User talk:Cirt

AFD/T • T-7 • T-2 • Relisted • AFDO • AFD tool links • WP:DRV • WP:MFD • AIV • RFUB • UAA/CAT • RFPP • PER • CSD • AB • FAR • FAC urgents • TFAR • RSN • BLPN • FTN • GAN Topic lists • 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
• Reflinks
• Citation tool for Google Books
• Citation tool for DOIs
• Tools, part 1: References, external links, categories and size

independent reliable secondary sources

• User:Citation bot/use

• {{findsources}}

Refs inside scroll box

<div class="reflist4" style="height: 200px; overflow: auto; padding: 3px; border: 1px solid #ababab">{{reflist|2}}</div>

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)

G8

Hi. Could you please let me know why this page (Comparison_of_knowledge_management_software) has been deleted? It seems to be a normal page like Comparison_of_FTP_client_software or Comparison_of_file_managers. And I do not see anything related to the G8. Please elaborate. Thank you in advance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by The.aloner (talk • contribs) 12:17, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Was deleted after WP:AFD discussion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of knowledge base management software. -- Cirt (talk) 12:22, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your quick answer. I believe there are two main problems with the page: links to external websites that make it a link farm, and non-neutral characteristics for some features. In other aspects is seems to be valuable because it gives some comparison for software in this industry. I'm learning several examples of comparison pages and it seems to me that solving these two problems may make this page more appropriate. I think I can start remaking the page. How do you think, is that better to make changes to the currently moved page or it is better to apply changes if page is undeleted? -- The.aloner (talk) 15:04, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

I've modified the page and removed link farm and non-neutral parts. I believe it can be undeleted now and further imporoved. The.aloner (talk) 12:29, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Not seeing any WP:RS secondary source coverage. -- Cirt (talk) 11:23, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Bacon WikiCup 2011

Pages

• Wikipedia:Bacon WikiCup
• User:SuperHamster/Bacon Challenge 2011
• User:SuperHamster/Bacon WikiCup 2011
• User:SuperHamster/Bacon WikiCup 2011/Submissions

History

• User:Sky Attacker/Bacon WikiCup 2010
• User:ChildofMidnight/Bacon Challenge 2010

Ideas

1. Films? — Bacon Grabbers, Canadian Bacon, Slaughterhouse (film) (aka Bacon Bits)
2. Books? — search on authors from prior year, also: Don't Forget the Bacon! by Pat Hutchins; Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon by Craig Fass, Brian Turtle, and Mike Ginelli
3. Drinks? — Bacon and Tomato Sandwich, Bacon Liquor & Tomato
4. Quality upgrade? — quality upgrade on articles from prior year: Everything Tastes Better with Bacon, The Bacon Cookbook, The BLT Cookbook, Bacon: A Love Story

-- Cirt (talk) 10:15, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Started peer review for one from prior: Wikipedia:Peer review/Everything Tastes Better with Bacon/archive1. -- Cirt (talk) 10:39, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

WP:WikiProject Bacon, {{WikiProject Bacon}}, {{User Bacon}}. -- Cirt (talk) 20:20, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Addressed most of the stuff from the peer review. Next up: book, portal. -- Cirt (talk) 17:11, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Portal done, at Portal:Bacon. -- Cirt (talk) 11:46, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Everything Tastes Better with Bacon peer review = done. Next up for peer review = Bacon: A Love Story. -- Cirt (talk) 10:44, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Bacon: A Love Story - up for peer review, now ongoing at Wikipedia:Peer review/Bacon: A Love Story/archive1. -- Cirt (talk) 21:40, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Created article = Don't Forget the Bacon!. -- Cirt (talk) 07:20, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Deshastha Brahmin

A while back you reviewed Deshastha Brahmin in response to a GA nomination but it didn't pass at that time. I've re-nominated it after a peer review, copy-edit, and the changes you had recommended. Just wanted to let you know of the nomination since you had mentioned back then to notify you of the re-nomination. Zuggernaut (talk) 06:12, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Ah okay, thank you. -- Cirt (talk) 19:17, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Just wondering if you had an interest in reviewing it again. Zuggernaut (talk) 04:38, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Apology

