User talk:Mike Rosoft

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by OSU1980 (talk | contribs) at 15:23, 4 February 2012 (usertalk admin Mike Rosoft question). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archived discussions:

CSD on IP Userpage

Hey. I understand how my nomination could be very confusing. The account that made the edit is a promotion only account that I'm running damage control on. Just wanted to let you know. OlYellerTalktome 19:17, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Could you please be more specific on what page/user you talk about? - Mike Rosoft (talk) 19:26, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
How many db-11 tags have you recently removed from Userpages? lol Here's the user: Sarurahn (talk · contribs). Here's the user whom's page Sarurahn was editing on: 86.108.28.24‎ (talk · contribs). OlYellerTalktome 19:31, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The user has been somewhat disruptive, but I wouldn't have gone as far as to call him an advertising-only account. He seems to be just ignorant of the Wikipedia policies and guidelines. (And in any case, I see no reason for deleting a welcome message he has posted on a user talk page.) - Mike Rosoft (talk)

Brittany pearson

Hello, Mike is it? Nice to meet you. I was just wondering what drove you to delete the brittany pearson page? She has quite the following in the town shes from and i was trying to put a funny/laid back vibe to her page. I was going to add more information as well but didnt have the time. Seeing as you're a hardcore atheist but liberal of heart can't we break this impasse and come to some kind of compromise? I promise if you take a chance of brittany pearson, she'll take a chance on you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bmae120 (talk • contribs) 07:18, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kidz of Tomorrow

I removed the Prod you added to the above article as unreferenced is not a criteria used for deletion. Mo ainm~Talk 21:38, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • It's not just that the article is unreferenced, but I wasn't able to find any evidence that the sitcom even exists. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 21:46, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
So would a speedy tag as a hoax not have been better? Mo ainm~Talk 22:02, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Maybe, but I wanted to give it a benefit of doubt. Perhaps {{hoax}}? - Mike Rosoft (talk) 22:04, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Deleted now as a hoax. Mo ainm~Talk 22:08, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jono: The Musical

This is not a hoax, this is a real show that is going ahead and will be shown to about 200 people. We are doing the show in support of the Mouth Cancer Foundation and hope to raise a lot of money for it. While it is based on my friend Jono, it is a fully fledged show and we have created seventeen of our own songs for it. Some examples of which can be found here - http://itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/jono-the-musical-the-official/id393425497. Also, the Paramount Pictures bit was a joke, which I would be more than happy to remove if you would please reinstate the page. I hope you read this and appreciate what I'm trying to say. Thanks.

---message from other user---

Learn to take a joke! Jono: The Musical is real! It's been in the making for a long time with many involved and is fully recognised as a legitimate production and as such, is deserving of a wikipedia page.

IP Changing date information

You might be interested that a recent string of undos you did are linked to an IP used by a prolific sock puppet. 204.2.37.158 has been linked to date additions to music articles, a trend that's been ongoing for years now. If you caught any other similar edits from other IPs they might be useful to note in the SPI (I recently opened a new one that will probably be merged into that one soon). Shadowjams (talk) 01:49, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why was the page deleted

Hi Mike Rosoft,

I'm curious as to why the page "Personal Trainer Development Center" was deleted? From what I can tell it is because the wording used to describe the company is the same as on the website. Is that correct? If I have permission to use the pictures and wording how do I prove that to wikipedia?

Thank you for your time, — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThePTDC (talk • contribs) 17:52, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • The page was originally marked for speedy deletion as copyright violation. Instead, I deleted it under a different criterion - as promotional. (Given that you are affiliated with the organization, you should have a look at the conflict of interest guidelines. Generally, it is recommended for users not to create articles about themselves, their companies, etc.) In addition, the name of your account seems to imply that it is a shared corporate account; since an account is only to be used by a single person, I would recommend for you to request its renaming, or simply create another one. (See the user name and user account policy.) - Mike Rosoft (talk) 18:12, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Realm of Titans

I played Realm of the Titans on the weekend and I went to the trouble of finding out enough information about it to fill an article since there was none on Wikipedia and I thought it was exciting and do not get as many opportunities to write articles about computer games as I did in the early days so I jumped in first. Do you think it is easy for a non-Chinese like me to research a game that is so far released in China? Also, your assertion that a game in beta does not warrant an article is invalid when there are hundreds of games on Wikipedia not even in Beta. Anyway, if you type it into google, you will get over 20 pages of relevant results. You want notability? Some guy I never met wrote an article about a small program I wrote while at university and that's been there for 6 years whereas most people wouldn't even be able to understand what it does. Scarlet (talk) 19:18, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

When a Wikipedia essay contradicts general community precedent, I would say to ignore it. However when a Wikipedia essay directly says to ignore precedent in general, as the one you just linked to did, I am not sure whether to laugh, cry or throw up. Addition and deletion should be based on nothing but the prevailing community standards of Wikipedia and the only way to possibly argue that that is through examples of what has been added, kept and deleted in the past.Scarlet (talk) 16:29, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I don't think that WP:OTHERSTUFF contradicts community consensus; to the contrary, it repeatedly gets referenced in deletion debates. Granted, results of previous debates may be used as a rough guideline on whether or not to keep a different one (though it is in no way binding; consensus can change). Mere existence of another article can't; just as well it can be a reason to nominate the other page for deletion as well. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 17:15, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Useless

Why did you protect the page Useless for all eternity? Since 2011 only eight revisions have been made to the page. You give as a reason: "Constant target for people to add their personal dislikes", yet "constant target" would mean the page is vandalised on a daily or weekly basis. That is not the case. So why even bother? 输寄请像 (talk) 17:41, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Don't mean to be rude, gov'ner. 输寄请像 (talk) 17:43, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's right, but as far as I can see all edits by unregistered users are of this kind. In fact, the last vandalism has remained on this page for months. That's why I had semiprotected the page. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 17:47, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I get it. Better to be safe than sorry, huh? :) 输寄请像 (talk) 17:50, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

God of War II

You reverted that edit before I could even try. Thanks for helping to make Wikipedia great!

