User talk:Wknight94

Please note that I will likely respond to new messages here.

Archives

Archive 1 | October 19, 2005-January 13, 2006 Archive 2 | January 14, 2006-April 2, 2006 Archive 3 | April 3, 2006-July 22, 2006 Archive 4 | July 23, 2006-September 23, 2006 Archive 5 | September 24, 2006-November 19, 2006 Archive 6 | November 20, 2006-January 20, 2007 Archive 7 | January 21, 2007-March 26, 2007 Archive 8 | March 27, 2007-May 22, 2007 Archive 9 | May 22, 2007-August 3, 2007 Archive 10 | August 4, 2007-September 22, 2007 Archive 11 | September 22, 2007-October 20, 2007 Archive 12 | October 20, 2007-November 17, 2007 Archive 13 | November 17, 2007-January 29, 2008 Archive 14 | January 30, 2008-March 13, 2008 Archive 15 | March 13, 2008-July 2, 2008 Archive 16 | July 2, 2008-August 17, 2008 Archive 17 | August 18, 2008-October 12, 2008 Archive 18 | August 18, 2008-July 17, 2009 Archive 19 | July 17, 2009-December 12, 2009

Thanks

Thanks for the revert. =) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 01:31, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

My pleasure. Wknight94 ^talk 02:33, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Can you block this user and delete the Str8lace page?

I just stumbled onto Str8-Lace.

User:Crookedarmy and IP User:71.202.254.74 have been removing the speedy delete template originally put up by another user, and they refuse to use {{holdon}}. Crookedarmy has been warned umpteen times.

Can you block them and delete this article? Moogwrench (talk) 12:03, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Umm, It was just recreated a bit ago by the same user, and he's deleting the speedy delete tags again. Moogwrench (talk) 13:22, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

For undoing the vandalism on my userpage. Ian.thomson (talk) 02:04, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

My pleasure. Wknight94 ^talk 02:05, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Tour Pages

Can you please help me get notices off of The Final Riot! Tour and the Brand New Eyes Tour? There are multiple references, all from reliable sources, on both pages. But the notice stating otherwise is still there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.231.81.57 (talk) 01:42, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings

Merry Christmas.--Sky Attacker the legend reborn... 01:46, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Same to you. Wknight94 ^talk 12:39, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Someone put some coal in that guy's stocking, it seems. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:39, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Just keeps getting weirder and weirder around here, eh? Wknight94 ^talk 17:05, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Either that, or we're just noticing it more. Time for a holiday. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:09, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

And happy new year

but ... I didn't understand your edit summary here tx--Epeefleche (talk) 16:33, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Which part? The list is not empty (which encourages admins to keep looking) and I only edited to decline one (hadn't edited in days). Wknight94 ^talk 16:35, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I see - you added that report (it was unsigned). That IP hasn't edited in two days - what would be the point of blocking it now? We usually go by the assumption that the people behind IPs change from time to time. Wknight94 ^talk 16:36, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Whoops. Sorry--I must not have signed it. I was reporting an IP vandal-only account, w/six or so vandal edits about a day and a half ago. OK--I had thought that as a vandal only account, without there ever having been other edits that were not vandalism, we would not assume that IP is a changing one. But tx for the explanation .. I wasn't clear from the edit summary. Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 16:39, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

No problem. I'll try to remember to include more info when you're the reporter. "Vandalism-only" is usually reserved for logged-in accounts, not IPs (unless something has changed recently...) Wknight94 ^talk 16:42, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Sorry to be a bother. Not familiar w/any technical meaning; was simply trying to save any reviewer time and indicate that every edit by the IP had been vandalism. Tx.--Epeefleche (talk) 17:12, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Vandal

Can you block the IP 69.136.62.96 who continues to vandalize Curt Schillings page.--Yankees10 00:50, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Done. And I got one of his accounts too. Wknight94 ^talk 02:15, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Sorry I took so long to respond, thanks.--Yankees10 16:33, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

86.160.26.102

I decline his unblock, but he really should have been escalated to a final warning before the hammer came down. Unless you believe he's a sock. Daniel Case (talk) 19:55, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

That area is rife with socks - Scibaby (talk · contribs) and such. And there were more than enough edits to warrant a block. What the hell is with that unblock request anyway?! "I have broken my leg"?! The intent was pretty clear there - to see how long it would take to be blocked. Wknight94 ^talk 20:29, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Riverside High School for Engineering and Design - slide show GIF

Hi. I hope you are having pleasant holidays.

I just stumbled across Riverside High School for Engineering and Design (in Yonkers, where a new anonymous user has been doing a lot of edits related to public schools).

I've never before seen a Wikipedia article illustrated by a slide show. I don't like it, and I'm wondering if there is a policy (or a set of guidelines) on this sort of thing somewhere. (I haven't been able to find any such.) You know more about media usage than I do, so I figured I'd start off by asking you.

There's also a possibility that the slide show is a copyvio, but I haven't found it on the school website yet. --Orlady (talk) 22:09, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi, you too. I tweaked so it's not at the top-left. I still don't like it either but it's better than no image at all (I guess). You don't even need to find the full animated gif - if any of the individual shots are copyvio, then the whole thing would have to go. If you have a decent image program (which I don't in all honesty - although I may be getting one from Santa!), then you could probably separate the animated gif into individual images and re-upload. Wknight94 ^talk 03:14, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

major league franchises, etc

Hi!

i've just read about as much as i could of the HEEOOUUGE discussion you had here between 18-23 Oct and i have to say...you hit the nail right on the head with your first couple of paragraphs alone!

you see, i tried to re-start an identical discussion here about a week before you (11 Oct) but i guess we missed each other!

mine never really took off as much as yours, tho.

since you appear to be much better at arguing than me (i tend to go for the calmly-calmly approach, whereas the fuck you, this is what i think approach seems to work quite well for you!), here's the crux of my argument which you can use next time you argue with your detractors, because i think got omitted in your discussion:

my argument: there's no "NEED" for ALL previous incarnations of teams to IMMEDIATELY HAVE-TO-HAVE have their own articles; rather, if anyone WANTS to make a split-off article with the full info on, say, Brooklyn, they should be ALLOWED TO DO IT.

ie. there's no "NEED" for all 29 franchises to "HAVE TO" follow the example of Montreal, but we merely need to PROTECT THE RIGHTS of potential editors WHO FEEL THEY WISH to split off an article.

see!

if this one simple rule is followed, then such splits will happen gradually and naturally.

because i think that's what most of the detractors are afraid of - that if this "rule" is imposed, then all hell and damnation will be let loose. but no. as long as people have something to say on an old team, let them; if they dont, then we can always leave it for later and someone else who feels they can do it properly.

and i have to say, i got quite miffed at the contributor on your discussion who gave the proctor and gamble analogy, as i deal with this particular point on my page - that there IS a difference between sports franchises and all other kinds...the FANS.

anyway - i think your arguments helped, for now anyway, as the Brooklyn Dodgers article has at least been redirected to "History of the Dodgers" rather than to "LA Dodgers", which got overridden even after i'd tried to write a reasonably succinct version of it in Feb-Apr. keep up the good work.

hope i've helped!

Cheers, and take care!

BigSteve (talk) 23:01, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Well, I'm not sure that's my approach exactly... It was more that I was waiting for someone to give a good reason to oppose - one that even I could get behind - but I never heard one. I still don't like the "History of Brooklyn Dodgers" title, but it's as good a compromise as I could muster. It covers my main complaint of having older incarnations hopelessly and increasingly under-represented. I could not - and still cannot - understand the idea that having a separate article somehow tricks or misleads the reader into thinking it is a separate franchise. It's hard to say if your argument would alleviate that concern, but it is definitely an argument that should help pull a discussion to a middle ground, and I will use it in the future. For the "misleading" concern, one could direct the detractors to look at the existing Dodgers and Giants splits, and honestly say whether they sound misleading. I haven't heard anyone say they do.

Thanks for the advice! The key to a good discussion is to draw in as many people as possible. That way, you're more assured that you get the right answer - whether it's the one you wanted or not. Wknight94 ^talk 03:50, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Definitely - the more, the merrier! wisdom of crowds and all that! BigSteve (talk) 15:37, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Television Radio, episode 127

76.223.72.72 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) same pattern as before. WuhWuzDat 12:31, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Blocked for a few months. Wknight94 ^talk 14:36, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

EPISODE 128, "Television Radio goes to Skokie": 76.223.71.178 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). WuhWuzDat 15:46, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Blocked again. Wknight94 ^talk 16:12, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

216.124.113.16 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), If he's anything, it's persistent. WuhWuzDat 15:41, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Blocked yet again. Six months this time. Wknight94 ^talk 16:07, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Episode 130: 76.217.32.98 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) 19:35, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Weird, he even reverted himself a few times. Are they even bad edits? This guy confuses me to no end. Wknight94 ^talk 19:50, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Episode 131: 69.209.230.243 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). By the way, I just (semi-)unretired myself. WuhWuzDat 01:46, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Welcome back. BTW, are all of the edits bad? I see few are actually reverted. Wknight94 ^talk 02:16, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

I only reverted the edits to a single article, as I no longer have any access to TW. WuhWuzDat 02:20, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

He has returned, see 99.137.149.253 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) (was also a previous IP address for this smelly sock), and 69.209.208.74 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). WuhWuzDat 11:45, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Yet again, at 76.223.74.106 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). WuhWuzDat 19:42, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

And yet again at 69.209.206.232 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). WuhWuzDat 23:03, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Yet again at 69.209.216.124 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

And just a few minutes ago at 69.209.209.29 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Is there any possibility of turning his edit filter back on? WuhWuzDat 13:22, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

The problem is that filter was very server-intensive and he is not all that active. Wknight94 ^talk 14:58, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

69.209.198.10 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) He may not be all that active, but he is persistent. WuhWuzDat 18:02, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Yup, persistent: 69.209.219.252 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). WuhWuzDat 05:52, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Block

Can you permanently block the IP's 98.203.213.238 and 24.19.12.246. They are the same one removing images and adding false info to baseball pages, and its really getting annoying.--Yankees10 02:06, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

We don't permanently block IPs - like ever. But I gave both three months off. Wknight94 ^talk 00:29, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks hopefully this person stops now.--Yankees10 00:37, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Courtesy blanking

Hi. I have no idea what a courtesy blanking is, but you may want to look into this. It's a discussion that developed after I replaced Chris's warning on that project. Regards, Wutsje (talk) 15:06, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Happy New Year! (Or is it so new, after all?)