Cirt, I owe you a couple of apologies. After we spoke off-wiki, I realized that it would have been better to post a question about your behaviour at FAR to your talk page, as Fainites did above. There was no reason for me to complain about your behaviour at Sandy's page without trying your talk page first, particularly since you and I are not complete strangers and have occasionally interacted in the past. I read a quite negative construction into your actions instead of assuming good faith, and I apologize for that too. The off-wiki conversation has made it clear to me that you did not intend your actions to be construed as they were. I hope that we can avoid any more misunderstandings. Thanks, and I hope you can forgive me for not talking to you first. -- Mike Christie (talk) 16:06, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much. This is most appreciated. -- Cirt (talk) 16:49, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

De brief voor de Koning

Sure and it's my pleasure; happy to be of help. Excellent article; keep up the good work! --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 19:16, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! ;) -- Cirt (talk) 14:48, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Dominika Stará

Hello Cirt. I apologize for bothering you repeatedly ... I left a comment at the Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons, however, my note remained unnoticed. Should I move the section to the bottom of the noticeboard? Thanks for any help/advice. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 14:39, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 14:48, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Okay thanks. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 15:07, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Can you help me please?

The article Tom Quinn (Spooks) quickfailed GA because the article was in a need of a copyedit. Since you previously worked on Adam Carter. I was wondering if you can copyedit that article for me. Thank you. -- Matthew RD 14:44, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Will take a look. -- Cirt (talk) 14:48, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Suggest you follow the advice of the GA Reviewer, and take the article to peer review before going for GAN again. The GA Reviewer in particular is one I have come across to have sound judgment, so I would advise against contesting the review itself. -- Cirt (talk) 14:52, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Email...

Hi Cirt, I got your email. I prefer not to take part in off-wiki discussions if I can help it; it's rare that I'm up on my emails anyway - sometimes I go weeks without checking it. Karanacs (talk) 14:55, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Alright. No worries, -- Cirt (talk) 14:56, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Careful

You deleted the access date. OrangeDog (τ • ε) 16:39, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes. I deleted the URL as well, so there is no longer a need for an accessdate to state when the URL was last accessed. -- Cirt (talk) 16:51, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

No you didn't... OrangeDog (τ • ε) 16:55, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Ah, thank you for pointing that out.  Done! -- Cirt (talk) 16:58, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Pennsylvania Chronicle

Hi Cirt, I was thinking about creating the page Pennsylvania Chronicle and discovered that a page with this name was deleted once before. Before and if I take on such an undertaking I would be interested in knowing why the previous article was deleted. The approach for the article I have in mind will be on an historic level, covering the paper's involvement in the American Revoulution and will highlight people like William Goddard, the paper's founder, and Benjamin Franklin who also was associated with the publication. Any advice and other information you may have would be greatly appreciated. All the best. -- GWillHickers (talk) 21:04, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Was deleted, after AFD, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American Chronicle. -- Cirt (talk) 06:48, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

IP 82.5.224.162 is now 86.29.113.118

Hi there. Just wanted to let you know that the IP address you blocked 82.5.224.162 has resurfaced under the IP 86.29.113.118. S/he seems to be vandalizing the same articles on the new IP. 90.201.150.226 (talk) 22:03, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Suggest you try WP:AIV or file a report, at WP:SPI. -- Cirt (talk) 06:46, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Advanced Ability Centre / Advanced Ability Center

I've just noticed that there seem to have been two organisations of that name, one in England (... Centre, redirecting to Scientology in the United Kingdom), and the other one founded by Mayo (... Center). Do you know if they were somehow related? --JN466 23:00, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

I am not yet certain, but it would seem to be the same or similar or related. I note you have still yet failed to place a notice at the talk page of Advanced Ability Center regarding material taken from the article David Miscavige, in order to satisfy copyright? -- Cirt (talk) 06:49, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

What is the proper way of doing that? --JN466 16:54, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

I see what you mean; I hadn't been to the David Miscavige talk page recently. Following what you wrote there, I made these edits. Does this adequately address the concern? --JN466 18:46, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes. -- Cirt (talk) 21:20, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Roger Waters FAC

We would like your help concluding the FAC for Roger Waters. — GabeMc (talk) 03:31, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Okay, will try to take a look. -- Cirt (talk) 06:49, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Article

Hello.

