User talk:Ecpiandy/Archive 9

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5 ← Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11

Inappropriate non-admin closure Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1 gigametre

Hi. I've undone your non-admin closure of this AfD because per WP:NACD, "close calls and controversial decisions are better left to an administrator". In addition, your assessment of consensus was evidently mistaken; if indeed you attempted to determine consensus at all. Please refrain from closing AfD discussions until you have had more experience with AfD procedure and practice. Regards,  Sandstein  09:37, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice, I will probably just refrain from making non-admin closures unless it is general housekeeping. TBrandley (what's up) 22:59, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 January 2013

Meredith Grey

Hey Tate, since you've reviewed several good articles nominations and reviewed Meredith Grey's, could you give your opinion at Talk:Meredith_Grey#In-Universe_and_other_concerns? Thanks. --Sofffie7 (talk) 23:19, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

I will attempt to provide an opinion. TBrandley (what's up) 23:23, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
Another user already removed the tags, but I wouldn't mind to have your opinion in case the article's quality is again questioned... ;) --Sofffie7 (talk) 23:27, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 January newsletter

Signups are now closed; we have our final 127 contestants for this year's competition. 64 contestants will make it to the next round at the end of February, but we're already seeing strong scoring compared to previous years. Colorado Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) currently leads, with 358 points. At this stage in 2012, the leader (Irish Citizen Army Grapple X (submissions)) had 342 points, while in 2011, the leader had 228 points. We also have a large number of scorers when compared with this stage in previous years. Florida 12george1 (submissions) was the first competitor to score this year, as he was last year, with a detailed good article review. Some other firsts:

Featured articles, portals and topics, as well as good topics, are yet to feature in the competition.

This year, the bonus points system has been reworked, with bonus points on offer for old articles prepared for did you know, and "multiplier" points reworked to become more linear. For details, please see Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring. There have been some teething problems as the bot has worked its way around the new system, but issues should mostly be ironed out- please report any problems to the WikiCup talk page. Here are some participants worthy of note with regards to the bonus points:

  • United States Ed! (submissions) was the first to score bonus points, with Portland-class cruiser, a good article.
  • Australia Hawkeye7 (submissions) has the highest overall bonus points, as well as the highest scoring article, thanks to his work on Enrico Fermi, now a good article. The biography of such a significant figure to the history of science warrants nearly five times the normal score.
  • Chicago HueSatLum (submissions) claimed bonus points for René Vautier and Nicolas de Fer, articles that did not exist on the English Wikipedia at the start of the year; a first for the WikiCup. The articles were eligible for bonus points because of fact they were both covered on a number of other Wikipedias.

Also, a quick mention of British Empire The C of E (submissions), who may well have already written the oddest article of the WikiCup this year: did you know that the Fucking mayor objected to Fucking Hell on the grounds that there was no Fucking brewery? The gauntlet has been thrown down; can anyone beat it?

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 01:00, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Spelling

In case you didn't notice it yet.. Sure you didn't mean disturb here? Don't think his day needs distributed, we aren't Robin Hood :P gwickwiretalkedits 05:35, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. TBrandley (what's up) 16:50, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Congrats... You gave an awesome answer in the Teahouse!

Hey TBrandley! Deletion policy is not a simple thing to grasp, but you gave a Teahouse guest leads to all the right places so that s/he could learn about the process. Thanks for doing that! Cheers :)


Great Answer Badge Great Answer Badge
Awarded to those who have given a great answer on the Teahouse Question Forum.

A good answer is one that fits in with the Teahouse expectations of proper conduct: polite, patient, simple, relies on explanations not links, and leaves a talkback notification.

Earn more badges at: Teahouse Badges

Ocaasi t | c 16:47, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, I appreciate it. TBrandley (what's up) 16:50, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Confused editor needs help

Hi, you recently moved File:Marywollstonecraft.jpg in response to a request I placed at Category:Wikipedia files requiring renaming, using {{rename media}}. I'm not sure my request was a good idea, as this file is on Wikimedia Commons. Please read Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Are Commons files transcluded into File: namespace?, where I describe what I was doing and why. Sorry, I probably should have worded that nicer, hope you don't take offense. I'm thinking now after reading the guidelines on moving Wikimedia files, which were only documented over there (I just added Commons guideline info to {{rename media}} documentaion), that the request I submitted on behalf of that other user should be undone as the reason may not be sufficient to meet the criteria. Hoping you can help me sort this out. Wbm1058 (talk) 19:54, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 February 2013

My Talk Page

I appreciate the thought but I can manage my own talk page. Also, you didn't roll it back all the way, the IP was just moving their post to the bottom (where it belongs). Crazynas t 03:49, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Invitation to WikiProject Hotels

Hello, TBrandley.

You are invited to join WikiProject Hotels, a WikiProject and resource dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of hotels, motels and lodging-related topics.

To join the project, just add your name to the member list. Northamerica1000(talk) 08:40, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

GAN drive award

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
Thank you for performing 8 reviews during the November/December 2012 Good Article nomination backlog elimination drive. --Noleander (talk) 21:54, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Jerome

Hi, TBrandley. I'm wondering if you're satisfied that Jerome, Arizona, meets the GA criteria? If so, could you promote it? If not, what else would you like us to do to improve it? Finetooth (talk) 18:58, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time and trouble to review the article and for responding so quickly to my note of February 7. Finetooth (talk) 19:40, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
No problem. TBrandley (what's up) 00:21, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Geographic Location 2

I closed this discussion as no consensus, but you should feel free to relist it as a discussion for merging it with {{Geographic Location}}. That would require tagging both templates with {{tfm}}. Sorry to be pedantic, but you should see the flames on my talk page when I'm not. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 05:01, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for letting me know. Those are my intentions, but I don't believe it is installed in Twinkle. I'll have to create a merger debate manually I suppose, but that is not a large problem. TBrandley (what's up) 00:21, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

The Tea Leaf - Issue Seven

Check out the Teahouse Genie Badge, awarded for solving issues on the Teahouse Wishlist.

Hello again! We have some neat updates about the Teahouse:

  • And...for all of your great work and all of the progress that you've helped the Teahouse make, we hereby award you the Host Badge:


Teahouse Host Badge Teahouse Host Badge
Awarded to hosts at the Wikipedia Teahouse.

Experienced editors with this badge have committed to welcoming guests, helping new editors, and upholding the standards of the Teahouse by giving friendly and patient guidance—at least for a time.

Hosts illuminate the path for new Wikipedians, like Tōrō in a Teahouse garden.

Earn more badges at: Teahouse Badges
You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here

Thanks again! Ocaasi 02:02, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

AN discussion

FYI, a current AN discussion is referencing conduct during an RFC you started. NE Ent 23:51, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. TBrandley (what's up) 23:56, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Page moves

Hi. A user has reverted your page move here in order to maintain the naming convention of over 70 articles. I can't see why you considered this move necessary. Please consider discussing eventual moves like these that can have site-wide consequences. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 20:00, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi. I see your point here, I just figured it would pass the general naming convention guidelines for geographical places but, in this case, it would probably be better to discuss a move. Thanks for the advice. TBrandley (what's up) 00:21, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
There is in fact nothing in the place names MoS that suggests that the names for the Thai provinces either need a parathetical dab or need moving. All Thai provinces are named after their capital city, which by your reasoning would mean that all the city articles would need to be moved to Khon Kaen (city). IMO, such moves just create more work to make a point. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:39, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
Perhaps not specifically, but based on my understanding, the convention is to place uncommon names in brackets, such as "name (film)". That's what I see around generally due to disambiguation concerns according to policy. The primary topic usually matters though. TBrandley (what's up) 23:39, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

RfA: thank you for your support

Thank you for your support and kind words during my RfA, TB. While the outcome was not what I hoped, I hope that my supporters were not disappointed with my performance. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 04:47, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

No problem, but of course I am was not disappointed in you, there appears to just be little mistakes that happened to occur due to enthusiasm I suppose. Regardless, I hope you will consider running for adminship again at some point. TBrandley (what's up) 23:39, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nayland Primary School

Hi. I understand your enthusiasm, but there was in fact a discussion recently about NAC closures a day early, even if the outcome was quite clear. That said, if you close school AfDs as 'redirect' please remember to add the {{R from school}} to the redirect page. Thanks. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:43, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Done, the script I use doesn't allow someone to apprehend a template for redirects. In regards to WP:SNOW closes, I have actually seen numerous other editors close debates in regards to this, but if it is not appropriate in many cases, I don't have a problem to stop performing these types of moves generally. Could you please provide a link to the discussions, as I am interested in them and can't find them anywhere: I tried WT:NAC and WT:DPR but there was nothing recent specifically related to this unless I am blind. Thanks, TBrandley (what's up) 23:39, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Peer review?

