User talk:Amakuru/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

→

Archive 10

The Islamic State listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect The Islamic State. Since you had some involvement with the The Islamic State redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Legacypac (talk) 11:48, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Move review

There is currently a discussion at WP:MR that you may be associated with. The thread can be found here. Thank you.Qxukhgiels (talk) 22:46, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Relisting a non-event RM

Hi, Amakuru. I'm wondering why you relisted the Old East Slavic RM. The RM was ignored by other editors who have been working on the article for years after the proposing user tried to change instances of Old East Slavic in the article. These changes were reverted by one of the long-term editors (who is a linguist).

I was the only one to respond with a comment purely to demonstrate that all of his reasons for opening an RM were baseless (i.e., in fact complete misrepresentations of the sources s/he cited). If it helps, I'm happy to strike through "comment" and change it to "strong oppose" as an out and out POV lie. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 04:45, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi @Iryna Harpy: thanks for your message. I relisted the discussion because it only had one response; if you have a look at WP:RM#Relisting, you'll see that this is quite usual practice when there haven't been many responses, or if a consensus is not yet clear. It causes the entry to go back to the top of the requested move list, so more people can look at it and comment. Relisting does not imply any opinion on my part about whether it should or shouldn't be closed, just seeking to get a better consensus.

After another week, it should then be closed, and if things remain as they are, I imagine it's likely to be closed as not moved. You could change your entry to an "Oppose" if you wish, although it's fairly clear already that it is an oppose, so I'm sure any closer would regard it as such. Thanks!  — Amakuru (talk) 09:36, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Cheers, Amakuru. I was aware that it is standard practice when there are few responses and policy-based/guideline-based arguments aren't up to par, but wasn't aware that it's standard practice where there's only been a noisy old moo (being me) and a few crickets and a tumbleweed in attendance. I'll bear it in mind. For some reason, I'd gotten it into my head that relisting tends to happen where there are at least a couple of Wikipedia projects involved where the RM has been posted on their noticeboard.

Okay, I'll change my position to 'oppose' and wait until an actual neutral party or a bot comes round and clears away the template as stale. Thanks for your time! --Iryna Harpy (talk) 09:22, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Thanks for the Harley Davidson Club move. Salty Batter (talk) 17:04, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, @Salty Batter: much appreciated!  — Amakuru (talk) 17:13, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Hector Xavier Monsegur

If you can't move it yourself, can I revert the closure? --George Ho (talk) 06:03, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi @George Ho: why do you want to revert the closure? I appreciate this has been sitting on the db-move list for a little longer than usual, but I anticipate it would get acted on today. There are usually more admins around to carry out such actions than those who perform move closures, in my experience. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 10:33, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Using G6 versus WP:RMTR

Hello Amakuru. I just closed few G6 deletions per your note at WP:AN. It is actually simpler if you are willing to file these at WP:RMTR. You could give the reason as 'non-admin closure of move discussion' if you want. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 20:49, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi @EdJohnston: thanks for the tip. I used G6 becauase that's what is suggested at WP:RMNAC. Ordinarily the G6 route is quite fast, usually within a few hours, just for some reason it went almost a day this time. I'm not sure how long it usually takes for technical requests to get actioned...  — Amakuru (talk) 21:18, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

The recent history of WP:RMTR suggests that admins come by to close the requests two or three times a day. EdJohnston (talk) 21:56, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Attached template

Talk:Twenty-four priestly gifts thanks for closing this RM. There is also a related template, what to do? In ictu oculi (talk) 14:05, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi @In ictu oculi: I would think it's logical to move the template to match the article. Also the title of the navbox should link to the article, not just to the kohen article. I suggest something like:

Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 14:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Yes, agree, how does one move a template? In ictu oculi (talk) 14:56, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

@In ictu oculi: Moving a template is just like moving any other article, as long as it is not move protected. You just go to Template:The twenty-four priestly gifts and select "Move" from the "More" menu. In this case I have just carried out the move and made the text change, since it seems we are in agreement on the matter. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 15:06, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Brian Kelly (U.S. soccer player)

A number of things wrong with this page move you managed to botch - one you didn't fix incoming links (e.g. this) and two you have used a naming format that was oppose, at best the article should have been moved to Brian Kelly (American soccer) in line with standard naming conventions. GiantSnowman 18:34, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