Sens08 (talk) 17:59, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

AJ Perez

For your information, this page is being repeatedly vandalised, numerous times over the last ten minutes or so. 输寄请像 (talk) 18:03, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

& for and

Hi Mike Rosoft, the reason I've put & for and is to create another edit, so the vandel who is writting on the Pierre Lewis page finds it more difficult to revert it back. Many Thanks. Daniel —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.12.191.246 (talk) 18:17, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mike, Once again, 89.243.223.206 is trying to vandalise The Pierre Lewis page, please would you block / warn them. Many thanks for your time and understanding on this matter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.12.191.246 (talk) 23:07, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Theresa M. Kelly for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Theresa M. Kelly is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Theresa M. Kelly until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Shannon Rose Talk 17:22, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

sowwy

Concerning the "pastor" definition - I was just being silly and saw whoever had edited it last had been "corrected" - I'm normally a model editor so don't hold it against me hehehe :P Erosabus (talk) 18:22, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Har Homa

Mind explaining why you removed my change at Har Homa? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Red Stone Arsenal (talk • contribs) 19:00, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand. What is the specific geographic meaning of "East Jerusalem" that is different from the specific geographic meaning of "Southeast Jerusalem"?

That article says , right in the beginning, "The term “East Jerusalem” is used in three different, incompatible ways", so it seems to me you replaced a precise definition, with an ambigous one. Which of the "three different, incompatible ways" that East Jerusalem can be used did you mean? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Red Stone Arsenal (talk • contribs) 19:09, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • "Southeast Jerusalem" means "South-eastern part of Jerusalem proper". "Southern East Jerusalem" means "Southern part of East Jerusalem [Israeli-annexed area]". Har Homa is in the latter, not in the former. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 19:24, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

But that information is already in the next sentence, why are we repeating it? Red Stone Arsenal (talk) 19:36, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • For the second time, Har Homa is NOT in southeast Jerusalem [proper], it's in southern East Jerusalem. I consider this point closed; if you want to continue it further, take it to the article talk page or editor assistance. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 19:50, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

MANCHESTER, NH deletion

I thought I was helping by adding a redirect to Manchester, New Hampshire. Several of this type of redirect exist, i.e. Hartford, Connecticut from Hartford, CT that has been in place since 2004.Please advise, thanks. Bob Shaw —Preceding undated comment added 19:13, 26 April 2011 (UTC).[reply]

  • Granted, but there's no point in creating redirects from all-caps titles. (Page titles are case-sensitive.) - Mike Rosoft (talk) 19:16, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Would you find Manchester, NH acceptable ?--Bob Shaw (talk) 19:31, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hayden (given name)

Hey there! You seem to have shot that article stone dead after someone had vandalised it. I don't think I have clearance to reinstate it, so it would be great if you could quickly pop over and do the raising from the dead bit. Best, Trigaranus (talk) 22:00, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ooops, taking it all back. Now it seems to work again. Seems I got stuck on a diff inbetween there. Sorry for the bother! Trigaranus (talk) 22:01, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Filter Platforms Inc

Why was this deleted? I read through all of the policies and made sure it was informative, not an advertisement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Funkrockr10 (talk • contribs) 17:23, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Granted, the page (Filter Platforms Inc.) wasn't particularly promotional in nature; on the other hand, it didn't cite any third-party references and only referenced the company's websites. The primary inclusion (notability) criterion is: did the subject attract non-trivial coverage in reliable third-party sources? I am afraid the company doesn't seem to meet these guidelines; articles that don't contain any claim of notability or significance may be speedily deleted upon discovery by any administrator.

    If you believe that the article could be salvaged, I might restore it into your user subpage for you to work on. You can also seek advice at editor assistance. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 17:34, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Thanks! BRgrds, Ian Cairns (talk) 17:37, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yurtengurt

Thank you for your swift action. Is there any way to tell if this account has connections to other accounts on WP?LedRush (talk) 17:39, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • There is (namely, CheckUser), but I suspect it has already been run. (The edits have been so thoroughly redacted that not even administrators can view them; only a handful of users have such a privilege. If you want to be sure, feel free to contact the Arbitration Committee.) - Mike Rosoft (talk) 18:09, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, but I don't quite follow. Do I go to checkuser and just give the name and someone checks the name and IP address? Why do you think the check was done already? Why would people need to see the edits? With someone attempting to out me yesterday, and someone again today, I just feel something fishy is going on.LedRush (talk) 18:21, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I was just about to enter in my request at the wrong place (the sockpuppet place).LedRush (talk) 19:07, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Is there any way to speed up the process at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations#Yurtengurt ?

There have been 4 attempts to out me in the last 24 hours.LedRush (talk) 21:31, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Timeline of the far future

You know, sometimes I wish we could preserve the truly creative bits of vandalism for posterity. Maybe we could start a trading scheme with Uncyclopedia. Serendipodous 08:44, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WoW RevDels

It might be a good idea to delete the edit summaries as well, for the stated reasoning. --Izno (talk) 18:07, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Meliniki revert-warring

Hello, the user Meliniki (talk · contribs) and his ip 94.209.255.110 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) are still continuing their edit-warring. I'm afraid we'll probably need something more decisive than the short block from the other day. Would you take action again, or do you prefer we re-file a request? Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:33, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

you deleted a article that i published live but all that was on there was the name and the template completely blank. I have been banned multiple times from Wikipedia but my suspension is over, please help me make this time around more enjoyable sir. I am really looking for someone to help me publish an article but this website has plenty of links please check it out and collaborate with me on notability. JO has shows, has a mixtape, and is all over the web in different forms which are not all self published, in other words his work has spread virally. If you search "JO" "4 The Hustlas" Rough Cut Freestyle Flow Rap Underground Rapper Unsigned Hype "Josh Eastman Enterprises" JO "Josh Eastman" Ent J.E.E. Mixtape Hip Hop mix tape hiphop "hip hop" battle rap music youll find several things he has over 5000 views on his youtube channel, has several artists, DJs, even record exucutives like this one from JIVE on twitter. PLEASE TAKE a minute to go to JO's Google Profile if you havnt already and look at the links. I am 448th on the Rancho Santa Margarita Hip Hop Charts for Reverb Nation. I Know there is a way to help me get this article ready to publish please help. I believe that the links and article are notable, where does someone draw the line between indie/independent/underground music and unnotability for wikipedia. I think i deserve a shot. I am an aspiring musician and this legitimizes my movement, when a fan who heard my album or song and want to look me up the "JO" wikiarticle will provide them with an easy to read bio and info regarding who JO is and does with supporting links —Preceding unsigned comment added by BobMcGuinness (talk • contribs) 14:20, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello would you like to explain your factual reasons for reverting the Jonah page?

