User talk:Richardcavell

See the archives of my talk page here:

• Archive 1
• Archive 2
• Archive 3

Khachkar destruction

Well, if you see User_talk:Grandmaster#Khachkar_destruction, User_talk:Aivazovsky#khachkar_destruction, and User_talk:Dacy69#Khachkar_destruction, you'll see that pretty much every party agrees with redirecting the page. So, there appears to be a consensus for it. Khoikhoi 03:12, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't agree with this redirection, it's completely unfair. The page was created as Khachkar destruction, and as soon as evidence on destruction in Armenia was added, it now has to be redirected to the city in Azerbaijan? The AfD was for some reason done by Aivazovsky in less than two weeks after the rejection of the initial one, so is there any reason for not abiding by Wikipedia regulations? Atabek 07:10, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Since I was the one who brought to the close attention of my Armenian friends the facts of khachkars and other cultural heritage of Armenians being destroyed or otherwise neglected by Armenians themselves, I feel obliged to comment too, and express disapproval of the redirect. Neither do I understand this sudden urge to delete the article -- it has been here for months, and after I've enriched it with new information, suddenly user Aivazovsky tries to delete it (for the second time). In order to prevent creation of great many pages about destruction of various monuments and other cultural heritage and even environmental damage, which of course destroys the ancient monuments too (and both sides, Armenia and Azerbaijan, have PLENTY of accusations and photos to trade), it is wise to group all this under one article, named either Khachkar destruction, or more broadly, Destruction of cultural heritage in the Caucasus (since Georgia was made a party by Armenians, and Georgians, going all the way back to 19th century, have more than enough counter-accusations towards Armenians too). --AdilBaguirov 08:14, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

please pay attention what user Eupator did today. He, without any discussion and consensus redirected page "Khachkar destructuion" to page "Khachkar destruction in Nakhichevan"! he is apparantely trying by this redirection to get rid of imporatnat information which he don't like--Dacy69 13:34, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		I think this was really sweet of you - thank you. – Riana ঋ 04:23, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

:) I thought it was appropriate. RfA can be rough on people. - Richard Cavell 04:27, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Bill of Rights for Young Offenders

An editor has nominated Bill of Rights for Young Offenders, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not"). Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bill of Rights for Young Offenders and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. Jayden54Bot 16:11, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

13 Winters, speedy deletion? What?

I'm sorry, but I rather think you are demonizing me a little much on the article on the 13 Winters Deletion Page. You even used "tantamount" to describe my actions on being confused about what really happened to the article. Was I to be informed about It's speedy deletion? Because I certanly wasn't. --Emevas 14:50, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

A user called Gogo Dodo speedy deleted it. I want it to be given its chance at AfD - it looks like it might survive, actually. Your actions in recreating the article were tantamount (ie equivalent) to contesting the speedy deletion, though it's obvious from the talk page that you were not aware of the processes that wikipedia uses to do that explicitly. Therefore it's another reason to give your article a chance at AfD. - Richard Cavell 21:45, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Ah, okay, sorry, I misunderstood the word tantamount (I was told it meant something else). Well, It may or may not survive. If it does it does, if it doesn't I'll be irriatated, but oh well... --Emevas 15:01, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Anthony5429 2

Anthony5429 withdrew and closed his own RfA. Wanted to notify an admin, just in case. —KNcyu38 (talk • contribs) 02:27, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Nevermind. —KNcyu38 (talk • contribs) 02:28, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

One (admittedly big) step may be to abolish self-noms, as most of those end unsuccessful, anyway. —KNcyu38 (talk • contribs) 04:01, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually, this is an interesting topic, and I'd like to know more. Could you point me to any relevant discussions? —KNcyu38 (talk • contribs) 04:41, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

As I'm fairly new (barely 4 months), the inner workings of policy proposal are totally over my head, but... well, I often read from other users who have given up (or are at least trying) that some major changes should happen. If I understand you correctly, by "conservative" you mean policy that won't go beyond explored territory. Hmm. Would you mind giving me any opinion on what I wrote here, whenever you can find the time and motivation? It's way off topic, I just stumbled over the page and didn't realize the debate had died. Where are major changes like that discussed, if at all? I'd really like to catch up on stuff like that. —KNcyu38 (talk • contribs) 05:07, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I appreciate what you wrote. Getting new policies approved around here seems to be very difficult, and it seems to me that the only way that essays are approved as policy is after people cite them as though they were policy for a while. - Richard Cavell 05:17, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

E-mail.

