User talk:Cirt

WikiProject Good Articles: Open Tasks This project identifies, organizes and improves good articles on Wikipedia.
Nominations: September 1983 Laws (talk | history | start review) • Paul George (talk | history | start review) • John Sterling (American football) (talk | history | start review) • Frank Butler (American football) (talk | history | start review) • Jug Bennett (talk | history | start review) Reassessment: Mary McLeod Bethune • Kowloon Walled City • John W. Campbell • Task forces: Project quality • Sweeps • GAN Backlog Drives • GA Cup WikiProject Good articles newsletter (last updated January 2013)
Good article criteria | Statistics | GAN Report | Changes log Nominations list | edit

AFD/T • T-7 • T-2 • AFDO • AIV • RFUB • UAA/CAT • RFPP • PER • CSD • AB • FAR • FAC urgents • TFAR • Google Search Requests for adminship and bureaucratship update No current discussions. Recent RfAs, recent RfBs: (successful, unsuccessful)

Other neat portal ideas for longer term

• Longer term ideas to think about from other portals:

1. Events section, like: "On this day" e.g., Biography, Religion, United States; "Selected anniversaries" e.g., War; "Calendar" at Holidays. Interesting idea of "Month selected anniversaries", at Oregon.
2. Model intro with some rotating images, after Portal:Oregon, Portal:Indiana, Portal:Iceland/Intro and Portal:Philosophy of science/Intro.
3. Revamp DYK sections w/ free-use images, model after Portal:Criminal justice and Portal:Oregon.
4. Portal palettes at User:RichardF/Palettes/Portals. Comparable color schemes can be developed from the various hue lists at User:RichardF/Palettes. Also see Portal:Box-header.
5. If there are a lot of categories, then categories section to 2 columns, like in Portal:Indiana.

   Also take some time to check out style/formatting at Portal:Indiana Cirt (talk)

Note to self

• MakeRef

independent reliable secondary sources

• User:Citation bot/use

• {{findsources}}

Cite templates

<ref>{{cite book| last =  | first =  | authorlink =  | coauthors =  | title =  | publisher =  | year =  | location =  | page =  | url =  | doi =  | id =    | isbn = }}</ref>

<ref>{{cite news| last =  | first =  | coauthors =  | title =  | work =  | language =  | publisher =  | page =  | date =  | url =  | accessdate =  }}</ref>

<ref>{{cite journal|last =| first=| authorlink=| coauthors=|title=|journal=|volume=|issue=|page=|publisher=|location = | date = | url = | doi = | id = | accessdate = }}</ref>

<ref>{{cite web| last =  | first =  | authorlink =  | coauthors =  | title =  | work =  | publisher =  | date =  | url =  | format =  | doi =  | accessdate =  }}</ref>

Citation model

The Simpsons (season 3)

Body text in-cite

<ref name="REFNAME">[[#LASTNAME|LASTNAME]], p. PAGENUMBER</ref>

References section

(reference template from WP:CIT)

*<cite id=LASTNAME>REFERENCE</cite>

Different model

• Template:Citation
• Template:Harvnb
• Example: <ref name="REFNAME">{{Harvnb|LAST|YEAR|p=PAGENUMBER}}</ref>

See models at The General in His Labyrinth and Mario Vargas Llosa.

More info. Cirt (talk)

More at Wikipedia:Harvard citation template examples.

And Template talk:Harvard citation no brackets.

Cirt (talk)

Dispatch

Cirt, Awadewit suggested that you might be interested in writing a Signpost Dispatch article on Featured portals (the only area of featured content we haven't covered). Sample previous articles are at {{FCDW}}. We've covered:

• Featured content overview
• Peer review
• Did you know
• Featured lists
• Good articles
• Featured sounds
• Featured topics
• Images
• TFA
• And Featured articles many times: Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-07-21/Dispatches, Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-04-07/Dispatches, Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-10-13/Dispatches

None of them start out looking like that: if an editor initially just chunks in some text, many others chip in to tweak it up to Signpost standards. For example, someone wrote this, which Karanacs, Royalbroil and I turned into this, so if you just chunk in some text as a start, others can help finish it off. Another example, I put in this outline, and Karanacs brought it up to this. Other editors have written almost complete and clean Dispatches without much need for other editing. If you're interested, please weigh in and coordinate at WT:FCDW In case you're interested, you could just begin sandboxing something at WP:FCDW/Portals and pop over to WT:FCDW to leave a note when you're ready for others to help out. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:26, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Will mull this over and most likely draft something up. Cirt (talk) 11:54, 18 November 2108 (UTC)

Razzies progress

• 15th Golden Raspberry Awards through 29th Golden Raspberry Awards = reformatting process done.
  • Note: Going to have to go back and model these after the modifications made subsequently to 29th Golden Raspberry Awards.
• 29th Golden Raspberry Awards - so far only one expanded with sourcing research. (WP:FL)
• Razzie Award for Worst New Star = reformatting process done, next to use Talk:Razzie Award for Worst Picture as model to reformat other pages in Category:Golden Raspberry Awards by category (with subsection breaks by decade)

Cirt (talk)

Leo Ryan GA Sweeps: On Hold

I have reviewed Leo Ryan for GA Sweeps to determine if it still qualifies as a Good Article. In reviewing the article I have found several issues, which I have detailed here. Since you are a main contributor of the article (determined based on this tool), I figured you would be interested in contributing to further improve the article. Please comment there to help the article maintain its GA status. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:19, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

No worries, sorry for the delay, I kept forgetting about it. The article's in good shape and it would be great to see it go to FA at some point after a good copyedit. Good job addressing the points so quickly. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:59, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

FarPoint Media Network

I wish to re-address the deletion of FarPoint Media Network. Article was undeniably dated and incomplete. But the main reasons for the deletion have since changed. The company's notability has increased as FarPoint Media grew to include over 100 diverse podcasts and has upgraded their online presence and activity. And, as a representative from the FarPoint Media Network, I offer to personally update and "substantially improve" the article content. (Pagemaster137 (talk) 23:36, 31 January 2010 (UTC))

Suggest you work on a draft in your userspace. Cirt (talk) 21:51, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

If an acceptable draft is created in my userspace, can FarPoint Media Network be undeleted and modified with the new content? (Pagemaster137 (talk) 05:57, 2 February 2010 (UTC))

We'd have to reevaluate at that point in time. Cirt (talk) 05:58, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Alright. That is do-able. I will work on it in my userspace and let you know when it is complete. Thank you for your help. (Pagemaster137 (talk) 06:08, 2 February 2010 (UTC))

Hello Cirt. I have completely rewritten the content of the FarPoint Media Network and would very much appreciate it if you could look it over to make sure it is up to the expectations. You can find it on my userspace. Thanks! (Pagemaster137 (talk) 21:01, 4 February 2010 (UTC))

Thanks. It still seems to fail WP:NOTE. Cirt (talk) 21:03, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

I'll keep working on it then. Thank you. (Pagemaster137 (talk) 21:05, 4 February 2010 (UTC))

Okay. Cirt (talk) 21:05, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

MECWA

21:33, 1 February 2010 Cirt (talk | contribs) deleted "MECWA" ‎ (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MECWA (2nd nomination))

The information came from the website, jubilee history 50 years and annual report 2008-2009.