Just wondering how I can get an article up? I mean, someone tried, a pro writer, and it was deleted. I have all links and facts proving the article. Please help. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oplexicon (talk • contribs) 11:38, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Note to self - portal Bacon

Portal:Bacon -- additions, help, etc. -- Cirt (talk) 12:30, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Congrats on making Portal Bacon it looks good. Spongie555 (talk) 23:43, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

I see your really good with Portals. Could you help me in Portal:Bhutan. I made it but I'm bad with portals and the only help I'm getting is from someone in Russian wikipedia. Spongie555 (talk) 23:46, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

If you liked my efforts at Portal:Bacon, I would suggest you look there for ways to reformat Portal:Bhutan. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 02:42, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Jason calling...

Cirt, since you're on duty (haha), what to do about this, The Bourn Legacy (film)? Simply blank and redirect? Merge and redirect? What I mean is, what are you going to do, with your administrative and moral powers, since I'm going to bed? Thanks! (Oh, you'll be pleased to know that my daughter went shopping with me and picked the most expensive bacon they had in the supermarket, thick-sliced and applewood-smoked.) Drmies (talk) 05:16, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

 Done, merged the two page histories together. -- Cirt (talk) 05:19, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Cirt, if you have a moment, please explain, in a nutshell, what you did and why--does it hinge on the fact that the recent article, with the incorrect title, has verified content? Thanks, Drmies (talk) 17:51, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Also, what you did here, I think I tried that to but couldn't (if I remember correctly) because the article (well, redirect) was already there--but you can do this as an administrator? Thanks again, Drmies (talk) 17:53, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Yup. ;) -- Cirt (talk) 21:18, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Just FYI

Nom here was actually a banned editor - Alison ^❤ 06:18, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Ah okay, thanks! -- Cirt (talk) 06:22, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Question about a deleted page

Hi,

My name is Ido, C Few month ago we added our page to Wikipedia, and for some reason it was deleted and cannot be edited now. Page location was: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shvoong

We accept your concern about high quality in Wikipedia, and would like to know how can we improve our page to be acceptable, high quality, and suit the Wikipedia site. Any remark, demand or suggestion will be treated, and actions will be taken as necessary.

Thanks a lot Ido —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.179.37.179 (talk • contribs)

Replied at User talk:80.179.37.179. -- Cirt (talk) 21:20, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Cirt. You have new messages at Acather96's talk page.
Message added 19:57, 20 October 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Ah okay thanks. -- Cirt (talk) 21:19, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

extremedb

I saw your name at the top of the discussion page on the Extremedb article deletion. You are the editor to contact to restart that discussion, correct? It is unclear as to why it was deleted: notability, or tone/content? No justification is given for the criticisms of “spam” or “reads like an ad.” The persons who made those comments seem to have an agenda other than article content quality or factuality. And, I don’t think an argument has been made against the article’s notability, and the content of the article itself, as I recall it, has some good evidence that supports notability. Is there a way we can actually look at the article, to consider various points? It seems pointless to discuss the article without examining exactly what we are talking about.

Other than contacting you, are there steps I must take in order to start a reconsideration of this deletion?

Svpcom (talk) 23:27, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

This was deleted after WP:AFD, and already went through one deletion review, at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 October 13. -- Cirt (talk) 23:29, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

FAC

Hey, thanks for the congrats :) I also submitted Taare Zameen Par for FAC today, if you are interested in Bollywood films, lol. Ωphois 01:36, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Elise Harris deletion

Hello. I was working a little on trying to improve a page that was recently deleted and I would like to know how I can set about trying to undelete it. I didn't get a chance to take part in the discussion as I didn't realise what was happening until it was too late. It seems to have got a little fraught and doesn't seem to have argued much based on policy. Anyway, I tried to read up on policy and tried to rewrite the page with better sourcing and referencing and thought that that was adequate. I checked all the rules and they said that it is possible to recreate an article as long as it is not exactly the same as the one deleted. The new one was not the same as it focused on poetry in recognised journals and journalism - two things that were not referenced very well in the deleted article. Also the other article was deleted very quickly before I had chance to prepare an argument showing notability. The new article was deleted quickly with G4 given as a reason - G4 says: A sufficiently identical and unimproved copy, having any title, of a page deleted via a deletion discussion. This excludes pages that are not substantially identical to the deleted version, The new page was not the same as the one deleted, I was at pains to re-source all the references and focus on only the things that could be proved as notable using adequate references. It was not identical as I made sure none of the things that were problematic were still there. I am sorry if I did this wrong. Again, is there any way to start a discussion for undeletion of the page (based on the newer version with better references rather than the old one which had some failings?) Sorry if I have gone about this the wrong way, and thanks for your help. Alwayssoma (talk) 03:12, 21 October 2010 (UTC) Oh, the newer page I was working on was Elise V. Harris. I substantially rewrote and re-sourced. Sorry again if I have overstepped the mark - I thought I had read the policies correctly.

