Discussion. I think it it's best to keep discussions in one place. So my talk, your talk, or an article talk - I'll carry on wherever it started.
Talk page stalkers are welcome here - just join in any time you feel like.
Admin: I'm new to the admin business, so if I do any admin things that you disagree with, please don't feel you need my permission to revert or adjust them - just use your judgment. But please do let me know.
As I have pointed at at WP:ANI#Sri Lanka, you made a mistake in blocking User:Distributor108--the vandalism (adding of his name all over the article)--was done by an entirely different editor (User: Joelcres, who I assume is a throwaway sock of one of the other editors on that article). I've indeffed Joelcres. In the meantime, though, other editors at ANI have agreed with the more general block based on the disruptive attitude. It would help if you could comment there and/or at Distributor108's talk page as to whether or not, given the fact that the vandalism was not committed by this user, you still would have blocked indefinitely for other problems, I'd appreciate it. Qwyrxian (talk) 07:27, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I was having lots of technical problems with that page - every time I tried to do a diff or look at old versions, I was getting a server timeout. I'm a bit rushed right now, but I'll comment a bit later. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:09, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, I appreciate that, but there have only been 6 commentators in 4 days, so it's hardly collapsing under the weight of a blizzard - there's no reason to cut short the usual 7 days. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:52, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, there is a user, User talk:Hillcountries who is edit warring and vandalising articles and adding POV and information without references to back up his claims. I and a few other editors have have reverted them but he continues to edit war. I have warned him more than enough times, yet he continues, disregarding my warning as 'rubbish' and accusing me of 'POV pushing'. Can you please make him stop this disruption. Thanks--Blackknight12 (talk) 10:40, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Greetings, there was, at one point, a rap group in Newfoundland that rapped in the local dialect (a mix of Candian and Cork Irish). At various points in 2006-2007 (when the group was current) folks presumably tried to make the usual "garage band" articles, which were repeatedly deleted, and eventually a mod (who last contributed in 2009) "salted the earth" to prevent future articles.
Turns out that not only amateur-linguist-MV but also no-crap serious sociologists found the band interesting, and wrote about it in a few journals. I've taken the available bits and made User:MatthewVanitas/Gazeebow Unit. Is there any chance you could take a squint, and if appropriate "un-salt" the earth so this draft can move to articlespace? If she goes, I'll also try to track down the band and get a promo shot for CreativeCommons. Thanks for any assistance or referral (in my brief deviation from India, currently tackling Dalit and Sikh Dalit articles). MatthewVanitas (talk) 01:21, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, previous versions were typical non-notable band stuff with no suitable sources, but your new version looks significantly different - I've unsalted it. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:34, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks dude! For future reference, is there any more standardised page I should go to in order to request unsalting?
That page had been up and down for six years; presumably there just wasn't much overlap between people who like the band and people who know how Wikipedia works. Honestly, I think they're both hilarious and linguistically fascinating; if you're curious check out their track "Trikes and Bikes" on YouTube. I'll try to expand it by finding some Canadian news/magazine articles discussing the band, and maybe see if I can track down one of the former members to get a photo OTRS'ed over. Thanks for the help! MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:14, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You could probably request an unblock of a salted page at WP:RFPP, I guess. And yep, the deleted versions were just descriptions of the band with only things like their Myspace page as sources. I'll definitely look them up on Youtube and have a listen! -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:46, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Glad to make it work. The band isn't everyone's cup of tea, but as mentioned in the article linguists find them interesting, and there's the whole debate on where they stand on the whole parody --> "parody of parodies" spectrum. Part of what makes the article fun is seeing how much you can sociolinguistically unpack from tracks made by teenages from a lower-middle-class suburb (Airport Heights) in a small city on an island off in the Atlantic. MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:08, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A barnstar for you!
The Barnstar of Diplomacy
This is the second Barnstar that I am leaving for an administrator because of your help yesterday. Thank you for being objective yesterday on the administrator talk about Asia Food Recipe and TravelFox. I took the day to reflect on the situation and I will be improving the other articles that I mentioned (AfroFoodtv.comCookin' with CoolioEpicuriousFoodPairRecipeBridgeYummly) as opposed to recommending them for deletion. After all, if I can make them notable, they will be a good inclusion to Wikipedia. No sense deleting content that should not remain (which they probably shouldn't at this point) if there is a chance to improve the article. Thanks again. Morning277 (talk) 13:51, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's very kind, thank you very much. And yes, I agree - much better to turn an article into something notable and sourced than delete, if it's possible. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:43, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A barnstar for you!
The Special Barnstar
Thanks for the speedy permaban of Poesam. That was a fairly disturbing message he left on my Talk page, and it's nice to know the Wiki Admin has my back. JoelWhy (talk) 21:38, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I could use your help as an admin for The World Tomorrow page. A newly created page had been deliberately configured to trump and overtake the original article for a copyrighted and trademarked program of the same name that is in current production. Someone in favor or a supporter of embattled Wikileaks founder Julian Assange did the damage, created a page for him and his show of the infringing title, and has worked hard to push the original page out of existance on Wikipedia. The original page now reads The World Tomorrow (1934) Chrisian television program 1934-1994 -- which gives the false impression the original is off the air and out of production. Please assist.