Hello, I have recently listed Millennium Force for a peer review and I'm skeptical about how long I'll have to wait and the quality of the PR will be. I know you PR List of roller coaster rankings so I was wondering if you're interested in PR Millennium Force. If not, I totally understand. Thanks, -- Astros4477 (Talk) 21:48, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I'll attempt to review within the next few days if possible. TBrandley (what's up) 23:39, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel Donnelly (journalist)

Why did you relist? it's clear consensus. LibStar (talk) 04:59, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. LibStar (talk) 05:16, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi. I relisted the debate because, though borderline, there were only two arguments for deletion aside from the nominator themselves. One of these arguments not actually demonstrate why it was not yet notable in their opinion so it was not that convincing, although it still is somewhat. If I were an administrator, I would not feel appropriate closing the debate with a consensus to delete. Based on this, I believe further comments are still necessary before a decision can be made by an administrator. TBrandley (what's up) 05:35, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
that's a big call you're making as a non admin. Would recommend you not relist in unanimous voting circumstances. regards LibStar (talk) 05:36, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
Judgment calls, all around. If anyone cares -- though I haven't checked the guidelines, I would tend to side with Lib here on the substantive issue. I've certainly seen some admins close !votes like that one as deletes. So, I do think as Lib suggests that it is the better course to not make a non-admin relist in identical situations. On the non-substantive issue that Iron raises at AN/I, I agree with him as well in what he said on that page. For the same reasons raised by Lib as to the main issue -- if it can be dealt with with more easily, by talkpage communication, it relieves the community of what might otherwise be needless discussion. Escalation to AN/I isn't IMHO the better way to go if there hasn't been an opportunity yet for the editor to discuss the issue. My two cents, but from my ample time here I would expect that most editors at AN/I would agree with that point.--Epeefleche (talk) 05:54, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
I have reverted the relist for now, pending further discussion. Besides, another delete vote has since been added and therefore an administrator should be able to close the debate easily now with a consensus to delete. TBrandley (what's up) 06:00, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
Actually, my first above comment was based on gut and what I've seen, but now that I look at WP:RELIST I see the relevant language is: "if at the end of the initial seven-day period, the discussion has only a few participants (including the nominator), and/or it seems to be lacking arguments based on policy, it may be appropriate for the closer to relist it, to solicit further discussion to determine consensus." So, nothing in it to suggest that non-admins have lesser powers than admins. And arguably the relist met wp:relist, in that there were "only a few participants." So no violation here. Still, its not a relist I would have made myself, as I've seen admins close such !votes as delete. BTW -- just so all is transparent, Lib and I were two of the three in the delete camp at the AfD. Still, I don't think that impacts my view on this issue.--Epeefleche (talk) 06:03, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I support the relisting. As I mentioned in the AfD, WP:RELIST does not specify that admins must be involved in borderline relisting, and in fact it is in no way related to non-admin closures. I believe WP:NAC was used as the baseline for the argument in that it's recommended admins close close-call closures. NAC is only an essay and not related to RELIST in any way shape or form. In fact, NAC is the only place where it's suggested admins take care of close call situations in XfD. The relist was closer to 'should be relisted under WP:RELIST' than 'do not relist'. @Libstar, I don't think you should be giving the recommendation that relisting should not be done in unanimous instances as clearly RELIST includes that possibility. You got the ANI wrong, and now it seems even the policy since going to any admin in any situation would not be helpful as TBrandley has not gone against any policy, guideline, or essay. Mkdwtalk 06:38, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

I don't think you should be giving the advice in regards to this matter." who are you to make the call? TBrandley heeded my request and changed his mind. LibStar (talk) 06:40, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
I changed it to "I don't think you should be giving the recommendation that relisting should not be done in unanimous instances as clearly RELIST includes that possibility" but you were probably replying as I was still typing. Like you decided to give advice to TBrandley, I decided to give you advice since that recommendation is not based in policy. Mkdwtalk 06:46, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

on the same token, i think almost all closing admins would have closed as delete. instead we are all wasting so much time on this AfD with extra delete !votes and arguing here. could have been avoided easily. TBrandley thank you for listening. it is appreicated LibStar (talk) 06:48, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

No problem, after that extra delete argument had been cast, then it was time to simply revert the relist and let an administrator close the debate soon. If it had not of been added, then we could have still been discussing whether it was appropriate in the case. Regardless, thanks anyone for their comments. TBrandley (what's up) 00:31, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
I don't understand the angst here. This is just a conversation. I agree with some, and disagree with some, of what others have done. I commented -- hopefully all will take my thoughts in the same civil manner that TBrandley is displaying. I'm not sure what was seen to be out of line about Mkdw expressing his thoughts as well. He is an editor with 15,000 edits under his belt (and, for whatever its worth, a high potential-admin score), expressing his view, and basing it on policy. Why would we want to chill his desire to contribute in that manner to a collegial group discussion? Or those who commented at the AN/I expressing their thoughts there. That all seems appropriate, IMHO Anyway, for what it is worth, I personally would not have relisted the AfD, do not see anything in policy to indicate that that was clearly wrong however, do not think the issue was AN/I-worthy, and commend LibStar for raising the issue on this talkpage and Mkdw for contributing to the discussion with a comment based on policy and TBrandley for maintaining composure and keeping an open mind..--Epeefleche (talk) 00:56, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

2012 Burgas bus bombing

Thanks for closing the Afd related to 'International reactions to the 2012 Burgas bus bombing'. I have now taken the content I believe worthy of keeping and transferred it to the host article. I would now formally ask you to merge the articles' histories. Thanks, -- Ohconfucius ping / poke 04:05, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

No problem, but unfortunately I don't serve Wikipedia as an administrator, you'll have to ask a current administrator to merge the histories together. Sorry. TBrandley (what's up) 04:10, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
10-4. -- Ohconfucius ping / poke 06:23, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Couple of things

you probably aren't aware of: your talk page is too wide to fit on a normal 13" laptop screen, and I can't find a link to your archives. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:19, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, I've added a link to my archives but I am not certain about its width. I have attempted to address the coding but nothing fits with the talk page. I'd be happy to here suggestions regarding it. TBrandley (what's up) 23:39, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
I'm finding the width to be obstructive to reading on a smaller screen too. Have you sought advice about the coding? -- Trevj (talk) 09:46, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
Try moving the userboxes and the large photo to your user page where they belong. Otherwise, if you've formatted the talk page using CSS, try using the standard talk page format. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:50, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
I already have a number of userboxes and images such as these at the user page, some were here to help some understand things about me before commenting. In any case, I have replaced it with a more visible look to some other editors. TBrandley (what's up) 00:31, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. That looks a lot better. There are no hard and fast rules for it except those at WP:User pages. Would you believe that even I was asked to remove stuff from my talk page? Not everyone on Wikipedia is a young user, and some are grouchy old professors like me who prefer not to see user talk pages looking like a teenager's bedroom wall - maturity goes a long way to the credibility of this encyclopedia (tips you can give to your younger colleagues here ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:07, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the comments, I believe that the design can be considered to be nice supposedly but it is more appropriate for the user namespace. I understand that user talk pages should probably stay simple, especially for newer editors at Wikipedia. In real life, my bedroom is actually very messy though :) TBrandley (what's up) 03:37, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

PERM

Again, not wanting to dent your enthusiasm, but while NAO are not forbidden (although not generally helpful), actual closures are best left to admins, and we usually leave around 7 days before closing for a non-response. It has happened in the past that we have disagreed with NAC. You might like to read all the threads here. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:15, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia is a community and disagreeing sometimes is plausible, I don't have a problem with disagreeing occasionally for good causes and my enthusiasm hasn't been damaged at all here. I just read all the comments there as suggested and I noticed there didn't seem to be consensus. Regardless, I attempt to follow those comments there, but somebody did actually suggest non-administrators asking questions regarding image copyright statuses could be beneficial, so if it is non-controversial (I will leave that in your judgement), I could continue to do that when necessary but avoid actual non-administrator closures in this case if you wish. Thanks for informing me. TBrandley (what's up) 03:37, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
I think that sometimes a good non-admin asking questions at PERM when a user requests the file mover right is beneficial. Don't know too much about other rights, but not all admins are aware of copyright of images and the like, so a good intervention from a non-admin with the knowledge is desired. My two cents. — ΛΧΣ21 04:16, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
I would usually just stick to confirmed because they are new users and usually it is much easier to determine the closing result and there seems to be another active non-administrator there, but I know that is poor reasoning. TBrandley (what's up) 04:20, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
You can give a hand in the area you prefer. I am used to evaluate and ask tough questions at the users asking for filemover right because I have a considerable knowledge about files, and I don't want unprepared users to hold it as a trophy. That's my reasoning :) — ΛΧΣ21 04:27, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

GA proposals

Hey TBrandley, care to take a look at my GA Proposals and see what you think? They're at subheadings of Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations#Dead Refs OK?. Is that the best place for them? Ryan Vesey 17:07, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Sure, that is the best place for the proposals because it is related specifically to the good article criteria and that is actually the most active page for things like that. I'll take a look at them more thoroughly now. TBrandley (what's up) 17:10, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks & good close

You did a better job closing the AFD than when I tried a week ago. I thought it was a no-brainer but I lacked the technical skills to do the job correctly but I'm glad you saw it the way I saw it. It was a snow-keep & I'm glad you were Bold. Your act was in good faith and it improved the encyclopedia. I'm glad you followed IAR as well. Good job, Tomato expert1 (talk) 07:02, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I saw a number of keep and merge arguments in the debate, but there is a well established guideline that articles for deletion should only be used for deletion discussion, that's what proposed mergers is for. Some of these arguments, however, were obviously inappropriate and against WP:ATA so I ignored those, but for the most, there was a consensus among valid arguments to keep or merge, and again, articles for deletion is not used for proposed mergers. In short: thank you. TBrandley (what's up) 17:04, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
Yeah man, no problem. We need more common sense wikipedians like you who realize that Wikipedia is a loosely defined, totally organic collaboration rather than admins who think we're too dumb to see the forest through the trees. I closed the AFD here but an admin over-ruled me and who the firetruck am I to stand up & challenge an admin right? I mainly just wanted to provide the diff of my actual close since I was too lazy to look it up yesterday when I left the message, but I went off on a side-rant. Sorry for that--I'll keep it brief: you should be an admin, because admins think they are better than people like us. I'm glad you stood up to the man & held your ground (so far... they waited 5 whole days before they stabbed me in the back so don't get too cocky just yet, anything can happen between now and then). Tomato expert1 (talk) 19:10, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata

Please be careful with your interwiki removals: you removed all interwikis on Penticton but the link to sr.wikipedia is not on the Wikidata item here. --Rschen7754 01:56, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, I added that link to Wikidata now, so it would seem appropriate to remove them now. TBrandley (what's up) 02:03, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
And again on Kelowna. Please check before blindly removing! --Rschen7754 02:42, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
I definitely did check and found all of the links in place here at Wikidata, just did again to ensure. What was I missing? TBrandley (what's up) 02:49, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
sr.wikipedia again, according to User:Addbot/log/wikidata. --Rschen7754 02:57, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

I feel like such a heel ...