Happy New Year! You probably have noticed the OTRS ticket regarding newrochellenews.info. That website says "The newrochellenews.info website is a collaborative effort of the Huguenot and New Rochelle Historical Association, the New Rochelle Preservation Society and the City of New Rochelle, created to increase awareness, understanding and appreciation of the history and current life of the New Rochelle community."[1]

The Community Links list on that website (see the bottom of this page) names the city of New Rochelle as one of its links, but the link does not point to the actual New Rochelle city website at http://www.newrochelleny.com . Instead it points to a random page on the newrochellenews domain. A few of the "City Hall" links on the home page point to pages on the actual city website, but there is no link to the main city page, and some links are to the newrochellenews domain.

Another of the identified sponsors, the Huguenot and New Rochelle Historical Association, uses http://thomaspainecottage.org/ as its website. The organization appears to exist primarily or exclusively to maintain the cottage. Its domain registration is of long standing and appears straightforward: http://whois.domaintools.com/thomaspainecottage.org . The site's developer and maintainer is identified as insitefacilitation, incorrectly linked on the website, but findable at http://insitefacilitation.com/ . It's a small web design company in Torrington, CT. (See whois info.) Its website lists Thomas Paine Cottage as one of its clients.[2] Interestingly the e-mail address for membership queries to this association is painecottage@optonline.net

Insite Facilitation is also identified on the newrochellenews website as the owner of newrochellenews, but it's not named as a client on the insitefacilitation website.

The newrochellenews whois interesting: http://whois.domaintools.com/newrochellenews.info

The third identified sponsor, the New Rochelle Preservation Society, has a remarkably small web footprint, as indicated by a "New+Rochelle+Preservation+Society" Google search. (That restricted search turns up only its own domain and the newrochellenews.info domain.) Its website is at newrochellepreservationsociety.com -- which turns out to be a newly registered domain with the same anonymous registration data as newrochellenews. This site also claims to be maintained by insitefacilitation. The website has no information about the organization that it is supposed to represent, but it does have lots of malformatted nonworking links, as well as links to newrochellenews.info.

It may be a new year, but I have a strong sense of deja vu. I want to flag this domain as not confirmed to be a reliable source -- and there is no reason to think that newrochellenews can claim ownership of the images on it. Would you support me in this? --Orlady (talk) 15:39, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

100%. WP:SPS policy is pretty clear - anyone can start a web site. I suppose the OTRS ticket says we can use prose which also appears on their web site, but without more verifiability, such prose would be inappropriate. As for images, I'd be interested to get specifics from OTRS. Did they claim to own images that appear on their web site? I notice there are no images at Commons anyway - and really not many links to the site here either. Frankly, I'm not sure what the point of the OTRS was. Wknight94 ^talk 18:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

I have a hunch that someone we know initiated the OTRS in order to give undue credibility to their self-published content. Additionally, I perceive the city/organization sponsorship that is claimed on the website as an attempt to endow this content with a mantle of reliability.

I'm happy to see that they self-published, instead of trying to get Wikipedia to accept their content, but I anticipate that they will be trying to use the OTRS -- and the sponsorship claims -- as justification for wholesale-inserting their unsourced text into Wikipedia articles. --Orlady (talk) 19:06, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, a future attempt sounds plausible. It would probably be best to clean up the current links to that site - remove any poorly-sourced material, and other stray links in the external links sections - and then keep an eye out for future links. It might also be good to remove all the individual talk page OTRS messages and consolidate them into a list somewhere. I don't remember if Talk pages contribute to Google weighting, but the messages aren't really appropriate if the articles don't actually have content from that site anyway. I'd be curious what the OTRS person's thoughts are on placing so many messages despite there being so few actual links to the site. The whole thing seems a bit peculiar to me. Wknight94 ^talk 19:27, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Indeed. I found the fire associated with the smoke. --Orlady (talk) 22:44, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Nice job! I see you deleted some - I deleted the rest. Wknight94 ^talk 23:27, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I got distracted by real life. --Orlady (talk) 00:29, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

I think the Chinese New Year is still "new," but this looks like Auld Lang Syne. This is just a heads-up; I know it's a duck, but so far there's not much wrong with the way it's quacking. (The contributions are reasonable ones.) --Orlady (talk) 18:40, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm, all it's doing is categorizing? Maybe it's a slightly different bird. Anhinga perhaps? WP:SPI might be worth a try to make sure. Wknight94 ^talk 18:48, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Edits

Re: New York Jets page: Would be glad to discuss out debate over valid sources on a talk page. I apologize for any inadvertent Talk Page Guideline violations, as this is my first time using any talk pages (well, second time--I just posted on Baseball Bugs' talk page). —— Playsmarts (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 05:33, 9 January 2010 (UTC).

Thank you for starting the discussion--its much appreciated, and I hope that we can hash this matter out once and for all. --Playsmarts (talk) 20:09, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Goodbye

As it has become painfully obvious, my contributions are no longer welcome or needed here. In light of this situation, I am leaving this screwed up bureaucracy for the conceivable future. Good luck, my friend and keep fighting the good fight. ILLEGITIMUS NON CARBORUNDUM WuhWuzDat 02:26, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I haven't kept up to date on the matter and generally prefer fire ant immersion to WP:RFC. To anyone caught up in a bad situation, I recommend just getting out of it and trying something else. There are even other sites entirely - I've been playing in Wikisource some lately. No reason to leave entirely because of one issue if you're willing to try another. Wknight94 ^talk 17:12, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Query on article deletion

Hi, I been working on the Baron Staffords and saw that you had previously deleted a page I was about to create The message says: 12:59, 19 August 2008 Wknight94 (talk | contribs) deleted "Edward Stafford, 3rd Baron Stafford" ‎ (G5: Creation by a banned user)

I just wanted to check there was no reason I can't continue with my page creation, ie it was down to the user, not to the content. cheers Rachelcgen (talk) 21:07, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

That is fine. Wknight94 ^talk 21:38, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Moved from above

Just wondering why you deleted the Juiceboxxx page. This man is amazing and I wanted to dedicate a page to him but wanted to check with you first. Amandabeck47 (talk) 16:36, 19 January 2010 (UTC)amandabeck47

Wow, you're in the WAY-back machine. That was deleted about 18 months ago! What part of WP:N does he meet now? Wknight94 ^talk 16:41, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Mets

I don't get what your signature has to do with the Mets.--Johnny Spasm (talk) 23:36, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Good grief. "A huge Mets fan"? He'll be chagrined... chagrined, I say... when you tell him. I'm not a Mets fan at all, and I got it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:48, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, you said "signature", not "name". There's where you threw us both off, with subtlety. ("Place it on Lucky Dan", e.g.) And beware of inspiring ideas. >:) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:42, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Should I colorize my signature? Will someone object because it's too many characters? Is it too "flash"? (An Aussie expression I learned recently) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:11, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

I've learned there is no limit to what people will object to. I can't imagine colorizing would upset anyone. I do it merely so I can find my own comments in long threads. Wknight94 ^talk 16:57, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, such as edit wars over whether to capitalize part of a title. If we could harness all that wasted energy, we could kiss the Middle East goodbye. So, is my color scheme reasonable? I have to ask, because my right-brain is underdeveloped. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:00, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Uh-oh, hopefully you mean kiss the Middle East problems goodbye? You're sure to catch plenty of flack for wishing the Middle East to go away! Wknight94 ^talk 17:02, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Not the Middle East itself, just the problems, yes. In contrast to the Yankees, who I do wish would just go away. And now you've given me another idea. Except they probably wouldn't like it if I embedded a smiling orange in my signature (or a baseball, or Bugsy). ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:47, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

You can probably get away with whatever color scheme you want - but images are generally a no-no. Wknight94 ^talk 19:00, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Even public domain images, I assume? It's the use of the image, not the image itself, that's kind of a technical issue with signatures, right? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:22, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes. Among other things, it would necessitate fully protecting the image forever so that your signature doesn't become the naughty body part du jour on 1,000 different pages! Wknight94 ^talk 21:15, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Hadn't thought of that. Too much assumption of good faith for my own good, I reckon. Still, it would be interesting to do it this way: 00:54, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

I think it is fair to say that a guy who made the team out of Spring training, and was demoted back to the minors with a .156 batting average didn't live up to expectations.--Johnny Spasm (talk) 01:54, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Or someone else got healthy or <insert some other explanation here>. How do you know they had expectations for Jones at that time? Need a source. Wknight94 ^talk 02:06, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

I need a source for "He was expected to bat higher than .156"?--Johnny Spasm (talk) 03:25, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

