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.

Deletion review for ServiceDeskUsers

An editor has asked for a deletion review of ServiceDeskUsers. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review.Gityerfix (talk) 04:58, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

DJ Warrior

Hi! Thanks for re listing the entry, I have now included all the references and it is all 100% official from official sources and credible sites. If you could ignore what the entertainment industry calls "haters" on the articles entry discussion page, and have it stay on Wikipedia as the information is directly from those many many credible sources that are all over the internet, That would be great, Thank you. --Journaldiction (talk) 21:18, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, AFDs must close via consensus at the AFD page, so it will need to stand or fall there. MBisanz ^talk 16:57, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

A Little Help

Hi. I accidently loss some sort of program on my computer or I think I accidently uninstalled it. I was wondering, would it be free to upload the Adobe's Flash Player? Also the same for Macromedia Flash Player and any of the other Adobe programs. CHANLONG (talk) 04:05, 13 September 2008 (UTC) Also what is JavaScript?

No, I'm sorry, Wikipedia only accepts free media, uploading copyrighted programs is not permitted. Please try another site like www.download.com. MBisanz ^talk 04:09, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

No that not what I meant. I was just wondering if Adobe Flash Player and Macromedia Flash Player were free products. This doesnt involve uploading it on wikipedia. I just need to get at info that required these program in order to read. I'm just wondering if it causes money or not. CHANLONG (talk) 00:49, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Statest.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Statest.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:11, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Taint

Hi, you closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Taint (slang) (2nd nomination) as a redirect, which I agree with - just letting you know that you unfortunately redirected the wrong page! You redirected Taint, the disambiguation page, when the AfD was for Taint (slang). I've corrected the redirect and the talk-page messages, just thought I'd let you know. Thanks! ~ mazca ^{t | c} 23:15, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Doh! Thanks for fixing it. MBisanz ^talk 23:17, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Relist problem

I know several people have been having a problem with a relist user script lately, so perhaps this is the case with you? I completed the relist process for you on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Health_care_politics, (the commenting out on the old log and the transclusion on the current log). If it was just an oversight or internet connection problem or whatever, then no problem, but if it is a user script problem, please have it looked at by the script developer. Thanks, Jerry delusional ¤ kangaroo 02:20, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Wasn't a connection error, so I will inform the script writer. MBisanz ^talk 02:22, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Jerry delusional ¤ kangaroo 02:43, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

WORKSFORME. Did it actually say it finished? Sometimes the server will hang on relists, trying to save 3 pages at once and it can take a few seconds for all of them to finish. Mr.Z-man 02:48, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I'll have to remember to leave the screen open a bit longer. MBisanz ^talk 02:48, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Same issue for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Inferno (truck); was probably from before I notified you last time. Jerry delusional ¤ kangaroo 03:20, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Nope, that was after, this is very odd, I think the script is not commenting correctly. I'll avoid any more relists tonight with it. MBisanz ^talk 03:22, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi, don't mean to be a pain, but there is another problem with some of your relists. The relist template was substed twice in a row on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Del Rey (band) and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Inferno (truck). Jerry delusional ¤ kangaroo 03:59, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Whoops, that part of the script seems rather buggy, I'm going to continue to avoid relists until it becomes more stable. MBisanz ^talk 04:01, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Old RfAs

As I understand it, it was your idea to create "archive" subpages for them from the old process page? I think it's handy to have them available by intuitively looking for the subpage in WP:RFA. However, I think a hatnote of sorts would be a good idea, with a link to the source page that contains the actual history. Everyme 07:56, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Nope, my idea was the categorize them, I think Majorly's was to subpage. MBisanz ^talk 10:39, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Email req

cross-posted

Have you had a chance to review my email request? MBisanz ^talk 11:55, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, only just now. If you want faster responses on matters like this, you should ask me directly by e-mail as a GC (which I review every day), as opposed to as an Arbitrator (once a week when things are very busy, as I need a few hours' concentration). :-(

Yes, I'm happy to release you from the convention for this matter, if you think it necessary. It will be considered whether or not you post it publicly.