@GiantSnowman: I explained my reading of the consensus in the move closure - it seemed reasonably clear to me in favour of the way I've moved it. Sure, you don't agree, and you voted oppose, but that's the way it goes sometimes. If you really have a problem with the way I closed it, you can always take it to WP:MR, but I personally think I was correct. As for the incoming links, that's a good call. Thanks for helping fix the one you pointed out, I'll see if I can get to the others later on today.  — Amakuru (talk) 19:19, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Two supports (not including the anonymous nominator), one partial support to Brian Kelly (American soccer), and one oppose (yes, from me) - you will note that the partial and the oppose were from WP:FOOTBALL members (who actually, you know, know what the standard naming conventions are). I am happy to accept a page move, but I am not happy to accept that page move - so I will ask you again to please move to Brian Kelly (American soccer) in line with standard naming conventions. GiantSnowman 19:42, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

@GiantSnowman: - I've put a message on the talk page at Brian Kelly (U.S. soccer player) asking those who voted for the current disambiguator why they did so and if they'd object to the more standard one. If they don't give valid objections then I will move it as you suggest. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 21:24, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Many thanks, good suggestion - and apologies if my initial message to you was a bit terse! GiantSnowman 09:31, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Naval rank moves

I have declined the request at WP:RMTR called 'Naval rank moves'. A link is here. Even if we consider the 2011 discussion as the latest word, it probably wouldn't justify the moves since a local consensus isn't normally enough to undo a site-wide guideline like WP:JOBTITLE. If you believe that job titles in certain areas should be exempt from the guideline, maybe you can open an appropriate RfC. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 15:42, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

@EdJohnston: OK, thanks for letting me know.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:05, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Talk:2 May 2014 Odessa clashes#Requested move 3 March 2015

I created and am inviting you to another move discussion; join in. --George Ho (talk) 19:18, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Rwandan Revolution copyedit

@Miniapolis: thank you very much for your work on this, much appreciated! I was going to ask you what you thought of the article in general (copyediting aside), but I think your recommendation to go with GA first and then see what happens more or less answers that question.  — Amakuru (talk) 21:16, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

I think it's just about ready for a GAN, but you may want to try peer review first since my only GAN to date was quick-failed (unjustly, I thought, but that's the breaks) :-). In my experience, FA reviewers are especially stringent with articles that aren't already GAs. Good luck and all the best, Miniapolis 00:33, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Rwandan Revolution

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Rwandan Revolution you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Whizz40 -- Whizz40 (talk) 23:40, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Rwandan Revolution

The article Rwandan Revolution you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Rwandan Revolution for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Whizz40 (talk) 06:40, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Barnstar for You!

		The Good Article Barnstar
		For your contributions to bring Rwandan Revolution to Good Article status. Thanks, and keep up the good work!  — ₳aron 09:18, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

@Calvin999: thanks very much for the barnstar, your kind words, and indeed the DYK nomnination. Onwards and upwards, to FA status hopefully! All the best  — Amakuru (talk) 15:44, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Peter Moores ps

I see that the discussion has been resolved. I was going to suggest that if a label is attached to the non-cricket Peter Moores, it should be Peter Moores (philanthropist), as this is the role in which he is better known - his business activities were brief and not eventful. Is it do you think too late or inappropriate to propose this now? Thanks, --Smerus (talk) 13:01, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

@Smerus: hmm, that's a difficult one. The conversation concerned mainly whether or not the cricketer was the primary topic, so the actual disambiguator wasn't addressed by most contributors, and I just went with the one in the original proposal. I'd suggest probably open up a new RM on that specific question would be best, with no prejudice either way, that way we get the best answer to that specific question. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 13:08, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

OK tks, I will think about this.--Smerus (talk) 13:11, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Rwandan Revolution

— Coffee // have a cup // beans // 00:02, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Pings have not always worked

Did you see my reply at 14:10, 19 March 2015 at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Religion? Thanks. GregKaye 13:42, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Move of Note

