User talk:WJBscribe

00:21, Tuesday 1 October 2024

User:WJBscribe	User talk:WJBscribe	User:WJBscribe/Gallery	User:WJBscribe/Barnstars	User:WJBscribe/Drafts
Userpage (commons · meta)	Talk (Archives)	Gallery	Barnstars	Drafts

Hi! Please leave a message and I'll get back to you...

Don't hesitate to get in touch if you have a question or need help. I'll do my best and can probably point you in the right direction if it isn't something I can sort out myself.

Will

Deletion of "List of people who died on their birthdays"

Hi. I've just discovered this article has been deleted. I'm looking for some discussion of the deletion/retention issue other than the vote itself (with reasons) and the outcome. I'm presuming there was some discussion before it ever got to the voting stage, but for the life of me it seems buried in the system somewhere. Can you help? Cheers -- JackofOz 13:04, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am not aware of any discussion about the article other than the AfD itself at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of people who died on their birthdays which I closed. If there was any other discussion about the article, perhaps the nominator or one of the other participants would be able to direct you to it... WjBscribe 00:15, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of "Tim Ryan (college president)"

Hi, I noticed that you recently deleted a page I created about Dr. Tim Ryan, an American Culinary Federation-Certified Master Chef who's the president of The Culinary Institute of America, a world-renowned culinary college. I was wondering if you could provide some feedback about what I need to do to ensure that, if I re-submit the article, it will remain posted on Wikipedia. I had noticed that the presidents of other colleges in our immediate region -- Vassar, Bard, Marist -- all have separate entries on Wikipedia. Indeed, just about every college I checked on Wikipedia had separate pages for their presidents.

So I guess I'm just wondering what I did wrong in submitting Dr. Ryan's entry. I'm fairly new to the whole Wikipedia submission experience, so please forgive me my ignorance. I would like to re-submit the page "Tim Ryan (college president)" and want to make sure I do it right this time. Thanks in advance for any recommendations you can make to help me with this. Jnormy 16:25, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like I didn't delete the article - only a page that pointed to the article, which was located at Tim Ryan, C.M.C., Ed.D., President, The Culinary Institute of America after the target page was deleted. It looks like this page was deleted by Lucasbfr (talk · contribs), who may be able to tell you more. But looking into it, his reason for deletion was that the text was a copyright violation - the problem seems to have been that the test was copied from this page. Wikipedia article need to be original content and cannot be reproduced from other websites without official notification from the copyright holder that they license the work to be used freely by anyone (not just WIkipedia). WjBscribe 00:12, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion Question

I'm confused by this was it a redirect to Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction) and deleted or what? Ctjf83 22:21, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was a redirect to Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction). There is a general consensus that we should not have redirects from the mainspace to the wikipedia namespace. Such redirects are felt to blur the line between encyclopedic content for readers, and the meta-content designed for its editors. WjBscribe 00:07, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

is there anything i can do to redirect it again? when i searched "In-universe" to read up on it, it came up with no results even close to it, so i had to look for a page with the template Ctjf83 03:15, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where were you thinking of redirecting it to? Recreating a redirect to Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction) would go against the consensus of the discussion. But if there is another article you think "in-universe" should redirect to, you can create a redirect to that page. WjBscribe 08:01, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

can i reopen a discussion on redirecting it to what it use to have...like i said, i had a hard time finding the article to read up on in-universe Ctjf83 06:23, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion request

Hi. Could I please ask you to delete two redirects I created by mistake? I put in the wrong diacritic, but then created ones with the correct one. The ones I'd like deleted are Marian Lǎzǎrescu and Ionuţ Ţǎran. Biruitorul (talk) 16:19, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem - done. WjBscribe 23:57, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks. Biruitorul (talk) 03:48, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RfA for Canadian Paul

Four years ago this day, a foreigner was voted by the community to serve a land that he loved. Today, a new foreigner humbly accepts the charge and support of serving a community that he loves. Hopefully, he won't disappoint.

Thank you for participating in my RfA, which passed with a vote of (47/0/1). The trust bestowed upon me by the community is one of the most touching honours that I have ever received, and I vow not to let you down. Whether you have suggestions for ways in which I could improve, a request for assistance or just need someone to listen, my talk page and my email are always open. I pledge to do what I can to help this project, in the words of a man who needs no introduction, "make the internet not suck." A special thank you goes out to Tim Vickers for nominating me. Cheers, CP 23:01, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

Hi; thanks for your support to my RfA, which closed successfully at (51/1/2). I'll keep this brief since I don't like spamming anyone: I'll work hard to deserve the trust you placed in me. Thanks again. — Coren ^(talk) 23:31, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Wetman's comments.