You have an e-mail ;) --TeckWiz ^ParlateContribs_@ 01:07, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Khachkar destruction

Alright, but is there any reason why is has to be until July? Most people at WP:AN said it would be fine to redirect the page if everyone agreed. July is so far off. :-( I think it would be better if you made it May, or even June. Khoikhoi 04:30, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

I gave 1 June 2007 as the earliest date to nominate it. I know that the date is arbitrary, but like I said, we need to give decisions some permanence and not game the system. I did, in good faith, conduct an exhaustive review before making my decision. - Richard Cavell 04:49, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Ok, fair enough. Khoikhoi 05:00, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

13 Winters

Hi, Now that 13 Winters have survived the AfD, I wonder if you know what happens to the band members' AfDs? I voted Keep for the band, but the individual members don't seem to pass WP:MUSIC and on that basis should be liable for deletion, but that no longer seems possible. StuartDouglas 09:41, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thank you for your Support on my recent nomination for adminship, which passed with a final tally of 89/1/1. If there's anything I can help with, then you know where to find me. Cheers. - Michael Billington (talk) 06:49, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

TeckWiz's RFA

Hey Richardcavell. Thanks for supporting my unsuccessful RFA this week under my old name, TeckWiz. I'm now known simply as User:R. Thanks for helping out with my editor review. I hope to keep helping and improving Wikipedia alongside you. --TeckWiz is now R ^ParlateContribs_@(Let's go Yankees!) 15:09, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Neal Winter

Neal Winter, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Neal Winter satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Neal Winter and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Neal Winter during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Crockspot 03:59, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Deletion review for Moneyfacts.co.uk

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Moneyfacts.co.uk. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Phil Bridger (talk) 09:40, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Andy Lee / Hamish Blake

Hi Richard, thanks for your message - I have now made a similar change to Hamish Blake. Hamish & Andy, Hamish & Andy (radio show), and Ed Kavalee are all prominently linked in the correct context within the article, and Today Network and Rove McManus are only vaguely related to the main topics. -- Chuq (talk) 11:57, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Peter Larkin

Hi Richard. Wikipedia:Naming conventions (people) is the relevent Wikipedia guideline. Note: "Do not have additional qualifiers (such as "King", "Saint", "Dr.", "(person)", "(ship)"), except when this is the simplest and most NPOV way to deal with disambiguation" Using (doctor) is just as simple and more importantly consistent with the way that Wikipedia treats other courtesy titles such as Fr., Prof. etc. See also Wikipedia:Manual of Style (biographies)#Academic titles. Cheers, Mattinbgn\^talk 07:34, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

You may want to have a look at Peter Larkins as well. -- Mattinbgn\^talk 07:50, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Re:

WP:Sims does not use those pages/templates anymore. Electrical Experiment 01:59, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

CIX40

This article is the creation of a single purpose account; the other three articles created by the account (Toshiba CIX 100, Toshiba CIX 200, and Toshiba CIX 670) have already been prodded. I'll probably give this one a week or so, then try a prod.

(I'd feel more charitable toward the article except that it sat in "unpatrolled" status for a month, which means that at least a few editors must have seen it and been unwilling to even mark it as patrolled.) -- John Broughton (♫♫) 11:38, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Rove

The addition on the template was a brainfart on my part. [runs off and hides] Wongm (talk) 06:26, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

David letterman

Re your deletion summary Pointless to send this through RfD, though it does not fulfill any CSD. I've seen admins cite WP:CSD#R3, but I agree that doesn't quite fit the case. Maybe R3 should be expanded to include such unnecessary redirects, or maybe a new R4 should be established? (Btw, I know they are harmless, but things like that are my usual pet peeves.) user:Everyme 12:13, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

The Meisner Technique School of Acting

I am confused by your notability policy. There seems to be a lot of gray area covered, but not much black and white. What makes The Meisner Technique School of Acting any different from The Sanford Meisner Center for the Arts. The Meisner Technique School of Acting is a reputable school, with a reputable director who also happens to be a legitimate actor and a disciple of Sanford Meisner. --Jmjrrtt (talk) 22:41, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Suitman496

Hi Richard. Thanks for the idea of shifting Suitman496's biography to his user talk. I was trying to CSD the many, many articles he was creating (and almost CSDed his user talk in the process - removed the template in time heh). He is now creating articles called Editing User talk:Samuel Tan (comment) in an attempt to contact me, in response to some explaining I did to him about his CSDed article, because he doesn't know how to use user talk pages. What is normally done in cases like this, where the author is repeatedly doing nonsensical things because he does not know how to use Wikipedia? Temporary block? Just curious. Cheers! -Samuel Tan 07:20, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I have User:Suitman/Suitman496 under surveillance. Do you want me to delete your own userpage and make it redlink? - Richard Cavell (talk) 07:19, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

