core is an extensive fusion genre that is a blend of extreme metal and hardcore punk. Metalcore music puts its emphasis on breakdowns, which are intense, slow passages that are conducive to slamdancing or moshing. Early bands like Hogan's Heroes, Integrity, and Earth Crisis were distinctly into hardcore punk, while later bands like Underoath, All That Remains, The Devil Wears Prada, Killswitch Engage, Trivium, Bullet for My Valentine, and As I Lay Dying has a strong inclination towards metal. Sepultura and Pantera influenced later bands and the additional advancement of metalcore. Subgenres include mathcore, deathcore, and melodic metalcore. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help)

[“Metalcore”-4] Music Nectar. "Metalcore". 2015. Retrieved 2015-09-19. Metalcore is a fusion genre which combines hardcore ethics and heavier hardcore music with heavy metal elements. Heavy metal-hardcore punk hybrids arose in the mid-1980s and would also radicalize the innovations of hardcore as the two genres and their ideologies intertwined noticeably, resulting in two main genres one being metalcore. The term has been used to refer to bands that were not purely hardcore nor purely metal such as pioneering bands Earth Crisis, Integrity and Hogan's Heroes. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help)

[“History-5] rezi. "History of Metalcore". 2015-05-01. Retrieved 2015-09-10. The Pioneers of a New Age (early 1990's) Hogan's Heroes (2 Albums Shown - Built To Last and Self Titled) (Attempting to evolve the sound even further - Replaced punk style vocals with screaming vocals) - Earth Crisis - (photo shown) (Attempting to evolve the sound even further - Replaced punk style vocals with screaming vocals) - Transcript of The History of Metalcore The Pioneers of a New Age, Hogan's Heroes, On the Brink of Commercial Success, Keep Calm and Wait for The Breakdown, - Characterized by a slower, heavier beat than that of the rest of the song, The Dawn of Metalcore, - Agnostic Front and Suicidal Tendencies began experimenting with different genres, The History of Metalcore (1980's-1990's) - Thrash Metal - Punk - Hardcore (Speed) (Harsh Vocals) (Aggression) Metalcore - Containing mainly the drums and a chugging rhythm from the guitars (Melody + Breakdowns) Breakdown Example - Earth Crisis ( Early 1990's) - Attempting to evolve the sound even further - Replaced punk style vocals with screaming vocals (Hogan's Heroes) (1990's - 2000's) In the late 90's Metalcore had finally gained a massive following, Century Media Records, Metal Blade Records, Rosters full of Metalcore bands, Inches away from reaching commercial success, (Tim Lambesis, As I Lay Dying), New Millennium, New Trends, (Early 2000's) - Heavily influenced by Swedish Death Metal, (The Jester's Dance, In Flames), (Agnostic Front) - Began incorporating melodic influences, Led to the creation of…, Killswitch Engage, Atreyu, All That Remains, Killswitch Engage, Formed:Westfield, Massachusetts, U.S. from:1999, Members: Jesse Leach (Vocals), Mike D'Antonio (Bass), Joel Stroetzel, Adam Dutkiewicz (Guitars), Justin Folley (Drums) Features: Melodic guitar riffs, double bass drum patterns, dual-guitar harmonies and, breakdowns - Their Record "The End of Heartache" peaked at #21 of the bilboard 200, selling 38,000 copies in the first week. - The album sold more than 500,000 copies - Nominated "Best Metal Performance" for the 47th Grammy Awards. (The End of Heartache, Killswitch Engage), Atreyu From: Orange County, California, U.S. (1998-2011, 2014- Present), Formed:1998 Members: Alex Varkatzas (vocals), Dan Jacobs (lead guitar), Travis Miguel (rhythm guitar), Marc Mcknight (bass), Brandon Saller (drums, vocals), Studio Albums: Suicide Notes and Butterfly Kisses (2002), The Curse (2004), A Death Grip on Yesterday (2006), Lead Sails Paper Anchor (2007), Congregation of the Damned (2009), Lip Gloss And Black, Atreyu (2002), All That Remains, From: Springfield, Massachusetts (2000 - Present), Formed: 2000, Members: Phillip Labonte (Vocals), Oli Herbert, Mike Martin (Guitars), Jeanne Sagan (Bass), Jason Costa (Drums), Top 3 Studio Albums: The Fall of Ideals (2006), Overcome (2008), For We are Many (2010), Six (Instrumental), All That Remains (2006), Moshing - Style of dance where participants push and slam into each other. -Originated in the 1980's, in Washington D.C. during the Hardcore movement., Circle Pits, Wall of Death - The Present State of Metalcore - New generations of kids attempt to simplify the genre - Abusing Metalcore's strengths, abusing them and, watering them down (Ex. Breakdowns) - Abuse of Studio Techniques (Ex. Auto-Tune), Making the once golden genre sound: - Generic - Repetitive - Mediocre - Lifeless - Fake - Over Produced - Unnecessarily low-tuned guitars, (Do you even Djent?), The "Djent Stick", (19 seconds, Profiting Off of Religion - Making money off of the middle-upper class market - Faking a Christian Faith in order to be accepted into households - Changed their lyrics to appeal to the Christian demographic, One in ten Christian bands we toured with were actually Christian bands. Tim Lambesis, AP Magazine. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help)

[“Hardcore-6] General-Books. "Hardcore punk". 2014. Retrieved 2015-09-10. Metalcore is a fusion genre which combines hardcore ethics and heavier hardcore music with heavy metal elements. Heavy metal-hardcore punk hybrids arose in the mid-1980s and would also radicalize the innovations of hardcore as the two genres and their ideologies intertwined noticeably, resulting in two main genres one being metalcore. The term has been used to refer to bands that were not purely hardcore nor purely metal such as pioneering bands Earth Crisis, Integrity and Hogan's Heroes. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help)

[Hogan’s_Heroes”-7] Metal Music Archives. "Hogan's Heroes". 2015-07-28. Retrieved 2015-09-21. "formed in 1984. The band was seminal in the development of metallic hardcore, skatepunk, metalcore and crossover thrash

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[1]

@@ Line 601: / Line 601: @@
 ==Request of restauring "All-Africa Games sports"==
 Hi, I put on first a request to you as an administrator who deleted the page [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/All-Africa Games sports|All-Africa Games sports]]. I created the page since a few days, maybe one day after, a request of deletion was put on Wikipedia, reason is that the article does not introduce any additional or relevant information. At this time the article was poor however i puted a template of "article need expand" and some days after I worked hardly to expand the article. But the article was deleted by vote yes, but as an administrator, u can see if it's correct to delete or no the article. All multisports competitions have similar articles ('''[[Olympic sports]], [[European Games sports]], [[Asian Games sports]], [[Pan American Games sports]] ...etc'''), I think [[All-Africa Games]] can have the same article. Thank u to read me and best regards. --[[User:Faycal.09|Fayçal.09]] ([[User talk:Faycal.09|talk]]) 17:53, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
+== mail ==
+{{You've got mail}}