Alwayssoma (talk) 03:12, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Please provide a link to where the page was located? -- Cirt (talk) 06:36, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fight or Flight (Star Trek: Enterprise)

Despite the fact that the majority view was "merge" and that most of the "Keep" votes said "well, sources must exist for this" yet none of them actually found anything significant? Black Kite (t) (c) 06:28, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorry you feel that way, but it is an incorrect assessment. -- Cirt (talk) 06:37, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

OK then - you said "Significant comments from multiple editors ... have shown there is enough reliable secondary source coverage to retain this article". If mine is an incorrect assessment, what is that coverage, and why does the article still contain precisely none? At the moment, the only sources are primary or trivial mentions and the article still fails WP:NOT#PLOT. Black Kite (t) (c) 06:41, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

AFD is not for cleanup. -- Cirt (talk) 06:41, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Cleanup is where an article is obviously notable, but in a poor state. That doesn't apply here. I'm sorry, but if you're closing a contentious AfD, you need to back up your rationale. Again, what is the reliable secondary source coverage that you claim has been found by multiple editors? Black Kite (t) (c) 06:45, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

I went ahead and provided some helpful links at the talk page. It looks like some editors have already begun positive quality improvement work on the article. :) -- Cirt (talk) 06:46, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

I'll give that a definite "Hmm" :) I think the best thing is to give the article a little bit of time, but I have this horrible feeling that, as usual, now it's been kept no-one will bother actually trying to improve it. Black Kite (t) (c) 06:53, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Wrong. ;) -- Cirt (talk) 06:54, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Of course, if you're going to do it yourself, my comment does not apply :) Black Kite (t) (c) 07:00, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

I have been trying for the past twenty minutes now. But this funny little bright orange bar keeps appearing at the top of the page, while I am attempting to improve the article. Kinda makes it more difficult to do research and add material to improve the quality of the page. :P -- Cirt (talk) 07:01, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Catholicism

Hi Cirt, I'm not sure, but it appears to me that User:Cresix is on some kind of anti-Catholic drive by removing the Category:American Roman Catholics from every article where the person's religion isn't cited. But he's not doing it for Protestants, Jews, Muslims, etc. How is something like this usually looked into/handled? Thanks, Markvs88 (talk) 12:19, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

You could try WP:ANI. -- Cirt (talk) 12:20, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK in T:AH

I don't know if there is a way to do a DYK action, but note that there is now a "dykentry" field in T:AH.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:21, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

I do not know how.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:48, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Kutch Kadva Patidar

Please review deletion of article Kutch Kadva Patidar. I have already given resons on deletion talk page i.e. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Kutch_Kadva_Patidar Thanks Kutchipatel (talk) 15:16, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Please do not post to WP:AFD pages after closure. -- Cirt (talk) 11:25, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LV (September 2010)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LV (September 2010) Front page Project news Articles Members Editorial

Project news The results of September's coordinator elections, plus ongoing project discussions and proposals	Articles A recap of the month's new Featured and A-Class articles
Members Our newest A-class medal recipients, this September's top contestants, plus the reviewers' Roll of Honour (Apr-Sep 2010)	Editorial In the final part of our series on copyright, Moonriddengirl describes how to deal with copyright infringements on Wikipedia
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 21:09, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Sauganash Hotel

On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, I commend you on your editorial contributions and diligent review. Please post this on your user page.

This user helped promote Sauganash Hotel to good article status.