Hello! I have seen your request to delete the redirect page Note so that the disambiguation page can be moved there. However, I see that there are a great many links to that page Note;[1] those should really all be changed so they link to Musical note. I have fixed a few of them, that were part of templates; how do you think we should handle the rest? Thanks. --MelanieN (talk) 20:06, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi MelanieN and thanks for the message. That's a good point, I hadn't thought of that. It sounds like a job for WP:AutoWikiBrowser, I should be able to work through them reasonably quickly using that. I'll get started now and let you know how it goes. Thanks!  — Amakuru (talk) 21:19, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

@MelanieN: - I have now finished the tidy up, all links now point to either Musical note or somewhere else (if they weren't meant to be musical in the first place). There are no longer any links to Note from the main article namespace. The remaining links are all from Talk, User, Wikipedia etc. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 23:15, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, good work! I have deleted the page. --MelanieN (talk) 23:17, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

OK great. I have now completed the move. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 23:22, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rwandan Civil War, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mortar. 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) 09:04, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Civility Barnstar

Thank you! I was really impressed by the constructive and non-acrimonious tone and contributions from everyone involved in the recent AFD discussion on the Alliance of Women Directors article. What could have been—with the wrong editors involved—a very nasty debate, turned into a very positive discussion. Even editors who strongly felt that the article should be deleted worked hard to find sources and fix problems with it. This is the kind of positive collaboration people don't hear a lot about in Wikipedia-land and I'd like to recognize it. Carl Henderson (talk) 19:58, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

@Carl Henderson: thanks very much for this. I don't think I was very heavily involved in the AWD discussion, but I'm always happy to get a barnstar, that's gratefully received!  — Amakuru (talk) 20:40, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

AfD of melee

You voted not to make melee a disambiguation page in a recent move request. Per the discussion, I have suggested the article be deleted due to lack of a relevant, cohesive encyclopedic definition of "melee". Your input would be appreciated. Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Melee.

Peter ^Isotalo 11:41, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

@Peter Isotalo: thanks for letting me know.  — Amakuru (talk) 11:43, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

New page recommended for creation

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Amakuru Wbm1058 (talk) 13:42, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi Wbm1058, and thanks for your kind message here. I occasionally wonder about having a go at becoming an admin - I don't need it for my article writing work, but there's no doubt it would be helpful for the RM process, and helping to work down the backlog there, being able to carry out some of the moves that I currently request admin assistance for. What I do usually wonder is what the contributors over at RfA would really make of me (it's very hard to see yourself as others see you!). I feel I have good knowledge of policies, and approach things in a calm manner, but on the other hand I don't have a lot of experience in the ANI and blocking areas, other than reading through existing issues occasionally. I've also not done too much at AfD yet. If I did become an admin I'd imagine watching and learning those processes before carrying them out myself. Let me know how you see the matter, and if you really think it's worth a shot, then I'd be happy to put myself through the wringer as they say it goes!

On a related note, I see you don't yet have the mop yourself... I'd assumed from the fact that you wrote the RMCD bot, and are a bit of a self-appointed overseer of the RM process, that you were already an admin. I'm pretty sure you'd make a very good admin yourself, judging from my interactions with you here, I don't know if you are interested in it. Thanks!  — Amakuru (talk) 19:20, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

University of Rwanda

Hi. As someone interested in Rwanda, I thought you might be interested in the new University of Rwanda article that I've created. I'm currently trying to get it featured as a Did you know... article. Any help with expanding the article that you could offer would be much appreciated. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:13, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Cordless Larry, I'll definitely have a look at that in the next day or two. I have to say, to my shame, I was unaware that UNR, KIST, and the other colleges had actually merged together in that way, that's an interesting development. It's been a few years since I've managed to get out to Rwanda, so what news I get is usually through trying to keep up with the press, and what my friends in the country tell me. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 19:23, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. Just checking that I haven't made any obvious errors would be great, even if you didn't have time to contribute further. It looks like the DYK will go ahead, so that should draw some traffic to the page. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:13, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

@Cordless Larry: I've had a quick read through, and it looks well written to me as it stands now, in its short form, I didn't see any errors... (I didn't check the sources though). Good work, and I'll definitely scout around for articles to add more detail in. Saying (and wikilinking) which former institutions were combined to create the university would probably be a good improvement, for example. Good work!  — Amakuru (talk) 20:31, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! Yep, I'd like to add more information about the institutions that it was formed from. Once the article grows a bit more, I will start to use the structure suggested at Wikipedia:College and university article guidelines. One issue with the merged institutions is that there is disagreement between sources about the number that were merged, so some expertise on Rwandan higher education might be helpful there. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:40, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Just to let you know that the article is currently featured on the main page, in the Did you know... section. Thanks for your encouragement. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:38, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