You need a source for anything anyone disputes. If he only made the team because Swoboda tweaked his ankle in Spring Training and someone else had the flu on opening day, then saying he did not meet expectations is untrue. Maybe hitting .156 was exactly what they expected but it was the best stop-gap a terrible 112-loss team could come up with. That's a far cry from what was written IMHO. The only undisputable facts that I am comfortable with - given the information available there - is that he was hitting .156 in early May when he was sent back to the minors. No presumptions there. Wknight94 ^talk 10:53, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Stating that fact keeps it in bounds and lets the reader draw his own conclusions. As far as stop-gap things go, I'm thinking of some early-Mets comments from a sarcastically written baseball card book. Like they were listing the records of the Mets starters in 1962, and the one with the fewest losses they referred to as the "stopper". And there was something about Jay Hook fittingly belonging to a rocket club. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:23, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Question

Is it possible to restore the edit history of articles that were deleted and re-created. For example I created the article for Jarrett Brown in late June or early July, then it was deleted, and was re-created about a month later. I'm pretty sure it was done to the Jerraud Powers article because if you look at the history it was created on December 27, 2008, deleted per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jerraud Powers, re-created on January 6, 2009 and the old edit history was re-added. So im just wondering if it can be done to Jarrett Brown.--Yankees10 22:58, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

I restored the old edits. Jarrett Brown was actually deleted twice, so the history looks pretty odd now, but it should be fine. BTW, you can see the deletion log most clearly here. The other article's is here. Wknight94 ^talk 00:25, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Ok thanks--Yankees10 00:27, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Do you think you can do Jamaal Anderson too?--Yankees10 00:35, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Done. That's an even bigger mess. Wknight94 ^talk 00:47, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Oh wow your right, I wish I didnt keep re-creating it back then, thanks.--Yankees10 00:51, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Jerry Grote

More ownership issues over on Jerry Grote.Orsoni (talk) 05:52, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

New message

I'm not sure how this forum thing works Wknight94, but deleting a repeating banner of "NIGGAS ARE BAD PEOPLE" from the contents pane is not vandalism. I'm going to assume that the message you sent me was sent in good taste, but undoing your last action was the only way to remove the banner. Thankfully its gone now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rhymel (talk • contribs) 05:38, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure which edit you are referring to but I see where it could be a misunderstanding. That vandalism was most easily fixed by clearing the browser cache, not removing the template altogether. But it's a technical issue that has since been resolved. Sorry for the confusion. Wknight94 ^talk 15:44, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Tags Question

Per the page, it shows a tag called "test edits". I assumed this tag was still in use, since unlike some of the lower tags in the list, it doesn't say "This tag is inactive." Yet, I can not find any results when I search for it, and I do not have anything hidden. On a hunch that the tag was disabled or broken, I ran a search on all articles with the text "Headline text" and got 3,079 results. This is the default text for the button, adding == Headline text ==. to the page.

I then asked about this on the Help desk, and another user discover that the tag had been turned off. It seems that you might have done this, being an edit filter manager. I am wondering if there was ant particular reason for such? If there is someting broken with the filter, I undertand. If not, it may be helpful to turn it back on. Not sure if I should take this to Wikipedia talk:Tags or not, but I figured I would ask you first. --Avicennasis 22:11, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

At the time, the edit filter performance was poor so I shut a few unnecessary ones off. If things are better now, it can be turned back on. You could mention it at WT:EF. Wknight94 ^talk 23:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

I have done just that. Thanks for all your help! --Avicennasis 01:45, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Jerry Grote

I still think you're wrong, and brought the debate up at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Baseball--Johnny Spasm (talk) 00:10, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Funny how you said we'd spent too much time on it already. WP:TE. Wknight94 ^talk 02:02, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

User talk:92.3.201.173

Looks as if he doesn't want TP priviliges either... raseaC^{talk to me} 16:43, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Indeed. Taken care of. Thanks. Wknight94 ^talk 16:45, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Tara Correa-McMullen

An article that you have been involved in editing, Tara Correa-McMullen, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tara Correa-McMullen. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. --Bejnar (talk) 21:59, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Jack Clark

I think I just assumed that it was not a valid image because it was a new editor and a lot of new editors dont know that the images have to be free and they upload pictures that are not valid. The picture is fine though right?--Yankees10 16:50, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Please help with an edit filter problem

I can't figure out what caused this editor to set off the filter. None of the watch words seem to appear in either the lines he added or the whole article before or after. Am I reading the code wrong? Either way, this filter has been set off twice in the past few days, and is very difficult to work with because even false positives are still often controversial edits that I'd be hesitant to add myself. —Soap— 01:22, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

I figured out the problem. Send me an email if you want a copy of my explanation. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 04:18, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Sigh, I should have looked around some more... Shirik explained the problem exactly on at Wikipedia talk:Edit filter#Filter 17. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 04:21, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Rich_wiki.jpg

Hi. Can you tell me why Rich_wiki.jpg was deleted from Richard Warren's page? I supplied all the necessary permissions months ago and those permissions still apply. Thanks Cronk69 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 06:56, 8 March 2010 (UTC).

Apparently OTRS did not receive your permission. You will want to ask at Commons:COM:OTRSN (I don't have access to OTRS). Wknight94 ^talk 12:09, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Request

Can you delete Glenn Murray (1930–40s outfielder), according to this Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Glenn Dale Murray, Sr. it was supposed to be deleted but for some reason never was.--Yankees10 01:02, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks--Yankees10 01:10, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Yep, done. Odd. I'll ask NW to make sure he didn't leave it for a reason. Wknight94 ^talk 01:14, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the reverts on the Somers, NY page. I didn't see the edits that were made. What happened there? MiracleValerie —Preceding undated comment added 20:23, 10 March 2010 (UTC).

They were done by a banned user, and therefore were undone. Wknight94 ^talk 20:34, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

AIV

Hello! I'm have a question concerning AIV (see this diff). I was just wondering why my 74.218.193.178 submission is not applicable here? Thanks if you can explain this to me. Cheers!☮ —Ecw.Technoid.Dweeb | contributions | talk 14:21, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Ordinarily, AIV is to stop a current or persistent case of vandalism. The edits from 74.218.193.178 were around an hour old so it wasn't particularly current. And before that, the previous edits were about six weeks earlier so it wasn't persistent. It's doubtful blocking that IP would have achieved anything. Wknight94 ^talk 14:31, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Woops, now I see I forgot to fix my time settings for daylight saving time so I guess the edits were current after all. Still, the edits have ceased so the IP didn't need to be blocked after all. Wknight94 ^talk 14:34, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your explanation. Cheers!☮ —Ecw.Technoid.Dweeb | contributions | talk 14:35, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Wknight94 (talk | contribs) deleted "EnergyMap.dk"

Dear Wknight94,

I just learned that the page Energymap.dk was deleted due to a G11 violation. ---> 14:45, 6 March 2010 Wknight94 (talk | contribs) deleted "EnergyMap.dk" ‎ (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion)

We created the page in good faith, it was also the authors first article in Wikipedia and it was not our intention to violate any regulations. Of course we want to respect the terms of Wikipedia and your deletion also seems rightfully. We hope it would be possible to temporarily restore the article and we will do our best to re-contribute an article in a manner of which is fully on Wikipedia terms.

Energymap.dk is a NGO and non-profit organization, and any funding that should be addressed to the project, is put in to the aim and work of keeping the website Energymap.dk running and up to date.

EnergyMap.dk was established when the largest NGO organizations in Denmark, within construction, agriculture and food, energy, wind power and the Renewable Energy Network (part-founder) formed a climate consortium, aiming at facilitating international collaboration in the form of joint research and development opportunities within clean tech, and sharing this knowledge worldwide.

As mentioned, we would very much like to re-contribute the page, in a manner which is on Wikipedia terms. It would therefore be highly appreciated if the article is temporarily restored to the EnergyMap user space, enabling a full review of the article, where we will address those problems that led to deletion in the first place.

Would you please temporarily restore our article?

Best regards

EnergyMap (talk) 12:15, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I've restored EnergyMap.dk. You should especially make sure that it meets our notability guidelines, including reliable third-party references. By the way, you may want to change your username since it implies that an entire company is using one account (see m:Role accounts). If I recall correctly, that is how I came across your article to begin with. Good luck. Wknight94 ^talk 12:56, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Birth place

I'm all for staying away from that war. When he first sent me the message saying he was removing birth year, I sent him basically the same warning you sent me. It wasn't until I noticed that he was also removing birth place from the opening line of articles that I began reverting edits. That I am certain is wrong. However, your advice is noted, and I will heed it.--Johnny Spasm (talk) 09:55, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Again, I'm not even all that concerned about the dates: it's the fact that he has also removed birth places from the opening line that concerns me. That's a new argument that I've never seen before. Have you?--Johnny Spasm (talk) 10:51, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Ack

		The Admin's Barnstar
		For being a highly active long-timer (on AIV)... and (unlike me) still manage to do even more CSD work. :-) -- Mentifisto 16:20, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Ha, thanks! Actually most of my deletions are from WP:BAN enforcement and WP:UAA spam pages. I should do more CAT:CSD work myself... Wknight94 ^talk 16:31, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Repeated vandalism of Gary Busey.