James F. (talk) 11:14, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, I'll keep that in mind in the future. MBisanz ^talk 23:25, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Talk:Neurotically Yours

Hey. I noticed you deleted Talk:Neurotically Yours as a G6 today. Did you also delete Neurotically Yours? The reason I'm asking is because, apparently, Neurotically Yours has been deleted (see Special:Undelete/Neurotically Yours), but there is no entry in the deletion log. The article was clearly not a speedy deletion candidate, but I can't find an AfD entry for it, either, and I can't even find out who deleted it in the first place, so I'm a bit confused now. Since you deleted the talk page, I figured that you might hopefully know what has happened here. --Conti|✉ 12:52, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Here is the AFD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jonathan Ian Mathers, it was a large delete, so the server timed out before it was logged (which is also why it didn't delete the talk page at the same time). MBisanz ^talk 23:21, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Ah, thanks! Just out of curiosity, will the deletion log for the article appear eventually when the server catches up, or will it stay empty? --Conti|✉ 00:24, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

It'll always stay empty, the system goes through a process to delete a page, and the last thing it does is log the deletion. If the server times out, it never gets logged, I've seen a similar thing happen with certain types of checkuser blocks and crat renames. I could undelete and redelete it, but it would freeze the server again and no guarantee it would create a log entry. MBisanz ^talk 00:27, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

I didn't know that. You learn something new every day, I guess. :) You could create a dummy page and delete that one, tho; that should probably work. --Conti|✉ 00:36, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Okey, did that. MBisanz ^talk 00:59, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm looking for a few good editors....

...who are willing to help hack through the labyrinth we call Wikipedia Policy. I've started up a project called Wikipedia:Policy condensing to help address the increasingly problematic instruction creep on the 'pedia. Ideally, this project will work to condense, merge, and in some cases delete the jillions of policies and guidelines into their basic components, so that both new and experienced users only have a few pages to read through if they have a question or concern instead of many. I'm hoping that once this project is through, we'll be able to reduce the number of policy and guideline pages by half while still keeping all the nuances and interpretations clearly available for users to understand. I'm contacting you about this because either you have previously expressed an interest in this, and/or I know I can count on you as a reliable editor who knows their way around the project. I'm not advertising this in the open just yet, as I'm hoping we can get a good foundation started with the few editors I'm contacting now so that when we do make this more public, we've already got a head start to show people what this project can do. So, if you've got the time and are willing, please stop by Wikipedia:Policy condensing and jump right in. If you have any questions, post to the project's talk page or leave me a note - I'll see it quickly either way. As always, thanks for your help. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 20:14, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Image deleted against consensus

The image which you seen fine to use in the NTD article was deleted against the keep consensus at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion/2008 August 31#Image:National Nine News Darwin opener.png.Bidgee (talk) 22:59, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Ok, back on my plate, I'll try to get to it tonight. MBisanz ^talk 23:25, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

I've asked for a deletion review. Bidgee (talk) 02:24, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: Logos

I was planning to take a look at that list today. I've already gone through the book covers, but there wasn't much worth fixing there. I'll see what can do with the logos. Bláthnaid ^talk 18:34, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Lintel (Linux)

Hey, you made the close decision for this article based upon what? I didn't put it up for AfD because it was a real term that didn't deserve an article, it isn't a term at all. - Jimmi Hugh (talk) 18:56, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

I understand that, but based on my read of the AFD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lintel (Linux), there was not a consensus to delete, but the arguments against keeping swayed me to give weight to the idea of redirection. MBisanz ^talk 18:59, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough... good call then. - Jimmi Hugh (talk) 19:24, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for your participation at my RfA, which passed with a count of (166/43/7). I appreciate your comments and in my actions as an administrator I will endeavor to act in ways that earn your full confidence, even though I don't have it now. Cirt (talk) 01:42, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your role in investigating votes during this process. I was unaware you were involved in that and I appreciate it. Cirt (talk) 01:02, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Bot name