Were I in your position, I do not believe that I would even bother responding to Wetman's rude, presumptious comments. As you rightly said, the talk page for the article is no place for such comments, anyway, and what result was he expecting from it? I saw the comment on the King Arthur article, and almost deleted it as inflammatory, trouble-making, and having nothing to do with actually improving the article. I do want to point out, however, that I did leave a comment here about the unprotection of William Blake article, and you never responded. Regardless, Wetman's behavior is out of bounds. Cheers! ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 05:19, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do apologise, I seem to have missed your comment about that article entirely. If this happens again do feel free to presume that I never deliberately ignore messages and that if I have responded to others and not you, this is an oversight on my part. Feel free to nudge. I don't think William Blake is bad enough to need protecting again if one takes into account that there were several edits by the same IP on November 15. Other admins may validly reach a different conclusion however, do feel free to request reprotection at WP:RFPP. And definitely do so (or nudge me again) should things get any worse, though that page is also on my watchlist so I shall be keeping an eye as well. Best wishes, WjBscribe 05:26, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good sir, please be assured that I never presumed you deliberately ignored my message. I assumed, rather, as you say, that it was an oversight. I was busy with other things as well, and did not check back for a few days, by which point the message had been archived. It is no matter. I have my eye on that article regularly, and we shall keep it free of garbage, I am sure. Cheers! ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 05:33, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Adminship

I have thought about it, and I am willing to accept your RfA nomination. I have prepared my answers to the 3 standard questions. I greatly appreciate your faith in me! Royalbroil 14:21, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's great - I'll write up a nomination statement for you. WjBscribe 18:03, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection Request

Following up an earlier protection request I made ([1]), I am happy to report the glimmer of compromise and so would ask for the following pages to be unprotected per emerging compromise: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Crackers_Don%27t_Matter&redirect=no http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Way_We_Weren%27t_%28Farscape_episode%29&redirect=no http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Won%27t_Get_Fooled_Again_%28Farscape_episode%29&redirect=no http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Die_Me%2C_Dichotomy&redirect=no

Thanks. Eusebeus (talk) 15:58, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I need some assistance, please.

I find it interesting the number of problems that are actually caused when we are attempting to solve other problems. Some time back, I moved the article IRA Abwehr World War II to IRA/Abwehr collaboration in World War II, because that seems to me be a more accurate and complete title. Fine. That is, until I looked at the talk page ([[2]]), where on sees a link [[< Talk:IRA]], indicating that Wikipedia sees this talk page as a subpage of main IRA talk page. Even worse, when one clicks said link, one is taken to a stray talk page that no longer corresponds to an article. "IRA" is now a redirect to "Ira" dab page, which dab page has a discussion page with no content. So, long story short, how do we sort all this out? It seems, first and foremost, that IRA/Abwehr collaboration in World War II will have to be moved again, perhaps to IRA-Abwehr collaboration in World War II. Then, that stray talk page will have to go somewhere, though I know not where. What are your thoughts? ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 18:13, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved IRA/Abwehr collaboration in World War II to IRA-Abwehr collaboration in World War II and fixed the redirects. Talk:IRA seems to make mose sense as a talkpage for Talk:Ira so I've moved it there. Does that all seem to make sense? WjBscribe 18:27, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That all makes perfect sense. Thank you very much. Was I making this more complicated than it needed to be?

On a related matter of page moves, how do I go about moving a page that I believe was incorrectly moved by a bureaucrat? Should I just go straight to him and make my case? ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 18:35, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A page move by a bureaucrat? There's no reason why editorial actions by admins or crats should be treated differently to those of anyone else. So you could be bold and move it if you think its a simple mistake. If you think their choice of name was deliberate but you want to propose a different one, rasing it on their talkpage and failing that the article talkpage seems a good way to approach it. WjBscribe 18:44, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again, and as always, for your time and efforts. I think I will just be bold and move the article to what I believe to be its proper title. As it is the name of an organization (i.e., International Movement for an Imaginist Bauhaus), I think the article title should follow the organization's literature. Cheers! ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 18:56, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

mail

You've got beans. ··coela can 04:29, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Already replied. WjBscribe 04:36, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Henry Ford unprotection

I think it may need to be reprotected. Since your unprotect, it's already had:1, 2*, 3, 4, 5* incidences of vandalism, two of which were clearly anti-semetism agenda edits. Is another round of semi-protection needed?ThuranX (talk) 02:47, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interestingly there have also been 2 good IP edits [3] and a vandal reversion. I'd rather not reprotect it just yet though might be willing in a couple days. Feel free to list it at WP:RFPP if you would like a second opinion. WjBscribe 10:22, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Small favor?