209.68.98.89 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) was blocked a couple of weeks ago, and is right back to vandal edits changing Gary Busey's birthname to nonsense. 98.192.185.110 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) has also done this at least twice in the last week. May I ask you at least block the first user again, and if you can block the second one I would appreciate it. Should I or someone request a semi-protect of a week or two? This seems to work in getting the IP vandals to lay off. This is so frustrating to me because I use my IP address at work, where I cannot log in. And I see IP vandals repeatedly warned and never dealt with while they continue to ruin Wikipedia as a valid source for information. Anyway...I'll shut up now. Any help and/or advice you can provide would be appreciated. Thank you very much. Trista (User Triste Tierra - cannot log in at work) 24.176.191.234 (talk) 19:08, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for blocking the first one. AIV just blocked the second one. Trista 24.176.191.234 (talk) 19:33, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I blocked both and protected Gary Busey. Wknight94 ^talk 19:34, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

BNP

Hi, I was wondering what are the options for the article, one disrupting editor has gone and there are requests to unlock on the talkpage, I have been looking for a better option but nothing has come from that yet and see my objection to unlocking as pretty pointless , one user SlaterStephen supports 1RR , all editors have had a time to calm down, it is time I think to throw it open again, your thought or comment are welcome on the talkpage, regards. Off2riorob (talk) 00:06, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

I went ahead and unprotected. Try WP:RFPP if things flare up again. Wknight94 ^talk 00:34, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks WK. Off2riorob (talk) 08:35, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Signpost

This might be of interest:[3] Shall I post it on the project page? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:47, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Probably not. There was probably a method to how they chose who they want to interview. You famous folk! Wknight94 ^talk 11:48, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Deletion review for Wikipedia logo

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Wikipedia logo. 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. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 16:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Does this look suspicious to you? user みや東亞

みや東亞 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

I could swear that I came across a long term sock account with chinese or japanese characters tagging his own sock accounts earlier today, but I didn't notice the standard LTV name. May be nothing, but since I had remembered your name as one of the blockers of the socks I figured I'd run it past you. Cheers. Syrthiss (talk) 14:27, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Nipponese Dog Calvero (talk · contribs) socks do that - repeating old edits and re-tagging his own socks. I am not familiar enough to recognize user:みや東亞 though. Wknight94 ^talk 14:41, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Ok, since I am neither I'll just let it shake out from normal process then. Thanks! Syrthiss (talk) 14:53, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Are you sure that was Jonathansamuel?

I went on to make the edit, which looked simple enough, but I have no experience with the sockpuppeter and wouldnt know how to spot signs of his editing. The way they waited and made 10 dummy edits does looks suspicious, though, so youre probably right. —Soap— 17:08, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, that's what Jonathansamuel does. Becomes autoconfirmed ASAP and then edits one of a couple different pages. It's him. Wknight94 ^talk 19:13, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

The Improvisatore

Hi. I have been advised I should contact you about this article and its talk page. I have actually already had extended discussions on the subject here. I assumed everything was OK but I have just seen a message that I should contact you. -- Ipigott (talk) 16:26, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Where did you see a message? I only see my ID on Zzuuzz's talk page (where you linked), and it looks like the issue was resolved there. Is there more? Wknight94 ^talk 17:26, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

It's here. -- Ipigott (talk) 11:17, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh. No, that just says I deleted the talk page at the time. I don't need to be contacted. You're fine. Wknight94 ^talk 12:05, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Well thanks for telling me I'm fine but the message says very clearly "If you are recreating a page similar to the previously deleted page, or are unsure, please first contact the deleting administrator using the information provided below." I have every reason to suspect that the page I was about to create would be similar or perhaps even identical to the one that was deleted as I wanted to add WikiProject Denmark, etc. But on the basis of what you say, I'll ignore such messages in future. -- Ipigott (talk) 13:18, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Template:Jeezy

Can you move Template:Jeezy to Template:Young Jeezy. Young Jeezy is his name.--Yankees10 16:00, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks--Yankees10 16:29, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Gift

For exploding my watchlist with WildBot tags. :-D KV5 (Talk • Phils) 12:07, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Ha ha, sorry! I love WildBot and wish it just automatically checked all articles, but until that happens, I have to summon it one-at-a-time apparently. Wknight94 ^talk 12:09, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Is no problem at all. I just checked my watchlist one last time before clocking in at work, and I had 55 or so new changes from all of the award articles! Thanks for doing that, btw. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 12:48, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Template policy discussion

You are invited to help consider a common template policy for all WP:SPORTS biography articles at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Sports#Template_policy_discussion.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:39, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Iachetta

Iachetta (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Another Liebman sock, or pretending to be. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:29, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Jane Webb article

Hi there. I was going to create an article about voice actor Jane Webb, but it seems that a page entitled "Jane Webb" has already been deleted twice; first by you, then by NawlinWiki.

Was the page you deleted about the same person, or a different one? If the same one, why was it deleted?

Wrightaway (talk) 17:35, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

They appear to be junk pages - unrelated to each other or any voice actors. (One was about someone's friend, and one was just gibberish). Create away! Wknight94 ^talk 18:09, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Deletion review

Hi, Wknight! Just to let you know that a deletion discussion you commented on has been taken to DRV. Those who argued the opposite way to you have already been selectively notified by someone else, so it's only fair that you get the head's-up as well. The relevant page can be found here: Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 May 11#File:The Time of Angels illustrative image.jpg ╟─TreasuryTag►Africa, Asia and the UN─╢ 18:10, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Deletion review for Takehiko Bessho

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Takehiko Bessho. 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. Aphaia (talk) 01:44, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Re:File:Kovpak.jpg

Hello, Wknight94. You have new messages at Fastily's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-FASTILY ^(TALK) 04:57, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

"Targeting his user space content"

May I just point out that since there was a truly overwhelming consensus that his userspace content was inappropriate, it is scarcely fair to single me out for nominating it? Best, ╟─TreasuryTag►First Secretary of State─╢ 14:22, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Wow, looks like you're right - the whole community has turned spiteful and mean against Norton! That's not something to be proud of being part of. Leave the guy alone. Wknight94 ^talk 15:11, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, I have to say I am proud of having initiated the deletion of what I42 (talk · contribs) rightly described as, "a gross violation of WP:NOTWEBHOST," but regardless, I think that to single me out for that is unfair, given the 10+ editors who also thought the pages should have been deleted. Or have you made similar statements against them? ╟─TreasuryTag►Woolsack─╢ 15:13, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

I heard you the first time. Wknight94 ^talk 15:35, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

You didn't hear this bit the first time, because I didn't say it... Or have you made similar statements against them? ╟─TreasuryTag►cabinet─╢ 15:36, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

You feel singled out - I got it. So noted. Maybe now you can imagine how Norton feels? Wknight94 ^talk 15:43, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Persistent unsourced-osity

Could you check this user's activity, when you get a chance? I'd recommend blocking. They've been warned repeatedly, and ignore same. Thanks much.

And btw, if you've not seen on your watchlist, I finally got down to southwest Florida in April and took lotsa pictures. Gorgeous weather the whole 4 day trip. Cheers! --Ebyabe (talk) 18:35, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Oh? Is everything from that IP nonsense? I notice some un-reverted edits. I'll have to check your pictures! Wknight94 ^talk 20:14, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Yep, it's all the same, undocumented stuff about the families of these people. Very odd and monomaniacal. The trip was rather roundabout. Here's a link to where I describe the route, so's you know what places to look for photos at. :) --Ebyabe (talk) 00:02, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Larchmont in popular culture

I see you have deleted the Larchmont in popular culture section from the Larchmont article. This section is comparable to pop culture sections found in other town articles (i.e.) Scarsdale, N.Y. . In fact Scarsdale's list is far longer and ridden with either unsourced claims or claims that are tagged dubious. Why have you decided to pick on Larchmont? Is there a wikipedia policy regarding pop cultural reference sections, because a lot of articles have them. Wlmg (talk) 02:55, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

That Scarsdale section isn't much better, but at least it includes a few cases where movies were filmed in Scarsdale or set in Scarsdale or something more substantial. Including a list of every time anyone in any show or cartoon strip, etc., mentioned the word "Larchmont" or "Scarsdale" - in any context - is silly. And I am not picking on Larchmont - I only noticed because someone added yet another razor-thin connection. Connections that obscure should be taken out of every article, not just Larchmont. It makes us look like a joke. Wknight94 ^talk 11:52, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Rewrite of Albany, New York

Noting your involvement on the Albany, New York article, I'd like to invite you to help out on the rewrite if you're interested; my plan is to bring this to FA status. I also added you on {{maintained}} template; feel free to remove yourself if you don't want to be there, however. upstateNYer 21:20, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

There you go

		The Socratic Barnstar
		Per your comment at the Giano Community Ban thread. Well said. LessHeard vanU (talk) 15:57, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

[4]

Heh, thanks. If I had infinite free time, I would investigate exactly who started all of the various Giano battles but a.) there are too many to count and b.) I'm scared what I would find. Wknight94 ^talk 19:03, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Revision to Sid Meier's Alien Crossfire and Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri articles

I noticed that you have revised either Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri or Sid Meier's Alien Crossfire.

I intend to revise those articles following the Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Article guidelines. There are more details on the discussion pages of those articles. I'd be interested in any comments you have. It would be best if your comments were on the discussion pages of the two articles.

Thank you.