Yes, I work for mecwacare and was asked to update the information as it was out dated. How can we get this undeleted? Is there any changes that you would reccomend in making? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mecwacare 02 (talk • contribs) 22:09, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Replied at user's talk page. Cirt (talk) 05:52, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

You have not answered my question, I want to know how to get undeleted.

The history information from the 'A Jubilee History' is in the National Library of Australia Cataloging and was first published in 1998 with the 50 year anniversary edition being published in October 2009.

I was simply updating out of date information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mecwacare 02 (talk • contribs) 22:14, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

David Lewis Anderson

Cirt, could restore the article to a subpage so we many continue to work on it to try to appease the wiki requirements.

I've added some responses below and will only say that many of the comments from NotHughThomas have been bitey. The wiki page does not say Dr. Anderson built a time machine, only discusses his theories proposed and presented on spacetime physics. There is no need on wikey to insult people by calling them crackpots and other terms. Again some responses below. Sciencefrontiers42 (talk) 16:08, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Hello again Cirt, I know you are busy but I wanted to ask if you would you be willing to take a look at the article in its present form. I worked with AirplaneMan's advice and I think the 3rd party citations and notability requirements were met. I added 3rd party recognition at a high level by the Romanian Government, United Nations, and added multiple 3rd party reputable citations to appearances and work.

I really just want to get this right and hope you will consider my request to look at the article in its present form just before it was deleted and provide any advice. Thanks for the consideration, Jennifer Sciencefrontiers42 (talk) 03:08, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Hello Cirt, I am new to wikipedia, just a couple months. I started working on an article about Dr. Anderson. There were suggestions and concerns raised. As each was raised I addressed each one.

For example, somebody challenge his appointment as an Ambassador for the United Nations, so I added a citation to the actual appointment letter. I did the same with a letter from the Romanian Governments.

(1) We can not prove the letter is legitimate. The letter is hosted on Anderson's own website. (2) Being a "UNESCO Youth Ambassador" is an honorary position similar to receiving a presidential youth physical fitness award. It does not involve any appointment by the UN or even a UN sub-body. It's an award for volunteers given out by private, national-level UNESCO enthusiast/affinity groups. There are tens of thousands of such "Youth Ambassadors." Even if legitimate it is not notable. Nothughthomas (talk) 04:47, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Cirt, Dr. Anderson and his foundation operate many programs for UNESCO. They are published all over the internet with photographic, video and newspaper evidence. Our colleagues have ever said that the UN Secretary General or the Romanian government will contact you in any manner you wish to authenticate his achievements and appointment as an Ambassador for UNESCO and Romania. Sciencefrontiers42 (talk) 16:08, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

I added links to his appearances recognizing his work from nationally sindicated shows, magazines, and others.

Only one "nationally syndicated" show was cited: Coast to Coast AM on which he appeared twice in 8 years. The other citations were from podcasts and internet radio, plus one conspiracy theorist magazine. Nothughthomas (talk) 04:47, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Dr. Anderson did a lot for me, his achievements are real and recognized around the world by many verifiable third parties. Please tell us how we can find a solution to make this work.

Provide citations from verifiable third parties that meet WP:CITE, such as links to newspapers (e.g. of acceptable newspaper - New York Times or Le Monde ... not Online Metaphysical Journal of Spooky Science), reputable magazines, books published by persons other than the author, third party news sites (not blogs) that meet WP:CITE (note: examiner.com is blocked from wikipedia from being used as a citation). Nothughthomas (talk) 04:47, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Cirt, I do not understand what NotHughThomas is saying. I've made no reeferences, ever, to the publications above. We can collect citations to other publications if needed. When we put more earlier, we were flagged for advertistement. Can you advise us? Sciencefrontiers42 (talk) 16:08, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

There was also a lot of slander about Dr. Anderson in some of the comments. I don't know if its a personal attack. I just know I am trying to work within the rules of wikipedia and don't know what to do. Can you advise?

There were serious notability concerns about a man who (1) claims a Ph.D. but is unable to verify when or where he received it, (2) says he invented a time machine and the technology is being suppressed by a secret cabal inside the US government, (3) has only managed media coverage on 1 conventional radio show, twice, in 8 years - plus a smattering of podcasts and website, (4) claims he is running a major mulitnational corporation involved in the most groundbreaking scientific research in the world (time travel), but the address of which happens to correlate to a work-loft building in Rochester that hosts a combination of apartments, real estate agents and dentist's offices, (5) is a known associate of Andrew Basagio, a regular lecturer on the UFO convention circuit who claims he is from the year 1968 and was chased by U.S. secret agents through a time machine to the present day to stop the secret of "teleportation" from leaking to the world. Nothughthomas (talk) 04:47, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Cirt, this doesn't make sense. It is simply not true. In response to above 1) We added the universities, they were deleted. Then we added the specific degrees that can be verified, but NotHughThomas deleted them too. 2) the wiki article discusses Dr. Anderson theories on potential energy stored by inertial frame dragging. I've seen him personally present these in universities here and in Europe. These theories are something he theorized in the 80's and then has been proved by NASAs experiments in recent years. Because somebody is not up on physics does not make it vodoo and this claim is false. 3) this is a false statement as well, see the recent article that verifies my comment. 4) Anderson MNC is a real company. It includes all the elements listed on his website. Products are manufactured and Amazon is used as a distribution and customer service mechanism, in addition to other products from Amazon. 5) This is a false claim, while Dr. Andrew Basagio has Dr. Anderson Name, there is no connection between the two. People have reference an interview making this claim, but the interview does not support the complaint.Sciencefrontiers42 (talk) 16:08, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Sciencefrontiers42 (talk) 02:30, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