I really would like some actual facts please? Or would you like some of mine? I have studied sperm whales for years and have worked closely with marine biologists and I don't appreciate people completely making up things about them.

--Backedupinfo 08:01, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Since you changed it yet again without talking. Please view the wikipedia page sperm whales they don't have an upper pallet of teeth, they can't chew or tear up food. Why would you OBVIOUSLY DISTORT FACTS?

“Sperm whales with severely mangled jaws have been seen in perfect health, apparently catching food just fine without the complete use of their teeth.” http://www.oceanicresearch.org/education/wonders/spermwhales.htm

          • Showing they don't chew or tear up their food*****

“….however, because of the rapidity of the flensing operations and the need to gather other biological data, we were able to collect samples of cephalopod beaks from only 157 stomachs. All stomachs contained at least a few cephalopod beaks. The number of beaks collected from each stomach ranged from 1 to 57, and the total number of beaks was 2060 (not including beaks from whole specimens, crowns, and buccal masses). All of the remains collected represent a minimum of 1700 individual cephalopods.” http://spo.nwr.noaa.gov/tr83opt.pdf

U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service *****Showing they don't chew or tear up their food*****

“After the whole bodies and heads were identified, the beaks were removed and compared with other beaks in the samples.” .” http://spo.nwr.noaa.gov/tr83opt.pdf

U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service *****Showing they don't chew or tear up their food*****

“They feed on several species, in particular giant squid, octopuses, and demersal rays. The white scars often seen on the bodies of Sperm Whales are believed to be caused by squid.” http://www.whale-images.com/info/sperm-whale-facts.htm

              • Showing they eat giant squid, octopuses, and demersal rays*****

--Backedupinfo 08:13, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your help on my talk page

Hello Mike, wanted to say thanks for your back up in this lenghty discussion on my talk page. How did you manage to usurp my account? LOL --Ben Ben (talk) 10:57, 7 May 2011 (UTC) PS: My first SPI, I feel honoured.[reply]

Over the Limit (2011)

Any chance you could move Wikipedia:Article Incubator/Over the Limit (2011) back to Over the Limit (2011)? The main concerns at the TFD were (1) too far in the future, but now it is less than 2 weeks away, (2) lack of reliable sources confirming that it would indeed take place, but more sources have now been added. For example, you can buy tickets at ticketmaster. I would say this is confirmation that it will indeed take place. Thank you. Frietjes (talk) 17:34, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I see

Thank you for the advive. I will use it. This template must be substituted, see Template:Smile for instructions 174.7.19.170 (talk) 05:31, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"The" Soulless

Since when is a real-life, cited cease and desist order considered to be "Vandalism"? Seems to me that you need to purchase a dictionary to figure that one out. Maybe you should try actually reading the cited article instead of assuming that it is vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.105.184.2 (talk) 06:56, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pimp tenure

I assure you this article is not a hoax, as you suspect. English history is just "stranger than fiction"! I have contributed to many WP articles on feudalism etc. (Lobsterthermidor (talk) 12:22, 14 May 2011 (UTC))[reply]

The later stuarts

Why have you deleted my article on the later stuarts, what is wrong with it??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johemsill5 (talk • contribs) 12:13, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DJ Stellth?

What do you have against DJ Stellth. He only wanted an article on him. It contains facts, about a REAL person, in REAL life, and it is about his music and is a biography —Preceding unsigned comment added by Djstellth (talk • contribs) 12:52, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ubisign

Hi. Why did you delete my Ubisign page? It's a REAL portuguese company (I work there), and the article was not promotional, as it told the history of the company, in resemblance with what I saw in other companies entries. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Utids (talk • contribs) 16:40, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • The main notability (inclusion) guideline is the coverage of the company in reliable third-party sources. Your article cited none; instead, it was filled with marketing language. In general, it is recommended that users don't create articles about themselves, their companies, or similar topics they are directly connected with; see the conflict of interest guideline for more details. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 16:51, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting pages about videos

You deleted my page about the longest YouTube video (ORIGAMI BOX DESTROY). Why don't you now delete page about the (once) most viewed about Charlie Bit My Finger video and why don't you delete the page about the first YouTube video - Me At The Zoo? Why don't you delete them too? Please answer. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by IksDe (talk • contribs)

  • Once again, see above. Is the video notable for anything but being the longest video on YouTube? Do you have any reliable third-party sources that mention the video? If not, then I am afraid Wikipedia won't have an article about it; it's that simple. (See the notability guidelines for web content.) If you believe that the page indeed meets the inclusion guidelines, consider creating it as a subpage of your user space, e.g. User:IksDe/Origami Box Destroy, and then seek advice on the editor assistance page. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 20:10, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • As a follow-up, the video doesn't seem to have attracted any coverage in reliable third-party sources. It has been mentioned in the YouTube wiki, and on several blogs etc. - these aren't reliable sources. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 20:14, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think that the longest video on YouTube wouldn't be much visited page? Ok, then... IksDe (talk) 20:19, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cayole

