User talk:MBisanz
Hi, This is just my talk page, feel free to leave any advice on my edits or ask for help on anything. If you feel I've abused my administrative or BAG powers, please see User:MBisanz/Recall for further instructions to request their removal.
| This is MBisanz's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23Auto-archiving period: 5 days  |
| Index |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 5 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Original AfD on Hinterschellenberg was deleted
You closed the deletion discussion for Hinterschellenberg today, with the conclusion being that there was no consensus. Is there a reason why it would be deleted at this time (for its possibly longer duration, or lack of opinions voiced at the discussion page) and the original page kept, and left up, with no notices? I wouldn't mind if it were extended for a while, perhaps so that more ideas could be shared. Thank you. Ramires451 (talk) 03:25, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
- It was already extended twice. The page is left up because a decision of "no consensus" means the page is not deleted. There would need to be a new AFD with an outcome of "delete" for it to be deleted. MBisanz talk 23:08, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks. I understand. Just to find your opinions on it, do you think that I should open it again, or from what you saw, to keep it? I still retain my original opinion that it would be better if it were removed, but I'd be happy to hear your views and thoughts, as well as those of other users. Besides, I don't want to open another discussion if it's clear that only I would support it, nothing gets done, and our time is wasted. Thank you very much for the help. Ramires451 (talk) 02:33, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
- There's a general presumption that if a place exists, it may have an article. You would need strong evidence that it is not really a recognized place, which the other two people disagreed with. I suspect Wikipedia has a lack of experts in this area, so no one would feel strongly about removing it unless it was a hoax or had no recognition (one of the people cited a government website referring to the location). MBisanz talk 19:54, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks. I understand. Just to find your opinions on it, do you think that I should open it again, or from what you saw, to keep it? I still retain my original opinion that it would be better if it were removed, but I'd be happy to hear your views and thoughts, as well as those of other users. Besides, I don't want to open another discussion if it's clear that only I would support it, nothing gets done, and our time is wasted. Thank you very much for the help. Ramires451 (talk) 02:33, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Village guillotine listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia:Village guillotine. Since you had some involvement with the Wikipedia:Village guillotine redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 23:55, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
Sunday January 15: Wikipedia Day NYC Celebration and Mini-Conference
| Sunday January 15: Wikipedia Day NYC 2017 | |
|---|---|
  You are invited to join us at Ace Hotel for Wikipedia Day NYC 2017, a Wikipedia celebration and mini-conference as part of the project's global 16th birthday festivities. In addition to the party, the event will be a participatory unconference, with plenary panels, lightning talks, and of course open space sessions. With special guests Katherine Maher of the Wikimedia Foundation and Tim Wu of Columbia Law School speaking on our Post-truth panel! Also featuring an International/Multilingual panel, a Documenting Activism panel, a Multimedia/Tech Panel, a Science panel, an Art panel, and more. And there will be cake. We also hope for the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects.
We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 14:57, 8 January 2017 (UTC) | |
The Signpost: 17 January 2017
- From the editor: Next steps for the Signpost
- News and notes: Surge in RFA promotions—a sign of lasting change?
- In the media: Year-end roundups, Wikipedia's 16th birthday, and more
- Featured content: One year ends, and another begins
- Arbitration report: Concluding 2016 and covering 2017's first two cases
- Traffic report: Out with the old, in with the new
- Technology report: Tech present, past, and future
Hi, this new version isn't even as good as the deleted one - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Persian Mastiff. Uses some of the same images also. Doug Weller talk 16:57, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
BRFA that you approved
Hello MBisanz, just a heads up, since you approved the original BRFA: [1] [2]. — Carl (CBM · talk) 14:24, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
Deletion of page for "Andy LoCascio"
I am the subject of this page. It appears that some of the references were deemed inadequate. Could you please restore the page? I will immediately work with the references to be sure that my name appears more prominently (specifically ScotusBlog). I will also update the article with more recent references. This is regarding my efforts in the IT industry.
I will also add addition references for my continued contributions to the fishing community.
Thank you for your consideration.
Is there some way I can be notified the next time a deletion discussion occurs for this page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Locascioa (talk • contribs) 18:47, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, but I cannot undelete the article. There was a discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andy LoCascio where the community determined it should not be retained. You would need to apply to WP:DRV to have it reinstated. Also, please review Wikipedia:Autobiography. MBisanz talk 03:35, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
Outstanding contributions recognition
|
Outstanding Contributions Award |
| MBisanz, I'm quite active in the Afd space and over time have noticed the absolutely stellar work you have been undertaking for ages. To say I'm impressed by what you contribute at the Afd desk selflessly, day after day, is to say the least. I would tend to believe the the community too perceives your contributions in the same way, or better. Thank you for being a great role model for new editors to follow.
As the legend in this award goes: Your work and contributions are exemplary. With intelligent and most helpful inputs, MBisanz, you truly are an outstanding contributor. Thank you for being a great role model for new editors to follow. |