This is a Wikipedia user talk page.
This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:JohnCD.

If I have left you a message: please answer on your talk page, as I am watching it.
If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, then place {{Talkback|JohnCD}} on your talk.
Please click here to leave me a new message.

Messages before 1 Mar 08 are in Archive 1
Messages for March - July 08 are in Archive 2
Messages for August 08 - January 09 are in Archive 3
Messages for February - June 09 are in Archive 4
Messages from June 09 are in Archive 5

October 2009

Removal of PROD from Boomz

Hello JohnCD, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Boomz has been removed. It was removed by 219.75.93.68 with the following edit summary '(no edit summary)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with 219.75.93.68 before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 20:13, 8 October 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages) 20:13, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Vain message

Thanks for creating the page on Millais' painting The Ruling Passion. Petty vanity impels me to point out that the article on the painting you footnote was in fact written by me! Lara Perry and DP Corbett were the editors of the book. Paul B (talk) 11:50, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent! Thank you for providing the information I needed. I will amend the citation as soon as I can work out what it should look like, and will Wikilink it to your username, unless you would rather I didn't. JohnCD (talk) 13:33, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, link away! Thanks. Paul B (talk) 13:38, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Zeus Cockatiel

This is absolute crap! I made this page as a tribute to my bird that just died so my kids could see that he left his mark, you have so many different articles on wikipedia that are garbage, unreliable and you delete this one. Seriously! Fuck you!

(replied on his talk page). JohnCD (talk) 17:22, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Ashyj555 (talk · contribs)

Hi JohnCD. It seems like User:J.delanoy has already declined that unblock request - I agree with J.dealnoy's and your judgment about Ashyj555. As a rule of thumb, admins generally aren't supposed to unblock users who claim someone else was using their account anyways (See WP:BROTHER). -FASTILY ^(TALK) 21:40, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Class project

JohnCD I'm a little unclear. The project is to create a mini-course which has been done by this professor before. Here is the link. http://tccl.rit.albany.edu/knilt/index.php/ETAP_623_Fall_2009_Design_Project_Agenda

Is this not allowed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chris Sunderlin (talk • contribs) 14:25, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see the problem. There is often confusion between the idea of a Wiki - "a type of collaborative software program that typically allows web pages to be created and collaboratively edited using a common web browser" - and Wikipedia which is a particular Wiki devoted to building an encyclopedia. Your project is based on a wiki here at the TaCCL/Albany website and that's where you should be creating your mini-course; you have accidentally wandered into quite a different wiki at Wikipedia, which is why you find us a little unwelcoming. We do have some educational projects here, but they need careful preparation - see WP:School and university projects. Best of luck with your project. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 14:56, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Attack pages

Thanks. Actually I did not think of it as an attack page - Thought of it just as some imaginative vandalism. Maybe I assume too much of good faith, even from vandals :-). Will make sure I tag potential attack pages with {{db-g10}} in future -- Raziman T V (talk) 19:14, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

7 Guys

i will hope that you will stop deleting the 7 guys page that i just created. We are a group at UMASS Dartmouth, that was created to Britten up everyone's days around the school due to a series of negative events. we are no differant than a band, or any other organization that it on this site, i dont understand why ours cant be noted on this site just as other organizations can be noted —Preceding unsigned comment added by Asinkus (talk • contribs) 19:47, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a notice-board or a social-networking site where anyone can write about themselves and their friends and their groups. To have an article, a club or group has to be notable, meaning that they have "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." Not many University clubs qualify, even old and well-established ones; I don't think a newly-formed group of seven students who "all set around eating pizza and watching NASCAR" makes the grade. More details in Notability (organizations and companies). Also, if you are writing about your own group, see the guideline on Conflict of Interest. JohnCD (talk) 20:06, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Adminship

It looks like you've never had an RfA, which is surprising. Have you considered giving it a go? You have thorough experience, and are very good with communication and judging whether articles should be deleted or improved. Although I'm not totally familiar with your work, I've seen you around many times and I think I'd be willing to nominate. Let me know (reply here is fine). Best, JamieS93 22:24, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your kind words. I have taken a day to think about it, because I have recently turned down two approaches (1, 2) but they made me consider further. The problem I see is that, looking at the requirements in WP:GRFA, I fail the very first one: "Strong edit history with plenty of material contributions to Wikipedia articles." I have never been much interested in article writing, I think my total of articles actually started amounts to two stubs and even when I have improved something like a wrongly-flagged hoax or deletion candidate I have seldom gone beyond the "acceptably sourced stub" stage. I read with interest in this RfA Newyorkbrad's eloquent plea that if you trust someone with the tools you should be able to trust him not to use them where he doesn't have expertise; but the RfA still failed convincingly, and my feeling is that the RfA community still regards article writing experience as essential, and that a candidate who can't point to DYKs and GAs will fail. So my response is: cautious interest, but in the light of the above do you think I have a chance? JohnCD (talk) 23:00, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello John. Of course you have a chance. In my opinion you are one of our best new page patrollers and I highly value your clear and straightforward comments also at AfD. It would be absolutely beneficial for Wikipedia. You have my full support. --Vejvančický (talk) 09:59, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad that you've taken some time to think about it. I've already given that issue some thought, too, but IMO it's not a roadblock. I tend to hang around WP:RFA; article-writing is something that the community would like to see, but from my experience, it's not a deal-breaker. A few WikiGnomes who share your same sentiment of "not much of a new-content contributor" have been promoted lately. As long as the candidate is otherwise very keen on experience in particular areas (such as you are with NPP/deletion), RfA participants don't seem to mind it much. This is evident in some of the recent successful RfAs, e.g: 1, 2, 3. In my opinion, you have a strong chance of succeeding. Most RfAs get a couple of opposes, and you'll probably have a few users concerned with the lack of article writing or a few little concerns. But people tend to really appreciate candidates who patrol NewPages with a careful eye; replacing an attack page "G3" with G10, or adding sources to an article that was tagged as a hoax or A7. You're also great with communication. For those reasons, you're a strong candidate for adminship, and I'm confident that you would pass.

And as far as I know, there's no problems in your contribs, either. But if you decide to run, don't be surprised if you receive a few opposes/neutrals for random issues, which is common at RFA. I'm not gonna push the RFA idea on you; but do keep considering it. :) Best, JamieS93 13:53, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I will now take several days, probably a week, to think more about it, look at some past RfAs and decide what my case would be and whether I want to run. I will come back to you. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 14:44, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

sir james kimbell

i am writing this article as a stubb of the book the thirteen treasures so dont delete it as your articles are stupid —Preceding unsigned comment added by Urbanword (talk • contribs) 10:43, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(answered on his talk page) JohnCD (talk) 11:01, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

adesilfe

it a description of a website. y should it be deleted?