@Cordless Larry: great, I've just had a look. Terrific to see Rwandan topics up on the main page again, congratulations on getting it this far! Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 17:30, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

@Cordless Larry: I checked the French article on the former National University of Rwanda and found it wasn't updated. I fixed that: fr:Université nationale du Rwanda. Anyhow, does anyone know if any Kinyarwanda and/or French speakers are interested in starting equivalents on those Wikipedias? Also I would like to know if there is a Rwandan bulletin that stated the school's name in Kinyarwanda and French. That may be useful on the Commons and other places. WhisperToMe (talk) 16:59, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

fr:Université du Rwanda French stub. WhisperToMe (talk) 17:44, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Station stuff

Since you participated in the RM discussion at Talk:Greenbelt Station#Requested move 7 February_2015, you may have thoughts worth commenting on at the related RFC at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (US stations)#RfC: some proper talkin' about station title conventions, including especially the survey at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (US stations)#Simpler questions / concise survey. If so, please comment there. Dicklyon (talk) 05:25, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Amakuru. You have new messages at Calvin999's talk page.
Message added 10:51, 10 April 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

 — ₳aron 10:51, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Plaster Stadium

Thank you for officially moving Plaster Stadium to Plaster Stadium (Southwest Baptist). Can you at a convenient time please view and weigh in on the discussion at Talk:Plaster_Sports_Complex? Thank you.UCO2009bluejay (talk) 21:59, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

@UCO2009bluejay: thank you for your message. I didn't spot that related discussion when I was looking at the Plaster Stadium one. I have now closed the second move discussion, as it has also run its course, and appears to be unopposed and not controversial. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 09:25, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Baron#Requested_move_7_April_2015

Regarding the above closure, I request that you reopen it because (1) the requested move may required deleting many pages, (2) there was no consensus because there was still a difference of opinion and (3) you did not assign due weight to the arguments in opposition to the use of sexist language but in effect simply dismissed them. Sincerely, BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 20:28, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

@BeenAroundAWhile: thanks for your message. On your specific points, (1) I'm not sure what you mean here; closing as not moved means that no deletions or movings need to be enacted; what did you have in mind there? (2) OK I've reviewed it again, and I'll accept that despite the numeric superiority of the oppose arguments, there is some merit in support votes too, so I've gone back and changed to "no consensus". It doesn't affect the close though, the page is still not moved with a no consensus outcome. And with this weight of opposition, I don't see much merit in relisting at this stage - the debate has had quite a lot of input so far, and it's unlikely we'll see a consensus formed to move the articles in another week of listing. (3) As in 2, I have now assigned due weight to the WP:SYSTEMICBIAS issue, and declared a no consensus, but again, I can't dismiss the votes in opposition either, they also give valid reasons. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 21:07, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Jr. comma RfC

You're invited to participate in the discussion at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#RfC:_Guidance_on_commas_before_Jr._and_Sr. Dohn joe (talk) 02:08, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Piracy in Somalia move

Hi Amakuru. You seem experienced with requested move discussions. No one has posted in the discussion of my requested move of Piracy in Somalia in two weeks now. Do you think it needs to be relisted, or has there been enough discussion? Cordless Larry (talk) 08:25, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi Cordless Larry, if I were approaching that conversation as a neutral, I'd think I'd judge there to be enough consensus there to make the move, without need for relisting. As you say, there's been no conversation for a long time, and there is a fairly clear excess of supports than opposes, with valid reasoning. That said, of course, neither you nor I are qualified to close the discussion, as we both expressed opinions in favour of the move. It needs an uninvolved third party to make the consensus call. The best plan to try to get it dealt with might be to list it at WP:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure. I'm not sure how quickly things there are responded to, but worth a try. Thanks!  — Amakuru (talk) 08:49, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. Yes, I realise that neither of us is uninvolved and so can't close it. I was just concerned that it had fallen off the radar. I'll post at that noticeboard, though there doesn't seem to be that much action there! Cordless Larry (talk) 09:58, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Indeed, Cordless Larry. The backlog at WP:RM does grow sometimes, although it seems like things usually drop off the bottom eventually! I often work to try to clear off some of the easier ones where I haven't contributed, as it's something I enjoy doing and obviously helps with the backlog...  — Amakuru (talk) 10:41, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

