User talk:Ad Orientem

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Usertalkpageheader Usertalkpageheader

Blessings and kind thoughts to you and your family[edit]

Bless you and your family in your bereavement. I am very sorry to hear that your dad passed away, albeit peacefully. Our thoughts are with you. Softlavender (talk) 23:11, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

  • I don't know you, but nevertheless offer my condolences for your loss. I hope you are feeling better now. starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 00:45, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
I saw this while browsing, and just wanted to leave a word of blessing for you and your family. May his memory be eternal! Evensteven (talk) 05:23, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment. Legobot (talk) 00:06, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Citation Barnstar Hires.png The Citation Barnstar
From one royalist and medievalist Orthodox to another. Prayers to your father.. Sigehelmus (talk) 00:54, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Sigehelmus, thank you very much. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:01, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Citing sources[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Citing sources. Legobot (talk) 00:04, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

AfD template removal[edit]

Please would you explain why you removed an AfD template w/editsummary "fixing AfD tag" here? As far as I can see the tag was filled-in & placed correctly. If I'm mistaken on that front, please do say.

The nomination process was awaiting completion and visible in my contribs ([1]). I do appreciate the rationale can be put on the article Talk but, since the request for completion of the final AfD steps is made at WT:AFD (for non-registered editors) it's reasonable to simply put the rationale there like most folks.

I've now seen you've gone and nominated it yourself, after having removed my {{afd1}}, substituting your own nomination statement. That seems a little inappropriate and, well, rude. Otoh if you found my nom statement inadequate in some way, then of course I'm always open to constructive feedback, but I can't see what was wrong with it. –146.199.151.33 (talk) 06:16, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Apologies if you feel I have stepped on your toes. Removing the incomplete tag and simply creating a new and complete one using Twinkle is generally much easier. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:42, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
PS you might find that registering as a member resolves a lot of these issues. You can nominate articles with a couple of clicks and not have to go onto the talk page at AfD and ask other editors to finish things for you. Just a suggestion... -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:48, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

() Actually the tag wasn't incomplete—yours is identical, it just has a later timestamp (diff). I did feel it came across (at the time) as less collaborative and more like someone else taking the credit so to speak with the non-reg'd editor silently erased from the equation. I don't think it was intentional. And I understand that you like to use familiar tools, though bar adding it to the log I'd setup everything so someone only needed to click the link and copypaste the text & hit Save. But no point dwelling and the AfD's up which is the important thing. P.S. Saw the note you added to the page - thank you. Have a good day. -146.199.151.33 (talk) 06:16, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Exclamation[edit]

What's the reason for the exclamation mark in !votes? Just curious. Sca (talk) 14:19, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

LOL! Honestly I don't have a clue. But it has been the convention on here for as long as I can remember. I just went with the flow. If you find out the reason, do drop me a line. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:27, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
It's a small point (!), but I find it confusing – like, am I supposed to be looking for other votes with exclamation marks? Oh well. Sca (talk) 14:46, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Japan[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Japan. Legobot (talk) 00:09, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anthroponymy/Standards[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anthroponymy/Standards. Legobot (talk) 00:03, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 May 2015[edit]

Barnstar[edit]

Starhalf Hires.png The Half Barnstar
Thank you for your many common sense edits to the USS PC-552 article, making the previous well-intentioned but malformed work more worthy of its subject. For improving the page, I award you with appropriate partial credit (shared with User:Dual Freq) and this very equally shared barnstar. BusterD (talk) 22:21, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
BusterD, thank you very much. :-) -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:28, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
Well deserved. Both you and Dual Freq have handled this exceptionally well. Let's hope your good work can bring back a potential contributor. BusterD (talk) 00:53, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Well cheese and effing crackers[edit]

When it gets to the point where you can't even read the "discussion" due to the color formatting, something has to be done. Of course I'll probably be reverted... μηδείς (talk) 03:13, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Maybe. ANI is such a nut house you never know. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:20, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on User talk:Factchecker atyourservice/Innuendo[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on User talk:Factchecker atyourservice/Innuendo. Legobot (talk) 00:07, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 June 2015[edit]

ITN closure[edit]

I wanted to know more about why you closed my nomination for 2015 Clinton Correctional Facility escape at ITNC. Is it because you think stories from the US must meet a higher standard of "significance" to be posted there? Everymorning talk 22:29, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for the note. The story in question is a sensationalized but ultimately fairly run of the mill crime story. People escape from prisons in other countries now and then and it gets some headlines, occasionally national, but there is nothing here that rises above the level of tabloid headlines. There is nothing here with international repercussions. This is at most a regional story that got picked up by the national media and will be front page news for a day or two. It does not meet ITN standards and based on my experience I believe there was less than zero chance the story was going to get posted on ITN. Sorry but there it is. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:21, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Handling trivia[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Handling trivia. Legobot (talk) 00:07, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Policy Advice[edit]

Can you possibly take a look at this edit please? It may be in violation of WP: PRIVACY. 79616gr (talk) 03:40, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. 79616gr (talk) 04:05, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
NP... -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:07, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library needs you![edit]

Wikipedia Library owl.svg

We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!