--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:24, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! -- Cirt (talk) 06:45, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Yellow Monkey- his abuse of authority

Please read my user pageandycjp (talk) 06:43, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Ok I am sorry if you regard it as such. Please could you undelete Buddhism and violence as the page should be improved not deleted. His judgement was too hasty. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andycjp (talk • contribs)

one section has one sentence

One section has one sentence. That looks pretty no-can-do-ish. I'd move it to the section below, but leave that to you. later! • Ling.Nut 11:59, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 12:02, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Frankie Martinez entry

Hi Cirt,

I would like to provide the additional support requested for Frankie Martinez's entry.

So do I request to have the article restored to my userspace so I can work on it to attempt to address the problems that led to the deletion?

Please advise on the next appropriate steps. Thank you.

Xenergizerx (talk) 17:49, 22 October 2010 (UTC) Gary gsu@abakuadancers.org

 Done, now at User:Xenergizerx/Frankie Martinez. -- Cirt (talk) 04:20, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Re: extremedb

It seems to me these review periods were brief, and it seems likely that only a limited number of persons contributed to the discussion.

I know that I would have added my thoughts if I'd known a discussion of this article was taking place. After the first "defense" of the article, the deletion request was withdrawn. And then a second deletion proposal was raised and quickly finalized without any defense being given.

Arguments in favor of the article, stated in the first defense, received no response. Instead, the article was deleted based on (as far as I can see) two rather vague _opinions_ (not arguments).

Do you not agree?

I request that the discussion be reopened so that questions can be properly addressed. As I understand it, this is possible on Wikipedia.

Svpcom (talk) 21:47, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

I am sorry but this has already undergone multiple discussions, first at WP:AFD, and more recently at WP:DRV, at page Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 October 13. The deletion was endorsed. -- Cirt (talk) 04:21, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

User:Cwestllc

FYI: [1]. I'm nuking it since it's not appropriate talk page discussion, but I figured I'd let you know in case the user becomes active again, or if you wanted to follow up on it. Gigs (talk) 02:17, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Deletion review for Emily Schooley

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Emily Schooley. 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. Misssinformative (talk) 09:44, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

The page was submitted for deletion by employees at Frozen North Productions, after Schooley outed them for poor business practices. See (http://emilyschooley.com/blog/?p=185)

The page existed for months, and both myself and others made efforts to find more credible articles with neutral points of view from reliable sources.

That it was "coincidentally" submitted for deletion just after Schooley posted her blog post is suspicious. Myself and others made efforts to revise the page after the original request for deletion was submitted, and tried to include more articles that met WP:N and WP:NPOV

We would like to see it undeleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Misssinformative (talk • contribs) 08:18, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

If you like you could work on a proposed draft version, within a subpage of your userspace. I could make such a copy available, if you wish it. -- Cirt (talk) 08:21, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Sure, I suppose. Are you able to see the differences between the page when it was submitted for deletion originally and the revised version from when it was deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Misssinformative (talk • contribs) 08:26, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

 Done, now at User:Misssinformative/Emily Schooley. -- Cirt (talk) 08:31, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. So what exactly can I do with that and how do I get it undeleted? How do I access the page from my pages? Misssinformative (talk) 08:35, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Replied at user's talk page. -- Cirt (talk) 08:41, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Can you tell me what is unsatisfactory or does not meet notable guidelines for actors in the current version?Misssinformative (talk) 09:28, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

I am also wondering about this. Having met Emily Schooley , seen her speak at conferences, and seen her work on screen, I feel that she meets the general notability guides at least, if not the notable guidelines for actors. I can provide scans of the conference guide in which I have seen her live at if the video is not enough evidence to show that she has done public speaking on the film industry. She is not a close personal friend of mine in any way, but she is someone that I have enjoyed seeing at conferences and watching her work develop over time. She has been credited for a significant amount of work, perhaps even statistically significant outside of one standard deviation above the mean based upon the mean of colleagues in her age range and gender. I wonder how an authority such as IMDB can have a page with the popularity that it does, and a resource such as Wikipedia will remove what I see as a page on someone wholly worth noting. That being said, I am seemingly misunderstanding the guidelines considering that the article was in fact deleted. I would like to endeavor to have her page restored. Would you be willing to guide me on how to correct the page so that it is in compliance said guidelines? Chaulis1 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:45, 23 October 2010 (UTC).