I might try to start to do the same myself. It's easy for me to grumble about there being a backlog, without actually doing anything to contribute to dealing with it. Cordless Larry (talk) 10:43, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Only Girl (In the World)/archive2

Hello. I re-nominated "Only Girl (In the World)" for FAC 8 days ago, but I haven't had any comments. As you commented in the previous one, I was wondering if you wouldn't mind re-reading and seeing if I have address your comments from the previous nomination. Thanks.  — ₳aron 10:06, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

MU.ZZ.LE

This was an expired proposed deletion candidate. Since you have requested that it be restored, I will do so. Neutrality^talk 17:55, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Talk:George Hudson (entomologist)

Actually, there are only one support and one oppose. Why including the nominator? --George Ho (talk) 02:33, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi George Ho, generally, as outlined in WP:RM#CM, the nominator is taken to be one "support" vote, unless they either (a) list a "support as nom" entry elsewhere, or (b) indicate clearly in the nomination that they don't actually support the move. In this case it is clear that the nominator intended to be heard as a supporter of the proposal. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 09:08, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Paul Hunter (American soccer)

I'm sorry but yes, your close does seem like a supervote. There is no evidence he is American - the soruces presented clearly show he is Canadian. Him attending high school and playing pro soccer in the States is whooly irrelevant. I would invite you to re-consider. GiantSnowman 12:28, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

GiantSnowman thanks for your message. As I said in the close, there was consensus to move, but no consensus as to where. I wouldn't have done a supervote if there were no consensus and the result were close. But to me, it seems like it's then best to pick one of the titles, but it's tough to ascertain which. It's tough in this instance, because with the standard disambiguator used in North America, "American soccer", it's not clear whether that refers to the nation where the soccer is played, or the nationality of the player. If it were "American soccer player", that would be clearer. But in the end, I had to choose somewhere, out of a no consensus between two targets, and the "American soccer" argument made sense. The soccer is American, even if the player may not be (according to known sources). I think if this were about a player of "American football", it would definitely go that way - see for example Bill Crawford (American football), who played American football, but was born in Canada. I suspect the disambiguator "American soccer" actually exists because we already have the "American football" disambig anyway actually. So I don't intend to change my close at this time, because I don't think moving to "Canadian soccer" or back to "soccer" would be any better in terms of reading the outcome of the discussion. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 11:43, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

As an editor of over 9 years's experience, with genuinely 99% of my edits related to soccer, I can confirm that the disambiguator refers to nationality and not location of play, and that the disambiguator of just "NAT soccer" is standard (as opposed to "NAT soccer player"). With your Bill Crawford example, his article is located at "American football" because that is the name of the sport he plays, it has nothing to do with the fact he was based in America. GiantSnowman 12:05, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

@GiantSnowman: OK then, I'll take your superb contribution history on soccer issues at face value, and accept that we use nationality, therefore my American football etc. argument is null and void. However, the point was also made in the debate that Hunter's situation is analagous to that of Mo Farah. Born in one country, but lived in another from an early age, and never again had any association with the birth country. Which exact passports he holds is not given in any source, as far as I can tell, so any assertion one way or the other way is always going to have an element of WP:CRYSTALBALL to it. But given his long association with the US, from childhood, and his status as a college All-American, it seems more likely that he would have played his soccer for the US than for Canada, had he ever been called up for international duty. I understand your argument, and I don't really feel strongly about this, but I'm not convinced it's a clear cut case where he should be at "Canadian soccer", therefore I don't think it would be appropriate for me to change my close. It's unfortunate that we don't have enough data to really make that call. If you feel very strongly about this, why don't you open up a new RM to "Canadian soccer", which would not be prejudiced either way, and allow the community to comment on this exact issue. If the new RM also resulted in no consensus, then you could seek alternative ways to resolve the issue. At the end of the day it has to reside at one title or the other, unless you accept a neutral third way such as Paul Hunter (North American soccer). Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 13:28, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

My point in the RM discussion was that there were/are zero sources stating he had American citizenship nationality - whereas I presented RS which clearly stated him to be to Canadian. You/others are just making assumptions, and I believe that (false) assumption has resulted in a poor close/move. GiantSnowman 13:50, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

@GiantSnowman: the reliability of your source was questioned in the debate as well, by Cúchullain, who said:

the only source I see that specifically says he's Canadian is this, and it describes itself as a self-published source. It doesn't look like a reliable source, and it's totally possible this element is in error.