The bot's program has been deleted (so it won't have any further activity). Do I still need to do anything? TEO64X 13:09, 16 September 2008 (UTC)--

Nope, I'll just have a crat turn off the bot flag. If you ever want to run it again, just ping me and I'll have it re-added. Thanks for the quick response MBisanz ^talk 13:16, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Deflagged. — Rlevse • Talk • 13:25, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

RfA categorization

Hi. Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Alansohn was not a failed RfA -- it was never started -- so I took the liberty of reverting your edit. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:31, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Okey, should it be deleted then? MBisanz ^talk 21:31, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Looks harmless -- perhaps you should ask would-be nominee and anyone else who edited the page. If they want to keep it, then I suggest keeping it (perhaps move it into user space if it really bothers folks to leave in Wikipedia: space).

There's some possible stigma in showing up on a category page of failed RfAs, especially if you never stood RfA.

You may want to doublecheck your list; glancing quickly, here are some others:

• Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/509BWPA
• Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/68.39.174.238
• Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/AlamoZoologist
• Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Alokprasad84
• Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Ameratsu

The first two are junk and should perhaps be deleted. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:45, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Yea, that has been my method so far, if someone opposes or if the person writes a long and involved statement, I tag it as unsuccessful. I've deleted a good number, but would be willing to test some like 509BWPA and Alokprasad84 through MFD to establish a precedent. MBisanz ^talk 21:48, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

RFA for an IP? Thats one hell of an IP! rootology (C)(T) 00:54, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

I know, it has 22,000 edits and probably more content added than I do. MBisanz ^talk 01:06, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Christy Johnson

Good call. I was hoping like hell the author would have provided the cites needed as I was pretty much stuck. Regards, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 05:27, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of ANZAPA page

This is just a brief note to indicate that I will be seeking a review of the deletion decision on the ANZAPA page. As this is the first of these "deletion reviews" I have instigated I will need a while to figure out the procedure. --Perry Middlemiss (talk) 10:26, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

That is your prerogative, you may find the instructions at WP:DRV useful. May I suggest though that with a vote of 8 to delete and 3 to keep, and with the delete votes citing policies such as WP:N and WP:RS and the keep votes citing no policies or evidence to the contrary, that I still believe it was the correct close. MBisanz ^talk 11:56, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

And yet I look at Stupid Evil Bastard, which strikes me as having no redeeming features at all, no references and no sources, and yet that was restored. The ANZAPA page had some 8 to 10 references, 6 or 7 external links, and at least one strong independent research listing and still it was deleted. I will admit that the last of these was only added this evening but it was still there. A number of arguments I raised in the discussion were also not answered, which left me curious. --Perry Middlemiss (talk) 12:26, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I must apologise if my previous comment came across as being aimed at you. Please be assured that it was not. I probably just needed a vent. Thank you for your comments above regarding the reasons behind your decision. I will certainly take note of them in my request for review. --Perry Middlemiss (talk) 13:00, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

No problem, I entirely understand and never mind giving reasons for my actions. MBisanz ^talk 13:04, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pilot (Fringe)

How is this a speedy keep? There are several deletes and merge comments, which would negate any Snow closing. -- [[::User:Collectonian|Collectonian]] ([[::User talk:Collectonian|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Collectonian|contribs]]) 17:28, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I see no delete comments, but I'll reopen it. MBisanz ^talk 17:31, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks :) One pure delete was struct, but there are several that are basically delete by redirecting, and a good number of merges that I felt should not be discounted. -- [[::User:Collectonian|Collectonian]] ([[::User talk:Collectonian|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Collectonian|contribs]]) 17:35, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

from an old coach

Hi Mbisanz, I took a wikibreak for more than a month due to computer problems and being busy with school, and was less active for a few months before that, but I hope to be more active again from now. I just wanted to say that I've seen how hard you've been working as an admin for the past 6 months or so, and you are really doing a great job. From the time that you were asking me questions in order to prepare to be an admin, I knew that you were serious about being one of the best Wikipedia editors. The amounts of positive discussion on your talk page and the variety of activities that you participate in are amazing. Keep up the good work, and I hope we can help each other sometimes on administrator tasks. Academic Challenger (talk) 22:55, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