Starship uploaded a Flickr file marked all rights reserved to Commons and then when it was deleted, uploaded it here. But for some reason neglected to put it back in the article. So I deleted it and left him a stiff note on his talkpage. I note that he has had several files deleted on Commons and that you have spoken to him there about copyright, so I'm letting you know. I'd really like to be wrong on this one. Yngvadottir (talk) 16:41, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

I noticed that from the deletion log. The user has actually uploaded a number of copyright violations, but likely in good faith generally. I have previously been mistaken as well about Flickr licenses that can be used but now I am familiar. It is a common mistake, but if the problem persists especially with the same image, then it is a substantial concern. Starship is currently taking an adoption course and there is probably a image licensing lesson, which is good but I'm not sure if that is going well. Either way, I believe Starship is just learning. TBrandley (what's up) 23:19, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Submission

I can't find any specific sources on the information. The ones that are currently on there are the ones saying the exact information even though it's not FOXSports or espn or any other national media sites.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Rodney_Smith_%28American_football%29 173.78.231.251 (talk) 23:39, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for the replying late, but try performing a search at Google News Archive or Google Scholar. If you can't find anything, I'm afraid the topic may be non-notable under Wikipedia policy. TBrandley (what's up) 23:11, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Aircraft carrier style

I moved the Aircraft carrier style information to Gangnam Style in popular culture#China before seeing the official move notice, as its notability is comparable to other parodies. Hope that's alright. If you still want it on the main page, you can revert. AngusWOOF (talk) 21:55, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know and performing the merger. That seems to be fine, good work! TBrandley (what's up) 23:11, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Response to comment on my talk page

Did you read what came before you commented on my page? Jivesh wrote that after I made ONE edit. He starts by bringing up something from the past (Go to "Don't adopt this tone with me", then needles me, then tells me to stop talking to him like I'm his relative and he's the one that was aggressive first? Please be a little more equitable in your criticism. Sometimes you just have to do a little more reading before you assume the worst about someone, thanks--Aichik (talk) 22:55, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) That doesn't really matter, Aichik. You personally insulted someone and was reported at an administrative noticeboard because of that. I could also give them a warning if I found anything, but that is just a personal attack made by you and thus knowledge should be shown for your actions. I reviewed that section, and didn't find anything but the addition of "personal attack removed" added by another user for your comments. Regardless, you don't just continue what another editor is doing and two administrators have warned you, [1] this is your obviously insulting comment. Please refrain from making such attacks, take a look at Kww (talk · contribs)'s comments at your talk page please. TBrandley (what's up) 23:11, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Millennium Force PR

Hey I just wanted to ask again about peer reviewing Millennium Force. It still hasn't been reviewed and I was wondering if you're interested. If not, I understand.-- Astros4477 (Talk) 03:17, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I completely forgot about the peer review. I'll review as soon as possible, will attempt to review some tonight. TBrandley (what's up) 03:27, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Renaming/Moving Files

Why is some of the files you change when I requested them because they new name was more suitable, but when I put preferred you declined it. Honestly I was trying to make some of them more informational with the titles and getting rid of the numbers. JayJayWhat did I do? 04:02, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi JayJay. I accepted and declining these requests based on the general convention of WP:FMV/W. I renamed some, but others I declined because of this convention. Files are not renamed typically because another title may look slightly nicer, mainly on the basis that most image names are not viewed or important to the encyclopedia. For example, a file named "File:WikipediansTakesNewYork'07.jpg" seems to already be fine based on the convention and should not be renamed to "File:Wikipedians Takes New York'07.jpg" to make it beautiful and more appealing or to make it uniform with other related files. Some were renamed because it was stated the names are misleading, which did appear to be correct in my judgement. I hope you understand, but that convention contains further information if necessary and that is what I saw. TBrandley (what's up) 04:09, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
Okay so files that have numbers are fine as long as they are not misleading? JayJayWhat did I do? 17:07, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
Correct. TBrandley (what's up) 02:02, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

SheiKra Peer Review

Hi, I know this message is going to sound really similar to the one by Astro's above but I just have to ask if you could please do a peer review of SheiKra. Looking at the history of peer reviews, I have a feeling that it will be like six months before a review is made if I didn't ask someone. I want to nominate it for FA status once a copy-edit is complete and getting this done is one step closer. If you can't/don't want to review this article, no worries. :) --Dom497 (talk) 12:51, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Wikiproject Articles for creation Needs You!

WikiProject Articles for creation Backlog Elimination Drive

WikiProject AFC is holding a one month long Backlog Elimination Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from March 1st, 2013 – March 31st, 2013.

Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 2000 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!

Delivered by User:EdwardsBot on behalf of Wikiproject Articles for Creation at 14:01, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Renaming/Moving Files

Why is some of the files you change when I requested them because they new name was more suitable, but when I put preferred you declined it. Honestly I was trying to make some of them more informational with the titles and getting rid of the numbers. JayJayWhat did I do? 04:02, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi JayJay. I accepted and declining these requests based on the general convention of WP:FMV/W. I renamed some, but others I declined because of this convention. Files are not renamed typically because another title may look slightly nicer, mainly on the basis that most image names are not viewed or important to the encyclopedia. For example, a file named "File:WikipediansTakesNewYork'07.jpg" seems to already be fine based on the convention and should not be renamed to "File:Wikipedians Takes New York'07.jpg" to make it beautiful and more appealing or to make it uniform with other related files. Some were renamed because it was stated the names are misleading, which did appear to be correct in my judgement. I hope you understand, but that convention contains further information if necessary and that is what I saw. TBrandley (what's up) 04:09, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
Okay so files that have numbers are fine as long as they are not misleading? JayJayWhat did I do? 17:07, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
Correct. TBrandley (what's up) 02:02, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Millennium Force PR

Hey I just wanted to ask again about peer reviewing Millennium Force. It still hasn't been reviewed and I was wondering if you're interested. If not, I understand.-- Astros4477 (Talk) 03:17, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I completely forgot about the peer review. I'll review as soon as possible, will attempt to review some tonight. TBrandley (what's up) 03:27, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
Just a friendly reminder that you started the peer review :).-- Astros4477 (Talk) 01:36, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, I have been very busy over the last few days and currently I am tethering due to lack of internet connection because my company has a large backlog, so I have not been able to be online often because of that. I will attempt to review further soon, but you may wish to request a review from another editor who would be able to perform it before me, although I may be active tonight; the choice is up to you, but I will get to it in the end regardless. TBrandley (what's up) 02:08, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
I totally understand. I have contacted User:Chetvorno.-- Astros4477 (Talk) 02:37, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

SheiKra Peer Review

Hi, I know this message is going to sound really similar to the one by Astro's above but I just have to ask if you could please do a peer review of SheiKra. Looking at the history of peer reviews, I have a feeling that it will be like six months before a review is made if I didn't ask someone. I want to nominate it for FA status once a copy-edit is complete and getting this done is one step closer. If you can't/don't want to review this article, no worries. :) --Dom497 (talk) 12:51, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

See my reply above to a simlar topic regarding a review. TBrandley (what's up) 02:08, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Edmonton

Hi TBradley. The Talk:Edmonton/GA3 reassessment is heading into its fourth month. You have had a good response from a few people interested in saving the article so it is probably time to make a decision. AIRcorn (talk) 22:54, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for replying late, been busy, but it does generally meet the good article criteria now so thank you for performing the closure. TBrandley (what's up) 02:08, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Heya

The new signature looks nifty! Just thought I would drop in and say that. — -dainomite   03:51, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. TBrandley (review) 03:59, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Hey TBrandley, I just wanted to make a quick comment regarding your new signature. I have pretty decent vision (20/20) and the colors are a little hard for me to make out. I would imagine that visually impaired individuals might also have an issue with it. Perhaps you could check the accessibility Wiki-Project which I believe has some guidelines regarding signatures? The orange is what I think is rather hard to read. It may just be the fact that my eyes have been dozing in and out lately and if so, sorry for bothering you. Just something to think about. Thanks. Go Phightins! 03:51, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

I can see the signature fine, but that may just be because I have a really bright screen which I set on purpose. I have seen WP:ACCESS previously, perhaps modifying the orange part of the signature to make it darker would address the problem? TBrandley (review) 03:59, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
Perhaps, or perhaps once I get a good night's sleep tomorrow I'll be able to see it fine. My screen is set on an about average brightness, and it is reasonably visible, I'm just not sure if it would be as visible to others. Darkening the orange would probably help. But in any event, I'm going to sleep. Go Phightins! 04:01, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
Okay, I have darkened the signature to ensure accessibility hopefully. Enjoy your night then. TBrandley (review) 04:07, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Co-nominate me for RFA?