Vyeh (talk) 16:43, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Mark Davis

Sorry about the page moving of Mark Davis (NBA) and Mark Davis (1980s NBA player) which contradict the previous WP:RM discussions. I didn't notice about that until after I moved them. But I still think those articles shall be moved and I have started a proper steps for requesting a move in their talk pages. — Martin tamb (talk) 17:44, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, thank you. If guidelines are different now, so be it, but a WP:RM should be done at a minimum. Wknight94 ^talk 18:20, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Note

A file which you previously commented on has been nominated for deletion [5] – ╟─TreasuryTag►Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster─╢ 08:19, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Photo of Rameses

Hey mate! I reverted your switch on the Memphis page, because your photo is already shown in the gallery section. You can swap the spots if you want, I just chose the other image because it gave a closeup of the person in question, and because it fitted better in that particular spot. Beyond that, I don't really have a preference. Awesome shot, by the way. Regards, Night w (talk) 01:24, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

I can see showing a closeup of the person in an article about the person. But the context here is the "colossal" statue, so I thought it would be good to show the colossal'ness of the statue. File:Ramses II colossal statue in Memphis 2010 3.jpg does a good job of that too with people nearby. But you don't get an idea of the size of the statue with the head closeup that is there now. Wknight94 ^talk 01:41, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

The section is supposed to be about statues of the person in general, the colossus being one of them. At the moment though, there is only one other statue discussed, which is the one that's supposed to be going into the new museum in Cairo. You can swap the images around and move the closeup to the gallery, but it's only that the rotated version (that's vertically longer) seemed to cut across multiple sections. But what happened with the gallery section and the map? I think my computer's view must be different to yours. Night w (talk) 01:54, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

The gallery and map look fine now. Previous to my edit, it was the big map left-aligned, then the notes and reference sections crammed into a small column to the right of the map, then the gallery of pictures crammed into another small column to the right of that. It looked the same in Firefox and IE7 on my computer. Maybe because I am running at 1440x900 resolution? It looked bizarre. Wknight94 ^talk 02:57, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm on a smaller resolution, I think that must be it. Were you going to make the swap with the photos? Or add the one you linked to above (with the feet showing)? Night w (talk) 06:01, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

No, I've lost interest. You can do what you want. Wknight94 ^talk 11:01, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

request deleted article copy

Could you please email or provide a userified copy of the version of Beechwoods Cemetery (New Rochelle, New York) which you recently deleted. Its deletion is disrupting disambiguation structure for cemeteries of this name and similar ones. I already restarted the article but seek to develop it better. thanks. --doncram (talk) 12:20, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Hey...

Hey, Wknight, I was working on designing a Wiki page (actually my first ever) for a non-profit theater company in my user-page until I would have it worked out enough to then create an actual page...Noticed you deleted it. I understand if you thought I was trying to advertise something in an inappropriate way, but at least if that's the reason, can you give me a solid explanation? And is there anyway to get all of that stuff you deleted back so I can edit it? Yes, I'm noob with this, but...I don't know. MagisterEquitum (talk) 22:40, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Ok, yeah, I just looked at the Deletion Policies and didn't see any criteria for why a user page would get deleted due to "promotion". Also, just f.y.i., "Promotion" in this case would be "promotion" of a non-profit funded largely in part by Chicago Public Schools. And I'm an unpaid volunteer. So if somehow I violated a rule to such a degree that you needed to just delete everything without notifying me first, I'd love to have that rule pointed out to me. That'd be fantastic, and then I'd happily edit it to make sure I'm not abusing Wikipedia's rules. Thanks MagisterEquitum (talk) 22:48, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Just noticed this in the Deletion Review page:

"content held in userspace without evidence of intent to work on it may also be nominated for deletion."

You may not have noticed, but at the top of my userpage it said "Very much a work in progress, feel free to edit" because some of the Board Members of the group have a link to it and were going to fact-check to make sure it was correct. Let me know. Thanks. MagisterEquitum (talk) 22:53, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Ah, after perusing, I see why you deleted my page. G11, or: "Pages that are exclusively promotional, and would need to be fundamentally rewritten to become encyclopedic. Note that simply having a company or product as its subject does not qualify an article for this criterion." That's why I was working on rewriting it. I'd be happy to make my page private OR move it completely off Wikipedia until it's Encyclopedic. So, for now, I'd really appreciate having the text back. Thanks. MagisterEquitum (talk) 22:57, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Just wanted to add that the speedy deletion was without any warning. I was alternating between wikimedia and my user page (as I added photos) and it was gone. Thanks MagisterEquitum (talk) 23:04, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Go ahead and block the MagisterEquitum. Did not realize it was case-sensitive, my mistake. Magisterequitum (talk) 16:35, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Okay, it's done. Now people won't get confused, so thank you. Wknight94 ^talk 16:39, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

deleted article, User:Grigoriu

About the article on GODS FFLV Enterprise Architecture Framework, you have deleted

The reason I put this article in, is because there are similar ones about Enterprise Architecture frameworks which can be equally thought as "advertisement" or products. At least you should have a consistent policy in this respect. It is true that is a Framework I conceived, but it is for the public benefits, as the Common licensing states, and it's for public use as are all other examples of frameworks accepted in your Wikipedia: OBASHI, CLEAR Framework for Enterprise Architecture, Information FrameWork (by Roger E), Integrated Architecture Framework (IAF) - from Capgemini, not to mention Zachman which is a framework promoted by a single person after all.

There are categories called Enterprise Architecture Planning, Enterprise Architecture, Enterprise Architecture Assessment framework etc in which my entry is qualified for.

The EA framework is described in a book I published in US and elsewhere. I have at least two reviews of the Enterprise Architecture book, by well known fora as IASA and BPTrends saying that the presented EA framework is valuable.

http://www.iasahome.org/web/home/blogs/-/blogs/review---an-enterprise-architecture-framework-3rd-edition

http://www.iasahome.org/web/home/blogs/-/blogs/review---an-enterprise-architecture-development-framework

http://www.bptrends.com/publicationfiles/03-08-BR-Ent-Arch-Grigoriu.pdf

There are documents on the web explaining it. After all this is no product or advertisement but a public concept which has some following. So what are the conditions to be accepted? Public use or knowledge of? This was a promotion for the public benefit not mine because the information becomes public and may not even be referred back to me.

But, in the end, you should have given me (and the article) a chance to explain all this to you before deleting.

I am not even sure that this message will reach you or how will your answer, if any, will reach me. I am not sure how to reach a talk page.

So long

grigoriu@hotmail.co.uk

"Speedy deletion nomination of User:Grigoriu

A tag has been placed on User:Grigoriu, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be unambiguous advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add on the top of User:Grigoriu and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Wknight94 talk14:51, 13 July 2010 (UTC)"

Mike Trout

I was just wondering if there was a possibility that you could delete the Mike Trout article for a possible rewrite? It currently re-directs to the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim minor league players page, and there isnt much on the page.--Yankees10 18:12, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Done. Wknight94 ^talk 18:21, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Ok, thank you.--Yankees10 18:38, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Long-term abuse report on Lemons&Limes

The long-term abuse project is currently being revamped and integrated with the abuse response project to provide a more effective and centralized project to effectively counter long-term vandalism. As part of this cleanup, old inactive reports are being deleted. I see that you updated the report on User:Lemons&Limes back in August 2009, but from what I can see, this user is no longer active. Could you verify that he is no longer active so we can delete the report? Or, if he still is, please help us update the report. Thanks. Note:I'm watching this page, so you can just reply here. Netalarm^talk 13:28, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

I don't see any recent activity. Wknight94 ^talk 13:41, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Do you think it's been long enough for the report to be deleted? Netalarm^talk 14:12, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Sure. Wknight94 ^talk 20:07, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Along these lines ... Baseball Bugs suggested I ask you if you've seen Ron Liebman active recently, for the same reason (above project and stale reports). He thinks he saw Ron on the ref desk over the weekend. Have you spotted more of him recently? Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 19:48, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Last time I was sure it was him was ChiSox20 (talk · contribs) a couple months ago. He's not well, and he's not going anywhere I don't think. I haven't noticed ref desk edits. Wknight94 ^talk 20:41, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

New York Jets

What is the user writer2.0 up to there? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:57, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Splitting into History of the New York Jets hopefully? Wknight94 ^talk 22:08, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

File:Great Pyramid of Giza 2010.jpg

OK, I am now officially jealous. :) --Ebyabe (talk) 18:36, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Heh, yes, it was something. I wish we had more time at the pyramids. We (unknowingly) sacrificed time there in favor of seeing other stuff in the area. Wknight94 ^talk 19:04, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

71.3.20.47

Since 71.3.20.47 admits to being a sock of Spasm, should it be blocked for the 3 months also? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:28, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

If that IP starts editing, then yes, let me know. But he appears to be smart enough not to sock around the block. Wknight94 ^talk 17:08, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Truth to tell, at this point I don't know what he's up to. But we'll see. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:52, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Jason Leopold

Someone that may put Ron to shame[6]. Can something be done about this, por favor? A long block might be appropriate, to cool things down. I put in something at the admin noticeboard, but this is rather getting out of hand. Much grass. :) --Ebyabe (talk) 18:18, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Wow, that looks like a good one to keep a long way away from. Is there any merit to what he says? Could it really be the subject's lawyer? Wknight94 ^talk 20:45, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Even if there's merit to his claims, he's going about it so the wrong way. I don't blame you for not wanting to get involved in the mess. It looks like the IP has been blocked for a bit, which is good. It amazes me at how obsessive people can be. Like this, for example. Have a good weekend! ;) --Ebyabe (talk) 15:26, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Notification

Please see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Proposed_amendment, and the subthreads above it. You are being notified as you were one of the users who proposed or discussed the original sanction. Ncmvocalist (talk) 15:22, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

[Mount Cuba Center]

Please revert the article [Mount Cuba Center] back to the proper place [Mt. Cuba Center] It may seem strange but the official name is Mt. Cuba Center not Mount Cuba Center also it creates confustion with the Mount Cuba Observatory which is not affiliated with Mt. Cuba Center. I would change it but I am not quite sure how, please e mail me at fvsad@aol.com if you have any questions. Thanks, in advance! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fvsad (talk • contribs) 19:32, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Rick Reilly

FYI... I don't recall if you were involved in the Reilly discussion a year or two ago when Tanninglamp (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) kept adding some BLP-violating editorial. Some bozo decided to lift the semi-protection, and a "new" user inserted the very same paragraph today, which I reverted and have asked to have permanent semi-protection restored. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:41, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Sorry I missed this somehow. Looks like it was sorted out, eh? Wknight94 ^talk 00:28, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Things seem quiet since it was semi'd. And all things considered, I doubt it was Tanninglamp, it was probably that same idiot that likes to copycat other users. I had an apparent Liebman sighting on my page today, but it was probably an imitator. Zapped, either way. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:25, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

VortexHealing Page

I wanted to create a page about VortexHealing and noticed you deleted a previous page, so I wanted to ask you if I could create a new page. I'm new, so forgive any mistakes I made typing this.