It was an honor being mentored by you, you made me the editor I am today, anything I can ever do to help, just drop me a line. MBisanz ^talk 15:02, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

User:Saturday

I think it ok to unblock him. His talk page explains. Thought I would make you aware. Rgoodermote  23:38, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Sure yea, I was on a train. MBisanz ^talk 01:07, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for updating the Freehold Twp seal Licence for me. Much appreciated!--I AM WATCHING YOU^{All the time...} 01:50, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Block of User:VengeancePrime

You claim that the user share the same IP, has similar nickname and editing topics as a banned user. But he twice[1][2] denied ever editing pedophilia related article. I had a brief look at his contributions and can't find any as well. Can you point me to them? --Dodo bird (talk) 10:47, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

checkuser, using technical information, determined that they were the same person. I'd prefer not to have to dig the edits up. MBisanz ^talk 14:35, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Thankyou

thankyou for updating the license on Image:LBClogo.gif - i'm not great when it comes to those things and anyway, i uploaded it a long time ago - these things slip the mind

thanks again, RA Random articles (talk) 15:44, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Catie Smith

Hey, you deleted the Catie Smith article, but not the rest of the articles associated with the AfD.  :) Corvus cornix_talk 21:18, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

 Done MBisanz ^talk 21:19, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Corvus cornix_talk 22:42, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

A really simple bot request

Hi, sorry to bother you at your talk page. I don't normally chase BAG members around, but the Bot Approval Process seems to have stalled this last week. I was wondering whether you could take a look at my very simple request for my already-flagged bot. It's just to change some headings in Tropical Cyclone articles, per the recent consensus on the project talk page. Plasticup ^T/C 21:49, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

 Done MBisanz ^talk 01:27, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Plasticup ^T/C 02:17, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Hi MBisanz. I would like to thank you for your support in my RfA and the confidence expressed thereby. It is very much appreciated. :) The RfA was closed as successful with 73 supports, 3 opposes and 4 neutral. I would especially like to thank WBOSITG for nominating me. Best wishes and thanks again, —αἰτίας •discussion• 22:51, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Iowa City press Herald.png

This image was apparently deleted b/c it didn't have a fair use rationale. I've restored the image (rather than go to the trouble of having it re-uploaded) and added a fair use rationale, and have additionally fixed the licensing template. Regards, Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 01:56, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Good grief! No I hadn't seen that box, that's terrible - I guess I'll have to get a new image anyway.  :( --Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 02:29, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

I've uploaded a new version (more recent) of the file. Much better. --Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 02:44, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Bots

Check this out m:User_talk:Rlevse#R._stands_for_Robot. and pls respond on the "Bot list" thread of my user talk page. Thanks. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:03, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

User_talk:CanisRufus#Bot_name is balking too. At least we've had two successes. — Rlevse • Talk • 12:03, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Patrick M. McCarthy

Hello. I was reading Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard and saw the entry for Patrick M. McCarthy. When I went to read the article, I found that I concurred completely with those that described it as a coatrack for issues surrounding the detentions in Guantanamo Bay. I looked back in the history for an acceptably neutral version to revert to but could find none and was about to summarily delete it under the provisions of Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Badlydrawnjeff. Then I saw that the most recent revision was your removal of the AfD tag. I still wish to delete it for the same reasons, in spite of the AfD. Could I ask you to review your closure and the article itself and let me know what you think. CIreland (talk) 05:06, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

800 Westchester Avenue

On 19 September, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 800 Westchester Avenue, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 06:04, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