If there were a lot more sources like this, it might add up to something, but in fact there's a complete lack of any solid reliable evidence (that's been cited) that he was/is either American or Canadian. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 14:01, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

It is a reliable source, used widely by WP:FOOTBALL - and again there is nothing which states he is American. The claim he grew up in the States - unreferenced. The claim he has American nationality/citizenship - unreferenced. The more I think about it the more this page move seems like a glaring BLP issue. GiantSnowman 14:11, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, it seems like most of the refs in teh article itself are now dead. Nobody has so far questioned the assertion that he grew up in the US, it doesn't seem likely that he didn't. [2] backs that up. As for NASL Jerseys, where to they get their information from? Is there any citation we can go by there? Strangely, Hunter's elder brother Tim, is listed as a US citizen.[3] Again, based on what information?  — Amakuru (talk) 14:42, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure where the info is from, but at WP:FOOTBALL we have always found it to be completely accurate and reliable. I'm not sure if this is a RS but it also states he is Canadian. Further source here doesn't mention either way. GiantSnowman 15:24, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

As I say, I'm still not convinced there is enough evidence to call it one way or the other, so I'm not reversing the close now, but I'd like more people to be involved in this, so I've opened up the discussion at the talk page and pinged you and others. Let's see if the issues can be discussed to resolution. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 15:49, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

The Valentine (museum)

Please see Talk:Valentine Richmond History Center#Requested move 20 April 2015. The requested move to 'The Valentine' would fail as No consensus if it had to be closed now. But you haven't yet given an opinion on The Valentine (museum). That sounds like an acceptable option to most of those who commented. Perhaps you could add a note to say whether you support or oppose that. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 18:28, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Melee

There was recently move debate in which you took part Talk:Melee#Requested move 9 March 2015. The debate continues in a slightly different form on the same page, your participation in it might help build a consensus. Please join the debate on whether it is appropriate to include the maintenance {{coatrack}} in the article Melee. --PBS-AWB (talk) 17:41, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Photograph requests in Kigali?

Amakuru,

Do you know any persons in Kigali who are able to do photograph requests? There are articles on expatriate schools that need photos. Some government ministry buildings may be good ideas as long as the Rwandan government is okay with those buildings being photographed (I know some countries don't like that).

WhisperToMe (talk) 17:02, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Rhotic and non-rhotic accents

Amakuru,

What's the current situation regarding the move of Rhotic and non-rhotic accents to "Rhoticity in English", as was agreed upon in the relevant move discussion? I notice that Gilgamesh~enwiki (talk · contribs) just re-created the page after it was deleted to make way for the move, which I think was a mistake on his/her part. Thanks.  White Whirlwind  咨  21:07, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi White whirlwind, apologies this was a mistake on my part. I quite often use the db-move template when closing a move that I can't perform myself, and I then try to watch out for it being done in the next few days. Sometimes the admin who deletes the page performs the move as well, sometimes not. In this case I must have overlooked the fact that the move hadn't been done yet. Anyway, the history on the target page was still simple, so I was able to perform the move today, which I have just done. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 23:25, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

@Amakuru: Much appreciated.  White Whirlwind  咨  23:57, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I noticed a red link in another page, so I fixed it by creating a redirect. I noticed the redirect had been deleted, but I couldn't quite understand why, so I recreated it. - Gilgamesh (talk) 09:26, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

RfC: Guidance on commas after Jr. and Sr.