If it's not a big deal, would you do a checkuser for me? I actually have no clue if it is or not, since I've never been involved in anything to do with it. But if it isn't, could you see if Gherek (talk · contribs), Lgbpsychology (talk · contribs), and/or ClydeOnline (talk · contribs) come from the same IP? Mucho Thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 04:00, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for helping with the duck!

I'll try to wield the Mop-and-Bucket with grace and humility. --Orange Mike 04:06, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Block Request

Wow, I never expected to find a reasonable admin. In any case, I don't object to the warnings on my talk page because they relate to previous users. I am, also, those previous users. I just don't like all the clutter on my talk page. 70.173.50.153 (talk) 10:27, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Info

Re your warning to an ip who just placed a link, Open Proxy & blocked :) Cheers --Herby ^{talk thyme} 10:29, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Knew it was worth making you an admin for a reason - even if you did shun my offer in favour of Lar ;) .... WjBscribe 10:51, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting - dumping links on here, en wq & commons at a minimum using open proxies - I guess a bot at work. And seriously - you comment may have made me think but I hadn't planned to do it (still trying to keep a nice low profile):) Cheers --Herby ^{talk thyme} 11:43, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for November 19th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 47	19 November 2007	About the Signpost

An interview with Florence Devouard	Author borrows from Wikipedia article without attribution
WikiWorld comic: "Raining animals"	News and notes: Page patrolling, ArbCom age requirement, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	WikiProject Report: History
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 10:53, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please unblock my IP

Then unblock me so I can go do other things. Jehochman and Durova's bad blocks are the only source of disruption here. If the rules say I'm blocked forever because Durova says I'm MyWikiBiz, then the rules are bullshit so why should I follow them? Durova made it so that saying anything at all about my block, even on my talk page, was a violation of the rules. A classic Catch 22 - if I complain about my block, and question her secret evidence which we all know by now gives wrong answers all the time, that proves that I should be blocked. But if I didn't complain, no one would even know there was a problem and I'd still be blocked. The one thing Durova and Jehochamn haven't tried was unblocking me and letting me edit, because it would beome pretty obvious that I'm not MyWikiBiz and they botched everything from the get-go. You call my conversation "disruption" only because I'm editing from TOR nodes, but who forced me to do that? If I wanted to vandalize things or cause trouble, that's what I'd be doing. I'm just talking about my block. Unblock me, and I'll move on. 24.19.33.82 12:42, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you want your block reviewed there are proper channels - as you well know given your assertion that you are a longtime editor. The block on your IP is anon-only so you may contribute with your account at any time. I recommend either emailing the unblock list or the arbitration committee. But this constant block evasion is getting tedious and I confess you have eroded any support I may originally have had for your position. WjBscribe 12:47, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But Durova said she would ban my regular account whoever I am. So either I'm Kohs and banned, or I'm not Kohs and will be banned. Anyway you're not supposed to have to fax your identity papers to ArbCom or anyone else to edit. I'm not MyWikiBiz, even Durova knows that or what are they investigating? So the block should be reversed. I don't want to be talking about this anymore than you do and I won't be once I'm unblocked. They're creating their own drama here. 24.19.33.82 12:50, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't say you needed to fax them ID, I said it was the proper channel to ask for your block to be reviewed. I think it would be inappropriate for Durova or Jehochman to block your account given their involvement. And anyone who did would need to show evidence. Of course, they may cite disruptive editing using Tor nodes - but then you've rather opened yourself up to that accusation by taking that route rather than taking advice and opting for the unblock list/ArbCom. WjBscribe 13:00, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You shouldn't have to ask anyone to edit as an anonymous IP. That's a betrayal of the foundational principles. 24.19.33.82 13:16, 20 November 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.96.75.87 (talk) [reply]

You were blocked - if you think the block was unfair, I've suggested two routes for you to appeal. Instead you have chosen to edit war across Wikipedia using proxies. I'm sorry but I don't find your approach condusive to having much sympathy for your cause. WjBscribe 13:19, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]