Stradivarius has convinced me to run for RFA, so I remembered that you had asked me in the past and wanted to know if you or Secret (I'll post this on their page as well) wanted to co-nominate me. (Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Tokyogirl79) Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:32, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

I'd be more than happy to co-nominate you! Besides, more nominations can only help your request for adminship's chances for succeeding which is already quite high ;) TBrandley (review) 15:39, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
Submitted a co-nomination now, if you don't mind. TBrandley (review) 16:00, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

AN/I

On what basis are you accusing me of "involvement"? 28bytes (talk) 20:08, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

TBrandley, I want to thank you for striking your comment at AN/I. I have a lot of respect for editors who are willing to do their own investigation and reconsider their position if the evidence leads them to do so. Cheers, 28bytes (talk) 03:19, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for your understanding and civility! TBrandley (review) 23:45, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

AfD

Hi, now that this article has been merged Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Heidi_Hazell how can I view what the original standalone article said? Thanks. --Flexdream (talk) 03:03, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Relisting of papabili AfD

Hi TBrandley, I'm interested to hear why you thought a relist was appropriate at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of papabili in the 2013 papal conclave. Per WP:RELIST, relisting is for when a "discussion has only a few participants" (certainly not the case here) or "it seems to be lacking arguments based on policy." Do you think it's the latter, then? As the guideline says, a relist shouldn't substitute for a no consensus close, which might have been more appropriate there. I have no problems with NACs—I perform them occasionally at AfD and frequently at RM—but I believe this decision would have been better left to an administrator. --BDD (talk) 23:48, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

I would have to agree that was probably an erroneous relist. The discussion had been plentiful and reasoned, such that it could and should had been closed rather than relisted. -- KTC (talk) 23:59, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
Been reverted now, sorry for the trouble there! TBrandley 06:21, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Edit request

hey in the honours section can you please add in the chelsea this: Barclays premier league Asia Trophy 10-11,uefa super cup runner up 2012,community shield runner up 2012,fifa club world cup runner up 2012.and also in his 12-13 season if you talk about his recent goals that would be good as well.thank you

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Premier_League_Asia_Trophy ps: and also that he scored in that final after coming as a sub LimbR014 (talk • contribs) 16:40, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

While I would love to assist you, you suggestions are not supported by reliable sources. Wikipedia itself only is not considered to be reliable, although you may used the sources from that article. TBrandley 18:31, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's articles for improvement

Hello, Ecpiandy. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:Today's articles for improvement#Main Page deployment, or not?.
Message added by Northamerica1000(talk) 09:44, 16 March 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Thanks for notifying me of the discussion, but I don't feel like getting involved with such matters at this time. TBrandley 18:31, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Congrats

Thank you for the kind comments regarding the promotion of Broken Sword, I appreciate it. --Khanassassin ☪ 18:20, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Your welcome, it was very nice work! TBrandley 18:31, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

RE: Sahand Ace

Hey TBrandley! Sorry for that notification. It was a mistake. Thanks and happy editing! Cheers! Mediran (t • c) 11:17, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

That's fine, although I was actually initially my mistake. I accidentally placed the {{db-disambig}} tag on the page and came back to replace it: at that time, you probably saw the previous deletion tag and notified me because of that. Either way, we are all human and all make mistakes on occasion; typically, there is no harm and there is none now. TBrandley 11:22, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
Yes indeed, I have saw the previous cached revision and just as I was going to decline it, I saw that you have already changed it back. Well, it's already resolved and thanks anyway for your consideration. Mediran (t • c) 11:55, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Relist

Please consider relisting Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Church of the Holy Trinity, Singapore. One editor cites inherent notability and the other says marginal sources but mostly talks about my other nominations. I don't feel this is a solid keep outcome. The same arguments are made at the other AFDs. Mkdwtalk 13:23, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

As per your request, I have reverted my closure and relisted the debate. I figured there was a clear consensus to keep in the discussion, but did not look at the factors to them. There should be a clear outcome in another week. However, please understand that any future closes would obtain consensus based on the current votes and any valid future arguments. TBrandley 13:23, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Thanks so much for that. Would you also consider Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Church of the Risen Christ. Identical !votes there too. Im likely to withdraw if more editors are willing to contribute meaningful guideline based arguments like they did st the one I already withdrew but in the meantime if you're willing to humor me. Mkdwtalk 13:26, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
Yes of course. Thank you. NAC's are always tricky but I certainly appreciate your willingness to rope the AFD a bit longer. Happy edits. Mkdwtalk 13:27, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
Thank you. I've known numerous editors who have had a bad history with non-admin closures including myself, but I always attempt to follow the written policy. In any case, I've relisted the other debate as well (another contributor probably would have make the same decision here), hopefully further valid arguments can be seen. TBrandley 13:34, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
Yeah tell me about it. I was taken to ANI for abuse of authority for NAC of an AFD that had 5 good keep arguments and no guideline/policy based nomination with no other delete support arguments. Mkdwtalk 13:42, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Reflist columns

Hi TBrandley, can you elaborate on your edit summary here? With the "30em" piped, I still see only one column of references. Hwy43 (talk) 04:51, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps it depends on your computer screen, browser and such because I see it as three columns. TBrandley 07:11, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
Ok. I'll refrain from deleting from other article in future knowing this. Also, thanks for returning to the various article that were not on my watchlist to add references to support urban area populations. Hwy43 (talk) 04:20, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
For keeping Wikipedia, and my talk page clean! Sitethief~talk to me~ 01:21, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Well, I figured I should probably patrol recent changes for vandalism, as the bot is down for a while. Ultimately, I got into reverting some vandalism and plan to continue doing so for a while. Besides, there seemed to be a high vandalism (crime) rate at the time anyways. In any case, the barnstar is much appreciated and it was no problem. TBrandley 01:35, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Some cookies!

Here's a plate full of cookies to share!
Hi Ecpiandy/Archive 9, here are some delicious cookies to help brighten your day! However, there are too many cookies here for one person to eat all at once, so please share these cookies with at least two other editors by copying {{subst:Sharethecookies}} to their talk pages. Enjoy! AutomaticStrikeout (T • C • AAPT) 02:44, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
Thank you, AutomaticStrikeout. The cookies are much appreciated, especially considering the weather ;) TBrandley 06:29, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
My pleasure! Don't forget to share! AutomaticStrikeout (T • C • AAPT) 14:35, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
Greedy me! TBrandley 04:09, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Y2K

I was thinking to ask a review! Can you change the result to "Withdrawn" on good faith! Because till now, not a single RS has been found which assures the notability! --Tito Dutta (contact) 03:23, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Okay, I've changed the wording and structure appropriately, as per your request. TBrandley 04:03, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Editing help

Good day TBrandley,

I got to this page a I seek help in resolving an issue with a page I created a few months ago for my former boss, MGen(ret) Alain Forand.

The disputed text is the generic biography used form another DND officiel site which I used from what I was given by the Regiment's office.

Although it is now considered a copyright violation, aside of re-writng everything, how can I revert this context and show his biography ?

Cheers

SWaterhouse from Montreal, QC, CA Steve (talk) 12:31, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, first of all, I would suggest taking a look at the conflict of interest policy if you are writing for your former bosses. The website you were using, National Defense, does not appear to have released its text into the public domain. I'm afraid the only option may be to rewrite the context into the article using your own words – see copyright violations policy. Sorry, but taking a look at some public domain resources may be useful. TBrandley 16:54, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
good work Gowtham avg (talk) 13:20, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
I'm not really sure what I did to deserve this, but thank you. TBrandley 16:56, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Remember me? :-)

Hey Tate! How are you?

As you've probably noticed, I've been away from Wikipedia for over 2 months now. I have literally been so busy with school as of late that I have had no time to work on Wikipedia. How has life on the 'pedia been for you? Any new achievements? Any conflicts worth sharing? I hope you've been enjoying your time on the site. I notice that you have >25,000 edits! Wow! The last time I checked I think you were just crossing the 10,000 plateau. Congratulations on your great accomplishment.

I think one of our last discussions was about our yearly television schedules. What have you been watching recently? Did you catch the premiere of Bates Motel on Monday night? It was a great pilot, especially if you're a fan of Psycho. Any new shows that you've taken an interest in?

As I said to Sophie, I plan on making my return to Wikipedia around summertime, during which I'll have plenty of time to resume collaborating with you guys and working on WP:SGH! How has the project been holding up lately? I imagine it has winded down since the summer, when we were whipping up good articles by the dozen! I hope to hear from you soon.

Regards, TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 02:29, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Joey, I'm very good. Well, I've successfully nominated the article Kamloops Airport and Omak, Washington for good article status, and obtained a unsuccessful featured article nomination for Penticton Regional Airport. I don't believe I've been involved in any conflicts or arguments since you last contributed; but nothing major if there was a conflict. I have been enjoying myself here, although I've been focusing on geography or airport articles to work on recently rather than television here. With daylight occurring longer now, I have been also enjoying myself outside of Wikipedia as well. I haven't been watching much television lately, other than Touch which has had an interesting plot recently in season two. The Grey's Anatomy project has been rather slow lately, but all pages on the topic are fine and appropriate. Not much vandalism has occurred on these articles, but you may wish to see Template:Grey's Anatomy as many are removing Sadie Harris from the list consistently. Regardless, I hope you are doing well outside of Wikipedia. TBrandley 04:03, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Glad to hear you're doing well. Congratulations on your new good articles! I heard Touch was a good show, but unfortunately it's been receiving horribly low ratings. Ah, still problems with Template:Grey's Anatomy? It's never going to end with that one. Well, I'm looking forward to summertime when we can get back to voracious editing; I miss staying up till 4am working on an articles! TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 14:01, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
I am looking forward to that time as well, and yes, the problems with Template:Grey's Anatomy and the removal of valid characters are continuous. TBrandley 06:12, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Stephen Colbert

You might get a chuckle out of watching this. Legoktm (talk) 05:26, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for letting me know. TBrandley 05:27, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Moot?