I had created an article about Cayole.com but it was deleted. It is notable because it was noted in New York Times and Newsweek among others. It's the only website that shows future price prediction for cruises. Why did you delete the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Greekguyinboston (talk • contribs) 06:03, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I have reviewed the article, and it seems that the website has only attracted trivial third-party coverage (see the notability guidelines for web content). If you believe otherwise, you can challenge the deletion at deletion review. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 06:07, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I may challenge it, but I'm trying to understand how you decide whether the coverage was trivial? Newsweek and Tnooz had full articles about Cayole, while New York Times article mentioned it quite extensively. Is there any criteria for "trivial"-ness or is it up to admins to decide? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Greekguyinboston (talk • contribs) 06:13, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I just read the link that you mentioned above and it has 4 criteria for trivial coverage. None of the 3 sources fit the trivial coverage criteria according to the link that you mentioned. Or am I missing something? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Greekguyinboston (talk • contribs) 06:56, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rusty Scupper

I am trying to add "Rusty Scupper" to this website. Why do you keep deleting it?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cfhpantera (talk • contribs) 19:18, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Six Million Crucifixions

Hi Mike--The above article has now been looked at by two folks who have marked it "good article." How do I either get rid of the unreviewed article tag or get whatever feedback I need. I have left notes at the request for feedback page twice now.Can you help?Nrglaw (talk) 01:09, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • It's not quite kosher to create an article with a "good article" tag in place and claim that two unrelated people marked it as such, is it? (See more about the good articles process.) That said, I have left a bit of feedback on the article talk page. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 06:16, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion contested: Alex Nahon

Hello Mike Rosoft, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Alex Nahon, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: I found a reference. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. --Σ ☭★ 07:41, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for the reminder; I have marked the article for insufficient notability, instead. (This automated message does sound condescending a bit, though, especially considering that I have been using Wikipedia longer than you. :-) - Mike Rosoft (talk) 07:54, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well that's why I used the newbie message. --Σ ☭★ 17:28, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

CSD notification

The page IIM Calcutta Executive Program in Business Management looks like it may be a valid CSD, but I prefer not to delete a page unless the creator has been notified. I understand that sometimes automated tools fail to do the notification for some reason. Not sure if that was the case, but could you make the notification?SPhilbrickT 12:40, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

May 2011

Pardon me, total Huggle malfunction, my fault Free_Bear (talk) 17:28, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ramot

An article by the BBC is not a appropriate source to support the claim that Ring Settlements are considered my most to be illegal under international law. I would like to see primary sources cited there (i.e. UN resolutions, etc.). You cannot use a parenthetical point in an online news article as the source such an important part of an article. By doing so you weaken wikipedia. Better to leave out the entire discussion until someone can take the time to put it a more neutral discussion with appropriate citations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 11235813ab (talk • contribs) 17:50, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • If you believe that the information could have better references, why don't you improve them yourself? Alternately, discuss the changes you intend to make on the article talk page, or ask for help at editor assistance. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 18:01, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • This issue has been discussed at length by the community. See WT:Legality of Israeli settlements. Please also note that all articles in the Israel-Palestine conflict topic area are covered by WP:1RR restrictions and discretionary sanctions since it is prone to extensive disruption so I suggest that you be very careful with your edits within this topic area sand always use the talk pages. Sean.hoyland - talk 18:04, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

why was "wicked shit wrestling" deleted?

Why did you delete my page, this is a legitimate wrestling organization, give me time to reference everything and you will see.

Bibletruth9 (talk) 20:50, 23 May 2011 (UTC)bibletruth9[reply]

Miami National Golf Club

Why did you delete the Miami National Golf Club page? The club is verified and a real place

Here is the website. [removed]

Please allow me to make the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by mngc (talk • contribs)

Whoa: Please review/reconsider spod!

In use template means please allow me the opportunity to build the page before you act. As per the text, the Vow of silence is utterly not the same thing as the Practice of silence. Please have some discussion before taking such drastic action! At the very least, please allow me to revert that and userfy.

OK so I have explained why I contest the redirect so it seems I should be permitted to proceed. In my experience, a lot of techies have not much background in this field. I have extensive background in this field. Monastic silence and monastic vows are two separate and distinguishable topics. But I don't want to get into a wheel war with an admin. Please advise.
While awaiting your reply, I review deletion criteria. The reason stated in comment, which is that the article is believed to be duplicate, is not listed on policy as a spod criteria. Thus, it seems that you may wish to template nfd if you don't accept the above rationale to restore or permit restoration. Please note that your silence could be interpreted as consent, but puts me in the untenable position of wheeling. Therefore, I would suggest that it would be courteous to attend to this sooner rather than later. Otherwise, any additional work I might care to do to develope the article is done under threat of another spod, and I don't think you wish that upon anyone.

Bard गीता 04:57, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I have restored the article and moved it to User:Geofferybard/Monastic silence. That said, I believe that its topic is so close to the topic of the article Vow of silence that the information could be included in the page itself. (And the page Vow of silence has itself been nominated for merging to the main article Silence.) By the way, a YouTube video is not a good reference; see the guideline on what constitutes a reliable source.