With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways:

  • Account coordinators: help distribute free research access
  • Partner coordinators: seek new donations from partners
  • Communications coordinators: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices
  • Technical coordinators: advise on building tools to support the library's work
  • Outreach coordinators: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs
  • Research coordinators: run reference services


Sign up now


Send on behalf of The Wikipedia Library using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:No original research[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:No original research. Legobot (talk) 00:06, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy). Legobot (talk) 00:06, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

No hard feelings[edit]

For nominating Death of Sandra Bland for deletion - I was almost certain this would happen, but not aware it would be at the hands of a monarchist :) I also suspected the article would be kept, per comments at the nomination. Thanks -Darouet (talk) 22:02, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

None at all. It happens. In hindsight I was definitely wrong with regard to the notability issue. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:28, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Bureaucrats[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Bureaucrats. Legobot (talk) 00:07, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:40, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Gold Bug is not an article[edit]

An article cannot consist of multiple different definitions like that. That's a disambiguation page.GliderMaven (talk) 02:41, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

See my response on your talk page. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:42, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

I'm not opposed to there being an article at Gold bug in principle, but there currently is not one. It takes more than a definition of a phrase to constitute an article, or even a stub. You should check out WP:Wikipedia is not a dictionary before trying to construct an actual article at this page.GliderMaven (talk) 02:45, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

You also need to be very careful about ascribing edits to bad faith. You literally have accused me of vandalism, and I take enormous exception to this. In addition, you have made non minor edit with the minor flag. Do NOT do that either.GliderMaven (talk) 02:45, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

You added this to my talk page:

[Image:Stop hand nuvola.svg|30px|alt=Stop icon]] You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Gold bug. You do not get to arbitrarily delete/redirect an article that has been worked on by numerous editors. If you do this again without talk page consensus you will be asked to defend your actions at ANI. Ad Orientem (talk) 02:41, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but this behaviour of yours is completely unacceptable.GliderMaven (talk) 02:46, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
(edit conflict)Arbitrarily blanking an article that has been worked on by numerous editors including a highly respected Admin and that is well sourced without any attempt at securing consensus looks like vandalism to me. I am not going to edit war with you. If you do not revert your arbitrary blanking/redirect I will open an ANI discussion. If you think an article has major flaws consensus should be sought before blanking/redirecting it. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:50, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Blanking an article is not necessarily vandalism, and you should not ascribe vandalism unless the behavior cannot be understood in any other way.
Administrators have no special powers or insight for deciding what is and is not an article. For myself, I've looked at this several times today, and come to exactly the same conclusion each time; it is not, and was not, an article. An article is supposed to be on one thing only. But here there's three (more like two and half things), and each of those is only one paragraph, that are unlikely to realistically grow to become an article.
In my opinion, the material should be moved to gold bug, which currently only has one definition. For simple terminology, which this is, wikionary is nearly always the best place to put it, as well as disambiguation pages as appropriate.GliderMaven (talk) 03:04, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
The best course of action would have been to propose a WP:MERGE rather than simply blanking the article and redirecting it. I also note that you moved almost none of the blanked article to the disambiguation page, despite the fact it is all well sourced. I concede you have a valid point about the nature of the page, and it needs work, but deleting 95% of it is not the answer. And again this sort of thing should not be done arbitrarily. Redirects are generally regarded as a form of soft deletion, which is what this looks like. It should not be done if there is an objection without consensus. If you disagree you should send it to AfD where you can now nominate articles for redirection. Finally I regret my intemperate language in response to your actions, though I also note your initial blanking/redirect carried no edit summary and looked malicious. I believe very strongly that you are wrong and handling this improperly. But I do acknowledge you were/are acting in good faith. Since I strenuously object to the redirect, I again suggest you self revert and propose a MERGE or send the article to AfD with a request for redirection. Let the community decide. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:16, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
See also WP:BLAR and WP:ATD-R. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:28, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

USS Liberty deletions[edit]

I would like to open a discussion as to why you are removing the adds to the USS Liberty incident that you feel are questionable. The article add quotes a book written by well known authors. I understand your issue with placement of my adds to the article, but I feel there is room to include my addendums.

I think a discussion is a good idea. It should however take place on the talk page of the article. Also I would note that quite a few editors have been removing the material. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:51, 27 July 2015 (UTC)