I had worked in the building for Philip Morris. I was surprised to realize that this iconic building did not have an article until you created it. Nice work. Alansohn (talk) 14:33, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Wow, tiny world, that is cool. MBisanz ^talk 14:37, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

RabbiBenjamin G. Kelsen

I just saw that an article that I had written about my teacher was deleted. This was my first page and I do not understand the reasons for the deletion. Could you explain them to me and perhaps help me fix the article? thanks, Ezra Sofer

I am not familiar with that exact article, you may wish to ask at the [[WP:HD|helpdesk] to find out why it was deleted and what your next step should be. MBisanz ^talk 08:45, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

"Market" templates

OK, so we can't use "Nielsen" language in the "Market" templates....fine, whatever.

This is the current, revised "market" template on WP:TVS.

I didn't make it, but I think it is a good idea. Doesn't use anything "Nielsen" "owns" (whatever) and let's us keep the information without them having another DMCA hissy-fit. Is this doable? If so, I can knock about 15 of these out right fast. - NeutralHomer • Talk 04:32, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Erm, I don't think so, Nielsen owns the actually way of categorizing the data into markets and categories, your template seems to have the same headings and categories. Best to consult with Mike Godwin before doing anything. I don't know the details of the notice, but it looks too similar. MBisanz ^talk 04:37, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

OK, I am really confused.....they own the way we make our templates on Wikipedia? Wha? Seriously, I am confused. If anyone emails or message Mike are we going to get a straight answer or some legal-ese jargon or nothing at all? What's our next step or do we just do nothing. I am kinda upset too that Wikipedia didn't decide to fight this. - NeutralHomer • Talk 04:39, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Your template has it broken into the Seattle area, with things like defunct, cable, etc. I believe it is that schema that Nielsen owns, although I have not researched it. Best next step is to contact Mike Godwin. I've seen this sorta thing at least three times, although not on as large a scale as this, so it isn't that unusual. The log diff if you are interested is [3]. MBisanz ^talk 04:42, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Let's just hope SwatJester is online.....I posted him a question. - NeutralHomer • Talk 04:51, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

I answered it. You'd be much better off contacting Mike directly for advice how it could be rebuilt without the copyright violation. mgodwin at wikimedia dot org is his email.⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 06:19, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for September 15, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 37	15 September 2008	About the Signpost

Wikiquote checkuser found to be sockpuppeteer	WikiWorld: "Ubbi dubbi"
News and notes: Wikis Takes Manhattan, milestones	Dispatches: Interview with Ruhrfisch, master of Peer review
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 04:53, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Your proposal

See here and here. I'm off to read the Signpost now and then shut down for the rest of the day. Totally need a break. Carcharoth (talk) 12:43, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Bot tool

See Wikipedia:Bureaucrats'_noticeboard#Bot_Status_Tool — Rlevse • Talk • 13:03, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Deletionpedia AfD

Although I agree with your assessment as "no consensus" (even as the nominator), did you close this AfD a little early because of the pending Slashdot link? Just curious, mainly. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 02:02, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

BTW, the AfD closure notice on the DP talk page says "Keep." Shouldn't that be "no consensus (default to keep)"? - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 02:04, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, you are right my closing script broke, nope SlashDot had no role in my decision to close or in the result of consensus I interpreted. MBisanz ^talk 02:36, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Your script also missed out closing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of software moguls. PhilKnight (talk) 03:01, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

 Done MBisanz ^talk 03:03, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Bishop Brigante AfD

The result was not delete. At the very least, it was no consensus. The delete votes were all going off an old version of the page. After I improved it, there were two keep votes excluding mine that had better reasoning behind them. The only delete vote was an unsubstantiated opinion. Yet the result is delete? That is irresponsible. --Pwnage8 (talk) 04:16, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Many individuals commented in favor of deletion, and none of them struck or changed their vote following whatever edits you may have made. Additionally, at least one more individuals commented in favor of deletion after your changes. Therefore, I feel it was an appropriate close. MBisanz ^talk 08:57, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