No but thanks, unless he starts vandalising my userpage, at which point I will report him until the cows (and various other animals) come home. I'll be monitoring the list of new pages too for a while, in case he creates more articles in an attempt to contact me. Looks like it doesn't pay to be friendly to some people :) -Samuel Tan 07:24, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

My thanks

		What a Brilliant Idea Barnstar
		One bright, shining barnstar presented respectfully to Richardcavell, who thought of the brilliant idea of userfying a new user's biography, which teaches the new user, by example, more about Wikipedia, and saves many editors the trouble of more deletion nominations. Keep producing those photons! Samuel Tan 07:41, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Unblock

Fair enough, it's done jimfbleak (talk) 08:43, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Steven Palmer (rugby player)

According to this statement, the author consents to the deletion of this page. --UsaSatsui (talk) 03:28, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Korean war crimes

Hi Richard,

It is not the same article. I did the work required (IMHO).

I asked for the review of old article but this is now redundant.

Can I safely repost?

Thank you. --Ex-oneatf (talk) 03:50, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Deleted Article: Harriet Fields

You left a note on my talk page stating that you deleted the article on Harriet Fields. First of all, why did you feel the need to step in and delete it before the "articles for deletion" had a chance to run its course? Consensus was not reached on this article. Consensus is a huge part of maintaining Wikipedia. Your actions have undermined the Wikipedia system.

Second of all, you labeled the article as "patent nonsense." I would disagree with this assessment, as would others, had they been given the chance to read the article. Therefore, in the deletion log for Harriet Fields, it will read "patent nonsense" and everyone will now have a biased view of this article.

To clear up any confusion, there was already an article on Harriet Fields, in which some high school girl wrote a one-sentence biography of herself. Two other members of wikipedia had marked it for speedy deletion. I then stepped in and rewrote/revised the article to its accurate meaning, which consisted of about four or five fully-written sections. I am confident that the article you deleted was my revision, which you deleted without any consensus, as the two members who marked the article for speedy deletion were referencing the previous one-sentence version.

Lastly, on my talk page, you stated that you "weren't sure what I was trying to achieve" by writing this article on wikipedia. I'm not sure what you mean by this-- obviously, anyone who writes anything on wikipedia is attempting to make wikipedia a better place of information.

Any comments/answers you have would be appreciated. WPNman (talk) 19:55, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi, WPNMan. The AfD discussion was not closed by me. I deleted the article after it was recreated the same day that the AfD was closed. I don't believe that there would have been any point continuing the AfD debate - it was fairly clearly going to result in delete. If you wish to question the decision, you can look at WP:DRV, but again, my advice is not to bother with it. The article will not survive.

May I also say that I'm a doctor, and the text that you have written reads like the product of someone with schizophrenia. I cannot see how the text could serve any useful purpose on wikipedia. I'm not trying to insult you. - Richard Cavell (talk) 21:55, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm aware that you were not the one who closed the Afd Discussion. Might I remind you that the original Harriet Fields article, the one-sentence version, was nominated for deletion, and two members of wikipedia recommended that it be speedily deleted. I then revised the article. A few minutes later, the page was deleted as a result of the original articles for deletion process. I then re-created the article with my revisions. This is when you stepped in and deleted it.

Yes, the article was re-created the same day it was deleted, but it was a completely different article, and therefore whatever the deletion result of the first article (the one-sentence version) should not apply to an article that has the same name, but completely different content about a completely different subject. The Afd debate you are referring to has nothing to do with my revision of the article.

There was, and is, a point for continuing the debate. Your opinion that it "fairly clearly was going to result in delete" may be true, but it is not definite, and other wikipedians may (or may not) feel differently. The only way to achieve consensus is by letting the articles for deletion run its course.

As for the article being written "like the product of someone with schizophrenia," I am led to believe that you did not even read the full article that you took the time to delete. Just so we're clear, the Harriet Fields article I am referring to is the one where Harriet Fields' collaborations with the Biulu are discussed.

In conclusion, you don't appear to be taking this issue seriously. True, it is a complex article, and beyond the reach of some, but there are many who might benefit from having this article on Wikipedia.