Scvcat (talk) 22:35, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Sure, it's been three years and the main complaint was that the article was so low-quality. Wknight94 ^talk 00:27, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Hosiery

Aha! Throwing down the gauntlet, eh? (Or the mitt.) :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:43, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Bill Lowrey (musician)

I am happy to rewrite this article, is what was deleted in an archive on Wikipedia? I'd like to review the original text. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scalhotrod (talk • contribs) 18:58, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

It was mostly a copy of http://www.banjo-rama.com/2009/performers.htm. Wknight94 ^talk 19:36, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Right, but not all of it. So can you retrieve it or not? Scalhotrod (talk) 03:11, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

See Bill Lowrey (musician). Wknight94 ^talk 12:51, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, much appreciated! Scalhotrod (talk) 22:36, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Query

Hi. Just curious -- does the finding lead to an extension of the three-month block, or is there no effect on the 3-month blocked account? Thanks.--Epeefleche (talk) 22:43, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Next will be an indef if I catch him (again). But otherwise, I am fine with leaving it as-is. Wknight94 ^talk 23:53, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Your call, of course. I guess I would favor some impact myself. Otherwise, we are perhaps sending out a message that an editor -- even one in poor standing, as currently under a block -- can sock, without any impact whatsoever. I'm not sure if that is the message we would want to send. The other issue is that I can already see the appeal of your eventual indef ... "But, the longest block he had was 3 months, without any additional block after that ...". So, I guess I would come out in favor of some additional time, tacked on. But as I said, you're the expert.--Epeefleche (talk) 22:17, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Protection of Kim Ok-bin.

Hey Wknight, there's been a request for unprotection for this page, just thought I'd check with you first since you semi'd indefinitely though. Is User:InkHeart still using sock accounts? Cheers, · Andonic ^Contact 16:54, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Oh, I don't know. I lost track. Feel free. Wknight94 ^talk 19:08, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Alright, thanks. · Andonic ^Contact 22:10, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

T.v

Yes, indeed. I wasn't sure at first.

I've deleted, reverted, and blocked. What do you want to do about this (noting the deleted stuff)? --Orlady (talk) 02:08, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Looks less proxy'ish than usual, but probably not much point blocking. And the last time I asked for a checkuser in a similar situation, it was refused. Wknight94 ^talk 02:31, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

I also didn't think it looked "proxy-ish," but I figured you might see something I couldn't see. Thanks for sharing your thoughts. --Orlady (talk) 03:57, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Pam Bondi

Thanks for your help on the Pam Bondi article. It looks like people involved in the local politics of Florida are trying to manipulate the article. Chicken Wing (talk) 18:11, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Another sockpuppet of User:Television Radio

I think 76.217.36.145 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is yet another sockpuppet of User:Television Radio. He removed the navboxes from Kostner (CTA Congress Line) and California (CTA Congress Line), which from what I've seen on my watchlist is typical of his editing pattern, and the IP's are from the same location as the other IP socks from a few months ago. TheCatalyst31 ^{Reaction•Creation} 23:11, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Protection level of Template:Infobox revolutionary

Hi, can you please lower the protection level of this template? I'm only counting 332 transclusions with AWB, so I'm not seeing a need for full protection. Thanks. PC78 (talk) 12:57, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Done. Wknight94 ^talk 15:14, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Conflict of interest accusation

Hi Wknight94, somebody has posted at the conflict of interest noticeboard about you: Wikipedia:COIN#user:_wknight94. Smartse (talk) 09:52, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know. Wknight94 ^talk 11:53, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Pending changes/Straw poll on interim usage

Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:53, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Just curious

Is there some standard period of time after which vandalism reports are overlooked at AIV? VernoWhitney (talk) 13:46, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Not that I know of. None of those looked like imminent threats to me. Wknight94 ^talk 13:49, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

José Morales

I noticed you dab'ing some pages for José Morales, and realized something was up -- there's two baseball players named José Morales. I just moved José Morales (baseball) to José Morales (designated hitter) (the other being José Morales (catcher), and will need to redirect the former to the dab page. Sorry you did all that work for nothing. -Dewelar (talk) 16:50, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. Wknight94 ^talk 17:06, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Just thinking

About one thing and another. --Orlady (talk) 18:19, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Yep, good enough for me. Wknight94 ^talk 18:45, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

In regards to Moomoo531 (talk · contribs) and 193.188.117.66 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)

Thank you for your help with 193.188.117.66 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). I thought you would want to know, I have filed a SPI case on the user. So, if you have any comments, it would be welcome. --Wolfnix • Talk • 18:55, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Wolfnix has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can Spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

L.A. Wrigley

Hard telling where that unsourced comment about Lane and the by-then-deceased Bill Wrigley. It's possible there were issues with P.K. Wrigley, but according to Old Ballparks, an early 1990s book by Lawrence Ritter, Lane moved the Stars team to San Diego in 1936 strictly because he wasn't making money in L.A. The move worked, as the minor league Padres were around for three decades before the "major league" :) Padres came along. The move also came at a fortuitous time for the young Ted Williams. The second incarnation of the Stars came when the Mission Reds gave up trying to compete with the Seals and move south to L.A., where they played one year at Wrigley Field while waiting for Gilmore Field to be built. That second Stars team was owned by Robert Cobb, the originator of the Cobb salad. Operating the Stars as well as the Brown Derby restaurants were certainly Bob's "salad days". :) The shuffling around of the two Stars teams is an interesting subplot in itself. There was a basic core of teams that played in the same place for quite a few decades (the L.A. Angels, the S.F. Seals, the Oakland Oaks, the Portland Beavers, the Seattle Indians/Rainiers) and a few others that were vagabonds. As regards Wrigley Field and Gilmore Field, they were used as backdrops for Hollywood baseball films, so they can be seen today even they were demolished a generation or two ago. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:02, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Another interesting thing about the PCL was that at its peak, they used to play a season that was over 200 games long, starting in California in like February or March, and working their way north as the weather improved. Also, with a season that long, a team would come into town and play for a week. If a weak team faced a strong team early, it wasn't unusual to have one team start the season 7-0 and their opponent 0-7. That would be brutal. But a number of guys made a living in the PCL, which was "almost" a major league. For the west coasters, that was their main baseball interest. The NL and the AL were only paid attention to when the World Series rolled around. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:06, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

I'm surprised they even paid attention to the World Series when neither league had a team within 1,000 miles, right? Yeah, I bet in California you could pretty much play 365 games per year. Wasn't it L.A. Story where every time they drove by the bank, the sign said 72 degrees? If there is a source for Wrigley Jr. and Lane not getting along, feel free to add that part back in. I did find a reliable'ish book in Google Books saying Lane moved because of the rent. But the two places where it read to me like Wrigley Jr. raised the rent in 1935 ---- three years after he died! ---- definitely needed to be fixed. In searching for a source, I found numerous places that copied that info word-for-word, so now that misleading connection has propagated because of "us". Wknight94 ^talk 17:23, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

I think they read it with the same level of interest (or lack thereof) they would have about any other east-coast entertainment item. Maybe your fix will propagate? I made a change to an article recently and went to google and discovered that they had instantly picked up the change. That's how to spread bad information like it was a virus. I've never seen anything that says Lane had a problem with the Wrigley family as such, only that he moved for financial reasons. If he did have problems with the Wrigleys, it was probably over the rent, not over which brand of gum to chew or something. Reading about Lane Field is interesting. It was made of wood, and it sat like half a block from the Pacific Ocean, so with 24x7 exposure to the sea air, its boards were constantly having to be replaced. Lane probably got a volume discount from the nearest lumberyard. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:07, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Unblock

Thanks for the unblock, I'm not clear if I'm unblocked only to discuss at ANI, or also for normal non-AWB editing. Rich Farmbrough, 20:34, 30 September 2010 (UTC).

Personally, I'm fine if you simply agree to stop any batch editing as soon as you start getting objections about the edits. But I think people more familiar with you at ANI would like some further concessions regarding batch edits, so you should discuss things with them before any batch editing. As far as non-batch editing, I don't think anyone had objections about that, so feel free. That is my take anyway. Wknight94 ^talk 20:55, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks again. Rich Farmbrough, 21:14, 30 September 2010 (UTC).

Wknight94: Thank you for having the willingness to unblock Rich. Please could you nudge the unblock message on User talk:Rich Farmbrough downwards in the section, to just below the unblock request that got granted ("To join the discussions at ANI.") so that there is no question or doubt[7] in any editors' minds over the purpose for which the unblock was granted. —Sladen (talk) 14:36, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Uh, I'm not sure what you're going for there. Feel free to move whatever you want. Wknight94 ^talk 17:35, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

M Kelly

Good idea! (I agree.) Thanks, Pdfpdf (talk) 14:39, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

I've merged several like that over the years, and no one has ever complained. So feel free to do the same if you find similar situations. Wknight94 ^talk 14:50, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Page move disaster

If you have a moment, can you take a look at SilkTork's recent page moves regarding Arsenal and Arsenal FC? I first noticed this one, because the article Arsenal/Surrealist Subversion is on my watch list. He moved the talk page, but not the article, to a location which simply makes no sense. Looking at his contributions, I see that this was part of a long series of page moves I cannot even begin to attempt to sort out. So, I thought I had better bring this to the attention of an admin. I posted this on Anthony Bradbury's talk page earlier, but he seems to be out. Your thoughts? ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 23:50, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, quite the mess. Does it look better now? Wknight94 ^talk 00:21, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it looks like everything is back where it's supposed to be. Cheers! ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 00:52, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Another question, if I may, related to the above. Arsenal/Surrealist Subversion is the correct name of the publication, but the forward slash creates problems on WP. On the talk page, it is clear that it is read as a subpage of Talk:Arsenal, though this is not actually the case. I am considering moving the article to a title without the forward slash, just to avoid this problem. Does that sound kosher to you, even though the publication "officially" has the forward slash in its title? Thanks for your time and efforts. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 01:38, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm, doesn't seem worth the trouble. What would you move it to anyway? Wknight94 ^talk 02:23, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Putting my two senses in here, the way it is right now may look funny, but it works. It might be worth a footnote in the article explaining why it looks like a subpage. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:00, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I wasn't sure what to move it to, either. The footnote might be a better idea. Thanks. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 14:22, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Filter 218

Define overwrought in this context? Rich Farmbrough, 12:18, 2 October 2010 (UTC).