AfD is not a vote. The outcome is determined by the reasoning behind the votes, not the number who voted for or against. --Pwnage8 (talk) 12:19, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I know it is not a vote, that is why I weighed the comments and still felt that people generally believed it should be deleted. MBisanz ^talk 12:21, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

All of their reasons were moot. The article clearly had sources. --Pwnage8 (talk) 12:28, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Even after you added sources, people still indicated that I'm not impressed with the accumulation of minor competitions and webzine coverage that's being used in this article., as that was the same viewpoint taken prior to the content changes you made, people still felt the sourcing was of too low a quality to keep the article. MBisanz ^talk 16:34, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Bank of new york.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Bank of new york.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:16, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

IRC

Matthew, Im trying to talk to you on IRC. You woudnt be ingnoring me would you? Just wanted to get some Q&A about your proposal   «l| Ψrom3th3ăn ™|l»  (talk) 12:28, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Nope, not ignoring you, just not at that machine today. MBisanz ^talk 14:13, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Truly amazing

The article THE OCTOPUS (POLITICS) was nominated for deletion on September 18. Within three days, you deleted it based on less than four comments. Not one single commentor made note of the fact that THE OCTOPUS (POLITICS) is a significant element of the U.S. political scene. Alfred W. McCoy first made note of THE OCTOPUS in his 1972 book The Politics of Heroin in Southeast Asia. Claire Sterling followed McCoy's expose` in 1990-94 with books: Octopus: The Long Reach of the International Sicilian Mafia, Crime Without Frontiers, and Thieves' World: The Threat of the New Global Network of Organized Crime. Danny Casolaro investigated something which he referred to as THE OCTOPUS, and his investigation eventually led to twenty years of U.S. history centering around suspicious political skulduggery that involved Inslaw, Iran-Contra, Oliver North, and Ronald Reagan—just to mention a few noteworthy elements. Yet, because someone feels that "a conspiracy" and all its tentacles does not belong in an encyclopedia you chose to delete THE OCTOPUS based upon the comment of a handful of individuals who showed absolutely no knowledge of the various elements of THE OCTOPUS. Heck, I have never even read the Wikipedia article called "THE OCTOPUS (POLITICS)" but I at least know that there must have been something there, and written by someone who recognized that THE OCTOPUS (POLITICS) was worthy of mention. Your deletion, and the speed with which it was done, is truly amazing. Hag2 (talk) 14:08, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

No, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Octopus (politics) was open 9 days and had 5 people supporting deletion and no people opposing it. It was a clear and clean close. MBisanz ^talk 14:12, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

In a world of millions of people, you base your "clear and clean close" on five? Also, I believe the listing showed that it began on 13 September by a an individual who showed no participation in any articles surrounding THE OCTOPUS (POLITICS) anywhere. Then the first comment did not begin until 17 September. Further, not a single commentor (including you) showed any participation in THE OCTOPUS (POLITICS) anywhere—with the exception of one person who believed that THE OCTOPUS (POLITICS) was a cartoon of "a government"!!! Moreover, one of those commentors supporting deletion was even unwilling to be a registered member of Wikipedia. Lastly, there was no notice (that I can find) requesting comment from interested parties in appropriate places such as the talkpages of any one of the Wikified subjects listed above. I just happened to stumble upon your deletion because a Wikilink in Danny Casolaro went dead...THIS MORNING, not on 13 September! Sounds like a quick and "truly amazing" hatchet job to me. Hag2 (talk) 15:45, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Erm, I'm not seeing how I did anything against any part of the deletion process. Could you explain further what procedure I failed to follow? MBisanz ^talk 16:00, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

What's truly amazing is that he has yet to respond to my criticism. Although he had a valid reason to delete your article, mine was deleted based on the number of votes and not the reasoning behind them. If MBisanz has nothing to say to that, I will have to go to deletion review. --Pwnage8 (talk) 16:25, 22 September 2008 (UTC)