    If you disagree with my evaluation of the article, you can seek advice at editor assistance. (Should you move the article back to article space, I don't want to be revert warring, either; I'd probably seek advice in the same place.) - Mike Rosoft (talk) 05:20, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mike I am saving now to avoid confusion due to the edit conflict hang on a second ...
Sorry my computer crashed. Well I do appreciate you getting back to me but unfortunately my carefully crafted appeal was lost during the crash. Well yeah we can seek uninvolved thir party opinion if need be but for the time being why not let the article develope for a couple few days and then see what it looks like? Believe me this is a vaaast topic and just because one English speaking wikipedian somewhere has been nominated for merger should not constitute a basis to act on Monastic silence, let alone speedy delete. It seems that your point is not wildly unsupportable - it may well be that at this point in the development of wikipedia a consolidation of these two topics might be in order. But it seems that, at minimum, proper process is to recognize that speedy delete is not the protocol. Probably wiki way here is to agree to disagree, take no action on a restoration of the page, with the understanding that if the page is restored you would have the right to nfd (nominate for deletion) at any time. The request would be perhaps that you would allow a stipulated amount of time - be it an hour, or a day, or two - but actually based upon your argument, it seems that I would be lucky to get even one hour before the nfd. I would not be offended if the arrangement is that you would nfd but at least, not spod. Fair enough?
PS: No hard feelings if I lose the nfd. IMO IMHO the merge might work on Vow of silence, for some months, before the topic gets more developed. ( And I do think you have an arguable point at this stage of wikipedia developement, not permanently.)IMO it makes for more clarity in collaborative writing to keep separate things separate. Maybe merge later but not merge for the sake of merging. The articles IMO develope much better if they are allowed to spawn and grow based upon narrowly defined concepts, which was the whole point of starting this artice.
PPS. Actually, Silence was a mess - section heading without content, two related sections separated by an off topic section. Per http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Silence&action=history I have cleaned it up but IMO it is the exact opposite of merge we need a disambig page with separate pages. I could see Vow of silence as a subsection of a broader topic such as Monastic silence but really, sir, based upon expertise, IMO, Vows of x are more appropriately a subsection of Rites and also a subsection of particular Orders. The Vow is not the master of the Practice.
Don't take this the wrong way, but this may be a textbook case of area expertise interacting with wikipedia expertise - not to say that is a bad thing. Probably the end result of this dialogue is a much better understanding of the disutility that had existed at those pages and the output should be a better final product. Awaiting your OK to proceed as outlined above. Bard गीता 05:33, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Silence on "Silence", interpreted

In light of your statement, to wit:

If you disagree with my evaluation of the article, you can seek advice at editor assistance. (Should you move the article back to article space, I don't want to be revert warring, either; I'd probably seek advice in the same place.) - Mike Rosoft (talk) 05:20, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

That is interpreted as presenting the following implicit options:
  • "seek advice at editor assistance"
  • move the article back to article space, in which case you would "probably seek advice in the same place.)"
Hence, my actions are as follows: I am cleaning up the article Silence, which is in pretty bad shape; I added religious cats to the already existing disambig page, made several suggestions. I will sit on all of this :until tommorow and seek your comments. Silence will be ... silence.:)Bard गीता 06:46, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
OK so its a go

I will paste the above discussion on user page. I will be offline soon but will buff everything up tommorow asap and we will be in good shape either way. Thanks. :)Bard गीता 07:05, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Friends

Hi Mike, I guess you inadvertently put back the vandalised version of the page Friends with this edit by Huggle. Lynch7 19:39, 28 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the vandalism revert on my userpage btw :) Lynch7 19:42, 28 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I guess there's a problem with Huggle? It keeps repeating this edit. Lynch7 19:47, 28 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

FIFA 2022

You're correct. Reverted. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:08, 28 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sefire treaty inscriptions

Hi, thanks for all your work. I started with the less common variant spelling Sfire treaty inscriptions and then moved to the more common one (about 45/55 on Google Books). Sorry, but probably a redirect is justified.In ictu oculi (talk) 01:58, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'll merge them..Thanks In ictu oculi (talk) 09:10, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tabulating machine

It appears that you reverted a half-dozen or so edits, citing HG. Would you review those deleted edits please, restore them, and feedback to the HG project whatever they need to improve its performance. Thanks, 69.106.237.145 (talk) 19:50, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done, thanks again! 69.106.237.145 (talk) 02:34, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Normally, Huggle doesn't revert anything on its own - it was probably a mistake on my part. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 05:26, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Biochar Emerging Commercial Sector

Hi Mike. I was wondering why you erased my edit to the Emerging Commercial Sector on the Biochar page. The edit was not spam- if you follow the link cited, you will find that the brand Soil Reef sells biochar products on their website as described. My edit was factual, well-substantiated, and done in the proper format, so I would appreciate it if you undid your deletion. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.185.213.226 (talk • contribs)

Status Quo

Thanks for your swift response to the IP's threat towards me. You showed more care and level headedness than I might have done! Cheers,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 21:18, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

schmulletin

What specifically is your connection between the word "schmulletin" and urban dictionary? It would appear that your "atheist"/"agnostic" background would cause you to be bias. so I expect a response from you asap. If not I will simply appeal. Thank you "hard-core" atheist. By the way... how can you be both an atheist and agnostic? You might want to look up the definition of both. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brianhigbee (talk • contribs) 20:07, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Article Help

Could you review the submission on my user talk page under title, “Filter Foundry”? The article has been deleted a couple times already—I just read the anecdote about Zeo, the new creator who gets it very, very wrong (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Wikipedia:_The_Missing_Manual/Editing,_Creating,_and_Maintaining_Articles/Creating_a_New_Article), exactly my story…word for word. Trying not to make the same mistake again.

Feedback would great! I want to know if the article could now be published

Thanks a lot!

Funkrockr10 (talk) 20:56, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Red link

Hi Mike Rosoft. I was surprised to see that "red link" is no longer red. I see from the page logs that you unsalted it recently as an experiment, so I thought I would check with you to get your thoughts before I RfD'ed the redirect to get it turned back to red. Thanks, 28bytes (talk) 05:00, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I would ask HJ Mitchell (talk · contribs), who recently unprotected the page with a reasoning that "somebody wants to do something legit with it". I don't think this is what happened - it was immediately created as a Wikipedia self-reference. I count the recent redirecting of the page to wiki markup/hyperlink as another Wikipedia self-reference, so I have deleted it and restored the full protection. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 05:25, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks... nice to see it red again! 28bytes (talk) 05:33, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Red link

Could you provide a better rationale than "Not a good idea" for deleting and salting red link? Red links are omnipresent on the internet and on Wikipedia...Smallman12q (talk) 23:22, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for Red link

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Red link. 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. Smallman12q (talk) 22:44, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nitte University