How am I supposed to interpret this? An article has been vandalised, a vandal has not been blocked, yet you wrote that the situation is of no relevance to admins. To the best of my knowledge, admins are the only editors who can protect pages and block editors. Who is supposed to fix the situation, then? Thanks in advance, Toccata quarta (talk) 07:13, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

The discussion was inactive and an administrator already gave a warning to the editor, thus the discussion is "moot". More specifically, when applicable, then report them at administrator intervention against vandalism or requests for page protection if the vandalism continues. Of course I care about vandalism at Wikipedia, I revert some pieces of vandalism on a regular basis. The IP address is shared, as noted at the administrator noticeboard, and if they continue after a final warning, then report them at administrator intervention against vandalism. That seems to be the general convention. Cheers. TBrandley 19:14, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for replying. I have now noticed that I got your text mixed up with the comment "Moot. Not an admin issue." by IP 88.104.27.2, and ended up conflating these two things. I apologise for my hasty reading. Toccata quarta (talk) 19:32, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

My "test edit"

Isn't "Bongwarrior" an objectionable username, due to its endorsement of illegal drug use?Gropman (talk) 04:08, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for mistaking it as a test edit, but it did seem like that due to the lack of reasoning. However, I still don't believe "Bongwarrior" is an objectionable username, because the editor is an administrator and probably wouldn't of passed an requests for adminship if they're username was not appropriate. I am also not aware of any endorsement related to illegal drug use, but a concern has not previously appeared. TBrandley 04:18, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Grey's Anatomy edit

Hi TBrandley. I received a message from you about the edits I had made on the Grey's Anatomy page. I believe the deletion you refer to was crediting Matt Mania as the Director of Photography. Matt Mania was the Key Grip on the show for some years, and has since been dismissed along with his entire crew. Thank you. Harmsdesign (talk) 00:30, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, feel free to revert my contribution now. TBrandley 01:00, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Ever considered WP:TFL?

Hello TBrandley, your recently promoted featured list would make a very suitable candidate for main page inclusion if you would be interested in nominating it. We have a process at Today's featured list which enables us to create blurbs and then gather community support for lists to be presented on the main page every Monday. The process allows up to ten nominations at the submissions page, so if it's full you may need to wait, but it would be great if you could consider nominating your list, or helping out with those other lists that have already been nominated. Thanks for your ongoing interest in the featured list process. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:01, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, I'll give it a shoot. TBrandley 18:15, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Thanks for all the help on my AfC!! But if you could you please help my article get reviewed faster??? Also, could you please help me increase the size of the History and other headings?? That is ony if you have the time... Thanks again.. The Wikimon (talk) 18:10, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the beer, I will attempt to assist the article as much as possible when I have some further time to spare. Cheers. TBrandley 00:01, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Is it a joke or is it a joke??

Checked out the SPI... Are you serious or is the joke on Automatic Strikeout?? Please let me know if I messed up the setup.... Cause I kinda posted this same message on his page and den deleted it... The Wikimon (talk) 02:29, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes, it is entirely serious. TBrandley 02:43, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
No come on, seriously?? Actually, I don't get what a sock puppet means. I mean I know what it is, but how can someone manipulate it??? Anyways, sad to know that some friend of mine is a sock puppet. The Wikimon (talk) 03:42, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
G'evening the Wikimon. A sockpuppet is someone who abusively uses multiple accounts, usually to push their point of view or otherwise cause disruption. TBrandley, in a rather lame attempt at humor I might add , implicated a few of his friends in an investigation as a joke. Hope you are enjoying your day. I am headed to bed. Good night. Go Phightins! 03:46, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
I'm just waiting for an admin who is sick and tired of this tomfoolery to come across and block all of us stating that we admitted it. Ryan Vesey 03:48, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
Haha! But I was not implicated there Mr. Vesey, so I will still be around to disrupt for the both of us. I mean for me. I mean, that's it. This is tomfoolery. Go Phightins! 03:54, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
It's a joke Wikimon. A sockpuppetry is when one person owns multiple accounts. They can use them to avoid scrutiny for their edits or to appear to manipulate consensus driven discussions (like AfDs). It is a blockable offense for good reason. TBrandley nominated us all for April Fools' Day. Ryan Vesey 03:45, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
You know what you're a bunch of jokers... Wait till I get back at ya!!! The Wikimon (talk) 03:51, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
This is the best joke of them all in Wikipedian history, perhaps. My best friend really is a sockpuppet though; you should meet him, his name is Joe. TBrandley 03:56, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiCup/History/2013/Submissions/TBrandley

Hi- I'm afraid I've removed the featured list you added. As it was promoted last round, it could not be eligible for points this round. J Milburn (talk) 09:43, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Okay, thanks anyways. TBrandley 14:05, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

April Fools RfC

I put your comment in the comments section instead of support or oppose just to be safe. Feel free to move it if you wish. AutomaticStrikeout (T • C • AAPT) 04:00, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Canoe BC

Canoe may be in the City of Salmon Arm now, but it had a Post Office and its own CPR station and was established and known as Canoe, British Columbia; there are many precdents for keeping comma-province over comma-neighbourhood; one that comes to mind is Aldergrove, British Columbia which is part of Langley but isn't Aldergrove, Langley. I urge you move it back; this should have been a move discussion.Skookum1 (talk) 03:44, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Okay, I'll revert back for further discussion. TBrandley 02:00, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Omak School District GA nom

Howdy- I reviewed your nomination of Omak School District as a GA. While I was personally shocked at the amount of information included in the article, I did not feel it met the standards for a GA. You can find my review here. Thank you for your contributions. PrairieKid (talk) 05:00, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for letting me know. TBrandley 16:45, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Various talks

Did you intend for this to be posted at that talk page or at Talk:Aldergrove, British Columbia? Hwy43 (talk) 23:44, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

It was intended as a reply for Arctic Gnome, thus I believe so. TBrandley 23:46, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
Actually, it may have been the incorrect place for the message. TBrandley 16:45, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Jeff Hershey page deletion

Hello There, My name is Jeff Hershey. I am a past and present professional international touring musician. I see that my biography page was recently deleted by you. I have been trying to figure out why this is? I have many, many resources to back up all claims. Now when you search my name on Wikipedia, it directs you to a page of a band I was formerly in and is now defunct. The information on that page is highly outdated and incorrect, as well. Please help. It's obvious to me that there was not enough research done. Many resources can be found at www.jeffhersheyandtheheartbeats.com Thank You Blanks 13 Blanks13 (talk) 10:17, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi Jeff, I redirected the article based on an articles for deletion debate which had a clear consensus to do so. The history for the page is still there and was not actually deleted; see here for previous revisions. The articles for deletion discussion concluded that the subject was not notable enough for a stand-alone article per the general notability guideline. You may wish to also see the conflict of interest policy. It was not really about how the claims could be back up, but rather about how many independent reliable sources could be found from numerous pieces of media. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeff Hershey for further information about the debate. If the content in your former band's article appears to be incorrect, then feel free to boldly fix the concerns you have, as long as your edit is not promotional and is sourced by reliable material. Please also see the guideline for primary sources. I appreciate the work you have done as an artist and am assured that you performances are great, but it just is not notable enough apparently. However, if you disagree, then search deeply for some significant sourcing from Google News Archive, HighBeam Research and other search engines. It can actually find enough sources to prove notability sometimes. Cheers. TBrandley 16:45, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for the information. I have resource links to backup claims from national to international press. In your honest opinion...will I be able to get this page put back up with the proper resources? How would I do that? Am I able to start a new page from the ground up?

Thanks, Jeff HersheyBlanks13 (talk) 20:12, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Well, if you add numerous independent, reliable sources and it is significantly different from the version which was redirected, then yes. However, may I ask which sources you maintain currently, or from which publishers? Thanks. TBrandley 14:37, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Invitation to WikiProject Breakfast

Hello, TBrandley.

You are invited to join WikiProject Breakfast, a WikiProject and resource dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of breakfast-related topics.

To join the project, just add your name to the member list. Northamerica1000(talk) 17:12, 6 April 2013 (UTC)


Thanks for the invitation, Northamerica. I've joined the project and look forward to collaborating with you soon. Cheers. TBrandley 14:37, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of roller coaster rankings/archive2

Hey TBrandley, would you mind giving a review for List of roller coaster rankings again? You reviewed it the first time but it wasn't promoted because there weren't enough supports. The second review is being threatened to not be promoted because there's not enough of a consensus. I'd really appreciate it, -- Astros4477 (Talk) 02:04, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I'll attempt to review again within a few days. I would encourage you to request other editors to review as well, though. It can only help the nomination with the constructive feedback regarding the article. Cheers. TBrandley 14:37, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Move Tulameen back to Tulameen, British Columbia

It should be a dab page if anything; Tulameen River, Tulameen Gold Rush.....when we say "the Tulameen" it means the region around the Tulameen River and/or the mining basin/history/rush. "Tulameen" isn't the main primary use, it's dual. Please stop being hasty with this dab-changing of yours, and start doing RMs and/or consult with other BC editors like me and The Interior first.Skookum1 (talk) 03:05, 8 April 2013 (UTC) Why did you http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Olalla,_British_Columbia&curid=20303660&diff=549249523&oldid=528684711 remove this cat from Olalla?] It's on the border of the Okanagan and Similkameen, it's actually on the Similkameen side of the divide.Skookum1 (talk) 03:13, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Okay, understood. However, the page was located at Tulameen, British Columbia and there were formerly no article available at Tulameen which leads me to believe it should be speedy renamed per the Canadian Manual of Style which clearly states settlements which have unique names on Wikipedia may be moved. I'm not familiar with the subject–even though I live near there–but it just seemed to be that no discussion was required. If there are other terms commonly related to the Tulameen Valley as well, then I would support the creation of a disambiguation page. In regards to Olalla, the first sentence confused me, but I have reverted my removal of the valid category now. Cheers. TBrandley 14:37, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Project for RfA nominators