Hi. I see the show has been back in production since 2004, so I have changed the disambiguation page at The World Tomorrow (disambiguation) to read "1934–1994, 2004-" - you are always welcome to make changes like that yourself. If you are disputing which article should be the primary topic for "The World Tomorrow", then that's a content issue that has to be decided by the Community - an admin cannot make the decision. I suggest you start a discussion at Talk:The World Tomorrow (disambiguation) to see what the consensus says - there is some material at Wikipedia:PRIMARYTOPIC#Is there a primary topic? that might help. Finally, I strongly suggest you do not personalize this, and just stick to the content discussion itself - referring to another editor as "Someone in favor or a supporter of embattled Wikileaks founder Julian Assange" is best avoided, as you really don't know who created that article or for what motivation. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:09, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A barnstar for you!
The Admin's Barnstar
I should have given you long time ago. You deserve this because of accurate judgements of CSDs, great advise to editors, always helpful and kind with perfection. You are one of the best admins that I have ever known (probably in the top 3) :) Yasht10109:05, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in their May 2012 Backlog elimination drive, a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on May 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on May 31 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goal for the drive will be to eliminate January, February, and March 2011 from the queue. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits more than 4,000 words, and special awards will be given to the top 5 in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", and "Number of articles of over 5,000 words". We hope to see you there! – Your drive coordinators: Dank, Diannaa, and Stfg.
Hehe, sorry. I spent all three days at it, and couldn't resist while it's fresh in my mind - and it was so good, I really don't want to let it go just yet :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:18, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Tis ok, given that I don't live in Liverpool AND I didn't go to the event... I think you've got more right than me ;) Everyone's talking about it today, must have been fantastic. WormTT· (talk) 15:20, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In restoring negative, unsourced statements [1]. I realize the legal threat was inappropriate, but so was the statement it was in response to. Buddy431 (talk) 02:18, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think that WP:GS action is required against SalariaRajput with regard to their continued battleground approach at Saini. The issue has been discussed on the talk page and there have been umpteen warnings on their own page, including some that they deleted. - Sitush (talk) 09:00, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Asking to be unblocked at User talk:Garry Singh Girn was certainly one heck of a coincidence. I have queried Bwilkins regarding possible other socks but am struggling in the early stages of my trawl to find the suspect. If I edited less then searching through my contribution history would be easier ... - Sitush (talk) 10:55, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am the author of the Pulse Recording wiki page, that you have deleted without any forewarning on April 24th. Pulse Recording is a privately owned, US music publishing company, not selling a product or a service, and does not accept unsolicited requests. This wikipedia page was not created in anyway for promotion or advertising of the company, but solely a listing of the company's clients and it's published stories. I received a note to make in-line citations to improve the article, which I completed last week. I am happy to make continued improvement to the article so that it passes your necessary standards, and falls in accordance with all of the other US music publishing companies that have wiki pages, and aren't being accused of "unambiguous advertising or promotion." I ask that you please re-consider the speedy deletion of this page, and advise the steps I need to take to get it back up. Thank you kindly (Jpoindex (talk) 21:43, 24 April 2012 (UTC))[reply]
Hi. Sorry you didn't get a notification - the editor who nominated the article for deletion should have informed you. The article when I saw it was full of blatantly promotional material (in a marketing/PR kind of way, not advertising products) - statements like "The company has proven to be a powerful force in discovering new songwriting talent...". "The company boasts...", "...collaborated with some of the biggest names in music", "is and has been at the forefront of music culture...", "..rare breed of industry entrepreneurs..." and so on. That style of writing might be fine for PR and marketing material, but it is entirely unsuitable for an encyclopedia. Anyway, I have now created a userfied copy for you, at User:Jpoindex/Pulse Recording, and you can work on it there before moving it back to article space - but please rewrite it and remove all the marketing puffery before moving it back, or it is very likely to be deleted again. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:54, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your thorough explanation, and thank you for providing a userfied copy. I will improve this article now and remove anything that may be perceived as biased. Thank you (Jpoindex (talk) 22:04, 24 April 2012 (UTC))[reply]
I made a slight change to the nom to refer to the photo: I added (pictured). You're all set. Nothing more for you to do. Congratulations. Anne (talk) 20:02, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Whilst I admit my edit of "allegedly dived" to "dived" did show my personal bias of the incident, I feel that the rest of article is obviously written by a Blackburn fan. "Blackburn showed quality", "local boy and legend David Dunn" and "Blackburn recorded a fine double" are examples of this. thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.167.247.68 (talk) 20:32, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, sorry, that "dived" change was the only one I saw - I missed your removal of the pro-Blackburn puffery. I've fixed it up now, and I'll try to have another look tomorrow. But if you see any more like that, please do feel free to change it to something neutral. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk)
Sorry, I haven't had the willpower for India-related things for the past few days - I'll try to pluck up the courage to have a look over the weekend. (Have a beer for me tomorrow if you're going - I can't make it) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:01, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