I noticed you just deleted the second creation of Nitte University citing "contents do not match title". I often patrol new pages, and I've always been unsure what to mark such pages as when I request speedy deletion. Would A1 be the proper tag for such pages? Inks.LWC (talk) 06:16, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Possibly; it depends on how much of a deletionist the reviewing admin is. (It looks like I was wrong on this article; the author just misspelled Nitte Trust as Net Trust. On the other hand, given the user name of the author, the page could be speedily deleted as self-promotion.) - Mike Rosoft (talk) 06:23, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

James Arness

Hi Mike Rosoft.
76.26.44.140 (talk · contribs) is at it again! I have warned them lvl 2. Regards, 220.101 talk\Contribs 20:37, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Charreada

You allow a criticism section on the Charreada page, then you say the page cannot argue with itself. You say you cannot allow statics based on multiplication, but you allow statics based on what the unsubstantiated facts. You remove a comment about how Cesar Chavez could not have testified at a hearing two months after he died. If you don't want the page to argue with itself, then remove the criticism portion of the page, since the animal rights fanatics are not telling the truth. (Rmj8757 (talk) 19:19, 5 June 2011 (UTC))[reply]

THE TREASURES OF DRUMORY

Hi Mike, my recent article THE TREASURES OF DRUMORY was deleted by you. Having read your reason for doing so, I rewrote the article and I'd like you to review it please, to see if it is now worthy of publication. If so, can you please advise how I get it to appear with all other Wikipedia articles. Thanks

[snip promotional]

Stewart Gemmill, June 6th 2011 Sgemmill (talk) 00:24, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Similar articles

Hi the article is similar to these articles on wikipedia

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

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

The article explains the origins of the urdu words. It will be made more encyclopedic as time goes by thanks. UrduChat (talk) 04:56, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Thank you for reverting a personal attack on my user page! Xionbox₪ 05:48, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick revert

[1], and sorry for being absent minded. Didn't realize that I was redirected to the mainspace.--Divide et Impera (talk) 16:01, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Altered speedy deletion rationale: Awakenings (party's)

Hello Mike Rosoft. I am just letting you know that I deleted Awakenings (party's), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 23:28, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Looks like this is not the case. I proposed the page for deletion ("Not written in encyclopedic style, no third-party references") while Nikthestoned nominated it for speedy deletion ({{db-promo}} - under which the page was eventually deleted). For some reason, the system didn't report an edit conflict, so I just re-added the speedy deletion notice. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 04:52, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The deletion tag is for the wrong article

Hi the deletion tag is for the wrong article. I have changed the article to the correct title and I have moved the list of words to wikitionary. The current article contains examples and is not a list of words. I had also left the message that the previous articles "list of urdu words and their origin" and "list of urdu words of arabic origin" can be deleted as they are no longer required. I dont understand why there is a tag on this page as it is different to the previous page and is not a list of words. UrduChat (talk) 11:20, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Frog

Are you sure that article is about real frogs? If it is then where could i put those frog images then?--HappyLogolover2011 (talk) 14:07, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why you deleted the page "Tengxiang Sweaters Ltd."?

I wonder why? I have done nothing wrong, right? And I am a staff of this company — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bnncff (talk • contribs) 05:42, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]


OK,thank you. I understand, I will always follow the guidelines of the Wikipedia.kongshengxin (talk) 05:26, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Apologies

Apologies for accidentally reverting your recent reversion. I was actually making the same reversion as you were, but you got in first and, for some strange reason, popups on my computer reverted your correction instead, then didn't display the error in history when I checked. Dbfirs 06:16, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks very much for the help. Nadiatalent (talk) 12:12, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How can I improve "The Library (Facebook Application)?"

You deleted this page that I created. I thought that linking to the articles written about it would establish notability. Do I need to include more press links about it? How can I make it fit the requirements for notability? Thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Booksbooks999 (talk • contribs)

Lauren Spierer

Mike Rosoft, I saw you recent deletion of Lauren Spierer. I wonder what your thoughts are about the relative notability of Disappearance of Susan Powell, Disappearance of Kyron Horman, Disappearance of Edward and Austin Bryant, Disappearance of Claudia Lawrence, Disappearance of Madeleine McCann, and Disappearance of Maura Murray. Perhaps Disappearance of Lauren Spierer would be more appropriate for inclusion? Thanks. Jweiss11 (talk) 19:26, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response. Jweiss11 (talk) 19:02, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List of cases of police brutality

Hello, Mike, I can see you are sysop on en.wiki. Could you please keep an eye on List of cases of police brutality, there seems to be someone who is trying to remove a referenced edit on a recent police cover up. This is a hot topic in Macedonia, so there will be activity on this page - I would suggest a semi-protect. Best. --FlavrSavr (talk) 19:22, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Red link

Please restore the page red link you deleted out of process. Lothar Klaic (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:01, 17 June 2011 (UTC).[reply]

I believe I created a valid disambiguation page. Please restore it in place or in my user space, so that I can contest the deletion according to wikipedia policies. Lothar Klaic (talk) 23:05, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am repeating my request, please restore the article into my user space, so that I can contest the deletion according to wikipedia policies. I have already seen the discussion you menitioned and I believe it was ill-informed, since they disn't see the actual page they voted against. They probably thought that it was a yet another kind of previousl deleted sort: a redirect to a wikipedia internal page or a unreferenced blurb. I believe I created a perfectly valid and useful disambig page. Lothar Klaic (talk) 15:43, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. I could have repeated the undeletion request already, but I created the page without much thinking, since I didn't expect it deleted. Now I want to take a second look at it to be sure I am right, and not to bother people with a yet another discussion without solid reason. P.S Please be sure that you resore the last my version: I cannot rule out the possibility it was vandalised or otherwise changed, so it became a fair game for quick deletion. Lothar Klaic (talk) 15:57, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you and apologies. It turns out that I have thoroughly forgotten what and where I wrote. Since for me the red link is not an undeletion issue (I wrote in the talk page, not into the article), where would you recommend me to discuss my suggestion about the page? Lothar Klaic (talk) 18:03, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:RFUP suggestions, it turns out that you protected the page, and I would like to ask you to unprotect it, to make a disambiguation page, as I described. Lothar Klaic (talk) 22:34, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Help with a sockpuppetry case