Deletion review was closed, with result deletion endorsed, at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 October 23. -- Cirt (talk) 21:21, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Please close WP:BLP/N

Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Paul_Watson has run its course. — BQZip01 — ^talk 08:46, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

I hesitate to protect the talk-page. Please post a request to WP:RFPP about that, linking to the WP:BLPN thread. That will hopefully draw in more admins to look into this. -- Cirt (talk) 08:51, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Don't really care about the page protection so much, but I see no reason to keep the BLP "discussion" open. — BQZip01 — ^talk 00:37, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

About Ms Sima yari

---

Forwarded Message ----

From: Dr. Abbas Milani amilani@stanford.edu Sent: Fri, October 22, 2010 9:14:53 AM Subject: "Sima Yari "

Dear Sir/Madam: It has come to my attention that the entry on Ms Sima Yari has been, for some reason, eliminated from the Wikipedia. I know of her work, her published poetry, and the defiance of her voice. May be it is just this defiance that has caused the malignant urge of some unknown force or person to try to eliminate her. I have been under the impression that yours is a site given to the democratic reflection of a plurality of voices; judgment on the ultimate quality of each voice is up to the readers and critics, and should not be left to those who have the patience or know-how to act as censors and forces of elimination. There is often not much of a distance between elimination from the page to elimination from the public domain, and even more, physical elimination. We must stop the shameful process where it begins. Restate her entry for she deserves presence, and not elimination. Best, Abbas Milani

Hamid and Christina Moghadam Director of Iranian Studies Research Fellow/Hoover Institution Stanford University 417 Galvez Mall, Encina Hall West, Room 210 Stanford, CA 94305-6045 Tel: 650.721.4052 Fax: 650.723.3010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.158.16.248 (talk) 15:25, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

After WP:AFD deletion discussion, was userfied for userspace draft work, to User:Nematg/Sima Yari. Suggest you get in contact with Nematg (talk · contribs). -- Cirt (talk) 21:22, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

clarification please...

You closed Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/Ibrahim Zeidan reports Abu Zubaydah image used as an interrogation tool. But you didn't explicitly say why you closed it as "delete". After re-reading WP:NOTWEBHOST I honestly don't see how this section of WP:NOT, cited by practically everyone who weighed in on the discussion, is relevant.

To what extent should I regard your closure as an endorsement of their WP:NOTWEBHOST sentiments? Geo Swan (talk) 15:31, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

It was an assessment of the overall consensus expressed by the community from the deletion discussion. -- Cirt (talk) 21:23, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

*pokes*

What's with you and bacon? Just wondering. :P Silverseren^C 22:22, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Have you not seen Wikipedia:Bacon WikiCup? -- Cirt (talk) 22:23, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

I have not. O_O So, this one ends March, 2011? I want to join! :D Silverseren^C 22:32, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Instructions and how to sign up, listed at User:SuperHamster/Bacon WikiCup 2011, but you may also want to leave a note for user talk page of SuperHamster (talk · contribs). -- Cirt (talk) 22:33, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/88.7 FM Campbell River, British Columbia

Cirt, you closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/88.7 FM Campbell River, British Columbia as delete and deleted the redirect 88.7 FM Campbell River, British Columbia. Would you delete CHVI-FM as well? (The article was moved to that title during the AfD discussion.) Thanks, Cunard (talk) 02:18, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

 Done! -- Cirt (talk) 02:19, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the quick response. Cunard (talk) 02:20, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome. ;) -- Cirt (talk) 08:45, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Confusion over article creation

Hello Cirt. I just thought that I would let you know that the message that you left for Bradley0110 about the article Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy (film) probably should have been left on the talk page for User:The Editor 155. In looking at the edit history here [2] Bradley created a redirect in '08. Then last week The Editor undid that redirect and created the article. Please don't think that this message is stating that you did anything wrong. I thought that the situation is a little confusing so I hoped that this info might help. Cheers and happy editing. MarnetteD | Talk 20:20, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Okay, thank you. -- Cirt (talk) 21:14, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Beautiful Heartache

The article Beautiful Heartache you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Beautiful Heartache for things which need to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:55, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