As one of the supporters of the proposal in the 2013 RfC on RfA reform, you are invited to join the new WikiProject for RfA nominators. Please come and help shape this initiative. Regards, Espresso Addict (talk) 18:50, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the inviation, I have decided to join the project. I look forward to collaborating with you there. TBrandley 16:15, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Kettle Valley move inappropriate

The problem is that there is not just a community by that name, there's an area. The community is really just an old rail siding, the valley is that of the West Kettle River and also the main Kettle River; if anything Kettle Valley should be a redirect to the latter..... Your campaign to strip unique placenames has issues, e.g. Eholt is also a notable person's name. Stripping these obscure places of where they are may follow wiki "rules" but it does nothing to make the encyclopedia more readable or accessible and removes context for readers who are not from BC or Canada......please desist......e.g. NB in a similar geographic parallel, there's Christina Lake, British Columbia (the community article) v. Christina Lake (British Columbia) the lake/geography article - don't merge them please, there's reasons for the distinction and lots of other similar examples.Skookum1 (talk) 01:57, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

the Galena Bay (British Columbia) redirect was always to the community because the bay will not have an article itself; in other cases like Seymour Arm vs. Seymour Arm, British Columbia and of course re Williams Lake or Fraser Lake, there's good reason to maintain the geogrpahic (parenthese) dab vs the community comma-province one.....and it's not up for you to decide that one is the main usage, since there is no main usage.Skookum1 (talk) 02:01, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Just noticed the Seymour Arm redlink; which has to be a dab page, there's a notable coastal body of water called Seymour Arm as well as the NE arm of Shuswap Lake - and the community at its head.Skookum1 (talk) 02:02, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
If an article is entitled "city, province" when there is no other article with just the "city", then the convention is to move it appropriately per MOS:CA. If at any time an article on another related topic occurs, then it may be moved back. I don't see the problem here. As a side note, sorry for the lateness in my reply. TBrandley 16:15, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Thorp

Hi again, and thanks for your GA review of Thorp, Washington. If there had just been a few issues with the article, I would've been happy to take care of them myself, but as such, I think I'll defer to someone more knowledgeable about the place. You can go ahead and mark it as failed for now. Thanks for your review—I'm sure it will help guide the article's further development. --BDD (talk) 19:43, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. TBrandley 16:15, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

My question

My question precisely. I simply put it back to the perfectly appropriate format it was at originally. Which you reverted it from. Why edit war over an acceptable, first-use style?--Epeefleche (talk) 22:44, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

That is a more readable format, with three columns showing in the reference section depending on which computer you use. I'm not the editor who originally placed in that format, but I was curious as to why it was changed. In my opinion, there needs to be further, appropriate reasoning. Unfortunately, I cannot find a relevant guideline regarding reference formatting, but there has seemed to be a general convention among other entries. TBrandley 22:51, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
More readable ... for whom? Not for me. On my computer, it renders only one column. As opposed to two. In the prior format. The earliest chosen format, from what I saw much earlier in the day, was the one that I restored. Generally, when there are two acceptable formats, the first one used is the one adhered to. And reverting it to a later-chosen acceptable format is highly discouraged.--Epeefleche (talk) 00:28, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

on Mount John Laurie

Do you have any reason to believe the info here is suspect or incorrect? The Interior (Talk) 06:11, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Well, the content was unreferenced and based on personal knowledge which contains no prove that it is actually correct, thus original research. If the entity was reliably sourced, then my suspicions would not be existent. TBrandley 16:08, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Scream & Shout/GA1

TBrandley, I think you may have forgotten that you initiated a review on this nomination on March 30! Can you please stop by and give it some time units? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:07, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I did forget! I plan to review that in a couple days, as I now maintain some time on my hands until Tuesday when school resumes. Thank you. TBrandley 16:08, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

SheiKra?

Hello again! I don't know if you review FAC's put I need someone to input a new review as it is stalling. I was hoping you could be one user to do so. If you want to, the review page can be found here. If not, its ok. :) --Dom497 (talk) 18:45, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

I'll attempt to in the future. TBrandley 16:08, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
Ok, thanks!--Dom497 (talk) 19:28, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Kaibigan AfD

Someone responded to your concerns on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kaibigan. Feel free to post your comments. Edge3 (talk) 15:55, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for letting me know. TBrandley 16:08, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi!

Hey TBrandley, I'm very happy to see you have been keeping an eye out and watching the Spokane, Washington article and trying to improve it. That is excellent, especially considering there are virtually no other registered users that do so, which is sad shame because that leaves a very good quality article to the devices of inexperienced IPs to run amok editing it :[. In speaking of the quality, I just recently saw that the article was last assessed in early 2009, which is quite a long time ago and the article has improved substantially since then, I think listing it for reassessment at Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/Assessment might be in order for what that is worth lol...

Anyway, Thanks for your contributions! 75.106.202.98 (talk) 03:47, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi there, I actually have all of the Washington articles listed on my watchlist in order to be able to monitor recent changes to them quickly. If you would like to, then boldly list the article on the list for further assessment, it is always good to have some feedback and opinions. By the way, you seem to be rather active for an IP contributor, have you ever considering creating an account to edit on Wikipedia? Cheers! TBrandley (T • C • B) 04:28, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
Cool. I'll think of tacking the article on the to-do list sometime in the future, although I don't know how much consideration they would give it considering I am an IP, lol. To answer your question about registering, I haven't given it any thought because I don't mind being an IP, in years of editing under many IPs, it has never been a burden to my contributing :]. Thanks again! 75.106.202.98 (talk) 04:58, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
Well, there are some stereotypes against IP contributions, but I do not believe any editors here would treat you any differently than if you were a registered editor. If you would like, again, try to do that. I take significant interest in Wikipedia on entries related to Washington, among other topics, for some reason, thus why I regularly attempt to monitor the entries. Cheers. TBrandley (T • C • B) 05:09, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

List of cities with more than one airport

Abbotsford may not be inside the Metro Vancouver area but the list is for airports that serve the associated city. If we use that as a criteria then Gatwick, Luton, Stansted and Southend as none of them are in Greater London. The same would apply to a lot of the airports on the list. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 21:58, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Fair enough, I understand your point. Initially, I believed that Abbotsford International Airport was designated as an airport serving Fraser Valley. However, upon further investigation, I believe it to generally provide service alternatively for Metro Vancouver, although residents of the nearby area (Chilliwack, Hope, Mission) may also use it. I suppose we could agree that serves both regions. Cheers. TBrandley (T • C • B) 05:49, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you!

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Thank you for protecting my userpage from vandalism! It's the first time in my two years here that I experience this. Happy editing and thanks again! ComputerJA (talk) 06:07, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Scream & Shout/GA1

It looks like you forgot this one again. If you can't give it attention with 48 hours of seeing this, I think you should strongly consider withdrawing as reviewer: making the nominator wait one month is truly excessive. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:44, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks very much for reminding me again, I've added some comments regarding the article's status and hope to add more after the current concerns are addressed, which should be rather easy. Cheers. TBrandley (T • C • B) 02:36, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

please hold off on categories

I just the creation of Category:Populated places on the Okanagan Lake and it's not titled properly. Category:Populated places on Okanagan Lake is normal BC English. The "the" wouldn't occur even in the old-fashioned version of the name Category:Populated places on Lake Okanagan. Because you created this, you can have it "speedied".....I may be able to get that done also because of the "the" not being idiomatic; please spend your energies writing and improving articles and don't fuss with categories or their creation until you are more familiar with category structures and naming conventions. Lots of places in the Okanagan need expanded writeups and photos; we don't need more Okanagan categories. "the Okanagan Lake" I've also noticed in your writing; just curious, are you from the UK? That's not a normal Canadian English idiom.Skookum1 (talk) 00:36, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

I don't mean to sound snide, but do you even live in the Okanagan? I just removed that category from Oyama, British Columbia, which is most decidedly NOT on Lake Okanagan.Skookum1 (talk) 00:43, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
Because you are the author of the category, you are the one who can get a "speedy" to change it see Speedy criteria, section C2/A I think it is there. Myself I'd have to do a ful CfD and it's a much longer and more laborious process. Thanks.Skookum1 (talk) 00:53, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for the advice. I've had the category renamed to Populated places on Okanagan Lake. I have been attempting to improve some articles when I maintain time, but I am not sure about the category work. I do agree that we do not more categories, because readers do not come to Wikipedia for that. However, they may be useful in some cases. Yes, actually, I am from the United Kingdom, specifically from Basildon, Essex. I moved to the Okanagan region and am now residing in the city of Vernon, which would answer your question. I accidentally added Oyama, British Columbia to the category at the time, but now recognize my error. Perhaps Category:Populated places on the Columbia River should also be renamed then—that was my example and model for further categories. Cheers. TBrandley (T • C • B) 23:29, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
Why does the Columbia River category need changing? WTF? You're not making any sense at all......unless your dialect of English omits "the" before "the Thames River" and "the Avon River"...even if it did, your dialect is irrelevant in terms of USian or Canadian usage.Skookum1 (talk) 10:58, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Washington (state)

Howdy- If you remember, I recently placed a peer review request for Washington (state). The review received no response, and was archived. I am going to go on ahead and try to get the article to GA or FA level. I just wanted to let you know. Have a good one. PrairieKid (talk) 21:34, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Scream & Shout/GA1: another week

Please stop by to continue your review. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:50, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Another week has gone by. This review is now 44 days old. Can you please finish it? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:34, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Nice work!