Again, any comments/responses you have are appreciated. WPNman (talk) 00:09, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Mate, I'm still not sure why it is you want this article on wikipedia. What is 'the Biulu'? Are you referring to an in-universe concept? As in, is this part of a TV show or a series of novels, or something? If you really want to have this article, you can recreate it or you can try your luck at WP:DRV. If you're not clear on DRV, I can help you with that. - Richard Cavell (talk) 03:08, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. No, the Biulu is not an in-universe concept, it is a real-life event that happened basically in a small town. Not many people truly understand all the legal and scientific terms that are involved with this issue. All I was trying to do here was to give information on this person and her "companion" for people who might want it.

After reviewing the deletion logs for the past several days, I have come to realize that the politics of Wikipedia's articles for deletion are difficult to endure. I have come to realize that my attempts to inform people of Harriet Fields and the Biulu have been soundly defeated.

I have attempted an in-depth study of WP:DRV, and I have come to realize that even if I were to appeal the deletion, the numbers are not in my favor. Politics. Even if the afd debate was re-opened, some of the concepts in the article would be met with heavy resistance. People would strongly deny key points of the article, especially the part of the transgression of the Biulu.

The outsider would certainly think that this article is strange, although I can assure you many people can attribute to its level of accuracy. Even though I would like people to be aware of the Biulu history (in case they encounter it themselves one day), I have been defeated in all aspects of this regard. My efforts have failed, and the information that I have to share will go unnoticed.

I would like to sincerely thank you for your time. I sincerely apologize for any inconvenience I have caused you or Wikipedia. It looks as though I must now turn my efforts elsewhere to promote the Biulu, althouh the Biulu, in its current state, would surely pocify this. Thank you. WPNman (talk) 03:41, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Re:Velvetpuffin

Hello. I tagged the article as G7 because I created the article and most of the information that is currently there was done by me. However, I don't believe that this article sustains notability or substantiate its existence. Cheers. -- Loukinho (talk) 05:24, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

CSD removal of Dark Intervals (film)

I am not clear on why you do not think Dark Intervals (film) is a CSD candidate. It is almost certainly a hoax and is even contradicted by E.B. Hughes and as such is CSD#3. I cite the following recent AfD as a precedent Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Agents (TV series). Regards. --triwbe (talk) 08:09, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

I gave my reasons of both of your talk pages, please read and understand. I have better things to do than list a "hoax". I am listed on the IMDB, I have sold 2 screenplays, it is hardly a past time. This is my livelihood, I have better things to do than lie about my success. Ebfilms (talk) 08:53, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Since the editor has changed the article to be about the screenplay, and not a non-existant film, all is OK. Cheers. --triwbe (talk) 14:33, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

As1960

I know this guy is blanking some AfD page, but although not encouraged, it is legal to blank one`s user talk-page, although archiving is preferred. It has happened to me before. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 08:12, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Schulman

Ive made a comment about this on User talk:Collectonian. DGG (talk) 09:02, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Stephen B. Levine move

Thanks for the note - I am currently working to add bios on key sex scientists supporting the DSM the way I did in 2006 with key race scientists supporting The Bell Curve. I would appreciate if you could clean up that specific disambiguation/redirect (sorry about making such a mess of it - wish it were easier for non-admins to correct such things). Please let me know if you would like to start or expand any specific biographies, and I will be happy to collaborate with you. Jokestress (talk) 14:53, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about the misunderstanding. I believe both Stephen Levines are equally notable to the general public but much more notable within their areas of expertise (when I was writing the psychiatrist's biography, it took me a while to figure out there were two separate people). I propose the psychiatrist at Stephen B. Levine and the poet/healer/author at Stephen Levine (author). Stephen Levine should be a disambiguation. The only confusion is that both are authors, and both are healers in a sense. The only reason I wrote the poet's bio was because it already had several wikilinks, and to disambiguate the two. I was unfamiliar with either until I wrote the psychiatrist's article. Jokestress (talk) 03:54, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing all that and the heads up on the inconsistency. I just corrected the birthdate to 1942. Jokestress (talk) 05:07, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