David Lee Anderson is a very nice man and a low-level con artist of marginal talent. His many websites mostly contain a combination of cut-and-paste pages he's lifted from wikipedia and Amazon Associates storefronts (see: biometricvisions.com). In the UFO conspiracy counter-culture there are dozens of people like him - many who attach to themselves various titles like "Dr." or "Sir" etc. without being able to provide proof of holding them - and we cannot include any of them on wikipedia until they do something notable, such as run onto the White House lawn naked with a gun claiming they're being chased by time traveling E.T.'s from Zeta Reticuli or something like that. Nothughthomas (talk) 04:47, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

The relevant prior AFD is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Lewis Anderson. Cirt (talk) 04:49, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Cirt, please look at Dr. Anderson's biography and article list on his site. These bitey comments are again, simply not true. Much of Dr. Anderson's orginal work is duplicated there and he does not make claims that are being suggested. It may be on the edge of possibility, but all grounded in physics. Sciencefrontiers42 (talk) 16:08, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Cirt, I a college student in South Africa, working with two students, one in Bucharest and another in Chicago on this article. Our friend in America working with us was in tears today because of the attacks of somebody named Nothughthomas. Many of his comments may have been correct, but many were false and many were hateful with no constructive purpose. We simply want to understand what needs to be done to improve the article to make it acceptable. We're not experts, but trying hard and are asking you to help us or help us understand. What do we need to do to avoid the hateful comments and get advice on how to make this work? WorldPeaceEU (talk) 05:02, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Suggest working on a draft version in a subpage of your userspace. Cirt (talk) 06:32, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

See discussion on my talk page for more. Regards, Airplaneman ^talk 20:57, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

 Done, please see User:Sciencefrontiers42/David Lewis Anderson. Cirt (talk) 21:10, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks :). I'll keep a close eye on the situation at hand (I saw your talk page post). Airplaneman ^talk 22:55, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Deletion review for Barad (band)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Barad (band). Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Siech•Fred ^Home 09:00, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice, Cirt (talk) 16:51, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Page at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 February 3. Cirt (talk) 17:08, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Query

Hi Cirt yesterday you closed the following discussion here Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MouseHunt as delete. I only post because two editors (Prodigy96 and TrustMeTHROW) in this discussion were confirmed to be sock puppets. Both of whom supported deletion. I was wondering if we could re-open this deletion discussion and perhaps have more input from other editors? I will respect your decision either way I just felt it prudent to bring this to your attention. Thank you for your time Ottawa4ever (talk) 10:45, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Reopened and relisted. :) Cheers, Cirt (talk) 16:51, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Serious Problem

I'm really having a very serious issue with Userid:antiuser. Despite my best efforts he is engaged in lobbying many multiple users against me, as a result of the speedy deletion of his UFO article. He's working overtime to flood admin Talk pages with every conceivable complaint and I simply don't have the bandwidth to keep up and jump from page to page to page, 24/7, defending myself. I have no doubt that, if you shop around to enough admins eventually you can get anyone banned on wikipedia. I think my days here are likely numbered and I'm at a loss of what to do. I think an ANI complaint would simply make matters worse as it would lead to more lobbying and "block shopping" and I don't want to reply in kind by "block shopping" because I don't think it's contributive to a positive environment. Nothughthomas (talk) 22:51, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Unnecessary revert

Dear Cirt - it is clearly evident you did not read my edit or examine my changes. I am a Wikipedian who has been here for NINE years and I certainly know the WP:LEAD section. If you reexamine my edit you will find that my changes significant enhanced the lead paragraph, and the details that were removed from the lead were of lesser importance and were fully covered in the subsequent paragraph.

It is careless and hamfisted actions like yours which are causing people to leave this project. Signed Manning, one of the first ever Wikipedia admins, and creator of the Wikiproject concept. 59.101.23.102 (talk) 00:45, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

The lead should be able to stand alone as a concise overview of the article. This cannot be more clear. Cirt (talk) 00:47, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes and it NOW does. The previous version was embarassingly bad. It contained minor details that were duplicated in the immediately following paragraph. WP:LEAD does not mean cram the entire article into the lead, it means provide a "concise overview". A detailed description of how the ceremony first began is NOT a "concise overview". Manning (talk) 00:50, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Please discuss at the article's talk page. Cirt (talk) 00:53, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

No, I can't be bothered and nor will I go to AN/I and fight about it. It is people like you who are destroying this project, and I don't have the strength to fight you. Keep the article your way, with it's redundancies, lack of balance and poor grammar. Also keep ignoring the improvements I made to the first paragraph. Bye. Manning (talk) 00:56, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

I added back the changes you made to the first paragraph, thank you. As for the removal of an entire paragraph from the lede, the best way to solve conflicts is to discuss them, politely, on the article's talk page. Cheers, Cirt (talk) 00:57, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Note: [1] = user refused to come to the article's talk page in order to politely discuss the matter, preferring instead to blank out the request. Cirt (talk) 01:13, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Had you wished to "discuss things politely" I would have been all for it. But no, you posted a "warning", accused me of "disruption" and then cried foul over my being "uncivil". It appears you only resort to the rules of proper engagement when things aren't going you way. Truly, truly pathetic. Now stay off my talk page and I'll stay off yours. Manning (talk) 01:18, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

I blanked to kill the conversation. Feel free to do the same here. Goodbye. Manning (talk) 01:21, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Feel free to come to the article's talk page anytime to discuss the matter, politely. Cheers, Cirt (talk) 01:22, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

[2] Cirt (talk) 01:31, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

NotHughThomas

I don't think I'm very happy about being accused of wikistalking or abuse of power. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 02:17, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Where? Cirt (talk) 02:18, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

• (edit conflict)On their user page Here, here, here, here and here.
• On user talk pages, here, here, here, here, here (your talk page), here (accusation I will impose a block a block while noone is looking!), here (referring to me) and here.
• On WP:AN/I here, here ("Regrettably it appears he ducked into adminship during my wiki-break, I can assure that any review of our previous interactions would have quickly kiboshed the community's decision to grant him admin privileges given his rather off-kilter way of interacting with other contributors, specifically me"), here and here.