Hey, just wanted to say what an awesome job your doing with the Omak, Washington article! Good article and going on featured, its amazing how detailed that thing is and how much content it has. Never thought the Omak article would have more cites than the Seattle article, lol. Kudos to you for all the time you've put in on it-the work shows!

Anyway, I am hoping you dont get all wikied out and stop editing, because I think it is the right time for the Spokane, Washington article to get some recognition and go for featured article. If your interested and want to nominate it (after your done with the Omak featured article, of course) I would definitely try to help you address any fixes the reviewers find. I dont find anything lacking in it when looking at the criteria they lay out (if you find something, holler and Ill look into it!). Its comprehensive, well written, well researched and well cited throughout, neutral POV, neatly organized and logically structured, and beautifully illustrated. Cant ask for more!

If this article ever gets featured, its would be now-before linkrot sets in, the IPs start putting in the 'Celebz from Spokane' section again, start monkeying with the climate table, and practically deleting entire sections without it going noticed because almost no registered users look at it :(. Now, Ive spent a lot of time trying to bring it up to spec, and Ive finally reached the point where Ive run out of ideas and I dont think its possible for it to not get promoted if we just put the time in to work on it. How rare is it that someone would be able to promote 2 FAs in about a month that are in the same WikiProject and sub wikiproject, lol. Unreal.

Anyway, if your interested let me know!

Have fun! 75.106.202.98 (talk) 01:32, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! I'd love to be able to help in the future, but I'll probably start with general copyediting. TBrandley (T • C • B) 05:11, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
Hey TBrandley, I think I know of a great way you can help the article by illustrating it! I was thinking about the lack of maps or graphs on the Spokane article when I saw the excellent OpenStreetMap that you made for the Omak article. I think if you could make of one of those for the 'Roads and highways section', if you have the time, that would help peoples understanding of the place. Making one of those would give people an idea of the city layout and what some of the features the article talks about looks like and where they are (Riverfront Park, Gonzaga, Spokane River, Sacred Heart Medical Center,etc). I think it would be ideal if such a picture could be centered on the square area formed by Maple-Ash in the west, Hamilton in the east, and East Mission/Maxwell in the north and I-90 in the south.
Just wanted to float that idea by you.

Cheers! 75.106.203.95 (talk) 07:04, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Opinion needed

Hey, could I get your opinion at Talk:Going, Going, Gone (Grey's Anatomy)#Final sentence of lead? Thanks! TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 20:22, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Sure, I'll try. TBrandley (T • C • B) 23:04, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Omak, Washington

Hi TBrandley, I'm beginning the copy-edit you requested to the above article at the GOCE Request page. Please feel free to contact me, and to correct of revert my edits if I'm doing something I shouldn't. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 22:29, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Washington template

Re [2] please use care with the Washington template, it appears on very many articles and adding Omak under "largest cities" of Washington is inappropriate. — Brianhe (talk) 04:10, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Please reconsider your revert; "urban areas" is listed under "largest cities" as shown below. - Brianhe (talk) 04:13, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
Gotta say, Greater Omak is a stretch...and it's not urban either. And "Okanogan Country" should be in "shared" regions, and the Cascade Range link there should be North Cascades.....there's also Columbia Basin and others that are shared with BC.Skookum1 (talk) 04:26, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
Yes, actually, it is an officially designated "urban cluster", a small urbanized region with under 50,000 inhabitants, but I understand your point. There are numerous urban areas in Washington, as they only require 2,500 people or more, but I felt the need to add link, due to its context. I'll attempt to address these template concerns, which I agree with, as well. TBrandley (T • C • B) 14:31, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for discussing this. @Skookum, "shared" was meant to imply shared between eastern and western Washington, not with other political entities ... for instance the Palouse is shared with Idaho, and Columbia Gorge is shared with Oregon, but it doesn't say so on the template. I think this would be hard without making the template unwieldy. — Brianhe (talk) 14:45, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
So, are we agreed that Omak should not be listed in the "largest cities" section? I don't want to make an edit to {{Washington}} that looks like an edit war. -- Brianhe (talk) 05:04, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles Recruitment Centre

Hello! Now, some of you might be wondering why there is a Good article icon with a bunch of stars around (to the right). The answer? WikiProject Good articles will be launching a Recruitment Centre very soon! The centre will allow all users to be taught how to review Good article nominations by experts just like you! However, in order for the Recruitment Centre to open in the first place, we need some volunteers:
  • Recruiters: The main task of a recruiter is to teach users that have never reviewed a Good article nomination how to review one. To become a recruiter, all you have to do is meet this criteria. If we don't get at least 5-10 recruiters to start off with, the Recruitment Centre will not open. If interested, make sure you meet the criteria, read the process and add your name to the list of recruiters. (One of the great things about being a recruiter is that there is no set requirement of what must be taught and when. Instead, all the content found in the process section is a guideline of the main points that should be addressed during a recruitment session...you can also take an entire different approach if you wish!) If you think you will not have the time to recruit any users at this time but are still interested in becoming a recruiter, you can still add your name to the list of recruiters but just fill in the "Status" parameter with "Not Available".
  • Co-Director: The current Director for the centre is me (Dom497). Another user that would be willing to help with some of the tasks would be helpful. Tasks include making sure recruiters are doing what they should be (teaching!), making sure all recruitments are archived correctly, updating pages as needed, answering any questions, and distributing the feedback form. If interested, please contact me (Dom497).
  • Nominators, please read this: If you are not interested in becoming a recruiter, you can still help. In some cases a nominator may have an issue with an "inexperienced" editor (the recruitee) reviewing one of their nominations. To minimize the chances of this happening, if you are fine with a recruitee reviewing one of your nominations under the supervision of the recruiter, please add your name to the list at the bottom of this page. By adding your name to this list, chances are that your nomination will be reviewed more quickly as the recruitee will be asked to choose a nomination from the list of nominators that are OK with them reviewing the article.

If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me. I look forward to seeing this program bring new reviewers to the Good article community and all the positive things it will bring along.

A message will be sent out to all recruiters regarding the date when the Recruitment Centre will open when it is determined. The message will also contain some further details to clarify things that may be a bit confusing.--Dom497 (talk)

This message was sent out by --EdwardsBot (talk) 01:23, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Omak, Washington

Hi TBrandley, I'm beginning the copy-edit you requested to the above article at the GOCE Request page. Please feel free to contact me, and to correct of revert my edits if I'm doing something I shouldn't. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 22:29, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Done—please see the article's talk page for removed text. Feel free to contact me about any issues arising from the copy-edit. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 19:42, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

GOCE May drive wrap-up

Guild of Copy Editors May 2013 backlog elimination drive wrap-up newsletter

We have completed our May backlog elimination drive.

The drive wrap-up newsletter is now ready for review.

– Your project coordinators: Torchiest, BDD, and Miniapolis

Sign up for the June blitz! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 05:18, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Movie4k.to at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 18:09, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 June 2013

Demographics of the United States

The census years 1610 to 1780 appear to be cut off in the table "historical populations" (top of Demographics of the United States, although they seem to be included in the table's source code - why? -- Kuhni74 (talk) 08:55, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Why does my comment on the American Indian natives (bottom of table) seem inappropriate to you? -- Kuhni74 (talk) 08:55, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Dispute over edit you made. Could you step in?

Hello! There is currently a debate over at the American Dad! talk page here regarding edits that you made over a year ago (this [3] and this [4]). Basically, your age-level rating edit was removed the other day by a user as "untrue." I then came in and restored the edit as "true" with a source. Then user:Doniago, who thought I made the edit and who has a habit of trying to start edit wars with me (quintessential example, as shown in the following where he has to self-revert as he realizes one of his reversions of my material is unconstructive: [5] and here [6]), jumped in the matter and stated the TV-14 material was "trivia." He used the argument that these types of ratings are discouraged at the wiki-project film article (as opposed to the wikiproject television article because it wasn't found there). I told him that he can't use policies located at wikiproject film for a television show. He argued that all policies of wikiproject film should too apply for wikiproject television. I told him that if all the same rules applied as between the two articles, they wouldn't both exist, that there would only be one article for both television and film. Doniago and CTF83 have been firmly claiming they are there because the edit in question and that it is "trivia" and "trivial junk" (as shown here [7]) yet are bringing up slews of other irrelevant matters into the argument. An administrator has since stepped in the matter and told the two users they were both wrong and I was right (as shown here [8] and here [9]), but this has been to no avail (as shown here [10]). Doniago has since resorted to begging for a block to get his way, and is irking administrators at the administrative noticeboards now (as shown [11]). As you made the edit, I was hoping you could step in as myself and administrators don't seem to be putting an end to the obnoxious behaviors from the two editors Doniago and CTF83. AmericanDad86 (talk) 23:17, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Sure, I'll attempt to. TBrandley (T • C • B) 20:34, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:King of the Hill Bill.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:King of the Hill Bill.jpg. 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 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 'file' 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 "File" 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. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:07, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Request

I was wondering if you could possibly comment at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of songs in Glee (season 1)/archive1. Robin (talk) 22:18, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

GOCE June/July 2013 events

Guild of Copy Editors July 2013 backlog elimination drive wrap-up newsletter

We have completed our June blitz and are about to commence our July backlog elimination drive.

The June/July 2013 events newsletter is now ready for review.