My nominations for speedy deletion

Hi Richardvavell, I have no recollection of ever having a dispute with anyone over the term Khojaly Genocide. My interpretation was that it was vandalism as per WP:VANDALISM it was a "change of content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia". Using the term genocide for events that are not a genocide diminishes the term and hence is a great diservice to people and nations that actually have experienced a genocide. No one uses the term "Khojaly Genocide" except for the most extreme propaganda sites, having even a redirect in wikipedia would in my humble opinion compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. If you feel that the nomination for speedy deletion is inappropriate, that is fine, I can take it to redirects for discussion instead. Pocopocopocopoco (talk) 23:04, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Let's call the Khojaly Massacre redirect a difference of opinion and I have taken it to RFD. The other pages that are misspelled are no brainers for speedy deletion. Redirects that are clearly mispelled should be speedy deleted no? I understand your a bit leary given the topic but I'm sure nobody will complain about deleting a misspelled redirect. Pocopocopocopoco (talk) 23:44, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Page move war

Hi. I understand you wanted to assume good faith and actually didn't want to give you trouble by filling the report. I did and you may comment here. Cheers, Gülməmməd ^Talk 23:36, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I don't think I'll comment on it because the admins already seem to know why I declined to act upon the speedy-deletion tags. I'm going to show caution on this issue - it's obviously emotive for several editors. - Richard Cavell (talk) 05:30, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Semiprotection for Stub12718696

PLEASE SEMIPROTECT MY PAGE!!!

Korean war crimes

I asked Future Perfect for a copy of the Korean war crimes page but they would not give it to me. But I found it in the Google cache. Would give me a copy of the second version which you deleted? I am not sure how these things work (admin powers/deletion logs).

I have caught a whiff of discussions going on at the Comfort women page and, reading over the article, it does not seem to be that bad. No worse than many on the 'pedia. Its strikes me that there is a lot of irrational or hot headed editing going on in some quarters and I would like to have a stab at cleaning it up starting with as simple stub.

TIA --Lucyintheskywithdada (talk) 04:20, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Non-heterosexuals article rewritten

Hi, I've rewritten Non-heterosexuals and would appreciate you revisiting Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Non-heterosexuals to see if your concerns have been addressed. Thank you! Banjeboi 13:35, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Angle boy article

There is no "artist" or any associated discography by someone named "Angle boy" or a "Anders Pederson" from Copenhagen that shows up in Internet searches. This is unusual because the article claims they are the author of "chart-topping" hits over so many decades. A speedy delete of this entry is needed! CZmarlin (talk) 15:23, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Tjandamurra O'Shane

I agree with your actions. -- Longhair\^talk 12:42, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Now at AfD, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tjandamurra O'Shane (2nd nomination). -- Longhair\^talk 15:09, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

My RfA

Richard, thank you for your contribution to the discussion at my recent RfA. Kind words indeed! If ever you have any concerns about my actions, adminly or otherwise, don't hesitate to let me know. Best wishes, Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 21:04, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Umm, what?

You overturned a BLP deletion that was over a year old without taking it to DRV or talking to me? No. Phil Sandifer (talk) 13:18, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Tjandamurra O'Shane

An article that you have been involved in editing, Tjandamurra O'Shane, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tjandamurra O'Shane (2nd nomination). Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Donald Albury 14:30, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Dante Arthurs

I have nominated Dante Arthurs, an article you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dante Arthurs (3rd nomination). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Guy (Help!) 19:16, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

rfa and lists

First of all, thank you for your support on my rfa and your kind comments, i really appreciate it. As for your comments about lists, i can understand what you mean about red links on lists, it can encourage new articles, but where i started off on this, although i've not been doing it so much lately anyway, is on musician/band lists. On articles such as this, allowing the addition of redlinks can be a disaster, as it opens the floodgates for all the myspace bands to add themselves. Take this earlier version of a list i cleared up for example, [1], it was a ridiculous mess and dead and false links made up practically half of it. However i seem to remember that somewhere out there a consensus was reached that music lists shouldn't have red links, no idea where but it certainly seems to be in force on a lot of them. I think that really, it all comes down to the type of list, e.g. List of Renaissance composers can have lots of dead links and every one of those that gets turned blue is a net gain, however, on the other side, List of pop punk bands shouldn't, because A) it can turn the article into a nightmare, and B) because of the nature of the subject, chances are much much higher that any notable band will soon get an article--Jac16888 (talk) 00:43, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

By the way, please don't think i'm ranting here, or trying to argue with you, i just thought i'd give you my point of view--Jac16888 (talk) 00:44, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Rfa Spam

Thank you so much for your support on my RFA, which today passed unanimously. I will do my best to make sure that I don't let any of you down. If you ever need any help with anything, feel free to ask me, i'll be happy to. Thanks again--Jac16888 (talk) 17:03, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Bon Levi

Please do not make personal attacks. Wikipedia has a strict policy against personal attacks. Attack pages and images are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images in violation of our biographies of living persons policy will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Paranormal Skeptic (talk) 01:31, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