Rather looks bad? - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 02:39, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Oh forget about it. I'm adding this to AN/I. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 02:47, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Not that you asked, but:

• I don't think admins should be thin-skinned about this sort of thing. It's par for the course even in situations where the best intentions have been accompanied by only the most courteous actions in keeping with best admin practices.
• In this instance, you could have avoided much of the conflict. The editor in question asked you to stay off her talk page, and without any real further admin business, you persisted (yes, you were responding to questions etc.—valid points, but to what end?). You could have just dropped the matter. ^Bongo_matic 02:30, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

I was asked to comment by AntiUser. You ask to what end... well, to the end that the editor is being disruptive. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 02:40, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Editor has now been blocked indefinitely, of course this is up for review later on. I am extremely concerned that Bongomatic has readded the attack on AntiUser at editor review - this does not seem wise! - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 06:20, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Please, the latest edits are to the user's own userpage. The user told me in good faith they will abide by my request to take a break. Let's all wait and see please. Cirt (talk) 02:31, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Celtic Gallaecia

I have put a redirect from the defunct Celtic Gallaecia page, to Britonia. This has fixed the broken link from 'Celtic Gallaecia' on the 'History of Galicia' infobox. I think that this now works OK from both a link and historical perspective. Best regards 11:38, 4 February 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wilfridselsey (talk • contribs)

No worries, Cirt (talk) 15:45, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Avon Plate F.C Deletion

Hi, just logged on to discover a page I created has been deleted. Article was Avon Plate F.C. I was not aware of the deletion debate at the time or I would have made comment at the time. It appears that the main complaints were around the jokey comment that Avon Plate was the 3rd biggest team in Bristol. I can only apologise for this - no offence or attempt to mislead was meant. I would argue against the claim that the subject is non notable as Sunday Football forms a huge part of English sporting culture and the teams that form the Sunday Leagues are vital.

I am relatively new to Wiki in terms of article editing/creation so it is clear I have alot to learn. However I would like to know if there are any steps I can take to retrieve the article so that it can be modified so that it is acceptable to the wider Wiki community.

Kind regards, Darren. Daz555 (talk) 14:28, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

I'd suggest to work on a proposed draft version in a subpage of your userspace. Cirt (talk) 15:33, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

OK, cheers. Can you advise how I retrieve the original article so that I can work on it?

Kind regards, Darren. Daz555 (talk) 11:26, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

 Done, now at User:Daz555 /Avon Plate F.C.. Cirt (talk) 16:31, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Sections

FloNight is not an arbitrator, and I am recused on this case. Cool Hand Luke 15:52, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

I see that NYB and perhaps some others have also posted in other sections. It appears that they only do this in response to comments. Sometimes the separate threading is hard to interpret. Cool Hand Luke 15:57, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Morons in a Hurry

Hey, Cirt, I may have overstepped in revising that sentence -- which was meant as copy editing, not content generation. I was trying to fix a sentence that makes no sense as written by revising to link it to the article's subject. Any guidance or advice you have on it would be appreciated. If you look at the sentence I was trying to fix, you will agree, I think, that it does not convey the intended meaning. Roregan (talk) 20:16, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

It appears to have instead had the effect of adding information that was not previously there, without sourcing. Cirt (talk) 20:17, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

(TPW) A moron in a hurry is my favorite legal phrase. Hipocrite (talk) 20:19, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

When I have time, I'll take another shot at it. Your keen eye will be appreciated then. Roregan (talk) 16:56, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Please do! I would most appreciate that! You may find some good sources at the article about the term itself, A moron in a hurry. Cirt (talk) 16:57, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Protection request

Could you possible semiprotect Human Factors Lab? Some IPs keep removing the AfD template, despite me stating numerous times not to, and to comment at the AfD. Thanks. Connormah (talk | contribs) 23:39, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

 Done. Cirt (talk) 23:42, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

The Human Factors Lab page has been under attack and vandalized by previous members of the band. The AFD request is part of these attacks. Comments have been made on the AFD page, people are simply deleting the request from the Human Factors Lab article to return it to how it was before the vandalism. If there is a way to prevent or reverse this vandalism maybe some of the people that know Wiki a little more, and have been re-adding the deletion request.. could instead try to help the situaion, instead of adding to the vandalism —Preceding unsigned comment added by HFLSev3n (talk • contribs) 23:47, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

3O

I will be responding on my talk page okay so I think you should have it on your watchlist. Thanks House1090 (talk) 00:42, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVII (January 2010)

The January 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:10, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Why the deletion of jasmere.com

Wondering why you chose to delete the article for jasmere.com. Yes, I have an interest in the cite, but it was also deemed newsworthy by Denver's NBC affiliate, Washington DC's CBS affiliate, Self magazine, Washington Business Journal and other reputable sources. Several veteran Wikipedians came to the articles defense, which cited legitimate sources and demonstrated relevance. Just trying to better understand what the criteria are, as this deletion seems to defy those that have been published. Thank you for your consideration. You can also reach me at kugelonline@yahoo.com ---- kugelonline —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.140.64.185 (talk) 04:18, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

More info, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jasmere.com. Cirt (talk) 16:28, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

One Lone Car

I'm really confused as to why the One Lone Car article was deleted on here. They have toured with so many big groups and they are signed to Uranus Recordings, which is owned by Robin Wilson of the Gin Blossoms. I've seen a lot of bands on here who don't even come close to fitting the notability clause, such as the band Pomeroy. How can a band be on big tours, have music all over MTV's Tv shows, a record deal, and even chart in the Billboard college charts not be notable? I think you need to do a little more research before you just assume what isn't "notable" in your uneducated opinion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.205.214.25 (talk) 05:22, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/One Lone Car. Cirt (talk) 16:29, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kill stealing

Hi Cirt; this AfD was closed whilst I was entering my !vote. Missed it by a few minutes. I was wondering if my comment might have altered your final decision. If not, you can go ahead and revert my edit. Thanks, Marasmusine (talk) 17:23, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Let's leave it as is. Cirt (talk) 19:46, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Why did you delete The 'X' Zone Radio Show?

I was told that it is becausde that we are not significant enough to be in Wikipedia?

What does one have to do to be entered?

We are the only radio show that is produced in Canada to be syndicated outside of Canada to the global market place.

Under th ecorporate umbrella - REL-MAR McConnell Media Company, we are a full blown radio broadcast / production facility, a television show with a reality TV show in production, a newspaper that has been publishing since 1993.

We bropadcast 5 nights a week, Monday - Friday, from 10 pm - 2 am and then our show is re fed through several networks (radio/television/internet) again from 2 am - 6 am.