The Irving Literary Society (Cornell University) - bit of a mess

Hi there, I'm contacting you because you because you handled the original restoration of the article after this deletion review . Following User:Racepacket's recent move of The Irving Literary Society (Cornell University) to Cornell literary societies and subsequent editing, User:Cmagha has cut and pasted the original version of that article to The Irving Literary Society and in the process removed all the edit history as well as creating an unattributed content fork. Also, Talk:The Irving Literary Society (Cornell University)/Archive 1 was not moved when Talk: The Irving Literary Society (Cornell University) was moved to Talk:Cornell literary societies and is now stranded, although I've added a link to it at the newly titled talk page.Could you sort this out, if nothing else to merge the page histories? If not, do you know an administrator who could handle this? I've got your page on watch, so please respond here. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 08:58, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Probably should be dealt with, via report to WP:ANI. Make sure to notify the user(s) involved. -- Cirt (talk) 08:59, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I wasn't sure if was appropriate to bring to ANI. Have done so now (and notified all and sundry). You'll find the ANI discussion here. (I've mentioned that I was bringing it there on your suggestion.) Best, Voceditenore (talk) 10:09, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

WA deletions

Which RFD discussion are you refering to? Simply south (talk) 11:55, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

What is "WA deletions" ? -- Cirt (talk) 11:56, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

The sandbox deletions. Simply south (talk) 12:14, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Sandbox/test. -- Cirt (talk) 12:15, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/Wikipedia:Sandbox/Word_Association. Simply south (talk) 12:30, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

That is from 2007. -- Cirt (talk) 12:32, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Nonetheless it still applies. Simply south (talk) 12:42, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, that is incorrect. Please see WP:Consensus can change, thanks. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 12:44, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

I meant to say that i feel some of it still applies. Simply south (talk) 12:48, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

I understand that, but community processes determined otherwise. Sorry, -- Cirt (talk) 12:49, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

As none of the word association pages were tagged or discussed in the MfD I've started a DRV to get them reinstated, at least pending actual discussion of their merits or otherwise: Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 October 25#Wikipedia:Sandbox/Word Association/Ultra Game. Thryduulf (talk) 13:20, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Request from KS

Kindly stay off my talk page with your contentious and unfounded accusations. If you want to discuss article improvement, I am more than willing to do so on the article talk page(s). - Best regards- KeptSouth (talk)

Please do not: 1) refer to individual users in edit summaries [3], 2) Make controversial edits with zero edit summary whatsoever [4], and 3) Use deceptive edit summaries while making controversial edits to a WP:BLP page objected to in ongoing discussion on the talk page [5]. Thank you. -- Cirt (talk) 15:18, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK issue

Hello! Your submission of Jessica Feshbach at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! The article does meet expansion, length and sourcing requirements, but the hook seems lacking to me. Maybe a punchier version could be created or a new hook provided from the ample material in the article. Alansohn (talk) 16:32, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

AfD Merge

If I close an AfD as merge, can I just copy and paste to the new article, or does an admin need to do a history merge? CTJF83 chat 21:54, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Help:Merging#Selective paste merger (with the wonderful shortcut WP:SMERGE) has the answer: no admin tools needed, but remember to put the details in edit summaries. Bencherlite^Talk 21:57, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Ok, thanks, CTJF83 chat 22:01, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Deletion

User:Sandbox for user warnings - why? THEMONO™ 02:43, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Sandbox/test. -- Cirt (talk) 02:44, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Harsh?

Hi Cirt. I'd suggest that this [6] is rather harsh and not even handed. I suspect from his/her posts that English is not a first language and from reading multiple posts the editor sometimes uses the language in a way that is not customary for a native speaker. As well, this is a contentious article and contentious discussion and there are some clear good faith concerns, which we are hopefully dealing with on the talk page. Unfortuantaly your warning isolates one editor when there are other editor concerns. Edith says the comments were not personal and given the language situation, I would tend to accept that. At any rate this is just my opinion. Best wishes.(olive (talk) 04:14, 26 October 2010 (UTC))

Thanks for your take on it. As always, on article talk pages, users should strive to avoid comments directly addressed about other single individual editors, and instead focus on discussion of content, reliable sources, and how to improve the quality of the article. -- Cirt (talk) 04:18, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

OzHarvest Deletion

Hi Cirt,

On september 1st, 2009 Our page under "OzHarvest" was deleted.

Is it possible for us to get this page back? Thankyou,

Regards MichelleOz