At the time, the filter system had limited processing power. If the load was too heavy, it would start ignoring edits at random. So while your date filter was consuming much processor time - seemingly for nothing - actual blatant vandalism edits were bypassing the filter. I don't know what the filter situation is these days. Maybe they have changed how it works. Wknight94 ^talk 13:11, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

While there is still a condition limit I would have been interested to know how many conditions it was consuming - I'll go back at some point and find out. The filter I recently fixed, for example was consuming 19 and mainly getting false positives. Funnily enough catching up with the X thousand items that filter was designed for was one of the things that got people annoyed. Rich Farmbrough, 19:02, 2 October 2010 (UTC).

Thanks!

I didn't realize that there were multiple Sean O'Sullivan's. Thanks for pointing that out to me. I usually double-check my links, but I apparently didn't that time. Thanks again!

Talkback

Hello, Wknight94. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Championships of the New York Yankees.
Message added 18:19, 4 October 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Armbrust ^Talk _Contribs 18:19, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Johnny Spasm

I don't know if you ever read it, but I left you a message on your bullpen account. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.3.20.47 (talk) 13:16, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

I read it. What I didn't bother telling you was that you were missing the point. A three-month block means a three-month block. It doesn't mean "just abandon that account and continue making the same edits as an IP, while not admitting any wrongdoing on your part". But I didn't expect that you would hear any of it, so I didn't bother. Now that your block has expired, I'll say it - whether you listen or not is up to you. Wknight94 ^talk 14:15, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Page moves

Point 4 in Wikipedia:Naming conventions (baseball players) says "If they were predominantly associated with different leagues (not including the modern American and National Leagues of Major League Baseball)..." Also I think a dash is preferable to a slash in page names. --Muboshgu (talk) 13:51, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

That naming convention sucks. Seriously. And I've never seen 1940s-50s anything. Wknight94 ^talk 14:31, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

I've never seen it with a slash before either. I think a dash would be more appropriate, no? --Muboshgu (talk) 16:42, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

I agree that the naming convention sucks. There is no reason that the NL and AL shouldn't be included there. By the by, Wknight, hope that this doesn't mean you're leaving us. — KV5 • Talk • 16:53, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

I've just had about enough of the narrow-minded thinking from that project. No one is using common sense and, frankly, very few of the people "in charge" there are writing any prose either. I took all the project pages off my watchlist and they can have at it. If Baseball-ref bullpen cited sources, they would be far-and-away the better site as far as baseball coverage. Wknight94 ^talk 16:59, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) A dash is for stating a range. Like 1952-1967. A slash is more of a connector - 1950s/1960s = 1950s and 1960s. In fact, (1950s and 60s baseball) would be better than (1950s-60s baseball) IMHO. Someone once suggested (played 1990-2008) as a disambiguation method. That may be better still. Anything but (born 1968) which is just awful and confusing. When someone sees "born 1968" in the search suggestions, they could think, "as opposed to what? Born 1967? How should I know when he was born?!" At least giving a wider range like 1950s/60s or "played 1990-2008" makes it clearer that it's the correct choice. Wknight94 ^talk 16:57, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

En-dashes are also used for disjunction; I'm pretty sure that counts. However, I understand your feelings. I do sympathize strongly, as I don't think we're using all available options before getting to birth year. That being said, I am trying to stay out of the drama over there at WT:MLB. I hope, after a time, that you'll reconsider and bring your considerable skills back to the project. — KV5 • Talk • 17:11, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

En-dashes, sure, whatever. Anything before the awful "born" disambiguator. That is just a terrible disservice to our readers. Another thing people forget about is that the readers come first. Just because one or two people personally feel a certain way, or are unfamiliar with certain facts, doesn't mean the millions of readers are the same. If only 100 people realize that K-Rod is Venezuelan (and I'm sure plenty more than 100 do - like the thousands upon thousands who are Venezuelan), that is 100 more than the number who know he was born in 1982 vs. 1983. But I closed up that thread at WT:MLB since no one seemed to be hearing me anyway, and kept responding with other irrelevant cases and fears about the future - as though once we change something, it can never ever be changed again. Totally narrow minded and I don't want to be associated. Wknight94 ^talk 17:26, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Understood. If you do change your mind... it's always a pleasure. Cheers. — KV5 • Talk • 17:46, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Melky Mesa

Can you please delete the re-direct page Melky Mesa? I'd like to start it from the beginning.--Yankees10 19:51, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Done. Wknight94 ^talk 20:03, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you.--Yankees10 20:09, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Gift

Heh heh, thanks. Wknight94 ^talk 15:13, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

User Col98umbus

Hello, You've blocked this user indefinitely for disruptive editing. As far as I can see, there were four edits and this user appears to be Michelle Kaufmann, the subject of the article. She appears to be upset about a possibly serious BLP violation, namely that the article said until very recently that her business went bankrupt, though the source says only that the business closed in an orderly fashion. Closing down does not necessarily mean bankruptcy. So, we have a new user, upset about possible BLP violations, unfamiliar with our policies, banned from editing. I have reached out to her by email. If she agrees to conform with Wikipedia policies, I respectfully request that you lift the ban. I will assist her with contributing toward consensus on this article if she wishes. Thank you. Cullen328 (talk) 23:11, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

If the user agrees not to persistently undo other people's edits without discussion, anyone is free to unblock him/her. Wknight94 ^talk 03:29, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Your note at ANI

Vandalism lasting 3/4 of an hours is a drop in the bucket. This edit, was there for four days until an IP blanked it a few minutes ago. Honestly, my gut feeling is that it's getting worse and vandalism is lasting longer. If I don't check my 6000+ (mostly biography) watchlist regularly, unsourced negative info and commentary and drive-by blatant vandalism can sit there for days. So, my commiserations, and I hear you loud and clear regarding pending changes. --Jezebel'sPonyo^{bons mots} 21:53, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

My point - and it was expectedly drowned out - is that the Sandberg vandalism should have set off alarms far and wide. A full 90% of the article was blanked out including all categories. If that's not being caught automatically, how can anything be? Wknight94 ^talk 22:04, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

That is so true, similar and worse are happening all around on articles some of them with only a couple of active watchers, it really is time to roll out pending on all BLP articles that are not front-line. The huggle warriors don't want it because they think they are doing ok without it, and doing a review is a thankless job as if you accept it you don't even get an increased edit count. I would just roll it out without consensus as a foundation tool and be done with it, but i'm a bit like that. Regards. ..I think the new version is ready and I thought it is rolling out ttoday or tomorrow but I can't remember where I saw it? Off2riorob (talk) 22:10, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

If we're serious about specially defending BLP's, it seems like we would want to do that. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:57, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Not that the point needs to be driven home, but I just found this bit of vandalism from April that was never comepletely reverted. This is a daily occurance for me. Oh well, I know I'm preaching to the choir here...--Jezebel'sPonyo^{bons mots} 03:02, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Sandberg

I'm ashamed to admit that Ryno is on my watch list but I overlooked that bizarre vandalism. Thanks for fixing. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:19, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Looks like I was offline during that interval. The vandals never sleep. Hey, what do you think of the idea of creating an extension to rollback rights, that I would call a "temporary block" right, to put a short-term cork in vandalism until an admin can look at it? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:24, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

I'd prefer the community regain enough sanity to make you an admin. Wknight94 ^talk 02:00, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Even as we speak, Vegas is taking bets on whether that comes first or the next Cubs World Series championship. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:25, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Article Deleted...

Hi there,

May I know why my article on (forTANK) was deleted? This is my first wikipedia article ever and it's discouraging to see it being deleted shortly after completion. This is a non-profit academic centre and I'm the deputy head of it.