OH, boy. I deleted this as it seemed negative BLP with nothing to redeem it. Was surprised to see you were the creator. Let me know if you want it back. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 01

40, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Restored. I don't know if the tagger reviewed the edit history. (I also notice he templated a regular, long term user.) With G-10's, I sometimes delete then review. If I'd checked the edit history first, I'd have just detagged and left a note. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 13:29, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm removing the unsourced negative statements that are BLP. Until they are sourced, I'd reccommend leaving them out to keep WP out of the legal arena :) No, I didn't review the edit history, just saw an unsourced article attacking it's subject. Cheers! Paranormal Skeptic (talk) 11:13, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Notability of Glenn Lumsden

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Glenn Lumsden, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Glenn Lumsden seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Glenn Lumsden, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 16:40, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar!

Also, please let me know if you ever have an article needing rescue from deletionists. I've been able to save a number of notable topics by adding sources during an AfD. Jokestress (talk) 18:02, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Mr. Johnson (Sesame Street)

Hi, Jc37. I agree with this move. Do you mind if I point out that you've used a period to abbreviate Mister? According to the style guide, you can use it or not as a matter of personal preference, but I just wanted you to be conscious of the choice if you weren't already. Since Sesame Street is American, it seems that the period is appropriate (though we would call it a 'full stop'). - Richard Cavell (talk) 08:56, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your thoughts : )

The use of the period was intentional, based upon the source(s) noted on the talk page. (Though I suppose creating a redirect without the period might be appropriate.)

And speaking of the talk page, check out the discussion there if you haven't already, I think there has been some interesting information presented. - jc37 09:04, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I read through it. It might be worthwhile to categorise the 'Anything Muppets', although I'm not sure that it would be. I think it's plain to see that the puppeteers have generic featureless muppet dolls in various colours and degrees of obesity, and then they can apply facial features etc. to create arbitrary personas. I suppose in hindsight 'Fat Blue' is jargon that is internal, used by the Muppet creators and does not refer to the Grover-as-waiter sketch character more than any other Fat Blue.

I created a redirect for Mr Johnson, without the period. It's a plausible search term or internal link that would otherwise be red.

By the way, I remember Simon the Soundman from my own days watching Sesame Street. I think he may have actually preceded Mr. Johnson, particularly given that the image from the Sesame Street wiki shows the prototype character labelled as 'Simon the Soundman'. - Richard Cavell (talk) 09:11, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Lists of characters per each type of "Anything Muppet" sounds interesting, actually. Since people are currently watching Mr. Johnson, perhaps it might be worth starting a discussion there. - jc37 09:33, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Obama article

Perhaps you did not notice that Barack Obama is edit protected. Would you kindly revert this edit?[2] If you feel strongly about it you can propose it on the talk page, although you will probably find that it has been deliberated before and found to be too insignificant to add to his bio. Thanks, Wikidemon (talk) 06:07, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

There is an on-going discussion regarding the protection level at the 4 candidates articles. You may be interested. see...Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents‎ and the section "should the bios be protected till election day....its Content #10.5--Buster7 (talk) 06:31, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Okay, sorry, I didn't realise that the articles were being considered like this. I've reverted my edit. - Richard Cavell (talk) 06:59, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

wow

Hi Richard - Thank you so much for the really REALLY nice note and helping me figure out what to do about the Lisa Masson page. Yes, I would love your help - you're right I'm a newbie-don't-know-what-I'm-doing but the page was looking better everyday and we were getting some really nice and supportive remarks. OK, yes, sand-box good idea. Please help. If I knew how to stick one of those big stars here, I would. Thank you thank you. Webwinnow (talk) 05:07, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I can't even imagine how you did that so fast! Wonderful! I am so happy. Honest biography of amazing and much respected lady doc. Hope I do her justice. I will dive into this project early tomorrow as my eyes are about to fall out. Thanks for being the hero.Webwinnow (talk) 05:27, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

OrangeCup

OrangeCup on Wikipedia I can move the page to my own computer... I just need suggestions on how to make it more objective... specifically... I feel that the page was only facts and there wasn't any "fluff" to be found that would make it seem advertorial. Can you give me advice on what to change. I thought it was objective. I mirrored it after a Pinkberry page and can't find what their page has over my page. Please help. Thank you. --FroYoNut (talk) 15:01, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I'll email it to you. - Richard Cavell (talk) 19:25, 5 November 2008 (UTC)