User talk:The Bushranger

This editor is an Illustrious Looshpah and is entitled to display this Book of All Knowledge.

Archives

as Aerobird - Jul 2008-Apr 2010 - May 2010 - Jun 2010-Oct 2010 - Nov 2010-Dec 2010 - Jan 2011-Mar 2011 - Apr 2011-Sep 2011 - Oct 2011 - Nov 2011-Dec 2011 - Jan 2012-Feb 2012 - Mar 2012-Apr 2012 - Apr 2012-May 2012 - Jun 2012 - Jul 2012 - Aug 2012 - Sep 2012 - Oct 2012-Jan 2013 - Feb 2013

This page has archives. Sections older than 24 hours may be automatically archived by when more than 2 sections are present.

Dornier Do 24 ATT

A tag has been placed on Dornier Do 24 ATT, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to a nonexistent page, or a redirect loop.

If you can fix this redirect to point to an existing Wikipedia page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you also fix the redirect. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. - Camyoung54 talk 23:07, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[TPS] Already deleted so I have restored the article and pointed it at Dornier Do 24 MilborneOne (talk) 23:27, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Huh, thanks for fixing that. Guess my brain went on vacation when I tried to make it a self-redirect. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 00:43, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sockmaster

Hi. Two puppets of sockmaster IronKnuckle have been indef blocked. See Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of IronKnuckle, to which you added two puppets.

IronKnuckle also has a history of such badly premised AfDs (with editors and closing sysops saying they either suggest bad faith, or an unusually poor grasp of GNG), that they have resulted in multiple same-day speedy keeps (16 speedy keeps on one day in January alone).

See also the AN/I discussion here about his AfDs, with the partial close by Monty845, in which Monty wrote inter alia "In my opinion, there is more then enough support here for closing the AfDs, and their continuing to be open is an ongoing problem, so I'm going to go close any that are still open on the basis of the above."

He has just AFD'd yet another article, with what appear to be similarly poor grounds. That's disruptive; especially so as the article is at DYK.

Don't we block such sockmasters generally?--Epeefleche (talk) 20:44, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Generally, but we've tried to apply some WP:ROPE here. Given the continued AfD problems, though, it might be worth going back to AN/I and talking indef, unfortunatly. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 20:56, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm supportive of that, if it requires further community input (and the prior AN/I and continued disruption is not sufficient to act on).

What can be done with regard to closing the current AfDm, which is disrupting the article's DYK? Especially in light of the prior AN/I and series of closes, with comments there by sysops and others? Thanks.

BTW, Rope led me to read the other interesting essay -- Wikipedia is not therapy.--Epeefleche (talk) 21:10, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, as it's clearly a misguided AfD, it'll probably be snow closed soon. And DYKs that are AFD'd are put "on hold" until the AfD closes, so no worries there. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 21:15, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll wait out the annoying disruption patiently. BTW -- I now see that Iron was blocked for his prior AfDs. In unblocking him on his second request, after Iron asserted "the mistakes I made were making AfDs that were premature, I'm sorry I didnt know.... I have learned now", Drmies wrote: "Per ROPE, if you will, and AGF, no doubt partly a result of my extreme liberalism. IronKnuckle's edits will have plenty of watchers, and future infractions will no doubt be dealt with swiftly--so, it won't matter much whether they return to editing now or when the original block is done. IronKnuckle, you'll have to at least act on the assumption (that's WP:AGF too) that editors don't (always) edit according to their political stance but that the overriding POV is our set of guidelines."--Epeefleche (talk) 21:19, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Epeefleche, thanks for the note. I have closed that AfD but I am not sharp enough today to decide on an indef block, though I think that's the proper way to go. Bushranger, I'd appreciate it if you could have a look. If you decide it's right to pull the trigger, do it: I trust your judgment. Drmies (talk) 22:33, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, after looking through things, I'm inclined to extend just a bit more WP:ROPE - while this AfD was misguided at best, looking at his last few before this, they appear to be legit. So I'd say 'one final chance'. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 22:53, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Of course they were legit. I nominated it because I felt it failed WP:NMMA and had no clue it passed WP:GNG. I also felt I was harassed on my page by Epeefleche because I nominated an Israel related article. Well let me say something: Israel related articles dont get special treatment, and Wikipedia is not a place for Zionism. I made a mistake, I didn't know it passed WP:GNG, and I resent that you falsely accuse me of disruption because you have a conflict of interest with Israel/Jewish related articles. IronKnuckle (talk) 01:54, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Cusak family (United States)

Hi, was this spelling intentional? All members of the category are named "Cusack" and I see no rationale for the other spelling. As far as I could tell, it was the disambiguation that was new. Elizium23 (talk) 22:56, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeep, that's a typo on my part. Good catch, I'll stick it up for immediate typo-fixing! - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 22:57, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]