Could you please send the text back to me (as I don't have another copy) and explain what do I have to do to make it publishable in wikipedia?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_think_tanks_in_the_United_Kingdom

Many thanks

Marv Marv2010 (talk) 12:53, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

If Wknight94 doesn't mind my doing a bit of talk page stalking, I should say that the text of the article cannot be returned to you, as it is a copyright infringement. However, since you presumably can still access the source from which you copied it, I don't see why you would need it to be returned anyway. In addition, the article was unambiguously promotional, and Wikipedia is not a medium for promotion or advertising. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:59, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, JamesBWatson, I agree. The "article" was basically a copy of http://fortank.com. Marv, I would also ask if you've honestly found other articles here that sound like that page: "forTANK is a network of experts coming from various disciplines that are here to provide insight on new forecasting methods....." They are "here"? Where? Wikipedia? This "article" was simply a collection of buzzwords that one would find in most any marketing brochure. How about just adding a sentence in Bangor University? Wknight94 ^talk 13:24, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

I do accept your view that the article needs editing, but I hope you would allow me to explain the following first: a) Re promotional material: forTANK is a NOT-FOR-PROFIT ACADEMIC centre and it's part of Bangor Business School, so the promotional claim is unfounded. b) Re Copyright Infringement: I'm currently the deputy head of the tank and the material I copied is my material. Please see the link here: http://fortank.com/the-tank c) I thought about writing an article on Bangor Business School (as the article doesn't exist) and including more info on forTANK in it, but would I still be able to link it to the list of think tanks in the UK? Thanks Marv —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marv2010 (talk • contribs) 14:52, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Can you find significant coverage of forTANK by reliable independent sources? If not, it fails WP:N anyway. Wknight94 ^talk 15:04, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

I guess if you define significant coverage based on the number of references and citations to the articles of our academics then the answer is yes, as our academics' work have been cited more than 1000+. The number is based on a "reliable and independent source" Harzing’s Publish or Perish software used in November 2010 - Please see http://fortank.com/publications. Hope this is sufficient to verify the notability of our think-tank. Many thanks. Marv —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marv2010 (talk • contribs) 19:17, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

He's overlooking the obvious signoff mode, which would be, "Many Tanks." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:30, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

I would appreciate a short reply to my previous request please. Thanks. Marv. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marv2010 (talk • contribs) 17:25, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

That means the members may be notable. But is the "think tank" itself mentioned in those publications? If not, then having an article for the group itself is not warranted. Wknight94 ^talk 01:32, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

The think-tank itself is not mentioned in these publications, but can't we argue that the notability of a certain group is the summative notability of its members? If this argument is plausible then forTANK should be as notable as the academics who work in it. Right? Marv —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marv2010 (talk • contribs) 02:33, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Pardon yet another talk page stalker here, but, per WP:NOTINHERITED, a groups notability is not inherited "up" from its members, just a a notable groups members are not automatically notable simply by membership in the group. WuhWuzDat 02:59, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

I concur. Wknight94 ^talk 03:50, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

I've posted some comments on Marv2010's talk page explaining some of our policies. I got an email from him, and have responded in detail, helping him (I hope) to understand our policies better, including notability, conflict of interest, reliable sources and copyright. Cullen328 (talk) 05:30, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

db-spam reverts private schools Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia

Thanks for your message about your reverts. I did reinstall some of the reverts in the Kuwait schools but I will revert those if not already done so and consider your suggestion of Wikipedia:AFD.

Many of these articles are quite plainly advertisements for private schools and if the community can't be relied on to make a common-sense judgement about them then I shall have to take the time to argue a case against them which is tiresome and I would have hoped unnecessary.

Is Wikipedia really committed to providing an entry for every school in the world (every church, every community group)? Or just the private ones? Why just the private ones? What are the criteria for making a school notable enough for coverage in an encyclopedia? Notable alumni? Notable contributions to education? Where does encyclopaedic coverage finish and advertisement start? The mention of gradings from commercial publications of the 'Good School' genre? Discussion of the school transport arrangements? Entry requirements? Fees payable? (Examples of all of these readily to be found).

I would have hoped common-sense judgement would have prevailed. Unfortunately not. Meanwhile a very great number of Middle East private schools are using Wikipedia as an advertising medium.

I grow increasingly discouraged with the quality and nature of Wikipidia's administration (all sheikhs and no pope one might say).

Nice pyramid. I grew up in Cairo pre-Suez and my first school was the Gezira Preparatory School 81.178.38.169 (talk) 06:21, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Added: I have undone my re-reverts except in one case (Gulf English School, Kuwait) which had already been deleted (I asuume by an administator) by the time I returned. I'll look out to see if an appeal is made there and contribute to the debate and see what the decision is before proceeding with the others. Gulf English School was no by no means the worst offender but I don't doubt its article was essentially an advertisement. There was already an advert template there and I'm pretty sure most of the article (save an amusing comment about the price of snacks in the students' canteen) was just a copy-paste of it's brochure.

Thank you for your time 81.178.38.169 (talk) 06:36, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

For WP:CSD#G11, the criteria is needing a total rewrite to become encyclopedic. I don't think that was the case for the articles you tagged (including the one that was deleted, which I disagree with). Usually such blatant articles were written recently with poor formatting and no references and no categories, etc. Many of the ones you tagged were originally written years ago, and maybe needed a {{npov}} tag, but not total speedy deletion. As for whether every school needs an article, that depends on who you ask. It is a highly contentious topic since I first arrived here. Wknight94 ^talk 11:44, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Joynt Scroll

You made no attempt to discuss the deletion before doing so. I recommend that next time you discuss and gain consensus beforehand. Wipkipkedia (talk) 11:16, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Perry Tole

Hi! I just thought I should stop by and ask that when denying a G12 when permission has been asserted or an OTRS pending tag has been placed, please remember to blank the article using {{subst:copyvio}} per Wikipedia:Copyright violations as oftentimes the permission is unusable or never comes through. Cheers! VernoWhitney (talk) 15:30, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Would you be interested in being an advisor about a documentary on the Panama Canal?

Hello, I noticed that you have more than ten edits on the Panama Canal article. First of all I would like to say thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. Secondly, I am writing to ask you if you would consider participating as an advisor to a group producing a documentary about the canal and its history. If this is of interest to you please drop me a note on my talk page. Thank you for your time. Psingleton (talk) 16:11, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Protection

The Semi on my user page was MUCH appreciated. Lets hope IP vandal sock fests like that dont happen again. Thanks again! I'm Flightx52 and I approve this message 06:45, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

My pleasure. Wknight94 ^talk 13:59, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Images of Kevorkmail

In the image of User:Kevorkmail had different pictures in my version they are different, so please do not delete my images. ArmOvak (talk) 14:06, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. But I will turn your attention to what I wrote there that this self made. ArmOvak (talk) 19:02, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Some pictures are not mine, but those that I have changed, their own. And you can submit a complaint the owners of those photos? ArmOvak (talk) 20:28, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Marty Lyons

I'm dealing with someone who has ownership issues with Marty Lyons. Care to get involved?

Vandalism of Kevorkmail

Dear Wknight94! User:Kevorkmail, which is now blocked, continues to make changes based on the vandalism. Under the rules of Wikipedia's party, which is blocked should not edit a Wikipedia article before it was unlocked. User:Kevorkmail be modulated articles based on IP-address 213.130.121.201 Take action, please! ArmOvak (talk) 15:53, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Travers Island (New York)

Can you cut and paste Travers Island (New York) that was deleted to my user page? --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 18:11, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

I really shouldn't. The banned user who kept creating it was known for misusing sources and using unreliable sources, etc. Hence why he was banned. Wknight94 ^talk 21:01, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Commons

I finally got around to using the Commons Helper to transfer a file: File:45thParallelMinneapolis.jpg Since you have lots of Commons experience, I wonder if you'd mind checking to see if I did it right and/or suggest a better way to do it? Thank you! ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:56, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Hey, great to see you made it over there. It's good for when you want a break from the childish drama - as long as you keep a few pages off your watchlist. Yeah, looks like that file is fine. I don't know where all the # characters came from, but no big deal. I see your picture gallery there has some photos of American statues, etc. You'll find statues are often copyrighted works, and the U.S. is not one of the countries that allows for freedom of panorama. Don't get too upset if they get whacked - standards are different here and I can always restore. Wknight94 ^talk 03:26, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

I saw that the Stevenson statue was marked for deletion and you copied it back. But is it valid within wikipedia either? I think I took that picture 5 or 6 years ago, and had no idea there was an issue with such. The other one I can think of would be the Floyd Olson statue, which is much older than the Stevenson statue, but for all I know it might be invalid also. Did you see any other statues? Also, I wonder if it would be just as easy to bounce a photo off my PC and just post the commons statement at the original. We'll see how things go. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:34, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Another possible problem could be the portion of the MTM statue that I uploaded. Again, I wasn't aware of this "freedom of panorama" thing at the time. There's also a painting from the Mall of America, but it has since been painted over, so I doubt anyone cares. The Spoonbridge and Cherry is a sculpture that gets photographed a lot. I don't know what its rules are. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:39, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

I haven't done much image admin work here, but someone told me (or screamed at me if I recall) that en.wp standards are different, and sculptor copyright is rarely considered. But even at Commons, there are exceptions to the exceptions - like if the statue was never copyrighted, or was copyrighted but the copyright wasn't renewed, etc. See Commons:COM:TAGS#United States. The problem with the Stevenson statue is that the sculptor is alive (although he'd likely disagree that that's a problem). Since he can be contacted (http://www.rickharney.com), you could always try to contact him and ask for permission. We even have some templates at Commons:COM:ET for such a request. For older statues, there are resources for trying to determine if it was ever copyrighted and if it was renewed (as required for copyrights in certain date ranges). As for "bounce a photo off my PC", I'm not sure what you mean, sorry... Wknight94 ^talk 04:09, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

I mean I would download it from wikipedia and then immediately upload it to commons. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:11, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Oh sure, that's fine. And as long as license and such is the same, and the file is categorized in Commons, the Wikipedia version can be deleted per WP:CSD#I8. Wknight94 ^talk 04:32, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Looking at commons a bit, I've come to realize that my photos are not really of the quality expected there. What's the easiest way to get them deleted? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:16, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Question Regarding Deletion of Capeeshxz/2Spot Communications

Hi Wknight94: Our teams wiki pages (Capeeshxz/2Spot_Communications, Jfeng15/Bloody_Bunny, Jfeng15/Unsleep_Sheep, Jamayliu/P4_&_the_Escape_Plan) were deleted for reason "G11". We are representing a legitimate company based in Thailand that has entered the US market. All pages were a work-in-progress (and hence created for our wiki user accounts). Could you please provide a better explanation for why our pages were deleted and any advice on how we can construct our page so it is acceptable for Wikipedia?

Thank you in advance for your help!

Best