We have a global audience and are no a so called radio show on blogtalk radio.

I am the inventor of The 'X' Game, an author, paranormal research, publisher, broadcaster.

I have been featured in other news media since 1993 - nationally and internationally including the BBC, CTV, CBC, YTV just to name a few.

I was part of the Canadian television production "Creepy Canada"

What does someone have to do to get their listing back in wikipedia?

Check out our websites:

www.xzoneradiotv.com www.xzonetv.com www.xzbn.net www.xchronicles-newspaper.com www.rel-mar.com

Rob McConnell —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xzoneradiotv (talk • contribs) 17:34, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

More info at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The 'X' Zone. Cirt (talk) 21:46, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

...for blocking that vandal. --Yowuza yadderhouse | meh 17:51, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

...and for blocking those two sockpuppets. GaryColemanFan (talk) 04:01, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

No worries, Cirt (talk) 04:02, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello. You have a new message at Swarm's talk page.

• And another. Swarm^(Talk)

Didn't you pull the trigger on RevolveR?

I'm confused. You closed the WP:Articles for deletion/Revolver (T-Pain album) as Delete, but one of the pages that linked to the deleted article is RevolveR, which looks at first blush like the deleted article, including the AfD message at the top. That AfD message though is linked to the closed AfD for Revolver (T-Pain album) (which is why I'm confused). Clearly something is wrong somewhere, but what? Yappy2bhere (talk) 21:51, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

 Done, thanks, Cirt (talk) 21:54, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

ItHysteria

Thanks for this block. Any chance you could process the related RFPP request? ItHysteria tends to IP hop, and he's damnably persistent.—Kww(talk) 17:42, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Cirt (talk) 17:44, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Re-consideration of Deletion, Request for Re-instatement of Article: article for Bob Frissell, author and teacher

Hi Cirt,

I'm contacting you regarding the deletion of the article for Bob Frissell on Feb 5 , 2010. Last week the article underwent a re-write to meet and/or exceed wiki's guidelines for a biography. Therefore, Bob Frissell's article should be re-considered and restored.

History. Bob Frissell's article had been proposed for deletion in February 2009. Specifically, Mr. Frissell's article was very thin on content in general, had no references, no internal links to other articles, and no external links. I found a comment by 1 user that Mr. Frissell only wrote 1 book; therefore he lacked merit for an article on wikipedia. Further, the 1 book listed in his article even failed to mention a major publisher (Random House).

Review of Mr. Frissell's latest article re-written in the past week will indicate that all guidelines for a biography have been met, references and links are verifiable, and that Mr. Frissell is in fact an author of merit.

Here is a summary of changes made in the past week to Mr. Frissell's article to address the original reasons for proposed deletion:

• Thorough internal links to existing wiki articles in good standing including influences, influencers, and collaborators in Mr. Frissell's area of expertise.
• Internal links of note were documented in the latest article including internal links to the articles of musicians who credited the ideas presented in Bob's books as a source of inspiration for their own creative work including Tool (band), Danny Carey, and Gojira (band). I discovered credit to Mr. Frissell in the articles for these musicians in the past week during the re-write of his article. I merely added a link to Mr. Frissell's article to the existing content in the articles of musicians.
• References and external links to external publisher sites of merit verifying the author's credit for referenced work in the article i.e. Random House.
• External links to the availability of Mr. Frissell's literary work at major eCommerce sites i.e. Amazon.

Please advise your thoughts on the re-instatement of Mr. Frissell's article. --Seodio (talk) 22:47, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Suggest working on a draft version, in a subpage of your userspace. Cirt (talk) 14:23, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of Shinji Hosoe

Hi, I noticed that you closed the AfD for Shinji Hosoe as delete, though no one actually participated in the discussion. Why wasn't it relisted instead? Heavyweight Gamer (talk) 22:59, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Consider it similar to a WP:PROD, where it was listed and no one raised any objections after a longer period of time. :) Cirt (talk) 14:23, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

AfD

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christopher Edwards (2nd nomination)Kitfoxxe (talk) 02:45, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Billboard gags

Hi Cirt. Do you think you could add a deletion rationale to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of The Simpsons billboard gags so that future controversies could be avoided? Theleftorium 15:20, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

 Done, Cirt (talk) 15:27, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

User Seelicolnshire (talk · contribs) and sockpuppet

I think User:86.149.39.124 is the sockpuppet/ip of block user Seelincolnshire. They are both promoting same site. Can you extend the ban on the IP address to permanent. --Tyw7  (Talk • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 15:48, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

No, but let's see what happens when the block expires. Cirt (talk) 15:58, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Another sock User:81.158.81.221. Replies seem that s/he is the same person as the above IP. --Tyw7  (Talk • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 17:48, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. Extended blocks. Cirt (talk) 17:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

RfA thoughts

Hey, do you think I'm ready for a RfA retry? Just hypothetically, I don't want to be one right now. Be honest too! CTJF83 chat 18:28, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure, I have not gone over it lately, will try to take a look soon. Cirt (talk) 18:31, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Ok, we need to get back to the days where we work on GAs together and such. CTJF83 chat 18:33, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Sounds good, Cirt (talk) 18:34, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Cancel the RfA thing, I don't want to seem like I'm canvassing. User_talk:Smithers7#RfA_Question CTJF83 chat 04:29, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Pedant17

Yeah, all credit to you as well, for not giving up on this. But he's not that bad, he does a lot of good copyediting in amongst the E-Prime, and hunting out a presumptious "is" sometimes turns up a fair points about attribution or clarity. Don't get to hung up on reverting him wholesale - it should be enough to just edit out the clumsiest E-Prime and force him to explain why "Outrageous Betrayal is a biography" should become "Outrageous Betrayal presents a biography", at which point I'd think WP:TONE and any RFC would be our side. --McGeddon (talk) 18:28, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

You're right, I suppose this is just going in circles. Perhaps we should just push him to raise an RFC if he feels that we're being unreasonable; if he instead goes down the usual road of "wait three weeks, revert to preferred version per wilful misinterpretation of WP:SILENCE" then we can take it to WP:ANI again to see if that makes any difference this time (looking at the last ANI, he didn't seem to take it very seriously). --McGeddon (talk) 18:44, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I'll keep an eye on things to see what happens. You may want to ask User:Thumperward for his thoughts, as he's also had problems with this user in the past. --McGeddon (talk) 20:04, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Oh, glancing through his recent edits, I only count one clumsy piece of E-Prime in this one. When he's not struggling to reword straightforward English sentences into E-Prime, he's perfectly good at copyediting. I wouldn't write him off. --McGeddon (talk) 20:31, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Although, eh, checking the edit history, he's already done a lot of previous "copyediting" on that article to remove the words he doesn't like, and the current version actually doesn't use the word "is" or "was" anywhere. (I haven't read it in detail to see how poorly written it is, but all the bullet lists look like a bad sign.) --McGeddon (talk) 20:36, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Admin