I recently tagged Ore(Geography) for speedy deletion under A10. Completely unrelated, I later stumbled upon some accounts that I referred to at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Electrician98. After I did up the report, it occured to me that that Ore(Geography) mentioned Minecraft and seemed to have a similar style of writing. However, without looking at that article's content again, I don't feel comfortable alleging the author of that article is related to the SPI report. Do you mind looking at the deleted article and seeing whether it might be related to the writing style of two accounts listed at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Electrician98? Thanks! 18:51, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Help with Donald McGavran Article

Hi, I'm writing a book on the life and ministry of Donald McGavran, and am trying to update and expand the information on the Donald McGavran page. Would you please allow me to make major changes to this page? Feel free to google the name "Gary L. McIntosh" to see who I am. thanks, GLMcIntosh — Preceding unsigned comment added by GLMcIntosh (talk • contribs) 07:37, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks...

... for reverting my user page. I got distracted and forgot about it. Based on the deleted Nitruzz I think the two you blocked are involved in some sort of puppetry with Nitruzz (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log). CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 16:24, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mytest page

I created the page in order to test Microsoft Wikibasha translator. It's not spam. But, you have marked spam and deleted it. I wanted to put delete request after finding Wikibhasha capability.--Fahim (talk) 17:26, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

June 2011

  • You seemed to have warned the wrong person :-) - Mike Rosoft (talk) 17:29, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I think that I reverted the page immediately after you did changing it back tot he same version we were both trying to fix! Sorry, Chris W4chris (talk) 17:34, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Da Hui

While I realize that this AfD discussion was created by a now-blocked vandalism-only account, I believe that, unlike the other AfD this account created, the nomination rationale for Da Hui actually has merit (per WP:SK "bad motivations of the nominator don't have direct bearing on the validity of the nomination"), and I would like to request that the discussion be re-opened to gain community consensus. —KuyaBriBriTalk 17:43, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the timely deleting of the -Biological theory of language- article. You saved me time. I will update the Distributed language article and fix the link. Lam Kin Keung (talk) 05:03, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

accidentally deleted page

The "Botdf (band)" page was deleted by accident and it wants to be reversed,if possible could be the one to do this? it would be appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Magnatank2 (talk • contribs) 01:46, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kištra

Considering that one of the co-founders of this band is a notable person, do you think this should qualify under A7? PanydThe muffin is not subtle 12:50, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes! Yes I did! Never mind...*runs away sheepishly* PanydThe muffin is not subtle 13:48, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Altered speedy deletion rationale: Leslie Leblanc

Hello Mike Rosoft. I am just letting you know that I deleted Leslie Leblanc, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 16:07, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

see your ...

... mail box pls, regards -jkb- (talk) 15:27, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

hi

Dear Mike My "edit" on the IR page is nothing but a repetition of the second paragraph in the opening section of the article itself.I find that section to be an important addendum to the whole article and so I repeated it in this section.Why then did you remove it?Dont you think that in that case the second paragraph of the article should also be removed?Thanks.````Skylark2008 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skylark2008 (talk • contribs) 09:43, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Mike

Look, friend, I understand why editing the Bottled_water to read "In some areas, tap water may contain added fluoride, which contributes to tooth problems and decay." from "In some areas, tap water may contain added fluoride, which helps prevent tooth decay and cavities." might not make sense to someone less scientifically inclined, such as yourself. However, when you have a page such as Dental_fluorosis, which so clearly contradicts the text on your bottled water page, I believe an edit to the truth is in order. So which is it? Is fluoride good or bad for my teeth? Or does wikipedia only associate itself with the generally accepted, rather than the actual truth?

How about this one? Fluoride_poisoning But wait...it's good for my teeth? Which are attached to my gums, which readily absorb chemicals they come in contact with, the same way someone who dips tobacco absorbs his nicotine...something isn't adding up here, Mike. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.139.50.148 (talk) 06:27, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Arabi Island

I marked the article {{db-hoax}} because I Googled it and got no concrete results. Maybe because SDPatrolBot is inactive, it wasn't restored. Please have a second look. Avenue X at Cicero (talk) 07:40, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Well done to the CVU! R RAE 12:42, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Page Vandalised.

Hi Mike, thank you for your help previously with the page for Pierre Lewis, it seems that once again, the individual is again trying to maliciously vandalise the page from various IP Addresses, I've once again reverted and corrected the page. Please could you warn them or give protective status to the page once again. Many thanks once again for your time and help with this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.12.144.122 (talk) 14:22, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mike, the Main IP Address that now seems to be doing it is, 46.208.227.53 many thanks for your help with this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.12.154.189 (talk) 22:10, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
For reverting vandalism off my user page without even me gettin' to know! Avenue X at Cicero (talk) 17:22, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pen Island

Back in 2010 you protected Pen Island from creation because it had repeatedly been created with some nonsense content. There has now been a request to create a redirect pointing to East Pen Island, which seems plausible. Could you please create it? If necessary, I'll watchlist it to prevent the re-insertion of whatever nonsense caused the protection. Yours, Huon (talk) 17:39, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Huon (talk) 20:35, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Mike Rosoft. You have new messages at Mediapr's talk page.
Message added 20:17, 23 August 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

The Cavalry (Message me) 20:17, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Mike,

Thanks for placing on the protection for the Pierre Lewis page, its worked for a while, but the individual is back with intent. many thanks for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.12.153.94 (talk) 09:20, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List of search engines

Hi Mike I would like to add some info in the page List of search engines, as some outdated info are now visible in it. How should I do? Thanks Raphael Perez (talk) 10:23, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Opeth wikipedia

Please do not revert that last change on Opeth's wiki change. Seriously i am getting tired of edits that i do getting reverted because YOU disagree with it. I spoke to Mikael personally from Opeth a long time ago.. and Megadeth ARE one of their influences. So please do not revert that edit again, because the information is correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.203.16.81 (talk) 17:01, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • For the record, I have never edited that article. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 17:14, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why?