– Your project coordinators: Torchiest, BDD, and Miniapolis

Sign up for the July drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 20:45, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello

Hey TBrandley, we haven't crossed paths much lately for whatever reason ... I haven't been as active, doesn't look like you have either. Just wanted to take a moment to say hello, and that I hope all is well with you. Go Phightins! 03:13, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the message, I had lost internet connection until a few days ago. However, I was performing several summer activities outside and still intend to, based on the magnificent weather here, but will still edit here, regardless. Take care, TBrandley (T • C • B) 19:04, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
Start Snuggle

IRC office hours for wiki-mentors and Snuggle users

Hi. We're organizing an office hours session with the Teahouse to bring in mentors from across the wiki to try out Snuggle and discuss it's potential to support mentorship broadly. The Snuggle team would appreciate it if you would come and participate in the discussion. We'll be having it in #wikimedia-office connect on Wed. July 17th @ 1600 UTC. See the agenda for more info. --EpochFail(talk • work), Technical 13 (talk), TheOriginalSoni (talk) 19:00, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Sounds fabulous. Thanks for letting me know! TBrandley (T • C • B) 19:04, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Washington, D.C.

I wanted to note your edit of List of states and territories of the United States is not technically correct. The District of Columbia and Washington are not legally the same thing - according to the US Census Bureau (page 31 of this document) "The District of Columbia has one city, Washington, which is coextensive with the District of Columbia. Washington city governmentally consolidated with the District of Columbia in 1874, which is a functioning government at the equivalent of the state level". Basically, the District is a consolidated city-county like San Francisco. Because the article is discussing the district - not the city - it is important to distinguish between the two, similar to how the list of List of counties in California discusses San Francisco in the context of a county, not a city. Toa Nidhiki05 20:09, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

However, there is not an incorporated municipality referred to as Washington, but rather an incorporated federal district. The City of Washington does not administratively exist, and it is more similar to a city-state than a consolidated city-county. Of course, in common sense, Washington, D.C. is a city, but just is not in technical terms. That's the reasoning for my modification. Regards, TBrandley (T • C • B) 20:15, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
The consolidation doesn't eliminate the legal distinction, however. San Francisco is both a county, San Francisco County, and a city, San Francisco. When referring to it in the context of a county, it is "San Francisco County", while when referring to it as a city it is "San Francisco" or "San Francisco, CA". If you were listing all counties and seats of California counties, you could say the county is "San Francisco County" and the seat is "San Francisco".
Similarly, "Washington, DC" is simultaneously a district, the District of Columbia, and a city, Washington. When referring to it as a district, it is the "District of Columbia". When referring to it as a city (which is most of the time), it is called "Washington" or "Washington, D.C.". Like most consolidated city-counties (or city states), they both technically exist, but encompass the same area and have the same powers. In that article, we are talking about it in the concept of a district - not city - so District of Columbia is used and "Washington" is listed as its only city. Toa Nidhiki05 20:28, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
I understand, but my one concern is that there is no actual incorporated place legally known as the City of Washington, unless you can suggest otherwise. There was formerly a city known as Washington, but later become a single federal district known as the District of Columbia. TBrandley (T • C • B) 20:31, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
Well, the Census Bureau says here (page 31) that "The District of Columbia has one city, Washington, which is coextensive with the District of Columbia". Toa Nidhiki05 20:36, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
In a casual sense, there is a city known as Washington, but it is not incorporated as one by any organization, regardless. Legally, there actually are the same entity. In a nutshell, the District of Columbia is a federal district similar to that of a city not part of any U.S. state, but does not contain any incorporated cities within its area. TBrandley (T • C • B) 02:14, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

GOCE July 2013 news report

Guild of Copy Editors July 2013 backlog elimination drive mid-drive newsletter
  • Participation: Out of 30 people who have signed up for this drive so far, 18 have participated. If you have signed up for the drive but have not yet participated, it isn't too late. If you haven't signed up for the drive, sign up now!
  • Progress report: Thus far we have reduced the number of May/June 2012 articles to just 124 articles, so we're on the right track. Unfortunately, for the first time in GOCE history, the number of articles in the backlog has actually gone up during this drive. While all participants are currently doing a fine job, we just don't have as many of them as we have had in the past. We have over 500 editors on our mailing list, but only 18 editors who have done a copy edit for the drive. If you're receiving this newsletter, it's because you have an interest in copy editing. Join the drive! Even if you only copy edit one article, it helps. Imagine how much progress we could make if everyone chipped in just one article.

– Your drive coordinators: Torchiest, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95, and The Utahraptor.

>>> Sign up now <<<

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 22:31, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Atlantis Waterslides logo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Atlantis Waterslides logo.jpg. 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 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 'file' 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 "File" 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. Hazard-Bot (talk) 07:55, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

DYK RfC

  • As a listed GA participant, you are invited to contribute to a formal Request for Comment on the question of whether Good Articles should be eligible to appear in the Did You Know? slot in future. Please see the proposal on its subpage here, or on the main DYK talk page. To add the discussion to your watchlist, click this link. Thank you in advance. Gilderien Chat|Contributions03:12, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
    • I appreciate the offer, but I have already submitted some comments there. TBrandley (T • C • B) 04:27, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

X-Files A-Class Review

I was wondering if you could promote/close some of the A-class articles. It seems that GrappleX and TRLIJC19 have pretty much left the building. "Millennium", "X-Cops", and "Vienen" all have supports, and there hasn't been any comments in months.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 21:22, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Sure, I'll attempt to close some of these discussions, if I could only remember the coding for closure. TBrandley (T • C • B) 19:30, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

User:Qworty

Today I decided to look into the final discussions on WP:ANI of complaints about User:Qworty. The enormous on-going trainwreck of subtle vandalism from that contributor was recognized about a month after you called for greater AGF to be extended to them, on April 4th, in Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive791#Persistent disruption by User:Qworty in articles on gender studies academics.

Can I ask if you noticed the expose entitled Revenge, ego and the corruption of Wikipedia published in Salon magazine?

It seems to me that Wikipedia has a pretty good record of detecting and reverting casual and obvious vandalism, but we are very weak at detecting subtle vandalism, like that of Qworty. I think there are still important lessons to be learned from the Qworty case -- hence my curiousity as to whether you changed your view on those earlier concerns about Qworty. Geo Swan (talk) 16:55, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

I believe you have contacted the incorrect editor, having never participated in such discussions on this editor. Despite that, I still agree with your concerns on sneaky vandalism. Best, TBrandley (T • C • B) 19:30, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

GOCE July 2013 copy edit drive wrap-up

Guild of Copy Editors July 2013 backlog elimination drive wrap-up newsletter

We have completed our July backlog elimination drive.

The drive wrap-up newsletter is now ready for review.

– Your project coordinators: Torchiest, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95, and The Utahraptor.

Sign up for the August blitz! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 23:36, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Ecpiandy, we moved your Teahouse host profile

Hello TBrandley! Thank you for being a host at the Teahouse. However, we haven't heard from you lately, so our bot has moved your Host profile from the host landing page to the host breakroom. No worries; you can always just Check in and our bot will move your profile back. Editing any Teahouse-related page will do the same thing for you. If you would prefer not to receive reminders like this, you can unsubscribe here. Thanks for your help at the Teahouse! HostBot (talk) 03:50, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 August 2013

GOCE Blitz wrap-up and September 2013 drive invitation

Guild of Copy Editors August Blitz wrap-up

Participation: Out of sixteen people who signed up for this blitz, nine copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

Progress report: During the seven-day blitz, we removed 26 articles from the requests queue. Hope to see you at the September drive in a few days! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Torchiest, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95 and The Utahraptor.

Sign up for the September drive!
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 02:46, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 August 2013

Invitation to WikiProject Invention

Hello, TBrandley.

You are invited to join WikiProject Invention, a WikiProject and resource dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of inventions and invention-related topics.

To join the project, just add your name to the member list. Northamerica1000(talk) 10:08, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
My current field of interest does not comprise inventions, sorry. TBrandley (T • C • B) 18:02, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history coordinator election

Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Kirill [talk] 17:48, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 September 2013

Disambiguation link notification for September 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Israel, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Unitary (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:56, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 September 2013

October 2013 AFC Backlog elimination drive

WikiProject Articles for creation Backlog Elimination Drive

WikiProject AFC is holding a one month long Backlog Elimination Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from October 1st, 2013 – October 31st, 2013.

Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 2400 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!

A new version of our AfC helper script is released! It includes many bug fixes, new improvements and features, code enhancements, and more. If you want to see a full list of changes, visit the changelog. Please report bugs and feature requests there, too! Thanks. --Mdann52talk to me!

This newsletter was delivered on behalf of WPAFC by EdwardsBot (talk) 15:35, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 September newsletter

In 30 days, we will know the identity of our 2013 WikiCup champion. Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions) currently leads; if that lead is held, she will become the first person to have won the WikiCup twice. Canada Sasata (submissions), Australia Hawkeye7 (submissions)—who has never participated in the competition before—and New South Wales Casliber (submissions) follow. The majority of points in this round have come from a mix of good articles and bonus points. This final round is seeing contributions to a number of highly important topics; recent submissions include Phoenix (constellation) (FA by Casliber), Ernest Lawrence (GA by Hawkeye7), Pinniped, and red fox (both GAs by Sasata).

The did you know (DYK) eligibility criteria have recently changed, meaning that newly passed good articles are accepted as "new" for did you know purposes. However, in the interests of not changing the WikiCup rules mid-competition, please note that only articles eligible for DYK under the old system (that is, newly created articles or 5x expansions) will be eligible for points in this year's WikiCup. We do, however, have time to discuss how this new system will work for next year's competition; a discussion will be opened in due course. On that note, thoughts are welcome on changes you'd like to see for next year. What worked? What didn't work? What would you like to see more of? What would you like to see less of? All Wikipedians, new or old, are also warmly invited to sign up for the 2014 WikiCup.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 23:34, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 October 2013

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ecpiandy/Archive_9&oldid=1191689343"