How far away is my progress to becoming admin? I've begin to work in "admin" related areas like vandalism and sockpuppets. Is there anything else I should do to guarantee my RFA passing? --Tyw7  (Talk • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 18:54, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I'll have to look into this further. Cirt (talk) 20:01, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

A question about redirects

Hello, Cirt, I'm Airplaneman. I had a question concerning the assessment of redirects. I was sifting through some redirects for the Percy Jackson Task Force and found that some are assessed, like this one. I've also seen some which have their talk pages redirected to the article's talk page. I'm leaning towards categorizing the redirects so the project can keep tabs on them, but I have no idea if there is a right or wrong way to go about this. What do you recommend? Thanks, Airplaneman ^talk 22:37, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I'd suggest asking at Wikipedia talk:Redirect. Cirt (talk) 00:56, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

OK, will do. Thanks, Airplaneman ^talk 04:47, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Sockpuppet case

Just to let you know that your response at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Seelicolnshire is needed. Thanks! --Tyw7  (Talk • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 22:50, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Okay, thanks, Cirt (talk) 00:57, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Somebody ask you a question at that page. --Tyw7  (Talk • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 03:17, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Deleted Post: Obselidia

Hi Cirt,

I am new to Wikipedia (well, not to reading it, but to contributing).

I wanted to post a small article about a movie I made which premiered at the Sundance Film Fest 2010, Obselidia, which won two awards (the Alfred P. Sloan Award and for Excellence in Cinematography). I see that someone previously tried to post an article about the film, but that it was deleted by you. I'm not sure why.

Can I post again? Will it be deleted?? It was actually Doron Weber of the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation who told me we should have a page!

Thanks for your help, Diane Deebstar (talk) 03:27, 8 February 2010 (UTC)deebstar

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Obselidia. I would suggest working on a subpage in your userspace. Cirt (talk) 14:24, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

WP:Articles for deletion/Inner Catalan border

Cirt, I was working on a keep for that AfD when you closed it, would you please reconsider. Power.corrupts (talk) 12:43, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Reopened, and relisted. Cheers, Cirt (talk) 14:21, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, just see you replied now, thought you might be in another time zone, änd I was working on another AfD, I'm slow when digging into AfD discussions, it takes darn long time. Thanks again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Power.corrupts (talk • contribs)

No worries, Cirt (talk) 14:30, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

and now ... Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Berte-Evelyne Agbo

I don't know if you were tired, under stress, or whatever, but this closure can hardly represent "consensus" when there is a complete absence of participation. I will not go into detail with Mr. Chill's ability to "find sources" - but all alarm bells should be ringing when it is an female author from Bénin or Sénégal, writing in French.

• The name is improperly spelled, seem to be Berthe-Evelyne Agbo.
• There was a recent in-depth interview in Léontine Bilombo Tsibinda. "Berthe-Evelyne Agbo, écrivain : La musique a une très grande influence sur ma vie." Amina 471, (juillet 2009), p. Europe p.36. Interview." [3],
• she has some mention on the web page of The University of Western Australia, [4] (in English),
• she has a page on "Culturessud.com, portail des littératures du Sud est réalisé par Culturesfrance opérateur du Ministère des Affaires étrangères et européennes et du ministère de la Culture en partenariat avec le Réseau culturel français à l'étrange", [5], I would say RS,
• she's on a list in the French Wikipédia fr:Liste d'écrivains sénégalais, current a redlink, but could be expanded by somebody someday
• she sure is in WorldCat "Emois de femme : poèmes, 1980-1982" [6], the book is at 14 libraries
• some texts of her has recently been published in an antology "Irène d'Almeida et Janis Mayes des USA, "A Rain of Words/Une pluie de mots"."

Is she important enough to an article on Wikipedia, saying: "Berte-Evelyne Agbo is a writer from Benin."? - Let the community decide, please relist that AfD and copy my comments there. Power.corrupts (talk) 14:22, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Reopened and relisted. Cirt (talk) 14:27, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, you are right about the tone, but developments around here the last couple of weeks have unfortunately reduced my patience thresholds, etc. Power.corrupts (talk) 15:34, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Daniel Tammet article

Thank you for your intervention concerning the edits by user 85.210.180.155 which constitute 'edit warring' and are in breach of Wikipedia's rules for biographical articles of living persons. The edit is not supported by any published source and appears based on the user's original research.

Unfortunately, you have protected the page with the unsourced claim present in the article. Wikipedia's advice to users clearly states that all non-sourced or poorly-sourced claims should be immediately removed from biographical articles of living persons.

My edit attempted a compromise on this matter (please refer to the talk page - surname section - and appeared to obtain a measure of consensus - see for example the comment by Freshacconci on the article history page.

Please undo user 85.210.180.155's edit in accordance with Wikipedia's rules. I recommend that you revert to my edit as the simplest alternative for the moment (refer to article history page).

86.193.84.62 (talk) 17:50, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I posted to WP:BLPN and WP:ANI. As the admin that protected the page, I'd rather another admin(s) take a look regarding possible cleanup. Cirt (talk) 22:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Biological warfare

Added some more thoughts and watchlisted the nomination page. Feel free to ignore anything you don't like, they're only ideas- you know more about the subject and about portals than me :) J Milburn (talk) 17:54, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I assumed it was like FAC, in that the done thing was to bring up lots of potential issues. I wasn't meaning to oppose, just to help improve. J Milburn (talk) 19:30, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I did notice you'd dealt with a lot of them, yes. I see the featured candidacy as another step in the life- as in, articles, lists, topics, portals and the like come out looking better thant they did when they went in. The support/oppose dichotomy only really applies to the likes of FP/FS, for me. J Milburn (talk) 19:36, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

User:Hardcorebutch

This seems to be User:Stickyblueeyes, back with a new name to do the same trolling. Thanks for your attention to this. Equazcion ^(talk) 19:53, 8 Feb 2010 (UTC)

 Done, Cirt (talk) 19:56, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks :) Equazcion ^(talk) 19:58, 8 Feb 2010 (UTC)

No worries, Cirt (talk) 20:01, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Tammet

Daniel Tammet Hi, it appears that the version that is protected is the uncited version, would you please revert it to the other version, thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 22:03, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Would prefer another admin does the editing part, and I just hang back as having protected it. Cirt (talk) 22:04, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Ok thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 22:05, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of Duckmandu

Forgive me for rehasing this--I didn't get a chance to comment during the deletion discussion. I am the original creator of the page.