Why are you and mcgeddon stalking me?Kfcdesuland (talk) 19:44, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

EDIT:Then why are you following me with a tool that tracks recent changes? I belive that that constitutes as an attack on my integrity and that you should be ashamed and apologize for your blatant attempts at stalking me.Kfcdesuland (talk) 19:53, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sir, why are you vandalizing my perfect edits with your flawed reality. It is a shame that you are a vandal.Kfcdesuland (talk) 19:58, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was out getting RELIABLE sources when you attacked me :( Kfcdesuland (talk) 20:07, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia not a web directory.

I disagree, Wikipdia is an encyclopedia about everything on this planet, which includes my blog. Wikipedia is a web directory of all things. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peterhoworth (talk • contribs) 20:30, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User page deletion

Hi Mike,

Sorry for mistakenly creating a user page (I've seen you've just deleted it). I've left a tag asking for the removal of this user's talk page. Further explanations are available on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. This is the good one.

Regards, ConradMayhew (talk) 18:02, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Said Shavershian

Could you also block all those IPs who were causing trouble. Thanks Nasnema  Chat  19:05, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Six Million Crucifixions references

Mike, a few months back you left a comment on the Six Million Crucifixions page regarding references to sources affiliated with the subject, rather than references from independent authors and third-party publications. What if some of the third party remarks in the article were written directly to the author by all those scholars in the field of the book, none of whom are affiliated with the author? They are very relevant, very significant and independent, but they were never published in an independent publication. Esautomatix (talk) 01:38, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for straightening out my goofy attempt to correct the punctuation at the Vlčice article. Dyslexia must be setting in. All's well. Dr. Dan (talk) 03:50, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Xmas gifts

Nazdar. Můžeš se mrknout sem? Pár vašich adminů asi neví jak trávit vánoce a silvestra a dostávají nápady. Dík, a zvlášť pak tedy PF a vše nejlepší do nového roku 2012, čau -jkb- (talk) 23:07, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Vasundhra Chiyertra or Vasundhara Kashyap or both

Hi Mike. R,
Popular actress, whoever she is she rates 2 WP biographies! Anyway because you are an Admin and have reverted the unreferenced name changes before on 'Vasundhra Chiyertra', (as recently as December 24) I thought I'd let you know that she now has pages under both names. Perhaps I should just tag the newer of these article for CSD-G6 (db-copypaste) or A10 (db-same)?

Funnily both were created by Kofykat (talk · contribs), who was also one of those who was editing the 'Chiyertra' page without edit summaries.

The 'Kashyap' page also qualifies as a cut/paste move as they apparently created the new page here at 15:42:03, 12 December 2011‎ by copying the 'old' page, and then attempted, poorly, to re-direct the original page to it here at 15:42:42, 12 December 2011‎).

Probably the easiest thing is re-direct the 'new' page Vasundhara Kashyap to Vasundhra Chiyertra, assuming that is the persons' 'correct' name! The 'references' don't clear up the issues, other than #1 confirming she has changed her name (was 'Adhisaya)' and the 'Vasundhara' or 'Vasundhra' part.

I have left a cut& paste move warning on Kofykats talk page. If there is a better way to handle this type of situation in future, please advise. Regards, - 220 of Borg 09:16, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Block on User:169.241.28.72

The well deserved block on User:169.241.28.72 on 7th January doesn't seem to have stopped the vandalism which continues on every day since. Could you just check that the block has actually stuck ? Many thanks  Velella  Velella Talk   20:36, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • The block indeed worked; the IP address had been blocked for a year, starting on 7 January 2011. I have posted another warning on the IP's talk page. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 20:58, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oops - sorry about that - with advancing years comes an almost complete indifference as to which year we are in !  Velella  Velella Talk   23:42, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring on Waste autoclave

You appear to be edit warring, neither of the revisions have sources. I have reported you, and the IP editor at WP:3RRN. Pilif12p 22:34, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Wikiwoods

Hello Mike Rosoft. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Wikiwoods, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: "In April 2011 WikiWoods was awarded the Theodor Heuss Prize in Stuttgart" is a claims of significance. Thank you. SmartSE (talk) 00:44, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • OK with me; the author expanded the page after I had nominated it for speedy deletion. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 19:44, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Persian gulf

You don't think the last change constituted vandalism? Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 08:39, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'd say it was an accidental blanking. Please wait for a moment; I have Huggle running and I am dealing with a different user at the moment. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 08:40, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Page: Mohammedan

I'm curious, why did you undo my undo?

The criticism section currently [after your undo] states:

Alexander the Great and/or Cyrus the Great are considered Prophets of Islam

Also, as I told User:Jingiby;

Criticisms of Islam or Muhammad do not belong in this article, this article exists to describe the word "Mohammedan", it's origins and it's use.


There is a whole category devoted to criticism of Islam.

Mr.sam.oliver (talk) 09:57, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cut and paste move of "Working Day and Night"

I am pretty sure that the correct name is "Workin' Day and Night" with an apostrophe. Obviously a cut and past move is unhelpful... but I think the correct response is to ask for a history merge, which I have now done. Yaris678 (talk) 22:36, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the IP vandalism on my talk page. --He to Hecuba (talk) 19:46, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding 2012 in video gaming

It's currently being targeted by 4chan users. You may want to semi-protect it. ScottSteiner ✍ 11:11, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

LittlePileofBuns and BigPileofFun

Hello, thanks to ban these vandals ! Eofren (parler/diskuti/talk) 14:29, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • All right, but it wasn't me who blocked them. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 14:31, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Rollback permission

Hey, Mike. I know you're busy, but I put in an application for rollback permissions yesterday, and I wondered if you had time to review my request. I've previously edited under a different username and retired the account with rollback, so I had to get my vandal reverts back up before I could request again. If you have time, I'd really appreciate it, but no expectations, I know you're busy. Thanks. OSU1980 15:23, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Mike_Rosoft&oldid=474967081"