Following the closure of a recent RfC you participated in, I have started an RfC on the separate but related issue of commas after Jr. and Sr.. Please see Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) § RfC: Guidance on commas after Jr. and Sr. and feel free to comment there. Thanks! —sroc 💬 06:03, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Rwandan novel: Our Lady of the Nile

Hi! I started a short article about Our Lady of the Nile. Have you heard of this novel? WhisperToMe (talk) 20:14, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

You may also be interested in Scholastique Mukasonga, the novel's author. WhisperToMe (talk) 18:29, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

@WhisperToMe: I've not heard of either, actually - I should order a copy, it sounds interesting!  — Amakuru (talk) 14:40, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

List of countries by GDP (nominal)

So you say that GDP is accurate data. Man you are wrong, GDP is only estimation, no one tells the accurate data. But I am agree that those are estimations and you can not put estimated data, so you need to check out this link http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2015/01/weodata/weorept.aspx?pr.x=66&pr.y=7&sy=2014&ey=2015&scsm=1&ssd=1&sort=country&ds=.&br=1&c=512%2C668%2C914%2C672%2C612%2C946%2C614%2C137%2C311%2C962%2C213%2C674%2C911%2C676%2C193%2C548%2C122%2C556%2C912%2C678%2C313%2C181%2C419%2C867%2C513%2C682%2C316%2C684%2C913%2C273%2C124%2C868%2C339%2C921%2C638%2C948%2C514%2C943%2C218%2C686%2C963%2C688%2C616%2C518%2C223%2C728%2C516%2C558%2C918%2C138%2C748%2C196%2C618%2C278%2C624%2C692%2C522%2C694%2C622%2C142%2C156%2C449%2C626%2C564%2C628%2C565%2C228%2C283%2C924%2C853%2C233%2C288%2C632%2C293%2C636%2C566%2C634%2C964%2C238%2C182%2C662%2C453%2C960%2C968%2C423%2C922%2C935%2C714%2C128%2C862%2C611%2C135%2C321%2C716%2C243%2C456%2C248%2C722%2C469%2C942%2C253%2C718%2C642%2C724%2C643%2C576%2C939%2C936%2C644%2C961%2C819%2C813%2C172%2C199%2C132%2C733%2C646%2C184%2C648%2C524%2C915%2C361%2C134%2C362%2C652%2C364%2C174%2C732%2C328%2C366%2C258%2C734%2C656%2C144%2C654%2C146%2C336%2C463%2C263%2C528%2C268%2C923%2C532%2C738%2C944%2C578%2C176%2C537%2C534%2C742%2C536%2C866%2C429%2C369%2C433%2C744%2C178%2C186%2C436%2C925%2C136%2C869%2C343%2C746%2C158%2C926%2C439%2C466%2C916%2C112%2C664%2C111%2C826%2C298%2C542%2C927%2C967%2C846%2C443%2C299%2C917%2C582%2C544%2C474%2C941%2C754%2C446%2C698%2C666&s=NGDPD&grp=0&a=

In this page you can see that the data currently on wikipedia is also a estimation. LOL — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saurabh2y (talk • contribs) 03:27, 10 June 2015 (UTC)‎

@Saurabh2y: fair enough, a good point. The data is always an estimation. What I meant in this case, is that the figure shown on the GDP page did not accurately reflect the source that all the figures came from, namely the IMF estimates. We don't have a duty to be "accurate" necessarily, but we do have a duty to accurately reflect what third party reliable sources say. Thanks!  — Amakuru (talk) 08:37, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Reference Desk question: the Gahuza language?

Greetings: I've asked a question you may help with at the Language Reference Desk: Gahuza language?. Maybe you could stop by to see if you can help. Cheers. Contact Basemetal here 07:48, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Beachley

The bridges are located in the village. But the motorway that uses the bridges cannot be accessed from the village. The article talked about "the bridges carrying the motorway" - and didn't imply that the motorway itself could be accessed from the village. Motorways in the UK (and generally, I believe - see our article) can only be accessed at specific junctions. But, I've clarified the text to avert any future confusion. (And the noun peninsula has no "r" in it - the adjective peninsular does.) Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:55, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

@Ghmyrtle: - OK then, the new wording looks fine. I did think it needed clarifying in some form, because it is a slightly unusual situation, that a road crosses a piece of land in between bridges, but has no access to that land, even if it is a motorway. Good catch on the "peninsular" spelling. I'm not sure if I even knew that it has no r on the end. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 12:15, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library needs you!

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)