I notice that the page was deleted on "unnotable performer" grounds. No editor seems to have noticed that the subject (Aaron Seeman, a.k.a. Duckmanu) is also a

• composer*. He composed the musicfor a grand opera, which was produced at a

major univerity. The libretto for the opera was written by a well-known scholar. This may not make him rich or famous, but it certainly makes him notable.

He was also for many years the primary composer of the band Fishtank Ensemble, a successful gigging band which is very active in the LA area and at music festivals in the USA and in Europe.

Mr. Seeman may not be as "notable" (i.e, famous) as, say, Britney Spears, but he will be listed in classical music reference books 100 years from now, when Britney and her ilk are long forgotten. Encyclopedias are supposed to be for the long run--not just who is famous for 15 minutes.

Perhaps the relevant question is: "had wiki existed in Mozart's lifetime, would I have deleted his page because he was less "notable" than Salieri?"

And as you probably know, J.S. Bach was Felix obscure until Felix Mendolsson rescued him. IMHO, when it comes to living classical composers, it is better to err on the side of being inclusive.

Also, Mr. Seeman is a well-known teacher of the accordion with several very successful students. OK, accordion is not my thing either, but each intrument has its following and its community. Aaron Seeman is very notable in the accordion community.

Just trying to raise a few issues that didn't get discussed. Wiki needs to improve its reputation in academic circles--being less "pop" oriented certainly would help. Just because editors haven't heard of something doesn't mean it isn't important. Discussion and consensus is not a substitute for research: before making this deletion, Wiki should at least have sought the opinion of a musicologist or classical composer.

I hope that, after investigating the facts, you will reverse your decision.

Thanks. --Mark —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mgryan (talk • contribs) 02:24, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

The discussion was at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Duckmandu. I would suggest working on a draft version in a subpage of your userspace. Cirt (talk) 17:29, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Daniel Tammet

Hello Cirt. Per WP:AN3#User talk:85.210.180.155 reported by User talk:86.193.84.62 (Result: 31h), the IP who was warring to insert the subject's birth name has been blocked 31h. If you wish, this might create an opportunity to lift the protection on this article. I felt it was necessary to get the IP's attention, since he'd been ignoring all warnings, and we can't keep it protected forever. (Though semiprotection is an option). EdJohnston (talk) 05:51, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

 Done, Cirt (talk) 17:27, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

RFA

No I don't but would like one. --Tyw7  (Talk • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 06:15, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

How to get one? --Tyw7  (Talk • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 18:33, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Deadstar Assembly

I would like to see about bringing up for debate the un-deletion of this group, as they were proven notable and valid in the past, and can only provide even more proof to support the fact upon request. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talk • contribs) 17:43, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Things that are in the article such as their referenced inclusion on soundtracks for both movies and video games, as well as various third party articles dedicated about the group alone should qualify them. But just in case it is not, please let me know what else can be included to ensure their re-addition.

Just an outline regarding their status:

They are listed as a national touring act in both Pollstar and Ticketmaster.

They were featured in the following BIG MEDIA - Broadcast, Film, Video Games, Radio, Satellite Radio, Online Radio

Project Gotham Racing 3

"Picture This" Movie

MTVs Punk'd episode #301

MTVs Making The Video - Goo Goo Dolls

MTVs NEXT

they've Had Significant Radio Play Internationally. I can provide the Title Codes as assigned by ASCAP

Britain Norway USA Canda

FMQB # 5 Most Added with 46 Adds (Friday Morning Quarterback - FMQB.COM)

CMJ Loud Rock # 6 Most Added with 59 Adds

"Killing Myself Again" added to AOL Radio

"Killing Myself Again" added in Video Rotation on Much Music Channel —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talk • contribs)

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deadstar Assembly (2nd nomination). I would suggest working on a proposed draft version in a subpage of your userspace. Cirt (talk) 17:58, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure how to do that, is there any link you can point me in the direction of that would explain it to me? Also, it would seem the original debate was way off the mark with its claims on the criteria, as they successfully defended those points over a year ago as shown in the outline posted above (in fact they had to REMOVE some references as they were told they listed too many), and only have more coverage since then. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talk • contribs) 18:02, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

You can work on it, at User:Elblots/Deadstar Assembly. Cirt (talk) 18:10, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I started, but would it be possible for you to copy over the old wiki page to this one so I can just work from that and add/reinstate the things that were on the article originally, as this would greatly expedite the process on both ends? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talk • contribs) 18:45, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for merging the old article with the new one. As you can see, I have added a few more valid references to the article. If you will please let me know what else needs to be done to prove notability I will make sure it gets done immediately. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talk • contribs) 19:10, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Most of those sources fail WP:RS, are not actually secondary sources, and/or fail WP:NOTE. Cirt (talk) 20:57, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't see how extensive coverage specifically about the group in print magazines are not valid, especially when providing referenced links to the specific publications (even one with them on the COVER). And what of the inclusion of the band on soundtracks? (A Major video game title as referenced on its OFFICIAL web site, a motion picture that topped ratings with millions of viewers the night of its airing, MTV shows - as heard on the samples posted from their official sources). If i were to provide the ASCAP info of the groups radio play, would that assist? (I don't ever see those things posted on any other bands entry). The band have headlined their own national tours, as listed on ticketmaster and pollstar. They are also on multiple independent labels in various countries.

MyAlbum/MijnAlbum

Hi there. I noticed that you just closed the Afd for MyAlbum.com as "Delete", but you left MijnAlbum, which was co-nominated, alive and kicking. Favonian (talk) 17:52, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

 Done, thanks. Cirt (talk) 17:52, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

AFD closure?

I am looking for someone to close this AFD Dean Chamberlain and I know you do them, if you get chance that would be good. Off2riorob (talk) 21:47, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

 Done, relisted debate for additional discussion. Cirt (talk) 21:49, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Ta, I can't see it happening though, the article has improved to a level where no one is bothered to reply anymore, you can't drag them in kicking and screaming. Off2riorob (talk) 22:04, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Magic City Morning Star

Hi,

I saw that the page for Magic City Morning Star has been protected because of my attempts at edits. I don't understand why my edits are worse than the current page. The page, as currently written is blatantly inaccurate and years out of date. It makes claims that are totally unsourced. Are unsourced claims okay if they have been on the page for years? For instance, the politicians listed as "contributors" never did any such thing, and those claims are unsourced anyways. I attempt to note the "contributors" did not actually contribute, and my edit is destroyed. Would it be better to simply delete the "contribution" section altogether? Help me out here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amglolz (talk • contribs) 21:47, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Please engage in discussion, at the article's talk page. Cirt (talk) 21:49, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Paul Carrigan

Hi, checking your brief closure summary of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul Carrigan‎, I'm wondering if you considered that most of the comments in favour of deletion were solely applying PORNBIO when Carrigan is not just a pornography actor but also a film director. As PORNBIO is specifically for actors, the closure should be based on the GNG. As Carrigan's work as a director of erotic wrestling films is notable as establishing the genre, I would have thought that GNG was easily satisfied (even if we are forced to ignore the fact that Carrigan is the second most credited actor in gay pornography). Would you re-consider your closure as I would have thought inconclusive might be more appropriate as a summary. Ash (talk) 22:03, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Consensus indeed favored deletion. However, I would be willing to userfy the page to a subpage within your userspace, if you wanted to work on it further there. Cirt (talk) 22:04, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Please do, though I am disheartened by the experience of having an article which by any normal common-sense definition is about a notable person deleted on the basis of notability. Being a cover star, the second most credited actor in the field and having so many films win well-known awards should have been sufficient. I guess I should take a nice long break from pornography articles while this bias for literal interpretation rather than common-sense has the upper hand. Ash (talk) 22:22, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

 Done, now at User:Ash/Paul Carrigan. Cirt (talk) 22:25, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

RE : Query

In a sense I forgot to complete the sentence, "but I won't go out to oppose it outright and I can live with it if others think it is justified" would be a more precise way of describing my stand. - Mailer Diablo 22:24, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

• Okay, I see what is happening now. I was still reading a cached version of the PD ._. I'll change my vote accordingly. - Mailer Diablo 22:31, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks...

...for semi-protecting the Ignazio Abate article! ^_^ Those IP users can get really annoying. Bye! — Luxic (talk) 22:36, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

No worries, Cirt (talk) 22:38, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

For semi-protecting my talk page. All that over me reverting some vandalism of one of their little friends! I hadn't even heard of the page they vandalised tonight until I accidentally stumbled across it with Huggle. Thanks again! --5 albert square (talk) 23:12, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome, Cirt (talk) 23:13, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

You're right

I'm sorry about that. I've adjusted.[7] Cool Hand Luke 23:31, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Apology accepted. Thank you. Cirt (talk) 23:31, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Hey, Cirt

Could you see about putting a soft block on 209.174.229.138 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), your the only admin i could think of off the top of my head Weaponbb7 (talk) 04:05, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Try WP:AIV. Cirt (talk) 04:55, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Bonnie Bailey

Hey there, I really have no idea what I'm supposed to do here in regard to disputing or requesting a page to be undeleted, I've only been a reader and not a contributor so please forgive me my ignorance. My friend Bonnie asked for help since she thinks I know "About Computers", more than her at least I suppose, but as this seems to be an issue with providing verification of the facts on the page I figured I could assist her.

http://www.discogs.com/artist/Bonnie+Bailey

http://www.zobbel.de/cluk/CLUK_L.HTM

http://top40-charts.com/videos/play.php?vid=owruZtqHw2Y

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=bonnie bailey&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&client=safari&rls=en&tab=nv#

http://www.google.com/products?q=bonnie bailey&hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wf

http://www.wikimusicguide.com/Bonnie_Bailey#About

How do I need to proceed to get her page reinstated?

Thanks you Travis Meck TMeck@YanniWake.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.64.104.66 (talk) 06:56, 10 February 2010 (UTC) 98.64.104.66 (talk) 06:59, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

No consensus vs. keep result

I'm curious when a vote should be marked with a definite result vs. "no consensus" - on John D. Hawks by my count it was 5 keep, 3 delete. --JWB (talk) 11:55, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

For starters, one of them was a "weak" keep. Cirt (talk) 20:57, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Does the difference have any consequences such as making it easier or more difficult to request deletion etc. in the future? --JWB (talk) 21:57, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Deletion review for Lindsay rosenwald

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Lindsay rosenwald. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. —Preceding unsigned comment added by J.D. (talk • contribs)

Thank you for the notice. Cirt (talk) 20:58, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

FayssalF

Do you mind if we consolidate our comments into the same section? I want it to get attention, and I didn't immediately realize what had happened. Cool Hand Luke 13:57, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

PQ Systems

I was hoping to improve this article but am having some trouble revising the old one. Could you shed some more light onto the reasons for deletion, this may help me in making a revision. It looked like there where a few comments but none of them seem too specific. one said something about underlying notability is lacking but i sourced several publications for the article. Can you help me lead me in the right direction?
Thanks
Bmxoffspring99 (talk) 14:56, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

 Done, now at User:Bmxoffspring99/PQ Systems, Inc. Cirt (talk) 21:01, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Engaged in an 'Edit War' over the words 'trope' and 'theme'?

I really do not understand this. The word 'trope' is clearly being used misleadingly in the 'Battlefield Earth' article when the word 'theme' should be in place. At first I was accused of vandalism without any clear explanation as to why (given the warning was a typical copy-and-paste scolding, the lack of context is not surprising). Then I edited the article back while giving an explain why I replaced the word 'trope' with 'theme' and suddenly I am in an 'edit war' which says I could be banned from editing on the site if I change it back. Huh?

I am really starting to not like this site at all. The site tells you to 'be bold' but whenever I try to improve an article someone (or something since these messages seem to be coming from bots on the site if that makes any sense) sends me a message accusing me of breaking one rule or another and always without an adequate explanation. I thought Wikipedia was an open process for the sake of improving articles and make it a more reliable source. Telling people they are wrong for making changes without any regards to the context of the situation only discourages edits. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.96.2.35 (talk) 17:39, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Please, engage in discussion about it at the article's talk page. Cirt (talk) 20:54, 10 February 2010 (UTC)